i thought maybe i irritated him.

i think that the existing classical title is ok, especially given the description. or it could be changed to classical/nylon.

i simply enjoy discussing the terminology, and i understod your point.

Neither of you did anything wrong! Dave brought up a very legitimate question and in fact the term "nylon' seems to be the more accepted term these days within the industry.

mc1 and ukejon,

Agreed with both your last posts in this thread.

And Dave, you've got a good sense of humour!

Yup. And if you'll visit that selection and go to the rosewood model at http://www.sandguitars.com/prod_rose_ds.htm and read the description, he says, "My Rosewood Model classical electric guitar is a close relative to the Mahogany Model. It leans a little more toward an acoustic nylon string guitar. It has the same standard braced classical soundboard, but the back and sides are constructed in a more traditional acoustic guitar style.

The sides are .090" thick and bent to shape. The back is a standard braced, two piece construction. The depth of the body can vary from 3" to 4". The body is bound in rosewood, and various purfling designs are available, including the ever popular abalone trim.

With no soundhole, this instrument has the feedback resistance of the mahogany model, but feels and sounds a little more like an acoustic classical guitar."

Really. Classical guitar. Similar text appears all over the site.

As I said a while back, Classical guitar = Nylon String guitar in modern usage for the last hundred years. The terms are polysemic. This section is not mostly all about nylon hybrid guitars.

I don't really think the OP's point and some of the followup points are well taken. You can't change common usage by fiat.

YMMV.

I guess if you still want to argue about it, carry on. I'm done.

No one is arguing, Bruce. We are having an interesting discussion about the OP's original question. No one is disputing that the terms "classical" and "nylon" are still in play and sometimes, as you suggest, appear interchangeable. But the kind of universal application and meaning that you suggest just isn't accurate today.

I was forced to listen to some very modern country music today on the radio. I was shocked, "How does this even pass as "Country?" At some time in recent yesteryears, all country fans were maybe thinking the same thing. Yet today, what I had to listen to is indeed considered Country-- just ask everyone! Even so, I'm not swayed by one luthier wanting to call an electric solid body with nylon strings a "classical." He may have *some* support in trying to change perceptions, or even by his own authority. What's wrong with the conservative usefulness of "All classical guitars are nylon string, but not all nylon string are classical guitars?" They say any definition in Webster's can potentially change due to popular misuse.

And why is this necessarily a discussion, not an argument? :D

You are right, lets make it an argument! :D And definitions do indeed change. The ultra conservative OED puts in a surprisingly number of new and even slangy words each year. Fascinating....

And don't even get me started on that stuff they call "Country" today....Patsy and Hank would be appalled. Country music died around 1975.....that's my story and I'm sticking with it!

If you can show me textual references to "classical guitar" referring to flamenco and Spanish guitars dating back to 1915, then I'll be a monkey's uncle. And you can call me Bob. Until then, I'm sticking with my understanding that the term "classical guitar" in common usage was likely not until post WWII.

I'm just sayin'...

Being new to this forum and this actually being an acoustic guitar forum I was curious why there wasn't a section for nylon stringed guitars and one for steel string guitar. This then would cover the full gambit of different types of guitars that fell in those category's.

Perhaps (don't know about "the last hundred years") but as FrankHS suggests Nylon String does not always equal Classical, and this may be more and more true each year.

And welcome to AGF, eddieblz.

As for the post that said that discussions about the different types of guitars that fall under those category's should be put in the general acoustic area, as a person new to this forum I noticed that a lot of very good threads get lost in the sheer number of posts and threads started in that section.

still seems to me, it makes more sense to have a classical and a nylon discussion...letting the author post in whichever they feel is the most appropriate

Nylon vs Classical
 

I agree with the sentiment of the OP's suggestion of naming the sub forum "nylon" rather than "classical", but as has been pointed out by others, I think it has more to do with the music being played rather than the construction of the guitars.

I do feell that nylon-strung guitars with radiused fretboards and nuts under 52mm are still, or at least could be, classical guitars, though.

Hm. I think I just argued against myself. Maybe I don't have an opinion one way or the other, after all.

Classical?

This video contains content that is blocked in your country. (Canada)