# New York City vs. Chicago Skyline



## Jan

New York for density, Chicago for architecture.


----------



## CrazyCanuck

This will be not be locked but keep it civil and everything will be okay.


----------



## icracked

Chicago!!!


----------



## _00_deathscar

Never seen that last pic before.

*Right-click -> Save*

Thanks


----------



## cubsfan

Jan said:


> New York for density, Chicago for architecture.


Agreed 100%



CrazyCanuck said:


> This will be not be locked but keep it civil and everything will be okay.


You Rock! Thanks...


----------



## spotila

so hard to choose!


----------



## poshbakerloo

New York City all they way!!!


----------



## isaidso

A worthy rival, but it's Noo Yawk!


----------



## luci203

CrazyCanuck said:


> City vs City is not allowed.


This is a city vs city thread, I think is ok, the city vs city is bad in the "rate our talls" section, so that one city thread risk to be floaded with all kind of discutions... instead of pictures and rating of that city.


----------



## pokistic

NYC is too way ahead of Chicago in terms of Skyline and number of buildings. So I prefer NYC. :yes: But Chicago has a good looking skyline though.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

In addition to having far more skyscrapers in general, NY has far more pre-WWII skyscrapers, and therefore, I prefer its skyline to other great ones like HK, Shanghai and Chi.

In terms of volume and quality of new skyscrapers, nothing will compete with Shanghai in a few years time.


----------



## luci203

dnobsemajdnob said:


> In terms of volume and quality of new skyscrapers, nothing will compete with Shanghai in a few years time.


And in terms of skyscrapers height, nothing will compete with Dubai... :rock:


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

Isn't Shanghai building the tallest building in the world?

Anyway, Shanghai is much huger than Dubai, and therefore, it will have more 300M+ buildings than Dubai.


----------



## Hindustani

NYC baby NYC. Chitown will always be a 2nd fiddle to NYC & will always be America's 2nd city.

Also, NYC skyline will only get better & denser once the Freedome towers will be completed in next 5 yrs.


----------



## cubsfan

New York:










Chicago:


----------



## KB335ci2

NYC, hands down!


----------



## luci203

dnobsemajdnob said:


> Isn't Shanghai building the tallest building in the world?
> 
> Anyway, Shanghai is much huger than Dubai, and therefore, it will have more 300M+ buildings than Dubai.


In size, Shanghai mop the floor with Dubai, or in number of skyscrapers (over 150m).

But in supertalls (+300m) not.

*SHANGHAI:*

built

1. _Shanghai World Financiar Center_ (492m) 
2. _Jin Mao Tower_ (421m) 
3. _Shanghai Shimao International Plaza_ (333m) 

under construction

4. _Shanghai Tower_ (632m) 

proposed

5. _White Magnolia Plaza_ (319m) 

---------------------------------------------------

*DUBAI:*

built

1. _Emirates Office Tower_ (355m)
2. _Rose Tower _ (333m)
3. _Burj al Arab_ (321m)
4. _The Address _ (306m)
5. _Emirates Hotel Tower_ (305m)

under construction - to be finished this year.

6. *Burj Dubai* (818m)
7. *Almas Tower* (363m)
8. *The Index* (328m)
9. *HHHR Tower* (317m)

under construction - advanced stage.

10. Princess Tower (414m)
11. 23 Marina (395m)
12. Emirates Park Tower 1 (395m)
13. Emirates Park Tower 2 (395m)
14. The Torch (345m)
15. Al Attar Tower (342m)
16. Al Yaqoub Tower (328m)
17. Ocean Heights (310m)

+ other supertalls in early stages of construction, proposed, on hold... (I have doubts for a lot of them)


----------



## tpe

Jan said:


> New York for density, Chicago for architecture.


_
I would say New York had surpassed Chicago [in number of skyscrapers] by 1900, as soon as the Singer, Flatiron, and Woolworth Buildings had been built. The 1920s saw a big building boom in New York. But in Chicago skyscrapers tend to be more architecturally distinguished. New York has an ambiance of skyscrapers to it, but I don’t think the individual buildings are as distinguished -- they could be in Indianapolis._

- Kenneth T. Jackson, past president of the New York Historical Society and Editor in Chief, Encyclopedia of New York City.


----------



## PedroGabriel

voted Chicago, looks way better than NYC, to bad its climate... never seen Chicago as America's second city, though it was LA.


----------



## 599GTB

tpe said:


> _
> I would say New York had surpassed Chicago [in number of skyscrapers] by 1900, as soon as the Singer, Flatiron, and Woolworth Buildings had been built. The 1920s saw a big building boom in New York. But in Chicago skyscrapers tend to be more architecturally distinguished. New York has an ambiance of skyscrapers to it, but I don’t think the individual buildings are as distinguished -- they could be in Indianapolis._
> 
> - Kenneth T. Jackson, past president of the New York Historical Society and Editor in Chief, Encyclopedia of New York City.


_New York's skyline far surpasses Chicago in terms of looks and density. Not to mention, New York is home many iconic structures (Empire State, Flatiron, Chrysler, Brooklyn Bridge, Statue of Liberty, former WTC) and Chicago is home to none that an average person would know.
_
-599GTB, and the voters here at skyscraper city.


----------



## DinamiT

NYC for sure -_-


----------



## michal a.

The both are superb..


----------



## lukaszek89

Chicagooooooooo!


----------



## helghast

keep posting more pics


----------



## bma83

For me the answer to this question is answered by which skyline is more pleasing to my eye. Which skyline clearly shows highs _and _lows? Which skyline offers different styles? Now, in terms of density New York wins, hands down, no question. In terms of style and architecture my vote goes to *Chicago *by a long shot. And , a mon avis, style and architecture are more important characteristics than density. I think New York’s density hurts it chances at winning the best architectural skyline title because a lot of its beautiful building are hidden by tall ugly boxy buildings.


----------



## nygirl

I'd like to add to my earlier statement.

I think Chicago's superb highrises compose the World's finest skyline but I think indivual buildings and fine high rise and midrise architecture unquestionably goes to New York City and I will probably exhaust the rest of my time on this thread dedicated to showcasing that--believe me I have enough fuel to keep this thread floating at the top of this section for even a couple of months.

That is not to take away from the architectural merits of Chicago and I do believe it is the only city in the world that comes close to matching New York's stock pile. With all of that said I think very few citys come even remotely close to Chicago in that sense and that says a lot.
That is not intended as a knock to other citys skylines and the achievements they have made in their time racing to the sky--its just that NY and Chicago have a 100 year edge on pretty much everyone else and pleasantly contrasting styles that have grown and aged well next to one another for far longer. 
I think it makes a pretty big statement to have stone and masonry next to brick work, next to glass-ordinary with ornate- simplistic designs with state of the art. It took time to get to where we are and you know what? We never stopped and we're still going... oh yes I do think that is a big statement. NY and Chicago can boast Art Deco, International, Beaux Arts, Neo-Classic, Post Modern, and the sleek glass structures of today in far greater amounts. At this time I feel they have both outgrown the days of competing with one another and proving themselves to everyone else. All they really have to do is just keep adding to the collection. 
Contrasting styles, I feel, are either taken for granted or so easily dismissed on these boards and while thats fine I can't help to see the substance in one dimensional glass structures and skylines that are comprised of nothing but--tricolored glass highrises. 
I like to think of it as a salad bowl but there is nothing inside of it aside for the lettuce. That would be a pretty boring salad.... Keep in mind when I mention "fine architecture" I am referring to highrises and midrises and do believe Paris and London's cityscape eat New York and Chicago for breakfast for the same reason I feel New York and Chicago's skyline eat the world for lunch and dinner.

Hope I made you hungry with that post. I'll be back with some photo contributions later. 

Skyline- Chicago
Architecture- New York


----------



## Northsider

Chicago for me, not just because I live here. NYC's is indeed impressive, but it just looking like a solid mass of skyscrapers. Chicago's is much more dynamic and photo-happy in my opinion.


> I think indivual buildings and fine high rise and midrise architecture unquestionably goes to New York City


I agree...but like mentioned, those buildings just get lost in the overwhelming mass of NYCs skyline. With Chicago you can see the forest _and_ the trees.


----------



## ZZ-II

NYC...but Chicago is the 2nd best


----------



## CityPolice

Northsider said:


> Chicago for me, not just because I live here. NYC's is indeed impressive, but it just looking like a solid mass of skyscrapers. Chicago's is much more dynamic and photo-happy in my opinion.
> 
> I agree...but like mentioned, those buildings just get lost in the overwhelming mass of NYCs skyline. *With Chicago you can see the forest and the trees*.


What do you call Central Park, or Battery Park, West Side Park(the park i use to play in when i was a younger) or any park on the outskirts of Manhattan. Dont forget we got the Bridges.


----------



## Skybean

I need more visuals to help me make an informed decision.


----------



## skyscraper100

i like both, chicago and new york is both beautiful


----------



## CityPolice




----------



## stewartrama

CrazyCanuck said:


> City vs City is not allowed.


and besides, its comparing the skylines not the actual cities. Take a chill pill


----------



## koolkid

CityPolice said:


> What do you call Central Park, or Battery Park, West Side Park(the park i use to play in when i was a younger) or any park on the outskirts of Manhattan. Dont forget we got the Bridges.


It seems like you didn't quite understand what he meant. Just to keep things simple, he's saying that one can easily appreciate buildings individually in chicago than in ny. He's right, the buildings here just get lost in the chaos that is our skyline.


----------



## Northsider

^^ Yes, I was not commenting literally on the trees or parks in either city. I was using a metaphor


----------



## CityPolice

koolkid said:


> It seems like you didn't quite understand what he meant. Just to keep things simple, he's saying that one can easily appreciate buildings individually in chicago than in ny. He's right, the buildings here just get lost in the chaos that is our skyline.


oops:lol: i see what hes talking about. I dont know why i took it so literal.


----------



## 3521usa

That first pic posted by CityPolice is one of my favorite pics of NYC. Anyway, I always go back and forth when it comes to which skyline I prefer. It all depends on the angle I guess.


----------



## nygirl

*NEW YORK CITY...round 1*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both citys. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**

















*

- Eric










- Eric


















*


----------



## nygirl

*CHICAGO...round one*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both citys. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**














































-	Den Haag Avw 









-	Den Haag Avw


----------



## nygirl

*NEW YORK CITY...round 2*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both citys. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**



















- me


----------



## nygirl

*CHICAGO...round 2*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both citys. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**














































- Thierryhubert










I_am_hydrogen


----------



## nygirl

*New York City*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both citys. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**




























stephenhafin


----------



## nygirl

*Chicago*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both citys. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**










- Chicago3rd









-I_am_Hydrogen









- I_am_Hydrogen



























- Chi649


----------



## nygirl

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both citys. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**

New York










-point&click









-point&click









- Patja



























-eqqman












Chicago
















































- Waterboy4


----------



## nygirl

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both citys. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**


Chicago


































































- me









- me



New York City

























































- point&click


----------



## nygirl

*RFC Panoramas*


----------



## _00_deathscar

MORE! MORE!

