NAD M3 versus Simaudio I-3 SE

Hi all,

I am thinking about getting a new integrated amplifier. I currently have some small easy to drive speakers. The nad m3 is appealing because of the built in cross overs (i use a sub as well). However, I may upgrade to a larger speaker in the future. Does anybody have listing experience with the M3 and I3? I tend to prefer an airy, open, high end. I plan to listen to both amps but have not had a chance yet. Any opinions and/or advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
I had the M3. It is not the last word in having an open airy high end. I never used the treble control but that might help with that. The M3 is sort of closed in the upper end. I haven't heard the I-3SE but from my reading, it is very different from the M3. The M3 would probably be a bit rolled off in the upper mids and highs compared to the I-3. But, the synergy of your speakers with either integrated (the strength of the match) will be also be very important.
Thanks for the responses. I have T+A talis tls1 speakers. My greatest worry is the way some people describe the M3s high end as sounding introverted. However, synergy (as foster_9 mentions) is not factor I have considered yet.
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??

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.