Jim Audiomisc
pfm Member
So they rely on the coil resistances to minimise each coil treating the other as a motor?
Making Mono - When Two Become One ?
- Thread starter Big Tabs
- Start date
So they rely on the coil resistances to minimise each coil treating the other as a motor?
Jim Audiomisc
pfm Member
Must confess that when I want 'mono' from an old mono LP I do a digital capture and convert that to mono. Most obvious 'improvement' tends to be that any spits or pops on one channel get reduced by 6dB. (Although the stereo means they are also easy to edit away entirely. 
) No wires were harmed in the process. 8-]
) No wires were harmed in the process. 8-]
windhoek
The Phoolosopher
We have achieved mono! I tried strapping and wiring in reverse as it was damn fiddly trying to get two pairs of straps at the headshell end but all I got from that was mono from the right channel only. I just spent about an hour or so strapping as per big tab's diagram (maintaining isolation between straps was just as tricky as getting the straps on in the first place) and I've now got a solid picture in mono, as it were.
I'm currently playing my Blue Train mono reissue (it's not worth anything other than what the music has to offer) and I'm inclined to think it sounds markedly better than it does using a stereo cart. Fwiw, I've put my ML stylus on the VM95E body as suggested.
I'm not sure what I'll do long term. I could always solder straps in place and make that headshell-cart combo a dedicated mono solution, obviously I'd need to change stylus tips at some point but that's no problem with a VM cart. For now, I'll play my three mono records and see how it goes, see whether it's worth doing something better or whether I should just sell my mono records and stick with stereo. We'll see.
I'm currently playing my Blue Train mono reissue (it's not worth anything other than what the music has to offer) and I'm inclined to think it sounds markedly better than it does using a stereo cart. Fwiw, I've put my ML stylus on the VM95E body as suggested.
I'm not sure what I'll do long term. I could always solder straps in place and make that headshell-cart combo a dedicated mono solution, obviously I'd need to change stylus tips at some point but that's no problem with a VM cart. For now, I'll play my three mono records and see how it goes, see whether it's worth doing something better or whether I should just sell my mono records and stick with stereo. We'll see.
Big Tabs
looking backwards, going forwards
I am glad you managed it. It took me ages, lots of bright light and swearing. At the time I did it, it all made sense, and I think it sounds distinctly better.
I have about 20+ mono L.P’s and I tend to put the mono cartridge on my second deck for a day or two and session the mono albums. I have some mono 7” Singles that sound great as well.
Takes me less than 5 mins to swap the headshells and set the tracking weight, the bias settings are about the same.
@windhoek maybe it depends a little on how you travel through your music? I tend to play an artist or type of music for a few days/ a week, then get pulled in a different direction emotionally so move on. My ‘Mono’ fix comes around every few months.
Having the choice is the positive.
windhoek
The Phoolosopher
Yeah, having had a chance to play some mono, I think it's worth having a proper mono solution rather than just using a stereo cart as I'd been doing. The upside about having a Technics deck is it only takes a couple of minutes to swap headshells. Compared to my usual cart/headshell, the tracking force needs to be 0.5 less as the AT headshell is heavier than the Technics one, and antiskate needs a wee adjustment as well but apart from that, it's practically plug and play.
paulfromcamden
Baffled
Very sensible approach if you want a digital copy. Not necessarily the most convenient if you just want to put your feet up of an evening and listen to some old records ;-)
Jim Audiomisc
pfm Member
The bulk of my 'feet up' listening is to a system connected to my NAS and a machine loaded with many files - inc homemade transfers of many of my old LPs. Means I can also tidy away any clicks or pops before listening.
TBH These days my record deck and cassette deck are in a different room to where I sit and listen.
Also very convenient when I'm working in the kitchen and use a DAP or feed to speakers there.
Still have loads of LPs to do, though. Probably never finish as I'm getting on.
Means I can also tidy away any clicks or pops before listening.TBH These days my record deck and cassette deck are in a different room to where I sit and listen.
Also very convenient when I'm working in the kitchen and use a DAP or feed to speakers there.
Still have loads of LPs to do, though. Probably never finish as I'm getting on.
Jim Audiomisc
pfm Member
A mono cartridge for mono LPs may often make good sense. I confess I do wonder a bit about the review measurements of many modern stereo carts that show (fairly) flat L and R responses - but V and H responses that are much less flat. Seems to be a case of the L and R 'averaging' quite different V and H responses. If so, implies the response varies with the L/R ratio. Odd that this is rarely mentioned or considered... or have I missed something?
I expect the V and H compliances and perhaps tip masses to differ. But would think flat all round is optimum. (?)
I expect the V and H compliances and perhaps tip masses to differ. But would think flat all round is optimum. (?)
Craig B
Re:trophile
Would this have to do with mutual inductance, Jim?
It used to be quite common for cartridge makers to list separate V and H compliance figures, however, I haven't noticed this for a very long time. Shure published V and H static at 4 x 10-6 cm/dyne for M3D, for example; this starting back in 1958.
I don't recall ever seeing separate frequency response plots for V vs. H, though. Regardless, I'll have a trawl through the 'archives' to refresh my memory.