Why mono?

Hi Mike. I too own many thousands of vintage mono microgroove records from the 50's and 60's, both on LP and 45, so I need no convincing on that front (and neither does my chick!) -- or that in many cases where both stereo and mono versions were available, mono was often musically superior. (Or more accurately, that stereo was often inferior, for understandable reasons.)

About your last point, as I stipulated, I've never heard a contemporary high-end mono cart, so my "perception" that listening to certain mono records in stereo can sometimes be preferable to listening in mono, can't be explained by what you're saying there.

However, I still don't have a technically persuasive explanation for your assertions, and I'm still not sure I have an answer to my question about whether comparisons were made vs. a mono switch, rather than vs. stereo.

Everything you hear may be absolutely right, I don't know -- it's just that, in my income bracket at least, I'd like to see an empirically convincing explanation for it, before spending on a mono cart when I already have mono switches on both my preamp and my phonostage. But the more anecdotal, nontechnical generalities that I'm treated to instead (by perfectly well-meaning audiophiles, who may or may not have mono switches), the more skeptical I tend to get that there's an explicable rationale. (And Art Dudley touting almost anything also has that effect on me! ;^)

Like Zaikesman, what I've read and been told over the years is that using the mono switch is all that's needed to mimic the operation of a mono cartridge. I can't vouch for its accuracy, but below is an explanation I found on another forum; maybe others will know if it has any merit.

"A stereo phono cartridge has generators that are sensitive to 45-degree motion corresponding the the 45-degree groove walls. It is wired in such a way that lateral motion of the stylus is in-phase and vertical motion of the stylus is out-of-phase. Therefore, when you blend the channels with a mono switch, purely vertical motion is completely canceled and purely lateral motion is maximized. This is exactly the way a mono cartridge operates. There is absolutely no difference whatsoever."

I also like using a stereo cartridge for mono records because my preamp allows me to send either the left or right channel to both speakers. On a few of my mono lp's, one groove wall is damaged much more than the other, and a stereo cartridge lets me listen to the less damaged wall.

And of course, there is the promise on the album jacket of many of my mono records that when played on a stereophonic machine, it will give "even more brilliant, true-to-life fidelity" than when played on a monophonic machine.

However, also like Zaikesman, and for the reasons listed above, I've never tried a mono cartridge in my stereo system, and none of the local dealers have a mono cartridge mounted up to audition. I greatly enjoy my mono records with my current setup, so the expense and hassles of adding to my system a turntable and cartridge dedicated to mono is not one I would undertake lightly.

read this....

about Miyajima Mono cartridges

the translation from Japanese makes for interesting reading but it makes some good points.

"my preamp allows me to send either the left or right channel to both speakers"

JR, what preamp are you using? Thanks!
-Bob

chicks dig mono

Dude, tell us your secret. Where are you hanging out? I tried listing "monophile" on my eHarmony profile and didn't get a single frigging response.