That is a very interesting read. I have long preferred the sound of conical styli for a number of reasons--I believe that they are much quieter than other stylus types, generally, and can track just as well and they seem to be "blacker," perhaps because of reasons pointed out in the paper. Maybe they twist less and so sound less confused.
There are some more advanced profiles that I have heard that are as quiet, though--the one that comes to mind is the Stanton or Pickering Stereohedron, but none have sounded as "black." There is a sense of space or rich silence between the notes or something that I get with conical or spherical styli that I simply don't hear with other shapes. It's almost as if there is an inaudible "buzz" with ellipticals and other shapes that you don't really hear, but you notice it because what you do hear is somehow less focused even if in other ways the more complex shapes give more detail or higher end frequency response (in some cases). The best comparison I can think of is a visual parallel--a conical sounds like what the world looks like after a rain--so clear. Rain knocks pollen and dust and all kinds of other stuff out of the atmosphere. You didn't really see it, and it's presence isn't like fog, but once it's gone you notice colors that are richer, depth perception is easier, and contrast is so much higher. Perhaps without the twisting what one actually hears with a conical is greater contrast.
I have Shibatas and hyperellipticals and they all seem to be overly sensitive to surface noise compared to Stereohedron. Microlines and line contacts, generally, seem to pick up imperfections or damage in the grooves and place the ugly sounds they have retrieved on the bridge of your nose. The cost of the luminous sound that they do deliver can be rather high as part of the bargain. Often, the improvement seems to be gained only through deal with the devil.
"It results in a sound that is particularly offensive to women." Interesting observation.
