Monaural LPs: Are They Worth Anything?

In the world of LP collecting, anything is fair play.  LPs were a common format back in their day, and were developed to overcome the short playing time of the 78RPM shellac discs of the day which, in their 10″ configuration, were only capable of about three minutes of music.  And when LPs first arrived, they were only available in monaural, and it took about 10 years for that to be replaced by stereo on a regular basis.  The short answer to my own question is:  “Yes.”  But, why?

Monaural records still have an appeal to many collectors.  Completists, of course, want every available version of a record that was released, so of course they’d want monaural, stereo and quadraphonic LPs  if their favorite artist every released anything in those formats.  But, collectors of an artist’s music are more likely to find value in those mono LPs.  There are reasons for this.

When stereo LPs were released, engineers discovered that they could create a fake stereo effect through a few different means.  They could use a comb filter, which sent different frequencies from the mono signal to each channel; this gave the sound a weird, phasey sound that ended up shifting a lot of the bass to one channel and treble to the other.  At other times, they would use a lot of reverb to give a false sense of depth.  Or, they would use both.  This was done to recordings that were only ever released in mono, as there was no stereo master tape to create an album from, and usually no multitrack tape to create a new stereo mix from.  So, why did they do it?  It was a great way to sell older catalog titles to the newfangled “stereo” crowd.  If you want to hear the true sound of a mono recording, buy a mono version of the LP.  If the cover says “Duophonic”, “Electronically reprocessed for stereo”, or anything similar, leave it in the bin!

When the stereo era came along, a lot of buyers still owned mono equipment that could not play stereo LPs without damaging them.  (See below.)  So, the record companies had to release two versions of each LP:  stereo, and mono.  In many cases, the mono mixes are unique, having a different balance of instruments and voices than their stereo counterpart.  A mono copy of the Beatles’ Sgt. Pepper has many differences that are easy to pick out, for example.  And in the 60s, many companies still felt the mono mixes were the definitive version; at A&M, most of Herb Alpert’s Tijuana Brass albums were mixed to mono by engineer Larry Levine, where Herb himself mixed the stereo versions.   (On the TJB’s debut album, in fact, there are some additional overdubs to create a stereo effect on the stereo LP, and the mono is the only way to hear the album in its unaltered form.)  Often, the 45RPM single mix of a song was different than the mono LP, so it makes sense to locate the singles in addition to the mono LP if you really want to hear some differences.

Mono LPs can often play cleaner than stereo LPs: when you play a mono LP, either engage the “Mono” button on your equipment, or use a double Y-connector to sum the channels together.  It not only collapses all of the background noise to the center channel, there are also phase cancellations that actually drop the level of noise.

There are also some drawbacks to mono LPs, but they are few.   For instance, there are some mono LPs that are “fold-downs” of a stereo mix.  All this means is that the stereo channels are combined into mono, rather than having a separate mix created for them.   The problem is that phase cancellations will cause strange imbalances in the mix; more specifically, anything in the center channel will be about 3- to 6-dB louder than anything panned far left and right in the stereo mix.  You’ll hear some instruments prominently, and others will be buried in the background.  Try it out if you have mono and stereo LPs of the same album:  use your mono button to play back both, and note which one sounds better!

Another drawback with mono LPs, especially ones from the 1950s when the format was in its infancy:  primitive playback equipment.   Those early tonearms and styli were nothing like the turntables we have today.  To put it nicely, they were not very kind to the records!  What you’ll hear most is a lot of distortion, mainly groove wear, from the heavy tracking force and spherical (conical) stylus that tracked the grooves.  This mistracking will sound raspy or even have a popping sound if the damage is especially bad.   It is not uncommon to find a mono LP that looks spotless, but have it play back with excessive groove wear.  This makes it difficult to find good, clean copies of Frank Sinatra’s early Capitol LPs that were originally pressed on the grey- and turquoise-label vinyl.  Which is sad, since these early pressings sound closest to the master tapes, hence their collectibility.  Collecting mono LPs will certainly require more persistence on the collector’s part, but the reward is well worth it.

Is there any special equipment needed to play back mono LPs?  In most cases, no.  A good cleaning is always recommended, of course, but your stereo cartridge will play back those mono LPs just fine.  And if you have a “Mono” button on your receiver or preamp, use it to cut the background noise.  Some companies still sell mono cartridges, but they are simply rewired versions of stereo cartridges; mechanically, they are the same, so there is no need for a separate mono cartridge just to play back the occasional mono LP.

This was not true in the early days of stereo, when older mono equipment was still in the majority.  Stereo LPs required a cartridge whose stylus could move in two dimensions, not just one; in the simplest of terms, mono LPs only move the stylus horizontally left and right, where stereo LPs also have movement vertically, up and down; a stylus that would not “give” in the vertical plane would ruin the grooves on a stereo LP.

So, there you have it!  Mono LPs have an advantage over stereo in some situations, and they are a great addition to any comprehensive music collection if purchased wisely.