Integrated Amplifier with a Mono switch

[Happy_Listner]

Does anyone know of any modern day integrated amps that have a Mono switch?

I just got the Beetles LP Box Set in Mono. After the fact, I just realized I don't have a Mono cartridge or even a Mono switch on my amp. I can play the records fine but either the cartridge or the switch would make these great recordings sound at their best.

On that note, does anyone even know if a Mono switch would suffice or would only a true mono phono cartiridge do the trick? I don't really want to have to switch out cartridges all the time.

Just when you think you know almost everything about Audio a new question like this pops up. At least it keeps things interesting.

 

[Al ears]

Good thing to bring up before others become, unfortunately, caught up in the mono hype.

There are, as far as I know, very few affordable integrated amps with a mono button. There is a possibility of adding a moving magnet phono preamp with a mono button like the Graham Slee Era Reflex Gold but this approach can also be expensive (approx. £450).

Although mono records can be played with a stereo cartridge ultimately the best way to hear them as they are meant to be heard is to by a mon cartridge (this will be the cheapest way). This is why Ortofon designed the 2M Mono cartridge to go with this box set (£250).

Of course you could just sell on the Beatles mono box set and buy the stereo version *bye*

 

[Happy_Listner]

Thanks Al.

Yes, but this is the newer special Mono Box Beetles version. Meaning it was recorded using the original Master Analgue Tapes and even using the original technicians notes in the recording process. This is a TRUE Analogue to Analogue copy. That is why it so talked about.

The past versions, like the most recent Stereo version, and the last Mono version, were recorded from the Digital Copies of the Master Analogue Tapes. What is the point of listening to an Analogue LP if it is a pressed recording from Digital files? Also, recorded and equalized not as the Beatles intended. I already have the Stereo Beatles CD Box Set for that.

Cheers

 

[chebby]

Although mono records can be played with a stereo cartridge ultimately the best way to hear them as they are meant to be heard is to by a mon cartridge (this will be the cheapest way). This is why Ortofon designed the 2M Mono cartridge to go with this box set (£250).

http://ortofon.com/hifi/products/cartridges/2m-series/2m-mono-se

Only available from Ortofon web shops. USA web shop $650 + postage ...

http://www.ortofon.us/product_buy?pid=309&category_id=36

€499 from their European web shop ...

http://ortofon-shop.com/shop/dj?page=shop.browse&category_id=79

 

[Happy_Listner]

Hi Chebby,

Yeah I saw that Ortofon Mono 2M SE Cartridge. They said they made it in honor of the new Beatles Mono box set. But at $650 all I can say is ouch! I am sure it sounds great but my Box Set cost me $375. Adding another $650, mainly just for that, would be getting to be too much. The $650 could be worth it for some, but I only have that Beatles box set and then a few other Mono records around so it's hard to justify. Plus, I think it wouldn't be too fun changing entire cartridges around just for a few records. I wish I had (could afford) two turntables or better yet one with dual arms!

Anyways, thanks for the Nagaoka MP110 cartridge mono stylus idea. So I can just pop in and out the stylus front without taking the entire cartridge off? That would be pretty cool! Do you know of it only works with the MP110? I'm wondering if I could buy a nicer MP-500 and then do the same?

Cheers

 

[Happy_Listner]

I have one more question for you guys I just thought of. So If I bought a Mono Cartridge what does it then mean when I play it through a Stereo integrated amplifier? Is the sound still not optimal if I don't have a Mono switch on the Amp?

 

[chebby]

Anyways, thanks for the Nagaoka MP110 cartridge mono stylus idea. So I can just pop in and out the stylus front without taking the entire cartridge off? That would be pretty cool!

I edited and removed references to the Nagaoka mono stylus because it is made for old (original) mono LP recordings from pre 1968 and may not suit modern mono LP pressings.

It seems the whole 2.0 mm vs 1.0 mm issue is a bit of a debate in itself (and that's just regarding old mono LPs not modern ones) and there was a good likelehood i'd have recommended something sub-optimal for your specific need. (Beatles box-set.)

 

[Jim-W]

The OP is absolutely right to be consideing an amp with a mono button but, as far as I know, there are no modern integrateds with said function. For what it's worth, I use older integrated amps or pre-amps with mono buttons such as the NAD 3020, NAD 3130 and QUAD 34/306. The NADs can be had cheaply and, additionally, they have excellent phono stages; on the other hand, the QUAD stuff still commands a relatively high price but, for those used to a modern and in yer face presentation, they can sound somewhat woolly and ill-defined.

