I have no no modern-day experience with a mono cartridge, and I love the involving effect of great soundstage and imaging. However, when it comes to multi-miked, multi-tracked studio albums, imaging and soundstage can be a crapshoot. When it comes to mono, you know the image is going to center between the speakers. Even so, mono usually has very nice sense of depth and ambienc, which these LPs have.
10-05-14: Tonykay
Slaw,
"Revolver" may be my favorite Beatles title. Your comment that the soundstage is "closed in" worries me a little. Did you use a dedicated mono cartridge or stereo?
The most important trait (to me is tonal balance. And in this parameter, these new Mono analog LPs trump the thin, brittle-sounding Capitol stereo versions handily. They have a completely different gestalt. Before I heard EMI/Parlophone LPs, I had thought that Beatles albums had a thin and brittle-sounding tonal balance.
Not so for the mono versions, which are warm, rich, and full-sounding. EMI mixed these albums with mono in mind, and I love them. They re-define what I thought Beatles albums sounded like. Sgt. Peppers reflects the balance I hear on my 1st-run Capitol mono pressing. The engineering team spent about 4 days mixing down Sgt. Peppers to mono and about 4 hours to do the stereo version. It shows. The tonal balance is so much better, I really don't care how wide the soundstage is. I'll take these mono versions over the fake stereo versions any day, where the voices were hard left and instruments hard right.