Separates vs. Integrated

My 2 cents. I would recommed you get a very nice power amp, and a passive pre. Money spent -> 80% for power amp, and 20% for passive.

Unless you have more than a few components to play and you value the convenience of not pulling cables whenever you switch the input sources, power amp + passive pre (such as FT Audio which I still own) or power amp which has volume control (such as Berning which I own and love) is the way to go, IMO. If you have only CDP which has relaiable enough volume control, then you don't even need a passive pre amp. Just feed directly to the power amp like I do.
I still don't understand why people expect a pre-amp to do what power amp is supposed to do other than volume control and input selection (and maybe phono section).

Of course, your taste may vary. You have to decide yourself. Listen for yourself. But if you like the sound with pre amp, you should wonder why that power amp cannot sound like this without pre amp. Something must be missing (synergy? chemical reaction? or inherent lack of xxx?) there. There may be some power amps which are designed to be purchased together with the same mfg's pre amp (meaning that power amp is not manufactured to sound great without the better half). That may be a marketing strategy or customer service. Some people may prefer complex "machine" sitting in the living room. There also may be many manufacturers like that, and some people may choose to combine one power amp with another mfg's pre amp. Like I said, some people may prefer different brands sitting on the same rack. Again, it's the question of your taste. There is no good or bad. Whatever sounds best is what you have been looking for.

I am a minimalist and a simple-mind guy, and I may be wrong as usual.

My past experience includes mono amps from Ralph Karsten, Nelson Pass, Jeff Rowland, BEL, and stereo amps from those above plus Goldmund, Audio Research, Levinson, Ayre, Boulder,Spectral and others. Preamps have included Encore, CAT,Reference Line, Krell, Threshold and some of the makers mentioned above. Eventually I downscaled to a Classe Six and a Seventy amp. So I've had a good taste of separates over the past 20 years but I have never owned anything superior to the JRDG Concentra 1 I now use.
Jeff's web site offers some of the innovations and design decisions that make him so proud of this piece.
I agree that most of the integrateds available in this country in the past were basically just a receiver without a tuner but I think a lot of the reason for that was the perception that (still prevalent) only separate components can deliver true high end sound. Jeff, among others, has most certainly put the lie to that belief.
Now that you can buy a Concentra used for $3K or less, there are strong arguments against the need for separates. That really isn't much to lay out for a preamp and amplifier of such high performance and pedigree. And considering that there is almost no wire inside my amp, I think there is a definite advantage in eliminating an interconnect.

SDT99, in separates there is less noise interference from neighboring circuits but it does not mean a human can hear it (as I stated in my response above). Just check out noise specs for the separates and integrateds that share the same circuits and you will find objective proof. So yes, separates are quieter and thus (for some) better.

Didn't Nudell and McGowan once make a monster integrated? There are good arguments for both approaches. Keeping amps away from low level signals is always a good idea, especially with tubes and phono stages. What better way to reduce the chance of microphonics and cross-talk. I like the post above that suggests separating all channels all the way. IMHO using cross-overs before the amp stage makes the most sense. I suppose that could be "integrated " as well. Some big amps really need space to disipate heat and as they require little in the way of hands on control, why not separate them?