Dartzeeel LHC-208 mk II vs. CTH-8550 mk II

[davelarz]

Hello all - I'm curious about anyone's experience with these two Dartzeel integrateds. I currently have the LHC-208 mk I. I bought it on a lark because I got a good price and I've always been curious about the Dart sound. For the past two years I've run the Ypsilon integrated and had no complaints, far from it. It's a wonderful unit.

But I am suprised by how much I like the LHC-208. It's not "better" than the Ypsilon. They are very different but equal to my ears, and I think my speakers come to life a little bit more with the Dart's extra power. And with the onboard DAC the LHC-208 is a real value proposition for me. Digital listening is secondary to vinyl for me and the Dart's DAC is surprisingly good in comparison with my resident DAC, the Weiss DAC501. I'd be more than happy to live with the Dart's internal DAC.

A friend of a friend is currently selling the MK II edition of the LHC-208 and because I've read that it is a significant upgrade on the MK I, I reached out to him about it. He told me he's selling his LHC-208 because he got the CTH-8550 mk II, and he was honest with me in saying that to his ears the 8550 is a significant step up sonically from the LHC-208. Of course, being a card-carrying insane audiophile, this threw me into quite a quandary.

From what I can tell there are a decent amount of users here of both Dart integrateds so anyone who can chime in on the comparison between the two, I'd love the feedback. The LHC-208 makes a lot more sense for me because I am much more into the idea of having an onboard DAC with an integrated than an onboard phono stage. I use a Mola Mola Lupe phono now (which I think is excellent - my thoughts on that here - https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/experience-with-mola-mola-lupe.38393/) and generally run three tonearms at once. The Lupe makes that incredibly convenient and what's more it sounds fantastic, the best phono pre I've owned and I've had a lot of them at all pricepoints. As ballyhooed as the CTH-8550 is, I just don't believe the phono stage will be at that level. I'm sure it will be good in the way that the DAC in the LHC-208 is good. But the truth is, the Weiss DAC501 is clearly better than the LHC-208 DAC. I just don't care much about that when it comes to digital. I do care in terms of vinyl, and unfortunately, given the pricetag on the CTH-8550 (even used) I'd have to sell the Lupe and use the onboard Dart phono stage to make it work.

I'll leave it at that. Please share any thoughts on the LHC-208 vs. the CTH-8550, especially any vinyl aficionados out there who have experience with the 8550's phono stage. The LHC-208 makes a lot more sense for me given my particular needs and also financially. But I'm sure you know how it is - when you're thinking about a piece of gear and someone with experience tells you "well if you step up to this it's WAY better"... well it's hard to get that out of your head. And in this case I couldn't help but take the guy seriously, because he was basically talking his way out of selling me an amp.

 

[Synaxis]

Hello all - I'm curious about anyone's experience with these two Dartzeel integrateds. I currently have the LHC-208 mk I. I bought it on a lark because I got a good price and I've always been curious about the Dart sound. For the past two years I've run the Ypsilon integrated and had no complaints, far from it. It's a wonderful unit.

But I am suprised by how much I like the LHC-208. It's not "better" than the Ypsilon. They are very different but equal to my ears, and I think my speakers come to life a little bit more with the Dart's extra power. And with the onboard DAC the LHC-208 is a real value proposition for me. Digital listening is secondary to vinyl for me and the Dart's DAC is surprisingly good in comparison with my resident DAC, the Weiss DAC501. I'd be more than happy to live with the Dart's internal DAC.

A friend of a friend is currently selling the MK II edition of the LHC-208 and because I've read that it is a significant upgrade on the MK I, I reached out to him about it. He told me he's selling his LHC-208 because he got the CTH-8550 mk II, and he was honest with me in saying that to his ears the 8550 is a significant step up sonically from the LHC-208. Of course, being a card-carrying insane audiophile, this threw me into quite a quandary.

From what I can tell there are a decent amount of users here of both Dart integrateds so anyone who can chime in on the comparison between the two, I'd love the feedback. The LHC-208 makes a lot more sense for me because I am much more into the idea of having an onboard DAC with an integrated than an onboard phono stage. I use a Mola Mola Lupe phono now (which I think is excellent - my thoughts on that here - https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/experience-with-mola-mola-lupe.38393/) and generally run three tonearms at once. The Lupe makes that incredibly convenient and what's more it sounds fantastic, the best phono pre I've owned and I've had a lot of them at all pricepoints. As ballyhooed as the CTH-8550 is, I just don't believe the phono stage will be at that level. I'm sure it will be good in the way that the DAC in the LHC-208 is good. But the truth is, the Weiss DAC501 is clearly better than the LHC-208 DAC. I just don't care much about that when it comes to digital. I do care in terms of vinyl, and unfortunately, given the pricetag on the CTH-8550 (even used) I'd have to sell the Lupe and use the onboard Dart phono stage to make it work.

