2. analog
  3. 123898-486

OK...I've ditched my mono cartridge

Like many others I suspect, after the Beatles Mono release Box Set
http://i.imgur.com/JhcIBai.jpg
I read a lot about the 'supposed' benefits of a true mono cartridge over simply using the 'mono' button in a phono-stage/preamp.
So I was persuaded to try one (without breaking the bank).
http://i.imgur.com/yHeUiPH.jpg
It's now been 18 months of listening and comparing the AT 33Mono
http://i.imgur.com/C3bAOfA.jpg
with all my other favourite stereo cartridges played with the mono button on the Halcro DM10 preamp.
Firstly...I'm not a fan of the AT33 sound. Compared to my short-listed dozen cartridges out of the 80+ I have owned, it lacks sparkle, depth, bass and 'life'...😩
Why have I narrowed down my worldwide search for the 'ideal' cartridge to a mere handful....to then just meekly accept the second rate performance of a 'hack' cartridge simply because it's a 'true' mono?
And why would anyone who has invested in a Koetsu Coralstone, Atlas, Anna, Goldfinger or Airtight for their stereo listening pleasure.....'step-down' to a lesser cartridge for their mono listening?
Oh...I know you can buy better sounding mono cartridges than the AT-33Mono.....but how many are you going to try to hope to match your favourite stereo ones?
Now that I've ditched the 33Mono.....I can listen to all my great cartridges with all their diverse flavours just as I do for stereo recordings.
And I never really did hear a special difference in the dedicated 'mono' one even though I half persuaded myself that I should...🤓
128x128halcro
pryso
1,933 posts
 
Thanks thom and iopscrl for substantiating my perspective.

But let me phrase it a bit differently than I did before.  First off, I probably need to own more than a few mono LPs before I'll consider the trouble and expense of a mono cartridge.  Otherwise hopefully I'll have a mono switch on my pre or phono amp and be content.

However if I've purchased many mono reissues, better optimization may be worthwhile. If those reissues were cut since maybe 1990, they very likely were done with a stereo cutter head.  So choosing an appropriate stylus suggests a modern profile, whether it is in an "adapted" stereo model or a true mono design.

But then if I own a number of original mono pressings, produced with mono cutter heads, my stylus choice will likely be different.  Why would I not want a larger, conical/spherical stylus to better match the groove made by that cutter?  Also in this case I do not want any vertical pick up so that affects my choice as well.

Without beating this into the ground I feel it depends on how many monos and how they were produced that we want to listen to.

fleib
1,124 posts
 

Pryso, This has been beaten to the ground on multiple threads and of course viability depends on a record collection. If someone has very good stereo carts and a collection of mono reissues, they will get performance beyond that of a stereo cart and a mono switch, with a high quality mono cart. This is with vertical compliance to play a modern reissue in a reasonable manner.

Even if vertical rejection is 30dB - same as a mono switch, the 45° groove wall has two sides, just like a stereo record. With a stereo cart there is always a difference between channels - output, phase, etc. That difference gets combined with a mono switch.

I can't say it's worth it for any individual user, but companies like Ortofon and Lyra make high end mono carts.

Regards,

onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,229 posts
 
Halcro, you state that you've had 80+ cartridges and then mention Anna, Coralstone, Goldfinger, etc.  Are these some of the stereo cartridges you've compared the A-T to?  Is that
regafan's avatar
regafan
74 posts
 
I run two turntables. One for two channel, and another as a dedicated mono playback system. I run an Audio Technica AT 33 mono on a Michell Orbe turntable with a SME V tone arm, sans damping fluid. Hooked up to a solid state phono pre-amplifier with 66 dB of boost and a 100 ohm load. I think it sounds great with new re-issues and old first issues. So has everyone who has listened to this set up.  Synergy may have been the problem with this cartridge in your system. Little things add up fast. 

I guess we could go digital if it all gets too much. Mono cartridges are less forgiving than stereo cartridges in many respects. They can put a heck of a load on a tone arm because of their requirements. 
iopscrl
196 posts
 
" Mono cartridges are less forgiving than stereo cartridges in many respects. They can put a heck of a load on a tone arm because of their requirements."

Actually more forgiving of pressing or condition defects.  Most noise is transfered from vertical content.  Most users of mono cartridges (modified for mono, or true mono) report a significant reduction in surface noise and audibility of surface defects.   However, some (not all) mono cartridges are lower in compliance than the average stereo cartridge, thus requiring a higher mass tonearm for best performance.  On the other hand, many have reported excellent results from using a Rega 300 arm with a mono cartridge.
More to discover