Your Preference: Resolution or Fullness?


Just saw this mentioned over at another forum and thought it'd be good to hear your thoughts. Do you place a bigger importance on a speaker's resolution or its overall fullness of sound? This can apply to any type of speaker model, whether it bookshelf/tower, etc.
mkash3
My experience in general is similar to Jmcgrogan2's.

My longest listening sessions tend to be with my speakers
that sound fuller. I am able to enjoy the music more for
longer periods of time.

Listening to/for "resolution" is harder work
mentally and requires more "attention to detail"
(no pun intended) and focus. It has its own rewards but I
find I'm ready to take a
break sooner. Fullness provides easy musical satisfaction to
just soak in and is
conducive to a more relaxed experience just enjoying the
music. The detail becomes a supplemental thing to enjoy
either more or less as desired as the music unfolds.
fullness of sound could mean a lot of things

I have often wondered if a system has perfect dynamic range (impossible I know) would that not mean it would have to also have perfect resolution because you need those absolute tiny bits of information to achieve the lower dynamic range.

In other words dynamic range is important to me and more important than either fullness or resolution.

I did not mean to steal the post OP...
I want the speaker to sound as close as possible to what I hear in live jazz concerts and symphony halls. This means natural warmth (not bloat) quick transients, but no brightness and as transparent from top to bottom as possible with great inner detail. You should be able to get all this at low or high volumes. Pin point imaging, depth, width all fall into play when you get all the other parameters, unless of course you are using omnidirectional speakers, which never seem to have precisely focused images. I also don't want the speaker to be a one guy or gals speaker were the sound is only good sitting in the middle. The speaker should be efficient and easy to drive and have beautiful WAF.
There's no strict audiophile vocabulary so people will naturally apply different meanings to terms. In the spirit of the OP where it's either/or I'll take fullness. I've heard too many components that in the name of resolution and detail are presenting the sound as bright, lean, thinner and bleached. Strip away the true fullness and body of instruments and you're left with an artificial, canned, unconvincing replica of the music.

The good news is that both resolution (natural) and realistic fullness/body are certainly achievable with some well implemented components. We can have resolution and fullness simultaneously.
Charles,