New amplifier for Paradigm Studio 60

Hello.
I'm from Russia; it's my first post here, so I must apologize for my bad English.
Two and half years ago I bought stereo consists of CD player Rotel RCD-1072, amp Rotel RA1062 and, finally, acoustic Paradigm 60 v.4. I really fell in love with Paradigms because of its dynamic, linearity and soft enough sound with great (in my 19 square meters listening room) bass and outstanding soundstage for its price. Rotel 1062 firstly seemed me good enough for Paradigms thanks to its details, linearity and bass control. But some times ago I started to notice some roughness in high frequencies, appearing as exceeding sibilants and sometimes schematic and metallic-sounded subtle HF details. I suppose my amp causes this disadvantage mostly than Paradigms.
So I'd like to ask the following questions.
1) Am I right thinking that in my stereo Rotel is source of HF roughness?
2) If the first question answer is "yes", what amplifiers with Rotel's bass control but naturally-sounded HF would you recommend?
3) What about Bryston B60? I understand that its quality grade is significantly higher than studio's, but, in first, it can fully expose studio's capabilities and, in second, with Bryston I get ability to farther upgrade my stereo because of Bryston's universality and sound quality (if I only will have enough money).
Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions.

Thanks you very much for concern on my trouble, I really was surprised to find so many detailed answers!
I'll try to answer all of you.
I used not correct world "roughness", I ought to say "crisp HF". HF is crisp sometimes, only on some genres and artists, e.g. on Norah Jones or Skye Edwards's vocals. It appears particularly on women's vocal, but sometimes – on a husky man's vocal, such as Mark Knopfler's. So, as variant, might it be due to the records quality?
I don't sure about clipping because it appears at comparatively low volumes, and not depends on volume from half past 8 till 11. And I don't need more powerful amp because I like mid volumes in my comparatively small room.
My friend's stereo based on hybrid Opera Audio Consonance A120 coupled with Jamo D450 has not such a crisp in the same typical Russian room (even more resonant than mine), so it isn't room acoustic effect only. My stereo sounded a little crisp in 3 rather different rooms. I'd listened my paradigms with his opera audio in one, and HF was noticeable silkier and smoother than in couple with Rotel, but not as soft as Jamo's HF. So I understand, that speakers are less perfect gear and give much more difference in sound than middle-cost amps.
On the other hand, I'd listened RA1062 with some others acoustic: Dali Ikon6, B&W CM 7 – HF remained a little crisp in varying levels. Even with B&W 805 Rotel gave a bit crisp sound, but 805 sounded smooth enough with Prima Lune tube amp. Reading this forum I've found some people think Paradigm Studio's HF not so smooth, and there's the same opinion about Rotel, so I suppose than in this couple occurs effect's mutual amplification. And because I like studio 60's sound style best of all within this price bracket I don't want to change them and I try to find amp sounded with Paradigms silky in HF like Opera A120, but controlling bass as well as Rotel.
Summarizing, opinion is divided – Buddahead advises try to change amp, Arnold advises not… What to do? It's clear only about room acoustic; I know that bad room might kill perfect sound.
To: buddahead. I dream about Bryston, though I never heard it, because of many comments such as " The Bryston B-60 gives you more than a taste of the High End—it gives you the High End" (c). But now I can't afford it. Maybe in far future I'll accumulate enough money for change speakers too with Paradigm S2, for example, or even with Westlake LC 6.5 or even 8, and I'd like to have at that moment true high-end universal amp. But if I can't, I'd like examine cheaper amps. By the way, what can you say about couple Musical Fidelity with Studios? I'd listened it but with Audiovectors and was well impressed, but how would it deal with my Paradigms? Has any reason to bear it from about 100 km to listen at home with studios?
PS Special thanks to Glangford for givin' good mark for my English. If you only know how much time I spent writing posts… Besides, your Russian is not so bad too!
Dmitry.

To: glangford
HF is not too much, but a little crispy in different rooms, even in dealer's large, anechoic enough room. I want no less HF, I want it more smooth and combined with midrange.

