Some of it I think is if you set the bike up as the frame builder suggests or if you are comparing, set up the seat at the same position and evaluate it from there.
Over time I have found that the 73° or 73.5° up to a 74° seat tube angle is probably best for me, but I can make even a bike with a 72.5° work pretty easily. This will get my saddle in the same spot on all.
From there getting the bars in about the same place can present a pretty wide range of stem extensions. This is with the same brand/style of handlebar. Having written all that... Bikes with a shorter front center, distance from the vertical line through the bottom bracket to the front axle can be more fun on the flats and need more attention on a descent. They are rewarding but demanding. These are for normal road bikes, save the Tesch S-22 which proclaims it is Built for Speed. The head angles vary and the rakes vary but the trail does not vary that much, no "low trail" machines in the bunch.
The bikes with lots of fork rake sometimes exhibit wheel flop, which shows itself on a local steep curvy 14% descent. Not my favorite feeling.

That, plus attempting to recruit the cat as an assistant.

but actually a glass of wine sounds real good right now!

That's a curious observation. The distance between the contact patch and the steering axis (measured either as trail at ground level or as a perpendicular to the axis so as to measure "flopping torque") differs by only 1cm or so for 72deg vs 74deg head angle, the larger trail being for the shallower angle. Rake reduces trail by moving the wheel forward, seemingly making the steering less floppy-over. So a shallow-angle bike essentially needs more rake, not less. Perhaps the apparent correlation is because shallower-angle bikes don't always have sufficiently greater rake. (Even so, as I said earlier, the difference is only 1cm or so. I don't think I could judge rake that accurately by eye. But then, my experience is considerably more limited than yours.)

IN retrospect, I realize there is one more factor in flop-over. The effective force of gravity on the steering axis is greater for shallower angle. Or put another way, even if the trail was zero, once the steering is turned away from straight ahead the front end of the bike necessarily drops more if the bike is leaned over. The effect would increase as you turned the steering more. Perhaps this is the difference. A shallower head angle could have a properly chosen rake but the change in front height would still be there.

For me high trail/high flop shows up climbing up steep hills at my (very slow!) maximum speed. Racey bikes tend to dart sideways under me in that scenario - scary when drivers are present!

I have attributed it to the rise and fall of the system.

Just rode my '73 Colnago to work, it requires much attention on that 14% S curved descent I go down, I can put the bike where I want more than other bikes but it is not a bike to do that with after 80-100 miles in to a ride. Give me a Masi for that.