Tube Amps Watts vs SS amp

Roberjerman, I went back and looked at the Heresy's timeline. It does date back to 1957 but it was called the H 700. It was given the Heresy name with an update in 1972 which was probably the year I got them as they were marketed at the time as new speakers. The K horn is the longest running production speaker of all time! I remember listen to them at the store I eventually got the Heresys at. They were being powered by Marantz Model 9 mono amplifiers and a Model 7C preamp. The turntable was a Thorens TD 124 with an SME arm. I don't remember the cartridge. That was the absolute State of the Art at the time. It had no problem doing realistic volume levels.

It is the clipping that is important. Glass clips softly, sand hard.

Atmasphere, I am certainly a believer in considering how the sensitivity of our ears changes with volume as were scientists long ago. Harvey Fletcher and Wilden Munson wrote their famous paper back in 1933. Loudness correction was a standard feature in preamps back in the day. The problem was that only one correction curve could be used which would only be accurate at one volume level. My processor uses a set of 6 curves pertaining to specific volume levels. The processor automatically blends from one curve to the next as volume increases, Dynamic loudness correction. The end result is that the music sounds the same regardless of volume. Bass and treble are automatically cut as volume increases. Under these circumstances I think distortion/clipping is more obvious as it stands apart from the high frequencies of the music. It also makes listening at high volumes magically comfortable. Violins and female voices do not cut your throat. The processor also does room control. IMHO the importance of room control is not in obtaining a flat frequency response as flat sounds terrible at most volume levels it is in obtaining exactly equal frequency response in both channels. The end result being laser imagining as frequencies don't shift between speakers. Any speaker's frequency response will change with position as well as two speakers of the same model will have slightly different frequency response. This technology is starting to become available in various iterations and I expect it will drift down to lower price points. None of the currently available units have dynamic loudness correction.

Atmasphere, one more series of questions. The Sensitivity measurement in db/1watt/1meter, is this measured with white noise? Does this really tell you how the speaker will perform with music? Is "music sensitivity"
frequency dependent. I roll off my speakers at 125 Hz 48 db/oct. My assumption has always been that the efficiency of the speaker increases because it would require less power to reach a certain volume than if I ran it full range. Is the correct or am I deluding myself? The sensitivity has not changed but efficiency increases?
The Soundlab Magestic 845 has a senstivity of 89db/1watt/1meter.
This means that it would take 128 watts to get to 110 db. This is the loudest playing music I would ever go. The MA 2 has sufficient power to do this. How would the MA 3 sound better. Some would argue that music being dynamic has peaks that go much higher than the steady state volume requiring much more power to handle without clipping.
Music obviously has peaks like the snap of a snare drum but are these peaks that much higher? The power required does increase
geometrically. The MA 3 will go about 4 db louder than the MA 2. Does this headroom make a difference?

Atmasphere, thanx for the article. For certain humans are extraordinarily change resistant. That is an unusual perception for an engineer. Those that embrace change are the pioneers like Tesla, Ford, Musk and others less well known. Too bad non of them are politicians.
Under the power paradigm you want speakers of steady impedance and relatively high efficiency. How does Soundlabs achieve this with an electrostatic loudspeaker. My Acoustats drop perilously low at high frequencies. I had to put a1 ohm series resister on the primary to prevent my amps from overheating. I removed the stock transformer drive and put one large 1:100 Sowter transformer on them resulting in this behavior. Conversely I always shied away from McIntosh amplifiers because they used transformers. I am not sure how they use feedback but it would appear they applying the objectivity principle. I am sure you prefer not to make comments on other companies amplifiers but how do you think this affects their sound versus standard voltage driven SS amplifiers. My final question is, how do you keep your amps power driven without transformers. 
I have long forgotten what boxes sound like;-)

browndt, Have you heard a Pass Xs 300 lately?

Roberjerman, I will agree that if you never play louder than 85 db you do not need much power and I had a very good audiophile friend in Miami who never did and he use to sit right on top of his Dalquist speakers wearing them almost like a set of headphones. His wife who was a sweetheart had relegated him to the smallest room in the house. I bought my Heresy's back in, lets see I was 17 at the time so that would be 1971. I think that was just when they were released. In college I use to drive the crap out of them with a Phase Linear 700. I use a YFE YF 20 sound level meter which is a fun piece to have and not very expensive. I can adjust my volume very accurately when AB ing equipment using a sine wave. At 100 db you are for certain clipping your amp. SETs do clip very gracefully which is one of the attractions and Herey's are very efficient. When I first got mine I had a Dynaco Stereo 70 which for my teenage ears did not play loudly enough. But, I had come from AR 2Ax speakers so the Heresy's were a big improvement. Subs would have helped but we did not have them back then. If your SETs do the job for you that is wonderful. They certainly can sound beautiful but I am the crazy maniac who wants the drum set in my media room and that requires serious power and subs even with efficient systems. Peaks can easily require 10 times the power which again is one of the big draws of tube amps. They clip more gracefully which allows them to play louder before getting obnoxious. 

Sanders biases his arguments towards his own amps which are admittedly great values in high powered amps. Yes, high powered tube amps waste a lot more energy as heat than an AB SS amp. He is also expressing his opinion with a bias toward driving his electrostatic speakers. He dismisses OTL amps off hand. He is right that you need to use a lot of tubes to reduce the impedance of the output section but once you do so they are every bit as effective at driving electrostats as SS amps. Sanders is right about clipping affecting the sound quality of amps. Power is expensive it is also everything in terms of producing realistic dynamics at comfortably loud volume levels. Boulder has come to the same decision. There is no such thing as too much power and I am inclined to agree. I am also guilty of being attracted to notoriously inefficient loudspeakers. All things being equal you are way better off buying more power than more cables.. Audioman58, transformers do not make power no matter how big they are and no transformer is always better than any transformer. There is no SET amp capable of the kind of visceral dynamic sound close to being realistic. IMHO they make great headphone amps. There is no speaker efficient enough to make a Set amp produce an undistorted 95 db comfortably which is around what is measure in most small jazz clubs. I suppose if you live in an attached condo and can't disturb the neighbors they are fine. Seigan, a 100 watt tube amp clips at exactly the same place as a 100 watt SS amp. But tube amps clip softly while SS amps clip hard. The Tube amp sounds better clipping than the SS amp which may be the major cause of the attraction of tube amps. The tube amp will seem to play louder. But any amp that is not clipping will sound better than an amp that is. You get an amp to POWER your loudspeakers. Power is everything. The more you can afford the better, Tube or SS.