The upward journey into my system's source now splits into two tributaries, digital and analogue. The digital life spring recently made a spectacular leap forward. I replaced the excellent un-digital-sounding Cary 303 -- sterling service for 2½ years -- with Pierre Lurne's Audiomeca Mephisto II. This is a very interesting machine using the Lurne transport and a state-of- the-art Anagram DAC (review pending). This player is the first that doesn't instantly make me think I'd rather be listening to Vinyl.

Vinyl has taken a lot of my time and attention over the last few years - scheming on how to get a good rig together, sacrificing to afford one. My guess? Committing to a turntable is one of the most stressful moments in audiophilia. Whatever we do, we'll end up either living with it for ages or taking a severe financial hammering should we sell. Most people allocate the big money on the table up front, then improve arm and cartridge as the bank balance recovers. I spent a year researching turntables. I was about to settle for the Nouvelle Platine Verdier (at a then whacking £2500) when fate intervened - an Internet DIY turntable post which sent me off to Germany's
www.scheu-analog.de.

The Schroder Model 2 arm is the single-most exciting and cherished component of my system. Head-over-heels stuff. Like the table, it's elegant and simple, a standard uni-pivot design with brass headshell/counterweight on a carbon fibre arm. Yet it's got a clever trick up its sleeve. In a standard uni-pivot, the arm wand rests on a single needle point to act as bearing. In the Schroder, the arm wand dangles by a single thread tensioned below by a magnet for a truly frictionless bearing. That's what it sounds like, too - surprisingly natural and open, never dominating. At £1300 it's not cheap, but after having been there, no going back.

Finally the Allaerts MCIS cartridge. When I first heard one on a Schroder Reference and Platine Verdier, I had no doubts that this was the arm-cartridge combination I ultimately wanted. The Schroder Reference will have to wait, probably for quite a while, so the Allaerts is the one for me. At £1500, I agree that it's completely insane. Don't forget the thing wears out, too. Is it worth it? In absolute terms, I have no idea. In terms of pleasure produced, without a doubt.

What else? I'll leave the home-made stands for later. Maybe the electricity's worth mentioning. Early on, I decided to install an independent spur for the audio system. DIY appealed to me - play dangerous games with the mains box, drill holes through two feet of walls and wind three 40-meter electrical cables around each other tied to a drill head. Frustrating work. The reward? It sounded exactly like the standard mains ring. With considerable disappointment, I put one down to experience. Regardless, I've plugged my system into it for years. A few weeks back, one of the plugs acted up so I jacked the turntable into the standard mains. Suddenly female vocals turned flat and gray, not to mention the large hole at the centre of the soundstage. This was by no means subtle. Perhaps the dedicated feed hadn't been in vein after all, merely requiring break-in? I like to think so. Finally, racks and power cords are mostly DIY as is the vacuum record cleaner.

This system's key features are transparency and refinement, with timbre, tonal colors and dynamics its chief strengths. It has an unusually wide soundstage. With a good record, its presence fools me into thinking that the musicians have parked their chairs in front of my bay window. The sound is quite three-dimensional, as though you could step between the instruments. The thing most people notice upon first hearing it? A friend called it "sound without fury". There's very little grain or hash. You can turn it up quite loud, still continue a relaxed conversation without raising your voice while the sound is filling the room. Turn the volume up farther and instruments grow larger and more lifelike without turning harsh - unless the recording is.


I've heard systems that do better by some audiophile criteria, but I would describe mine as well-balanced overall. Of course, there's a whole list of components I'd love to hear, starting with a trio of horns: the Living Voice Air Partners, Be Yamamura' monsters and the visually stunning Jadis Eurithmie. But these are in a different, stratospheric league and the stuff of dreams.


My original sonic goal was to create a system that didn't get in the way of the musicians. That is a matter of taste, trial and error but achievable. Increasingly, I'm wondering though. Am I actually looking for something else now? It's difficult to describe, like wanting to be as close as possible to what is viscerally moving the musicians to produce the sounds they do, the "essence" of why they're playing a particular piece that way. Whatever communicates that best is what I'm striving for.

This quality might well be different from the standard audiophile checklist. Getting closer to the music doesn't necessarily happen through a vast soundstage, incredible dynamics or neutrality across the spectrum. In fact, any of these qualities may be at odds with it. The other day I heard a statement rig with musical inertia - a cheap copy which bore no relationship to the expressiveness of the musicians trapped on their CD.