Faustuss, You wrote, "Considering your response to Richard's comment about tip mass and the above diatribe regarding electrical damping. Objectively, wouldn't you have already considered a cartridge that has a stylus with a nude mounting and an advanced stylus profile and the cartridge's electrical damping would already be part of the manufacturer's compliance specification; thus, a more important consideration would be matching the cartridge's specified compliance and weight to that of your tonearm's mass and compliance? Wouldn't achieving as close to optimum lateral and vertical resonance of 10Hz be as equally important? It has as much to do with trackability as the stylus' tip mass or as you are now saying moving mass?"
I described my interpretation of RB's statement about the damping effect. RB did not explain the phenomenon; he only mentioned it. Based on my definition of a "diatribe", I would not say that my post contained a diatribe against anything. As to the rest of what you wrote, I don't follow you. No matter what LOMC you are using, you have a choice regarding input impedance of the phono stage or whatever the LOMC is directly driving ahead of the phono inputs. That choice is in addition to all the other elements that you mention. Furthermore, I am not saying that cantilever damping as a result of current through the coils of an LOMC is good or bad; it's just an idea that has been discussed here and elsewhere. Like I did mention, some think it is a problem while some others think it might actually benefit performance by the damping effect. Dave Slagle might want to comment; he does this stuff for a living.

