SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
There is virtually no difference in volume potential between 160 and 175 wpc. The difference in sound quality will be more noticeable.
integrateds vs TOTL receivers
- Thread starter Twenty20Man
- Start date
- Status
There is virtually no difference in volume potential between 160 and 175 wpc. The difference in sound quality will be more noticeable.
Apples and oranges -- they made vintage separates too, right? I much prefer separates (way more flexible swapping things in and out as well), but still own a few great big receivers just because they're so damned cool.
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
Apples and oranges -- they made vintage separates too, right? I much prefer separates (way more flexible swapping things in and out as well), but still own a few great big receivers just because they're so damned cool.
Agreed! My monster receiver collection is very cool but I'd rather listen to my separates.
terra1
Addicted Member
I agree with Socal Sam that the difference between 160 v 175 may not be that noticeable.
I still think blackfly hit the basic concepts why integrated or separates have the potential to be better though.
And it appears he may have also hit on your possible underlying question of whether or not to go integrated/separates. And whether that is a step up from where you have been going -- up and down the receiver trees where you basically hit the top and end of the line.
First, you have some fine gear and they can certainly be equivalent or better than some separates.
It would seem that what you have would take some very fine components to improve on the sound. Also keep in mind receivers combine a preamp, tuner and amp so you don't have to fret with matching. It's done for you. Like it or not.
But if you want to explore, then yes, there can be better. There always is. Consider the people who made receivers also made and marketed separates for the niche audiophile market.
But like your receiver journey, the only way is to experiment and see what you want to improve. And do your research and compare to what you have.
When buying, for me, it is usually either to upgrade or stay within a brand's sound I like. Budget is always a factor. The fact you have some high powered receivers, I would ask, what is missing that I would like to see if I can to improve the system? Is it power? Then I may try something like a Carver M500t at 250 watts. I remember it sounding great when the seller demo'd my Polk 10Bs. Dynamic horns, Drums and bass had the attack of a live performance in a club.
But the thing to do is audition if you can. Go to some hifi stores. That what I used to do when buying new. Just to see what high end gear can do. You can always listen in on other people's demos. Maybe it isn't just the amp but speakers, cables, wire, etc. that you want to improve. Upgrading can be an expensive and slippery slope.
Once you are convinced how good separates can sound, then you can make some decisions.
Forums are nice for opinions and information gathering, but tastes can vary and change and grow. I'm sure you know that from your collection.
Don't tell anyone but the pre-amp section of my 9090db sent my mcintosh mx110 into a permanent retirement. I know you're not supposed to "use recievers in high end systems" but this was a no contest. The pre-amp section of my sx1010 also retired a couple of stand alone pre-amps in another set up.
Granted these set-ups aren't world beaters by any means but don't write off using the pre-out section of a good reciever into your favorite power amp. Give it a try and you may be pleasantly surprised at how good those old recievers really are.
Granted these set-ups aren't world beaters by any means but don't write off using the pre-out section of a good reciever into your favorite power amp. Give it a try and you may be pleasantly surprised at how good those old recievers really are.
Pyrrho
Super Member
Of course, you are right in saying that if one unit fails, you only need to send that one piece away, and can continue to use the rest. And of course it is generally easier to upgrade bits and pieces if one has separates, though with higher end receivers, they generally have preamp in and out, and have extra inputs that could be used for a different tuner, so one can use as much or as little of the receiver as one wishes.
But what you are saying about what can be done in making a receiver is demonstrably false. All one need do is construct a large cabinet, mount the separates in it, and one has a receiver. One could even mount a surge protector (or whatever fancier thing one chooses) into the box, so that there is one power cord coming out of it, and one switch which shuts it all off. A receiver can be as good as any separates made, if the manufacturer chooses to make it. They generally don't for a couple of reasons. First, the receiver starts to get very large going to the higher end of things. Second, people are prejudiced against receivers, so that people who would be happy to blow the money on the separates would not consider the all in one unit. But it is just plain wrong to say that a receiver cannot possibly be as good as separates.
In the case of low end separates, they tend to be a very poor value, as they are not great, and one pays extra when one could get equal performance in a receiver for less. Granted, one still can upgrade bits and pieces, and then there is the issue of one part failing not requiring the whole thing to be serviced. But the reality is, such electronics, if competently made, and not abused, are very reliable, so that isn't going to be an issue most of the time. And one can use part of a receiver without using all of it, as mentioned before, so one can upgrade bits of one's system if one wishes to do so.
So, unless one is at the very high end of things, a receiver is generally a smarter buy. At the very top, of course, one must go with separates (or construct one's own receiver), simply because manufacturers choose not to make them.
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
Having heard many of the TOTL receivers and separates from the same year and maker, I'll have to respectfully disagree.
This is partially true if you prioritize cost, size, and perhaps looks above sound quality.
Installing separates in a single cabinet does not make a receiver. The components will still have separate power supplies and better sheilding.
Great separates will beat a great receiver, and that's not plain wrong. As much as I think my Marantz 2500 sounds great, and looks ultra cool, I'd rather have a 510M, 3800 pre, and a matching tuner, and be free to experiment with other components if/when I feel like it.
Manufacturers choose not to make receivers, because people choose not to buy them -- that's the only reason. The equivalent purchase prices in today's dollars for a Marantz 2500 would be ~$5500 -- would you buy a $5500 receiver? Not me, nor many other people either.
