Is integrated the future for 2 channel audiophiles?

Been there done that many times over the last 40+ years. I’ve always went back to separates. Integrated amps have been getting better but you also have many limitations with them. Lately for me it’s been the power. I was happy with my Hegel H300 until I purchased larger Usher speakers. Went separates. Went with a new McIntosh preamp with a built in 2 phono preamps and dac. Just sold my Hanss T-60 turntable last week and now selling all my vinyl. Never used the McIntosh dac because I have the superior PS Audio DS dac. In the coming weeks, I’ll be looking to see if I can get rid of the McIntosh preamp and run the amp straight from the dac. So yes, there are ways to consolidate but take different routes to do this. I do use a few integrated amps in other parts of the house.

I enjoy the NAD C-388 integrated with BluOS2i MDC module. It's the best all-in-one I could find with A-B speaker switching to drive 2-ohm loads. Not as fully developed user interface nor as easy to use as Denon/Marantz AVRs (on-screen menus). It checked all the boxes for $1,500 (with MDC) - which I think is a bargain considering some people would spend more than that on the interconnects required for seperates.

In regard to neatness, downsizing and fitting the listening/living room yes I see integrated amps becoming popular. Also if the integrated amp has good connections to all types of sources, a good Dac and the power to drive most speakers that would increase the appeal to certain music lovers. In regard to downsizing in certain quarters active speakers play a role so the preamp with any other inclusive capabilities comes to the fore and power amps, integrated amps and extra cable connections vanish (as the power amps are contained directly in the active speakers).

if the topic remains about INTs under 3K or a mite higher, i’ve always opted for HT receivers sheerly for versatility with connectivity and processing digital info.

there is becoming a strong argument for uber expensive INTS though.

there are plenty of debates on INTs vs one another too.

the idea separates out run INTs is fast becoming invalid given some of these new ‘Statement’’ INTs, ranging from 30K to more than 140K!! ala Vitas new 030, and the VAC statement INT, to name a couple.

look into eastern Europe and there are more interesting INTs coming onto the market.

the main theme for the invested audio nut is still gonna be the baking of the ‘cake’ using the mix and match lets see what will happen with this preamp and that amp, and or when differing toopologies are mated, tube pre SS amp, etc.

that is the mystique or curiosity factor which seems to keep pushing this AN along. past EXP as well says until you get well into the multiple Thousands of bucks separates do seem to rule given the mix and match approach.

but then that mixing and matching adventure can be quite taxing, after a while, depending on how pedantic aor how deep his or her pockets  devotee may be.

the main interest for me in a rig whose heart is an INT could be as:
a starter system

a secondary outfit.

an I’m thru messing around I’ll just go all in and nab one of these 25K to 50K retail INTs and kick back!

albeit, there is a strong attraction to see how things work together when designs are completely different… or all the same.

if this is a life long hobby, it should be all about the journey, not the destination, shouldn’t it?

I suppose destination gear is for those who have at some point decided to quit this past time.

Integrated: Reduced Space; Remote Volume; Reduced Interconnects; Reduced Cost.

Remote Volume (modern preamp or modern integrated) effects top shelf space requirements. I used both SS and Tube Amps (Stereo or Mono) for many years on lower shelves before I wanted remote volume. Remote volume requires at least desk high shelf height (my top shelf) for remote beam use.

Reduced Space:

My 13’ wide room, large speakers away from corners, leaves only 88” linear shelf for active components. R2R on top reduces that to 88”. TT reduces it to 48” = only two short stacks of equipment, 4 of which use remotes.

1 digital stack, 3 remote devices:

Single CD, Multiple CD, Chase Remote Line Controller (my separate digital integrated, I use primarily for remote balance of CD’s, especially compilations of separate recording sessions). I found, a very slight balance tweak can make a surprising amount of difference to many CD tracks. It goes to my Integrated Tube Amp's AUX input.

1 tube stack, 1 remote.

Tube preference, heat from tubes effects top shelf space requirements.

I just designed and built a ventilated enclosure with floating solid glass top so I can stack my modern Integrated Tube Amp Cayin A88T over my old McIntosh Tube FM Tuner/Preamp, mx110z. (they only made 6 tube tuner/preamps, 'separates' took over soon after). The McIntosh incorporating FM Tuner, Phono EQ, Tape EQ reduces the need for those separates. Note: my choices of modern tube amp is limited to units with 16 ohm taps. I expected my modern Carver FM Tuner to beat the mx110z FM tuner, but happily the McIntosh FM is equally awesome. A dedicated FM antenna is needed for these older tuners. I listen to one station, WBGO Jazz, so the Carver was on a lower shelf.

As it has no remote control, I could put the McIntosh Tube Tuner/Preamp 1 shelf down, as I did with prior tube receivers, but that is a compromise I never liked.