Importance of Amplifier versus Preamp?

02-07-15: Phd
It may appear that John's earlier integrated amp recommendation as a resolution to the OP's situation, does have its merits. In fact I have recently gone with an integrated amp to simplify my system and although it doesn't cost nearly as much as the Vitus integrated, I like the way it sounds! Mine is the dual mono Onix (made in England) rated at 120 watts per channel, plenty of power for my current needs.

02-11-15: Melbguy1
The SIA-025 is surely one of the best integrated amps, though there are many other great ss and tube integrateds including the Burmester 909 Mk5, Soulution 530, Ypsilon Phaethon, Kondo Ongaku & on the more budget side, Vac Sigma 160iSE.

I also have gone to an integrated amp, apparently on the super budget side, a VAC Sigma 160i. I'm very happy, and have sold off my separates. It makes life a lot simpler, and I now know I'd have to at least triple the expense to top it.

Yes, integrated amps can be beaten, but one has to be ready to pay a LOT more money.

02-11-15: Jmcgrogan2
I also have gone to an integrated amp, apparently on the super budget side, a VAC Sigma 160i. I'm very happy, and have sold off my separates. It makes life a lot simpler, and I now know I'd have to at least triple the expense to top it.

Yes, integrated amps can be beaten, but one has to be ready to pay a LOT more money.

Jm, the Vac 160i could only be considered a "budget" alternative against something like a $73k Burmester or Kondo amp, or maybe $30k Vitus. In fact, your commments suggest it should be on par wit the Vitus...at under half its price!

No David, I just find it amusing that a $16K integrated amp (VAC Sigma 160iSE) would be considered a budget component. I wonder how many other folks would consider a $16K integrated amp a budget component.

It all depends on your point of view I suppose. Some could call the $30K Vitus a budget component compared to the Kondo and Burmester!

After reading some comments on amplifier, I really wonder what mechanical/electrical/audio miracles have been performed , knowing the fact that the laws of Physics are still the same as they were 20/30 years ago, metallurgy has not come up with new alloys, to justify the cost in ten of thousands of dollars. As Mr Carver demonstrated, by building an affordable amplifier, of which the sound could not be distinguished from an extremely expensive name amplifier that was being compared to(mid`s 70 )!
The fact also remains that the human auditory system is very limited in scope, unless your name was Beethoven, or Mile Davis,for example. Just wondering.....So if I was able to spend 5/6 grands on an amplifier, I would probably buy a Carver amp...I can already feel the wave of outrage from all the AUDIOPHILES coming at me....OHLALA!

As Mr Carver demonstrated, by building an affordable amplifier, of which the sound could not be distinguished from an extremely expensive name amplifier that was being compared to (mid`s 70)!

To clarify some points about that:

What Carver did, actually in the early and mid-80's, was to tweak the "transfer function" (the relation between output and input) of one of his amplifiers to match the transfer function of the highly regarded Mark Levinson ML-2 solid state amplifier (as chronicled in "The Audio Critic"), and subsequently to tweak the transfer function of another of his amplifiers to match that of a well regarded Conrad Johnson tube amp (as chronicled in "Stereophile"). His demonstration consisted, in addition to some ABX testing, of providing the two amps with the same input signal, and showing that when the output of one was electronically subtracted from the output of the other, essentially nothing remained. More precisely, a null of greater than 70 db was obtained, at least in the ML-2 comparison.

There were two major problems with all of that, however:

1)The tests showed, at best, that the two amps nulled against each other just with one specific speaker load, which was used in implementing his tweaks.

2)Credible anecdotal evidence subsequently emerged that he was not able to maintain anything remotely close to a 70 db null in production. Bob Carver essentially admitted this in an interview which appeared in "The Absolute Sound" about two or three years ago.

Regards,
-- Al