price point to move to separates vs integrated


Hi,
I have spoken to different dealers about the most effective way to spend my money on amplification and have gotten different views. (I know opinions are like elbows, everyone has one, or two...).

One fellow said something along the lines of: as soon as you can afford low end separates you should go that route over a more expensive integrated due to the interactions in the same chassis.

Another suggests still going integrated at $6K.

I realize my ears are the final deciding point but the grey stuff between them is longing for a more concrete set of guidelines.

Thanks for your thoughts and replies, the more the merrier,
Gus
gustav1
One fellow said something along the lines of: as soon as you can afford low end separates you should go that route over a more expensive integrated due to the interactions in the same chassis.

LOL! What a twit! Maybe he meant that low end separates would beat a low end integrated amp, in which case he could be right.

Yes, in the last 10 years or so integrated amps have come a long way, yet some audio snobs still refuse to give them their due. I have listened to a $6500 integrated amp go toe-to-toe with $20,000 separates and not only did not get embarrassed, but was surprisingly close. I would say the results were mixed. That integrated amp also embarrassed many separates costing more than it did.

Yes, theoretically separates have the potential to sound better, but there are many mitigating factors that can keep that from happening. Mismatching separates, extra cables and power cords are just other chances to screw up the sound. My current separates list for over $11K, yet I would be very tempted to switch to that integrated amp if I could find one.

Integrated amps will give you the best bang for the buck. $5K worth of separates may beat a $2K integrated amp. $10K of separates may beat a $5K integrated amp, etc. It would probably take over $50K of separates to beat VAC's $22K Phi Beta 110 integrated amp.
I just like the idea of integrateds because it's one less $100 power cord and one less $100 pair of interconnects. It looks cleaner too.
I really don’t understand why this "integrated vs. separates" thing seems to be such a conundrum. First, unless we're comparing amplifiers of similar price, of what use is it to talk about additional chassis, power supplies, transformers, etc. Cost not being a factor, enhanced isolation will always provide an advantage; no one will debate that. But, in application, those advantages are very costly and seldom cost effective, IMO. When we equalize total cost (this includes interconnects, power cords and shelving) of moving from an integrated to separates or monoblocks, seriously compromised parts quality is the tradeoff.
I have been using integrated amps for years, some of the best, Viva, Lavardin, Karan and currently, a Pathos Inpol2 and Ayon Spark. I agree with all the comments suggesting integrated amps have come a long way in the last few years and can go toe to toe with much more expensive separates. Then I made the mistake of a prolonged listen to an ARC reference 75 power amp at a recent show.....big mistake. Now I have to work out how to fit a big power amp and pre, on my packed shelves, planned around an integrated amp.
Many good points made already. Hi end integrated amps are tough to beat. Areas to go one over the other is flexibility and features, which differ from brand to brand. The biggest reason goes beyond the hearing and the cost, but the heart. What would you like for yourself. Ultimate separates should sound better than top of the line integrated especially from the same brand. But in the end more than sound it may be what makes sense to you and what makes you happy.
At the higher price points it not just the sound but the style. What vision of your system brings joy to your heart and ears when you power up.

Well that's my two elbows worth.