Yes, but the OP seems to think it favors box speakers over dipoles and omnis. It doesn't, as far as I can tell.
Dipoles and Omnis require a different setup, you have to consciously use the sound going out the back (and sides) - and you need to have sufficient distance from both rear and side walls, for those reflections not to interfere with the main imaging/soundstaging... so that means the speakers need to be ideally 2m / 6ft out from the rear wall, and a minimum of 1m (preferably 2m ) from side walls.
Use of absorbing/reflecting materials tends to be different, as does the positioning of the speakers themselves.
The test room is set up for mono-directional box speakers - in the testing, only a single solitary example of a dipole electrostatic was used - and was rated very poorly. But there are numerous ELS's and omnis that have been ranked very highly by audiophiles and speaker designers, and this setup does not allow them to achieve their potential.
Having said that, 90% of buyers have no interest in dipoles and omnis, 90% of the market is made up of box speakers - it has its validity, but its validity is limited to the category it was designed for - box speakers.
If I had not been exposed to Quad ESL's in my early 20's - I would have merrily followed the crown, and gone with box speakers....
But once I had heard the Quad ESL63 & ESL57, and the Martin Logan CLS ... there wasn't much out there that came close (circa 1985).
Yes, the average level of quality of box speakers has risen over the years - the mass market speakers are much better than they were back in the day ... but the top end, hasn't moved as much as people think - the best of the 80's and 70's is still very very good indeed.
And yeah those ESL speakers were always demonstrated well out into the listening space - often 3m from the wall behind them and to the side.