Cartridge/Tonearm matching fundamentals?

I've seen / used that "gridded graph" and it did not work out correctly. At least not in the one case that i relied on it. That was enough to teach me that not all "tools" are accurate. While i don't know if it is the same graph ( which i would assume that it was ), If others have used that graph, and it worked for you, please let us know. It is possible that the manufacturer's specs that i used were incorrect or that i just ran into a "freak situation". It would be far too convenient to "write off" such an easy method of arm / cartridge matching if i was the only one that had problems with that specific formula.

For further reading on the subject, try checking out this link to Galen Carol Audio. I think that this has been posted here in the past but wasn't sure, so i figured that i'd throw this one in as another point of reference. Sean
>

Is the lydian beta very different to the origional removeable body lydian? I'm curios because I had one and it was one of my favorite cartridges, can't get it now.
I'm also curious, although I'm not sure it will apply. I found the old lydian a good match to the older immedia rpm arm. Same with the clavis d.c. I understand Mr. Perkins used the lyra cartridges for his design of the rpm arm. Is there something different about the behavior of the rpm arm as opposed to the vpi?

Okay, regarding the "oar in the water" analogy, this is a mitigating factor as I mentioned above, as are the weighted "outriggers" on some unipivots. It can help to improve things. However, I would point out that even if the "oar" is greatly slowed by the "water", it still moves(azimuth). And then when it tries to come back to normal(azimuth), it is slowed in it's return, by the "water". Neither of these is optimal performance. So yes, it does help out, and these arms that Viridian mentions are better performers, under stress of low compliance, than ones without the damping.

Okay.Just my opinion.