Is there any truth to this question?


Will a lower powered amp that can drive your speakers, in your room, listening to the music you like sound better than using a powerful amp to avoid clipping?

Here's the scenario: Use a 50 w YBA amp to drive 86 db efficient Vandersteens in a 10 x 12 room, listening to jazz or

Will a 200 w Krell or such sound better and more effortless.

Some say buy all the power you can afford and others say the bigger amps have more component pairs ie) transistors to match and that can effect sound quality.
128x128digepix
Post removed 
Hi all ! This is my experience....two amplifiers from the same company , one a 50wpc amp ...and the other a 250 wpc amp . The smaller amp (operating below clipping) always sounds better than the 250wpc amp . Why ? The larger amp is more complex with more output devices which muddies up the sound . Same goes with tube amps ...same company , same amp family ...one is 30wpc , other one is 140 wpc ...unless clipping the 30 wpc sounds better . Simpler with less BS in the signal path is almost always better .
Pubul..the best I've ever heard Vandersteen 2 speakers was with a Music Reference RM 10. If I were looking at tubes that little EL 84 amp can do magical things. I guess you're all right, you have to try it..it's one time that following the rules doesn't always give you the best result.
IN your case with 86db efficient speakers my guess is the 200 w Krell will sound better and more "effortless".
Digepix, you are not the first person to tell me that the best they ever heard the Vandersteens was being driven by the tiny RM10 - I kid you not. In fact, I think Roger designed the amp when he owned a pair of the 2Ces, it seems he thought 35 watts was enough power!