Fili Lunae,
Thanks for your explanations. i’ll keep on trilling then.
Cheers.
More spoken Latin:
Latin Before you Know It Lite (FREE) - trial version of full product http://www.download.com/Latin-Before-You-Know-It-Lite/3000-2279_4-10369243.html
Rosetta Stone Latin Level 1 (free demo) http://www.rosettastone.com/ind/free_demo
As regards ‘gn’ in Latin, the only logical conclusion is that it resembles the ‘ng’ in English words like “singing” and “king.” This sound is known as a “velar nasal,” and some languages like Sanskrit have a separate letter which represnts it, but most, like Latin, German, and Greek, do not, and make do with combinations to express it.
The reason that this must be is that there are words that begin with the sound, such as the praenomen Gnaeus. Latin is too phonetic for the “g” to simply be ignored. Thus is must be included. But pronouncing this as “g-naeus” is unacceptable. Therefore there must be a single, solitary sound.
In Italian, and other Romance languages, this sound, among others, was moved forward, palatalized, thus rendering the palatal nasal ‘ñ’. It follows very logically, if by moving backward in time, one moves the sounds backward in the mouth, one may arrive at the Classical pronunciation. Nothing else makes sense.
FiliusLunae, I forgot to say I think the same as you on the “Latin sounds like Spanish” issue; I always also thought that was because the lack of fricatives.
Lucus Eques, I understand the logic behing your post, and the “Gnaeus” example really makes sense. But I’ll make use of my right to remain skeptical about that until I have enough Latin knowledge to be able to read Latin Authors on grammatical issues. Until then, I’ll keep saying “mah-gnoos” and “g-naeus”. 
Whatever suits you, amice o mi. My opinions are distinctly controversial — but then, they always are. 