Effect of stylus type on playback of VG mono record

periclimenes

periclimenes

Active Member
Hello. I recently became curious about the effect (if any) of the stylus profile and size on the playback of older mono records. My understanding is that early mono LPs were cut and intended to be played back with 1 mil conical styli. I had been using a Grado Black on my turntable and was looking to try a new cartridge, so I picked up a Nagaoka MP-110 (which has an 0.4x0.7 elliptical diamond), a JN-P100 stylus (0.6 mil conical), an N-MP 1.0 stylus (1.0 mil conical), and an N-MP 2.0 stylus (2.0 mil conical). If you are interested in the results, here is a recording of So What from a VG 1st Dutch mono pressing of Kind of Blue using each stylus. None of these have had any sort of break-in period. Please weigh in and share your thoughts!

Elliptical

0.6 Conical

1.0 Conical

2.0 Conical
 
"My understanding is..." I wish people would cite authoritative sources sometime, and I don't mean Michael Fremer or The Absolute Sound.
I play my old mono LP's and 45's with modern elliptical styli with no issues whatsoever.
 
My experience has been that with some exceptions vintage mono records play back best with conical styli. 1 mil is best for NM records but they are more prone to skip if any damage is present. That's why I also keep a .07 mil conical for VG/VG+ records. I can think of one case, a Brenda Lee mono LP I have that skips all over the place with both conicals but doesn't skip once with my AT150Mlx.
 
Poinzy said:
"My understanding is..." I wish people would cite authoritative sources sometime, and I don't mean Michael Fremer or The Absolute Sound.
I play my old mono LP's and 45's with modern elliptical styli with no issues whatsoever.
Click to expand...
Hello. I wasn't suggesting I had experienced any problem. I was just curious and thought others might be interested to hear the same cartridge with different styli. I'm sorry that I'm not able to cite a publication or original manufacturer data regarding the available styli profiles in the 1950s.
 
periclimenes said:
Hello. I recently became curious about the effect (if any) of the stylus profile and size on the playback of older mono records. My understanding is that early mono LPs were cut and intended to be played back with 1 mil conical styli. I had been using a Grado Black on my turntable and was looking to try a new cartridge, so I picked up a Nagaoka MP-110 (which has an 0.4x0.7 elliptical diamond), a JN-P100 stylus (0.6 mil conical), an N-MP 1.0 stylus (1.0 mil conical), and an N-MP 2.0 stylus (2.0 mil conical). If you are interested in the results, here is a recording of So What from a VG 1st Dutch mono pressing of Kind of Blue using each stylus. None of these have had any sort of break-in period. Please weigh in and share your thoughts!

Elliptical

0.6 Conical

1.0 Conical

2.0 Conical
Click to expand...

How well was this record cleaned before you made the samples?
 
Poinzy said:
"My understanding is..." I wish people would cite authoritative sources sometime, and I don't mean Michael Fremer or The Absolute Sound.
I play my old mono LP's and 45's with modern elliptical styli with no issues whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Who is an "authoritative source" on this subject? Somebody else who has done what the OP did? :dunno:
 
Mr.White said:
How well was this record cleaned before you made the samples?
Click to expand...
Great question! The record was ultrasonically cleaned using the solution from the infamous "record cleaning - you're doing it wrong!" thread, followed by two rinse cycles on a vacuum cleaning setup.
 
I gain the same increase with mono as I do with Stereo Lps by using modern cartridges with sophisticated stylus shapes and cantilevers. Would install old bias ply tires on your Porsche or Hyundai and expect the same performance you receive from low profile radial tires. You get what you pay for if you are a wise shopper. Remember there is a succor born every minute.
 
twiiii said:
I gain the same increase with mono as I do with Stereo Lps by using modern cartridges with sophisticated stylus shapes and cantilevers. Would install old bias ply tires on your Porsche or Hyundai and expect the same performance you receive from low profile radial tires. You get what you pay for if you are a wise shopper. Remember there is a succor born every minute.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense. An item that is not made for the job may perform the job to a certain degree but that doesn't magically make it made for the job. There is a reason why the clip in the OP with the most groove noise is the elliptical. It's the shape of the stylus. An elliptical stylus because of it's shape is going to ride closer to the bottom of a mono groove [and what dirt is there] in a way that a conical cannot. Shape and size also comes into play adversely in the last clip of the 2mil. It's too big for the 1mil groove. It's not tracing the walls properly [music is fainter] and it's actually picking up additional noise at the very surface that the correct [1mil] or smaller [0.6mil] avoided.

