2. amps-preamps
  3. 1092464984

Advice.. Integrated vs Seperates - Low Budget..

Here's the dilemna. I've got two different dealers I deal with primarily, I respect them both and they have very different sets of opinion - which is fine :) So I'm looking for a 3rd...4th.. etc sets of opinion.

I do have a Passive Pre-Amplifier. FT Audio's LW1S2 infact, and have been using it with my NAD C350 (now looking to sell it and move to a real poweramp).

However with my limited budget locally my choice for a poweramp is basically either the Rega Maia, or the Monarchy Audio SM-70. Both of which are hovering in the $800 CDN ($600ish USD) range.

So my one dealer is suggesting that I go for the Monarchy/Passive Pre-amp which does sound very good. The other one is suggesting that I give up on the whole idea of seperates and go to an integrated in the $1500 CDN range, which would be around $1150 USD.

I know that Integrateds have been getting better and better and that in the mid - high end it appears that there are integrateds that can match some seperates (Sim I-5, Plinus 9200, Vecteur etc). But for this price range - where I'm at wouldn't this very nice Passive Pre and match it with a good Power Amp best any similarily priced integrated?

As well can someone please correct me as to the benefits of seperates vs integrated? I had thought it had a lot to do with flexibility (ability to mix n match tube pre with ss amp for example) reduced crosstalk/rfi etc.

Thanks in advance,

Nathan Klassen
vaystrem

Showing 1 response by vaystrem

vaystrem OP
80 posts
 
Thanks for the input all.

My system is composed of:
Quad 21L Speakers
NAD C350 Integrated (To be Replaced)
FT Audio LW1S2 Passive Pre-Amp
Speaker Wire: NearSota - OTA Wire - Bi-Wired
Interconnects: Kimber 4 Strand Copper OEM (Similar to KS-1011)
Source: Toshiba SD-430V

First. I am of the mind that the source is incredibly important, however it was much to my surprise to discover that the NAD is a weaker link in my system than the Toshiba. The Toshiba ABSOLUTELY is the next thing to be replaced in my system.

Why do I believe that the NAD is weaker than the Toshiba?
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1083534349
That is my in house roundup of a Rega Planet 2000, Cambridge Audio Azur 640c, Arcam 73t, Roksan Kandy mkIII, Cary 308, and Creek CD50mki.

No the Toshiba was not better than any of the associated players and I have my eye on the Cary or the Creek for my next source.

Without the Pre-Amp, bypassing the NAD's pre-amp section, it was nearly impossible to distinguish between players. Putting the pre-amp in it was not hard to tell the difference. One thing came through very clearly, my Toshiba could not image / had no soundstage etc. Also the Cary had a smaller soundstage than the Creek and even had one I would describe as small - this is something I have heard from no one else.

So recently I had both the Monarchy SM-70 and the Sophia Baby Tube Amp in my system. Suddenly the Toshiba has a soundstage, and can image. I'm sure that the Cary would do a hell of a lot better (as would most of the other players in that round-up). So while the Toshiba is weak, and it is but considerably better & non-fatiguing compared to my previous Pioneer DV-353 --- the NAD is really holding back the system as a whole.

Creek + Pre-Amp + NAD is about as enjoyable as Toshiba + Pre-Amp + Monarch/Other Poweramps.

Which is why I'm looking at th power-amp first - to enable me to be better able to evaluate a source when I get to that stage, and provide me a more enjoyable experience in the interim.

I guess I've always felt that Integrateds are ultimately a compromise at some level.
More to discover