Can Integrateds compete sonically with seperates?

[jimbones]

I am old school and have 30 yr old seperates (Audio Research/Aragon) I know there have been quite a bit of advances in all area's of electronics and speakers. Question I have is, Can integrated preamp/amps compete sonically with seperates? Say up to 100/150 wpc?

[StereoNut]

I'd say you have a much better chance now than ever before, Jim.

The economic crunch over the past 5+ years has put a rather large dent in the expendable $$$ capital available for audiophiles to spend on new toys.  Many audio manufacturers seeing a downturn in overall sales (especially in more expensive equipment) started adding quality integrateds to their product lines to position themselves better in fighting for the lessened available sales dollars "out there".

I'm not saying an integrated will perform every bit as good as separates, but I believe the gap has closed between the two.  If you consider one less power cord and set of I/C's with an integrated, the "bang for the buck" factor makes it a very attractive alternative.

Of course, this is just my 2’

Bill

[sleepyguy24]

I'd love to hear membership's thoughts on this. If you are using the same speakers that the Audio Research/Aragon combo were powering for me I can't fathom an integrated that could match that performance unless it is a big dollar high powered integrated.

My experience is limited but I have a great condition Accuphase E202 Integrated that I compared too with an Accuphase C200 preamp and a Baldwin tube amp combo using the same speakers (KEF 103/3 and then KEF Q300s). Sound wise things were different. I had great imaging and very nice mids and highs with the separates combo. With the E202 imaging was ok but music was more forward. My listening space was small so couldn't crank up the volume without going deaf but I bet I could crank things up more with the E202. Functionality wise I liked the C200 preamp more because it really has a lot more functions than the E202.

[richidoo]

It's all in the engineering. If the designer has good ears, and good understanding of subtle electronic principles and knows what to do to fix the problems that occur along the design path then they can achieve very good performance whether integrated or separates.

There is a lot of black art in making feedback and current sources and mirrors work well. Removing out of band IM distortion, eliminating crossover distortion. It is all possible and when it's all fixed you have great sound. It doesn't have to cost a lot of money in parts, but the development takes a long time to get the refinement we want.

I think there are some strong benefits to integrateds. Eliminating the wiring and connectors. Eliminating an extra set of input and output caps. Share PS, smaller space. But the power output is usually limited by heat dissipation and power supply size. Above 100-200w I would look to separates.  If the class B crossing distortion can be reduced without a ton of class A bias, then you can make more power in a smaller integrated box, but that's not easy.

My little 15W Samet I15 integrated has displaced (stereofool's loaner) AR Ref1 and VT100 that I was using before. I don't miss them too much. Well, maybe a little.   It has been continually refined for 6 years.

The Sim Audio Moon Evolution 600i integrated amp intrigues me. 125W. They have a 175W also. Sim's not gonna be cheap.

The ARCAM A19 is getting good reviews, appearing in European shows with the little KEF K50 speakers. Whether it sounds good with anything else I dunno, but Arcam stuff usually pretty alright. The A19 is from their top FMJ series.

AR's tubed VSi60 is very nice, but limited power. I heard it with bigfish a few years ago playing Wilson Sophia2. It was excellent. Again, not cheap, but good stuff.

There is a lot of crap in the low/mid priced integrated market. It all hides behind the "good for the price" excuse. Exposure is an example. I bought one just to see if it was as good as Samet I60 integrated, because the reviews were so over the top. It was built like junk and sounded significantly less impressive than the I60. It lists for $2000!! To me that's a ripoff, but they have to pay the distribution and insurance and factory and employees and insurance. So that's what it costs.  You kinda have to shoot for the best brands to find good value in that price range. But then you're not in that price range anymore! oops! haha 

But you get the benefits of an integrated amp that sounds as good or better than the low end separates.

The used market will offer some great integrated options.
http://www.marklevinson.com/Products/Details/33
http://www.stereophile.com/integratedamps/997classe
etc.

The link to Agon's integrated amp listing confuses the forum software because it has a close bracket in the link, so you'll have to do that one yourself... But there are some pretty pickins there from time to time.

[Hugh]

Not quite 100W or anywhere close to it but I let this review speaks for itself in relation to the topic.

