Frustrated with the sound of my system


Here is my system:
Rotel RCD-965BX CD Player as transport
MSB Link 2 DAC
Sonic Frontiers SFL-1 Signature preamp
Classe 10 amplifier
North Creek Audio Borealis speakers (Custom built kit speaker...something close to a Proac Response 2.5 design)
M&K V-75 sub
Kimber and Cardas interconnects
Kimber 4TC/8TC bi-wire speaker cables.

Here is my frustration:
The sound, regardless of music, sounds stringent, hard, really lacks air, and is anything but relaxed. It is fatigueing. I can listen to my Grado 60 headphones on an iPod and the sound is frustratingly more relaxed and has what I would call air.

I don't think that my system is that outstanding, but it really seems like I should be more pleased with what I am hearing.

I would be interested in your thoughts on where the most likely opportunity is. I really like the individual components of the system (OK the Rotel/MSB set up is old and just OK), but all together they seem to be underwhelming. I am thinking it is either in improving the digital front end (new player or DAC) or moving to a planar speaker to get the sound I desire. I have thought about new player like an OPPO 93 or 95, perhaps a tube based player or DAC, or else looking at something like a used pair of Maggie 12's or 1.6's. I have always enjoyed the Maggie sound.

In either case I am thinking that $2k is the absolute max I would want to spend on any solution. Thanks in advance. If there are other questions I would be glad to supply details.
stuartbmw3
To add to my post, i disagree with much of the advice above and suspect it is one or more of your components and have had a bad experience with the same model Rotel player myself which i used in different systems and even moving to a new house and room. Of course it could be a different cause in your case but i suggest you borrow a Marantz 6004 which i have heard and like, or one of the new Cambridge or NADs (many choices) and bypass the DAC before trying the other suggestions.
Throw the bums out and spend more dough before taking the room out of the equation by a nearfield set-up to see? This cost nothing and should be very telling if it is the room or system synergy and is the FIRST thing that should be done, come on guys why spend money on a hit or miss crapshoot, it doesn't make sense at this point.
I'm not sure I understand the contentious debate between those focussing on placement/treatment issues and those focussing on equipment issues. It seems pretty obvious that neither good equipment set-up poorly, nor bad equipment set-up optimally, is going to shine.