DCS Puccini and Uclock vs Debussey and Uclock

I am also thinking of using the Puccini and clock for computer audio..I already have a good transport and did not really want to change it....but I would, if the Puccini was better than the Debussey as a DAC for computer audio. But the Debussey disappointed on vocals, at least the way I like to listen to music...so now, I am concerned that the Puccini and clock DAC may suffer the same presentation of vocals as the Debussey.

I started off wanting a separate DAC to my transport, so that as DAC's improve over time, I could continue to upgrade the DAC without having to throw away my transport if it was integrated...more costly.

Jfrech, the Paganini Upsampler needs to accept 32/384 from all inputs and allow defeat of the automatic DSD upsampling in case you prefer native resolution, like me. After leading the charge they are ossified into a late 20th century perspective. Like so much of the EU.

I hear they're abandoning federalism and entering the 21st century. However meekly.

jon47...what is your system...that might help a little. I'd be surprised if a non dCS transport/Debussy/Uclock would beat a dCS Puccini/Uclock...plus with the Puccini/uclock you get native SACD, which is the stregnth of the dCS platform for sure i'd say...it just depends on your software.

Also the Puccini has a few more digital filters, including the new apodizing filter...than the debussy....

Jfrech, native DSD with dCS is incomparable. Upsampling all PCM to DSD is not necessarily preferable. I've found listening to PCM at native resolution through a quality DAC superior to the processed complexity of upsampling. 16/44 sounds contrived processed to 24/96. It sounds cartoonish pushed to 1/2.82Ms/S. IMHO.

Jfrech, please tell me after many years of experince, can you tell which is best power cable for Puccini ? Also which interconect can I use between dcs and REF 5 ?