Simply put, the mono button acts to reduce background noise as it combines the two channels into one signal which helps to reduce extraneous background noise. Much of this background noise was produced by the way in which the records were cut; this is certainly evident on older, pre-stereo records from the 50's and 60's, but I'm wondering if modern record production may eliminate this and, hence, the need for a mno button with newer records. In other words, the new Beatles box may sound perfectly good without a mono button as there may well be no extraneous noise. I really don't know, but it's an interesting thought.

As for ;mono hype' Al, well, I'm sure that you're well aware that greater care was taken with mono mixes than with the stereo which was often an afterthought for the nerds and geeks with these here new-fangled stereo record players. As overdubbing was frequently done live, there are often sonic variations too, ie a different guitar solo or vocal. For us 60's freaks, finding a mono copy of 'Their Satanic Majesties' or 'Mr Fantasy' and hearing the different mixes is ridiculously pleasurable. Yep, it's sad but oh so true.

 

[Al ears]

Spam blocked when trying to quote chebbys reply.

The cartridge I was referring to was the 2M Mono rather than Ortofon's moneygrabbing 2M mono SE. The 2M mono is available online for £240.

 

[Al ears]

The OP is absolutely right to be consideing an amp with a mono button but, as far as I know, there are no modern integrateds with said function. For what it's worth, I use older integrated amps or pre-amps with mono buttons such as the NAD 3020, NAD 3130 and QUAD 34/306. The NADs can be had cheaply and, additionally, they have excellent phono stages; on the other hand, the QUAD stuff still commands a relatively high price but, for those used to a modern and in yer face presentation, they can sound somewhat woolly and ill-defined.

Simply put, the mono button acts to reduce background noise as it combines the two channels into one signal which helps to reduce extraneous background noise. Much of this background noise was produced by the way in which the records were cut; this is certainly evident on older, pre-stereo records from the 50's and 60's, but I'm wondering if modern record production may eliminate this and, hence, the need for a mno button with newer records. In other words, the new Beatles box may sound perfectly good without a mono button as there may well be no extraneous noise. I really don't know, but it's an interesting thought.

As for ;mono hype' Al, well, I'm sure that you're well aware that greater care was taken with mono mixes than with the stereo which was often an afterthought for the nerds and geeks with these here new-fangled stereo record players. As overdubbing was frequently done live, there are often sonic variations too, ie a different guitar solo or vocal. For us 60's freaks, finding a mono copy of 'Their Satanic Majesties' or 'Mr Fantasy' and hearing the different mixes is ridiculously pleasurable. Yep, it's sad but oh so true.

I predate you somewhat and have quite a few mono pressings myself.

The 'hype' I was referring to was one particular Beatles Box set that was launched recently that has lured the unsuspecting into buying it when they don't have the equipment to play it on. ...... Buyer beware and all that. G'day to you. *biggrin*

 

[Jim-W]

Oh ok. Apologies. I thought that you were referring to the current spat of mono reissues and the hyping of mono in general; I mean it's certainly a way of extracting more money from the punters which is what I thought you meant.

My main point is that he may have the equipment to play it on as recording techniques may eliminate the background noise that necessitated a mono button...at least those new Beatles records should sound pretty good via modern tts, amps and speakers.

'I predate you somewhat.' Then you must be very old indeed.

Cheers.

 

[Happy_Listner]

I'm a one year old Turntable newbie and I was lured into the "hype" of this Beatles Box set. I assumed it was ready to go until a friend asked me if I had a Mono cartridge. Ummm? All I said was no, ah, do I need one?

So now I will take this on as a challenge to learn somethings new and even perhaps find ways of getting into listening to Mono records properly. It seems like there is a lot to learn...

I found a demo Mcintosh MA6300 and I see a Mono button on the front. It's pricey but I am sure it's good.

 

[Al ears]

I'm a one year old Turntable newbie and I was lured into the "hype" of this Beatles Box set. I assumed it was ready to go until a friend asked me if I had a Mono cartridge. Ummm? All I said was no, ah, do I need one?

So now I will take this on as a challenge to learn somethings new and even perhaps find ways of getting into listening to Mono records properly. It seems like there is a lot to learn...

I found a demo Mcintosh MA6300 and I see a Mono button on the front. It's pricey but I am sure it's good.

I'm sure the McIntosh is very nice but you do not really need it.

