2-3K, Integrated or Seperates

I agree with Bar81 but only if you have easy to drive speakers. I tried the Ayre but my "cheap" Rotel RC1070 had better control over my speakers.

While integrateds may always involve a sonic compromise compared to separates, I really feel the gap is diminishing as separates become better and better in quality.

I personally shelled out a little more than 3k for a used Simaudio i7, but have heard other integrateds in your price range that are all but equal to separates. In many cases, it came down almost to personal preference rather than objective superiority/inferiority.

And, as has been noted already, it just makes your entire setup less encumbered with power cords, interconnects, etc.

I think 3K integrated should always be better than 3K separates, and probably are. That is, at the same price points the integrated should have better parts with lower chassis costs, and cabling costs compared with similarly priced separates, especially at the lower end of the price spectrum. If you were considering a low cost passive attenuator for your pre with a more expensive amp to equal the price point, you might be better with the separates.

As with all things, it depends on what you want. The upside of separates, it seems to me, is that you can upgrade one and keep the other, at least for awhile. The upside of integrateds is that you'll get more functionality out of the same budget.

For three-k you can get some pre-owned stuff that would totally kick butt in either camp. One other thing to consider is whether you like your music warm or snappy. In my opinion, the quick-tempo'ed detail freaks out there (like me) are better off with separates, while the lush, rosy sonic palettes have a lot more choices for integrateds. Someone's going to pounce on that, but it is my experience.