Review of Dartzeel NHB-108 Amplifier


Dartzeel is a relatively new entry to the high-end game. Despite being reviewed by John Marks in a recent issue of Stereophile, the company's only current product offering, the NHB-108 stereo amplifier, hasn't gotten a lot of press on these shores. Hopefully this "review" will do its part in rectifying that.
As many of you probably already know, Switzerland-based Dartzeel is the brainchild of one Herve Deletraz. Herve is a wonderful guy who's dedicated to the very best customer service. As essentially a one-man operation, I'm sure his time is limited, but he's always responded to my e-mails in an extremely courteous, timely manner.

On to the amp. I'm not one for technical details, so I'll leave them to those of you who want to visit Dartzeel's website. Basically, the 108 is a "purist" stereo amp rated at a relatively modest 100 wpc. Its smallish dimensions belie its weight, which measures around 65-70 pounds.

Internally, the amp is incredibly well laid out (if tightly packed), with an attention to detail that one should expect--but doesn't always receive--from components in this price range.

Outside, it's purely love-hate. (Refer to the website for pictures). Either you get it or you don't. Personally, I've grown used to its appearance over time, but it's taken a while to become acclimated. If WAF factor is any sort of issue, practice up on your compliments. Then again, I may be overstating the case. While it's not Liv Tyler, it's not Janet Reno, either. Time reveals its inner beauty.

Performance-wise it's a much more straightforward issue. In my experience the 108 is the most balanced, natural-sounding amp I've ever heard. It has a way with timbre that's downright spooky--up there with the very best tube units one cares to mention. The sound is just "right"--every note is reproduced with a tonal correctness and warmth that is as close to the real thing as I've heard in an amp. Because of it's sheer naturalness, it can take a while to overcome the initial impression that it is somehow soft or rolled off. That is most emphatically not the case! Dynamics are crisp and fast, and the frequency extremes are right where they need to be--not overstated or highlighted at all, just perfectly natural and realistic.

The only potential weakness of the 108 is its power rating. It flows a nice amount of juice for 100 watts, but one could theoretically run into problems with particuarly current-hungry or inefficient speakers. Part of the amp's midrange purity, I believe, is attributable to the use of the bare minimum of bipolars in the output stage. That, of course, comes at the price of power, but in this case the tradeoff is more than worth it. Just take some care in speaker matching--as you should, anyway--and you'll be rewarded with a sound that balances the very best of solid state with a midrange that will make some question whether they even need to fuss with tubes.

Despite its novel physical appearance, the need for careful speaker matching, and the fact that the US dollar has been taking a Tyson-like beating lately, the Dartzeel is a serious contender in the super-amp category. Yes, there are amps out there that do this or that "better" than the 108, but I've yet to hear one that strikes a better balance between the various areas of performance. It's a stunning piece of engineering and a landmark amplifier.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Product Weakness: Appearance is strictly take-it-or-leave-it. Power rating requires some attention to speaker load. Cost.
Product Strengths: Naturalness, midrange magic of the highest order, speed, dynamics

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Associated Equipment for this Review:
Amplifier: Dartzeel NHB-108
Preamplifier (or None if Integrated): EMM Labs DCC2
Sources (CDP/Turntable): EMM Labs CDSD
Speakers: Von Schweikert VR-4 Jr.
Cables/Interconnects: Jena Labs Pathfinder
Music Used (Genre/Selections): Rock, blues, country, some classical
Room Size (LxWxH): 24 x 20 x 7
Room Comments/Treatments: Echo Buster, ASC
Time Period/Length of Audition: 3 months
Other (Power Conditioner etc.): Shunyata Hydra-8
Type of Audition/Review: Product Owner
hooper
Howie you don't have to sit in the sweet spot to hear it, it a very obvious coloration of the sound.

2 people sat next to me when we listened to the Maggies and 4 of us were present when the 20T system was being used and in both cases people took their turn in "the" chair. The effect was quite obvious most people didn't sit in "the" sweet spot to confirm the change they sat there to see if they liked it better.

As for my system let's not forget, my little system is my bedroom system and don't kid yourself about its quality. Those speakers would be about $4000 retail and now that I have my D2 Audio amps are on the way should make for a very nice system.

Keep in mind the Behringer can be replaced by a BSS or a Lake Technology crossover at my discretion.

Alas,

Forgive me for this oversite; I should have included this reviewers comments to have some back up.

From the Rick Gardner Positive Feedback review;

"Intellectual confusion aside, I will tell you what I hear. I think a lot of upper midrange/lower treble energy in digital reproduction comes out as "noise" because of time coherency problems. We call this "tizz" and we all abhor it, while assuming it is just part and parcel of the current digital standards. Well, that may not entirely be the case. Imagine wires that can
sort the tizz and upper midrange crunchies into something very much like music. Think about all of the hard, tizzy, overly sibilant digital recordings you have (especially the ones where you love the music and hate the recording). Now, think about those recordings transformed into something that is not only survivable, but also actually rewarding."

