Dear @mijostyn : It's not that I prefer pivoted against LT only that today for me is the best option, that's all.
Btw, it's useless to follow the dialogue with you about Löfgren A and B because I think your never read before the over 150 pages of the 1938 Löfgren papers where you can learn which was his main target no matters if the grooves goes up to the label or not, next again part of what I posted about:
" Löfgren developed an optimisation method which involved applying the minimax principle (as used by Wilson) to the WTE. The maximum level of the distortion is then represented by the slope of the tracking error graph rather than by the level of the tracking error. This method results in less tracking error at the inner grooves where the wavelengths are shorter. The introduction of this inverse radius weighting complicates the analytical solution, and Löfgren uses an approximation method which relies on the error angle being small. This is a reasonable mathematical approach, and incurs very little error. An interesting feature of the optimisation method is that the null radii will later be shown to be the same as those provided by the later authors. The optimum solution from Löfgren provides for an offset angle and overhang which minimises and equalises the three resulting WTE peaks across the record playing surface. "
The B solution was only a sifde line and not his main target but to understand what I said before about the LP label you need to understand in deep Lofgren A in the WP.
Btw, the comment from that expert I posted came from 2010 .
No matters where the LP label is, just after the second null point ( inner ) the cartridge task is way more complicated and where the levels of distortions goes up and up till the last inner groove. The optimization WTE in Lófgren A permits lower distortion level where it matters the more. Take it or leave it but these is the main target/issue by Löfgren and he stated in those WP.
R.