Absolutely loving this thread. Orgasm of great skyline pictures.


----------



## Northsider

Great collection NYgirl...really shows off both cities!


> Orgasm of great skyline pictures.


lol


----------



## Twix

This makes New York City a very beautifel skyline.










I still LOVE NY!


----------



## luci203

*Gotham City... *:uh:










_Ice age... _










:drool: :drool:


----------



## Joy Machine

I gotta go with chicago, although at night, nyc is the one. the chicago skyline has life and color and as someone stated...dynamics. For the overall scheme, Nyc is just so brown and dreary looking


----------



## nygirl

There used to be these great threads a couple months and few years back where the Chicago and NY forumers kind of got together to compare similar shots around both citys with eachother. 
There were 2 or maybe even 3 in all and the best part was that everyone got along which is rare in any vs. thread and it happend x3 for us. 

I have no idea where those threads dropped but Kevin if you're out there and you got the links maybe we can bring them back to life to accompany this thread.

We should do an architecture thread paying homage to both of these citys somewhere.


----------



## Northsider

> There were 2 or maybe even 3 in all and the best part was that everyone got along which is rare in any vs. thread and it happend x3 for us.


I loved that thread! I did a quick search in the Chicago forums but I couldn't find it. :-/


----------



## tpe

nygirl said:


> There used to be these great threads a couple months and few years back where the Chicago and NY forumers kind of got together to compare similar shots around both citys with eachother.
> There were 2 or maybe even 3 in all and the best part was that everyone got along which is rare in any vs. thread and it happend x3 for us.
> 
> I have no idea where those threads dropped but Kevin if you're out there and you got the links maybe we can bring them back to life to accompany this thread.
> 
> We should do an architecture thread paying homage to both of these citys somewhere.



Yes, I remember some of those old threads.  I am sure that we can recreate them, if we can't get back the old links...


----------



## Northsider

> There were 2 or maybe even 3 in all and the best part was that everyone got along which is rare in any vs. thread


For the most part, I think NYers and Chicagoans respect each other's city. When the thread celebrates both of them, rather than compare, good things happen. :-D I still cannot find that thread, it must have been a while ago.


----------



## cubsfan

edit


----------



## lukasargyros

*all about where you grow up*

as with anything in ones environment, there are certain aspects that have more meaning to that person than other aspects. so the idea of "the skyline" treated as an object can have meaning to a person. 

take these two people. someone that grows up in manhattan or chicago and for a majority of their lives never really leaves the city, the skyline will probably have less meaning to them vs. someone that grows up outside of either city and gets to experience the skyline the way a skyline is supposed to be experienced. *from a distance.*

perspective is key in the meaning of anything. 

so...its a preference thing too. but i think the manhattan skyline is far more impressive than chicago...although im a fan of chicago from the ground over manhattan

maybe


----------



## cubsfan

More of Chi:


----------



## nygirl

Oh that last shot is money...I like how the buildings around Rush street, Streeterville, and around the water tower puncuate the sky. That, and the trio of Intercontinental, Trib, and Wrigley are quintessentially Chicago. I'll check the archives for those threads but I'll probably have no luck. If we can put our heads together on this one and get a new thread where should we put it? I'd like it if this could be that thread but the title will bring in an unwanted element that is expected. We could call it the Chicago-New York apprfeciation thread? Architecture thread? We could always call it "Wanna know who your Mommy and Daddy are?" but that would be a little too inflammatory but still funny.


----------



## spyguy

nygirl said:


> There used to be these great threads a couple months and few years back where the Chicago and NY forumers kind of got together to compare similar shots around both citys with eachother.
> There were 2 or maybe even 3 in all and the best part was that everyone got along which is rare in any vs. thread and it happend x3 for us.
> 
> I have no idea where those threads dropped but Kevin if you're out there and you got the links maybe we can bring them back to life to accompany this thread.
> 
> We should do an architecture thread paying homage to both of these citys somewhere.


It was resurrected years ago, but there wasn't a great deal of interest in it anymore.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=292814


----------



## Northsider

^^ I don't think that was it. At least, not the one I am thinking of. It was a thread with similar shots of NY and Chicago.


----------



## Jardoga

I didnt realise Chicago was so big! Is it the second most populous American City?


----------



## nygirl

*Chicago*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both cities. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**






























- ChicagoGeorge









- blue(skied)









-IsaRic









- I_am_Hydrogen


















- Wolfgang1320


----------



## nygirl

*New York City*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both cities. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**










- Maria Erin


















-DanDC









-Mariah1103









-Midweekpost




























-Alexjon


----------



## chicagogeorge

I thought we ended these city vs city threads?

Btw, both skylines are world class... :cheers:


----------



## nygirl

*New York & Chicago*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both cities. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**



















-cbotnyse

Chicago









New York








-Pmarella?


Chicago








-cbotnyse

New York








- Alexjon


Chicago










New York








- Dave Schumaker



Chicago










New York








- Optum

Chicago








- cbotnyse

New York








- Gio.o


Chicago








- I_am_Hydrogen

New York








- Winnie0917  I know I know


----------



## MDguy

Jardoga said:


> I didnt realise Chicago was so big! Is it the second most populous American City?


Third, behind Los Angeles


----------



## nygirl

*The Windy City*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both cities. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**





























- chi649



























- Joel Mulligan


----------



## nygirl

*The Big Apple*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both cities. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**



















- Jim in Times Square









- Cbotnyse









--Volguus Zildrohar









-RFC









- Gio.o









- The Big Black Mariah


----------



## nygirl

*The City of Big Shoulders*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both cities. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**



















-I_am_Hydrogen









-cbotnyse









-cbotnyse


















- Yaminie10


----------



## nygirl

*The City that never sleeps*

*For a while I have been saving photos from various threads on the forum of both cities. I usually use them to post in other threads and other sections but they're also perfect for this one. There are a few that are out-dated as well as other that are not exactly skyline shots but along the lines of this thread. *Please note that if a photo is not credited it is not mine nor do I know who took it.**










- Volguus Zildrohar









-Bunky1603









- UrbanImpact









Gio.o









- Tin can Telephone









- Jennsch


:cheers:


----------



## clnense

Hi, both cities look great.
Personally i think NYC skyline is more dense but i think Chicago's buildings look more modern.


----------



## BALENCIAGA

New York City:


----------



## parcdesprinces

Hummm.....a harrowing choice.....I've been to both of them.....and I liked each one differently...

Sorry, I can't vote ! :lol:


----------



## helghast

does anyoby know where or what building this shot was taken from ?
http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww49/rozwell08/2947770752106c373a9bbuz0.jpg


----------



## Northsider

helghast said:


> does anyoby know where or what building this shot was taken from ?
> http://i704.photobucket.com/albums/ww49/rozwell08/2947770752106c373a9bbuz0.jpg


I want to say this one: http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=parkplacetower-chicago-il-usa

...but I could be way wrong...


----------



## hoosier

Both cities have nice skylines, but I have to go with New York because it has FOUR different skylines (Midtown, Downtown, Brooklyn, and Long Island City). Plus, you can't beat the sheer urbanity and density of Manhattan.


----------



## Chi649

A few of Chicago











*scroll------>*


----------



## 599GTB

Some NYC pics.............


----------



## nygirl

Some great examples of the architecture I'm talking about.


hoosier said:


> Both cities have nice skylines, but I have to go with New York because it has FOUR different skylines (Midtown, Downtown, Brooklyn, and Long Island City). Plus, you can't beat the sheer urbanity and density of Manhattan.


Yeah but we're also drawing imaginary lines. Jersey City+ Newport and to some extent Newark are worthy of being mentioned. We live in a metro much more so than just the city and if it is about numbers than NY has several skyline other than the 4 mentioned. A linear skyline of midrise apartment blocks spans coney island. White Plaines and New Rochelle are closer to certain parts of the Bronx and then there is the stretch of Fort Lee- West NY and Hoboken. 

All of those cities and seperate skylines could never hold a candle to Chicago but combined with NYC they are a significant presense.


----------



## CityPolice

ChiTown2PA said:


> I don't think he meant literal "trees." He meant you can see the impressive shape of the skyline AND the rich texture of each individual building that comprises it.
> 
> This comes from an expression, "You can't see the forest for the trees." It means, you are so caught up on details, that you cannot see the big picture. It's a joke.


I know that. But thanx


----------



## MDguy

tj_alan90alan said:


> whatever they say .. Maryland Ruless!!!




What?! haha


----------



## madtony26.2

I voted for Chicago. From what I've seen, New York dominates Chicago in numbers. Taller buildings.. more buildings.. more people. But, with the few buildings Chicago has compared to NY, they are mostly quality architecture. NY may have as many good looking skyscrapers as Chicago, but the number of ugly buildings in NY take away from the rest of the skyline.


----------



## backupcoolm4n

I LOVE both cities, but New York wins, it is Chicago all around but on a grander scale in my opinion


----------



## Manila-X

CityPolice said:


> This picture is in the future. Notice the Freedom Tower and the rest of the WTC.


That pic surprised me as well seeing The Freedom Tower render in the pic


----------



## Jarvijarv

*ALWAYS THE OPTIMIST*



madtony26.2 said:


> I voted for Chicago. From what I've seen, New York dominates Chicago in numbers. Taller buildings.. more buildings.. more people. But, with the few buildings Chicago has compared to NY, they are mostly quality architecture. NY may have as many good looking skyscrapers as Chicago, but the number of ugly buildings in NY take away from the rest of the skyline.


^^
Exactly how i feel. kay: I like the stark variation in heights of Chicago and its street scenes are some of the most beautifully planned. On a purely photogenic standpoint, it's why i also choose Chicago.


----------



## sumo^san

are we voting for the size/numbers or by the beauty?

aesthetically wise...CHICAGO definitely ^^


----------



## CityPolice

sumo^san said:


> are we voting for the size/numbers or by the beauty?
> 
> aesthetically wise...CHICAGO definitely ^^


Both put together.


----------



## JURARO

I agree with many of you here:

Size, density - NYC

Aesthetics and building styles - CHI

My vote is with Chicago strictly in the skyline sense.

PS>> Notice the amount of international posters that support NYC.....I guess being the set for all those movies has paid off, smart move.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

NY for aesthetics, size and density.

NY has had a building bitz featuring projects by all of the world's great celebrity architects. 

Chicagoans seem to forget that practically every office tower that's been built there in the past ten years is a box.


