Playing mono records properly without breaking the bank - a phono pre-amp question.

Elliott, Your experience is slightly different from mine.  I played all LPs, mono or stereo, with a stereo cartridge for the first ~35 years of my audiophilia.  And I agree with you partly, I never felt a crying need for a mono switch or a mono cartridge.  However, the recent interest in mono LPs and mono playback induced me to acquire preamplifiers with a mono switch (I have two systems) and also a mono cartridge.  Since then, using these devices, I have been impressed with the positives of playing mono LPs in mono mode (either by using a mono cartridge or by switching or both). There is less high frequency "hash", for sure, but also there is enhanced clarity and a closer approach to the live sound.  I wouldn't go without at least a preamplifier with a mono switch, these days.  For certain LPs produced in both stereo and mono during the transition phase from mono to stereo, I can even say I prefer the mono version. On the other hand, I wouldn't argue that a casual listener could not be happy in stereo.

hrabieh, optimizing mono playback can become complex, but basic enjoyment doesn't need to be.  Yes, there can be considerations for when the record was issued, groove width, even EQ.  But I believe the first consideration is which mono records will you listen to?

There are multiple reissues now of older mono LPs.  Since mono cutter heads are no longer available (so far as I know) these are cut with stereo cutter heads.  This simplifies matters as a stereo cartridge stylus should be just fine.  A mono switch may still be beneficial, such as Elliott suggested, to reduce background noise.

However, if you intend to play original monos from the late '40s to early '60s, by which time initial mono releases ended, then there may be no simple playback solution if you are concerned about sonics.  A modern stereo cartridge can be used but will not be optimized for stylus size, pickup type (no vertical groove information, only noise).  Also multiple EQs were utilized by different labels (requiring selectable settings).  So the best answer there is a second cartridge and specialized phono stage, which you want to avoid, at least to begin with.

Because I have a lot of mono records in mint condition I thought it would be worth the effort to do just what you are considering, which is to get a dedicated mono set up with mono cartridge and separate arm for my TT.  Having gone that route, I felt as though the sound quality through my rather expensive stereo rig sounded better on mono records than the mono set-up.

I cannot explain why given the explanations noted above, which seem scientifically plausible. It should be noted that I did not have a mono switch on my phono pre or on my preamplifier.  Perhaps that is why there may have been some sound degradation.  I suspect the other reason may be that the stereo cartridge on my stereo set up is rather expensive compared to the mono cartridge I purchased and thus has better all around resolution and micro dynamics.

Most of the mono cartridges I auditioned before buying were moving magnet monos.  My experience has been that the best low to medium output moving coil cartridges are significantly superior to moving magnet/iron designs and that is perhaps why the stereo set up outperformed the mono set up.

My advice having gone this route, is as others have said, play the monos with your stereo set up and enjoy their rather unique characteristics.

Somewhat off topic, there are some cases where I felt my mono RCA "shaded dog" pressings of classical music were sonically superior to the stereo versions.  Oddly, perhaps others can comment on this, the front to back depth (imaging) and dynamic punch were greater on the monos than on the identical stereo pressings making them more enjoyable to listen to than their stereo counterparts.

@lubachl regarding your experience comparing playback on your existing stereo MC with a cheaper mono cart. I suspect a lot of what you are hearing is the differences in carts. 

In my setup I have a pretty expensive stereo cart (AS Palladian) and an much cheaper mono (Miyajima Zero). Arguably the Palladian is more detailed, more accurate etc but the Zero has an ineffable sense of wholeness and soul that really brings out the best in mono (especially on the wood armed Durand Talea I mount it on). 

Suffice it to say listening to Martzy on the Palladian is a bit of an exercise in analysis whereas with the Zero one relaxes in pleasure. I do have to say that going mono can be spendy once you start getting a taste for ERC pressings (never mind the originals) and the like.

All in all I’d recommend you keep up your search for the mono cartridge that sings for you!

OP writes:

"not planning on getting a turntable with interchangeable headshell and
(c) don’t see myself wanting to get a cartridge with a removable stylus where I would switch out the stylus each time I want to play a mono record..(d) will not be playing any 78’s on this turntable".

That is why I mentioned the already setup TT. It is fully adjustable, but no need to adjust anything (except level via it's adjustable feet) (perhaps OP might want to try a different cartridge later).

The low quantity of Mono records he describes do not warrant the advanced considerations he mentions.

The remote controlled stereo/mono switch can be tried, kept, returned, about the same price as a different cartridge, but no skills/work involved.

I do have Stereo/Mono circuit in my McIntosh mx110z tuner/preamp (wonderful tube phono eq) as I mentioned.

I never tried a Mono cartridge. That is a specific alternate. Perhaps I will buy one I can return, try it, see if it bests the Stereo Cartridge/McIntosh Mode switch, keep or return it.