The accepted belief in audio has been that the best performance is obtained by separate components. The advantage of separate components are that upgrades can be achieved via piecemeal. Changing out one box at a time made it easy to tell what the upgrade offered. The separate components approach is thought to provide better performance due to the fact that each box is optimized for it's specific function. However, there's also a down side to the separate component approach.
The largest downside is that all these separate components have to be connected via cables. Let's be honest here: Cables cannot ADD any improvement to a given setup. It can only REDUCE the transfer function loss form one component to another. Audiophiles can pay thousands of dollars on these cables that cannot improve performance. They at best, can only reduce the transfer function loss. Another potential downside is that the separate components may not be fully optimized to work within the system as a whole.
The legacy thinking is that an all in one component solution was a "lifestyle choice". The overall system's performance would be compromised in order to achieve convenience. That may have been true in the past, but no more.
I would argue some of the absolute best sonic performance is achieved by current state of the art integrated solutions. The Devialet Expert Pro products actually have better performance specifications than any comparable separate component setup. There are valid reasons why this is so:
-The DAC/Phono/Streaming input options are optimized to work with the amp section
-No interconnect cables required to connect the various input functions together. No transfer function loss.
-The DAC is connected directly to the power amp section. Again, no transfer function loss.
- No worries about induced hum from a given component.
- The most advanced switching power supply and power amp design in the industry.
A similar set of arguments can be made regarding the NAD Master Series . The Devialet is slightly more advanced with better specs, but both sets of options would be excellent options .
Going forward, predict that integrated solutions will continue to grow and improve.
" Don't look back. Something may be gaining on you"
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - The case for integrated audio solutions. - Freo-1 17:33:06 10/21/23 (21)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - immatthewj 11:42:54 10/27/23 (1)
- It's about how noisy the power supply is. - Freo-1 14:53:44 10/27/23 (0)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - Tuckers 11:43:08 10/25/23 (1)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - Freo-1 11:58:38 10/25/23 (0)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - dbphd 13:28:00 10/23/23 (1)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - Freo-1 13:36:15 10/23/23 (0)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - Analog Scott 09:45:43 10/23/23 (10)
- You can't be serious? - Freo-1 09:59:20 10/23/23 (9)
- RE: You can't be serious? - Analog Scott 10:22:27 10/23/23 (8)
- RE: You can't be serious? - Freo-1 10:27:24 10/23/23 (7)
- RE: You can't be serious? - Analog Scott 10:49:34 10/23/23 (6)
- Lack of signal loss. - Freo-1 11:17:29 10/23/23 (5)
- The math is simple - Analog Scott 11:24:05 10/23/23 (4)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - firstname.lastname@example.org 09:37:17 10/23/23 (1)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - Freo-1 10:17:11 10/23/23 (0)
- RE: The case for integrated audio solutions. - email@example.com 20:33:14 10/21/23 (1)
- Good observations. - Freo-1 07:40:44 10/22/23 (0)