Why do better MC cartridges cost a fortune?

many thanks Henry. I will copy this list for reference when I start playing around with the new/old rig. 
best,
bill hart

Miura or early Countach?

Actually, earlier - Islero S, one of 100 made. Same engine as the Miura but in line rather than transverse (and in the case of the Miura with an integral gearbox housing).

Synchronizing 12 Weber throats was enough to drive me to drink (a short trip, I grant you).  Fortunately once done they didn't go out of whack again.

Dear @inna : Seems to me that you already have very good answers about the high $$$$ for LOMC cartridges. I have nothing that can justify those high prices. The " problem " will follow be that always exist people to pay for it. This is the real " problem " for the 95% of the audiophiles that can't invest with those " crazy " prices. Such is life.

@whart , I understand that Air Tigth is a " brother " of the My Sonic Labs manufacturer this is that the AT comes as OEm from MSL. I like a lot MSL ones and heard ( not in my system. ) the AT Supreme and is really good too.

As you know tubes is a " forbidden " audio item for me, can't fulfill my MUSIC/audio targets but this is me.
In my experiences and everything the same LOMC cartridges beats overall  MM/MI cartridges . Some people speaks that the LOMC cartridges has not the " coherence and weigth " like the MM ones but this depends mainly on the room/system and tonearm/cartridge set up accuracy levels.

Probably the only advantage behind MM cartridges is that does not needs a high gain active phono stage due to its higher output levels. This is a good thing for system with tubes but if what we want is true high quality levels the LOMC cartridges ( vintage or today ) is the way to go.

Am I saying that MM/MI are not good enough ?, no it's a good alternative and a different kind of sound but not as the LOMC quality levels.

I own several LOMC/MM/MI cartridges that through many years compare d it in between using same analog rig: everything the same. The very best MM/MI are very good and near the LOMC cartridge for a lot less money but all depends on each one MUSIC-sound targets and priorities.

As I said MM/MI is a good alternative, perhaps not for everyday but the ones that over their audio life only listened through LOMC cartridges it's worth to finally give a chance to the MM/MI alternative.
I have to say that there are audiophiles that doing comparisons in between choosed for the MM/MI alternative. Not me but you can try, it can helps as a very good spare unit.

In the same way that exist solid reasons why DD beats BD TT or digital beats analog or SS beats tube technologies there are reasons why the LOMC superiority. Yes, is the fancy high cost alternative, no doubt about.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

Dear @whart : Year ago and after I started the MM thread in the analog forum J.Carr posted that MM/MI cartridge design has higher distortions than LOMC cartridges.

In those old times and due my high " motivations/emotion " to discover the " new kid in the blok " I really can't understand or attest what J.Carr posted but over the years I found out that he is rigth, the LOMC designs are more faithfully to the recording that the MM ones. Both designs are different and we can expect that both sounds exactly the same, exist a superiority in between but always is fine to own a good MM/MI cartridge and listen to it.   

Time to time you can find out Astatic MF-200 or a B&O MMC2, both are very good performers. Normally almost no one cares about B&O design but is one of the best out there.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.