Are integrated amps technically better than separates?

Very unlikely you’d reach the same power levels at the equivalent cost in an integrated amp.

Power wise, maybe not. Sound Quality I know it can be BETTER.
I had an Accuphase.. Integrated can have it all.. That unit bested many a Krell, Mcintosh, ML, setups... I know I owned them..Some units can still add singles along with the integrated, the best of ALL worlds.. Integrated, separates, SS, and or valve..

I'm pretty happy now, but for the dollar, starting all over again..I might go integrated.

Regards

New: the biggest bang for the buck, integrated.

Used: I gotta say separates.
For some reason, stereo bunnies, leave some really GOOD deals around.

Not to say the there’s not deals on integrated, just not as many.
I Wonder why?

Happy with what they have crowd, did a little more research crowd, bigger bang for the buck crowd, sound friggin’ great crowd. I can see why, for sure. Some really good ones, Accuphase, Man oh man. A true regret, when I sold that.

To answer the question are integrated technically better, NO, technically.  But being well matched with each other, 
Technically sounds quite a bit better for the NEW dollar....

Regards

erniesch4 posts05-19-2020 8:54pm

It’s so interesting that folks think they need a high quality power chord and expensive interconnects. Never mind that just inside the wall is the cheapest copper lines the contractor could buy. It’s laughable. Just inside your loudspeaker is usually a thin generic cable connection between the crossover and drivers.
You need expensive cables because it makes you feel better.

Expensive no, adequate yes.. Feel better, never..

PC and interconnects can cost a few bucks and a little time too.

It can almost make up for some of the inadequacies, you pointed out..

Glad you noticed why every little bit helps....Your learning..

Took a while for me too...

Regards