If I remember correctly, the reviewer sold his Concert Fidelity Pre & Pass Lab Monos once he auditioned the AN300B.

http://hometheaterreview.com/melody-an-300b-integrated-amplifier-reviewed/

[Carlman]

I am a separates guy when it comes to pre's and amps. The amp needs to be 'synergized' to the speakers and the pre needs specific functions. Those change independently over time so I like having the flexibility.
To me getting an integrated limits my options.
I haven't heard an integrated that would work for me long term. But I like big power. 500w would be my ideal amp.
C

[bhobba]

I would say - yes.

I have owned a few integrated's I thought were fantastic - a Trafomatic Experience 2 and Leben.

However these days I much prefer direct connecting DAC's to amps and using the volume control in the computer - much more transparent to my ears.

But that is just me - many love what a valve pre does and would never do what I do.

Thanks
Bill

[jimbones]

I would say - yes.

I have owned a few integrated's I thought were fantastic - a Trafomatic Experience 2 and Leben.

However these days I much prefer direct connecting DAC's to amps and using the volume control in the computer - much more transparent to my ears.

But that is just me - many love what a valve pre does and would never do what I do.

Thanks
Bill

I do that with my Burson sometimes. I am considering a BMC or Benchmark Dac2 HGS as a upgrade

[rollo]

  The big sonic difference is not tonality or harmonics. intergrated Amps can and are capable of correct tonality. Emotional impact as well.
   Where the difference lies is in the artifacts that bring us closer to the illusion of a live performance.  
    With separates the power supplies are the key. Imaging, sound stage and scale of sound usually are more developed and defined.
     The right Intergrated for ones system eliminates cables, connectors, solder joints and circuitry. If the intergrated offers separate power supplies for each function all the better.
    Power available stops many from purchase of intergrated amps. If one owns highly efficient speakers no problem. Shindo, Leben offer great ones. Audio Note as well.
    If the trannies are of high quality maybe the point is moot and then goes to power offered.
     I have used passive preamps, no preamp, tubed dual mono preamps, battery powered, both SS and tubed.
     To my ears a non preamped system has it advantages in clarity, less noise floor and detail. However loses the weight or body and soul. I believe the preamp makes up for the source.
    We rely on the recording quality. Garbage in garbage out.If I was to use no preamp the source would have to carry the goods. Is there a source out there that does that ? Yes sir ya just need a bunch of money.
    I'm liking the Esoteric line these days. Especially the "K" series. Tonality and harmonics that are spot on with authority. Expensive yes but no pre required. A well designed volume control is all ya need. The new TEAC is a giant killer IMO. For under $3000 try it.
    For intergrated amps, Rogers, Plinius, VAC and Shindo come to mind. Ya just need the right speaker.


charles



    
      

[jimbones]

 The big sonic difference is not tonality or harmonics. intergrated Amps can and are capable of correct tonality. Emotional impact as well.
   Where the difference lies is in the artifacts that bring us closer to the illusion of a live performance.  
    With separates the power supplies are the key. Imaging, sound stage and scale of sound usually are more developed and defined.
     The right Intergrated for ones system eliminates cables, connectors, solder joints and circuitry. If the intergrated offers separate power supplies for each function all the better.
    Power available stops many from purchase of intergrated amps. If one owns highly efficient speakers no problem. Shindo, Leben offer great ones. Audio Note as well.
    If the trannies are of high quality maybe the point is moot and then goes to power offered.
     I have used passive preamps, no preamp, tubed dual mono preamps, battery powered, both SS and tubed.
     To my ears a non preamped system has it advantages in clarity, less noise floor and detail. However loses the weight or body and soul. I believe the preamp makes up for the source.
    We rely on the recording quality. Garbage in garbage out.If I was to use no preamp the source would have to carry the goods. Is there a source out there that does that ? Yes sir ya just need a bunch of money.
    I'm liking the Esoteric line these days. Especially the "K" series. Tonality and harmonics that are spot on with authority. Expensive yes but no pre required. A well designed volume control is all ya need. The new TEAC is a giant killer IMO. For under $3000 try it.
    For intergrated amps, Rogers, Plinius, VAC and Shindo come to mind. Ya just need the right speaker.


charles



    
      

You mean the teac dac?