----------



## ZandoKan

Chicago is amazing

but...i voted for NY... is very nice


----------



## BALENCIAGA

I love this NYC pic!


----------



## 599GTB

JURARO said:


> I agree with many of you here:
> 
> Size, density - NYC
> 
> Aesthetics and building styles - CHI
> 
> My vote is with Chicago strictly in the skyline sense.
> 
> PS>> Notice the amount of international posters that support NYC.....I guess being the set for all those movies has paid off, smart move.


Yea, because they're international, they must be misinformed and basing their opinions from television even though this is (1) a skyscraper forum (2) with skyscraper fans (3) who have seen thousands of New York City and Chicago photographs to compare. How ridiculous. 

What type of forum do you think this is? It's not like we're walking about on the streets and polling random people who could care less about skylines. I think many of us know enough about skylines and buildings to forum our own opinion opinions.

I live in the United States and I think aesthetics, size, density = NYC.


----------



## D.D.

I have voted chicago... NY skyline is too crowded and filled with red bricked cubes.. (ugly sckyscrapers) overall chicago skyline is a win, but in terms of city wised critique I'll go for New York.. gotta love that city  (I put my bad experience in the past)


----------



## -Corey-

This is a hard one, but i voted for New York.


----------



## BALENCIAGA

MORE NYC!!!!


----------



## cubsfan

I cannnot believe that New York is 3 to 1 on Chicago in this poll.
I wish that Chicago had 2,000 17 story buildings built during the 1920's. *sarcasm*


----------



## bobbie501

Both NYC & Chicago have beautiful skylines but Chicago can be Futuristic City when compared to NYC,It can lead the world & can be the American answer to the rising Asians.My vote is for Chicago.


----------



## Northsider

cubsfan said:


> I cannnot believe that New York is 3 to 1 on Chicago in this poll.
> I wish that Chicago had 2,000 17 story buildings built during the 1920's. *sarcasm*


I think most people just look at NYC and see the sheer mass of concrete and think "wow! that's awesome!". As NYgirl said previously, Chicago is skyline perfection.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

cubsfan said:


> I cannnot believe that New York is 3 to 1 on Chicago in this poll.
> I wish that Chicago had 2,000 17 story buildings built during the 1920's. *sarcasm*


The two thousand 17 story buildings built in the 1920's are one of the things that make NY vastly superior to Chicago from an architectural perspective.









Moreover, unlike a new city like Chicago which didn't even exist during Colonial times, New York's 400 years of architectural history also make it vastly superior.


----------



## ElCrioyo

i think new york is better...but it may be influenced by the fact that i live here


----------



## Northsider

> Moreover, unlike a new city like Chicago which didn't even exist during Colonial times, New York's 400 years of architectural history also make it vastly superior.


But we're talking about _skylines_, not how old the city is.


----------



## FabriFlorence

It's a giants battle but I voted for Chicago. In my opinion its skyline is insuperable.


----------



## tpe

dnobsemajdnob said:


> The two thousand 17 story buildings built in the 1920's are one of the things that make NY vastly superior to Chicago from an architectural perspective.


Ignorance is bliss.



> Moreover, unlike a new city like Chicago which didn't even exist during Colonial times, New York's 400 years of architectural history also make it vastly superior.


Name me one building in the NYC skyline that dates prior to 1850.


----------



## rise_against

I always go back and forth on this one:

In person NYC is much more impressive, almost overwhelming.
In pictures i think Chicago has the much nicer skyline. 
I thought NYC was the more interesting city overall.
The built form of both cities is impressive, i love the older stuff in NYC but i adore the international "boxes" in Chicago. People dont realize how hard and special it is to make exceptional "boxes". Besides its not as if Chicago was all boxes, there is a great mix of buildings there as well.

Overall: Both are great in different ways. I dont know how someone can bash one or the other without letting hatred or bias creep in. In the past (back in the ol' city vs city days...are we allowed to do this again?) i think i voted for NYC, so today i think im feeling Chicago...really impossible to make up my mind though.


----------



## tpe

ElCrioyo said:


> i think new york is better...but it may be influenced by the fact that i live here


That is fair enough.

I think the NYC skyline is best appreciated in sections. Taking all of these sections together can be both overwhelming and confusing. The overall effect is nonetheless powerful and impressive.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

tpe said:


> Ignorance is bliss.
> 
> 
> 
> Name me one building in the NYC skyline that dates prior to 1850.


Skyscrapers did not exist before 1850. I was responding to the post which referred to NY's scores of 20 story buildings constructed during the 1920s. That being said, from skyline shots of lower Manhattan, one can see several colonial era buildings including this one.


----------



## tpe

dnobsemajdnob said:


> Skyscrapers did not exist before 1850. I was responding to the post which referred to NY's scores of 20 story buildings constructed during the 1920s. That being said, from skyline shots of lower Manhattan, one can see several colonial era buildings including this one.


You don't see such buildings in the skyline. For example, you can't even see St. Pats, which is buried by all the later buildings. 

They certainly don't contribute anything to the present skyline.

And Boston and Williamsburg have superior architecture from the colonial period. Does it make Boston a better architectural city than NYC?

Compared to Venice and the Italian cities, NYC is a baby architecturally and artistically. Does it mean that NYC is not significant architecturally?

Answer: no. NYC is significant, even if it represents really significant architecture from just the past 100 years or so. 

The same with Chicago. Just because NYC is older doesn't mean that it is more significant architecturally (besides, none of the post-1850 buildings in NYC are architecturally that significant, on a global scale). 

The fact that there is a Chicago School of Architecture speaks for itself -- there is no equivalent New York School of Architecture, as accepted universally in architecture history.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

tpe said:


> You don't see such buildings in the skyline. For example, you can't even see St. Pats, which is buried by all the later buildings.
> 
> They certainly don't contribute anything to the present skyline.
> 
> And Boston and Williamsburg have superior architecture from the colonial period. Does it make Boston a better architectural city than NYC?
> 
> ....
> The same with Chicago. Just because NYC is older doesn't mean that it is more significant architecturally (besides, none of the post-1850 buildings in NYC are architecturally that significant, on a global scale).
> 
> The fact that there is a Chicago School of Architecture speaks for itself -- there is no equivalent New York School of Architecture, as accepted universally in architecture history.


The building that I posted is visible in skyline shots, as are others.

NY has more colonial buildings than Boston or Williamsburg and older ones too. Boston's oldest is Paul Revere's house from the 1660's. NY has several that pre-date that. Most of the colonial buildings in Williamsburg aren't even genuine. They're reproductions.

Who cares is there's a Chicago School of Architecture? That's a ridiculous argument.


----------



## tpe

dnobsemajdnob said:


> The building that I posted is visible in skyline shots, as are others.


But it doesn't contribute to the skyline -- there is no question about it. 

St. Pats is much taller and much more imposing, and yet it is never mentioned when it comes to the NYC skyline. 

To say that such buildings contribute to the NYC skyline is a stetch.



> NY has more colonial buildings than Boston or Williamsburg and older ones too. Boston's oldest is Paul Revere's house from the 1660's. NY has several that pre-date that. Most of the colonial buildings in Williamsburg aren't even genuine. They're reproductions.


You see? You fell into the familiar trap. WE are talking about QUALITY here, and not QUANTITY.

A lot of crap is a lot of crap. A diamond is a diamond. 

Name me ONE colonial building in NYC that can hold a candle to the Williamsburg building attributed to Christopher Wren himself.












> Who cares is there's a Chicago School of Architecture? That's a ridiculous argument.


Who cares? Why, people who are actually not IGNORANT of architecture, of course! :lol:


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

I find it quite amusing that when it comes to buildings from the 1600s, you refer to a "trap" of quality v. quantity. I hate to disillusion you, but neither New York nor New England had buildings on the scale of European ones in the 1600s. Moreover, to even dispute the quality of a building from the 1600's (even if it were located in Europe) is infantile. That being said, in response to your statement about Boston having older and a greater quantity of such buildings, you're wrong.

With respect to your inquiry of great Colonial buildings in NY that rival Williamsburg's, here's one of many.










Secondly, as noted, most of the buildings in Williamsburg are reproductions -- not originals, including that one which was reconstructed on the original site in the 1920's.


----------



## Northsider

dnobsemajdnob, you are basically arguing that NYC is older and has more buildings, therefore is 'better' than Chicago. If that's your argument, fine...but let's not start "who cares about Chicago school of architecture", etc.

If the thread was NYC vs Chicago: historic buildings...maybe you'd have an argument


----------



## tpe

dnobsemajdnob said:


> I find it quite amusing that when it comes to buildings from the 1600s, you refer to a "trap" of quality v. quantity. I hate to disillusion you, but neither New York nor New England had buildings on the scale of European ones in the 1600s. That being said, in response to your statement about Boston having older buildings, you're wrong.
> 
> With respect to your inquiry of great Colonial buildings in NY that rival Williamsburg's, here's one of many.
> 
> Secondly, as noted, most of the buildings in Williamsburg are reproductions -- not originals, including that one which was reconstructed on the original site in the 1920's.


The Wren Building is not a reproduction. It is restored exactly as it was in the 18th century.

And surely you know of Christopher Wren, correct? Whether it was actually designed by him personally or by his Office in London, that building ranks as perhaps the most perfect colonial building in the US. 

There is nothing in NYC that can equal it from the same period. Period.

The next thing you will tell me is that there are colonial buidlings in NYC that would equal this:


----------



## tpe

dnobsemajdnob said:


>


And by the bye, St Paul's chapel, lovely as it is, is certainly NOT architecturally significant. Architecturally, it is a pale derivative copy of THE ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT one in London:


----------



## 599GTB

Northsider said:


> *I think most people just look at NYC and see the sheer mass of concrete and think "wow! that's awesome!".* As NYgirl said previously, Chicago is skyline perfection.



Not really.

And who cares what NYGirl said? She is one opinion out of the 200+ voters who overwhelmingly think NYC's skyline is perfection. I don't think Chicago's skyline is perfection.


----------



## tpe

599GTB said:


> Not really.
> 
> And who cares what NYGirl said? She is one opinion out of the 200+ voters who overwhelmingly think NYC's skyline is perfection. I don't think Chicago's skyline is perfection.



NYGirl has roots in NYC and Chicago, and is familiar with both cities.

She is certainly more qualified than many people here.

And as for the poll, I would believe an architect of Frank Gehry's stature first before any of these 200+ opinions.

After all, there will always be more cockroaches in the world than people. So will this make garbage any more tastier to us, simply because there are more roaches who prefer it?

Please don't take the analogy too seriously!  But I hope you get what I mean...


----------



## Northsider

> Not really.


Thanks. That comment really helps move this thread along.


> And who cares what NYGirl said?