I can't tell you how many perfectly good mono LPs I gave away because I thought old monos just sounded bad and gave up. It was the elliptical stylus I was using, not the records themselves. Summing the channels also helps reduce SN. .
 
Mr.White said:
That makes no sense. An item that is not made for the job may perform the job to a certain degree but that doesn't magically make it made for the job. There is a reason why the clip in the OP with the most groove noise is the elliptical. It's the shape of the stylus. An elliptical stylus because of it's shape is going to ride closer to the bottom of a mono groove [and what dirt is there] in a way that a conical cannot. Shape and size also comes into play adversely in the last clip of the 2mil. It's too big for the 1mil groove. It's not tracing the walls properly [music is fainter] and it's actually picking up additional noise at the very surface that the correct [1mil] or smaller [0.6mil] avoided.

I can't tell you how many perfectly good mono LPs I gave away because I thought old monos just sounded bad and gave up. It was the elliptical stylus I was using, not the records themselves. Summing the channels also helps reduce SN. .
Click to expand...
In case anyone is wondering, these clips have the channels summed, which did make a noticeable difference in reducing the surface noise.
 
I prefer the .6 mil conical over the others, it sounds more natural to me. I don't understand the use of a 2 mil tip on a "LP".
 
malden said:
I prefer the .6 mil conical over the others, it sounds more natural to me. I don't understand the use of a 2 mil tip on a "LP".
Click to expand...
The 2 mil was experiment mostly to see what would happen. I had read a few articles that a larger conical might "ride above" groove wear. Clearly, if this is possible, 2 mil is way too big for this particular record.
 
twiiii said:
I gain the same increase with mono as I do with Stereo Lps by using modern cartridges with sophisticated stylus shapes and cantilevers. Would install old bias ply tires on your Porsche or Hyundai and expect the same performance you receive from low profile radial tires. You get what you pay for if you are a wise shopper. Remember there is a succor born every minute.
Click to expand...

And with sophisticated stylus shapes there's no benefit and often exacerbated surface noise, out of band surface noise you don't want. Sometimes less is more, remember said record won't carry more than 15-18 Kilohertz of frequency response anyway, so why enjoy out of band surface noise which intrudes on the music you want. I keep the line contacts and the Shibata and other such tips for modern audiophile pressings where they make a difference in the sonics. I get the conical and .3 x .7 or .4 x .7 elliptical tips out when I want to play vintage discs in typical condition. The archivist's perspective, the broadcast engineer, and the vintage record collector who specializes in such records for me matters more than the no holds barred audiophile who uses the too forensic stylus profile for every record.
 
Mr.White said:
There is a reason why the clip in the OP with the most groove noise is the elliptical. It's the shape of the stylus.
Click to expand...

Strange - the elliptical had the LEAST surface noise to my ears.

And the record sounds like it needs a good scrubbing and vacuum with my shop vac.

Thanks for posting these files.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

periclimenes
  • Poll
(another) stylus profile comparison - Miles Ahead
Replies
4
Views
274
periclimenes
periclimenes
plbeard
Nagaoka for Lp Mono, N-MP1.0--user reports?
Replies
0
Views
243
plbeard
plbeard
beatcomber
The truth about Grado's MC+ and ME+ mono cartridges
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
8K
sberger
sberger
ranf1970
Elliptical vs. Conical Stylus
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
Reticuli
R
beatcomber
Shure M78S + N25C stylus for mono?
Replies
0
Views
860
beatcomber
beatcomber
Back
Top Bottom