Why the facination with integrated amps?

AES/EBU better than USB?  Really?  AES/EBU is just SPDIF on a balanced physical layer, with all the synchronous issues (clock is least common denominator) rather than USB whcih allows, no, demands re-clocking - its asynchronous. Actually its not re-clocking, its clocking, period. That means your DAC determines the timing, and timing + voltage (DAC'd output) = slope = frequency = music, to over-simplify.  So that's almost astonishing, unless your digital source has God;s own clock.
You hear what you hear, and you may be right in this instance, but i'd be asking myself "why?" and "what's wrong with the other interface?"
G

When "Hi-FI" gained popularity at the dawn of the "50's, the affordable amps were Integrated - Bell, Brook, Bogen,Grommes, etc.  No frills. Then Mac, H.H.Scott, Marantz, Fisher, Quad brought increasing levels of
sophistication and fidelity - at a cost. Nowadays, many of us don't feel
the need for flexibility options the Separates offered. Us old-timers
remember choices for distinct recording curves: AES, Decca, RCA
(RIAA), LP, 78", etc. along with and the introduction of a "loudness" control - these and several other control options, along with demonstratively better audio are what set Separates on their elevatedstatus back then.
That's apparently changing, and perhaps for the better, for the reasons others have mentioned.  For my part. I enjoy the flexibility and audio offered by my fully-rehabbed MC 34 and M 2570 (End of the G.Gow era and his sound at Mac).
Maybe I'm simply too old and can't hear anything better!

But, hey - it's all about what YOU think you hear, isn't it?
Bo

Had a MC 6100 integrated amp 40 years ago none since then.If you love integrated amp jump on one asap!!