user poll on seperates vs integrated

vonhelmholtz: i post here when i have a question about something, not sure why not posting all the time is an issue for you.

i asked the question because i'm curious to know if there's a prevailing opinion on whether, when cost is equalized, people think you get better results for the money out of less expensive separates or more expensive integrated because it might influence what direction i go in the future.  i'm not on the verge or a purchase, but down the line, as i look at future upgrades, this is the sort of fork in the road that determines the future of a system.  it's also just interesting to me.

vonhelmholtz comment is priceless

Left me stunned and frozen for minutes

I was told that under 10K: integrated is the way to go, overt that: monoblocks and preamp

grislybutter: that's an interesting sort of rule of thumb, do you recall who gave you the advice?

my budget would probably walk that line, so i guess that doesn't help that much.

the obvious future plan i guess would be to build off of what i have, for example, i have a parasound phono amp, i could eventually save up and get the matching pre and power amp or something like that, but as i was reading reviews, looking at my options, just generally getting a lay of the land as far as options in that price range, it occurred to me that for the same price as the couple of separates, i could get an integrated from somebody perhaps a little more exotic that i wouldn't otherwise have had on my list of options, and it got me curious as to whether people thought one option was definitively superior to the other or if it was more contentious.

i appreciate everyone weighing in with any personal experience they might have had.

If $10K is your budget, try and audition the Technics SU-R1000 integrated. I have its little brother, the SU-G700M2 and would only consider moving up to that if budget allowed. Integrateds have come so far these days.

Another county heard from.

All the best,
Nonoise