Charles Chen

Stealth 50-50 Evaluation:

 

Positive Points

 

1)      Quiet background (I agree)

2)      Very well behaved through entire sound spectrum. (I agree)

3)      Very good resolution & focus. (I agree)

4)      Very good side-side, front-back soundstage, including rear soundstage width. (I agree)

5)      Good punch in mid bass. (I semi-agree.  It doesn't stand out much for me.)

6)      Good size of sound, but not top-notch. (I agree)

7)      Can be useful in taming a bright and forward solid state system.  (I agree)

 

Negative Points

 

1)      The overall sound is not lively enough and a bit too dark.  (I agree)

2)      Leading edge of sound too soft, lacking attack & excitement. (I agree.  The attack on piano is too soft for my taste too.)

3)      Doesn’t “let the notes go” and sounds a bit “tight”.  (I semi-agree.  Even after 100 hrs, still sound a bit tight)

4)      The softness imparts a filmy / veiled sound.  (I semi-agree.  I also think its is an unpleasant quality)

5)      Soundstage and midrange too recessed. (I agree.  It is too distant for my liking)

6)      Midrange lack bloom, body and presence.  Midrange also slightly tilted upward but still acceptable.   (I agree completely.  The vocals do not separate toward the front with enough contrast.)

7)      Soundstage height is not impressive. (I did not notice, but in retrospect, probably agree)

8)      Does not have ultimate high end and low end extension.  Also not enough bass quantity. (I agree.  Bass extension, control and musicality on Eagles Tequila Sunrise can not compare to NBS Statement II)

9)      Piano and cymbal decay too quickly and sound different from silver or copper cables (unnatural?).  Also, cymbal does not crash, splash and soar.  (I agree, but not sure if its unnatural, just “different”—and I don’t like it.)

10)  Doesn’t sound expansive with large scale music. (I agree.  It doesn’t have the huge, sweeping, holographic feel). 

11)  Separation of instruments in space is not top-notch (I don’t agree, but do believe that separation on NBS and Audio Note is better). 

 

Compared to NBS Monitor I & Statement II:  The sound of NBS is more open, more dynamic, bigger and more robust.  There is a sweeping, holographic feel on top of a very solid bass foundation.  NBS has more of a midrange presence, and bass extension / control / tunefulness that is far more preferable to us than that of the 50-50.  The high end extension on the Statement II is a bit rolled off compared to Monitor I and AN-Vz, but is better than the 50-50.  The Monitor is slight more neutral than Statement II, and offer better high-end extension, and a slightly more linear sound.  The Monitor I also compares to 50-50 in a similar manner with a bigger, more dynamic, more open and more robust sound. 

 

Compared to Audio Note AN-Vz:  The offers a cleaner, more crisp, more airy sound that is huge, effortless and elegant.  The AN-Vz produces a high that crashes and soars.  It can be a bit unforgiving on bad recordings.  Its bass extension is not as deep as NBS, but it is rather competent , being deeper and more tuneful than the 50-50.  The midrange, like the 50-50, has a very slight upper tilt, but it is different in that it sounds closer, more textured and more intimate with more body and separation.  Its midrange presence is similar to the NBS Monitor I, but with a more elegant and liquid sound.  The overall sound is a bit thinner and brighter than the NBS Monitor I.