Mike Richter wrote:
Rob Bamberger wrote: > I seem to recall hearing in the early 1960s (when I was a mere youth > developing an instinct that would, in due course, mistrust a > civilization that could come up with reprocessed stereo) that playing > stereo pressings on a monophonic record player would harm the stereo LP. > Was this a myth? At some point, stereo LP covers indicated that they > were mono-compatible. Was the prior warning meant to discourage people > from playing stereo records with their older, heavily weighted tonearms > and mono cartridges that would chew up the stereo groove?
It was not a myth. Some monaural cartridges had so little vertical compliance that they would mash the difference signal out of existence in a few playings. AFAIK, "mono compatible" meant that after you did eliminate the vertical component, the horizontal (lateral) would still play adequately with the incompliant cartridge.
Note that the issue was not so much tracking force per se but compliance, displacement of the stylus assembly per unit of force applied.
Mike -- mrichter@xxxxxxx http://www.mrichter.com/
There were a few types of LP labelled "mono compatible". In the mid 60s (or earlier?), Mercury introduced the Wing label, reissuing a lot of mono pop and classical material in simulated stereo..the sound was ghastly in mono and stereo. I know there were a couple of other such labels, aside from Everest and Stereo Fidelity producing mono LPs which were actually pressed from the stereo stampers. In 1968 we began to see "playable on mono equipment" on virtually all stereo LP jackets because the companies finally phased out mono at that time, and we were told that the tone arms and cartridges were now compliant enough.
I have one Cook stereo lp (not binaural) that must have been cut with a 1-mil or 1-5 mil point, "A Double Barrel Blast"..that disc never sounded good on anything. Also wasn't terribly funny.
dl