I was always a proponent of separates. However, I now am greatly enjoying an integrated. The benefits of separates have been mentioned, and I agree. But, let's consider the benefits of a great(not good) integrated. Cost, space, the removal of possible mismatch between pre and power amp(happens a lot more than we realize), the removal of the possible mismatch between the preamp/interconnect/power amp, and the fact you can spend twice as much on a power cord(since you're only buying one). In the Stereophile review of the ML 383, the company maintains the integrated is BETTER(at half the cost!) than their equivalent 380/334 combination, UNLESS a perfect interconnect match is used. So, right now, I think for the majority of us(who do not have a cost no object budget), one of the great new integrated is better.
Integrated Amps vs. Separates.
I'm curious what people think the better option is, integrated amp or seperates. It seems that integrated amps are a cost cutting measure, but do they also cut sonic quality? Assuming similiar price ranges, what would people here generally choose. Give me some examples/brands/models and comparisions from your experiences. Thnaks. Carter p.s. Is the Krell KAV 300i really the king of integrateds like many reviewers say (i.e not only better than all other integrated amps but better than most seperates)?