Just offereing some friendly and free advice from a good deal of experience, no need to get defensive.
Fact remainds that you're player is not broken in. I've found most new cdp and dacs take an inordinant amount of time to run in, as much as a month and many hundred hours before showing their worth, which is why I highly suspect your ability to derive an accurate appraisal of this unit.
I also believe your 'reference' NAD to not be up to par in the grand scheme of things, at least compared with the dozens upon dozens of playback sources I've heard and owned, which is what spawned my comments, nothing more. Even should your opinion not change of the player, do you really want to trade musicality, more detail, natural warmth and richness for the thin, cold, analytical, artifically airy/extened trebble with grit and did I mention thinness of the nad... Is it possible that the 'laid-back' sound in relation to forwardness is actually accurate, and the 'airy' and 'light' is actually tizzy, thin and rolled up next to natural richness and accurate, smooth trebble extension....
I don't quite follow your argument that 'thin' and 'weakly-resolving' can be presented as as neutral/uncolored, as these flaws, along with a few others, are consisten character traits/flaws of the nads' sound, but if it's what you like, or just what you're accustomed to being correct, I can't argue against that, and in that light I can definately see how the Marantz sound doesn't appeal to you.
Just trying to help here, give some perspective, not trying to pee in your electronics.
Fact remainds that you're player is not broken in. I've found most new cdp and dacs take an inordinant amount of time to run in, as much as a month and many hundred hours before showing their worth, which is why I highly suspect your ability to derive an accurate appraisal of this unit.
I also believe your 'reference' NAD to not be up to par in the grand scheme of things, at least compared with the dozens upon dozens of playback sources I've heard and owned, which is what spawned my comments, nothing more. Even should your opinion not change of the player, do you really want to trade musicality, more detail, natural warmth and richness for the thin, cold, analytical, artifically airy/extened trebble with grit and did I mention thinness of the nad... Is it possible that the 'laid-back' sound in relation to forwardness is actually accurate, and the 'airy' and 'light' is actually tizzy, thin and rolled up next to natural richness and accurate, smooth trebble extension....
I don't quite follow your argument that 'thin' and 'weakly-resolving' can be presented as as neutral/uncolored, as these flaws, along with a few others, are consisten character traits/flaws of the nads' sound, but if it's what you like, or just what you're accustomed to being correct, I can't argue against that, and in that light I can definately see how the Marantz sound doesn't appeal to you.
Just trying to help here, give some perspective, not trying to pee in your electronics.