Interesting acoustic comparison as the Aranjuez and the Takamine are built for amplification with bridge pickups, cutaway body and preamps inside and thus slightly compromised as acoustic guitars.. High end Yamaha's are good and this is purely a concert classical guitar without pickups etc. so this comparison will obviously favour the Yamaha in an acoustic setting. The Aranjuez performs surprisingly well acoustically given that it has no sound hole and designed not to feed back in a stage setting. Takamine's electro-classical guitars are very reliable and well made and a practical choice for working musicians as excellent when amplified and competent enough as an acoustic. With my Takamine I have found that using a combination of external mics supported by the guitars internal pickup can produce some very good results when recording.
I have a G255 S and what is apparent are the necks which are more narrow on the Takamine and Aranjuez . The Yamaha has all the lines of a traditional classical guitar. The Aranjuez in the beginning had sympathetic tones coming through more than the Takamine but with higher mids than the Yamaha which was deeper throughout.
I like Yamaha, and a Aranjuez for playing with an amplifier. Yamaha have a more natural and richer sound. Takamine also sounds good and there is a cutway
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 พฤศจิกายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wPd7VFfWHIA/mqdefault.jpg)
Interesting acoustic comparison as the Aranjuez and the Takamine are built for amplification with bridge pickups, cutaway body and preamps inside and thus slightly compromised as acoustic guitars.. High end Yamaha's are good and this is purely a concert classical guitar without pickups etc. so this comparison will obviously favour the Yamaha in an acoustic setting. The Aranjuez performs surprisingly well acoustically given that it has no sound hole and designed not to feed back in a stage setting. Takamine's electro-classical guitars are very reliable and well made and a practical choice for working musicians as excellent when amplified and competent enough as an acoustic. With my Takamine I have found that using a combination of external mics supported by the guitars internal pickup can produce some very good results when recording.
I have a G255 S and what is apparent are the necks which are more narrow on the Takamine and Aranjuez . The Yamaha has all the lines of a traditional classical guitar. The Aranjuez in the beginning had sympathetic tones coming through more than the Takamine but with higher mids than the Yamaha which was deeper throughout.
Very helpful! I prefer the takamine, and am leaning towards purchasing one now. Thank you.
Takamine sangat bagus suara akustiknya sangat jelas
With this mic setup and position, the Takamine had the best manners. I can tell that there is a lot yet to be revealed by the Yamaha however.
i think yamaha more classical sound
I like Yamaha, and a Aranjuez for playing with an amplifier. Yamaha have a more natural and richer sound. Takamine also sounds good and there is a cutway
Nice :) Greetings, Chris
Puestos:
1: aranjuez
2: takamine
3: yamaha.
I thought the Yamaha sounded the best in all the presentations.
Yamaha has the warmer tone, the Takamine is louder and brighter than the other guitars
i have the takamine, and have a good sound ......
Yamaha
Aranjuez
Perfeito 👍
Prefiero la Yamaha.
Yamaha mucho mejor que las otras dos
can give thoughts if all gitars uses the same strings brand..
so far the 2nd gitar is poor in sound..
yamaha is deep..
takamine is bright
If I remember correctly, at least Takamine and Aranjuez have Hannabach's Low Tension Strings.
Takamine esta entre aranjuez y yamaha, aranjuez suena mas a flamenca y yamaha suena mas a arabe.
Yamaha