From low enough volume (volume control at half past 8) till high. I don't listen very loudly, no more loudly than at half past 10 volume control position.

studio in his price segment. In this price segment I like also Jamo D450 with quiet different sound. They sounded more naturally and without brightness at all, but I prefer paradigms for its dynamic and really deep bass; besides, Jamo's high seemed to me, otherwise, a little muffled. These two models of speakers impressed me most of all other listened speakers cost no more than $2000 per pair: Monitor Audio RS6, Dali Ikon 6, Focal JM Lab Horus 726, AE Aelite 3, B&W cm7, Elac FS247...
Generally, without regard to price, I was especially liked sound of Westlake Audio Lc 8.1, driven by tube amp VTL, but, unfortunately, can't afford it. But among speakers priced no more than $2000, I still like Paradigms studio best of all. So if I decide change speakers, I will examine more expensive models, which whenever will demand more advanced amp. So I've decided to start upgrade from amp.

Thank you for advice. Space between speaker's acoustic axes is about 2,4...2,5 meters; I usually sit about 2,7...3,0 meters and never farther than 3,5 meters from speakers, so you've confirmed one of my hypothesis that in my case bookshelf speakers are rather suitable then floorstanding. Then the following question: what the difference between simply 2-way bookshelf speakers and near field monitors? Professional series present little in our country, and I have to choose generally among home speakers, so if I change floorstanding speakers with more advanced bookshelf ones?

Many thanks. If it's so simple, it's good, because I'm in some financial troubles now because I have to refurbish my new flat. So as I first step I'll make some audyssey (if I understood this word meaning), soften my room and after that listen my stereo: probably, I wouldn't like any change. I can't use tone control because there isn't it in my amp, and I don't much like it.
Once more thanks to all, you already gave me much information for thought.
It's midnight in Moscow now, so I go to bed.
Best regards,
Dmitry.

Because of my insufficient knowledge in English yestarday I didn't understand right what does "audyssey" means; I thought it's a kind of room acoustic preparation No, I'm not going to use audyssey, but refurbishing my flat I'll make some acoustic preparation for getting rid echoes and etc.
commsysman & Swampfox, thank you for advises, I'm going to follow both: first - set right room acoustic, second - try other amp. Because the problem is only partially room, I wrote above about listening to my stereo in 3 different rooms, and HF characteristic feature was the same even in overdamped room. Repeat, not bright but a little harsh HF. As I told, I listened to my speakers with some others amp, and, to be honest, I really like my speakers, but just my amp seems to me a little strident.
Especial thank to commsysman for good Musical Fidelity M3i review. As I wrote above, I had listened another (forgot model), more expensive model; so I've started to look closely M3i, all the more so I've already read some good comments on it ant it is quiet within my budget.

Hmmm, you make me more think and listen to... I listened to some different records yesterday and I was generally glad how my system sounded, except rare very little inaccuracy. It seems to me, those of you who think than that little problems are not owing to system itself are right. I've agreed that little harsh HF is mostly due to record's qualities (they are not noticeable on every record) and not acoustic-prepared room. I'm 32 but I'm an old-school 'diophile too, so I think the less elements from record to speakers the better, and I don't have excess money, working as an engineer, so I wouldn't like to buy some equipments such as Audessy. First step I'll make normal acoustic preparation of my room and vary speaker's position.
I know than amps exchange involves small sound changes, but if I have time, money, etc I'll try some other amps to satisfy my interest.
I think that only much more costing equipments can give noticeable sound quality changing, but think such an expense unacceptable for me.
Thanks to all,
Dmitry.

I have no Home Theatre receiver; I have only stereo equipments and have no need, no resources and no place for HT yet. My amp is rather old-school device with only balance control and stepped tone correction, so I can use no software in it.
However, thank you for info; if I ever have Home Theater, I'll probably use it.

Thanks, it's sold here, I've already found it, it's oficially priced here about $2300. I bear it in mind.