Pyrrho
Super Member
On the contrary, it is creating a receiver. A receiver is still a receiver if the manufacturer puts separate power supplies for each section, and no matter how good the shielding is.
this thread is getting a bit too theoretical/semantical, is it not? making one big metal enclosure around separate enclosed components and calling it a receiver because it still has one power cord? that's fine, i guess. it would be TOTL if it used TOTL components, and it would obviously compete with any components separately for the same reasons. but nobody's done that that i know of, so it's essentially moot w.r.t. the OP.
let's say you call the SX-1980 the most TOTL receiver of all time. for the cost of the average of the last couple eBay sales, you could get an EW'd Spec 2 amp, a Spec 1 preamp, and still have around $400 to spend on the tuner of your choice, which may or may not beat the 1980's, IDK. i admit, it's handy to have everything in one box that takes up less vertical space, and it may look cooler, but i feel pretty confident about which setup would perform better. maybe i'm missing the point, though.
and we've definitely gotten off topic from "Integrateds vs TOTL receivers." strictly on that note, i'll say that i've always figured that most companies' TOTL integrated was just a slightly better laid out version of their TOTL receiver.
let's say you call the SX-1980 the most TOTL receiver of all time. for the cost of the average of the last couple eBay sales, you could get an EW'd Spec 2 amp, a Spec 1 preamp, and still have around $400 to spend on the tuner of your choice, which may or may not beat the 1980's, IDK. i admit, it's handy to have everything in one box that takes up less vertical space, and it may look cooler, but i feel pretty confident about which setup would perform better. maybe i'm missing the point, though.
and we've definitely gotten off topic from "Integrateds vs TOTL receivers." strictly on that note, i'll say that i've always figured that most companies' TOTL integrated was just a slightly better laid out version of their TOTL receiver.
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
There is only one integrated I know of that has separate power supplies for the preamp and amp sections. The Sansui AU-919. Most receivers take power for preamps off a secondary winding.
Pyrrho
Super Member
The point is, when doing a comparison, one must compare individual units. It is no use saying integrated amplifiers are better than receivers, because some receivers are better than some integrated amplifiers, and vice versa. If we confine this to TOTL units, whose line are we talking about, and from what time period? If we are including all brands and all times, we will find quite a variety of quality involved in both, and we will have some TOTL receivers being better than some TOTL integrated amplifiers, and vice versa.
The same applies to getting a separate preamp and power amp(s).
As a matter of fact, some receivers have been very well made, being better than quite a few separates. Simply counting the boxes is no way to determine quality. The fact that some people are prejudiced against receivers explains why so many low end separates have been made over the years, as they appeal to people who can't afford the best and are deluded into believing that receivers cannot be good. But they would be well advised to get over their prejudice, and buy a good receiver instead of low end separates.
The bottom line is this: When selecting a particular component, the number of boxes the stuff is in is not what determines the quality. It would be extremely foolish to pass up a well made receiver for poorly made low end separates.
Again, as a matter of fact, the very best components ever made have been separates, but that is simply because that is the way manufacturers have chosen to do it. They could, if they wished, put those same circuits in a receiver, though, of course, it would end up being a very large receiver. Of course, the very best equipment ever made is totally irrelevant to most people, as most people cannot afford it. The reality is, one needs to consider what is the best one can afford, and what that will end up being is, in many cases, a receiver, though in other cases it would end up being separates.
Of course, once one is in the used market, what will be the best value will depend upon the deals one encounters, which may go against the general trend.
Going with your particular example of a Pioneer SX-1980 at typical used prices, I agree that it is not a good value compared with some other options. Too many people recognize it and value it too highly for it to be normally a good buy.
Twenty20Man
Is that you Michael?
my thoughts of the 700c driving the amp section of a 1250 wasnt about volume but rather sound quality. the 1250 was built at a time when pioneer pulled out the stops.
think this way..if we were all listening and someone were switching between the amp in the 1250 and lets say a 700m how easy do you think it would be to determine which you were listening too
think this way..if we were all listening and someone were switching between the amp in the 1250 and lets say a 700m how easy do you think it would be to determine which you were listening too
terra1
Addicted Member
I think sound quality was absolutely considered in the answers. More power can also give you more dynamics at given sound levels. I assume that's also why you kept going up the ladder on receivers.
I suppose it would be the same as comparing your Pioneer to Yamaha to Concept. Subtle differences if any according to your tastes. I mentioned the M500t because I had experience with that and 250 watts can possibly give you a dramatic impact in difference as far as rendering dynamics. None of this 15 watts difference which may be inconclusive and string on the debate. But a recent 700m went for a respectable $1011 on eBay indicating somebody thought it could seriously compete. That was the one referencing EW.
So what's your point? Do you think integrated/separates cannot compete with your SX-1250?
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
The 700M would walk all over a SX-1250. The Pioneer is nice but it is not all that dynamic. IMO, this was an effort to tune to the stable-mate HPM-100 which has a mountain in the frequency response curve about 3 kHz. Basically, the SX-1250 is down-tuned to balance out the HPM-100, which is bright. The 700M has no such limitations and in fact sounds suberb on my NS-1000M's. Of all the monsters I've tried, only the 16.5 manages to sound decent on the NS-1000M's.
merrylander
AK Member
Twenty20Man
Is that you Michael?
not at all, I am thinking about design and when everyone talks about TOTL receivers, they talk about the manufacturers building it the best they could. then they also made the Specs, some fine integrateds. sooo component wise, design wise how much of a difference is there..
I have listened a few 1250's and they all sound good, but mine has been restored every cap replaced some select transisters replaced. and i must say the difference is a huge difference..very dynamic, which got me thinking along these lines..I want to get a good vintage pre..like a 700c or a C200
- Status