Why mono?

Granting that I've never listened to a modern high-end mono cart, I'd be curious to know whether the posters touting mono carts above did their comparisons to stereo carts as the OP suggests (and as I normally do in my system), which is with a preamp mono switch engaged? If not, then you're working at a relative disadvantage in S/N ratio at the least (disregarding for the moment all the other sonic variables between what of course could be quite different carts). If what we're really talking about here is listening to mono records in mono vs. listening to them in stereo -- not simply whether a mono cart sounds better than a nominally equivalent stereo one for playing mono records *in mono* -- then that strikes me as somewhat of an apples-and-oranges comparison.

I still don't think I've heard/read a convincing argument as to why investing in a separate mono cart has an advantage over simply using a mono switch if you have one (assuming your stereo cart is properly aligned), since summing the 2-channel signal cancels out virtually all of whatever spurious vertical modulation info may be present. (On top of which, it is my experience that a minority percentage of mono records in clean condition will actually sound better played with a stereo cart *in stereo* despite the lower S/N ratio, presumably due to disk-mastering/pressing anomolies that can sometimes result in a degree of unwanted HF cancellation when played in 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! ;^)

Mike: Thanks for the link. Unfortunately, due to the language gap but also what I perceive to be a near total lack of genuine attempt at explanation or justification on the part of the author, it doesn't tell me anything useful. But if you think their carts sound great for the money, that at least is something.

Thom and Jazzdoc: Again, all well and fine impressions, but what is the comparison (if you know) to simply summing the channels of a good stereo cart that you already own? The more the folks who champion mono carts post like the question doesn't exist, the more I wonder whether they know the answer, or even to ask the question...Maybe everyone ought to state for the record (sorry!) whether or not they even have a mono switch available in their rig (or summing Y-cables, but less good for the obvious reasons), because I realize that these days many don't.

Jrtrent: I also used to take advantage of channel/groovewall-selection capability with mono records back when I was using a C-J PV8 full-function preamp, and older McIntoshes had this too...Just like a mono switch (and also an absolute polarity switch), I'd like to see modern standalone phonostages incorporate this "L to L + R"/"R to L + R" feature (since linestages won't ever again, as mono is only really important for vinyl playback). It can also be useful for certain diagnostics even if you never use it for listening to music.

OK, now we're getting somewhere guys: Mike and Jazdoc both categorically stated (paraphrasing here) that to their ears in their systems, a mono cart really does play a mono record better than a stereo cart with the channels summed. I'd still like to know the mechanism behind this finding (and of course it's always possible that they just prefer the sound of those carts, irrespective of the fact that they happen to be mono carts), but at least now I know there's some subjective basis for looking into the subject more, rather than wondering if all the hype could merely be the result of audiophiles whose preamps simply lack mono buttons. (And yes, I find, like Mike does, that engaging the Mono button with a stereo cart playing a mono record usually doesn't change the sound all that much, save for a slight reduction in noise and a slight tightening of the central image -- not surprising. But if a mono cart somehow proves to be much better than this, I certainly will be surprised, pleasantly so.)

Hi Pryso: Actually my own linestage (a Levinson 380S) and my current phonostage (a PSA GCPH) both feature remote-controllable mono and polarity functions, which I think is wonderful. More should.

But what I was referring to above was the Left or Right Channel to Left + Right Channels switch that Jrtrent mentions, which you only find on some older (usually full-function) preamps or receivers. That's a feature we probably won't be seeing again, but I'd still like to see some audiophile phonostages incorporate it. (Also I can't understand why more don't offer a defeatable rumble filter. Other than the polarity switch, which many DACs have, these functions are exclusively for vinyl replay and should be located in phonostages since most linestages omit them.)

Hi Dave: Are you talking about something that can be accomplished in between the cartridge pins and the headshell pins using headshell wires? (No way would I attempt to rewire anything inside a cartridge itself.) Please elaborate, and maybe comment on why this would be any different than using a preamp mono switch?

So, would any of the posters who own mono carts care to list which manufacturers in their experience offer 'true' mono carts as opposed to repurposed stereo ones, with distinct generators and suspensions that aren't for use with stereo records, and maybe what they think of those ones they've heard?

The thought occured to me -- since it stands to reason that stereo CD players can't suffer from whatever ill effect it's supposed to be that's said to make stereo carts less than optimal for playing mono LPs -- that if this alleged deficiency in playng mono LPs with stereo carts is true, then on average, mono CDs therefore ought to sound better relative to the their mono LP counterparts than do stereo CDs relative to stereo LPs (for those of us using stereo carts -- most, I'm sure).

This isn't something I've noticed however, not that I've specifically listened for it. (Then again, despite owning more vinyl than "discs" by a factor of over 20 to 1, neither am I one who thinks LP sound is necessarily always better than CD sound. I think mastering quality greatly trumps format, but also that, mastering quality aside, each format can have its strengths relative to the other.)