# Asia Most Distinguished Tower



## skymad (Aug 30, 2005)

What is your Asia most DISTINGUISABLE tower ever BUILT?

Like Eiffel tower, it belongs to Europe.
In North America, it goes to Empire State Building.
Asia ??? 

My pick goes to Petronas Twin Towers in Malaysia. 
It was the starting point for the world to turn attention to the emerging Asian powerhouse. Soon after that, it stimulate the Asia n the rest to begin the race to the skies. :runaway: 

It was also the beginning mark that Asia has arrived - a new ground for skytall towers centre. Petronas steal the world attention onto Asia and it is arguarbly the most recognized tower ever built in human history besides the ESB n Eiffel tower. 

But there's more to these malaysian twins than just scraping the sky. though modern in construction, use of materials and expression of structure, the petronas towers break with modernist orthodoxy by being symmetrically arranged on the site and figurative in design. they also represent an attempt by a western architect to interpret islamic design ideas in a contemporary way. With regards to these reasons, i hv felt petronas deserves it, and belongs to Asia most distinguishable title.


----------



## DarkFenX (Jan 8, 2005)

Well, I think could be Taipei 101 but I agree, the Petronas Tower had a huge impact.


----------



## Skoulikimou (Aug 20, 2004)

i must say Petronas towers


----------



## Travis007 (Jul 19, 2004)

Petronas> Jin Mao > BoCHK


----------



## NapHsu4922 (Jul 1, 2004)

Bank Of China Tower IMO.


----------



## Chibcha2k (Oct 19, 2002)

Petronas, BoC HK...Taipei 101


----------



## ncon (Apr 6, 2005)

PETRONAS TOWER !


----------



## James Foong (May 12, 2005)

BOC of HK got me into the skyscraper world, but Petronas was the one thats got me crazy.


----------



## Urban Dave (Apr 18, 2004)

Petronas or Bank of China.


----------



## JDRS (Feb 8, 2004)

^^ Agree with that 100%.


----------



## RafflesCity (Sep 11, 2002)

Petronas Towers


----------



## Brett (Oct 26, 2004)

Petronas, IMO Taipei 101 did not make as big of a splash internationally when it was built as the pertronas towers.


----------



## SGoico (Sep 5, 2005)

Bank of China, HK. Is not the tallest but is really smashing. Impacted my first time I saw it


----------



## jlshyang (May 22, 2005)

Petronas......Malaysia and Asia's pride =)


----------



## samsonyuen (Sep 23, 2003)

Bank of China for sure. Petronas and Jin Mao are number two and three, but quite behind in my mind.


----------



## adidas (Sep 2, 2005)

Petronas tower OR jin mao


----------



## radekmysza (Nov 26, 2004)

1.Petronas 2.Bank of China 3 Taipei101


----------



## elsonic (Aug 21, 2003)

I have a crush for this one :










but the Petronas have a bigger impact.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

Bank of CHina building! Very unique!


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

My choice is HSBC, which is a very innovative skyscraper for the 1980s and even today, albeit not very tall.


----------



## ladolcevita (Aug 11, 2005)

Oriental Pearl Tower in Shanghai? The Tallest tower in Asia, and a member of the World Federation of Great Towers


----------



## FLscraper (Jun 26, 2005)

^ Pearl is hidious and a cry for attention in Shanghai, imo.

My vote is Petronas.


----------



## tootshibbard (Aug 9, 2005)

I would say Bank of China building. It is astonishing and I get to see gerat buildings everyday in Chicago. But it is so unique and its lines are so smooth and gracefull that it is unmatched.

I tend to like art deco and classical scrapers but the Bank of China is one that truely astounds me.

Petronas is also very nice and probably 2nd best in Asia. It is funny to say but I think it would almost like it better if there were just one instead of two. There is something I don't care for in twin towers or for communications/observation towers.


----------



## tootshibbard (Aug 9, 2005)

The Oriental Pearl Tower should be condemned. It looks more akin to an amusemant park ride then a building. I am not picking it out because I also feel that way about the CN Tower in Toronto. I just don't like communications/observation towers. It seems as if they are a cheep way for city planners to up their skyline for vanity sake without having much substance behind it.

The only one I kind of like is the space needle in Seattle and even that I am wishy washy on. The space needle doesn't dominate over the entire skyline though and doesn't make any pretenses about being a real building.


----------



## redstone (Nov 15, 2003)

I must say many modern Asian towers reflect the culture or philosophy of the country, unlike modern towers of other places. 

No offense.


----------



## Pengui (Jun 3, 2003)

skymad said:


> What is your Asia most DISTINGUISABLE tower ever BUILT?
> My pick goes to Petronas Twin Towers in Malaysia.
> It was the starting point for the world to turn attention to the emerging Asian powerhouse. Soon after that, it stimulate the Asia n the rest to begin the race to the skies. :runaway:
> 
> ...


I would pick Petronas Towers too, exactly for the same reason (also because it is IMO the most beautiful supertall building in the world, by far if you ask me ;-) )


----------



## James Foong (May 12, 2005)

Petronas up-close shot.


----------



## missingtooth (Sep 28, 2005)

*Petronas*

I also think petronas is the most beautiful supertall building in the world. Even the burj dubai, the freedom tower, fordham spire, turning torso, SWFC or any other mega tall towers that are under construction/proposed can top petronas as being the MOST BEAUTIFUL TOWER/BUILDING ever built. 

So to that effect, i would say that Petronas Twin Towers are the modern icon for not only M'sia but Asia as a whole. I dare say that it is only third to the Great Wall of China and the Taj Mahal as being the most recognizable icon in Asia, in my eyes at least.

Peace.


----------



## skymad (Aug 30, 2005)

I m dismayed tht Petronas towers received much critics from the other end side of the world. It caused a stir when CBTUH declared Petronas was the world tallest by over 33ft than Sears Tower. By looking rationally, I see this critic is the kind of defending with no valid reason. It’s a nationalism fight. These fighters killed the beauty of Petronas. It has caused a great damage to the reputation of Petronas that until now, most people still believe it is the world best-known cheater. The fact is that Petronas didn’t built to cheat, nor for the height. I doubt they would hv the idea to surpass barely a few feet. 

The trouble is that the definition of antenna and spire is not clearly understood by many. Antenna is a temporary ornament, while a spire is a permanent structural element built into the tower. Sears tower however would be classified with the tallest building to the top of antenna. At least, Sears tower can be contented at the moment.

There is also a good argument of a claim that we can get the tallest building title with just building a two-storey office/residential with soaring spire to surpass the record. Its clearly show there is a possibility we can do that. From view perspective, it would looks like a freestanding structure. So, we got to clear out some doubts here before we can validate the claim is true. Now, you hv to ask yourself how do you define a building and a free standing structure? 

As for me, a building is a habitable place, while a freestanding structure is just a structure that is not purposely built for residential/office. That’s claim fall into the building category. However, by how much mean is the building is really habitable? 

I would think it is very unfair/weird if a 2-storey house just because of its spire height suddenly overtakes Taipei 101’s title! May I suggest here… Perhaps CBTUH should set a minimum percentage of space must be habitable in a building. That’s ll clearly give a new definition for a ‘building’ term. How’s your argument?


----------



## redstone (Nov 15, 2003)

Hmm... Spires are for aethestics, antennae are functional....


----------

