2. analog
  3. 150194-1294

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!
goofyfoot
intactaudio
293 posts
 
How exactly are mono records cut with a stereo cutterhead any different from those cut with a mono cutterhead?  The only difference I am aware of is the groove width / depth but the cutting stylus and groove profile is a "V" for both.

dave
hdm
1,055 posts
 
"If you're expecting 850-1000 hrs from a well polished nude conical Denon tip then how many hrs do you expect from Shibata or MicroRidge?"

My expectations, based on my experience, would be as follows:

1) 850-1000 out of a high quality nude conical.

2) 2,000-2,500 hours out of a high quality line contact or microridge.

Note the words "high quality". Not all conicals are created equal any more than all line contacts or microline styli are created equal.

But I have put those kinds of hours on a Denon 103R before retipping it, with no ill effects (and the cartridge still sounded good when retired) as well as the higher number on a couple of decent cartridges with good quality line contact and microline styli.

This assumes both:

1) playing vinyl that is both in very good condition and very clean

&

2) careful cueing practices
chakster's avatar
chakster
6,144 posts
 
1) 850-1000 out of a high quality nude conical.

2) 2,000-2,500 hours out of a high quality line contact or microridge.

This is overestimated so much in my opinion, especially for nude high quality conical.

in my vision it is more or less like that:

300 conical

400-500 elliptical

600-800 shibata and line contact

1500-2000 for some micro ridge and microline

up to 2500 only for some exotic profiles like Replicant-100 or Gyger, VdH

chakster's avatar
chakster
6,144 posts
 
@goofyfoot 

Actually chakster, you're reiterating the dilemma. The post is about finding a stylus that works optimally with both 1940's /50's mono and mono reissues. The fact that a conical stylus is suited for early mono records is something that, I believe, we've gotten past. The discussion is about a stylus and cartridge that works for both old and new.

Sorry i have no experience in mono records from the 40's era. 

But i think you can get much better sound and overall better usability (long life span) with modern profiles playing new mono reissues or vintage mono from the 60's/70's. This is exactly what modern manufacturers recommend. I think you need at least two different mono cartridges or just two different mono styli (in case with mono mm cart) for records from the different era. You also need a phono stage with different RIAA curve for very old mono records as far as i know. The Gold Note phono stage has various RIAA curves. 


pryso
1,905 posts
 
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.
More to discover