I tend to side with mijostyn and the 'audio science' side of the debate. In general, I'm curious as to how much of the 'science' side of the debate is truly measurable. Computerized measuring apps have come a long way recently, as has high-resolution spectral display. I'd like to see an arm like the Viv A/B'd against an 'idealized' analog setup or a pure digital source. If the inner groove TAE is truly significant, you could probably even see the distortion on a spectral display in addition to on an oscilliscope. It sounds like the measurements are small enough that it would be extremely dependent on the tight control of everything else measurable.
That said, as I've mentioned, I'm probably going to use the Viv as my secondary arm for 78 RPM sources because it fits on my plinth without having to spend thousands more on an upgraded dual-armed plinth or screw around with my workflow by swapping armboards every time I change cartridges. 2-channel tools can fix the phase errors. I mostly transfer 10" records, too, so I can set the null point to be optimized for 10" records rather than 12" records.