Moving coil VS moving magnet/iron

You can say that Decca also never "advertised" like that, but it’s MI and when i read comments about Decca i see how many MCs went to the dust.

Every manufacturer is free to record a video for youtube or make comments on audiogon like J.Carr did in the past.

It’s great that we can watch Peter’s lecture. Yes, his business is MI, but MC is also his business, you’re sending your broken MC to him.

If every manufacturer can share the knowledge with us it would be better, now we have Peter, who’s next?

P.S. Joseph Grado passed away long time ago.

Here is a documentary about Grado

Thank you roberjerman, exactly. One thing though. Joe Grado (a watch maker) invented the moving coil cartridge. For some reason I have not been able to ascertain he switched to moving iron. Obviously he thought it better for some reason. I wish I could say more about Soundsmith cartridges but I have just never been tempted to buy one although I find the cactus cantilever intriguing.  

Chakster, Ledermann's lectures are just a marketing tool. There is truth in them but also unfortunately distortions designed to favor his products. In Peter's case I actually think he believes himself. This is what happens when you let assumptions lead you around by the nose. Having an hypothesis is fine but to make it fact you have to prove it. Peter handily neglects that aspect. On the other hand nobody has proven him wrong.
Roberjerman, I forgot to add that although you are right, the damper in MC cartridges prevents the reflection of some energy energy is still reflected at the grove in the for of inertia. The force required to move the effective mass of the stylus and cantilever. This force is effectively absorbed by the vinyl as long as the stylus is tracking correctly. 

@mijostyn Do you think the reviews are not marketing tool ? I rarely see any negative review. Everything is marketing today. So we can only buy both types of cartridges to compare, this is what i am doing myself. MM and MI are great, normally cheaper, much more convenient, does not require some crazy phono stages or other devices to make them even work. Personally i would never recommend a LOMC for beginner, only if he already have some killer MM/MI and willing to spend more for curiosity (even without luck).  

Roberjerman, You wrote, "Mc cartridges have a rubber damping block at the opposite end of the cantilever. This takes care of vibrations traveling up the cantilever - so no vibrations reflected back down the cantilever!"
Do you believe those dampers on MC cartridge suspensions are absolutely 100% efficient?  Is anything in the physical world 100% efficient?  Most likely, the answer is no; therefore there is energy traveling down the cantilever.  Also, if you want to suggest that Peter Ledermann is being disingenuous in order to sell cartridges, then your critique ought to include a physical explanation for why you say MC cartridges generate a superior transient response (presumably superior to MI and MM types, but you don't say).  If your explanation hinges on low inductance, explain how that might work, because I think inductance per se is a non-factor, if one chooses the proper amount of capacitance to go with.  The inductance of an LOMC is typically more than 10,000X less than that of an MM but only about 50X less than an MI; if those differences were directly proportional to transient response, I don't think we'd be having this discussion; every one of us would be using an LOMC cartridge and MI/MM types would have gone the way of the ceramic.
Peter Ledermann probably feels he has to write those essays in order to convince audiophiles, who have been brainwashed for years into paying exorbitant prices for LOMC cartridges, to give his products a try.  Also, he is a smart guy; perhaps it would be more fair to ask him to defend his theses regarding "jitter", etc, instead of smearing him here, more or less behind his back.  I think he is an honest man who believes what he says.