Reversing the connections, in my opinion is not really going to make any difference. Other than two independent RCA analogue connectors outside, I am sure they are both sent to the same audio circuitry inside. Mind you these are not digital connections, rather two analogue connections.
Even at home I use these two connections between multiple sources. In pure direct mode, they do not make any difference.
Regarding the soundstage being an effect of the amp, speakers or source, in this, case makes do difference. Since all other factors were the same, we can only conclude that the CD Player made a difference. Since it was able to centre the main singer/instruments perfectly, I suspect it was sending the data in a manner that enabled the amp and the speakers to create a larger soundstage. The Marantz was clearly limiting the sound stage and the speakers were very clearly 'visible' to me with my eyes closed. It was like two sound walls that were created to the left and right of the speakers, and the sound was not allowed to go out beyond that. When the Emotiva was playing, the walls just vanished.
The Emotiva has a variable output voltage stating from 1 V rms and going to 7 V rms. I suspect the player automatically compensates for gain loss in source.
Here is comparison of the specs
Marantz
* Frequency Range: 2Hz-20KHz
* (S/N: 111dB
* THD: 0.002%
* Channel Separation: 110dB
* DAC: Cirrus Logic
Emotiva
* Frequency response: 0-20Khz (+/- 0.1 db)
* S/N: >100dB (A weighted)
* THD: <0.01% 0dB 1KHz)
* Channel separation: >95dB - ref. 1kHz
* Output voltage: 1V rms (7V peak)
* DAC: Analog Devices
The differences in specs are small, but the Emotiva did seem to perform better. In complicated instrumental numbers, the Emotiva was clearly able to separate the instruments much better.
I know many of you are Marantz fans, but Emotiva seems to have done it's homework well.
Cheers