The Palladian-A step beyond

Maybe because I have to be concerned with exact calculations and minutiae of other kinds in my work life, I tend to be lazy about facing exactitude in my hobbies.  Seems to me that no matter what anyone can do, no matter how great a genius or how creative or innovative, it is only possible to achieve tangency to the groove wall of an LP at two points on the playing surface, given a conventional pivoted tonearm that is mounted such that the stylus tip overhangs the spindle and employs a headshell with offset angle.  Optimal mounting geometry would seek to place those two null points such that tracking angle error up to and after each of the two null points is minimal.  From what I can gather, Lofgren and Baerwald published the best solutions to this problem, and maybe now Dietrich has done even better, but I have to wonder how large a difference alignment alone could possibly make in the listening experience, when we are comparing solutions that are very close to each other.  I am dubious, and I do own and use a UNItractor.

If the AS cartridge sounds wonderful, it is probably because it is a very good cartridge, maybe a great one, but I doubt its excellence has much to do with alignment per se.

Now as to the discussion of cantilever movement.  It's interesting to me that MC cartridges, which are generally low in compliance, lose again. Add this to the other drawbacks: (1) The moving mass of an MC is not as low as that of an MI cartridge. (2) The low signal voltage necessitates one of a few tricks to add gain, any of which inevitably also add distortion of one kind or another.  Why do they dominate the high end?
They do have the undeniable virtue of costing more.

A pensive post Lewm..🤔
And one which I think the 'High-End Cabal' (which includes reviewers) would like dismissed 🙈
I have just today, conducted a mini-shoot-out between the Sony XL-55, Sony XL-88 (both renowned LOMCs from the Golden Age of analogue-70s-80s) and one of my favourite MM cartridges (also from the same age)..the Victor Z1 fitted with the SAS stylus.
In two words.....no contest 😎
The Victor has all the immediacy and involvement of 'live' music combined with the delicacy, depth, spatial imagery and speed that are commonly used to describe LOMCs....
Yet I have perhaps a dozen other vintage MMs which are virtually as good as the Z1/SAS and each one can be had for a maximum price of $400...😝
The real question is.....how does the Victor compare to the Palladian....❓👀

For me, it may be no coincidence that the MC cartridges I like most have tended to be those with high-ish compliance, compared to their brethren.

**Why do they dominate the high end? **

I think you know. Despite their limitations, "they do have the undeniable virtue of costing more."

You've both got it.....😎
When those with 'means', have $200,000 speakers driven by $160,000 monoblocks with $40,000 line-stages preceded by $20,000 phono-stages driven by $120,000 turntables with $35,000 tonearms......it is unthinkable to run it all with a $600 MM cartridge...😱
So I don't blame the cartridge manufacturers.....
They essentially have no choice.
It's not a question of 'how' a cartridge sounds.....
The only question is...."Does it sound good enough to justify a $10,000-$18,000 price-tag?"
Because no-one who buys a high-end LOMC will ever compare it to a $300 vintage MM or even a $1,500 vintage LOMC in their 1/2 million dollar systems.
And those that do......will rarely be taken seriously 😴
So of course the 'wannabe high-end' audiophiles who can never afford the costs associated with a full-blown high-end system, can just possibly stretch to the 'same' esoteric LOMC (or its close relative).
In this way.....having a $4,000-$6,000 LOMC on their $3,000 tonearm on their $2,500 turntable makes them believe that they are approaching the analogue 'nirvana' of their brethren.
While the majority of audiophiles running their $200-$900 modern MM cartridges are wondering if they will ever taste the 'joys' of the LOMC elite.....
And so it will continue to be.....👐