What kind of listener are you?

Yes that sounds like a good idea to me. Inefficient speakers require more power, and amps that are powerful and involving are few and far between and tend to be very, very expensive. Low power amps on the other hand that are emotionally involving are common, and range from very affordable ones that sound quite good to expensive ones that are utterly captivating. So its no contest.

That said, the first component to make me realize the importance of Feeling was the 150 wpc McCormack DNA1. Back in those days I was very methodical in using my favored test CDs with tracks selected to help me run down my audiophile checklist, all of which was analytical. It was only when I caught myself lost in the music totally forgetting about the checklist that it dawned on me, this is what its all about. That was my first real high end component, and while it definitely passed the Analytical and Thrill requirements it was the Feeling (pleasure) that really reeled me in then, and has ever since.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ndZrj7DSmk00WIORrcS_siKnUK_kj3SrFFamrWJxGh8/edit#heading=h.q7dek...

Less analytical these days and more into does the music move me, tonality, check. Dynamics check. Emotion depends on the music, still get in the moment whether Greig or Lou Reed’s Rock and Roll Animal. In the end, I am very happy with my current set up and it’s sound representation.   Using your Venn diagram, I would still be centered at CDT.

Yeah its Origin Live came up with this. One thing I find interesting is my Origin Live Conqueror arm does a better job of balancing these three pillars than most other components. Synergistic Research wire is a little more skewed to Clarity and Dynamics, my Herron is a little more Tonality and Detail, and so on. Not a lot, I just don't go for anything very far from optimizing all three. 

Its a small sample size. But it is interesting to note the one manufacturer who breaks it down this way is also the one to achieve the best balance across those criteria. Well maybe not so much interesting as expected: Plan your work, work your plan. 

mc,
I think the link you use is one leg of three things which affect what one hears.
-Equipment
-Recording
-Room

Perhaps I miss your point?

That Origin Live document is itself pretty "analytical," but interesting nonetheless.
For me, accuracy of instrumental timbre is probably most important, followed by spatial realism (soundstage width and depth, instrumental placement, "air" around instruments). But that would be primarily for acoustic ensembles: chamber orchestras, string quartets, jazz groups. For rock, tight and accurate bass is obviously important at loud volumes. Someone on this site has mentioned somewhere that large orchestras don't come across well on any but the most uncompromising (and expensive) systems in acoustically benevolent spaces, and I think that's true. For me, small chamber orchestras that are well recorded are among the most satisfying, and exciting, to hear on my system. Any of the Orpheus recordings of Haydn symphonies, for example, fall into this category.