Seeking more 3d imaging, deeper/wider soundstage


I'm considering replacing either my amp or my pre. My system is profiled in my system link. Which do you think would improve soundstage/imaging more:
Replace the P3? I'd consider used McCormack, or a passive line stage, but my amp clips at 5v, which is what my DAC puts out when using the XLR outputs, and I'd like to try those someday...not sure a passive is a good fit for my system? Plus I require a remote. That's a deal breaker.
Replace the Rotel RB-1080? I'd consider parasound (a21 is a bit too pricey for me), used McCormack, odyssey, maybe even older krell or classe. I want XLR inputs tho.
Budget is $900-$1200 for either. Music spans the full gamut, excluding hip hop and country. Room is small, 12x12x8. I'm going to throw up some affordable foam acoustic absorption this summer (foam factory). Thnx in advance.
realremo
Magico is a very well made product and very good in this regard based on personal past auditions. Used prices here I have seen recently are coming down as well to the point where Magico used is more realistically competitive on price with other options as well.
I have the same speakers paired to a Marantz PM8004. They sit 2.25 feet from the side wall and 3 feet from the back walls. I have them toed in 20 degrees so that they aim right at my seating area. I get very good 3-d imaging as a result. My room is 10x13x10 but is it also heavily damped with carpet, draperies, and cd shelves. The Quads really work well with smaller rooms like ours.
With all due respect to those here more knowledgeable than myself , I would not throw out that Rotel amp ! I have used
one for a few years and achieved some really wide and deep sound staging with sometimes spooky imaging ! I don't think that your amp is the culprit here .
I have also been in a square room and was unable to achieve any decent effects at all other than just left , right and
center .
While using the Rotel amp , I tried three different sources and they made the biggest difference for imaging . Of course if it isn't in the recording it won't come out !
From my experiences , I think that your small square room is causing the most problems .
I have also tried the diagonal speaker placement , while in a small 10'X11' room , mentioned above . While the tone was better it really didn't do much for imaging . The speakers aimed to the right , as mentioned above , does sound interesting though . I had never heard of that one .
I would definitely play around with the speakers in different locations and get the equipment away from them as well . While using the Rotel amp , I pulled the speakers out into the room more and away from the equipment that was between them . The soundstage increased emensily , now this was in a larger room at this time . But the Rotel amp was not limiting the sound stage or the imaging , it was the placement of things that did .
Depending on the source and the recording using my Rotel amp , I was able to place the band in my backyard and singer in my attic ! I could put the drums outside to the left in my lanai and Robert Plant behind my listening position ! This with a rather inexpensive Nad CD player and JM Lab speakers and a Rotel prepro .
Changing nothing else except the CD player changed the whole sound stage and imaging effects !
I have heard one of the respondents system , who contributed above . They did not have any better of a soundstage than I did in my small room and he demoed two different tube amps with different topologies .
Just my 2 cents worth based on my own experiences .

Good luck
Don't expect 3d imaging from hip hop...rap or most pop music....it just isn't there. Try some nicely recorded live jazz or classical to determine what your systems baseline is.....of course the above recommendation with set up and room treatment will need to be done first.....but if the source recording is not 3d..your playback will never be.