# Which skyline do you prefer? Classic (NY) or Modern (HK Shanghai)?



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

People often contrast the NY and HK skylines and argue which is better. To me, they are quite different as NY is a mix of old and new and HK is all new. They are both nice, as are Chicago's, Shanghai's, Dubai's, etc. Which style do you prefer?

Modern Hong Kong










Modern Shanghai









Classic New York








































40 Wall Street

















The Municipal Building

























The old city hall which dates from 1802 sits across the street from it









The San Remo 









20 Exchange Place









Federal Courthouse
















While not skyscrapers, the Surrogates Court and the Tweed Courthouse across the street are awesome

















120 Broadway

















Bankers Trust








Bankers Trust at ground level (on right hand side)
























Sherry Netherland and the Pierre








Woolworth

































The Beresford
















Metlife
























New York Life

































The Flatiron









The El Dorado (which looks a lot like the San Remo (also on CPW))

















American Radiator

























General Electric

















Standard Oil

























The Trinity Building (named after Trinity Church next door)
























Trinity Church with the Trinity Building in the background









No introduction needed

















The Crown Building

























55 Liberty St.

























The Helmsley

















The Waldorf








The Carlyle
























The Ansonia


----------



## UrbanSophist (Aug 4, 2005)

You should show more of HK and Shanghai for a better comparison.


----------



## LordMarshall (Jun 26, 2005)

HK for me


----------



## JDRS (Feb 8, 2004)

Why are there so many NY pics in comparison?

I really like stone skyscrapers but overall I prefer the energy and vibrancy of HK's skyline, although in general I would say classic.


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

I prefer NY's because it's a mix of old and new, whereas HK and Shanghai are all new. Also, I generally prefer the architecture of old skyscrapers. They're also awesome at street level unlike modern ones.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

Thank you for the amazing pix of older NYC highrises. For other's wanting more pix
of Hong Kong, do a bit of googling, and post some pix. Easier than complaining.

I would go for the classic skyline any day of the week, and New York is one of the very best examples. Unless these structures already exist in your city, they will
never be constructed in the future. 
So, for me there is no contest- classic by a country mile because of the mix of styles.

That dog diarroeha pic had me in stitches!! :lol: One way to stop people from
hyperlinking.


----------



## pottebaum (Sep 11, 2004)

New York--loads of old stuff and loads of new stuff.


----------



## UrbanSophist (Aug 4, 2005)

LLoydGeorge said:


> Also, I generally prefer the architecture of old skyscrapers. They're also awesome at street level unlike modern ones.


Well, that's a sweeping generalization.


----------



## krull (Oct 8, 2005)

*New York City* = old, classic, historic, contemporary, archtitecture, landmark, modern, new, large, world class, diversity, class status, developed, developing, changing, vibrant... etc.

What more can you ask? 

On a side note... I love Honk Kong and Shangai aswell. Very modern cities... but I prefer the mix that New York City offers.


----------



## jtownman (Jan 31, 2003)

I know this is YOUR thread, but I've never seen a more bias thread! That being said, NEW YORK style..


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

UrbanSophist said:


> Well, that's a sweeping generalization.


What new building is like this at ground level?


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

Here's a great combination of old and new that can be found in very few cities outside of NY: a house from the 1700's next to an ultramodern skyscraper with a classic skyscraper (see the close up below) in the background and the magnificent customs house (see below) behind it.


----------



## EtherealMist (Jul 26, 2005)

I prefer the NYC skyline. I believe that older buildings/skyscrapers are just so unique and beautiful and are created with such attention to detail. The type of stuff you just dont see in modern buildings.


----------



## Jules (Jun 27, 2004)

Classic NY.


----------



## Skybean (Jun 16, 2004)

Well it could be argued that Shanghai is both a modern and historic city, in the fact that is has such a diverse stock of buildings from the early 1900s. I think that the majority of people are quite surprised when they visit for the first time (as I was). But no one builds them tall and in such quantities of quality buildings as New York. For this reason, NYC is my number 2. 

But sometimes you have to enjoy something refreshing and uplifting. Some new and striking. HK's skyline gives me a sense of energy and I can _feel the vibrancy_ -- as cheesy as that sounds.

