define resolution

I'm entering a new phase of discovery re: different sonic properties of cables. I've been comparing two mid priced IC's($600-800). I would describe Cable A as liquid, refined, detailed with a deep soundstage. Cable B offers more texture and timbre - more presence, more forward and flatter soundstage. How would resolution be applied here? Thanks!
JMHO, but I think that soundstage depth is a hall mark of fine resolution, whereas more presence, forward & flatter sound stage is more associated with an uptilted upper-midrange and high end.
i don't see the point. just go with the set of qualities that you value most. having said that timbre, pitch resolution, note decay (all functions of harmonics) were the last qualities to flesh out in my system and probably are the qualities i would be most critical of when evaluating a system or component.
Resolution is the fineness of image that can distinguished. Traditionally, resolution was applied to the visual, as in photography, telescopy. cinematography or even TV. By analogy, we have aural imagery. So position, separation, depth and relative values and interplay to a sonic image. In one sense it even surpasses the visual, because vision is mono or stereo, but sound has a much wider a field. So there is a point.
I place non-mechanical sounding and music making sense as my top priorities which I have found in the Cardas Golden Cross (not the most detailed).
resolution is the level of detail. coarse vs fine such as different grains of sandpaper, higher grain = more pieces of sand per area thus more resolution, simple really.
The sandpaper analogy is interesting. So, when Cable B presents greater texture, timbre, and weight to the vocals than Cable A, would Cable B be like a courser grade sandpaper. Or finer, since it is revealing more detail?

Technically, the resolution of a system is it's noise floor. So as far as the qualities you are describing, resolution doesn't seem to be one of them.