Network bridge and puccini clock

Hello Everybody

Could you please advise me about my upgrade project

Have a network bridge and an AMR dac signature (up to 192)
The dac has no external clock connection (integrated worldclock management as i understand)
Using my set via Spdif, most of the time 44k, sometimes upper mainly 96, some 192

Thinking about adding a used puccini clock
Good idea or not ?
What do you think about result

Seller tells the clock is limited to 96 k, but should be ugraded if needed
as i understand, it’s no use for me cause i don’t need usb ?

my question can be summerized with
Would puccinni clock add quality to the network bridge ?

Thanks for feed back

IMHO in your current configuration it is not necessary to use an external clock with the Network Bridge. This has nothing to do with USB or not.

dCS clock inputs will properly work with 44,1kS/s or 48kS/s, even when the sampling rate of the music is at multiples of these base values. AFAIK upgrading the clock is not possible.

IMHO no.

Thank you Martin,

As i understand your point : sometimes too much isn’t better
Seems wise !


Please see my answers above.

looking to differents clocks, i see 50 and 75 ohms bnc outputs
for example mutec ref 10 has both connection
Do you know which is the good one to connect to DCS NB ?

assuming the cable is short 0.5 to 1 meter, and well done, has the clock cable any impact on the result ?


That’s not the only point.
The dCS NB’s integrated clocks (separate for 44.1 kHz and 48 kHz) are outstanding on their own.
The SQ in your system essentially depends on your DAC.
An external wordclock might start to make sense, if you had to externally synch multiple units.

The Mutec Ref 10 is a 10MHz reference clock and cannot be used on a dCS NB.
The clock inputs of the dCS NB are wordclock inputs for 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz signals and their integer multiples @ 75 Ohms.

BTW, I provisionally use a Mutec MC-3+ Smart Clock USB on the outputs of the dCS NB and do reclocking (unnecessary). Provisionally, because I have not yet changed the switching of my digital sources (I need to go from the current 8x8 digital matrix to my 16x16 digital matrix, but the whole rewiring is a lot of work; 50+ cables; LOL). The MC-3+ hangs on a Mutec Ref 10 SE 120.
For the near future the basic idea is to reclock all HiFi sources, which have no wordclock inputs, and after that synch all units with wordclock inputs (dCS and pro audio gear) to a central wordclock.

Thanks Martin for your guidelines cause this is a new point for me
assuming NB clocks are good or very good, and my amr dac unable to have an external sync, i went on the amr website and found this text about clocking:
It seems they have a special solution to adress the point
can you tell me your opinion about ?
if positive, i will conclude the best solution is to stay without clock

Global Master Timing®/Intelligent Memory System®

Before the arrival of the DP-777, the issue of solving jitter introduced via SPDIF using a Phase Locked Loop (PLL) Clock recovery was seen as sufficient. However, this analogue “solution” to a digital problem is woefully inadequate yet is not even commonplace.

AMR’s Global Master Timing (GMT)/Intelligent Memory System (IMS) represent a total “out of the box” systematic digital solution that solves the digital SPDIF jitter issue once and for all. The Intelligent Memory System holds a large number of complete audio samples, so it may completely absorb a large amount of variation (jitter and drift) in the incoming signal, while still sending out data at a fixed and precise clock rate, regardless of variations in the incoming clock.

Central to the GMT clock system is an ultra-low jitter, quartz-driven clock system capable of producing over 28 million different frequencies. When engaged, the GMT system intelligently and dynamically controls the clock that drives the DAC chips and takes the data out of the memory buffer. The GMT Clock is set to precisely match the principal frequency of the incoming clock with a precision of better than 0.001Hz. Hence, if the frequency shifts from 192,000.002Hz to 192,000.003Hz over a period of minutes (drift) which is the minimum to be meaningful, the GMT clock will intelligently and precisely track the change.

Once the GMT clock has correctly calculated the incoming clock, the rate of updating the DAC’s clock with the minimal 0.001Hz step (~0.004ppm accuracy) step is at most, once every few minutes or less. As a result, the DAC clock is completely decoupled from the source and completely stable.

With the GMT clock that drives the DAC Chips and to clock the data out of the memory buffer at the same exact frequency as the incoming clock, there is nil jitter in the source clock, as there is no physical PLL link between the source clock and the clock driving the DAC Chips.

The GMT System is not a secondary PLL as used in some cases and some DACs since the late 1990’s, but an entirely new concept. Instead, GMT is a system that will completely block jitter and only react to compensate any slow drift in the clock source or to adapt to a change in sample rate.

The GMT Zero Jitter mode is available for all digital inputs including the USB input and is the new clock standard reference for the digital audio world.

Sorry Pierre, but I do not really understand what AMR actually does.
Other information I saw on their homepage were not reassuring either. Tech specs were far from being brilliant.

I’d recommend to carefully read the series of posts from dCS’s James Cook about DAC and clocking in this thread:
(dCS Ring DAC - A Technical Explanation)

The bottom line: My recommendation for your upgrade project would be to look for a (second hand) dCS DAC.

