Mono recordings

For the most part not much IMO. Stereo done correctly, whether in original recording or not, sounds better to me nearly all of the time because of the spatial and dimensional aspect of the sounds which stereo provides. Which sounds more life like. Sometimes stereo can be annoying, even if recorded in stereo, such as music with only two sources, for example guitar out of one channel and voice out of the other. Or John Coltrane blowing down the house from only one speaker and the band (or parts of it) from the other. I wish those recordings were mono, or at least the lead player's solo. With stereo, I prefer the lead singer/player/soloist emanate from both speakers, creating a center image as if mono.

I have the Beatles on mono and stereo. I do prefer their more quiet material in mono because I feel I can get deeper into the music, but their more raucous material in stereo. When it comes to R & R, stereo is the only way to go IMO. Purity be damned. 

I only own a few mono records. When I listen to them I rarely, if ever, even notice they are mono, or think about it. I just enjoy the music..... 

There is a lot of old great classical recordings and jazz that are only in mono. What I like about mono is you tend to concentrate on the music than on the sound
Alan

What contribution, if any, does a mono cartridge make? I have neither the money nor the desire to purchase a mono cartridge. But just wondering. 

rockyboy -If I recall correctly, a  true mono cartridge picks up only horizontal modulations and (unlike a stereo cart.) ignores the vertical modulations.  On a 50's/early 60's pressed mono record this results in less surface noise. 

I've got quite a few mono LP's from that era (mostly classical and jazz) and I can attest that when these records are played on a true mono cartridge, surface noise is, in fact, lessened.  Such was the case with a Lyra Helikon mono cartridge (which crapped out on me way too soon) and my current Ortofon Cadenza Mono cart.