Ever gone from seperates to an integrated?

First of all, sound preference is very subjective.
Maybe your Karan is as good as it gets for an integrated. However, there are a lot more upside on Seperated. Sorry to hear that you didn't find the right match to your taste. Class A and price means nothing to me if they don't sound good together. Even with the same brand, it is not neccessary a perfect match either. The sound could have been colored by the cable and the electromagnetic field in between. i.e. If you throw in a super bright cable in a super bright system then it will never sound good. A right amp to match your speaker is also just as important too.

Just like you said "There are differant quality sounding systems on each side" but it is much easier to tweak seperated then get stuck with one integrated. There is a lot more matching requirement for seperated. If simple is better than why do professional/amature photographers choose SLR over point and shoot camera?

Just my 2 cents

Logic appears to be triumphing over reality here.
All that matters is whether or not you like what you're hearing. The number of boxes in play is not relevant. My experience with Pass, Goldmund, Krell, Levinson, Atmasphere,BEL,Rowland, Spectral and CAT separates mixed and matched over several years was entirely eclipsed by the introduction of a Rowland Concentra II integrated.

That said, I'm headed back to separates as we speak because of having purchased the 201 monos from Rowland. I guess the biggest issue in this whole argument is the length of my speaker cables. With the integrated I needed 15 feet each way......now I use just a foot on each.

I think non analogue audiophiles should be using a digital transport directly into powered speakers. Doesn't that sound like an elegant arrangement. One cable from transport to speaker and another from speaker to speaker. With the new digital amp craze this could become commonplace. Meanwhile check out the Bang & Olufsen Beolab 5. That's what I'd like to have. Then you've maxed out the integrated concept.

Spent late 2002 and most of 2003 upgrading after 8 years with the same set up. Many purchases (all used so loss on the resale was not really a factor) racking up a 99 rating on Audiogon (33 transactions). Final separate system consisted of Tyler Acoustics Linbrook Monitors, a Bryston 4Bsst, ARC Ls16MkII, Levenson No. 360 DAC, Theta Jade Transport, Interconnects and digital cables out the wazoo. Wife would not use the set up due to "too many buttons and switches to navigate" and when I looked at the system in the rack it just was not pleasing.

In October I decided to downsize and wound up with a CJ CAV-50 Integrated, Shanling modified CD-T100, Nordost I/C's and speaker cable and kept the Linnbrooks. Could not be happier with the sound quality, equipment placement, financial investment and my wife will actually use the system.

Not knocking separates and would actually agree that in general a separate system has more benefits, tweeking flexability, power potential to use a wide range of speakers and all other arguments. Just for me the benefits of a integrated system and single CDP out-weighed the other factors without any real loss in sound quality (again my ears).

Those above and in various posts who advise to audition as much equipment as possible and develope a system that fits your needs and most importantly your ears are right on the mark.

Just my opinion.

Have recently upgraded from a Krell KRC3-Theta Dreadnaught pre-power combination to the YBA Passion Integre, that costs significantly less.

Was that an upgrade or what? Absolutely. The YBA has more detail, bigger and better soundstage, superior timing, neutrality and to sum it up much more musicality. The YBA Passion Integre is a remarkable amp. Result: I've never enjoyed music like this before and the YBA can play from classical to rock.

Now my wife likes listening to music and my two young kids (5 and 3) ask for music rather than TV, and I can tell you, that is something.