At this point a personal unknown , And of course I cannot speak for Jeroen … Can you answer your own question ? Yourself not having owned or lived with either turntable or cartridge ?
Mono Cartridges
- Thread starter Asamel
- Start date
shouldn’t matter. I try to visit properly set up systems, so they have been there a few years. The badly set up ones sound far worse than the well set up of the same equipment. When you get something new, set up time is long. Listening is the easy part once things are set up.
You seem fixated upon spherical , wheras I also mentioned elliptical styli .
I seem to have to ask once again … Can you explain how a 0.7 width styli , not directly contacting and thereby transducing the side wall signal inscribed into said side wall of the mono pressing can feasibly be making better contact on that 1.0mil cut ?
How would you know this ? You have zero personal reference point , merely a series of random snapshots around the globe That either do or do not suit your own personal predilection !
Last edited:
what are you basing the 0.7 Vs 1.0 on apart from Miyajima hype and reading what some people have written on the forum? Have you done the compare of the two on the same table, and against multiple high end stereo carts, with the old monos?
because that’s what people new to an equipment take, when you repeat visit then you see how the system or table has changed over two years. And where people don’t try to change a well set up cartridge easily. Unless you are doing this day in and day out as a good set up business like Anamighty sound or something. And vyger the initial part takes time from all reports. Once you get familiar with it, fine.
ok, please tell us how you treat the label to make out original monos for testing purposes
Perhaps you should re - read , or read for the first time , the caviats contained within my initial post of the day on this whole subject.
Anyway let me know when you finish your experiments. And it you find it worth having separate mono to listen to instead of playing the mono on the RS.
Both will contact, but in different places. Spherical styli contact patch is the smallest, rising with various profiles.
Because modern stylus profiles have a triangular cross section. With the help of this triangular shape they can accommodate variable groove width. As you know modern profiles mainly used on stereo cartridges for stereo records which have variable groove width due to out of phase signals. Normal width of stereo groove is 18um (0.7mil) but it's not constant it varies and modern profiles are made to conform this situation. Otherwise they can't track stereo records. When groove gets wider stylus gets in the groove more increasing contact area and when groove gets narrower the opposite happens. There is not much of a difference between 18um and 25um which modern stylus profile can easily accommodate. On the other hand spherical has fixed width/diameter and can not conform varying groove width as good as modern counterparts.
Last edited:
if Miya mono is 0.7 for reissues and 1.0 for first press, sumile is only 0.65 mil? So they don’t believe in optimal for first press by that theory?
But only in the lower microns section of the cut … for simplicity sake … the bottom third of the cut where the narrower 0.7 profile is making contact with the side wall fine … but what about the 2/3rds of the signal imbedded within the upper two thirds of the cut where the narrower stylus profile is not making optimal contact ?
As I have already said … In the fullness of time I will be able to answer that question to my own satisfaction via real world A/B comparison with the TWRS on Vyger Indian IV Sig … It most certainly wont take decades
If it helps, a record collector who sold off his stereo recordings was recommending vintage ortofon mono with type A and G headshells... never tried.
he had tannoy silvers made in the mono era and sold off over 5000 stereo LPs and just listened to mono. Never heard the system but has chatted with him
he had tannoy silvers made in the mono era and sold off over 5000 stereo LPs and just listened to mono. Never heard the system but has chatted with him
Imho what is a more interesting question is if a mono cart with no vertical compliance ( often of the vertical shaft generator topology ) can yield better results than a modern MC topology ( regardless of how it's wired )...
You probably mixed things up. Whatever you said above is only true for spherical 0.7 mil. I'm not advocating spherical 0.7 mil or 1.0 mil.
The illustration you shared compares sphericals. Modern stylus profiles (micro ridge, shibata, micro line, line contact, replicant 100, Fritz Gyger, van den hul etc) are very different with their bigger contact area. Unlike spherical which is in contact at two points with groove walls modern profiles are in contact almost up to the top at wider area. Modern profiles are not narrow. They are wide but very thin triangular shapes while spherical is both thick and narrow with it's geometrical constrain, fixed radius. Please check stylus profiles because you are still comparing sphericals in each other while I'm totally advocating modern profiles from the beginning.
Last edited:
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |