Soundstage depth and width


Which one is more important? It is the depth to me, I don't tolerate flat sound.
inna
Timbre is more important than depth or width, but even though I consider depth and width an effect I prefer width.

If I had to pick one or the other, I would say "depth"; however, they both are very important. I think "dipole" speakers contribute more depth than box speakers.

"Timbre" is very complex. How can someone state "unequivocally" that they have the right timbre?
Tough question . I guess I'd go with depth , if a sound stage doesn't have a three dimensional image it loses it's believability . If I can't determine a musicians position on stage it loses me .

I don't think you can give dipoles a universal indorsement for having a deep sound stage , Iv'e heard many that didn't .

I think we can all agree on a "three dimensional image"; what is most interesting, is how the various components contribute to that image. I'm curious to learn what others know in regard to this.