I don't know what I'd compare it to, but I can tell you what I hear in it. I really love the Nbox's meaty and up-front mids. This, IMO, is its strong suit. Relative to the mids, I find the bass less detailed and without the extension I'd really like, but not bad sounding by any stretch. It's the highs that really get me with the NBox. I find the HF painful, fatiguing - harsh, spitty, lacking detail, and somehow missing seamless integration in the transition from HF to mids. Like the HF is kinda floating up there without a grounding into the mid frequencies. Not sure how best to explain it. I also find the soundstaging a bit flatter than I'd like, but that may be a function of the recordings I've heard - some are better than others. But aside from the soundstaging, I hear similar sonic characteristics - to my ears - as the ones I mention above in every NBox recording I hear. It's not a band sounding pre, but IMO it doesn't sound great, either.
In the past, I've made no secret of the fact that I much prefer the Sonosax SX-M2/LS2 (but of course we should all make up our own minds). And I'll do the same here. Better LF extension and detail. The mids aren't as meaty and up front, though they have every bit as much detail as the NBox, if not more. And I find the HF smoother, more detailed, and better integrated with the mids. Given the better detail across the board, I find the /LS2 offers more accurate and open soundstaging than the NBox. But note: the /LS2 costs a good nerdle more!
Anyway...blah blah blah...I've said most of this before, and it's all IMO, of course. Bottom line, I'd be reasonably happy with the NBox, but far happier with the /LS2.