Integrated amp or Separates?

T

Taiga

Audiophyte
Interesting comment about the speakers. The RP-280f are essentially the same as the RP-8000 reviewed here:

In fact, some online commenters remarked that the horn tweeter in the 280f, which is the precursor to the 8000, had a warmer sound. I suspect those impressions are listening bias, and that the 8000 are no different in sound, just with added bling to the appearance i.e. the gold rings on the horn and woofers, different grille, and metal platform. The spec sheets are mostly identical.

Certainly not high end, but I don’t think they are to be disparaged.
(plus I got the pair for $800 including shipping).

I really appreciate all of the great comments here.
 
H

HT4Life

Audioholic Intern
Parasound Hint6, man this place gets pretty confrontational, lets get more bran in those diets hahah
I feel the snarkie folks in forums are like the people who ride ur bumper on the expressway, its the only place they can be mean with anonymity, i just dont get the pleasure out of confrontation, its audio, just audio…….

Charactor defects is all
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I had always used Marantz PMs (had a 4000, 5000, 7000 and 7200) I liked them, but the previously were all analog and no video. Added video to the second system so it didn't work for me anymore and sold each as I upgraded, but they're very good integrateds.

Integrated amps tend to have larger power supplies, or use the power supplies from the flagship models of an AVR line since they have extra room from the other circuit boards not being there, so they do tend to have more oomph vs. a comparable AVR in my experience. They don't really sound different from an AVR though, IMO, especially with digital source.
I am not sure if that is true as a general statement thought, and it is hard to compare anyway if you are comparing integrated amps to AVRs used for two channel applications. It depends on the specific models a lot.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Interesting comment about the speakers. The RP-280f are essentially the same as the RP-8000 reviewed here:

In fact, some online commenters remarked that the horn tweeter in the 280f, which is the precursor to the 8000, had a warmer sound. I suspect those impressions are listening bias, and that the 8000 are no different in sound, just with added bling to the appearance i.e. the gold rings on the horn and woofers, different grille, and metal platform. The spec sheets are mostly identical.

Certainly not high end, but I don’t think they are to be disparaged.
(plus I got the pair for $800 including shipping).

I really appreciate all of the great comments here.
I doubt anyone would disparage your RP-280F. On audio forums, you bound to come across posts about speakers matter more to sound quality than amplifiers but that's just in general.

Given the very good sensitivity specs (probably at least 91 dB/2.83V/m), the A-S701 or the R-N803 (again, better value, better DAC if you are going use that feature) should be able to feed them easily, unless you sit far away and/or listen to reference level. Again the R-N803 measured so good that it gets ASR's pink pather and those who frequent that website knows how hare it is for an receiver to get the pink pather.

Yamaha R-N803 Smart Receiver Review | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum

R-N803

1646491353190.jpeg


A-S701

1646491443937.jpeg


For under $800, both are good values but the R-N803 may be hard to find now, due to its popularity and the supply chain issues.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
i just dont get the pleasure out of confrontation, its audio, just audio…….
I agree with this.

We love this hobby. It is important to us. We care tremendously about audio and video. We want our systems to sound awesome. Absolutely.

But at the end of the day, this isn't medicine, surgery, rocket science or bridge and skyscraper engineering. It's audio. :D
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Nuh-uh. I disagree. :p

Yup, and lots of passion. Every one of us has gotten carried away at some point. Myself included.

I remember someone getting pretty heated over some ASR reviews when he first hit the scene. ;)
Who? Me? If so, I was probably saying the same thing I am saying now:

1. It’s just audio, not medicine or surgery or rocket science. :D
2. If your system sounds good, then it’s good.
3. If you’re truly proud of your system, then you made the right decision. If you bought some cheap imitation cheese that you end up regretting or not proud of, then you probably didn’t make the right decision when you bought them. :D

Do research, save up money, and do it right. Life is short. We only live once. Don’t cut corners and regret later.

So it comes down to us truly loving the way our systems sound, truly enjoying our systems every day, and truly being proud of what we own.

And then posting our “Last System I Will Ever Need to Buy” thread. :D
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
i had to wait and squirrel away more cash.
That’s the way to do it. Research, plan, save up, do it right. No regrets. No imitation cheese. Life is too short. Enjoy as much as we can. :D
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Who? Me? If so, I was probably saying the same thing I am saying now:

1. It’s just audio, not medicine or surgery or rocket science. :D
2. If your system sounds good, then it’s good.
3. If you’re truly proud of your system, then you made the right decision. If you bought some cheap imitation cheese that you end up regretting or not proud of, then you probably didn’t make the right decision when you bought them. :D

Do research, save up money, and do it right. Life is short. We only live once. Don’t cut corners and regret later.

So it comes down to us truly loving the way our systems sound, truly enjoying our systems every day, and truly being proud of what we own.

