Watts! How many do we need?

Got a new amp. Accuphase P-4600. It’s great. I love it. 
150 watts into 8 ohms, 300 watts into 4 ohms and it has meters so I can see wattage. Have them set on freeze so I can see the highest wattage during the session.

My Harbeth speakers are not very efficient. Around 86db. Their impedance is an even 6 ohms dipping no lower than 5.8 ohms. 

Playing HiRes dynamic classical recordings  ( Tchaikovsky , Mahler) at room filling volumes I have yet to exceed 1watt.. 

Amps today offer a lot of watts some going to 600 even 1200 watts. Even if you have inefficient speakers with an impedance that dips down to 2 ohms do we need all this wattage or should we be focusing on current instead? 


@bigtwin  , is an unltralinear watt identical to a triode watt?  That's a serious question, I am not intending to be sarcastic.

Beyond my paygrade.  We should all buy and listen to what we like.  There is no one right answer when it comes to amp power.  As pointed out in several comments, which I agree with, there are many factors that determine the proper combination of equipment.  I can only say that with my speakers, a low powered amp is not that correct equipment.  Cheers.

@immatthewj   I think that Sanders covered this question fully in his paper? 

@bigtwin  , I am honestly not familiar with Sanders or the paper you referenced, but is it accessible on this site?  What would I need to use (besides "Sanders") as a search engine to find it?

@immatthewj  Scroll up about 15 posts and you will see I pasted a potion of the paper and included a link to the full paper.  Sanders does a good job explaining the perceived difference in tubes and SS, and why many systems may be underpowered.   Once again, I am assuming he knows what he is talking about after designing and building amps and speakers for decades.   For me anyway, he calls into question all the members who claim only fhe first watt is important and that 50 watt amps are all you need.   Read the whole paper and tell me what you think.  Cheers.