NAD M3 versus Simaudio I-3 SE

My thought is if your speakers tend to the brighter side then the NAD will be a good offset to that; if not, then you'll be dealing with some restriction in the upper mids and highs.

Has anybody here listned to the M3 and a rotel. I have a rotel ra-1062 currently. Was wondering how the performance at higher frequencies compares (I know the rotel is a much cheaper amp).

okay... last question. thanks for bearing with me. What about the M3 compared to a simaudio I-5??

Thanks
Brian

I used to have a Sim I-3 (regular version) in my set-up, then after trying out several other amps, I settled on a NAD M3, so my impressions aren't side-by-side, and should probably be taken with a grain of salt. That being said, I found that the NAD was simply much better than the I3 in all respects--resolution, soundstage, pacing, etc. Of course, given the respective price points for these amps, that's probably to be expected, and I do think that the I5 might be more comparable to the M3. The M3 does output well over double the wattage of the I5, though...

I had the I-3 (regular version) and I-5 also for a couple of years (one year each). Now I have the M-3. In global terms, I-5 and M3 are almost in the same level with some differents, both betters than the I-3. I-5 is warmer than M-3 and M-3 has more power and better management of bass. For my system with very revealing speakers M-3 match better than I-5.