Separates vs. Integrated?

[Jason Lopez]

I currently own a NAD C352 integrated amp and want to upgrade. Let's say I want to budget for $2000. Would it be better to spread that amount between a separate amp/pre-amp combo, or get a $2000 integrated amp? At what level does an integrated amp exceed the performance/sound of separtes at the same price point?
It would seem to me (at a $2000 price point) that with an integrated amp...a designer/engineer could really tweak all the parts to sound their best together. Like a synergistic effect. They KNOW everything about the sonics of the the amp and pre-amp that are going into one chassis and can design them to work together. Kind of the way digital/active speakers are designed. Also keeping in mind, fewer interconnects and one less power cord to upgrade.

 

[croseiv]

I would go separates just because, a separate amp will be more robust, as that piece is dedicated completely to that function. Even with an integrated amp, you will have less space in the box since it still needs room for a preamp as well as an amp, and hence less room for a larger transformer, caps and heat sinks.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Have a look.

Hi Jason,

When you say $2,000 price point, I figure you mean street price, right?

Check this out: http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/audiovideo/3088/krell-s-300i-integrated-stereo-amplifier.html

This one is less expensive: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/integrated-amplifiers/637-marantz-pm8003-integrated-amplifier.html

* But the Krell S-300i is definitively the way to go.

 

[croseiv]

Hi Jason,

When you say $2,000 price point, I figure you mean street price, right?

Check this out: http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/audiovideo/3088/krell-s-300i-integrated-stereo-amplifier.html

This one is less expensive: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/integrated-amplifiers/637-marantz-pm8003-integrated-amplifier.html

* But the Krell S-300i is definitively the way to go.

He could get a stand alone preamp plus separate amp and be better off for that a mount of money IMO. The Krell just seems over priced.

 

[WmAx]

Let's be clear: you will not get any actual sound quality difference by doing this. The only possible 'upgrade' you can make, is if your speakers are very demanding by way of power or current, then you would have to simply use a much more powerful amplifier. I don't care if you compare a $500 Yamaha receiver to a $10,000 Krell amp and exotic preamp - if the speaker is not needing some special device because of very difficult load impedance - then both scenarios are going to sound exact/identical in blinded conditions unless one of them is purposely(or by bad design) altering the frequency response or creating high levels of distortion.

-Chris

 

[croseiv]

I don't care if you compare a $500 Yamaha receiver to a $10,000 Krell amp and exotic preamp - if the speaker is not needing some special device because of very difficult load impedance - then both scenarios are going to sound exact/identical in blinded conditions unless one of them is purposely(or by bad design) altering the frequency response or creating high levels of distortion.

-Chris

Unless he's prone to cranking it , and needs more power. Assuming the two are of "exactly" equal power ratings then no difference in SQ will be noted. Now if his current amp is being pushed to clipping, then he will notice an improvement in SQ by going to a better, more powerful amp. I can personally testify to this. A system is only as good as it's weakest link.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Hey Mr. Jason Lopez, you've got anything to say?

By the way Chris, Touche!

 

[croseiv]

Incidentally, altered frequency response may be desireable. Hence we have the lovers of tube amplifiers.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Unless he's prone to cranking it , and needs more power. Assuming the two are of "exactly" equal power ratings then no difference in SQ will be noted. Now if his current amp is being pushed to clipping, then he will notice an improvement in SQ by going to a better, more powerful amp. I can personally testify to this. A system is only as good as it's weakest link.

It is quite clear from his post, that Jason is into good sound quality, great design engineering, great internal parts, good looks, great build quality and great overall performance in the most simplistic approach.
He's talking in audiophile terms.

 

[croseiv]

It is quite clear from his post, that Jason is into good sound quality, great design engineering, great internal parts, good looks, great build quality and great overall performance in the most simplistic approach.
He's talking in audiophile terms.

It's quite clear he wanted some suggestions for 2000 dollars...I suggsted he not blow it on a Krell integrated thingy when there are many other options available for that price.

 

[WmAx]

Incidentally, altered frequency response may be desireable. Hence we have the lovers of tube amplifiers.

Ah, yes.... the audiophile that likes EQ(by way of the very high output impedance of the tube amp) but does not know it, and actually will not use a REAL EQ where one can precisely adjust the modifications to the response to preference instead of putting up with the singular one caused by the electrical reactance interface.

-Chris

 

[WmAx]

Unless he's prone to cranking it , and needs more power. Assuming the two are of "exactly" equal power ratings then no difference in SQ will be noted. Now if his current amp is being pushed to clipping, then he will notice an improvement in SQ by going to a better, more powerful amp. I can personally testify to this. A system is only as good as it's weakest link.

Well, clipping would come under my stated condition of high distortion.

Personally, I don't deal with clipping. My main stereo operates with about 850 watts RMS per stereo channel and my computer monitor system operates with about 1050 watts RMS per stereo channel. Multiple dedicated 20A lines. I'm clip proof.