Apparently _I_ do. I have a lot of respect for her. Who the heck are you? 


> She is one opinion out of the 200+ voters who overwhelmingly think NYC's skyline is perfection


Please read the whole thread and _then_ comment. I'm not going to post what I think her opinion is...I just reposted what she posted and I totally agree with it. 


> I don't think Chicago's skyline is perfection.


That's nice. Thanks for your comment. Any reasons?


----------



## Ni3lS

Voted for Chicago. Chicago's skyline is way better IMO. Looks more balanced to me. Some of the towers are pointing out of the skyline, I like that. In NYC you have a lot of towers at the same height. It's like one block concrete. I don't want to put NYC next to Sao Paulo for example. But if they keep building at the same height, it will get there. Sao Paulo is seriously a skyline I hate. It's all the same height, no towers pointing out, you don't even know what's the middle and what's the end of the skyline. In Chicago it's easy to see how they built up that skyline. You can see the end, the middle etc. Like I said. It's perfectly balanced.


----------



## 599GTB

tpe said:


> NYGirl has roots in NYC and Chicago, and is familiar with both cities.
> 
> She is certainly more qualified than many people here.


How funny, because that poster has roots in both cities her opinion regarding skylines is seen as more valid? Quite a stupid argument, don't you think? Who told you I (or the other 200) voters have no roots in Chicago and/or New York City? Oh that's right, you just assumed it because Chicago is being walloped.

I suppose I have more architectural authority than the both of you since I was born in Rome.



> And as for the poll, I would believe an architect of Frank Gehry's stature first before any of these 200+ opinions.


Another quite ignorant statement. What did he say anyway? While you're at it, compile the opinions of the _other_ top 100 architects instead of picking and choosing. I don't want to start a city vs. city, but whenever I'm discussing cities/architecture/whatever and it doesn't go Chicago's way, I'm always presented with some random quote or opinion from some sort of "expert" to show me that I (and the public) are both wrong. It never fails as evidenced by this thread.



> After all, there will always be more cockroaches in the world than people. So will this make garbage any more tastier to us, simply because there are more roaches who prefer it?
> 
> Please don't take the analogy too seriously!  But I hope you get what I mean...


There are no "facts" regarding which city has better skylines or a better buildings....because it's all opinion.

I think New York is superior to Chicago in both aspects but my opinion doesn't make it a fact. People prefer New York's skyline over Chicago but that doesn't make it a fact that New York's is better either.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

tpe said:


> The Wren Building is not a reproduction. It is restored exactly as it was in the 18th century.
> 
> And surely you know of Christopher Wren, correct?....


I'm English, so yes, I know Sir (Thank you) Christopher Wren.

The building you note, unlike the Capital building on the other side of Gloucester Street (and for the most part, all of Williamsburg) is not a 100% reproduction. It's a 99% reproduction. As per Williamsburg's website:


"The Wren Building bears the name of the distinguished English architect, Sir Christopher Wren, who may possibly have influenced its original design. Construction began in 1695. The building sustained serious damage in fires in 1705, 1859, and 1862, but the massive exterior walls of the Wren Building are largely original. The Wren Building now has the outward appearance that it showed from early in the 18th century. It is located on the College of William and Mary campus."


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

Northsider said:


> dnobsemajdnob, you are basically arguing that NYC is older and has more buildings, therefore is 'better' than Chicago. If that's your argument, fine...but let's not start "who cares about Chicago school of architecture", etc.
> 
> If the thread was NYC vs Chicago: historic buildings...maybe you'd have an argument


I'm not arguing that at all. This all started by one person's comment about the thousands of 1920's era 20 story buildings in NY, a comment to which I directly responded. Someone then asked me to name a single pre-1850's building that's visible in the skyline, which I did, etc.

My initial comment on this thread is that NY is better architecturally. Full stop.


----------



## helghast

^^ better architecturally ? :lol: thats a joke. ny just has density, Chicago is the one with architecture. its that simple


----------



## tpe

599GTB said:


> How funny, because that poster has roots in both cities her opinion regarding skylines is seen as more valid? Quite a stupid argument, don't you think? Who told you I (or the other 200) voters have no roots in Chicago and/or New York City? Oh that's right, you just assumed it because Chicago is being walloped.


She certainly knows more about both cities than you, for instance. And why not? She can argue both cities rationally, and not from a vantage point of ignorance, like some people here.



> I suppose I have more architectural authority than the both of you since I was born in Rome.


But do you even know architecture? It is clear that you don't, and I bet that I know more about Roman architecture of ANY period than you do.




> Another quite ignorant statement. What did he say anyway? While you're at it, compile the opinions of the _other_ top 100 architects instead of picking and choosing. I don't want to start a city vs. city, but whenever I'm discussing cities/architecture/whatever and it doesn't go Chicago's way, I'm always presented with some random quote or opinion from some sort of "expert" to show me that I (and the public) are both wrong. It never fails as evidenced by this thread.


So you apparently are one of these irresponsible posters who don't read anything that has been previously posted. Look at the posts and quotes I cited in the earlier pages.




> There are no "facts" regarding which city has better skylines or a better buildings....because it's all opinion.
> 
> I think New York is superior to Chicago in both aspects but my opinion doesn't make it a fact. People prefer New York's skyline over Chicago but that doesn't make it a fact that New York's is better either.


There is such a thing as an informed, educated opinion, and an opinion based on ignorance and complete lack of knowledge. And clearly, the opinion of one great architect has more weight than a thousand ignorant and conveniently anonymous ones like yours.


----------



## tpe

> I'm English, so yes, I know Sir (Thank you) Christopher Wren.
> 
> The building you note, unlike the Capital building on the other side of Gloucester Street (and for the most part, all of Williamsburg) is not a 100% reproduction. It's a 99% reproduction. As per Williamsburg's website:
> 
> 
> "The Wren Building bears the name of the distinguished English architect, Sir Christopher Wren, who may possibly have influenced its original design. Construction began in 1695. The building sustained serious damage in fires in 1705, 1859, and 1862, *but the massive exterior walls of the Wren Building are largely original. The Wren Building now has the outward appearance that it showed from early in the 18th century.* It is located on the College of William and Mary campus."



But do you really KNOW him? Hmmm? 

And so you agree with me that the current state of the exterior is faithful to the original 18th century design, correct?

Please know the difference between a reproduction and a restoration. And even if it were a total make-over, the fact that they follow the original design guarantees that the architecture is the same, correct? Shouldn't this be obvious?


----------



## Oriolus

I'm always impressed by the density and extent of New York's skyline, more so then Chicago, but my vote goes to Chicago. From many angles New York seems chaotic and messy, with too many grubby little buildings to detract from its more archirectural distinguished skyscrapers. Whereas Chicago always seems so sleek and clean, with a much better overall asthetic appeal. 



matthemod said:


> Went up to Chicago the other week to see Flogging Molly (awesome) and got this picture from the ride in. It's my favourite!


Is that the road Ferris Bueller took into the city? Worth watching the movie just for the skyline shots of Chicago


----------



## backupcoolm4n

Amen NYC does have nice 17 story buildings built in the 20's, that guy is just jealous, sure Chicago invented the skyscraper but NYC perfected it, and tested its limits, NYC is full of beautiful "17 story" buildings with exquisite detail, and many buildings built during and before the 1920s were tall and extravagant as well such as the Woolworth Building, Trump Tower (name changed), and Metropolitan Life Insurance Buildings are all good examples


----------



## jayhawker

New York does not have an awe-inspiring view that epitomizes the skyline as Chicago does. Only the view from across the bay of Hong Kong can beat the view of Chicago from the planetarium. It really is beautiful. The collapse of the Twin Towers did great harm to the world's original skyline, and it is no longer the world's most attractive or impressive. New york has yet to recover, and it seems as if it may be decades until it does--which is a shame because so many here seem to equate peaks-and-valleys from a distance with actual greatness.

One gigantic falsehood perpetuated on this thread is the idea that New York has density but not quality. This is outright lie, and deserves to be treated as such. New york has both in spades. No city in the world compares to New York in quality and diversity of architecture. The greatest compliment I can give Chicago is that it comes closer than any other city--though it it is still not close. When it comes to Colonial, Georgian, Renaissance, Gothic, Beaux Arts, Art Deco, Post Modern and Contemoprary architecture, New York just destroys Chicago. Just destroys it. Then there is the international style--which Chicago claims as their own school. Well lets talk about the greatest international style buildings in the US., Seagram, Lever, UN, US Steel, Chase, Daley Center, WTC, Hancock. Yes Chicago shines, but New York is just as impressive. If not moreso. What am I saying--definitely moreso. 

The advantage of chicago is that there is more space, which is certainly nice for looking at individual buildings--but a great detriment to the urbanity of what is supposedly one of our of our most urban environments. Hmmmmmph. Asphalt parking lots and buildings perched on parking towers have no business in an "alpha city", but if one wants to look at a specific skyscraper--i guess it helps. Another advantage of Chicago is that is a great underdog city. no doubt my post will be followed by a slew of pro-2nd city replies.


----------



## charmedone

this thred is kinda dumb i mean the only other city that can beet new yorks skyline is hong kong but thats only because it grew so fast as a city i mean chicao is a nice city but it doesnt have that same affect that new york does when you look at 
new york has also built some of the worlds tallest buildings chicago only did that one or twice and you can find many diffrent styles of buildings from old to new short to tall in many diffrent styles chicago has that but not as much 

chicago lacts alot of older styled buildings from the 1920's and 1930's theres some but there not as tall and inspirering as the ones you see in new york city but thats also because most of chicagos tall buildings were built between the late 60's to now


----------



## Ni3lS

^^ Dude, work on your grammar. Your post is unreadable. Ever heard of : . or , ?


----------



## tpe

jayhawker said:


> New York does not have an awe-inspiring view that epitomizes the skyline as Chicago does. Only the view from across the bay of Hong Kong can beat the view of Chicago from the planetarium. It really is beautiful. The collapse of the Twin Towers did great harm to the world's original skyline, and it is no longer the world's most attractive or impressive. New york has yet to recover, and it seems as if it may be decades until it does--which is a shame because so many here seem to equate peaks-and-valleys from a distance with actual greatness.
> 
> One gigantic falsehood perpetuated on this thread is the idea that New York has density but not quality. This is outright lie, and deserves to be treated as such. New york has both in spades. No city in the world compares to New York in quality and diversity of architecture. The greatest compliment I can give Chicago is that it comes closer than any other city--though it it is still not close. When it comes to Colonial, Georgian, Renaissance, Gothic, Beaux Arts, Art Deco, Post Modern and Contemoprary architecture, New York just destroys Chicago. Just destroys it. Then there is the international style--which Chicago claims as their own school. Well lets talk about the greatest international style buildings in the US., Seagram, Lever, UN, US Steel, Chase, Daley Center, WTC, Hancock. Yes Chicago shines, but New York is just as impressive. If not moreso. What am I saying--definitely moreso.
> 
> The advantage of chicago is that there is more space, which is certainly nice for looking at individual buildings--but a great detriment to the urbanity of what is supposedly one of our of our most urban environments. Hmmmmmph. Asphalt parking lots and buildings perched on parking towers have no business in an "alpha city",  but if one wants to look at a specific skyscraper--i guess it helps. Another advantage of Chicago is that is a great underdog city. no doubt my post will be followed by a slew of pro-2nd city replies.



