Thanks dave. I suspected that so appreciate the confirmation.
Mono Reissues and the Conical Stylus
Hi Folks,
Recently I started buying mono reissues from Speakers Corner, Impex, and have recently ordered a few from Analogphonic. They're all of the 'long haired' variety. In the process, I've come to discovery threads where posters claim that the newer mono reissue grooves are cut in a V (stereo) shape rather than the vintage U (mono) shape.
My AT 33 mono cartridge comes with a conical stylus and from what I can tell, so do the better mono cartridges, i.e. the Miyajima Zero Mono. This of course would then create an issue where it pertains to using a conical stylus in a V shaped groove.
Around November, I plan to purchase a Jelco tonearm for my modified Thorens TD 160 and after that, will be looking to upgrade to a higher end mono cartridge. However, I don't see that they're would be a viable solution to the stylus dilemma given that I will only have one tonearm. I do by the way own a collection of early mono records but would like to find a cartridge that better crosses over between my vintage pressings and my reissues. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Recently I started buying mono reissues from Speakers Corner, Impex, and have recently ordered a few from Analogphonic. They're all of the 'long haired' variety. In the process, I've come to discovery threads where posters claim that the newer mono reissue grooves are cut in a V (stereo) shape rather than the vintage U (mono) shape.
My AT 33 mono cartridge comes with a conical stylus and from what I can tell, so do the better mono cartridges, i.e. the Miyajima Zero Mono. This of course would then create an issue where it pertains to using a conical stylus in a V shaped groove.
Around November, I plan to purchase a Jelco tonearm for my modified Thorens TD 160 and after that, will be looking to upgrade to a higher end mono cartridge. However, I don't see that they're would be a viable solution to the stylus dilemma given that I will only have one tonearm. I do by the way own a collection of early mono records but would like to find a cartridge that better crosses over between my vintage pressings and my reissues. Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Showing 6 responses by pryso
Hi gf, I suspect your goal of "a stylus and cartridge that works for both old and new" may not be possible. At least not if your goal is to "optimize" overall playback. So far as I know, only stereo cutter heads are available now for all reissues, whether stereo or mono. As already described here that means a groove which may not be compatible with earlier conical styli. J. Carr has commented on the subject saying their choice of modern elliptical styli shapes for Lyra mono cartridges sound best. I suspect that is due to utilizing reissued mono LPs for their evaluation. It was also suggested here that archivists may have multiple conical styli sizes to accommodate mono LPs from different eras or companies. That tells us something about how complicated this question can become. My answer will be to utilize a mono conical stylus for '50s and '60s mono pressings and a stereo cartridge with mono switch engaged for current mono reissues. But you would need to add a mono switch for that. |
gf, my point in mentioning Carr and Lyra was to suggest even designers/manufacturers don't agree on this subject. Since I'm not an engineer I must rely on simple logic. And to me it is logical that stereo cutter heads being a different size and shape than the earlier mono cutter heads will require a different playback profile. That's why I don't see a single answer for your question. Anyway, good luck. I've certainly seen positive reports on the AT 33 mono cartridge. |
chaster raises a good point which shows how deep the issue of "mono playback" truly becomes if you're half way serious about it. The RIAA equalization became effective in 1954, but many labels did not immediately adopt it. Some, particularly in Europe didn't comply until the early '60s. So depending on how anal one wants to be with mono playback it becomes a question of: * mono VS stereo cartridge * "true" mono VS strapped mono * stylus shape and size * appropriate equalization Now anyone looking to go back further to 78s then actual recording speed must be added to the list. Anyone wanting to learn more about all this could start here - http://midimagic.sgc-hosting.com/mixphono.htm |
For as many years as I've been playing LPs I should know this. But this thread helped me realize that I don't. Early stereo LPs often contained warnings against playing with a mono cartridge. Was that due to the larger conical mono stylus tip compared to elliptical stereo tip which might cause damage to the groove? Or was it an issue with vertical motion of the stylus/cantilever? I've read that true mono cartridges do not pick up vertical groove information. I assume that is because of the coil configuration rather than the cantilever not being able to move vertically. If it is the latter is that the reason it can cause groove damage? |