I'll defend my comment comparing Naldini to Armani. First, the cuts are not that different-- Armani cuts a broad, Scholte-style shoulder for any given size (in 44, their shoulder span runs 22 inches, as opposed to a typical industry size of about 20.5). But so does Naldini. The principal difference I see in the cuts is the more generous overall chest dimension in the Naldini, and the unfortunately larger upper arm diameter (correctable in either make). The Armani cut I have seen and tried still lacks upper chest "wrap", has the same billowy upper sleeve, and still has a low chest pocket after all these years. Both suits are going to require a skilled tailor to fit most people optimally, so I fail to see the Armani advantage. They're both generously cut, good fabric, lightly fused suits with minimal handwork (as is the Boss). That's why I grouped them together. The mere fact that those defending Armani have to explicitly exclude half of their product line tells me something: Armani is in fact the Italian version of RL: midgrade stuff with a high-grade veneer. RL zealots always defend RL with the same caveats, saying "Ralph Lauren is a brilliant design house, if you don't count Chaps, Polo, RL67, Lauren, Rough Wear, and all the other past and present crap." Yes, and GM makes great cars-- if we leave out everything but the Corvette and the Tahoe. Rather than springing for a hideously overpriced, probably poorly altered $1000 Armani at some Collins Ave boutique, I would rather see a Style Forum reader buy the Naldini for $150, spend another $200 on tailoring, and have a suit that fits, wears for 5-6 years, and doesn't represent a marketing fraud. I'd probably first suggest that any savvy buyer look at a Samuelsohn or Corneliani, but that wasn't the question that was asked.