Well, I never look down on a nuanced opinion.  This is fine by me.

For the others who are not so nuanced and in need of additional reading, I would call them to the *American Institute of Architects*' verdict, cited in numerous professional and popular publications. Here is a sample:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200601/book-reviews

And I quote:

_*Affirming the evident, the American Institute of Architects recently judged Chicago the city with the finest architecture in the country. To take the obvious a bit further, Chicago holds more important buildings of the past century and a half [tpe: yes, they mean post 1850s or thereabouts] than any other place in the world.* And to look at it another way, Chicago's architecture constitutes one of this country's greatest contributions to modern civilization... _

But is it EVIDENT in this thread? Hmmm? 

Now who would you believe? The AIA, or the 200+ anonymous so-called "opinions" on this thread? Hmmm? 

Unbelievable. So unbelievable, it is pretty much a joke. :lol:

http://www.aia.org/index.htm


----------



## Avian001

^ I completely agree with the AIA. But I am a member after all  

However the idea of "best skyline" is pretty vague. And better architecture doesn't necessarily equate with skylines.


----------



## Northsider

> this thred is kinda dumb i mean the *only other city that can beet new yorks skyline is hong kong*


I think this thread is dumb because of end all be all posts like that. The fact that you totally shun Chicago, or any other US or world city for that matter, is what makes this thread dumb. There are so many posters here who have posted their appreciation for two skyline greats...yet there are so many who just post their ignorance.


----------



## tpe

Avian001 said:


> ^ I completely agree with the AIA. But I am a member after all
> 
> However the idea of "best skyline" is pretty vague. And better architecture doesn't necessarily equate with skylines.



This is true. Skylines are a matter of opinion/taste. But there is so much crap and misinformation posted on this thread (of which I am sure you have read) that I wanted to set the record straight as far as architecture is concerned.


----------



## Duzk

I think that most people just say NYC because that's what they see on T.V. and the media...

Also there's more NYC'ers which means NYC has a lot more home-based supporters in these polls.


----------



## Quall

tpe said:


> Then you are in the same school as Le Corbusier, who believed strongly that the Architecture of Chicago and New York are wanting.


Not sure about that. I don't think it's "wanting" or bland in any regard. I just think it's ugly.


----------



## tpe

Quall said:


> Not sure about that. I don't think it's "wanting" or bland in any regard. I just think it's ugly.



Frankly, I think he really felt the same way too! :lol:


----------



## pokistic

backupcoolm4n said:


> Amen NYC does have nice 17 story buildings built in the 20's, that guy is just jealous, sure Chicago invented the skyscraper but NYC perfected it, and tested its limits, NYC is full of beautiful "17 story" buildings with exquisite detail, and many buildings built during and before the 1920s were tall and extravagant as well such as the Woolworth Building, Trump Tower (name changed), and Metropolitan Life Insurance Buildings are all good examples


I agree. NYC is the best skyline in the world. The mix of so many old buildings to new ones is just amazing. :yes:


----------



## Rizzato

let me holla at you for a second 
NYC is the dark canyons, the grit, the grime, the old school skyline. you've got to hand it to them for putting up the Chrysler and ESB in those conditions, and inspiring us with their other contributions since then. I choose NYC
Chicago is more of the new school, fresh-faced, well-balanced skyline, with a swagger, and rightly so. it already looks luscious enough, so when Legacy is finished and Aqua is all cladded, it will be even better


----------



## Northsider

I don't know why people associate Chicago with "new" skyline...just because it's tallest towers were built 1969, 1972, and 2008? Practically all of the Michigan Ave wall is historic old buildings, and the wall is a predominant feature in the skyline from the east.


----------



## nygirl

Some of you are getting too passionate and while that is not a bad thing try not to be offensive and accept the opinions of others whether or not you agree.
This thread was reluctantly kept up by the staff because some thought you could be mature enough to keep it civil and at best enjoyable. There are however a handful of you (from both sides) getting too defensive and it doesn't help the argument of Chicago and New York being able to keep up a civil vs. thread.
I'll also mention that vs. threads are no longer allowed on this site so we are also dancing around a taboo by allowing it to remain up.


Too much distraction going on with biased arguments and defensive retaliations. I'm starting to think this should be locked and closed and I'll be the first to suggest it to the moderators of this sub forum if it continues. Try and keep it to minimal conversation and unlimited pictures..I have been very busy lately and have not had the time to go searching maybe others can contribute large photo posts? 


I thought the idea of switch hitting with Skyline and individual pieces of architecture was a good thing so if it bothers some of you that architecture took on a role in this thread you can blame me...tough.

Northsider, TPE, Krull... I'm counting on you seasoned forumers that don't need to be told anything to keep this thread chugging along. What do ya say? Go team CHI-NY!


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

I'm not being condescending. Chicagoans want to assert that their city produces the world's best architecture (and, at the very least, America's best) and that is, in most non-Americans' view, incorrect. Moreover, when non-Americans (and/or non-Midwestern Americans) dispute Chicagoans' false claim, they become indignant, as is clearly evidenced on this thread.

I posted a series of utilitarian boxes that Chicago has built as offices in the past decade. Chicago clearly is not building one Swiss Re after another, and star architects, such as Foster, Rogers, Piano, Nouvel, etc. clearly have not been involved in Chicago's office design in recent years.

In addition to the foregoing, I was appalled during my last trip to Chicago to see a large number of car parks in the middle of the city. That hardly is the setting of an architectural showcase.

Lastly, this crass, insipid attempt to mimic European Classicism belies Chicago's claim to a great architectural heritage. McDonald's (or some other tasteless brand that lacks substance) should be headquartered in this tower.

Jan


----------



## 599GTB

dnobsemajdnob said:


> I'm not being condescending. Chicagoans want to assert that their city produces the world's best architecture (and, at the very least, America's best) and that is, in most non-Americans' view, incorrect. Moreover, when non-Americans (and/or non-Midwestern Americans) dispute Chicagoans' false claim, they become indignant, as is clearly evidenced on this thread.
> 
> I posted a series of utilitarian boxes that Chicago has built as offices in the past decade. Chicago clearly is not building one Swiss Re after another, and star architects, such as Foster, Rogers, Piano, Nouvel, etc. clearly have not been involved in Chicago's office design in recent years.
> 
> In addition to the foregoing, I was appalled during my last trip to Chicago to see a large number of car parks in the middle of the city. That hardly is the setting of an architectural showcase.
> 
> Lastly, this crass, insipid attempt to mimic European Classicism belies Chicago's claim to a great architectural heritage. McDonald's (or some other tasteless brand that lacks substance) should be headquartered in this tower.


I agree. I see many buildings with parking lots as the base in Chicago which I think is terrible. Parking underground is OK but parking as the base of a building? Awful. Also, Chicago is just too boxy.

I just prefer New York's more dramatic skyline (and their overall urban design/architecture). Chicago's skyline is nice, but when I travel I'm never WOW'ed by it when I arrive in the city wheras I'm always WOWed when I arrive and am driven across a bridge into Manhattan.


----------



## JJose

humm kinda hard to choose one, both cities are great!!! lol just kidding!!!, NYC of course!!! I love this city, the best city in the world.


----------



## nygirl

*Northsider, Pokistic, Balenciaga *

Way to bring the thread back...you guys rock.

*Dnob*

You are out of line with the "second city syndrome" talk. Untrue and uncalled for. I will kindly ask you to cool it. Think...friendly competition. :hug:

*599GTB &Duzk*

Weak points on amounts of posts and membership for New York and Chicago. Those numbers are totally irrelevant to a thread dealing with a personal preference. That's like saying all the Chicagoans in here choose Chicago over NY and vise versa. 

*599GTB*

_"Why is it so hard to accept that people prefer New York's skyline and architecture?"_ now you are just generalizing. 
That is such a baseless comment...and how would you prove that? A popularity poll with a clickable link? Please spare us and stop antagonizing the other members with snide questions. All this talk about second, third city syndrome isn't helping your case of superiority-complex-denial. Quit bashing. Oh and one last thing; don't go ahead and make a statement on behalf of "most" of us nyers--most don't give a crap about skylines and buildings and those of us that appreciate them, know Chicago is no slouch to New York. I'll ask you very nicely to stop inflaming arguments.


----------



## nygirl

*Jumbo sized panoramas of New York City*












- [email protected] ssp


Some night panoramas








-sp1te









-triplestate


----------



## Densetsu

Definitely NY!


----------



## Northsider

>


First I'd like to comment on this. While this is no doubt a _spectacular_ view, the skyline itself really isn't much. Like I keep saying, it's just an overwhelming mass of concrete. It just doesn't seem very dynamic to me.

Next:


> I hate to burst the bubble of the Third City proponents who seem to think that their city has cutting-edge, modern architecture like London's, but the reality is that most office buildings constructed in "Tri-Town" during the last decade are boxes.


Great. We know that you can dig up a myriad of box buildings in Chicago at a feeble attempt to prove whatever point you thought you were trying to make. If this is what you think Chicago is, you have much to learn.





































Do I really have to keep going, or can you keep your ignorant, anti-chicago comments to yourself and let this thread have fun?


> Skyscrapercity's Chicago sub-forum: 69,597 posts
> Skyscrapercitiy's NYC sub-forum: 43,235 posts.
> 
> As we can clearly see, Chicago's board is far more active than NY's. You know why? Because it seems most NY'er architecture fans post on "Wired New York" and the myraid of other NY-centric forums as opposed to only one (SSC) for Chicago. Why is it so hard to accept that people prefer New York's skyline and architecture? All the Chicago crying/second (3rd?) city syndrome on this thread is exremely sad. Don't take it so personally. They're just buildings.


...and Chicago doesn't have these sorts of fan forums either? tsk tsk. If you think this forum is the end all be all for Chicago architecture enthusiasts, you have much to learn as well. Next...



> Northsider, Pokistic, Balenciaga
> 
> Way to bring the thread back...you guys rock.


I'm trying...it's hard when douchebags want to ruin everyone's fun.



> I agree. I see many buildings with parking lots as the base in Chicago which I think is terrible. Parking underground is OK but parking as the base of a building? Awful. Also, Chicago is just too boxy.


