Mono recordings


What's the attraction of mono recordings? I have a couple CDs (Pet Sounds  and Cream e.g.) that contain both stereo and mono tracks and a couple mono lps (using a stereo cartridge). I always prefer the stereo cut. What am I missing?
rockyboy
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