pre+mono or integrated

hi all,
the amplification section of my set up consists of an integrated amp running the HF and a pair of monos running the LF, the whole amplification section cost around £2400 when new, my question is it is possible for an integrtaed to out gun a pre+mono set up and would an integrated amp of better quality or supposed quality do a better job than my current set up?
if so, which?
i`ve been offered around £1800 for my amps and would be loookin at an integrated (used, of course) for similar money.
any help/advice greatly received
thanx
ps, my current amps are Cyrus apa7.5`s and a Cyrus C7integrated with Psxr

 

Whats wrong with what you've got and how you looking to better it? Plus what source(s) and speakers will it be used with?

 

My gut instinct would be to say yes, a good integrated will see off the cyrus combo. A s/h belcanto Evo2i would be a great option, as would an Audio Research VSi55 to name but two. But it also depends on what source/speakers you are using, and what sound you are looking for.

 

i`ve got a litle bit bored of the Cyrus sound, you know, a bit flat sounding, not expressing the music, and a restrained depth to the sound, don`t get me wrong i loved it at first but now think i need something better, PLUS i`ve got shed loads of little black boxes and thought maybe it`d be a good idea to just have one better quality box, my source is also a Cyrus with B&W speakers
cheers

 

theoretically a good integrated should show a pre/power the way home thanks to all sorts of things like good matching of pre and power stages, lack of interconnects, shorter signal path etc. however most manufacturers see integrateds as 'entry level' and therefore don't make as much effort. of course there are exceptions to this such as those mentioned by robbo. you might want to look at the nad s300, gryphon callisto, lavardin is(?), manley stingray and there are plenty more....
most integrateds are a dead end though which is great if you went to forget the willy waving and just listen to music.
cheers


julian

 

I agree with Julian - theoretically integrateds should not be the compromise many imagine (although I believe Naim would disagree here)

One box takes a lot of the hassle out of the hobby and these days there are some stonking examples to be had. A s/h Bel Canto Evo would seem to be a good shout at the pricepoint

 

I'd agree that are some exellent integrateds out there,as mentioned the NAD,Primare,spring to mind at around £1500,but personally I found the current pre/power I'm using to be better than my previous Integrated (Copland CTA 401) but then we're talking double the money if bought new.

Maybe it would be wise to get a £1500 new priced amp,second hand ex demo for around 800,sell the cyrus,what's the B&W your using,the NT range? well compare them to something like a Spendor SP100 again second hand,and you'll really notice the difference.

 

I would replace with an ATC integrated, not much better out there than this fffffellow.circa £1k s'hand.

 

If you want bags of clean power, another shout for an evo 2i.

If you want warmth and instruments to sound less digitized, then a good valve amp.

 

Yes, rip the guys arm off for that cash, and get something decent with liberated funds

 

interesting how the problem space changes - just where, if ever, to do the integration.

I've bought into the separate transport/dac argument, and as my dac (the Dax Decade) has a pre-amp built in (integrated in), I then have a poweramp (well an integrated that can be switched to poweramp only) and a pair of passive speakers.

Having opted for the passive speakers, rather than active 'integrated' speakers, I'm searching in the 'which poweramp' space. I confess that I like the versatility of my present amp, but upgraditis (that well known itch) suggests that there is something else out there waiting for me ...

Will it be mono poweramps, a flirtation with valves, a 'better' switchable integrated stereo or the more 'traditional' stereo poweramp? Or perhaps I should do my integration on the last and embrace the active speaker. Not sure I'm ready for it but there is that 'integrated' that really reduces the box (and interconnect) count: CD transport + digital speakers

 

tbh, my personal thoughts are that, unless you really want to simplify, interconnects do change the character slightly, systems without them are little if any better.
a well matched conventinal system will beat most 'integrated' dig ones.
same with coupling caps, they do change the character, tho its no better for having them removed. IMO.
There are HUGE stories going around that short paths make the sound better, as do no caps in the signal path, and no wires.
I haven't found proof of any of this, theoretically, it makes sense, but it doesn't bear out in reallity.
I had a valve amp that has coupling caps, hardwired, and miles of wire in the ouput transformer, not to mention a load of iron thro which the signal goes, no electrical link, and it wasted any short signal direct coupled tranny that I tried.

