Some people like sharp image, some people like the sound coming from every where and think that is closer to a live concert. I personally use headphone and do enjoy the sharp image that headphone provides. I do notice that some songs are recorded with stereo image in mind, but there are still people prefer dipoles even the image is not sharp. The big sound stage and wide sweat spot are also advantages of dipoles.
My philosophy for audio playback is "if it sounds good, it is good." I can totally believe that dipole speakers could give a wonderful presentation of music. I actually haven't heard any decent dipoles, except panel designs, which strike me as too fussy. I would like to hear a properly executed system like the Linkwitz designs at some point. I don't know enough audiophiles
The original Bose shtick was to utilize reflections off walls to evoke the spacious, diffuse sound of a hall. The other day I was listening to a pair of Bose 401s, which are kind of close to a dipole, and I enjoyed that spacious sound, for what it was. This idea of Bose is kind of ridiculous, because recordings done in live acoustic spaces already have the ambience captured, so you're just reflecting already reflected sound.
The reality is that most good recordings are strong enough to translate across many different playback systems. Surprisingly well. There is in some sense, I think, a canonical representation of the music, but it's an abstraction. The closest practical expression would be playback in the mixing studio.