What's new

Integrated Amplifier (1 Viewer)

Mark Fitzsimmons

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 18, 2001
Messages
539
I am brainstorming ideas for my dorm room audio system. I just don't think I'll have room to go with a surround sound setup so I think I can live with a nice stereo for the time being. At first I was looking at stereo preamps, because recievers appear more cheapish to me. But preamps can get quite expencive once you add in the price of the amp. So I am toying with the idea of getting an integrated amplifier. But I don't understand...

What are the differences between an integrated amplifier and a reciever?
 

Jason Wilcox

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Messages
652
i was in the same situation as you. what can i fit in my dorm room? (i've still got another year until then) i went with an old marantz receiver, some koss bookshelf speakers, and a yamaha sub. try and find a marantz or sansui receiver from the 70's. they are all built very well and sound great.

as mike said the only diference is that the receiver has a tuner built in.

at one point i had an old sansui integrated amp and a sansui tuner....they were very nice but they were too bulky for a dorm. it's like having 2 receivers...(also the amp weighed 60lbs)
 

Mark Fitzsimmons

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 18, 2001
Messages
539
Is that the only difference?

Does the absence of an AM/FM tuner incorporated into the design improve the sound quality any? Doesn't seem like it would.
 

KeithH

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2000
Messages
9,413
Mark asked:
Does the absence of an AM/FM tuner incorporated into the design improve the sound quality any?
Often times, yes. Think of it this way. Consider a stereo integrated amp and a stereo receiver that carry a comparable retail price. If you figure that the mark-ups on the two components are similar, then the designers of the two components have similar budgets to work with. The receiver has a longer parts list due to inclusion of the tuner. Often times, compromises are made in other areas such as the power supply, amps, etc. to include the tuner and stay within budget.
Generally speaking, the simpler the component in audio, the better it is. Let me stress that this is not an absolute, but it is often observed. Typically, at the same price point, an stereo integrated amp will beat a stereo receiver. Likewise, a dedicated CD player will beat a DVD player playing CDs. As you can probably imagine, a stereo integrated amp will very often be better than a comparably priced home-theater receiver.
Regarding budget stereo integrated amp, definitely look at offerings by NAD (www.nadelectronics.com). I use the C 370 in my main system (biamped with the C 270 power amp) and the C 350 in my second system. Both integrateds are excellent for the money. The C 370 retails for $700, but I bought it for $525 from Sound City (authorized dealer; 1-800-370-3156). The C 350 retails for $430, but I bought it from Sound City for $325. The C 350 and C 370 have garnered high praise from a number of hi-fi magazines. In fact, the C 370 has been What Hi*Fi?'s (UK) stereo amp of the year two years running.
 

Bob Marker

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 7, 2001
Messages
89
Mark:
In answer to your question about sound quality, I think your conclusion is correct.
In my experience, a receiver can sound just as good as an integtrated amp or , for that matter, separate preamp/amp systems. I've owned and compared all three types and found them to be indentical in sound.

Guess I should also add that there were huge differences in the price of these components. My receiver (a Pioneer) cost $100 whereas my separates (Classe preamp and amp) cost about $2500. The integrated unit is a Luxman that listed for $750.

Bob
 

KeithH

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2000
Messages
9,413
Bob, to each his own. I feel it depends on what components one is comparing and the quality of the rest of the system. I have done similar comparisons and found stereo integrated amps to beat stereo receivers and stereo separates to beat stereo integrated amps. Admittedly, the comparisons have some flaws. There are not many stereo receivers available these days, and most that are available are budget models that aren't very good in my opinion. Also, separates are often more expensive than integrated amps. Still, I hold my position that the simpler the component is, the better is the performance, normally.
 

Bob Marker

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 7, 2001
Messages
89
Keith:
Yes, I guess our differing experiences have lead us to different conclusions. Nothing wrong with that.
Bob
 

Alex F.

Second Unit
Joined
Aug 29, 1999
Messages
377
In some cases an integrated amp can be a direct equivalent to separates and offer first-class performance. For example, McIntosh makes two such products, the MA-6900 and MA-6500. Mark Levinson and BAT come to mind as well.

McIntosh's MA-6900 ($4500), for instance, combines the circuitry of their C42 stereo preamp ($3700) and MC202 $3200) power amp. This integrated has fewer features than the separates from which it is based, but it shares their sonic performance. Stereophile magazine recently gave it their top rating, Class-A. In short, a well-designed integrated amplifier can indeed compete sonically with the very best separates. But I'll be the first to admit that this is relatively unusual.
 

stephen_z

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 20, 2002
Messages
117
Mark,
I tend to agree with KeithH that you'll get better value from the integrated amp than a receiver in terms of sound quality and longevity. Whereas multi-channel receivers come and go with each new processing mode, a well chosen integrated amp will provide listening pleasure beyond your college years, whether it's relegated to a bedroom or den once you've upgraded.

P.S. Let's not discount the "ooh and ahh" factor of a sleekly styled integrated amp (Arcam, Creek, Roksan, Audio Refinement) over a mass market receiver.
 

Ted Kim

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Messages
214
Mark, you have to keep in mind that stereo receivers generally are marketed toward the lower end of the market, with the exception of something like the Krell receiver. Integrateds can be a great value because not only because of the lack of a tuner but also because the can be quality products that are mass produced and have a big market overseas. Integrateds are considered the way to go in the UK and most of Europe and Asia, as their rooms are generally smaller and require less power and space (than separates) and $$$. So a lot of the integrateds really do offer a lot of value. I've owned both a NAD 314 and Classe CAP 150 integrateds, they were both worthwhile purchases, though in way different price ranges. Generalizing a bit, it seems both the UK and Canadian integrateds, as well as the US models, are fairly easily accesible in the US.

I would keep
Classe, Creek, Musical Fidelity, NAD, Rega, Bryston, Sim Audio, Arcam, Jolida (tubes), on the list of candidates.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,813
Messages
5,123,610
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top