Chicago is indeed boxy, which is unfortunate. But that is not the epitome of Chicago architecture and certainly not of the skyline either. Yes, there are a lot of parking lots which many Chicagoans are not happy with...but many have been redeveloped in the past decade, it used to be worse.


----------



## tpe

Northsider said:


> ...it's hard when douchebags want to ruin everyone's fun.


_sicut canis qui revertitur ad vomitum suum sic inprudens qui iterat stultitiam suam_ :lol:

Sorry, but I couldn't resist that one. 

You, NYGirl, and the others are doing a splendid job highlighting both cities/skylines. Much appreciated.


----------



## chicagogeorge

That first pick of NYC with the bridge is excellent! :bow:


----------



## Rizzato

Northsider said:


> I don't know why people associate Chicago with "new" skyline...just because it's tallest towers were built 1969, 1972, and 2008? Practically all of the Michigan Ave wall is historic old buildings, and the wall is a predominant feature in the skyline from the east.


Chicago has an amazing mix of old and new, and its old buildings are unique and classy..I called it new school only _in relation_to NYC, which, to me, has more older buildings easily visible (Woolworth, Metlife, American International, etc)


----------



## Northsider

Rizzato said:


> Chicago has an amazing mix of old and new, and its old buildings are unique and classy..I called it new school only _in relation_to NYC, which, to me, has more older buildings easily visible (Woolworth, Metlife, American International, etc)


Ok, I respect that. At least you were kind enough to reason out your opinion rather than a moronic blanket statement of some other users. Some Chicago angles lend themselves to better views of the older buildings.


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

Practically all US cities have nice old buildings. Milwaukee, Detroit, Denver, etc.

However, NY has nicer ones and in far, far, far greater numbers than any other (although its smaller East coast cousins, Boston and Philly, also have a high percentage of them too).


----------



## Guaporense

dnobsemajdnob said:


> The two thousand 17 story buildings built in the 1920's are one of the things that make NY vastly superior to Chicago from an architectural perspective.


Well, do you have a source for this very large number (2000! highrises over 17 stories build in the 20's)? This would mean that New York had almost the same number of highrises that it has today.

I mean, today the second city in north america for number of highrises has only 1700 buildings over 12 stories! How many highrises over 12 stories new york had in the 30's? Four thousand?


----------



## dnobsemajdnob

2,000 is not my number. It's another poster's. I don't think, moreover, that it was meant to be a precise number. That being said, Manhattan alone has well over 2,000 buildings that from the 1920's and earlier, although they're far from all being 20 stories or more.


----------



## Guaporense

dnobsemajdnob said:


> 2,000 is not my number. It's another poster's. I don't think, moreover, that it was meant to be a precise number. That being said, Manhattan alone has well over 2,000 buildings that from the 1920's and earlier, although they're far from all being 20 stories or more.


Well, I asked because I read somewhere that in the 20's building boom about one thousand buildings over 20 stories were build in manhattan and about 50 buildings over 40 stories. Now, if the two thousand buildings over 17 is correct, that would imply that in the 20's, one thousand buildings between 17 and 20 stories were build.

I get the impression that new york had most of its highrises build before the 1935, but most of the tallest buildings, over 600 feet tall, were build after 1935 (62 from the 80 tallest buildings build in new york were build after 1950).

Now, I think that it is fair to say that new york had more highrises in the 30's than Chicago or Toronto have today (maybe even more than their numbers combined). Well, since many highrises were demolished in the last 70 years, it can be said that new york, and since most of the new ones are very large and tall, had about the same number (less the 20% variation) of highrises in the last 70 years?


----------



## marvinganalon

For me newyork has the most building that signatures the skyline of itself..

but my favorite buildings are in chicago the john hancock center and the sears tower

in new york they have their very own empire state building and the chrysler building

it is very hard to tell who has the best skyline...

but for me, please dont argue me

MANILA


----------



## FabianFB!

New York City !


----------



## ElCrioyo

actually...looking at the last few images of both skylines.i noticed that it is hard to find a good angle for the New York Skyline...unlike the Chicago one which has great Images in this thread, i haven't seen many images of the New York Skyline that have caught my attention...

I guess in a way...the Chicago skyline is much better organized towards a single section than compared to the New York one which has Lower Manhattan, the ESB in 34st(in the middle of no-where) and then the Midtown Skyline(42st-72st)


----------



## Logsy

dnobsemajdnob said:


> I'm not being condescending. Chicagoans want to assert that their city produces the world's best architecture (and, at the very least, America's best) and that is, in most non-Americans' view, incorrect. Moreover, when non-Americans (and/or non-Midwestern Americans) dispute Chicagoans' false claim, they become indignant, as is clearly evidenced on this thread.
> 
> I posted a series of utilitarian boxes that Chicago has built as offices in the past decade. Chicago clearly is not building one Swiss Re after another, and star architects, such as Foster, Rogers, Piano, Nouvel, etc. clearly have not been involved in Chicago's office design in recent years.
> 
> In addition to the foregoing, I was appalled during my last trip to Chicago to see a large number of car parks in the middle of the city. That hardly is the setting of an architectural showcase.
> 
> Lastly, this crass, insipid attempt to mimic European Classicism belies Chicago's claim to a great architectural heritage. McDonald's (or some other tasteless brand that lacks substance) should be headquartered in this tower.
> 
> Jan


Hi LondonLawyer!

It is obvious that you have a problem with Chicago. That is completely fine, but your efforts to objectify your position are downright hilarious! 

While the topic of this thread is inherently subjective, and based on people's personal architectural taste and sense of aesthetics, the fact that Chicago is recognized not only as a city of great architecture, but also as one of the world's leading centers of business and commerce is very bothersome to you. Various studies conducted by reputable organizations using sound methodology (MasterCard Company, The City of London) reflect Chicago's credibility in the international domain. 

Finally if you are so impressed with 2000 midrise buildings built in NYC during the 1920s, I suggest you visit Paris and examine that city's midrise architecture. I don’t think there is a comparison, similarly to Chicago’s high-rise architecture.


----------



## 599GTB

Northsider said:


> First I'd like to comment on this. While this is no doubt a _spectacular_ view, the skyline itself really isn't much. Like I keep saying, it's just an overwhelming mass of concrete. It just doesn't seem very dynamic to me.


LOL, that skyline "really isn't much". On what world? What a joke. 

I haven't seen one Chicago photograph out of the hundreds I've seen on here that look as nice as that particular midtown shot (even though downtown Manhattan seems to be missing).



Logsy said:


> While the topic of this thread is inherently subjective, and based on people's personal architectural taste and sense of aesthetics, the fact that Chicago is recognized not only as a city of great architecture, but also as one of the world's leading centers of business and commerce is very bothersome to you. Various studies conducted by reputable organizations using sound methodology (MasterCard Company, The City of London) reflect Chicago's credibility in the international domain.


Nobody is dispuing Chicago's semi-relevance. The question is - it anywhere near New York City level in that regards? No.


----------



## 599GTB

nygirl said:


> *Northsider, Pokistic, Balenciaga *
> 
> Way to bring the thread back...you guys rock.
> 
> *Dnob*
> 
> You are out of line with the "second city syndrome" talk. Untrue and uncalled for. I will kindly ask you to cool it. Think...friendly competition. :hug:
> 
> *599GTB &Duzk*
> 
> Weak points on amounts of posts and membership for New York and Chicago. Those numbers are totally irrelevant to a thread dealing with a personal preference. That's like saying all the Chicagoans in here choose Chicago over NY and vise versa.
> 
> *599GTB*
> 
> _"Why is it so hard to accept that people prefer New York's skyline and architecture?"_ now you are just generalizing.
> That is such a baseless comment...and how would you prove that? A popularity poll with a clickable link? Please spare us and stop antagonizing the other members with snide questions. All this talk about second, third city syndrome isn't helping your case of superiority-complex-denial. Quit bashing. Oh and one last thing; don't go ahead and make a statement on behalf of "most" of us nyers--most don't give a crap about skylines and buildings and those of us that appreciate them, know Chicago is no slouch to New York. I'll ask you very nicely to stop inflaming arguments.



Since you're apparently now the nanny of this particular thread, I find it interesting how you conveniently skipped the other ridiculous posts by your Chicago friend basically calling us ignorant to the subject because we're "internationals" (and because Chicago is performing terribly on this poll).

Why?


----------



## 599GTB

nygirl said:


> That is such a baseless comment...and how would you prove that? *A popularity poll with a clickable link? *


Why yes, there is!!!!

America's Favorite Buildings - AIA Polling of the Public

http://www.favoritearchitecture.org/

A New York City building is #1, and New York City the most dominant city when viewing the results. Chicago is barely mentioned. I think it's fair to make an assumption that the world's public prefers New York City's architecture/skyline. Although, I'm sure this list is gabage to some of our fellow Chicago crybabies since [insert single random washed up "expert"] thinks otherwise. But who knows? Maybe people just don't care enough about Chicago to take notice of their superior (LOL!) buildings?

Anyway, to the results.....