Is the digital recording over-sibilant or has he discovered his wires are over-sibilant? See if the recording remains over sibilant then the JL wires are filters are they not? The key word in that whole paragraph is "sort" and up till now dim wit Rick has tolerated "tizz" on his digital, come on!

BTW Ricks system is horrendous, a disasterous composition of "supposed to be good" products.

Rick Gardner continues....
"The simplest, coherent description I can give is "buttery." I am using this term to suggest the liquidity and harmonic richness of single-ended tube amplification, without the artificial sweetness and weird tonal shifts. Utterly seductive."

Ever touch butter? what happens? Smudges doesn't it. There is definitely two sides to the coin for a filter and I'm thinking the last thing a VR9 needs is to be buttered up. But since Its not my system its not for me to say.

"Jennifer's wires have driven me deeper into my large CD collection than I have been for some time. Recordings I had decided were simply digital disasters I now find enjoyable."

Cable system that fixes recordings that are "digital disasters".

What if the recording isn't a digital disaster? Then what information is being scraped off or changed? I'm just asking because you can't turn the cable off!

I'm a dealer and a consumer and I'm calling it like I've heard it and apparently as Rick has heard it. His system needed the Jena Labs treatment and the two systems I have heard did not. What say you about yours? My original comment about Hoopers system was a hunch about his system and it didn't look like it would benefit from being "buttered". Maybe the Dartzeel is bright?

Have a good one guys.
Cinematic: I'm not the most tech-savvy person in the world, so I won't get into a technical discussion about the Jena cables, but I will share my experience. I listened to A LOT of cables before coming to the decision to buy the Jena Dreamdancers: several Siltechs, Transparent Opus, MIT, Cardas, AudioQuest DBS, Wireworld, Tara, and (not coincidentally) the Analysis Plus Gold. Each had their strengths and weaknesses, and I was actually leaning toward the AP Gold. Then JTinn sent me a Dreamdancer interconnect. After several days of listening, I came to the conclusion that the Dreamdancers were clearly the superior cable: sheer resolution, dynamics, naturalness, etc. I then wired up my entire system with Dreamdancer cable, and I haven't looked back. I hear none of the smearing you described above; in fact, they are a very synergistic match with my Von Schweikerts and DarTZeels. At any rate, that's MY experience. Sorry they didn't work for you.
Hi All,
I've heard the Dart'zeel amps at CES, actually sitting next to mark Senior and behind Jonathan. The sound was great, but I think that they are underpowered for many speakers. I have Dynaudio temptations taht require a good high-powered amp. If dart'zeel could come up with a 3-400 watt high current amp i would love to listen, but til then, I'm not interested. OTOH, I LOVED the Vr9's, andf i can't wait til my stock hits so that I can buy 5.

david Shapiro
Don't have to be sorry, but I really felt in my experience with the cables that they would bloat the sound of your system and round it off. I have no knowledge of the Dartzeel and that maybe the wild card in our differing opinions/experiences.

Clearly they are working for you, and that's good.

My observations were made with the speaker cables FWIW.
This is an amplifier I would love to learn more about but with the original review here, and the one in Stereophile, I still have no idea what the sonic strengths are. Ok ok, it has great clarity. Great clarity compared to what? Ok ok, it is natural sounding. Natural sounding compared to what? Neither of these comments tell me much. Surely every product must have some weakness (other than it's external appearance) compared to other "state of the art" amplifiers.

A few months ago I heard the CAT JL-2 amp vs. the Atmasphere MA1 amps. I could make the same comments about these two amplifiers. Both of these were outstanding musical products. But they were so very different in virtually every way, e.g., tonal balance, resolution, dynamics, harmonic richness, etc. When you get to this level, it all comes down to personal preference.

Each of us has to make a compromise when it comes down to our own personal checklist as to which product most suits our own taste and fits in with the rest of our system. No offense to Hooper, but how can such a supreme product's sonic capability be summed up in one paragraph? If a product truly stands out from the competition, do we not deserve to learn more?

The Stereophile review makes no sonic comparisons, tonality, resolution, noise level, etc., to the other many "top" amp contenders. It is essentially worthless in providing value to the reader.

It's always nice to hear of a new "great" product, but unless the writer can put this new product into perspective of the competition, all the reader learns is that the writer claims this is a phenomenol product. But is this not the claim we read in every top-contending product review that essentially puts the previously claimed product out to pasture? And most likely, that older product has some strengths that exceed those of the new king of the hill. But we never hear about those as the new product has no peers.

John