mono cartridge or mono switch? Or don't care??

[Frog]

Not sure where to put this thread, so would welcome some input

- What is everyones opinion on mono recordings? I have loads, and played with a mono cartridge, great, no less enjoyable than stereo (IMO).

BUT...any opinions on whether the sound is better with a dedicated mono cartirdge or if your pre amp has a mono switch, better using an "ordinary" stereo cartridge with the mono switch in?

I am absolutely certain a mono cartridge is better with 50's mono classical records but I'm not totally certain with later pop records. If you want to debate why, thats fine too !

Comments?

[hifi_dave]

You need a dedicated mono cartridge as it doesn't produce a signal from the vertical stylus motion.

[DSJR]

Agree - to a degree, but also a stereo cartridge wired or switched for mono won't reproduce the vertical stylus motion either as it's seen as out of phase and cancels out.

My suggestion if you're able to change cartridges is to look out for a GE or Tannoy variluctance type of vintage cartridge and have it sensitively re-tipped/restored. I believe the Goldring 500 series could be added to the list as well (don't know the American equivalents and I'll currently pass on a mono SPU ;)). Some very old mono LP's were severely limited in level, despite the better quality vinyl often available and one of the above should add some often much needed drama to the proceedings IMO, as long as you can handle one with your LP player.

[Frog]

Thanks for the comments.
No I'm not looking to change cartridges, the SPU is a perfect match for the 3012 and has zero vertical stylus motion.(As a result would damage stereo records). You may be missing out on hearing a mono SPU ! I chose it for exactly the reasons you both point out.

The question is really one of tonality for later mono recordings. The CG25i can be a bit bright on later recordings but this doesn't seem to be an issue with pre 1960 sih recordings.

[hifi_dave]

Well, you already knew the answer. A mono cartridge is what you need and yes, I do know what a mono SPU sounds like as I have a vintage one here.

[Frog]

Hello Dave

- No I dont know the answer. I may have phrased this badly, so apologies.

I suppose I'm asking if the CG25i, with zero vertical compliance, would sound brighter than a "normal" mono cartridge. I originally bought it for the number of very old mono classical chamber recordings I have. I've not heard an ordinary mono SPU (which I believe has vertical compliance and would'nt damage stereo records) so have no point of reference.

[Reid Malenfant]

The question is really one of tonality for later mono recordings. The CG25i can be a bit bright on later recordings but this doesn't seem to be an issue with pre 1960 sih recordings.
Could this be down to different equalisation being used prior to pressing the records? I seem to recall that there were quite a few standards in use back in the day.

You simply might need to use different equalisation during playback to get things where they should be? :scratch:

[Frog]

Well, I agree different EQ is possible Mark, but as the 50's classical records are on a variety of labels and presumably could have a variety of eq's I don't think so, because they all sound broadly similar. The difference in brightness playing a later 60's pop record is huge.
Example, play 50's Nat King Cole, Sinatra: or classical Columbias, EMI's, LXT Deccas, DG's, Vox,etc and the sound is basically the same. Play a 60's Aretha Franklin, Otis, Pet Sounds or (say) Beatles Revolver and it becomes very bright. (these are all originals not reissues).
?
Could it be that they were just recorded that way, or is it something to do with groove width? In which case a different profile stylus for the 60's stuff may help. NB The CG25i has a 25 mic spherical stylus.

- anyway, doesn't look like anyone definitively knows, it had been bugging me for a while and I just thought I'd ask.

[Barry]

The standard RIAA equalisation curve, that we enjoy today, was not proposed until 1954 and even then not all record companies adopted it. Certainly by 1960 all record companies had embraced the RIAA standard, but until then, whilst different companies had their own standards, the sound could be noticably different if the correct equalisation was not used.

Collectors with large collections of 1940 -1950s recordings will either use vintage preamps that offer various pickup equalisation curves (such as the Quad 22, early Leaks etc.) or more modern equivalents such as the Graham Slee unit.

Regarding the choice of pick up cartridge to play monophonic records, in order of preference the choice would be:

(1) A truly monophonic cartidge (Any American model, Tannoy variluctance, early Ortophon, Ferranti ribbon, Denon 102 or EMT);

(2) A stereo cartridge wired as mono;

(3) A stereo cartridge wired for stereo, fed into a preamp with a stereo/mono switch set to 'mono'.

[Frog]

The standard RIAA equalisation curve, that we enjoy today, was not proposed until 1954 and even then not all record companies adopted it. Certainly by 1960 all record companies had embraced the RIAA standard, but until then, whilst different companies had their own standards, the sound could be noticably different if the correct equalisation was not used.

Collectors with large collections of 1940 -1950s recordings will either use vintage preamps that offer various pickup equalisation curves (such as the Quad 22, early Leaks etc.) or more modern equivalents such as the Graham Slee unit.

Regarding the choice of pick up cartridge to play monophonic records, in order of preference the choice would be:

(1) A truly monophonic cartidge (Any American model, Tannoy variluctance, early Ortophon, Ferranti ribbon, Denon 102 or EMT);

(2) A stereo cartridge wired as mono;

(3) A stereo cartridge wired for stereo, fed into a preamp with a stereo/mono switch set to 'mono'.




Thanks Barry. (1) is what the CG25i is but I think I'll have to get hold of a standard mono SPU from somewhere and see whether its tonally different...