Let's just enjoy the shots and not turn this into City vs. City again :cheers: 

Older architecture

Western Market









Peninsula Hotel














































Street Level
-highly intimate, family owned shops and some smaller chain stores


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

Those are great HK photos.

By the way, the old buildings in Shangai are the low rise ones on the Bund. They don't really have old skyscrapers (e.g., 30 stories or more), do they?

I agree with your statement about this not being a competition. It's a preference as to whether one likes a mix of old and new skyscarpers like in NY or purely modern like HK, Dubai, etc.


----------



## savadaba (Feb 2, 2006)

Definately Hong Kong (modern skyline)}

I don´t like NY skyline cause it looks so "brown" The city its nice but i don´t like that "brown" color of the city.


----------



## Nouvellecosse (Jun 4, 2005)

I prefer NY classic at street level, and HK modern at a distance. Overall though, I think I prefer NY.


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

LLoydGeorge said:


> I prefer NY's because it's a mix of old and new, whereas HK and Shanghai are all new. Also, I generally prefer the architecture of old skyscrapers. They're also awesome at street level unlike modern ones.


contrast to popular belief, Shanghai's skyline is not all modern, it has a classic skyline as well, mostly art deco buildings built in 30's, just on the other side of the river. HK also has some colonial buildings left here and there but they do not form a skyline.


----------



## soulkorea (May 10, 2005)

as a city, I like NYC the best, no city in the world is like NYC.
but as for skyscrapers, I like Hong Kong the best. The most amazing skyline in the world.


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

Sen said:


> contrast to popular belief, Shanghai's skyline is not all modern, it has a classic skyline as well, mostly art deco buildings built in 30's, just on the other side of the river. HK also has some colonial buildings left here and there but they do not form a skyline.


Aren't the older Shanghai buildings lowrise though (e.g., 5 to 20 stories)? For example, their are thousands of old beautiful buildings in NYC like the following, the NY Yacht Club, which I love.










However, it's not a skyscraper and therefore, was not the type that I was addressing in this thread.


----------



## Sen (Nov 13, 2004)

I think some can be considered "skyscrapers" as they are over 20 stories, (accepted defintion for a skyscraper is a building that is over 11 stories) esp those on the bund, i dont think any 30+ buidlings exist. back to the thread topic, I prefer modern over classic, i like progress and forward looking city planing, but in this specific comparison i will pick new york, new york is new york, no substitute!


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

This is the 21st century and modern scrapers more matter! So I prefer modern compared to classic ones 

And with Shanghai, most of it are being focused in Pudong. Shanghai has alot of classic Art Deco skyscrapers especially in The Bund though they're not as tall as the ones in NY.

*The Bund*


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

Those aren't skyscrapers though. New York has 1,000s of buildings that height. That's why I defined "skyscraper" as over 25/30 stories.

Anyway, the buildings on the Bund look quite nice.


----------



## fox1 (Apr 27, 2003)

If you wanted to post 2 pictures of HK/Shanghai and 69 pictures of New York, the thread title *"A huge number of pics of New York"* would have been more accurate


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

Out of the 3 cities, *Shanghai* offers the most contrast, with one side being primarily old buildings while across the river is primarily ultramodern :


----------



## illmatic774 (Jul 20, 2005)

NYC Baby.

Im not, no other city is doing for me what the Empire City does


----------



## fox1 (Apr 27, 2003)

really dig that 2nd last shot. Have walked right there a lot!


----------



## j4893k (Sep 30, 2005)

Lol... This thread should be renamed to "New York Photo Thread". 

I like the New York type of skyline better overall. New York's buildings make it seem so warm & welcoming... Something that Shanghai and HK's complete moderness doesn't do. 

New York also offers quite the combo of modern & historical buildings. Something no city can compete with.


----------



## DonQui (Jan 10, 2005)

Hands down the classic ones of Chicago or New York. Anyone can put up a glass shiny tower, but no one is going to be able to replicate authentically the neo-Gothic elements of the Woolworth building, the Art Decco of the Chrysler building, or the elegance of the FlatIron.

