How are you playing your precious MONO Vinyl?

I asked essentially this same question a few years ago to the experts at Ortofon and the answer is there is no difference electrically and, therefore, no difference sonically.

Honestly I do not know.  I have all of the above: true mono cartridges (Myajima and AT), bridged stereo to mono (Ortofon 2M Mono SE - personal fav), and a stereo switch (KAB). all work.  My take is that Ortofon, ever practical, has probably determined the same thing, that is that all these methods all work, therefore, they settled on the bridged stereo to mono approach as the most practical for them.  That is likely true from a manufacturing perspective in allowing them to offer mono versions of cartridges across several models at various price points in both MC and MM.  Also, the number of units sold per annum is probably relatively small.  Again looking at from a practical perspective this makes sense.

Lalitk,

Using your ears makes sense, but it only will take us so far.  This thread makes clear what a mine field the whole mono record business can be.  For example, as lewm points out, when and how a record was made matters.  Records cut late 1940s until early 1960s were mostly cut with groove width of 1.0 mil.  The exact dates vary by label.  Miyajima and AT, for example, make conical stylus cartridges with no vertical compliance that work for those, but for records made on modern cutting lathes the grooves are 0.07 mil wide, and these need a different stylus altogether.  Just using ears can land the unwary in trouble because using the wrong stylus can damage the record not to mention not sounding very good.

There is no one answer to this riddle.  VAS offers some great cartridges too.  My collection includes a matching pair of VAS Nova MC, one mono, one stereo, both aluminum cantilever with a 0.07 mil elliptical stylus.  The VAS mono is my preferred mono cartridge for classical.  As I said in a previous post the 2M Mono SE is my preferred mono overall, but I should clarify that preference is based on jazz recordings.  I listen to jazz 80-90% of the time.   

So what octane fuel should I use in my Lincoln Continental?  It has the 400 HP 3.0 liter V6.  From Elliott's info it sounds like 93 octane might offer a marginal performance boost, but I don't drive it hard.  Since Lincoln went out of the car business and I don't like SUVs, I am more concerned with longevity.

Thanks for this information.  It seems clear that if there is a performance difference for a specific vehicle that boost is coming from the engine management software adjusting the settings such as timing based on the knock sensor readings.  Without the benefit of this information what I have done is listen to the engine.  Not sensing pre-ignition, I dropped from 93 first to 91 and then to 87 octane fuel.  This in the cool months.  In the summer, I use 93 just because it is hot.  

For primarily listening to jazz my ears tell me that irrespective of manufacturer MC cartridges tend to be smooth, MM and MI cartridges tend toward more edgy.  The last cartridge I would choose to listen to jazz, maybe excepting a classic 1950 Ellington record, would be my Myajima.  

Actually it sounds like our experience is quite similar.  It is the limitation imposed by the English language that is impeding communication here.  I used the adjective smooth to characterize MC sound.  You more precisely use the example of a piano and attack, or lack of same, as a limitation of MC sound.  It seems clear to me that our observations are converging.  My preferred stereo cartridge is an Experion, a MI.  We both listen to a lot of jazz.  My guess is that our favorite piano is not a Steinway, at least for jazz.  Something a with a little more edge to it serves jazz better.  A good Baldwin perhaps, or one of my favorite sounds from the past, a Mason & Hamlin?