I'll leave it at that. Please share any thoughts on the LHC-208 vs. the CTH-8550, especially any vinyl aficionados out there who have experience with the 8550's phono stage. The LHC-208 makes a lot more sense for me given my particular needs and also financially. But I'm sure you know how it is - when you're thinking about a piece of gear and someone with experience tells you "well if you step up to this it's WAY better"... well it's hard to get that out of your head. And in this case I couldn't help but take the guy seriously, because he was basically talking his way out of selling me an amp.

Great post. Thank you for sharing.

Although well out of my price range, I've always wonders about Dart's and look forward to peoples answers to you post.

 

[KeithR]

The 8550 is much better as it has separate transformers for preamp and amp.

 

[CJmooney]

I have a CTH 8550 Mk II and listen to vinyl about 75% of the time. I love the onboard MC phono section and that is the reason I ultimately purchased the 8550 (I purchased from Ed at Audio Association, one of the forum sponsors). I would describe my vinyl sound as possessing a seductive midrange, being extended at both ends of the musical range, as highly resolving, and magical at imaging and space. Also, the 8550 is a champ at low level listening and is never fatiguing. It is powerful and dynamic. I believe the MC input is a current mode design and that may be part of what I love, as my prior phono preamps were voltage designs. This just sounds "different" and better in my opinion. I have no experience with the DZ 208, or the Mola Mola Lupe. I do have experience with the CH Precision integrated, Gryphon, Audio Research, Dagostino and Doshi phono sections (in friends systems). I love the sound I'm hearing and can honestly say the CTH 8550 Mk II with MC phono section has been the best audio purchase I've ever made.

 

[davelarz]

That is really valuable feedback CJ thank you. But… is it a current based phono in the 8550? The one in the NHB isn’t. I’m surprised how little info there is out there about these phono stages.

 

[CJmooney]

This review talks about the current mode MC Phono section of the 8550 (under updates to MK II)
https://www.thesoundadvocate.com/2021/07/dartzeel-cth-8550-mkii-integrated-amplifier-review/

 

[TheAudioAssociation]

That is really valuable feedback CJ thank you. But… is it a current based phono in the 8550? The one in the NHB isn’t. I’m surprised how little info there is out there about these phono stages.

I've been in touch with Hervé at DarTZeel. He will provide details on the differences. Please stay tuned.

 

[davelarz]

This review talks about the current mode MC Phono section of the 8550 (under updates to MK II)
https://www.thesoundadvocate.com/2021/07/dartzeel-cth-8550-mkii-integrated-amplifier-review/

I saw that review. It ah… didn’t seem like the most thorough investigation of the matter.

 

[davelarz]

Btw here is Fremer’s assessment of the phono stage in the Dart pre amp. Not that I am inclined (at all) to take his word as gospel but I have to say left to my own devices I would likely write something very similar in describing the DAC in the LHC-208:

The NHB-18NS Mk.2's built-in phono section is not the equal of the CH Precision P1 or the Ypsilon VPS-100 Silver Edition or other standalone phono stages. It's neither as transparent nor as dynamic as either of those named, but they are dedicated phono preamps that by themselves cost in the neighborhood of the darTZeel (the CH, at $31,000 without X1 power supply) or a lot more (the Ypsilon, at $65,000). However, the Mk.2's phono stage will more than satisfy casual vinyl listeners, and even enthusiasts who haven't been exposed to the best outboard phono stages might be happy

 

[TheAudioAssociation]

Hello folks. Here's Herve's response to the design characteristics of the 18NS and 8550 phono stages.

When I firstly designed the NHB-108 model one, the patented circuit proved to be so universal that I could apply its basic bricks to virtually any analog design, with stunning results.

So, I firstly downscaled a bit the NHB-108 circuitry which led to the NHB-18NS line stage.

Then, I scaled it down further, with some modification in the transistors arrangement to make "micro power amps" (here, micro means microscopic, not microphone), building some power amplification stage instead of just voltage gain stages. Doing this with only a couple of transistors, I was able to split the circuit in two identical sections, and I inserted the full passive RIAA EQ in the middle of them.

The biggest challenge was finding out extremely quiet transistors, and at the end we succeeded.

The very last existing NHB-18NS phono stage is extremely low noise, and we pushed it even further by using the old – but very effective – trick which consists to parallel input transistors to lower the input noise.