Many glass scrapers in cities like Hong Kong, could be the modern skyscrapers of any big city. However, when people see the Empire State Building, very few would have to spend more than a second to identify as New York.


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

Here are some more of my favorites. Unlike the others, these buildings are in the 15 to 20 story range. There are 1,000's of buildings like this in New York.

The St. Urban









The Kenilworth









The Langham









The Chatsworth
















Classic New York


----------



## krull (Oct 8, 2005)

This my view in Manhattan.... lots of old buildings.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

^^^^ OMG it is "krull" of you to show such heart-wrenchingly beautiful pix 
of NYC. I wish I were there THIS INSTANT. :dizzy:


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

I prefer NYC's mix of classic and modern. I mean there isn't a better skyline with the mix of both. HK's skyline maybe new and shiny, but it's mostly ugly bleak residential towers with a few commercial towers. Ohh the truth hurts, doesn't it?


----------



## HKT (May 17, 2003)

polako said:


> I prefer NYC's mix of classic and modern. I mean there isn't a better skyline with the mix of both. HK's skyline maybe new and shiny, but it's mostly ugly bleak residential towers with a few commercial towers. Ohh the truth hurts, doesn't it?


I don't see any better residential towers posted by krull from his Manhattan view. Look at the shorties, their roofs are dirty and IMO, definitely not classic.


----------



## FREKI (Sep 27, 2005)

Hong Kong for me!


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

HKT said:


> I don't see any better residential towers posted by krull from his Manhattan view. Look at the shorties, their roofs are dirty and IMO, definitely not classic.


Manhattan's residential towers have character, Hong Kong's are simply commie blocks.


----------



## I-275westcoastfl (Feb 15, 2005)

New York definetly with a mix of old and new and a truly amazing city hong kong is great too like bank of china thats world class and at night its pretty cool too i mean hate or love it u gotta admit this pic is tight


----------



## nygirl (Jul 14, 2003)

Hong Kong really deserves more of my respect, i mean i know it's great. I should make it more public though. I say they both do a great job representing a dramatic scene, with a collection of remarkeable styles and colors. Both are attractive and inspiring. I happen to think Dubai is an amazing place. I loveeeeeeeee the architecture, i love the way Sheik Zayed Road formed this collases of a wall in the desert, anyone who thinks that is less than incredible is a FOOL. 
The islands, the go attitude...

It's very much appreciated in this little corner of New York City.


----------



## nygirl (Jul 14, 2003)

HKT said:


> I don't see any better residential towers posted by krull from his Manhattan view. Look at the shorties, their roofs are dirty and IMO, definitely not classic.


I'm sorry but how can you tell how dirty those roof tops are? Looks like the upper east side.. The 80's i'm guessing. I'm sorry hkt but are you mocking the UE S?? no matter how fat your forum mouth may be, those are classics, and they are not dirty, and i'll bet your fat forum mouth on it. You are right, there are alot of grungy old buildings in new york. Plenty. Too many. Just like there are repetitive, unimaginative, but self sufficient and wonderful in there own way, clone residentials in your neck of the woods. Everywhere has a flaw. The beauty of it is, as much as we all think of it as a flaw to the opposite, to the other side it isn't home without it.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

polako said:


> Manhattan's residential towers have character, Hong Kong's are simply commie blocks.


Even the public housing in the lower east side?


----------



## HKT (May 17, 2003)

polako said:


> Manhattan's residential towers have character, Hong Kong's are simply commie blocks.


Don't forget that any given twin-towers around the world are just commie-blocks.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

polako said:


> Manhattan's residential towers have character, Hong Kong's are simply commie blocks.


What side of the city are you lookin at?

Both HK and NY have their commies whether they're brown or gray


----------



## HKT (May 17, 2003)

nygirl said:


> I'm sorry but how can you tell how dirty those roof tops are? Looks like the upper east side.. The 80's i'm guessing. I'm sorry hkt but are you mocking the UE S?? no matter how fat your forum mouth may be, those are classics, and they are not dirty, and i'll bet your fat forum mouth on it. You are right, there are alot of grungy old buildings in new york. Plenty. Too many. Just like there are repetitive, unimaginative, but self sufficient and wonderful in there own way, clone residentials in your neck of the woods. Everywhere has a flaw. The beauty of it is, as much as we all think of it as a flaw to the opposite, to the other side it isn't home without it.


