2. amps-preamps
  3. 1179261913

Best integrated for rock music under $1,500?

I'm currently seeking the best integrated amp for playing rock music that I can find for under $1,500 (although I'd really like to find something under $1,000, if at all possible!). The speakers I will be using will likely be PSBs - either the B25 or the M2. The "rock" in question is mostly late '60s/early '70s (e.g. Hendrix, Cream, Byrds, CSNY, Zeppelin, etc.), although I must say I also play some Jazz, Country and Classical as well! In any case, I want an amp that will keep up well with fast-paced stuff and give it some air, vitality and detail in the process.

From everything I've read online so far, I'm considering a Musical Fidelity 3.2 or a Creek 5350SE, although I'm also tempted to go low-budget with the NAD c 352. What do you all think?
suicaine
rnm4
308 posts
 
Veroman and Chandler2,

He wants to spend no more than 1500 on the amp. I assume he'd be pairing with speakers in that category as well. Maybe for large large $$ you can get a well integrated sub/monitor setup. But in that price range, I doubt it. I've tried it, and didn't like it. Also, I simply don't believe the Nait 5i won't drive full range speakers to below 50hz. Why on Earth would you think that? Of course integration and synergy are everything, but that argues for fewer elements to work with, not more.
jack_dotson
210 posts
 
Suicane, how about the Krell 400Xi? I haven't personally heard this amp, but it recevied some really good reviews.

I have also been kicking around the idea of getting a integrated and amp and I too listen primarily to classic rock.

While doing my research the Krell seems to be about the best show in town in this price range, at least on paper and from what I've read.

Just another log for your fire.
alextychkin
87 posts
 
Krell all the way. Rock, or any other bass-heavy music, will require a tight grip on your woofers, something that only a high powered amp can provide. Forget all those puny-wattage int-amps, you need something SS with at least 150 watts, no matter how efficient you think your speakers are.
And one more thing : get some tone controls/equalizer as well. Those rock recordings need some tweaking to make them listenable.
veroman's avatar
veroman
298 posts
 
did i say that rnm4? i do not even know the nait5i and 50hz stuff? and full range spkrs? and all the rest of this stuff. my post was not assuming anything about speakers of any price fwiw. i honor your exp. with subs but for rock and roll i was merely pointing out that suicane could get a nad amp, save a few bucks and get a self powered sub for bass kick if he so chose as nads have sub outputs. i feel you misunderstood my posting. i have full range speakers but i added a sub for foundation and it was no big deal as it crosses over so low most music hardly moves the woofer anyway.
rnm4
308 posts
 
No Veroman, you didn't say that about the Nait 51; Chandler2 did. You did say that sub integration *need* not be a nightmare, which I agree with. But at the same time I think that in the OP's likely price range, it would likely be one, and that he'd be better off with full range speakers. I honor your experience too, but think that Naim and NAD are in different leagues, and that it would be better to go with the Naim (still saving a few hundred bucks over his stated 1500, which could go to better FR speakers), rather than sacrifice quality over the largest range of frequencies just to service 20-50hz with a self powered sub. Given good full range speakers, there's no need for that anyway. The Nait is super slammin' and punchy as it is.
More to discover