What is meant exactly by the description 'more musical'?

. . . and apparently by some SET standards, 14 or 15 wpc is a lot, as I keep reading about some of Dennis Had’s new stuff making less than 5 wpc? I DEFINITELY don’t think that would satisfy the average metal head.

classical is not my thing; but if it was and I wanted to hear The William Tell Overture (I hope I got that right) at what was a satisfying level, I wouldn't be looking at low powered SET stuff.  And I wouldn't be looking at the low powered SET stuff if I was into death metal either.  And most of the posts from the metal guys that do post here, seem like they are into the big SS stuff.  I am not saying that I don't think tubes can do metal, but I am saying that I don't think 15 wpc or less is going to do what the average metal guy wats it to do.

SETs are best used with high efficiency speakers- often over 100dB. A 5 Watt SET might be used with a speaker that is 103 or 105 dB. That is why a 15 Watt amp might seem like a lot. If not used with such speakers you would be correct; but such a person would likely find the amp unsatisfying with any genre because there wouldn't be enough power.

IOW you are talking about an equipment mismatch.

Anyway, you also provided a definition of "more musical" as sounding like "real music" [Quotation marks are mine]. By "real music", do you mean as it sounds in the audience of a large colliseum or at the mixing board? Or do you mean as it sounds to the audience in an unamplified venue? Or do you mean the way it sounds in the studio when it is being recorded?

'Real music' in that it sounds as real as the recording allows. So that might mean it sounds like you're in a live amphitheater or it might sound like the musicians are in your room.

What if someone’s ear does not care about the kind of distortion @atmasphere identifies with musicality?

They literally would not be from this planet! IOW there are no such people. That is because all people use the same hearing perceptual rules.

As i see it now after my experiments and this correspond to what you said when you said that you want to see the musicians more than hear them,

iis now so well reproduced and translated by your system/room that now you "SEE" the instruments and musicians...

Actually, @mahgister , what I meant was that back in the days I was attending venues with live music, I was going out more because I wanted to see the band/performer perform than I was to hear them perform. It was always, "Hey, let’s go out this weekend and see so & so at such and such a club." I don’t go out to see/hear live music now-a-days, and when I go back to my little room and start flipping switches and selecting discs to listen to, it is all about what I hear, and what I hear does produce some visualizations, but to enhance the visuals I turn off the lights and take my glasses off and close my eyes. (I am actually at the point where closing one eye would work, but the eye that is gone is the only one I can squint without squinting the other at the same time, so therefore I close them both.)

@atmasphere

’Real music’ in that it sounds as real as the recording allows. So that might mean it sounds like you’re in a live amphitheater or it might sound like the musicians are in your room.

okay, I understand what you are saying; however I personally think I might describe that as accuracy more than musical. Not to protract this any further, but I am good with Webster’s definition (paraphrasing) of musical having to do with being pleasing and harmonious, and back in the ’70s and ’80s when the live venues we were going to were mostly coliseums or amphitheaters I really don’t remember the SQ being very good at all. I think it was all about the shared emotional group experience of SEEING a band we really thought was great enhanced by whatever misbehavior was going on at the same time.

Therefore, going back to Webster’s definition, for the live performance of (for example) Sammy Hagar opening for Boston at The CheckerDome in St. Louis (which was the very first concert I ever attended) to be musical, it would have to have been from the sound board perspective, not from the perspective of being in the audience.

@immatthewj ....*Whew*G*  'On the other note' ultimately is a preferable condition...;)  And cueing up would be...problematic...at best.

A ss amp person myself, I can appreciate good luck when rolling the tubes and hoping for luck to strike.  Since I read about that activity around here a lot....us ss types do some 'chip swaps' with sound cards and the like, so there is a variant of sorts.

Toured the pressing shop at Citizens' today...and actually bought an LP; 

The Pentangles' "Basket of ight"....guess I'll have to dust off the TT....

Anyhow....Y'all take care out there... 👍, J

@atmasphere , in light of the SET & metal discussion that was going on, this is an interesting thread:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/young-audiophile-metal-head-looking-to-level-up-speaker-choice#2643720

I also was wondering if in your opinion there was a trade off other than LF bandwidth when using high efficiency horn speakers? (I was thinking of some of the newer Klipsch monitors that MD carries.) Would there be a reason NOT to use this speaker with a moderately powered amp? Such as a tube amp doing 50 wpc in triode mode?