*RANK BUILDING STATE ARCHITECT YEAR COMPLETED FUNCTION *

1 Empire State Building NY - New York Shreve, Lamb & Harmon 1931 Skyscraper 
2 The White House DC - Washington Hoban, James et al. 1792 Govt. 
3 Washington National Cathedral DC - Washington George F. Bodley and Henry Vaughan 1990 Religious 
4 Thomas Jefferson Memorial DC - Washington Pope, John Russell 1943 Memorial/Monument 
5 Golden Gate Bridge CA - San Francisco Joseph B. Strauss (Engineer) Irving F. Morrow and Gertrude C. Morrow (Architects) 1937 Bridge 
6 US Capitol DC - Washington William Thorton, Benjamin Henry Labtrobe, Charles Bulfinch, Thomas U. Walter, Montgomery C. Meigs 1865 Govt. 
7 Lincoln Memorial DC - Washington Bacon, Henry 1922 Memorial/Monument 
8 Biltmore Estates/Vanderbilt Residence NC - Ashville Hunt, Richard Morris 1895 Residence 
9 Chrysler Building NY - New York Van Alen, William 1930 Skyscraper 
10 Vietnam Veterans Memorial DC - Washington Maya Lin in association with Cooper-Lecky Partnership 1982 Memorial/Monument 
11 St. Patrick's Cathedral NY - New York Renwick, James 1878 Religious 
12 Washington Monument DC - Washington Mills, Robert 1884 Memorial/Monument 
13 Grand Central Station NY - New York Reed and Stern and Warren and Wetmore 1913 Transit 
14 Gateway Arch MO - St. Louis Saarinen, Eero 1965 Memorial/Monument 
15 Supreme Court of the United States DC - Washington Gilbert, Cass 1935 Govt. 
16 St. Regis NY - New York Trowbridge & Livingston 1904 Hotel 
17 Metropolitan Museum of Art NY - New York Vaux, Calvert et al. 1880 Museum 
18 Hotel Del Coronado CA - San Diego Reid, James 1888 Hotel 
19 World Trade Center NY - New York Yamasaki, Minoru 1973 Skyscraper 
20 Brooklyn Bridge NY - New York Roebling, John Augustus 1883 Bridge 
21 Philadelphia City Hall PA - Philadelphia McArthur, Jr., John 1881 Govt. 
22 Bellagio Hotel and Casino NV - Las Vegas Jerde Partnership with Deruyter Butler and Atlandia Design 1998 Hotel 
23 Cathedral of St. John the Divine NY - New York Heins & La Farge and Ralph Adams Cram Religious (unfinished) 
24 Philadelphia Museum of Art PA - Philadelphia Trumbauer, Horace 1928 Museum 
25 Trinity Church MA - Boston Richardson, Henry Hobson 1877 Religious 
26 Ahwanee Hotel CA - Yosemite Valley Underwood, Gilbert Stanley 1928 Hotel 
27 Monticello VA - Charlottesville Jefferson, Thomas 1808 Residence 
28 Library of Congress DC - Washington John L. Smithmeyer and Paul J. Pelz 1897 Govt./Library 
29 Falling Water/Edgar J. Kaufmann Sr. Residence PA -Bear Run Wright, Frank Lloyd 1935 Residence 
30 Taliesin East WI - Spring Green Wright, Frank Lloyd 1911 Residence 
31 Wrigley Field - Chicago, IL IL -Chicago Davis, Zachary Taylor 1914 Sports 
32 Wanamaker's Department Store PA - Philadelphia Burnham, Daniel 1909 Retail 
33 Rose Center for Earth and Space - American Museum of Natural History, Museum of Natural History NY - New York Polshek Partnership 2000 Museum 
34 National Gallery of Art (West Wing) DC - Washington Pope, John Russell 1941 Museum 
35 Allegheny Country Courthouse PA - Pittsburgh Richardson, Henry Hobson 1886 Govt. 
36 Old Faithful Inn WY - Yellowstone National Park Reamer, Robert 1927 Hotel 
37 Union Station DC - Washington Burnham, Daniel 1903 Transit 
38 Tribune Tower IL - Chicago Howells & Hood 1925 Skyscraper 
39 Delano Hotel FL - Miami Beach Swartburg, Robert 1947 Hotel 
40 Union Station MO -St. Louis Link, Theodore C. 1894 Transit 
41 Hearst Residence CA - San Simeon Morgan, Julia 1947 Residence 
42 Sears Tower IL - Chicago Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (Bruce Graham) 1974 Skyscraper 
43 Crane Library MA - Qunicy Richardson, Henry Hobson 1882 Library 
44 Cincinnati Union Terminal OH - Cincinnati Alfred Fellheimer and Stewart Wagner, consulting architect Paul Philippe Cret 1933 Transit 
45 Woolworth Building NY - New York Gilbert, Cass 1913 Skyscraper 
46 Waldorf Astoria NY - New York Schultze & Weaver 1931 Hotel 
47 New York Public Library NY - New York Carrere & Hastings 1911 Library 
48 Carnegie Hall NY - New York Tuthill, William B. 1891 Auditorium 
49 San Francisco City Hall CA - San Francisco Brown, Jr., Arthur 1915 Govt. 
50 Virginia State Capitol VA - Richmond Jefferson, Thomas 1788 Govt. 
51 Cadet Chapel - Air Force Academy CO - Colorado Springs Skidmore Owings & Merill (Walter Netsch) 1962 Govt./Religious 
52 Field Museum of Natural History IL -Chicago Atwood, Charles B. 1893 Museum 
53 Apple - 5th Avenue NY - New York Bohlin Cywinski Jackson 2006 Retail 
54 Furness Library - University of Pennsylvania PA - Philadelphia Furness, Frank 1888 Library 
55 Mauna Kea Beach Hotel HI - Kohala Coast (the Big Island) Skidmore, Owings & Merrill 1867 Hotel 
56 Rockefeller Center NY - New York Hood, Raymond, et. al. 1940 Skyscraper 
57 Denver International Airport CO - Denver Fentress Bradburn Architects 1995 Transit 
58 Ames Library MA - North Easton Richardson, Henry Hobson 1879 Library 
59 Milwaukee Art Museum WI - Milwaukee Calatrava, Santiago 2001 Museum 
60 Thorncrown Chapel AR - Eureka Springs Jones, E. Fay 1980 Religious 
61 TransAmerica Building CA - San Francisco Pereira, William 1972 Skyscraper 
62 333 Wacker Drive IL - Chicago Kohn Pedersen Fox 1983 Skyscraper 
63 Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum DC - Washington Hellmuth, Obata + Kasabaum (Gyo Obata) 1976 Museum 
64 Faneuil Hall Marketplace MA - Boston Thompson, Benjamin (Renovation) 1978 Retail 
65 Crystal Cathedral CA -Garden Grove Johnson, Philip 1980 Religious 
66 Gamble House CA - Pasadena Greene and Greene 1908 Residence 
67 Nebraska State Capital NE - Lincoln Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue 1932 Govt. 
68 New York Times Building NY - New York Piano, Renzo 2007 Skyscraper 
69 Salt Lake City Public Library UT - Salt Lake City Moshe Safdie and VCBO Architecture Associates 2003 Library 
70 Dolphin and Swan - Walt Disney World FL - Orlando (Lake Buena Vista) Graves, Michael 1990 Hotel 
71 Hearst Tower NY - New York Foster, Norman 2006 Skyscraper 
72 Flatiron Building/Fuller Building NY - New York Burnham, Daniel 1903 Skyscraper 
73 Lake Point Tower IL - Chicago George Schipporeit and John Heinrick 1968 Skyscraper 
74 Guggenheim Museum NY - New York Wright, Frank Lloyd 1959 Museum 
75 Union Station CA - Los Angeles Parkinson, John and Donald B. 1939 Transit 
76 Willard Hotel DC - Washington Hardenbergh, Henry Janeway 1901 Hotel 
77 Sever Hall MA - Cambridge Richardson, Henry Hobson 1880 Auditorium 
78 Broadmoor Hotel CO - Colorado Springs Warren & Wetmore 1918 Hotel 
79 Ronald Reagan Building DC - Washington Pei Cobb Freed & Partners (James Ingo Freed) 1998 Govt. 
80 Phillips Exeter Academy Library NH - Exeter Kahn, Louis I. 1972 Library 
81 The Plaza Hotel NY - New York Hardenbergh, Henry Janeway 1907 Hotel 
82 Sofitel IL -Chicago Viguier, Jean-Paul 2002 Skyscraper/Hotel 
83 Glessner House IL -Chicago Richardson, Henry Hobson 1887 Residence 
84 Yankee Stadium NY - New York Osborn Engineering Company 1923 Sports 
85 Chicago Public Library IL - Chicago Hammond, Beeby & Babka 1991 Library 
86 Lincoln Center NY - New York Harrison, Wallace K. et al 1968 Auditorium 
87 The Dakota Apartments NY - New York Hardenbergh, Henry Janeway 1884 Residence 
88 Art Institute Of Chicago IL - Chicago Shelply, Rutan, and Coolidge 1893 Museum 
89 Fairmont Hotel CA - San Francisco Reid & Reid and Julia Morgan 1906 Hotel 
90 Boston Public Library MA - Boston McKim, Mead, and White 1895 Library 
91 Hollywood Bowl CA - Hollywood Lloyd Wright, Allied Architects, Frank Gehry 1924 Auditorium 
92 Texas State Capitol TX - Austin Myers, Elijah E. 1888 Govt. 
93 Fontainebleau FL - Miami Beach Lapidus, Morris 1954 Hotel 
94 University of Michigan Law Library MI - Ann Arbor York & Sawyer 1931 Library 
95 Getty Museum CA - Los Angeles Meier, Richard 1997 Museum 
96 High Museum GA - Atlanta Meier, Richard 1983 Museum 
97 Federal Building and United States Courthouse NY - Islip Meier, Richard 2000 Govt. 
98 Humana Building KY - Louisville Graves, Michael 1986 Skyscraper 
99 Disney Concert Hall CA - Los Angeles Gehry, Frank 2003 Auditorium 
100 Radio City Music Hall NY - New York Stone, Edward Durell and Donald Deskey 1932 Auditorium 
101 Paul Brown Stadium OH - Cincinnati NBBJ 2000 Sports 
102 United Airlines Terminal - O'Hare IL -Chicago Jahn, Helmut 1988 Transit 
103 Hyatt Regency GA - Atlanta Portman, John 1967 Hotel 
104 AT&T Park (San Francisco Giants Stadium) CA - San Francisco Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum 2000 Sports 
105 Time Warner Center NY - New York Skidmore Owings & Merill (David Childs) 2003 Skyscraper 
106 Washington, DC Metro DC - Washington Weese, Harry 1976 Transit 
107 IDS Center/IDS Tower MN - Minneapolis Philip Johnson and John Burgee 1972 Skyscraper 
108 Seattle Public Library WA - Seattle Office of Metroplitan Architecture (Rem Koolhaas) 2004 Library 
109 Museum of Modern Art CA - San Francisco Botta, Mario 1995 Museum 
110 Union Station IL - Chicago Graham, Anderson, Probst & White 1925 Transit 
111 United Nations Headquarters NY - New York Wallace K. Harrison, Le Corbusier, Oscar Niemeyer et al. 1953 Govt./Skyscraper 
112 National Building Museum/Pension Building DC - Washington Meigs, Montgomery C. 1887 Museum 
113 Fenway Park MA - Boston Osborn Engineering Company 1912 Sports 
114 Dana-Thomas House IL - Springfield, IL Wright, Frank Lloyd 1904 Residence 
115 TWA Terminal - JFK Airport NY - New York Saarinen, Eero 1962 Transit 
116 The Athenaeum IN - New Harmony Meier, Richard 1979 Auditorium 
117 Walker Art Center MN - Minneapolis Herzog & de Meuron 2005 Museum 
118 American Airlines Center TX - Dallas David M. Schwarz/Architectural Services and HKS 2001 Sports 
119 Biltmore Arizona AZ - Phoenix McArthur, Albert Chase 1929 Hotel 
120 Los Angeles Central Library CA - Los Angeles Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue 1922 Library 
121 San Francisco International Airport CA - San Francisco Skidmore, Owings & Merrill 2000 Transit 
122 Camden Yards MD - Baltimore Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum 1992 Sports 
123 Taliesin West AZ - Scottsdale Wright, Frank Lloyd 1937 Residence 
124 Holocaust Museum DC - Washington Pei Cobb Freed & Partners (James Ingo Freed) 1993 Museum 
125 Citicorp Center NY - New York Stubbins, Hugh 1978 Skyscraper 
126 V. C. Morris Gift Shop / Xanadu Gallery CA - San Francisco Wright, Frank Lloyd 1948 Retail 
127 Union Station MO - Kansas City Hunt, Jarvis 1914 Transit 
128 Rookery Building IL - Chicago Burnham & Root, Frank Lloyd Wright (Lobby) 1888 Skyscraper 
129 Weisman Art Museum - U. of Minnesota Twin Cities MN - Minneapolis Gehry, Frank 1993 Museum 
130 Douglas House MI - Harbor Springs Meier, Richard 1973 Residence 
131 Barnsdall House/ Hollyhock House CA - Los Angeles Wright, Frank Lloyd 1920 Residence 
132 Pennzoil Place TX - Houston Philip Johnson and John Burgee 1975 Skyscraper 
133 Royalton Hotel NY - New York Starck, Philippe (Renovation) 1988 Hotel 
134 Astrodome TX - Houston Hermon Lloyd & W.B. Morgan and Wilson, Morris, Crain & Anderson 1965 Sports 
135 Safeco Field WA - Seattle NBBJ 1999 Sports 
136 Corning Museum of Glass NY - Corning Harrison & Abramowitz, Smith-Miller + Hawkinson, and Gunnar Birkerts 1951 Museum 
137 30th Street Station PA - Philadelphia Graham, Anderson, Probst and White 1934 Transit 
138 Robie House IL - Chicago Wright, Frank Lloyd 1909 Residence 
139 Williams Tower (Transco Tower) TX - Houston Philip Johnson and John Burgee 1983 Skyscraper 
140 Stahl House/Case Study House #22 CA - Los Angeles Koenig, Pierre 1960 Residence 
141 Apple (SoHo) NY - New York Ronnette Riley Architect 2002 Retail 
142 John Hancock Hotel and Conference Center MA - Boston I.M. Pei & Partners 1976 Skyscraper 
143 Pennsylvania Station/Penn Station NY - New York McKim, Mead and White 1910 Transit 
144 Hyatt Regency CA - San Francisco Portman, John 1973 Hotel 
145 Carson Pirie Scott IL - Chicago Sullivan, Louis 1899 Skyscraper 
146 Museum of Modern Art NY - New York Philip Johnson, Cesar Pelli (1984), Yoshio Taniguchi (2004) 1964 Museum 
147 Auditorium Building IL - Chicago Dankmar Adler and Louis Sullivan 1889 Skyscraper 
148 Brown Palace CO - Denver Edbrooke, Frank E. 1892 Hotel 
149 Ingalls Ice Arena - Yale University CT - New Haven Saarinen, Eero 1958 Sports 
150 Battle Hall - University of Texas TX - Austin Gilbert, Cass 1911 Library