-Chris

 

[croseiv]

Personally, I don't deal with clipping. My main stereo operates with about 850 watts RMS per stereo channel and my computer monitor system operates with about 1050 watts RMS per stereo channel. Multiple dedicated 20A lines. I'm clip proof.

-Chris

Nice! I haven't gotten there yet...But no more clipping here. I did clip the 1015 occasionally.

 

[Jason Lopez]

It is quite clear from his post, that Jason is into good sound quality, great design engineering, great internal parts, good looks, great build quality and great overall performance in the most simplistic approach.
He's talking in audiophile terms.

Thank you for everyones input. Again....my question was....what's the better way to spend $2000? On an integrated or separates? If i'm spending the same $2000 on a separate amp/pre-amp combo...I would think there would have to be compromise as opposed to spending the whole $2000 on one piece.

 

[Lordoftherings]

It's quite clear he wanted some suggestions for 2000 dollars...I suggsted he not blow it on a Krell integrated thingy when there are many other options available for that price.

That was only one from a million other suggestions.
And I thought that it was one of the very best one too.
YMMV.

 

[croseiv]

That was only one from a million other suggestions.
And I thought that it was one of the very best one too.
YMMV.

LOL!!! Yes my M would V....

 

[Lordoftherings]

Thank you for everyones input. Again....my question was....what's the better way to spend $2000? On an integrated or separates? If i'm spending the same $2000 on a separate amp/pre-amp combo...I would think there would have to be compromise as opposed to spending the whole $2000 on one piece.

If I had an extra $2,000 to spend on a 2-channel stereo amp, I'll get that Krell Integrated amp
S-300i in a New York minute. I already have some nice speakers that will match it very nicely.
But that's just me.

* I don't need 850 watts or 1 kilowatt, I just want a pure way to amplify the signal in the most natural way, with great musicality, strong & tight bottom octaves, liquid midrange and angelic treble.
I'm all about true aural pleasure, and not hearing destruction.
My taste in music recordings are Classical, Jazz, Blues, Soul, Folk & Acoustic everything from these classes.
Megadeth and Metallica, no thank you very much.
But that's just me.

Your set of ears, your set of choices.

 

[croseiv]

If I had an extra $2,000 to spend on a 2-channel stereo amp, I'll get that Krell Integrated amp
S-300i in a New York minute. I already have some nice speakers that will match it very nicely.
But that's just me.

* I don't need 850 watts or 1 kilowatt, I just want a pure way to amplify the signal in the most natural way, with great musicality, strong & tight bottom octaves, liquid midrange and angelic treble.
I'm all about true aural pleasure, and not hearing destruction.
My taste in music recordings are Classical, Jazz, Blues, Soul, Folk & Acoustic everything from these classes.
Megadeth and Metallica, no thank you very much.
But that's just me.

Your set of ears, your set of choices.

What I find somewhat disturbing is that you assume we are all lesser hobbyists because we have the ability to boost the signal well wthout blowing it on a Krell. Frankly, I'm about aural pleasure just as most of the people who frequent this website. Don't lump us into an "inferior group"...

 

[WmAx]

If I had an extra $2,000 to spend on a 2-channel stereo amp, I'll get that Krell Integrated amp
S-300i in a New York minute. I already have some nice speakers that will match it very nicely.
But that's just me.

* I don't need 850 watts or 1 kilowatt, I just want a pure way to amplify the signal in the most natural way, with great musicality, strong & tight bottom octaves, liquid midrange and angelic treble.
I'm all about true aural pleasure, and not hearing destruction.
My taste in music recordings are Classical, Jazz, Blues, Soul, Folk & Acoustic everything from these classes.
Megadeth and Metallica, no thank you very much.
But that's just me.

Your set of ears, your set of choices.

I assure you, your main system probably will not even compare to my computer monitor system - it would be a long shot. My systems are all about sound quality - and I have engineered/built/designed them to exceeding levels of performance/transparency - both measurably and audibly. I also ensure my acoustics are perfect - using unlimited levels of treatments to get the desired result(s). My standards for SQ are extreme - what most audiophiles might consider good - I consider utter mediocrity.

The sad fact is that with standard sensitivity speakers, a very large amplifier is required to prevent clipping on dynamic recordings. Some classical recordings have 30+ dB transients.

-Chris

 

[biz97]

I assure you, your main system probably will not even compare to my computer monitor system - it would be a long shot. My systems are all about sound quality - and I have engineered/built/designed them to exceeding levels of performance/transparency - both measurably and audibly. I also ensure my acoustics are perfect - using unlimited levels of treatments to get the desired result(s). My standards for SQ are extreme - what most audiophiles might consider good - I consider utter mediocrity.

The sad fact is that with standard sensitivity speakers, a very large amplifier is required to prevent clipping on dynamic recordings. Some classical recordings have 30+ dB transients.

-Chris

And you should see what he considers his "clock radio" !

All kidding aside, you should post some pics/details some time. We all can't get our systems to the same type of performance but improvements can always come from inspiration.

BTW, thanks for the info in the other threads on the Behringer 2030Ps. I'm not a DIY guy but the stock performance is still great for my application.