Do Integrateds sound better than Receivers?

Rosedanny - I've benefitted from some posts you had placed previously. Hope I can return the favor. I think Bob_reynolds response gets to the heart of the matter.

FWIW - I'd been running a Yamaha R1000 receiver (from the early '80s) for many years. New it cost me close to $1K US. Well-regarded in its day - though not megabucks high end, obviously. Went to an entry level integrated tube amp (JoLida 502B) a few years ago for similar money and couldn't be happier. Actually, I probably could be happier but that will take some additional money that isn't in the current budget. So, my long-winded point to you is that for an equal spend, an integrated can do you better than a receiver.

Like Bob said.

If you have a receiver and an integrated at the same price point, hopefully, the cost of the tuner is used for better parts in the integrated and it will sound better. However, design is as important as "parts". Therefore, an integrated may or may not be better than a receiver at the same price point. I think the reality is that the integrated will be better than the receiver, but it doesn't have to be this way.

Rosedanny

If you're headed where I think you are... consider this as a better solution, though perhaps a longer path... buy an amp instead of an integrated, and use the Receiver as a preamp.

Unless of course you need 'now' more so than perhaps 'better' or at least more flexible, down the road. Or simply a second system. Naturally if concerns for some degree of immediacy, or budget are in play an integrated can serve very well. The above posts, and Bob's in particular point out the obvious differences between receivers and integrateds at the same price points, generally speaking of course.

Are you considering a tube int? Solid state? have you thought about your plans long term?

I've wanted a real nice integrated for some time, yet receivers always are attractive to me as they possess greater bang for the buck usually. that and the facct I've a fair 2 ch system too play a part for my decision making.

Again, a very good path for a very good 2 ch system can be had by attaining a nice int. I would caution against taking a sideways step in either direction though.

I've a penchant for trying to move up the food chain in audio when the mood or opportunity presents itself. having flexibility for future moves is also a big deal for me.

Take care.

Rosedanny ;
As an insentive , when I moved from a receiver to Rotel seperates , it sounded as if I had taken a blanket off of my speakers ! All of the other equipment and cables remained the same .

I then moved on to integrateds that , used , cost much less and I have received better sound . I am now using an integrated that is head and shoulders above the Rotel stuff at 1/3 the cost new .

I believe that in your price range you can't beat a good integrated . You have many well respected pieces to choose from .

Good luck .

Hey thanks to you all! What you've all said makes sense to me and helps to clarify things. If I'm understanding you, an integrated amp would produce better sound, provided I move up rather than sideways as Blindjim says. I'm considering mostly solid state, but might be swayed to tubes. Here's the list so far: Creek, Rogue, Luxman, Bryston, Arcam, Rega . . . still narrowing down. I want one with a phono stage, around 100 watts per (SS), and two sets of speaker posts. Any suggestions of an integrated that would gell with my existing set up would be appreciated. What integrated do you have, Saki70?