More power or better quality power?


I use a 120 watt NAD integrated and a pair of Sonus Concerto Monitors (Home version), and a REL stadium III for the low end. I am researching new integrateds because my System sounds lifeless. My car system sounded much the same before I added a higher power (twice the wattage) and higher quality (3 times the price) amp. The difference was night and day. So I am wondering, do I need more power for my home system, or do I just need better quality power...or worse yet, BOTH! My room is pretty large (18 by 18 give or take, plus a high vaulted cieling). The system is tucked in a corner and i listen from about 8 feet away on axis. I listen to everything, but mostly rock. I was considering a 100 watt Primare that is on audiogon right now. I was going to go Plinius, but I think with warm speakers, and warm cables (cardas) That might be just too much warmth :)
Low level quality of sound is important because I do no live alone and don't want to need to crank it to get a good quality sound.

So, is bigger really better, or is it it the quality?
phoenix469
Bob, you should maybe just get out and listen to a bunch of gear; it would probably help you to understand what people are talking about when they say things like different amplifiers sound substantially different. You might become less set in your theoretical opinion that everything sounds the same.
Post removed 
Ohh yes I guess those tube guys don't care about neutrality anyway as they continue to roll their tubes...
I do believe that if one amp/preamp sounds substantially different when level matched operating within their linear region, then one of them is broken (possibly by design).

In my opinion, I don't believe one design is broken if it does not sound the same as with another design. Speaking out of common sense, all designs, be it amps or speakers are all different. The parts inside the amps, the type of parts, the arrangement of electronic boards etc. are all different and that explains to why they sound different. In general/theory, an amp is supposed to be neutral, in fact everything should be designed close to as neutral possible so as to reproduce the signals in their true state. This doesn't appear to be true in actual case. Designer's may be striving to achieve neutrality but most equipment more or less have their own kind of sound due to the points as mentioned above. The term is subjective and debatable. In fact, I don't know how we can classify any particular equipment as neutral. Only if we can measure neutrality.

More technical persons would be able to explain or clarify in better terms.

In response to the poster of this thread, it would be good to get a quality integrated amp as opposed to using your NAD as a line stage in the long run.
Bob,

We agree that speakers are the "most important" component (have the most influence on sound) but that is about all we agree on, I think. I'm really not sure how you could *not* hear major differences, irrespective of power, between, say, a class AB SS amp, an OTL push-pull tube amp, a digital amp, and a single-ended tube amp, so I don't know. They all tend to have rather distinctive sounds, though ranking one or the other as best or better is largely taste.

Here's a little story (which I am making up right now). A subjectivist and an objectivist were going to go out for dinner. The subjectivist says "Let's go to Vito's, this killer Italian place I know - you'll be amazed." The objectivist replies, "Ha! I've measured the food at McD's and found it to have comparable or better calorie, protein, carbohydrate, and nutrient specs than Vito's. You're kidding yourself to say their food is 'better'! It's placebo effect!"
No offense. :-} I hope that was at least passably amusing.

P.S. Objectivists take all the fun out of audio.