All you need is a Mono cartridge and the 'mono button' on the amp becomes irrelevent. If you want to hear that lovely Beatles collection in all it's mono glory then just buy the Ortofon mono cartridge. It is going to mean a bit of cartridge swapping ( which is why most people with a lot of mono recordings have a tonearm with removeable headshell) but it is ultimately the cheapest way to go.

 

[stevebrock]

Only stylus / bodies are interchangable with the MP110, MP150, MP200

 

[Happy_Listner]

Al,

So would a mono button achieve the same results as a mono cartridge?

Does a mono cartridge truly make a mono button irrelavant or is there any advatage to using it in conjunction with the mono cartridge?

Thanks

 

[Jim-W]

I was wondering if they'd used a mono head cutter on these new pressings and I assumed that they wouldn't; a mono head cutter would necessitate a mono cart but, it turns out that they used a Neumann SX 74 which is a stereo cutting head. It follows then that these records will contain two identical stereo channels rather than one mono channel. You can, therefore, play these records on modern stereo equipment and they'll sound fine and, more to the point, they'll produce a decent mono image without the need to faff about with mono carts and buttons. Whether this is genuine mono is another matter entirely.

 

[davedotco]

I was wondering if they'd used a mono head cutter on these new pressings and I assumed that they wouldn't; a mono head cutter would necessitate a mono cart but, it turns out that they used a Neumann SX 74 which is a stereo cutting head. It follows then that these records will contain two identical stereo channels rather than one mono channel. You can, therefore, play these records on modern stereo equipment and they'll sound fine and, more to the point, they'll produce a decent mono image without the need to faff about with mono carts and buttons. Whether this is genuine mono is another matter entirely.

I was about to ask if anyone knew the details of how they were cut and this answers my question perfectly. Should work fine with a stereo cartridge as althogh mono, it has in effect been cut in stereo. Good compromise i think.

For those of you wondering what all the fuss is about with this mono vs stereo lark, one album that I revisited recently is a great demonstrator of the differences in these 60s recordings.

Go onto Spotify and find the 'Delux Edition' of the Bluesbreakers album, all the original tracks are there in both mono and stereo. Have a listen, see what you think.

PS. I am sure there are plenty of other albums to try but I found this quite interesting.

 

[Jim-W]

I read your comment with interest, davedotco; I've got both mono and stereo copies of this record and there are quite obvious sonic differences. Primarily, mono adds bass weight, thumping drums and Clapton's incandescent solos burn very brightly; there's also a real understanding of a band playing together.I quite like the stereo though: it sounds a little more sophisticated with instruments spread across the spectrum but it lacks the powerful focus of the mono. John Mayall hated the stereo, maintaining it was meant to be heard in mono. Traffic's 'Mr Fantasy' and a fair few other late 60's records have different guitar solos, vocal takes etc on the mono/stereo. The only 60's gem I prefer in stereo is The Pretty Things 'S F Sorrow' which sounds far more adventurous and exciting in stereo, the mono being rather dull and lifeless for some reason.

On the subject of The Beatles, 'She's Leaving Home' is, of course, only heard properly in mono as the varispeeding on the stereo is just bonkers: it plays at a very slow speed. Similarly, 'Rubber Soul' is horrible in stereo with its voice/instrument stark channel separation. On the other hand, the White Album sounds fine in both mono and stereo...I think they'd got to grips with mixing for stereo by 1968.

 

[Tzutzu]

Here is the answer Michael Fremer gave to the question "will these records sound ok if played using a stereo cartridge?"

"They will sound fine through a stereo cartridge but much quieter and with more stable and solid images through a mono cartridge OR if you have a mono switch on your preamp or phono preamp or if "Y" the cables: plug the stereo pair into a "Y" cable, plug the male out into a female "Y" connector with a pair of male outputs. You might lose a bit through the multiple connectors but you'll hear the value of a mono switch and/or a mono cartridge."

 

[davedotco]

I read your comment with interest, davedotco; I've got both mono and stereo copies of this record and there are quite obvious sonic differences. Primarily, mono adds bass weight, thumping drums and Clapton's incandescent solos burn very brightly; there's also a real understanding of a band playing together.I quite like the stereo though: it sounds a little more sophisticated with instruments spread across the spectrum but it lacks the powerful focus of the mono. John Mayall hated the stereo, maintaining it was meant to be heard in mono. Traffic's 'Mr Fantasy' and a fair few other late 60's records have different guitar solos, vocal takes etc on the mono/stereo. The only 60's gem I prefer in stereo is The Pretty Things 'S F Sorrow' which sounds far more adventurous and exciting in stereo, the mono being rather dull and lifeless for some reason.

