How Does An Integrated Amp Differ From A Receiver?


How Does An Integrated Amp Differ From A Receiver?
128x128mitch4t
It does get a little confusing these days.


An integrated amp minimally integrates amp + pre-amp in one box.

These days integrated amps may also optionally integrate within the box:

1) streaming capabilities using a network connection
2) a built in DAC
3) an additional phono pre-amp for vinyl (just like the days of old)

If the device also can tune in broadcast am/fm radio stations, it’s a receiver.

Any decent receiver will provide connections needed for an external am/fm antenna to use with the radio tuner.

Just to make things confusing, devices with integrated digital streaming alone (no radio tuner, no antenna) might also be labeled or called a receiver in that it provides a means to select the digital source to listen to similar to a traditional broadcast radio receiver.

Hope that helps.
Traditionally a receiver meant it had built in radio tuner, usually for am and fm.
However have also seen receivers that had just dbb radio ?
Mapman has a point that any that stream internet radio could also conceivably be called a receiver.

Not really many new traditional receivers built right now, at least nowhere near the amount of integrated which are having quite a bit of a resurgence.
The term "receiver" derives from the concept of a radio receiver which typically had facilities for audio amplification for playback. They don't call them tuners in HAM circles. They're receivers. The tuner portion of a good old receiver will consume a quarter to a third of the electronics and they were much better quality than what you get in today's black plastic faced boxes. 
Since the FM bit is quite simple the price difference between an integrated amplifier and a reciever is often minimal. However, in practice modern receivers often have quite a few additional options that integrated amplifiers lack, such as networking ability, Airplay, (more) digital inputs and even room equalization (e.g the new Yamaha RN803d).
These days FM is quite redundant, given the high quality and broad selection of internet radio stations, particularly at higher bitrates. FM is an antequated technology with many sonic limitations. Internet radio is far from perfect as well, and the failings of the two systems are not directly comparable, of course, but on balance I now prefer internet radio for sound quality, and of course even more for the range of stations from all over the world. And with internet radio sound quality will only go up with increasing bandwith and higher bitrates.
mitch4t
today's receiver has plethora of "bells and whistles" whereas an integrated amp does not. The largest difference between the two, a receiver does offer a radio tuner.
Happy Listening!
@mitch4t Given the level of equipment you have/have owned, and the level of music and audio you have been involved with, I am surprised at the question, but that's just me.
@mrdecibel ...I do know quite a bit about audio...but I don't know it all.  Some things that may be obvious to a lot of you are still unknown to me.  That's why we have this forum...and that's why I use it.  If you delve deeper into some of the posts that I've originated. I've often asked questions that are known to seasoned audiophiles that I just didn't know the answer.  So, just because I've been around for a while, I refuse to not ask questions just because it may seem that I should know the answer.

Thankfully, the cats on this forum are always on call to promptly and respectfully answer my questions.  And thankfully, no one here has ever pointed a finger at me and said "you should know that!"....even when I probably should know the answer.
@mitch4t , Sorry, I never intended to point a finger, as, I have followed many of your posts. I made an assumption of knowledge I felt you possessed. Always, MrD