2. analog
  3. 149582-33556

advice for mono cartridge

Hi,

I have a Garrard 401 with a Magnepan Unitrac and an SME 3009 Mk II Improved.

I’m thinking about turning one of the tonearms into a dedicated mono setup, probably on the SME 3009 Mk II Improved, as the Magnepan is my main arm and I really like the sound of it for stereo. The SME has a detachable headshell, making it easy to switch back and forth if necessary and I’m used to the sound of the Magnepan, so I don’t really want to change anything there.

I run MM only right now (although I guess I could pick up a step up transformer) and the SME has an effective mass of 9.5g. It also tracks only to 1.5g (although I bought the additional counterweight, which might help with that). It seems like my choice of mono cartridges is thus pretty limited. It seems the Ortofon 2M Mono Special Edition could be a good choice.

At the same time, I’m reading all sorts of contradictory info about whether vertical compliance, which the Ortofon seems to have (as opposed to Miyajima), is a good thing or not and whether a 1 mil or 0.7 mil stylus is best. Some also say a more modern line contact profile (the Ortofon has that) is actually preferable, even for older records, etc. Ortofon seems to say just that in their literature and Michael Fremer seems to agree. Also the Ortofon seems to have internally strapped output, which is somewhat controversial.

I actually heard recently a couple of very high end systems that used Miyajima mono cartridges and they sounded fantastic, huge soundstage, very realistic … but they were also clearly out of my price range, and only fit much heavier tone arms.

I have a mix of older mono pressings and reissues, presumably cut with a stereo cutter head.

I'm looking for advice from people with direct experience.

Considering the above,would the Ortofon 2M mono SE be a good choice? Does anyone see anything else more or less in that price range that might better it? Or should perhaps just wait and switch to a tone arm that would give me better options for mono down the line, perhaps a Fidelity Research FR-24, FR-54 or FR-14, which contrary to the FR-64 and FR-66, can be had for cheap. Budget is a concern overall.

Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Jerome Sabbagh
128x128saxman73
chakster's avatar
chakster
6,144 posts
 
Not many mono experts here as i can see. 

Here is more about mono cartridges in the article by Art Dudley. Only the cheapest mono carts have conical tip for mono, most of the high-end mono have at least elliptical or line contact.

What i can see in Lyra Etna MONO specs is LineContact stylus:

"Lyra-designed long-footprint variable-radius line-contact nude diamond (3um x 70um profile, block dimensions 0.08 x 0.12 x 0.5 mm)"

Why High-End manufacturers of the modern Mono cartridges are using LineContact for Mono ?  Probably because LineContact is better for Mono ? 

Why do we need a mono switch if a true mono cartridge has just 2 pins with just two wires coming from the headshell (not 4). The generator of such cartridges is a true mono. It's not enoug for a proper mono playback? 

Post removed 
flatblackround's avatar
flatblackround
279 posts
 
I agree it seems redundant to engage the mono button when the cartridge is mono.  However comparing the two with just a push of a button and my ears.  I prefer to use it.  Maybe a McIntosh preamp thing.
chakster's avatar
chakster
6,144 posts
 
I will add some spices:

1) New mono cartridges from respected manufacturers have vertical compliance, they do not act like oldschool mono with latheral compliance only.  Why ?

2) New mono cartridges have the best styli with most complicated profiles just like the most expensive stereo, not like oldchool mono with conical. Why ? 

3) What makes a cartridge "true mono": A mono motor with two pins input or a mono Stylus without vertical compliance ?

 
Post removed 
More to discover