Crap just purchased Beatles Mono set and realized I don't have a cartridge for them

sruddy

sruddy

Super Member
I have an Empire with a stock 98 tonearm and a Shure M97xE cartdridge. I have no mono cartridge and I don't have any extra tonearm headshells either. I guess I need to find an aftermarket headshell and purchase a mono cartdidge. Problem is I have no idea what to get that will work on my existing tonearm.
 
You don't need a mono cartridge. These LPs were cut on a stereo lathe (with the same content fed to both channels) and will play nicely with any stereo phono cartridge. Even a stereo/mono switch on your phono stage or pre-amp isn't going to do much if your cartridge alignment is good.
 
Nooooooo! Playing a mono LP with a stereo cartridge will bring about the end of the universe!
 
skriefal said:
You don't need a mono cartridge. These LPs were cut on a stereo lathe (with the same content fed to both channels) and will play nicely with any stereo phono cartridge. Even a stereo/mono switch on your phono stage or pre-amp isn't going to do much if your cartridge alignment is good.
Click to expand...

Well that's good to know. I read in a sidebar of Sound and Vision magazine that vertical travel of a stereo stylus on a mono record will result in noise. They recommended Ortofon 2M Mono SE for the Beatles Mono records. No way am I going to pay that kind of money especially if it's not needed.
 
I believe that's true -- for LPs cut on a mono lathe. Vintage Beatles mono LPs, for example. But it's very rare for new "mono" LPs to be cut on a mono lathe.
 
no need, just use your standard cart as stated above...

You can also build a Y-connector to sum the channels and re-split them for about 20 bucks at the Shack if you want to achieve the same effect as a mono switch if your system lacks one
 
Last edited:
It's amazing to me how much misunderstanding there is about how to play this new Beatles set, and about mono in general.

Like any record mastered after 1968, these records were mastered with a stereo cutting head. Do not sum the channels for mono or you will lose some upper treble due to phase cancelation.
 
The big caution when stereo LPs were new was not to play them with a mono LP needle. I have a lot of late 50s and early 60s mono LPs which play just fine with my 1970s era stereo cartridges. Sometimes I think they sound better with my circa 1958 Shure M3D stereo cart with its conical needle.
 
illinoisteve said:
The big caution when stereo LPs were new was not to play them with a mono LP needle.
Click to expand...

Correct. A mono-cut groove only requires that the cantilever wiggle from side to side (horizontal compliance) whereas a stereo groove requires a cantilever to wiggles sideways as well as up and down (horizontal and vertical compliance).

Until the late '60s, mono cartridges only had horizontal compliance and were not compatible with stereo records because they would damage the groove. That's why mono and stereo pressings of the same albums were issued simultaneously.

By around 1967 or '68, most new mono cartridges were engineered to work OK with stereo records (with horizontal and vertical compliance), and the industry stopped releasing mono pressings.

The studios also began junking their "outdated" mono equipment, including mono cutting lathes. From that point on, any time a mono-only recording (ie: from the pre-stereo era) needed fresh plates to be made for a reissue/repressing, they would spool up the mono tape on a stereo machine and cut new plates with a stereo cutting head.

This is how the new Beatles LPs were cut. In effect, they are stereo records with the same information in both channels.
 
I bought a new record for my neighbor back in the early 70's. It was one of those thin ones. They had an old mono console from the fifties. I waited for the tubes to warm up changed the switch to phono, let down the tone arm and it went skating across the record. The needle was too fat for the grooves. It would play for a couple seconds and then skip. I've still got that record.
 
skriefal said:
I believe that's true -- for LPs cut on a mono lathe. Vintage Beatles mono LPs, for example. But it's very rare for new "mono" LPs to be cut on a mono lathe.
Click to expand...

To tell you the truth, I have no issues playing my original Parlophone mono Beatles albums with a stereo cartridge.
 
illinoisteve said:
The big caution when stereo LPs were new was not to play them with a mono LP needle. I have a lot of late 50s and early 60s mono LPs which play just fine with my 1970s era stereo cartridges. Sometimes I think they sound better with my circa 1958 Shure M3D stereo cart with its conical needle.
Click to expand...

The M3D even came with a strap that fitted over the two signal pins to run it as a mono cart.
 
beatcomber said:
The studios also began junking their "outdated" mono equipment, including mono cutting lathes. From that point on, any time a mono-only recording (ie: from the pre-stereo era) needed fresh plates to be made for a reissue/repressing, they would spool up the mono tape on a stereo machine and cut new plates with a stereo cutting head.
Click to expand...

Never say never. Someday you will log onto Acoustic Sounds and see this:

"GENUINE MONO RECORDS! These reissues were mastered on vintage 1949 all-tube mono mastering console, lovingly restored by Professor Algernon Winburne-Smythe in his Cambridge studio. These reissues have U-shaped grooves and feature horizontal compliance only. They should be played only with a modern or restored vintage mono cartridge with a conical stylus.

These reissues have been pressed on virgin 200-gram vinyl, in a limited edition of 200 copies for each title. They are offered to subscribers only at a very reasonable price of $189.99 per LP. Sign up now to be sure you get each title; we expect that in the future, they will become valuable collector's items."