On the subject of The Beatles, 'She's Leaving Home' is, of course, only heard properly in mono as the varispeeding on the stereo is just bonkers: it plays at a very slow speed. Similarly, 'Rubber Soul' is horrible in stereo with its voice/instrument stark channel separation. On the other hand, the White Album sounds fine in both mono and stereo...I think they'd got to grips with mixing for stereo by 1968.

Some of the 60s recordings are very interesting, there are clearly different mixes at work here not just stereo vs mono. I an not that well informed in this area, the Bluesbreakers album was one that was thrown up by my iPod as it was playing two versions of each song and the differences were very noticeable.

I am not a Beatles fan so can not comment on the other examples but this is an area that I might investigate at some point.

 

[davedotco]

Here is the answer Michael Fremer gave to the question "will these records sound ok if played using a stereo cartridge?"

"They will sound fine through a stereo cartridge but much quieter and with more stable and solid images through a mono cartridge OR if you have a mono switch on your preamp or phono preamp or if "Y" the cables: plug the stereo pair into a "Y" cable, plug the male out into a female "Y" connector with a pair of male outputs. You might lose a bit through the multiple connectors but you'll hear the value of a mono switch and/or a mono cartridge."

Strictly speaking the new Beatles records are not mono, they are stereo records cut with an identical signal on each channel. This is not hair splitting, it does make a difference. This makes it more compatible with modern 'stereo' players but is not true mono.

The practical result is that a proper mono switch on the amplifier is probably more important than a mono cartridge though to be quite sure about this I would like to have hands on and try some alternatives, sadly not going to happen as I no longer have access to the required equipment.

 

[Jim-W]

I agree, dave. They're produced for modern record players with stereo cartridges and their mono credentials are a little suspect. I also agree that the mono switch is more important than a mono cartridge since they're cut for 2 channels, albeit identical ones. I'm not putting the process down; I think it was the right thing to do in terms of offering mono records to today's market. Some of us older dudes may have headshells with mono carts but to aim for that market would be rather limiting in terms of sales. I think what they've done is perfectly acceptable. I'd like to hear them back-to-back with mono originals though. sadly, I won't because although I'd like the book and the packaging, I don't need the records.

 

[Happy_Listner]

Thanks everyone, this is a really interesting discussion. I guess this still leaves me with many questions.

Firstly, I am wondering if these new Beatles records were cut in true mono then would that make a difference in sound quality? Of course when using a mono cartridge.

Secondly, I am still trying to get an answer to my original question. Maybe someone can explain it for me? Perhaps it has an obvious answer, but I just want to make sure. So If I am using a mono cartridge and the signal is going into a stereo preamp does a mono button make any difference to the sound?

 

[Jim-W]

I think that these questions are just too difficult to answer without listening to the sound and making your mind up. I don't really think it's that important. Tell you what though, they'll sound a million times better than listening to them on a tinny transistor radio or a barely adequate mono speaker on an old dansette which is the way I, and many others, first heard them. Anyway, the box of nice new, good-quality and unscratched lps will be a damn sight cheaper than paying for the originals. On the other hand, I love the scratches, clicks and pops of authenticity.

 

[davedotco]

Thanks everyone, this is a really interesting discussion. I guess this still leaves me with many questions.

Firstly, I am wondering if these new Beatles records were cut in true mono then would that make a difference in sound quality? Of course when using a mono cartridge.

Secondly, I am still trying to get an answer to my original question. Maybe someone can explain it for me? Perhaps it has an obvious answer, but I just want to make sure. So If I am using a mono cartridge and the signal is going into a stereo preamp does a mono button make any difference to the sound?

There are too many variables hear to give a definitive answer.

"True mono" recordings are modulated laterally (in the horizontal plain) and designed to be played with a true mono cartridge which has no vertical compliance. I doubt if such a cartridge is even made these days, it would also only output a single channel so you would need either a mono amp or a stereo amp with comprehensive mono switching facilities, a simple mono button would not be enough.

All in all I think the record company have, for once, taken the right option. the records should sound pretty good in stereo, may be better if your amp can switch to mono. Buying a modern, dedicated mono cartridge looks like overkill in this instance.