I do had an opportunity to compare on the same design several stylus profiles on LOMC.
How can you do that with LOMC? Please explain.
You cartridge must be re-tipped if you want to add another profile, retip is degradation in sound, this is why your experience is not positive.
So I can agree sometimes fairy tales about superiority of advanced profiles can be ignored also.
Give us an example when Conical profile is better than anything else, or please recall an elliptical that better than MicroRidge or similar profile.
Profile is foreseen by design and engineer. SPU Wood A for example has conical stylus.
SPU is oldschool cartridge designed in the 40's, maybe you like cactus stylus or those steel needles for gramophones too ?
I owned SPU Classic
with conical tip and this is an awful cartridge just liek Denon 103, next one was SPU Spirit LTD with Elliptical and it was much better cartridge, last one was SPU Royal G mkII with Replican 100
and this is the best SPU i have ever heard in my system.
If you want to re-tip your MC cartridge every 600 hrs you can use Elliptical, life span of the conical tip is shorter. But if you want to use your SPU for 2000 hrs then Replicant 100 is the best (the finest quality).
What is your argument ?
I want to tell you that nobody uses a conical tip anymore on any high-end cartridges, it is inferior profile by default, it's obvious for any cartridge designer today and it was obvious even in the 70's/80's. Since JVC invented Shibata.
Even Ortofon claimed that conical is the worst stylus profile and you can read it in their books, catalogs etc. Check this
If you don't know the basics about diamond profiles please find a valid source and read about it.