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
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.
chakster, When I mention vinyl from the 1940's, I'm actually referring to that period of time where shellac changes to vinyl but exactly when, I don't know for certain. I do have some very early vinyl. As for my phono stage, I have an ASR mini basis exclusive phono amp which is  perfect for all playback.
pryso,

 The Ortofon Cadenza mono makes claim for being ideal for any type of mono vinyl despite the era, however it is still questionable as to whether or not the Ortofon is simply just a strapped mono cartridge.

I'm afraid I can't see myself affording a Lyra anytime soon though yes, that would be ideal. I don't understand Lyra's stylus description or why it's different;

    Kleos

Stylus: Lyra-designed long-footprint variable-radius line-contact nude diamond (3um x 70um), slot-mounted

I bought a mono cartridge about a year ago and still haven't mounted it, because I am so pleased with the results using just the mono mode switch on either of my two preamplifiers.  This also tells me that an internally bridged stereo cartridge might be just fine.  For hairsplitters and purists, I suppose one must have a bona fide true mono cartridge.  One guy even claimed you need BOTH a true mono cartridge AND a mono mode switch for best results.
I bought a Shelter 501 mk2 mono. Does anyone know how it produces a mono signal?  I presume it might well be an internally bridged version of their stereo equivalent.  I'm not losing sleep.
lewm,

I have neither a mono switch on my ASR amp nor my entry ASR phono stage, so that's out of the question. It was suggested in my earlier post on this sight (Which mono cartridge under $1,200.00) that I look for a true mono cartridge. I went from a strapped mid level Grado to the AT 33 mono and I prefer the AT.