1 Like

It’s ok Martin. Very kind from you trying.
No matter dcs dac are good (best?), but final choice probably also depend on the level of the set (i will tell mine is optimized upper average, not best of breed).

My current experience is that i won far more optimizing the data part (nas, lan, ) and digital cable, but changing dac.
At a level, It never appears me to be the major or first goal to play for (perhaps wrongly)
Each time i won in the upper, each time the amr dac sounded better, without fully changing from style.
last example was adding NB, which compared to other bridge like lumin, was far away as i like, music first, analytic yes but not alone or first.

By the way AMR has a real good tube analogic preamplifier, which isn’t so regular.

Have you seen to 6 moons test which is honest and well done for me (not all the time with them) about AMR signature.

Of course it should appears a little bit swiis army knife, but the brand is like this, trying all the possible ways and ideas to optimize, and pushing an agressive marketing to sell it

They had some success, but now it’s a sleeping brand. They developp another brand who’s name is IFI, but on a lower target

But now my optimisation is nearly done for this set, i will think about your idea, and test a dcs dac to see about, but i have a doubt to win on all area (pre +dac).


I did read the test.

Did you read the James Cook’s posts about conversion and clocking ?
(dCS Ring DAC - A Technical Explanation)

If you can try out the Puccini clock in your system before buying then do it (and rely on what your ears will tell you).

IMHO the idea behind upgrading is 'how can I get the highest improvement for my limited money".

May be the bottom line of my previous post was a bit too radical, but it was in some way based upon my own HiFi history.
I exclusively use solid state amps since 1974 (Marantz made in USA, later Accuphase). For me tube amps are history.
The change from my first CD player (1985, Marantz CD 74) to an Accuphase (1989) was a huge leap forward. For me Philips DAC chips are history.
The change from an Accuphase DAC to dCS gear (2002) was the next huge leap forward. The purchase of a Vivaldi DAC and recently a NB resulted in even more progress. A fanless NAS should be delivered this month.
Changes were always ‘dictated’ through the requirement to match the quality level of the loudspeakers.

Don’t worry about being a little bit radical. our choices have been made with time and we trust them, even if we don’t arrive to the same place… it’s natural.

No i don’t read cause french votation this day,and also cause i am not able to evaluate the technical aspect. but i will try to for you…
this being, i have no doubt there is lot of reality and science in it
I trust expert and consider scientific aspects but it’s not my only key for the choice.
my compass is the fact i feel the product reading about (some experiment learned through multiples errors and changes…!), then the fact my ears validate after some weeks of listening.

by the way, you and me have some experience in hifi
you remember surely the time where the best amp was tho one with the best specs.
i don’t want to say it’s the same but just to tell mesurement and science are not the only/major critical success factor
Only major conbtributors in their domain, as dcs, have the grace to use technology to do music (as i refer to my NB experiment).

I have the same approch than you with a different conclusion as a set and choice
IMHO the idea behind upgrading is 'how can I get the highest improvement for my limited money".
Tubes can be oldies or not. i have made the choice to keep them with AMR as preamp and dac.
Oldies isn’t obligatorily outdated, as newbies are not obligatory better.
depends what you priorize in your pleasure of listening
but i choose mosfet for amp cause tubes don’t match for me

Actual set (oldies and newbizz mix):
NAS SYNOLOGY 116/118- Ethernet cat 8 shielded (i know about what tells dcs for cat 6 unshielded), audiophile switch (yes it works from my point of vue), NB DCS, digital high end spdif (yes it’s a bonus), AMR as a tube preamp dac, then a french mosfet 2.200 w by mimetism, analog litz cable from a very good australian manufacturer Aurealisaudio
all digital cables and switch by aqvox germany.
all power tuned with separate links to the electrical network and furuno cable and outlets
Then Jamo 907 dipoles and TAKET add-ons for high and low

if you have a little time to spend, take pleasure looking at these taket japanese products. incredible but it’s works…i have them. what’s interesting is the design approach. not the same as accuphase of course but indeed japanese…


My choices are first based upon my ears. But I’am also interested in why some ‘cooks’ cook better than others. Consequently I need to understand the technical aspects as well. And I trust those manufacturers, who not only serve me a philosophy but also explain and prove to me, how they implement it in practice.

IMHO the dCS NB is a fantastic piece of equipment and I’m tempted to replace my CDs by a NAS, because it seems likely there is no audible difference between the two storage media.

BTW I enjoy ‘the Voice, la plus belle voix’ of TF1 on my system.

i have changed some years (about ten) ago for full dematerialization and no regret at all for CD and even vinyls. I must admit it wasn’t as good at the beginning, but so convenient…
After some years, i am now sure this is a demanding way, although and even you fully trust a manufacturer.
Everything matters, and could cause a loss, and so a bonus to find.
but the result is there
funy to see how much a marginal optimization can give a noticable better feeling as you approach the similarity.
That’s why we are in this game i think
Of course a good manufacturer can give you a good (fantastic for dcs) starting point, but you will have more by thin tuning.