Each time you double the number of input parallel transistors, you lower the noise by 3 dB. We use "enough" transistors in parallel to lower the noise and at the same time obtaining a very low input impedance, just the thing that MC cartridges love.

The last version is capable of a very healthy 82 dB of gain, yet with a very low noise.

The fact that the NHB-18NS is working on batteries is a true gift since intrinsic residual hum is totally absent.

The result is just breathtaking, since you don't need any step-up transformer even for you very low output cartridges, and then the phase is totally respected from deepest bottom to highest tops.

Then, the circuitry of the NHB-18NS phono stage was used and up-scaled again, to create the CTH-8550, and then, the NHB-458/468.

But that's another story.

When we designed the CTH-8550, as I just wrote above, we took the NHB-18NS phono stage, up-scaled it, and finalized the integrated amp.

It was a bit different from the NHB-108, however kept the darTZeel signature, and truly deserved its "8550" appellation, which was, at the time, 85% of the preamp/amp quality, at 50% of the price.

In the CTH-8550, I wanted to implement 2 types of phono stages, an MM and a MC.

Directly using the NHB-18NS phono stages with their very minimalist but highly sophisticated design would have taken too much space, and, at the end would have cost way too much expensive.

At the same time, I was quite reluctant to use standard operational amplifiers, even if we can find some which are extremely performing, especially when you measure them.

As you know, I am firstly a "hearing" man, and then only, a "measuring" one.

Of course, measures are of paramount importance. Right after the listening pleasure.

So we looked around, and the end we chose a dedicated professional microphone circuit (yes, here, it is well "microphone", not "microscopic"), with a very low noise figure.

We had to tune it a little bit to our specific application, and then the CTH-8550 phonostage was born.

This phono stage is based on a current feedback technology for the MC stage, so it allows for self-adapt the load for the cartridge.

We nevertheless added a parallel resistor at the input, which acts as "current bleeder", preventing most of pops and DC steps when you plug in and out the RCA jacks.

This phono stage is extremely quiet, too, and even if not as quiet as the one built into our flagship preamplifier, it is quite difficult to beat, even by expensive standalone competition.

And the icing on the cake is that we recently designed a dedicated mumetal shielding kit for the transformers inside the CTH-8550 (MkI and MkII), which dramatically reduce, virtually to inaudible levels, any residual hum, bringing it closer to the NHB-18NS. Not the same, but really nicely scaled down.

Most recent 8550 MkII are now on equipped in standard with the mumetal jacket. A upgrading kit will be available very soon for those who want to make their CTH-8550 phono stage sounding "unbeatable".

Last but not least, what about the debate of having a current source or a voltage source phono input (please note that the CTH-8550 is not current source, but current feedback, which is not exactly the same).

Current source phono stages are a bit like current source power amps.

They may be ideal if the load would be constant across the whole audio bandwidth.

Unfortunately, a MC cartridge, and a speaker even more than this, does not exhibit a constant impedance across the audio bandwidth.

This uneven load translates to a correlated uneven stage gain, and at the end a response which is not flat.

So the reason why the voltage gain configuration is more linear, and also the reason why the CTH-8550 MC input is current feedback but not current source.

At the end, the only real question is: does the music bring you elsewhere, at the heart of the event? This only that way we conceive our instruments.

 

[CJmooney]

Great explanation, thank you. Are there any plans from darTZeel for an optical phono cartridge equalizer/preamp?

 

[TheAudioAssociation]

Great explanation, thank you. Are there any plans from darTZeel for an optical phono cartridge equalizer/preamp?

Hey there Corey! I haven't heard of any plans but I'll ask and see!

 

[TheAudioAssociation]

Hey there Corey! I haven't heard of any plans but I'll ask and see!

Hi Corey. Here's Herve's answer to the optical card option.

"... this has already been considered long time ago, but if it will be an add-on of a fully new design is still under investigation."

 

[GreenNGoldCheesehead]

Wwhich did u end up purchasing and why ? I am debating the same decision. Thx.

 

[davelarz]

I have just purchased a CTH-8550 mk II. Even with the current Dartzeel situation, I voted with my ears. I love the LHC-208 but after reading so much on the forums about Dartzeel lately with the recent hubbub I was really struck how CTH owners don't just seem to love it... they write and talk about it like it's a spiritual revelation. I couldn't resist. I will report back when I get it.

 

[CJmooney]

Congratulations and welcome to the club. I predict many happy hours of music in your future!

 

[TheAudioAssociation]

Congrats on your 8550! You'll rediscover your music collection all over again. Enjoy!