And then posting our “Last System I Will Ever Need to Buy” thread. :D
Agreed, in general. For argument sake, what If someone comes and ask if he should stretch his budget to get the A-S1100 instead of the R-N801 or A-S701 for better sound quality, that he heard in his local dealer's demo room?

I probably wouldn't just say go for it, without also saying something cautionary as well.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Agreed, in general. For argument sake, what If someone comes and ask if he should stretch his budget to get the A-S1100 instead of the R-N801 or A-S701 for better sound quality, that he heard in his local dealer's demo room?

I probably wouldn't just say go for it, without also saying something cautionary as well.
I would say I don't think the A-S1200 sounds better. But the A-S1200 looks better and feels better, and I would be a lot more proud to own it. :D

SQ and measurements are important. But pride of ownership is just as important to me. :D
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
Who? Me? If so, I was probably saying the same thing I am saying now

Just sayin'. We all get a little over exuberant sometimes!
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I would say I don't think the A-S1200 sounds better. But the A-S1200 looks better and feels better, and I would be a lot more proud to own it. :D

SQ and measurements are important. But pride of ownership is just as important to me. :D
I used a bad example actually. A better one could be, if someone paid $9,999 for the PS Audio power regenerator and said "I have everything plugged into it and simply find our music to be more dynamic and alive. Greater separation and resolution…and all with no hint of harshness or whatever. No glare or grit. But, more visceral and, well... more overall engagingly so….Bass seems to go lower with a wonderful sense of tightness… or rightness, especially as evident from the subs in the Vandersteens. Slam and punch, texture and presence. Palpable as all get out, and, as I said, texture… oh man… where there is, there is... texture. ". We, the experienced audioholics probably can do better than just saying, congrats, if it improved the sound quality for you, you made the right decision..:D:D
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I used a bad example actually. A better one could be, if someone paid $9,999 for the PS Audio power regenerator and said "I have everything plugged into it and simply find our music to be more dynamic and alive. Greater separation and resolution…and all with no hint of harshness or whatever. No glare or grit. But, more visceral and, well... more overall engagingly so….Bass seems to go lower with a wonderful sense of tightness… or rightness, especially as evident from the subs in the Vandersteens. Slam and punch, texture and presence. Palpable as all get out, and, as I said, texture… oh man… where there is, there is... texture. ". We, the experienced audioholics probably can do better than just saying, congrats, if it improved the sound quality for you, you made the right decision..:D:D
I agree with you. But most of the time, it's nothing extreme like that snakeoil BS. :D

Most of the time, like in this thread, it's about spending $1K vs $2K vs $3K for Amps and AVR.
 
Last edited:
T

Taiga

Audiophyte
I’ve been thinking about a receiver being a better value without an audible penalty in sound quality compared to an integrated amp. Would this line of thinking apply to multi-channel (5 or 7) home theater receivers as well? Specifically, would it serve me to consider an HT receiver even though I only plan to use 2 channels? That is what I had been doing with a (now malfunctioning) HT receiver that I got from a friend. For example, something like this:

Is there a penalty in sound quality or reliability with an HT receiver compared to an integrated amp?
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Generally a good multich avr has the best economies of scale currently. Some can be somewhat limited as to setup on big screen vs front lcd panel on the avr, sometimes equally frustrating ! :)))

Do you plan on integrating a sub or not? The avr usually has advantages there. In terms of general "sound quality" the playing field is largely more similar than different, depending perhaps on particular/specific needs.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I’ve been thinking about a receiver being a better value without an audible penalty in sound quality compared to an integrated amp. Would this line of thinking apply to multi-channel (5 or 7) home theater receivers as well? Specifically, would it serve me to consider an HT receiver even though I only plan to use 2 channels? That is what I had been doing with a (now malfunctioning) HT receiver that I got from a friend. For example, something like this:

Is there a penalty in sound quality or reliability with an HT receiver compared to an integrated amp?
No penalty for sound quality. Maybe for reliability.

Analog amps and preamps are probably more reliable because they have less circuit boards and parts. But AVRs can last 15-20 years also.

Refurbished may have the penalty for reliability and factory warranty. You are taking a higher reliability risk when buying refurbished AVR and AVP.
 
cpp

cpp

Audioholic Samurai
I agree with this.

We love this hobby. It is important to us. We care tremendously about audio and video. We want our systems to sound awesome. Absolutely.

But at the end of the day, this isn't medicine, surgery, rocket science or bridge and skyscraper engineering. It's audio. :D
So very true. Its a hobby just like, cars, fishing, golf, photography, bicycling, boating. Enjoy it, your way.
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
No penalty for sound quality. Maybe for reliability.

Analog amps and preamps are probably more reliable because they have less circuit boards and parts. But AVRs can last 15-20 years also.

Refurbished may have the penalty for reliability and factory warranty. You are taking a higher reliability risk when buying refurbished AVR and AVP.
AC4L sometimes offer a free 3 year warranty with some of their refurbished AVRs.

 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top