Do Titles on Abstracted Works Enhance?

I was working on a painting the other day and another artist at the studio asked what the title was going to be. We then launched into a discussion about whether or not the title on a painting enhanced the viewer's understanding of what the work could possibly mean. Does it matter?
I have always felt that "the work should speak for itself" and that it doesn't matter what the artist is like, what their age or experience is, where they may have attended school or how many degrees they may have. But after having witnessed many, many people come into the gallery and look at artwork, I know that the title of work is often the "Aha!" moment for viewers when trying to understand a piece of art. It can often make or break a sale. This is also true for realistic work as well. A landscape from the Blue Ridge Mountains may look just like the very same mountains elsewhere, but folks identify with names and places they know, thereby helping to close a sale.
I understand why it is so much easier for some artists to simply place a number on a piece of work, especially in a series, so as not to predetermine or coax the viewer into a certain perspective. Titling a work "No.23" keeps things ambiguous and allows the viewer to make for a cleaner decision about the work. Unfortunately, unless you already have a great following or perhaps are hanging in the National Gallery of Art, this can turn people off.
At the end of the day, what a work is titled is the artist's decision and if it enlightens, then I suppose that it is helpful. In a perfect world,I would love to envision someone seeing my work from across a room, exclaim how lovely it is and never even look for the title.