Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
These are the 3 cities my wife and I have visited since getting married. We actually went to D.C. for our honeymoon in 2014, visited Boston last summer, and ventured to NYC for spring break this year.
I'm a huge history buff, so my goal is to visit as many historic cities as I can. Next on our list are Williamsburg, VA and Philadelphia.
There are things I loved about each one. You can't talk about D.C. without mentioning those gargantuan Smithsonian museums, The National Archives, and the majestic Library of Congress. Boston is charming; it's chock full of Revolutionary-era history and has a very collegiate/intellectual feel to it. And you're never bored in NYC. Not surprisingly, I was mostly drawn to the museums there, including Federal Hall, Fraunces Tavern, Museum of American Finance, The Grange, New York Historical Society, and Museum of the City of MY.
The architecture in all 3 cities took my breath away. I just couldn't stop snapping pictures of buildings. You don't see anything that comes close to that here in Florida.
If I had to rank them, I would put Boston first, D.C. second, and NYC last, with D.C. and Boston nearly tied for first.
Here's why: The less hustle and bustle and congestion, the more alluring a city in my book. I found NYC to be too much. Everyone is always in a hurry. Nearly every restaurant/shop we visited was jam packed.
I found the pace slower and more inviting in Boston. I fell in love with Boston Common and the Public Garden. The Boston Public Library was gorgeous.
I see D.C. as falling in between Boston and NYC in terms of the nightlife, crowds, etc.
Most people I ask say they've visited NYC, but neither Boston nor Philadelphia.
As I noted earlier, I visit these cities chiefly for the historic sites and museums. I realize that isn't the main reason people flock to them, especially NYC. Many just want to catch a Broadway show, shop in Times Square, or dance till the morning hours.
I understand that most people will not invest all that time and money just to museum hop. And places like Boston and Philly don't have the tourist traps that NYC does. D.C. also feels a bit more touristy than Boston because of the Mall.
How would you rank them? Do you agree with my points?
2) DC - met my wife. lots of memories and feels familiar, like home.
3) Boston - love everything about the neighborhoods and vibe. Wish I went to college here. Don't like the sports teams (not a big deal) and the weakest of the three for Chinese food (big deal)
That said, DC and Boston could have easily been swapped if not for my ties to DC.
I feel funny saying this because I live near Boston and I'm a booster, but I have to go:
1. New York
2. DC
3. Boston
I agree that Boston is probably the most laid back, yes. Boston is definitely the best for history, but it's also easily No. 3 for museums. New York and DC are the two best museum cities in America, and it's not close.
I find it hard to rank them in terms of architecture. They're all great in different ways.
I'm also a history buff. I would probably put DC first, with Boston very very closely behind, and New York last.
I do think Boston has the history edge quite easily on both, but DC has the museum edge quite easily. New York is mostly just museums. I think the museum edge DC has is too strong. Boston tore down a lot of their historic buildings sadly.
Boston has the worst nightlife of all three. Not sure how you came to the conclusion that DC is last. Bostonian's themselves (while some may prefer the quiet) are more likely to admit the lacking nightlife relative to it's peers, if they had to list something they wish was better.
You'll love Philadelphia. It's my favorite place for history and museums over Boston and DC. The historical footprint in Philadelphia is much larger, with larger historical neighborhoods. IMO, Philadelphia does history better than anywhere. There is still a **** ton of historic areas that were preserved. It's awesome. More comprehensive. I found Boston's history to be more fractured and more sparse throughout the city. But it's easily second in that regard.
Do take note of the suburbs as well. Philadelphia and Boston have the best suburbs mixed with colonial history. They're extremely picturesque.
There is also this that just opened over a month ago. I can't wait to get there.
To get a real idea of what New York is like, you have to venture outside of Midtown Manhattan (which tends to be pretty crowded)
We actually stayed in the Financial District in Lower Manhattan. That put us close to Wall Street, Trinity Church, Museum of American Finance, Federal Hall, and other great historic sites.
I agree that D.C. and Boston blow NYC out of the water when it comes to history. For example, the presentations/displays at each of the stops along the Freedom Trail are on a much grander scale than those at the historic homes and churches we visited in NYC. I also noticed that when it comes to history-related merchandise, Boston decimates the Big Apple.
I may be in the minority here, but I actually prefer small and less busy (Boston) to big and bustling (NYC). Honestly, if I had a choice, I'd rather go back to Boston Common/The Public Garden than visit Central Park again.
I'm the bookworm type who every now and then misses college, so it's no surprise I'm partial to beantown.
I loved D.C. as well, but it felt much more touristy than Boston. Yet there's no denying that no city's museums hold a candle to the Smithsonian.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.