Camera analogy, read on !
I can think of a dozen amp / preamp / interconnects combinations that just cannot match the quality of a fine integrated, be it tubes or SS.
The chances for a ''mis-integrated'' systems are great.
Also to consider, the trial and error cost of finding that perfect combination.
I do think separates do sound better, but only the better-matched systems.
I have owned both separates and integrateds of considerable cost in each category.
There was a time where I just analyzed sounds to find sonic flaws, which led me to re-question my separate component choices every time. Talk about being on the audiophilia merry-go-round.
Then I started listening to integrateds. These machines are no longer the ''poor man's audiophile amps'' of 20 years ago.
Factor in the hassle-free factor, and the fact that a professionnal designer actually decided on ALL of the choices inside - it's not a bad deal if you asked me.
A friend of mine who is as taken in PHOTOGRAPHY as others are in high-end audio told me this:
I had asked him why, with all of his experience and knowledge, he was using the AUTOMATIC PROGRAM MODE (think integrated amps as an equivalent in high end audio) instead of going full manual on his settings (think separates) to get that ''perfect'' photo (..or sound..)
In essence, I was really asking him why he was using the ''beginners'' automatic setting instead of the ''more serious'' and professionnal manual settings so that he could get exactly the image (sound) he wanted.
His reply: ''Are you kidding ? With the advancements in camera technology, the computer in this camera is perfectly integrated to adjust exposure, shutter speed, white balance, aperture and so on....for a photographer to BEAT THIS and to find BETTER settings takes one hell of a photographer. And besides, let's suppose I do find better settings, by the time i get there the moment's gone....and the photo opportunity might be lost. So, for 90% of the time, the auto pilot is good enough and I enjoy the photos immensely, even though sometimes I know I could have probably done better if I picked the settings myself. But, is it really worth the trouble to the point of missing the moment?
Sorry if this seems a strech, but this is exactly how I feel about integrateds. A top notch integrated has it's ''settings'' chosen by an electro-acoustic professionnal. Always subjective of course, but it's damned good most of the time.
Pretty hard challenge to beat if you asked me, with our Lego sets of amps, preamps and interconnects.
Just in case your'e wondering, the camera is a relatively inexpensive Nikon D-40 single reflex digital that retails for around $ 600.00 or so. Including the stock zoom lens.
Just a few years ago, this level of quality was available, according to some experts, only in cameras that sold around....$ 4,000.00
Separates are better. But not always. Only speaking from personnal experience, your mileage could vary.
Cheers all !
I can think of a dozen amp / preamp / interconnects combinations that just cannot match the quality of a fine integrated, be it tubes or SS.
The chances for a ''mis-integrated'' systems are great.
Also to consider, the trial and error cost of finding that perfect combination.
I do think separates do sound better, but only the better-matched systems.
I have owned both separates and integrateds of considerable cost in each category.
There was a time where I just analyzed sounds to find sonic flaws, which led me to re-question my separate component choices every time. Talk about being on the audiophilia merry-go-round.
Then I started listening to integrateds. These machines are no longer the ''poor man's audiophile amps'' of 20 years ago.
Factor in the hassle-free factor, and the fact that a professionnal designer actually decided on ALL of the choices inside - it's not a bad deal if you asked me.
A friend of mine who is as taken in PHOTOGRAPHY as others are in high-end audio told me this:
I had asked him why, with all of his experience and knowledge, he was using the AUTOMATIC PROGRAM MODE (think integrated amps as an equivalent in high end audio) instead of going full manual on his settings (think separates) to get that ''perfect'' photo (..or sound..)
In essence, I was really asking him why he was using the ''beginners'' automatic setting instead of the ''more serious'' and professionnal manual settings so that he could get exactly the image (sound) he wanted.
His reply: ''Are you kidding ? With the advancements in camera technology, the computer in this camera is perfectly integrated to adjust exposure, shutter speed, white balance, aperture and so on....for a photographer to BEAT THIS and to find BETTER settings takes one hell of a photographer. And besides, let's suppose I do find better settings, by the time i get there the moment's gone....and the photo opportunity might be lost. So, for 90% of the time, the auto pilot is good enough and I enjoy the photos immensely, even though sometimes I know I could have probably done better if I picked the settings myself. But, is it really worth the trouble to the point of missing the moment?
Sorry if this seems a strech, but this is exactly how I feel about integrateds. A top notch integrated has it's ''settings'' chosen by an electro-acoustic professionnal. Always subjective of course, but it's damned good most of the time.
Pretty hard challenge to beat if you asked me, with our Lego sets of amps, preamps and interconnects.
Just in case your'e wondering, the camera is a relatively inexpensive Nikon D-40 single reflex digital that retails for around $ 600.00 or so. Including the stock zoom lens.
Just a few years ago, this level of quality was available, according to some experts, only in cameras that sold around....$ 4,000.00
Separates are better. But not always. Only speaking from personnal experience, your mileage could vary.
Cheers all !