:D:D:D
 
beatcomber said:
. . . .
Until the late '60s, mono cartridges only had horizontal compliance and were not compatible with stereo records because they would damage the groove. That's why mono and stereo pressings of the same albums were issued simultaneously. . . . . By around 1967 or '68, most new mono cartridges were engineered to work OK with stereo records (with horizontal and vertical compliance), and the industry stopped releasing mono pressings. . . .
Click to expand...

There was an economic aspect to the releasing of the same records in both mono and stereo. In the early '60s they sold the mono records for as much as a buck or two cheaper than they did the new-fangled stereo records. This was when you mailed a letter for 4 cents and a McDonalds hamburger cost 15 cents. Back then $1.50 more for the stereo version was REAL MONEY. And a lot of people still had working mono equipment, too. Even after they got their first stereo, they probably bought some mono records to save money. I'm not talking about audiophiles, but just plain folks who still had a black-and-white TV, too.
 
Sam Cogley said:
The M3D even came with a strap that fitted over the two signal pins to run it as a mono cart.
Click to expand...

O, it's a grand old piece of machinery, Sam. I haven't listened to mine for a while. Fell in love with it when it came to me on a used Dual 1009. They were a beautiful match. I don't have the mono-conversion strap.

As for summing the signal with the mono button, isn't that mainly a problem with stereo records people want to hear in mono. Unless they were mixed in a way that makes that an option, there are likely to be phase differences between the channels that will diminish the signal. If the signal in all parts of the groove is the same (wouldn't that be the case with a mono record), that problem should not be possible. In any case, if you listen carefully over headphones and hear no signal loss when pressing the mono button, then it really won't be an appreciable problem with the recording you're playing (at least with the state of your hearing).
 
vinyl1 said:
Never say never. Someday you will log onto Acoustic Sounds and see this:

"GENUINE MONO RECORDS! These reissues were mastered on vintage 1949 all-tube mono mastering console, lovingly restored by Professor Algernon Winburne-Smythe in his Cambridge studio. These reissues have U-shaped grooves and feature horizontal compliance only. They should be played only with a modern or restored vintage mono cartridge with a conical stylus.

These reissues have been pressed on virgin 200-gram vinyl, in a limited edition of 200 copies for each title. They are offered to subscribers only at a very reasonable price of $189.99 per LP. Sign up now to be sure you get each title; we expect that in the future, they will become valuable collector's items."

:D:D:D
Click to expand...

Even in such a situation a stereo cart will work fine, though a conical/spherical stylus would be recommended for best results.

illinoisteve said:
There was an economic aspect to the releasing of the same records in both mono and stereo. In the early '60s they sold the mono records for as much as a buck or two cheaper than they did the new-fangled stereo records. This was when you mailed a letter for 4 cents and a McDonalds hamburger cost 15 cents. Back then $1.50 more for the stereo version was REAL MONEY. And a lot of people still had working mono equipment, too. Even after they got their first stereo, they probably bought some mono records to save money. I'm not talking about audiophiles, but just plain folks who still had a black-and-white TV, too.
Click to expand...

My parents' records from that era are a hodge-podge of mono and stereo, mostly based on what the local record store had in stock.

illinoisteve said:
O, it's a grand old piece of machinery, Sam. I haven't listened to mine for a while. Fell in love with it when it came to me on a used Dual 1009. They were a beautiful match. I don't have the mono-conversion strap.
Click to expand...

One of my M3Ds came to me on a mono arm, with the strap in place. Another one (that I have since passed along) came with the original box, stylus guard, and the hardware still sealed in its plastic bag. It's just a little bit of stiff wire with a loop formed in each end to slide over the pins. If I remember where I stored the strap I still have, I'll take a picture of it sometime.
 
I have an nice old Shure 75-6 that I use for mono... I strapped the pins to make it mono. It does a nice job with these new Beatles LP's, and of course, the old originals too! One thing I have noticed on a couple of the new LP's when playing with a stereo cartridge that there are the occasional pops and clicks, but when using the 'mono' Shure, these are inaudible :) I don't hear any reduction in treble... they still sound full-frequency, but it does seem to eliminate background noise quite nicely. And with 78's and a 78 stylus, it makes a heck of difference to overall background noise!
So I guess the upshot is, a cheap cartridge can be adapted easily for mono only duties, and will give some benefit. In my experience. :)
 
I have a "mono" (Grado MC+) cartridge and it presents a perfectly fine stereo image when playing a stereo recording. I'm not sure what makes it "mono" unless its stylus profile is different that that of the "stereo" carts. Does anyone here know?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Johncan
Fairchild 412 and Microtek arm - what cartridge?
Replies
11
Views
2K
Johncan
Johncan
spotmaticf
Garrard Lab Type A for Mono LP and 78
Replies
4
Views
519
shsulli
S
T
Need Help with Thorens TD-147 and A-T cartridge
Replies
5
Views
571
tonysco
T
Azimuth
Should I get a conical stylus for mono records?
Replies
8
Views
609
jrtrent
J
T
Second headshell and cart for mono
Replies
12
Views
441
beatcomber
beatcomber
Back
Top Bottom