Anyone here addicted to MONO pressings?

[montesquieu]

Might be a dumb question but one that has just occurred to me....

I think it's accepted that it's ok to play old mono records with stereo equipment (cartridge) but for best results a mono cartridge is recommended, Vice versa is a no no.

But, my question is, with the recent new releases of mono mixes, for example Pink Floyd's Piper at the Gates of Dawn, do they still need mono gear to be best appreciated or not ie are they cut as a stereo record but just with mono info?

Have done that experiment with my Miyajima Zero 0.7 mono vs Miyajima Madake stereo. The mono is better. Indeed after an evening of experimentation around this at my place, using the Prestige Miles Davis reissues to test things out, as well as some original early microgroove recordings from the early 50s, Petrat ordered up two Zeros (1.0 and 0.7).

Reissues generally as well as a lot of later mono (typically marked 'mono') are cut with a v-shaped groove (like a stereo record) to the modern groove width so will play happily with a modern stereo cartridge, but there are benefits from a proper mono cartridge in terms of 1) noise (thought this shouldn't be a big isssue with expensive reissues and 2) overall coherence of what's picked up from the single coil - it just sounds more right. Hard to explain till you've heard the comparison.

Original microgroove records from the pre-stereo era (not necessarily marked as mono because there was no stereo back then) have a wider u-shaped groove and need a wider stylus.

[Ammonite Audio]

But, my question is, with the recent new releases of mono mixes, for example Pink Floyd's Piper at the Gates of Dawn, do they still need mono gear to be best appreciated or not ie are they cut as a stereo record but just with mono info?

Good question, but I hope that modern mono cut with a stereo head still has only horizontal modulation, so no vertical component (eg extraneous noise).

[scotty38]

Thanks for the replies, much appreciated.

[vintagesteve]

When listening with two speakers I get a soundstage. Sure it's about half the width of stereo and doesn't reach the speakers but it covers 2/3rds the distance between the speakers. It is a sounstage akin to a live performance.

I suppose the issue is, 'what is a soundstage' A soundstage to me is not some kind of wall or span of sound with an apparent finite width as you describe, it is one where the individual instruments and voices can be heard coming from different points in front of you on a left to right basis. That is how it appears when you listen to musicians on a stage in front of you. Of course, one has to take into consideration larger concert halls and rock band scenarios where the room is so big, and/or the PA is so loud (reverberations, delays etc) that this left to right (stereo) imaging or positioning no longer occurs, or becomes very difficult to detect. But in a more intimate acoustic, orchestral or 'lighter' electric band scenario, you can easily pick out the positions of the various instruments etc. That is my definition of a soundstage and what most people that I know in the recording, hifi and musicianship worlds take it to be. So, a single mono speaker is capable of filling a room with sound just the same as two speakers in mono are capable of doing. They will both sound different for obvious reasons. Yes, two sources of sound can be identified with two speakers and a higher spl will be detectable to the left and to the right, but as I have just described, with either system there is simply no ID, no data, of where individual instruments are placed, and therefore no true soundstage. If people want to refer to an apparent 'width' of a music source in front of them as a soundstage that's up to them, albeit, in my opinion, confusing the true meaning of the word soundstage. Before hifi entered the smoke and mirrors phase as it did in the 70s, becoming more matter of the head than the ears, speaker reviewers - as they still do now - used to refer to the ability, the accuracy, clarity and the fidelity of the speakers to be able to provide the listener with a clear, distinct soundstage, the ability to pick out the left to right positioning of the various instruments. Speakers being by a long shot the weakest link in a hifi chain, they play a crucial role in maintaining the recording's stereo image - its soundstage. I realise that people do believe in other definitions of soundstage such as its apparent width.

[montesquieu]

I suppose the issue is, 'what is a soundstage' A soundstage to me is not some kind of wall or span of sound with an apparent finite width as you describe, it is one where the individual instruments and voices can be heard coming from different points in front of you on a left to right basis. That is how it appears when you listen to musicians on a stage in front of you. Of course, one has to take into consideration larger concert halls and rock band scenarios where the room is so big, and/or the PA is so loud (reverberations, delays etc) that this left to right (stereo) imaging or positioning no longer occurs, or becomes very difficult to detect. But in a more intimate acoustic, orchestral or 'lighter' electric band scenario, you can easily pick out the positions of the various instruments etc. That is my definition of a soundstage and what most people that I know in the recording, hifi and musicianship worlds take it to be. So, a single mono speaker is capable of filling a room with sound just the same as two speakers in mono are capable of doing. They will both sound different for obvious reasons. Yes, two sources of sound can be identified with two speakers and a higher spl will be detectable to the left and to the right, but as I have just described, with either system there is simply no ID, no data, of where individual instruments are placed, and therefore no true soundstage. If people want to refer to an apparent 'width' of a music source in front of them as a soundstage that's up to them, albeit, in my opinion, confusing the true meaning of the word soundstage. Before hifi entered the smoke and mirrors phase as it did in the 70s, becoming more matter of the head than the ears, speaker reviewers - as they still do now - used to refer to the ability, the accuracy, clarity and the fidelity of the speakers to be able to provide the listener with a clear, distinct soundstage, the ability to pick out the left to right positioning of the various instruments. Speakers being by a long shot the weakest link in a hifi chain, they play a crucial role in maintaining the recording's stereo image - its soundstage. I realise that people do believe in other definitions of soundstage such as its apparent width.

Seems to me that's a extremely impoverished perspective on what a decent system can deliver - there's far far more to soundstage than the pan button on a mixing desk.

I think you are also ignoring how the ears and brain actually create the perception of sound. It's safe to say that this is not a post-1970s phenomenon, rather the function of eons of evolution.

[Wakefield Turntables]

So Tom slightly different topic which budget cart or replacement stylus for old carts would you use to play 78s

[montesquieu]

So Tom slightly different topic which budget cart or replacement stylus for old carts would you use to play 78s

I use a Shure M44-7, with some styli from Expert Stylus, 3.0, 3.2 and 3.5.

Most of the styli for 78 commercially available for 78 are 2.5 which are fine for very late, 1950s 78s, but earlier ones through the 20s, 30s, 40s and into the early 50s have a wider groove. And even some later ones work better with a wider tip if they are a bit worn. There's no real way to tell which tip works best except by ear, whichever is the quietest.

I also have an Edison 'Replica' which is an early incarnation of the Miyajima Kotetu. This is a moving coil with a 4.0 tip.

[Wakefield Turntables]

Thanks

[Mike - H]

When I finally got round to doing a detailed catalogue of my music, I discovered to my surprise that about 20% of my vinyl was in fact mono. On top of that I then bought the beatles mono collection.
Then a posting by Hugo about the virtues of mono cartridges piqued my interest, so I decided to take it further. After some research I opted for an Audio Technica AT33 EV matched up with an Audio Technica AT33 Mono, this meant that I can just change heads without changing all the other settings.
These were my first MC cartridges so I needed a phono stage for them, I went with a Graham Slee Reflex C with a mono switch. Since then I’ve looked for the mono version of anything I’ve bought if available. I have found that a lot early “stereo” records are improved by the use of the mono swtch.