[DaveC]

I don't think there is a clear answer here, but there used to be a very good reason for separates... the preamp provides voltage gain for a power amp that requires it. It makes a lot of sense to give a voltage gain stage it's own power supply, source switching and volume control, which can drive a variety of power amps depending on the needs of the consumer.

I have experimented with using my SET amp's driver stage (a ccs loaded 12BH7A) without a preamp vs using my preamp as a driver stage (6SN7 Aikido) without the 12BH7A, as both gain stages provide about the same amount of gain. The results weren't even close... the Aikido completely blew away the SET amp's driver stage. Now I use the Aikido to drive the SET amp's GL KT77s directly... no coupling capacitor at all in my amp and only ONE cap in series with the music signal from the DAC chip's output to the speakers. This also means my amp has about a 15V input sensitivity without the driver so a preamp is required...

These days it seems like amps have <2V input sensitivity, so the requirement for an active voltage gain stage is questionable, and many systems have an excess of gain so I like the idea of using a zero gain tube buffer stage instead of a traditional preamp.

[rollo]

 The big sonic difference is not tonality or harmonics. intergrated Amps can and are capable of correct tonality. Emotional impact as well.
   Where the difference lies is in the artifacts that bring us closer to the illusion of a live performance.  
    With separates the power supplies are the key. Imaging, sound stage and scale of sound usually are more developed and defined.
     The right Intergrated for ones system eliminates cables, connectors, solder joints and circuitry. If the intergrated offers separate power supplies for each function all the better.
    Power available stops many from purchase of intergrated amps. If one owns highly efficient speakers no problem. Shindo, Leben offer great ones. Audio Note as well.
    If the trannies are of high quality maybe the point is moot and then goes to power offered.
     I have used passive preamps, no preamp, tubed dual mono preamps, battery powered, both SS and tubed.
     To my ears a non preamped system has it advantages in clarity, less noise floor and detail. However loses the weight or body and soul. I believe the preamp makes up for the source.
    We rely on the recording quality. Garbage in garbage out.If I was to use no preamp the source would have to carry the goods. Is there a source out there that does that ? Yes sir ya just need a bunch of money.
    I'm liking the Esoteric line these days. Especially the "K" series. Tonality and harmonics that are spot on with authority. Expensive yes but no pre required. A well designed volume control is all ya need. The new TEAC is a giant killer IMO. For under $3000 try it.
    For intergrated amps, Rogers, Plinius, VAC and Shindo come to mind. Ya just need the right speaker.


charles



    
      

You mean the teac dac?

  No the CDP. Very impressive.


charles

[rollo]

I don't think there is a clear answer here, but there used to be a very good reason for separates... the preamp provides voltage gain for a power amp that requires it. It makes a lot of sense to give a voltage gain stage it's own power supply, source switching and volume control, which can drive a variety of power amps depending on the needs of the consumer.

I have experimented with using my SET amp's driver stage (a ccs loaded 12BH7A) without a preamp vs using my preamp as a driver stage (6SN7 Aikido) without the 12BH7A, as both gain stages provide about the same amount of gain. The results weren't even close... the Aikido completely blew away the SET amp's driver stage. Now I use the Aikido to drive the SET amp's GL KT77s directly... no coupling capacitor at all in my amp and only ONE cap in series with the music signal from the DAC chip's output to the speakers. This also means my amp has about a 15V input sensitivity without the driver so a preamp is required...

These days it seems like amps have <2V input sensitivity, so the requirement for an active voltage gain stage is questionable, and many systems have an excess of gain so I like the idea of using a zero gain tube buffer stage instead of a traditional preamp.

  If ones Amp has an input sensitivity of less than 1V try a passive without hesitation. 2v is OK but less is better. My Audio Research amp DR250 is .6V, with a passive pre really good. Try it if your amps conform.


charles

[jimbones]

Thanks all for the different perspectives. I'm sure for uber expensive stuff the separates is the only way to fly, but at a lower price point the integrated's have decent performance and have gotten better. 30 years ago I wouldn't even consider one. Today someone can get into bona fide hifi with a integrated.

[Werd]

I am old school and have 30 yr old seperates (Audio Research/Aragon) I know there have been quite a bit of advances in all area's of electronics and speakers. Question I have is, Can integrated preamp/amps compete sonically with seperates? Say up to 100/150 wpc?

Whats the criteria?