High vs low internal impedance cartridges....Is there a sonic signature for each type?

air core is bass shy by nature although masters found the ways to compensate that. Ikeda used plastic cube to wind a coils in order to get more homogenous magnetic field and more bass. Friend of mine changed permanent magnets into field coil only due to lack of bass in his air core designs. Aircore isn't the design which is intended to be bass heavy although you can hear bass details  in the music.

Dave Slagle, one of the two brains behind EMIA, has converted a few MCs to "field coil" types, using the Denon DL103, for one example.  I have heard that cartridge at the Capital Audio Fest, in the context of a truly fantastic direct-drive double Quad 57 system, that Dave also designed.  It's hard to tell what makes that overall system so great, but for sure the field coil mod to the Denon seems to be part of the explanation, because I have never heard a DL103 sound so good.  (Chakster, the DL103 may have been re-tipped with an exotic stylus; I have no idea what stylus it bears.) 

I definitely have preferred MCs with low internal impedance vs those with high.  I wanted to point out that this question is really only pertinent to MCs, because MI and MM types are some of my favorites even over LOMCs, despite having relatively high internal impedance/resistance.  I agree most with Nandric's breakdown of the issues that might make low impedance MCs sound best.  Also, besides a "coreless coil" (don't know of any examples of such a type), one might wonder about the Audio Technica ART7, which uses an amorphous core, still has excellent bass response but very low output due to inefficiency of an amorphous core.

Coreless coil the most known example is Denon DL304

and if to speak about mainstream flagman AT-ART1000

Although it’s important to define what does it mean low ohm - to me it’s up to 5 ohms...
in most old SUT’s it’s marked the same, most of them "low " means up to 3 ohms like mine FR XF-1 type L