----------



## fionapoulsen

New York has a much stronger brand outside, but Chicago's skyline is almost perfect


----------



## nygirl

You know what? I am like a nanny because some of you are a bit too immature for the discussions on this website. I did not skip conveniently over any posts I see you as the instigator and that is all that matters to me. Chicago, performing terribly on this poll makes it no less grandiose, charming, monolithic, influential, well balanced, all around great looking than it already is and commands more respect than you are giving it.
If you feel that this poll means anything other than silly ratings in an online chat forum then you need to get out more. 
And while I do not moderate this forum I am not barred from reminding you how you should conduct yourselves on here. Mind you I said remind and not reprimand which is how some of you mistakenly perceive it to be. 
I'm glad they got rid of city vs. city and this thread is a testament to that choice. 
I'm going to collect some posts in here and bump the old, much more member-friendly, non vs. thread we had. lock:


----------



## nygirl

599GTB said:


> That rule is stupid. Why can't there be city vs city discussions? *Are we little babies *who need to be protected from getting our little *feelings hurt*? Most of us are adults and should be able to have skyline versus skyline threads on a skyscraper forum.
> 
> So weird.



You seem kind of juvenile if anyone asks me. Why are you rooting for competition? So you can act jerky and do your best to be a nasty snob so you can alienate yourself from the members of this board? Because you are doing a good job of it. "Are we babies" and "getting your feelings hurt" the wrong things for YOU to be asking. Your attitude is all wrong dude, chill out. 



599GTB said:


> _New York's skyline far surpasses Chicago in terms of looks and density. Not to mention, New York is home many iconic structures (Empire State, Flatiron, Chrysler, Brooklyn Bridge, Statue of Liberty, former WTC) and Chicago is home to none that an average person would know.
> _
> -599GTB, and the voters here at skyscraper city.


This is indicative of the institgation I mentioned earlier so there is no confusion. 

I rest my case as to why this city vs. city thread should be locked.:cheers:


----------



## Northsider

> LOL, that skyline "really isn't much". On what world? What a joke.


Like I repeatedly keep saying, NYC's skyline is certainly overwhelming and awe inspiring, and truly one of the best urban areas in the world. But as far as skyline _aesthetics_ are concerned, for me at least, it just doesn't cut it. Just because the skyline is massive doesn't mean it's pretty to look at. Look at Sao Paulo...it has thousands of buildings forming a truly massive urban fabric...that doesn't mean its skyline is beautiful. I just find Chicago's skyline to be more pleasing to look, though it's not as massive and it doesn't have that "holy shit" factor that NYC does. At first, for me and I'm sure others, there _is _ that initial "holy shit" reaction to NYC's skyline. But the more I look at the more I don't like it (compared to Chicago's skyline). I just see a jumbled mess of concrete.

The only thing that's a joke is your attitude towards other people's opinions. ...and Chicago isn't doing terribly on this poll...NYC only has *63* more votes. I don't see why you are getting so bent out of shape over this...god forbid people prefer Chicago over NYC (BLASPHEMY!)


----------



## 599GTB

Northsider said:


> Like I repeatedly keep saying, NYC's skyline is certainly overwhelming and awe inspiring, and truly one of the best urban areas in the world. But as far as skyline _aesthetics_ are concerned, for me at least, it just doesn't cut it. Just because the skyline is massive doesn't mean it's pretty to look at. Look at Sao Paulo...it has thousands of buildings forming a truly massive urban fabric...that doesn't mean its skyline is beautiful. I just find Chicago's skyline to be more pleasing to look, though it's not as massive and it doesn't have that "holy shit" factor that NYC does. At first, for me and I'm sure others, there _is _ that initial "holy shit" reaction to NYC's skyline. But the more I look at the more I don't like it (compared to Chicago's skyline). I just see a jumbled mess of concrete.


Just because Chicago's skyline is spaced out doesn't make it attractive either. Look at Houston. Hudreds of spaced out boxes, but that doesn't mean Houston's skyline is beautiful either. If Manhattan's buildings were spaced out, it would do nothing but turn it into a second-class city like Chicago or Houston with poor urban design. New York's skyline is beautiful.



> The only thing that's a joke is your attitude towards other people's opinions. ...and Chicago isn't doing terribly on this poll...NYC only has *63* more votes. I don't see why you are getting so bent out of shape over this...god forbid people prefer Chicago over NYC (BLASPHEMY!)


Only? Uh, 63 votes out of 263 votes is _a lot._ That's like X candidate losing an election 38% to 62%. That's not terrible to you? :lol: That's awful...but whatever!


----------



## 599GTB

nygirl said:


> You seem kind of juvenile if anyone asks me. Why are you rooting for competition? So you can act jerky and do your best to be a nasty snob so you can alienate yourself from the members of this board? Because you are doing a good job of it. "Are we babies" and "getting your feelings hurt" the wrong things for YOU to be asking. Your attitude is all wrong dude, chill out.
> 
> 
> 
> This is indicative of the institgation I mentioned earlier so there is no confusion.
> 
> I rest my case as to why this city vs. city thread should be locked.:cheers:


What's wrong with instigating? As an outsider of both cities, I can't help but find the bitter cases of "second city syndrome" slightly amusing. I just find it cute how personal some people are taking the loss.

It would be boring if I weren't here to instigate - and the only reason I turned into an instigator is when we were all called uninformed internationals just because Chicago is being trounced by NYC on our poll. What a bunch of sore losers.


----------



## krull

NYC. Is a city with a more extensive and bigger skyline with plenty towers making their peaks in the skyline and buildings canyons. Gotta love this city. Chicago in the second best for me in the USA of course.





































































































Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasonjthomas/sets/72157616904942721/


----------



## Northsider

> Only? Uh, 63 votes out of 263 votes is a lot. That's like X candidate losing an election 38% to 62%.


Lying with statistics is a beautiful thing, isn't it? I would argue that 1 out of 2 is much less significant than 5,000 out of 10,000, wouldn't you? Still 50%.


> As an outsider of both cities, I can't help but find the bitter cases of "second city syndrome" slightly amusing. I just find it cute how personal some people are taking the loss.


First off, it's apparent that the only people with "second city" syndrome are you and other Chicago haters. I have yet to see Chicagoans mention this once, or cry about NYC. The Chicagoans appear to be the most appreciative of _both_ cities. And just because we feel that NYC is the only North American city that compares to Chicago, that doesn't mean we are jealous of it, mad at it, suffering from second city syndrome, or whatever...I think ignorant people like you just made that term up because we are always talking about NYC (with the highest respect might I add).

Second, who is taking the so called "loss" personally? You? I don't know what thread you are reading, but I see nobody taking anything personally, except me and a few others who find your attitude ridiculously annoying and obnoxious



> the only reason I turned into an instigator is when we were all called uninformed internationals


After initial instigation by you. You had your bias and attitude right from the start...no wonder this thread went south.


----------



## tpe

It seems like the cockroaches are again coming out of the woodwork! :lol:


----------



## _00_deathscar

The problem I have with NYC's skyline is that it's 'too big' - if that's possible.

Viewed from some angles (can't tell you which - will show you a picture later), the skyline looks unimpressive and just like a mid-sized American town's...*because* so many of the towers are all so close in height. But obviously, each tower is about 200m or so..it just creates a strange effect that isn't too appealing.

Viewed from other angles of course, the skyline is awesome.


----------



## alicanatasever

_Mega city İstanbul_

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=228812


----------



## nygirl

There is another thread for those of us that want to avoid immature competition and can have intelligible conversation about the highlights in both amazing cities, repeat offenders have been dealt with and this thread WILL BE locked.


This thread, as I see it was like a test to see if city vs. city could come back without the BS but as we can see it really can't. I hope to see the big contributors here over in the new thread. It'll be a lot more enjoyable.


----------



## Matthieu

That thread certainly went around for way too long.


----------

