[riffmeister]

Originally Posted by frankhond

First of all, thanks for your effort, it was fun to do the blind test. I voted for B as the better guitar, but my reaction was that it's hard to really tell because of the way you play it. On the other hand, the repeated A/B of short phrases counteracted that somewhat, that was a very good setup. This is in no way a criticism of you or your work, just my impression of what I hear.

It's true that wine tasters sometimes can't tell the difference, or that stock brokers sometimes perform no better than random. But analogies to wine and topics one knows little about have mostly entertainment value.

A concert quality classical (besides everything Charles said) is meant to be LOUD, some concert guitarists have gone on record stating that this is in fact the most important property. To bring out the volume, you need correct classical technique and nails.

Another important attribute is evenness of tone and volume across the strings as well as up the neck. To bring that out, you need to be able to play evenly, with correct classical technique and nails.

Of course, for a guitar meant to be recorded only, the loudness is less important. This enables a studio to use a cheaper guitar, as long as it sounds good. Classical technique may matter less too, if the guitar is mainly used for textures or small riffs in pop music for example. Inside a tonal space with other instruments, eq and effects, it would be hard to hear the difference between a "good" and a "concert level guitar".

So if the Cremona does what you need, it's win-win. The specific requirements of concert level classical guitarists are not an issue here.

Thanks again for your effort.

Well said.