2. analog
  3. 195131-1294

Mono Cartridge Stylus

So a while back there was a thread about mono cartridges like the Miyajima. There was some confusion about stylus size and what should be used for mono re-pressings versus the original mono pressings.

So Miyajima claims that their 0.7 stylus is optimal for modern mono re-pressings and that their 1.0 stylus is for those earlier mono pressings that began in 1950. Columbia introduced the Microgroove pressing in 1948. The Microgroove pressing offers 300-400 grooves per inch and AI claims that the correct stylus for these pressings is 0.7. I will say that I don't believe Miyajima to be entirely wrong, as there were labels that still used wider grooves however, I believe nearly all of the major labels eventually adopted the Microgroove band width thus making it the norm by the early to mid 1950's.

goofyfoot
goofyfoot's avatar
goofyfoot OP
1,429 posts
 

@kennyc I'm referring to their description as to what stylus type is best for what type of pressing.

About stylus size of Zero MONO
0.7mil is suitable for reissue monaural LP and a monaural LP of after 1960.
1.0mil is suitable for the monaural LP of a deep groove of the first press of the 1950s.
However, both styli can trace the monaural LP of all generations without a problem.
When you listen to the monaural LP of all generations, we recommend 0.7mil.
When you listen to a monaural LP of the first press of the 1950s mainly, we recommend 1.0mil.

 

billstevenson
588 posts
 

It is not clear to me why you are confused.  Actually, I don't believe you are confused, rather it seems you have figured this out correctly.  Since the majority of your mono records are Microgroove the best stylus option for you is 0.7 mil. 

goofyfoot's avatar
goofyfoot OP
1,429 posts
 

@billstevenson There was confusion on a previous thread about the difference between Microgroove mono pressings and the earliest vinyl mono pressings. Even though I mentioned on that previous thread, that Microgroove pressings had a narrower band width than the early mono pressings that weren't Microgroove, it appeared as though none of us knew what stylus would be best for Microgroove records. When I was able to sort it out and get this information (assuming that AI is correct), I wanted to post it so that other monophiles also understood the differences. I didn't want to keep it all to myself, what fun would that be?

Post removed 
billstevenson
588 posts
 

Got it. Well now I am going to open another aspect to the mono discussion that had me scratching my head for a long time.  That is what shape works best.  Miyajima makes a case for their wonderful sounding conical stylus.  I have a Zero.  Peter Lederman of SoundSmith makes a very compelling argument against conical and I have learned that they are in fact hard on records.  For old jazz I actually prefer a very lowly MM cartridge only available in the EU that has a Shibata stylus, it is the Ortofon 2M Mono SE.  But is is lousy for classical being too bright and edgy.  The Miyajima is easily the best for that, which is a dilemma.  I also have a VAS Nova, with an elliptical styllus and reasonably priced, a SoundSmith Hyperion with a line contact and pricey that are both good sounding for classical (but not as good as the Miyajima) and are easier on the records.  I have others, the accumulated detritus of a lifetime of seeking unobtainium.

More to discover