Integrated Amps vs. Separate Preamps
and Power Amps
High-end audio abounds in myths masquerading
as facts. I can’t remember how many times I’ve heard that a separate amplifier
and preamplifier (separates for short) are always better than an integrated
amplifier (i.e., a component that has a preamplifier and amplifier in one chassis).
It’s as if those who say this believe that all that’s important is the number of
boxes you own. As a result, even those audiophiles who might start out owning an
integrated amp and are happy with it often begin lusting after separates, thinking that
they’re the only way to improve the quality of their systems’ sound. But is that
always the case? Is there even a shred of truth to it? To answer these questions,
let’s talk about how this myth likely got started.
The preamplifier handles all the delicate functions, such
as switching among different source components and volume control. The preamp is really
the master control unit for your system -- the place where all the little things are done
before the power amp gives the end result a big push. The power amp’s job is
straightforward. It takes that line-level signal from the preamp and simply makes a bigger
version of it, so that it can drive the speakers to proper volume levels. The signal that
comes out of the amp is often referred to as a high-level signal.
It’s cost-effective and convenient to have the
preamplifier and amplifier in the same chassis -- which is what an integrated amp is. But
when you start combining both sections into a single chassis, for numerous highly
technical reasons, one section can interfere with the other, and the end result can be
something of a compromise. Optimally, then, it’s best to keep these sections
separate.
But, what’s optimal is not always practical or
cost-effective. First, there’s the matter of space. In general, one chassis, even one
slightly larger chassis, takes up less space than two. Then there’s money. Designing,
building, and marketing a separate preamplifier and power amplifier substantially
increases costs. Because no parts are shared, including the chassis, you need two of
everything -- even two power cords. Therefore, you can’t simply break down an
integrated amplifier into two separate components and have it come out costing the same as
an integrated unless you start cutting corners and making compromises. And if you do that,
then the separates will no longer be of as high a quality.
As a result, when you look at the top offerings from the
finest electronics manufacturers, their best products are almost always separates.
That’s because performance comes first and cost comes second. In fact, I don’t
know of a manufacturer of separates and integrateds who touts the integrated approach as
being the best. This is mostly where the "separates are better" myth stems from.
Yes, separates can be better, but only if you’re not as concerned with how
much the end result costs. And some separates cost a lot -- sometimes thousands and
thousands of dollars. If your budgets of space and money are unlimited, you can shop
solely for separates and not think twice about whether you should be looking for an
integrated amp. However, if cost is a concern -- as it is for about 99% of consumers --
the choice isn’t so clear. In fact, at some price points an integrated will actually
be the better choice, and sometimes the only choice.
For example, NAD’s C325BEE, a 50Wpc integrated
amplifier, costs $399 USD. I don’t know of any separate preamplifier and amplifier
(if you can even find them) at that price that can equal it. At $399, forget about
separates -- you don’t have such a choice. An integrated amp is the only way to go.
At higher prices you do have a choice, but no clear
answers. For instance, this month Jeff Stockton reviews the NuForce IA-7, a 100Wpc
integrated for $1495. That’s more than three times the price of the NAD C325BEE, and
for that money you could start looking at separates. But will separates automatically
be better at this price point, just because the preamp and power amp are in different
chassis? No. Whether you’re talking about integrateds or separates, $1495 still
won’t buy you a cost-no-object product. Whichever you end up buying will have been
built with compromises in order to meet the price point. Neither will be perfect; what
will determine which product sounds better will be other factors in the design, not
whether it comes in one box or two.
Surprisingly, these days the same logic holds true for
products priced quite a bit more than the IA-7’s $1495. I say surprisingly
because it wasn’t that many years ago that companies didn’t try to make
state-of-the-art integrated amps that cost quite a lot -- the marketplace wouldn’t
support them. Once the price got up to about $2500, companies forgot about creating
integrateds and focused on separates. That’s all changed.
For example, over at SoundStage! A/V, I recently
reviewed the Simaudio
Moon Evolution i-7 integrated amplifier, which costs $6000. At that price, most of the
i-7’s competition will be separates, which you’d think would put the Simaudio at
a disadvantage -- for $6000, designers can create some pretty good preamp-plus-power-amp
solutions. But the i-7 is extraordinary -- as good as or better than many separates
I’ve tried at that price. I’m not saying that the i-7 will beat everything --
Simaudio’s Evolution line includes separates priced quite a bit higher that are
supposedly better -- but at anything less than cost-no-object levels, it comes down to a
plethora of design details, not just the number of boxes.
While the mantra of "separates are better" is
still often chanted, understand that it’s true only for products that have been
designed and built with no cost constraints whatsoever -- the really expensive stuff. For
everything less, it doesn’t necessarily hold true. The only way to decide what’s
best for you is to trust the only two things that matter: your ears. Put your faith in
them, not some myth.
…Doug Schneider
E-mail comments to the editor@goodsound.com.
|
