The “They are here” vs “You are there” sound topic

Interesting views, here’s a user comment I found for instance on SST Sistrum platforms and racks:

“It feels as though the window into the music is even more clear, that a film has been stripped away making the illusion of actual musicians in the room even more compelling. This is important to me, as my pursuit has always been of the "they are here" and not the "you are there" variety...”

One of the examples I was wondering why and how people make the distinction. There are more of these views and explanations I found in a recent edition of the Absolute Sound magazine dividing the camps. Let me find it and I’ll share it here as well.

I think the premise is sort of off. You always want to be at the venue. The question is where in the venue do you want to be. Very few recordings are done so that you feel the instrument is in the room with you. Many studio recordings are very surrealistic and don't put you anywhere. 20 foot wide pianos do not exist. But with a well done live recording the question is where in the venue do you want to be. I prefer to be right up front 6th row or so. This is also more realistic in small clubs were you are always up front. The effect is do almost entirely to speakers and the way they radiate. Point source speakers give you a small sound stage and put you in the back of the hall. Line source speakers put you up front giving you a much larger sound stage. Point source advocates will tell you the stage is too large. I think not. They are just use to listening to miniature stages. The biggest problem for line source advocates is that most recordings are mastered on point source speakers and sometimes the translation to line source is not...right I suppose. So the main factors are speakers and recordings. Other electronics and audiophile paraphernalia make relatively little difference. Next in line would be the amplifier as you do need whatever it takes to get clean peaks of 105 dB. Then the cartridge if you do analog. 

Mike 

You are there: very expansive soundstage, feels like you can visualize the recording space.  First speaker example that comes to mind is DeVore.

They are here: forward presentation, very solid, focused images, such that the performer feels physically conjured in your room.  Zu is the classic example here.

I prefer "they are here".

To my ears and in my rooms I have found most conventional designs lean towards they are here presentations.  Projecting into the room with less rear wall interaction. A few exceptions along the way of stellar designs have done both when the recording offers it.  Conversely I’ve had Bi-polar and Di-polar designs that leaned more towards the you are there sound.  They all used the rear wall to create a hall effect to a greater degree.  Logans, Maggie, Mirage and Eminent Technology usually gave me the larger ambient field and when the venue was captured in recordings these designs almost always made me hear more of the you are there sound stage.  
Just my brief two cents on what I’ve experienced.   

Exactly right bryhifi. You are comparing line sources to point sources. There are very few if any Bi poles out there. That is a speaker that radiates from both sides in phase. Most of them, all the ones you mention are di poles. Both sides radiate 180 degress out of phase. It is not the sound bouncing off the back wall that gives you that "you are there" image. It is actually the lack of reflected sound that allows you to hear farther into the recording. Dipoles throw very little energy to their sides, up or down. Most of us that use them also dampen the wall behind them which tightens up the image even more.