Just because people visit a city of importance does not make it a "tourist town" in my book.

To me a "tourist town" means a place where if all the tourists went home, it would not exist. Hardly the case for Rome or Barcelona.

If you travel by train in Italy between le Cinque Terre & Rome and would like a day in some towns where the experience is 90 percent about the beautiful old & charming Italian town + seeing Italians, eating good (not expensive) local food, walking on cobbled streets and browsing little shops and markets:

Lucca
Montecantini Alto
Pistoia
Arezzo
Orvieto
Chiusi

Again, all of these have train stations PLUS all of these towns have at least one major artistic or historical feature to learn about. Most have several more but you can see them all in less than 1/2 a day. Still it can be fun to spend the night there because all have nice streets without cars for evening walks or bike rides, beautiful piazze, outstanding trattorie with local food for dinner + good morning markets.

(wasn't suggesting to see them all but offering a list of options to choose from)

"To me a "tourist town" means a place where if all the tourists went home, it would not exist."

That's a pretty useless definition. Barely a handful of places would qualify if that. I suppose you don't think Venice and Dubrovnik are tourist towns in that case.

Thanks Massimop, I will look into those towns -

I'm not arguing with you thursdaysd. You can stop now.