So just because it's separate it's better??

[painttoad]

i think having(and using) the dynamic power equates directly to sq but that's just my opinion...and that is the purpose of separates.

i do similar to you with my theater. 5 monoblocks for the main 5. receiver powers front height. all marantz and it is 10x better with the monoblocks.

 

[Dony]

i think having(and using) the dynamic power equates directly to sq but that's just my opinion...and that is the purpose of separates.

i do similar to you with my theater. 5 monoblocks for the main 5. receiver powers front height. all marantz and it is 10x better with the monoblocks.

Hi Painttoad,

I understand your thought process. However, for me I follow another thought process, for example when I listen to 2-channel analog audio at low to moderate levels.

For that instance it is not about the power of the separate amp that makes the difference but rather the ability of the whole system to produce the warm, detailed sound that I am after. Currently I use a Kenwood KR-6600 from the 70s with JBL L80T3 from the 80s. Someday I will find a vintage Accuphase Integrated amplifier that I will put into my vintage system, not because it is better than a separate amp would be but because it is different than what I have today.

Ultimately I love to try many different brands of equipment, but for me they don't necessarily need to be all separates because what I want to experience is the different sound signature of different manufactures.

Incidentally, my home theatre system consists of a Marantz home theatre AVR with vintage NAD amplifiers. The speakers are Golden Ear Triton, Definitive Technology, and Klipsch reference. So I would say I'm not brand specific.

 

[painttoad]

i've got a nice sounding kr4600 so i'm sure the kr6600 sounds nice also.

most of what i run is separates but i have some integrateds also. i've got a few vintage receivers also but am not using any atm. i am listening to a sx1080 that i just fully serviced for someone. it's nice but does not sound as good as any of my separates.

 

[BOUXY]

Seperates are better I think because if you use a Receiver if the Tuner or whatever breaks down you lose use of the whole Receiver while it is being repaired but when you lpse seperates depending on what you lose,you can still use the rest of the System

 

[RobRoy]

It's usually true with all other things being equal. I used to own an Hitachi 200 WPC Class G amplifier (HMA-8300). A friend had an Hitachi receiver with the exact same amplifier section. Well, mostly. Mine had some HUGE capacitors, and it didn't have to shield the amp from the pre-amp.

However, when comparing a $4,000 built in piece to a different brand's $200 separate piece, I'm guessing the former is going to be sonically better.

 

[Dony]

Seperates are better I think because if you use a Receiver if the Tuner or whatever breaks down you lose use of the whole Receiver while it is being repaired but when you lpse seperates depending on what you lose,you can still use the rest of the System

Hey Bouxy, I agree with your comment.

Except in the case of only having one amplifier or one pre-amp in your system. If either of those components breaks then your out of luck as you won't be able to use the rest of the system without having those separate components in a functional state.

 

[painttoad]

if you guys don't have backup for your backups then you are doing it wrong

 

[HPMguy]

Isn't multiple systems a requirement on AK? As in a dozen or so? Lol!

 

[Dony]

It's usually true with all other things being equal. I used to own an Hitachi 200 WPC Class G amplifier (HMA-8300). A friend had an Hitachi receiver with the exact same amplifier section. Well, mostly. Mine had some HUGE capacitors, and it didn't have to shield the amp from the pre-amp.

However, when comparing a $4,000 built in piece to a different brand's $200 separate piece, I'm guessing the former is going to be sonically better.

Hi RobRoy,

Yes, it appears there would be an obvious difference based on a TOTL built in component versus a BOTL separate piece. But to further the discussion, let's take the following example.

Given the option of purchasing a NAD C658 BlueOs Streaming DAC and a NAD C298 amplifier (approximately $6000 CDN) vs a McIntosh MA252 Integrated amplifier (approximately $6000 CDN), would I automatically pick the NAD system?

Not necessarily, I would need to compare the systems with all other items being equal (speakers, input source, interconnects, etc.) to decide which has the better SQ to my ears. I wouldn't automatically choose the NAD system just because they are separates (I am a NAD fan). This also extends to vintage equipment as well. I truly believe some vintage integrated amps/receivers with their old phono sections sound better than vintage or modern separates from other manufactures, sometimes regardless of price.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

Hi Painttoad,

The reason I don't agree is that my home theatre is already a combination of using a home theatre AVR and separate component amps. So in my case I'm using the separate amps to power my front main speakers (bridged mono), my side surround speakers, and my rear surround speakers.

The home theatre AVR amp section is used, but it is only connected to my front center channel. The main reason I have the separate amps is that I want the dynamic power available to my speakers for the transient peaks in loud movie scenes. Does it mean the SQ is automatically better, not necessarily. It is the same reason why my front speakers have dedicated built-in power amps for the subwoofers, does it sound better then using the AVR amplifier for the subs? Maybe or maybe not.

If I didn't have the separate amps and only used the AVR to power all channels then the transient peaks would sound different, but I wouldn't say the SQ is automatically better. In my ears, the two areas that affect the SQ the most are the input source and the speakers. The components in the audio path should have the least amount of influence, especially as you go up the ladder in terms of quality. I guess my ears are just too old to hear the differences if they exist....

So to me the components like pre-amps, amps, etc. have a lesser impact then the speaker and the sources. Components like TT, DAC, CD/DVD/SACD player, speakers, subwoofers, etc. are where I tend to spend most of my money. I think as long as the pre-amp, receiver, AVR, main amps are of decent quality then they are lesser of a concern.

For me, AVR is for video, for TV, for gaming. 2 channel of the best for listening to actual music. And musical nuance. My 2 channel will outlast 99.9 of AVR units ever built, and still perform to high standard year in and year out. Digital disc players are not forever units. Neither are powered subwoofers. Those have a finite lifespan.