A year ago, or so, I also was looking at the T-Splines vs. Clayoo issue, as I needed one of them for organic modeling I was being called upon to do. At the time, I decided to go with T-Splines, just because Clayoo was so new and T-Splines was a more mature product. At the beginning of this year, I took another hard look at Clayoo, to see if it was something I should add to my tool box. I used the latest demo, side by side with T-Splines, to see if it had any advantages.
I do like some of the features of Clayoo, it does seem like it would be a little more intuitive for someone just starting out. Some of the methods of modeling in Clayoo, which I thought would be easier than T-Splines, really didn’t turn out to be any better. In my limited experience, T-Splines creates cleaner and simpler NURBS surfaces, when converted and it seems to play better when modeling with existing NURBS surfaces within Rhino. In the end, I didn’t see anything it could do that I couldn’t already do with T-Splines (although with a different method), so I didn’t think it was worth the expense for me to add it to my tool box.
In your case, I think you might be good with either one. There are some people wondering about the future of T-Splines, whether it’s a valid concern, I don’t know. Clayoo doesn’t have that baggage, coming from a developer of other Rhino plug-ins. But with your concern with the quality of surfaces, I would give the nudge to T-Splines for better quality converted to NURBS surfaces. Again, only in my experience, no claims on being a professional software evaluator, just a everyday Rhino user.