New AT cartridge thoughts/question

@bkeske, If break in does not exist which, is essentially what he is saying for his cartridges at least then what causes it? Without saying it he has implied that it is psychological. As for his other possible mechanisms they are laughable. Styli do not rotate if glued in correctly. They are (or should be) permanently fixed to the end of the cantilever by one means or another. Azimuth does not change in moving coil cartridges. The coil is pulled firmly against it's rubber suspension which is fixed to the posterior pole. In order to change azimuth you would have to release the wire, rotate the coil then pull the wire tight again. He is patently trying to trumpet his design by belittling others which is a methodology he frequently uses in his lectures and the most significant reason as to why I probably will never own one of his cartridges. 
The changes that might occur in a cartridge are relatively minor and do not explain the degree of change many people hear. I had a Clearaudio Talisman for a while. It has a reputation for being a bright cartridge, too much high end. It was but after a while the brightness seem to fade. Ok I thought. The cartridge is just loosening up. Eventually I switch back to another cartridge which for a while seemed dull but then it sounded fine. On switching back to the Talisman it became just as bright as when it was new. The only thing that was breaking in was my mind. We get use to things, the new norm. 

Well, with Peter’s experience and knowledge of personally designing, building, and re-tipping, I’m not sure I could say his statements and findings are "laughable". Perhaps you should email Peter and question his statements.

But again, you can think as you wish.

~@bkeske, I think he is looking for a mechanism to placate the population. He is in business to sell cartridges. He can not just come out and attack people's sensibilities. Another thing. This is not rocket science. Phonograph cartridges are very simple devises. Electronics engineering and even speaker design are far more complicated subjects.
Peter's experience is in building and repairing cartridges. I would not know were to start in that regard and my hands are too shaky anyway. His designs are borrowed from others with some embellishment.  

I own an Audio Technica ART7 cartridge that I purchased new. At first, I did find it to be lean or clinical sounding, although from the start it was a champ at revealing detail and inner musical voices, as well as having a very articulate bass. Nevertheless, I usually got tired of it after about an hour per listening session. However, after 20-30 hours total, it began to shift in tonal emphasis toward the midrange and upper bass, and these days it is one of my favorite LOMC cartridges. (I own at least 20 cartridges of all types.) Despite the scoffing of MillerCarbon and Mijostyn, I would not attribute this change in my subjective experience of the ART7 solely to psychological adaptation to the sound of the ART7, because at any one time I am alternating among 3-4 different cartridges, running on any of the 5 turntables that are set up to feed two very different audio systems (3 turntables on one system, 2 turntables on the other). I rarely stick to only one combination of tt and cartridge for more than a few consecutive sessions. Thus, I don’t have a fixed mental reference for how music should sound in either of the two systems. The ART7 is not "training" me to hear it in any one particular way. I don’t know what is the mechanism for cartridges changing sound quality from new, but I do believe it happens. Think of it this way: cartridges can wear out for reasons other than stylus wear, so why shouldn’t they also "wear in"? So my advice to you is to give your new AT a little time, and hope for the best.

In re-reading Miller Carbon's post, I see now that his idea is not really different from my experience of the ART7.