Very good nygirl. Only two sentences and got you very upset. 

Sorry, I've been more patience than you do because I can accommodate a page of criticizing of HK and glorify NY before making a reply but you can't.

Yes, I like HK's shiny buildings because I like more natural light going into my apartment and office desk than the artificial lights.


----------



## polako (Apr 7, 2005)

hkskyline said:


> Even the public housing in the lower east side?


Yes, even the public housing in the lower east side has more character than Hong Kong's residential towers. Here is my point, NYC's housing projects are dispersed throughout the city here and there, but they make up such a small percentage of the housing in the city that they are hardly an eyesoar when looking at the NYC skyline. Hong Kong's skyline is almost entirely composed of those ugly eyesoars interspersed with a few reasonable commercial towers. Well the complete opposite of NYC.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

polako said:


> Yes, even the public housing in the lower east side has more character than Hong Kong's residential towers. Here is my point, NYC's housing projects are dispersed throughout the city here and there, but they make up such a small percentage of the housing in the city that they are hardly an eyesoar when looking at the NYC skyline. Hong Kong's skyline is almost entirely composed of those ugly eyesoars interspersed with a few reasonable commercial towers. Well the complete opposite of NYC.


I disagree with NY public housing having less character compared to HK ones.

As with HK's skyline. This is what you'll see in most tour books and magazines. And to the viewers, most of them don't care about the sprawl of surrounding high-rise flats



















Anyway this is turning to a HK VS. NY thread again!


----------



## LLoydGeorge (Jan 14, 2006)

Guys. Let's keep this in perspective. NY and HK are both awesome. Whether one prefers all new or old and new is subjective. 

We should all take deep breaths and think about what really matters in life (i.e., twin towers)


















:cucumber: :banana: :righton: :cheer: :carrot: :naughty: :cheers1:


----------



## bjfan82 (Dec 13, 2004)

definitely not Shanghai, those buildings look like what people in the 1960s thought cities would look like in the 2100. Modern Hong Kong looks sweeeeet but so does NYC...the jury is out with me. Too close between those two cities.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

bjfan82 said:


> definitely not Shanghai, those buildings look like what people in the 1960s thought cities would look like in the 2100. Modern Hong Kong looks sweeeeet but so does NYC...the jury is out with me. Too close between those two cities.


Shanghai's skyline and skyscrapers doesn't do much justice for me. Well except the Jin Mao and a few other scrapers but the rest, nada! 

And why is it Shanghai and HK compared to NY. How about putting Chicago in there


----------



## nygirl (Jul 14, 2003)

HKT said:


> Very good nygirl. Only two sentences and got you very upset.
> 
> Sorry, I've been more patience than you do because I can accommodate a page of criticizing of HK and glorify NY before making a reply but you can't.
> 
> Yes, I like HK's shiny buildings because I like more natural light going into my apartment and office desk than the artificial lights.



Regaurdless your both going to end up sounding like dickheads in the end.

I see it this way. Appearance wise lets all agree to disagree, personally neither are eye candy. The lower east side is loaded with character as a neighborhood. The place has seen every group get its social start in the city.
The housing doesn't need to be interesting. As dumb as that MIGHT sound to you. 
And i am in no way bashing Hong Kong. I have absolutely no reason to. The commies there happen to be colorful, theres more life to them. They are by far more attractive than boxy little bricks and windows. All are unique and self sufficient. I think when most people have a certain opinion about it, it's more or less the huge concentration of them. Theres no style to distinguish from the other because they are all practically the same. 
It's not meant to bash, just an opinion. I won't disagree with u at all about Nyc lack of imagination and maintenance to it's projects. Though it is limited to certain area's. Don't confuse old brick work to project houses.


