Some designers claim that paralleling multiple output devices to get higher output degrades the sound. The original Dartzeel amps were based on the philosophy of minimizing output devices (only two were used per channel), but, demands from the market for more than 100 watt/channel made them abandon this philosophy. I don't know if there is any truth to this claim. But, many years ago I heard two Rowland amps that were very similar in design, but one was rated at something like 50 watts and the other 200 watts per channel. Both were used to drive somewhat challenging speakers (if I recall correctly, they were Maggies). At the not extremely loud volume I heard the combinations, I actually preferred the lower powered amp and so did the owner of the store that demonstrated the amp/speaker combination. Who knows what other factors might have been involved, but, in this case, the lower powered, and cheaper, amp prevailed.
When coupled to high efficiency speakers, my favorite amps are almost always low-powered tube amps I currently run a 5.5 watt per channel pushpull pentode amp. My other amp is a parallel single ended amp that puts out a whopping 6.5 watts per channel One of my all-time favorite amp is a pushpull triode amp that I think puts out 8 watts per channel, my other favorite is an output transformerless amp (giant four box affair for stereo) that puts out something like 30 watts per channel.