Age old discussion I know but MM or MC? Benefits?

Chackster, I said MI all the way not MM .
And that for classical which was the post before that .

Well, well well indeed.
Hard to say which was the big mover as I made a number of changes at once.
Nottingham Analog Spacedeck cw Shelter 501 mk3 mc cart.
Also built a new rack using 2" maple boards and allthread and moved everything over and took time to tidy up all the wiring.
But...the music, oh the music.
NEVER has vinyl sounded so sweet in my system, so much air and just well soul is best words I can come up with.
Not that I thought so at first as first l.p. on was in through the out door by led zep, must be a poor recording as I thought, umm, soso.

Then I slipped on in the dark by grateful dead....ooh yes please, that hit the spot indeed. Followed with number the brave by wishbone ash and dark side of the moon by Floyd.

Just....heaven. Money very well spent imho.

In my experience, as I have moved to more expensive cartridges, all the sound parameters have improved; always worth the investment. If you aren't going above the $1200 or so ceiling on MM, then MM or MC is your choice.  Generally, they are priced pretty respective of performance.

I am lucky, I have and use both MC and MM cartridges.  One tt set up for MM and the another for MC.  I listen to classic rock most of the time so the MM is used a lot.  The late 80's to present vinyl seem to sound better with the MC.   Currently my too cartridges are: AT-150MLX with a ATN150Sa Shibata stylus and for MC i use DL-103r with a hardwood body or a AT-33PTG/II

My first posting here, apologies if it is long, and I'm an absolute newbie, so apologies if the questions are such basic common knowledge, but I am hoping to learn from those who are knowledgeable.  So I'll quote three:

lewm:"  If Robjerman's rationale were correct (about MCs being superior because of having lower moving mass), then Moving Iron (MI) cartridges should rule, because MI cartridges have lower moving mass than do MC cartridges.  On top of that they generally have higher signal voltage output which makes the job of the phono stage much easier, in that the phono stage needs to provide much less gain for an MI, and much much less gain for an MM than for any MC.  With gain comes distortion and noise.  (One disadvantage of a LOMC cartridge.) Also, contrary to your assumption, I would argue that very little to nothing has advanced in the area of cartridge design, in the past 9 years since Raul opened his thread."

And chakster: " It’s always nice to get rid of all additional cables, suts, headamps etc, just to connect your MM to the phono stage to get the decent loud sound."

And leonardcooper: "  I believe as you get fast you must sacrifice output."

I am left wondering, with the various comments, are these LOMC cartridges a viable choice in a "mainstream" person's setup, as opposed to an "übersetup" where distortion and noise are essentially eliminated?  At some point, isn't the cartridge fast enough?  And, with phono pre-amps, why is there a distinction between MM and MC, when really the distinction is with the output voltage?  Aren't phono pre-amps for MC, or such low output cartridges, also more, if not much more, expensive than the MM pre-amps, everything else being equal?  It seems they are all designed for MM, and then some add the MC, and then others add the MC with different levels of adjustment for the vastly different outputs among the LOMC.  What is the lowest output MM and what is the highest output MC?  And finally, what drawbacks have prevented MI from being the top choice?