----------



## nygirl (Jul 14, 2003)

COME ON WANCH! IMAGINE WHAT HONG KONG WOULD LOOK LIKE WITH CRAZY SPIRES AND JAGGED ROOFTOPS AND TWIN CROWNS WOULD LOOK INSTEAD OF RECTANGULAR SHOE BOXES STACKED IN NO ORDER. 
How much ass would that kick?


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

nygirl said:


> Regaurdless your both going to end up sounding like dickheads in the end.
> 
> I see it this way. Appearance wise lets all agree to disagree, personally neither are eye candy. The lower east side is loaded with character as a neighborhood. The place has seen every group get its social start in the city.
> The housing doesn't need to be interesting. As dumb as that MIGHT sound to you.
> ...


About the Lower East Side. Ok, the place has alot of housing projects but the life there is vibrant and there are alot of known people from that area like Penero for example.


----------



## DonQui (Jan 10, 2005)

NYgirl, calm the hell out.

You raving like a lunatic is not helping my city out in this discussion.

:no:


----------



## Zaki (Apr 16, 2005)

I like modern skylines more. Maybe not shanghai type of odern but definitely HK type.


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

polako said:


> Yes, even the public housing in the lower east side has more character than Hong Kong's residential towers. Here is my point, NYC's housing projects are dispersed throughout the city here and there, but they make up such a small percentage of the housing in the city that they are hardly an eyesoar when looking at the NYC skyline. Hong Kong's skyline is almost entirely composed of those ugly eyesoars interspersed with a few reasonable commercial towers. Well the complete opposite of NYC.


New York City is home to over 8 million people. If the housing projects are as rare as you claim them to be, then where do the people live? The reality is there is a lot of ugly residential architecture in New York, and that there are plenty of repetitive 'commieblocks', such as in the lower east side. Not everyone is able to afford to live in a piece of spectacular architecture in *any* large city simply because there is such a wide range of incomes in the demographic. This applies in Hong Kong, New York, London, etc.

There are plenty of brown utilitarian residentials all over Manhattan, for example. I don't see how these have more character. They're just a pile of bricks, concrete, and wood slapped together to make reasonable housing for the middle class, only in New York the price for one of these is spectacularly more expensive than in Hong Kong.










While these may not have a big impact on the skyline, Hong Kong's residential supertowers don't impact the main skyline either. The traditional skyline is mostly commercial glass towers :


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Each cities has their best and worst parts whether it's NY, HK or Kathmandu.

As for NY and HK, they got their iconic skyscrapers as well as their tenements and we can't deny if we have them in our cities.

Whether they are tenements, commieblocks, PJs or housing estates they provide housing for the lower class which is better than seeing alot of them sleeping in street corners or in shacks.


----------



## Method101 (Nov 16, 2005)

haha, yeah i would have to admit that this thread is a bit biased

but regardless, it has to be new york for me, I'm not too big a fan of the cheesy neon lights and overkill flashy lights.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Method101 said:


> haha, yeah i would have to admit that this post is a bit biased
> 
> but regardless, it has to be new york for me, I'm not too big a fan of the cheesy neon lights and overkill flashy lights.


It's all good man. But what if NY ends up getting it's own Symphony Of Lights


----------



## Method101 (Nov 16, 2005)

WANCH said:


> It's all good man. But what if NY ends up getting it's own Symphony Of Lights


haha yeah true, I got to admit man the symphony of lights does look very nice, but I guess I meant more in the sense that I wouldn't like the futuristic neon lights and flashiness to come to new york, I dont know, don't think it would fit very well. It fits well in areas like times square, but the nyc skyline as a whole, but i do have to admit, it fits perfect in hong kong


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

Method101 said:


> haha yeah true, I got to admit man the symphony of lights does look very nice, but I guess I meant more in the sense that I wouldn't like the futuristic neon lights and flashiness to come to new york, I dont know, don't think it would fit very well. It fits well in areas like times square, but the nyc skyline as a whole, but i do have to admit, it fits perfect in hong kong


I honestly agree that the heavy concentration of neon in NY should be limited to areas such as Times Square.

But neon is slowly phasing out in Times Square and what you see more in this area are electronic lighting effects.


----------