 

well, I certainly dont see myself going down the radical dig road just yet, if only because I've invested in both the transport+dac/preamp combo and the speakers. So, if not an integrated pre/power, what recommendations for my poweramp slot? I tried a Sugden poweramp recently and enjoyed it, but not that much over the AudioLab 8000S I have in the chain (see above), especially given its versatility.

have you any valve recommendations to try to try?

[edit: incidentally, I quite like what the vdh The Second does to the link between the Dax Decade and the AudioLab, giving it a rounder less electronic feel; so do the vhd The First Ultimate but that introduced a hum, perhaps because the Dax has a passive pre-amp??]

 

I read an opinion somewhere (David Heaton?) that the best pre-amp was no pre-amp, hence the decision to include a passive pre-amp in the dac, but what are the plusses and minusses of having a separate pre-amp?
- presuamably one upside is being able to take in different line/analogue sources

 

Not sure if the DAX does ALL of the volume control digitally or like Meridian swaps over to analogue as the resolution drops, if it's completely digital then a pre-amp will give you analogue control over the volume which is done without 'throwing' bits away as the volume qoes quieter.

With regard to amplification, if you like the Audiolab sound, perhaps you should try out the WHJLH100A amps from Williams-Hart (http://www.williamshart.com/jlhampli.htm). I replaced the Audiolab 8000MX's on my surround channels with his monoblocs, quite a step up in performance with similar tonal balance. At the time I bought mine you could buy an upgraded version with better power supply caps, coupling caps, key resistors and connectors, don't know if it's still available.

 

heard a lot of good stuff about the belcanto evo2i BUT where the hell are they all? especially at circa £1800 second hand? what`s this amp going to give me over my current stuff? i soon be selling the rest of my Cyrus kit and get a replacement cd player, again i don`t know which to go for, any suggestions???????? my total amp+cd budget would be circa £3k for used kit.

i`m using B&W cdm-nt`s (for now)

also heard a lot of good stuff about the Bow Technologies gear, just wish i could afford such luxuries!!!!!!!

WADIA MIESTER....what`s `DECENT` in your opinion ??

BOTTLENECK....nice PRS, i`ve got a 1992 custom24 with birds, sweet guitars!!!!!

 

gary,
this is a common misconception about a lot of digital volume controls. as the datastream is expanded from 16 to 24 bits with the lower 8 bits combrising either 0's or random dither you can throw them away without effecting the origional data - 8 bits will give you 255 volume increments. also there is the fact that some cdp's / dacs allow adjustment of the output voltage via dip switches (or other methods) which allow 16 / 18 / 20 bit cd players / dacs to stay near the top of their volume range even at low volumes - if you see what i mean.
as with most things in audio there are advantages and compromises in both digital and analog approaches.
cheers


julian

 

I like vdh cables myself nice natural, easy to listen with detail.

the differences between a passive pre and an active one are.

passive, usually clearer, can sound weak and insipid.

active, can lose out in clarity, more beefy, and driven due to gain, drums in particular get more drive.

IMO the williams linsley hoods were not good SS amps at all. They came bottom of my pile in a comparison between

naim 250
michell alecto
pioneer a-09
alesis ra100
then the williams....shouty, balance not right, good bass due to active psu, but not at all my cup o' tea, worth a try if cheap, but trouble selling on.

 

I think that just goes to show how different everybody's opinions are. After reading about the current fave, Bel Canto, I took along my modified JLH amps and compared them to the latest Bel Canto and preferred the JLH, then again, my main amps are Krell monoblocs, another amp not thought much of here.

 

Hi Cat.

Sadly, its not my PRS, but a custom-made one I nicked from the site. I do have a PRS, but mine is a standard in black with 1/2 moons. I bought it second hand in '92 from a guy who played in a gospel band in Nashville Tennessee so thats pretty cool.. he was selling it to buy a Martin dreadnaught.

Anyway, for Belcanto's try Audiogon (www.audiogon.com). According to WM the voltage conversion isnt that bad.. although you might want to ask him directly.

What the BC gives is absoutely shed loads of super-clean power. It makes traditional class B powerhouses sound wimpy and clouded.

If you like your music with a bit of warmth - if you know valve amps from your guitar - the differences in audio seem similar - more warmth, tone, but slightly less focused at the edges with many.. A carefully chosen valve amp will add texture and musical richness, but for sheer ecky-thump its got to be quality digital amps like the belcanto.

nb the BC's take an analogue signal in, not a digital one, and Im convinced this makes it less analytical than some digi amps..

all my tuppence worth