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
Unsound, you make a very good point, the Vandersteens might be the last speaker on earth (ok, I'm exagerating)you would use nearfield - with all that time alignment and phase coherecy stuff built into its design ethos. Of course they can still be enjoyed, but not really optimal placement for the way VS works across the line.
The thing is music music is a lot more complex than any test signal. Transient response is different technically from clipping, however I suspect the two are related. AN amp that does not tend to clip should be able to handle transients better, though there is more to it than just that.

An analogy is can a water balloon be inflated instantaneously when required. A lot faster when there is sufficient volume of water and pressure (similar to voltage and current ie power in electronics).

Similar with transient response an amp that does not break a sweat handling the peaks (ie does not clip) is more likely to have the drive needed for fast transients when needed as well. Not to say that less powerful amps with good design may not also do quite well with transients, but I think that would be more hit or miss and clipping could become an issue.

The Class D (switching) Bel Canto ref1000m amps I use with my inefficient hard to drive speakers are champs to me at this. They are very efficient and very powerful, articulate at lower volume and also seem to never break a sweat. Clipping is a non issue as best I can tell with these. Not so with most any other amp up to 200 w/ch or so that I have tried.
I had the Vandersteens in a house driven by a 200 watt Krell and I was sitting back 7 or 8 feet in a 20 x 25 room. Now my first wife is gone..the Krell is gone all that remains are the Vandersteens. I'm saving for a pair of Harbeth speakers and sell the Vandersteens, time and finances will tell.
DIg,

Oh, so you actually have run the Vandy's off the larger Krell in the past!

So what is your take on your question based on your recollection of how that sounded compared to what you have now?

Whether any particular setup floats your boat or not is all that really matters.

Harbeth would sound much different than VAndersteen in general I would expect. We all need some change in our lives sometimes.
In a big room sitting farther away from the speakers it works with a higher powered amp. In my current situation sitting near field with a solid wall 3 feet behind me it would just overload the space and clipping distortion would be the least of my problems. Richard Vandersteen set the power range on these speakers from 40-160 watts so I've had both extremes and for my situation the lower powered amp is doing just fine. People say YBA is a little light in the bass but any more would just cause other problems.