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.
I prefer London, but I will admit that food is better in New York City. NYC is a great place to sample little hole in the wall restaurants.
Food wide London has some fantastic places and plenty of choice from across the world, with places like Borough Marker offering a massive variety of global food offerings.
Depends on what you're interested in. I like history and New York is awful for that compared to London.
This is just an absurd thing to say - New York is structurally not that much younger than London - it’s not like London is great for history just because some founded it in the ancient world - most of its built form is Victorian and modern with some georgian features. New York is practically the same.
Dubstep spawned the whole recent EDM dance movement in the US
As for Grime, it is the progenitor of the Bass Driven Trap Music currently making waves in New York.
Sonically New York is about 10 years behind... LOL
This is a perfect example of how insular and arrogant British people are.
Dub was itself influenced by American music. NYC had an electronic music scene with Silver Apples in the late-1960s. It was an epicenter for clubbing, for hip hop, for house music well before London was. It was also an epicenter for jazz and rock and roll music well before London was. This is just such a preposterous, backwards assertion. London is well behind NYC and America, and sonically, of copies everything that comes out of America.
.
NYC does have some excellent museums but it simply cannot compete with the scale and variety of London's offerings.
NYC is a bland, samey place for the most part, London has centuries of history on its side, far greater architectural & cultural variety.
You are such an insane, bitter Brit with the typical anti-American chip on their shoulder.
London is far more “bland” than NYC - what is a “samey” place? You’re not making sense. London is not historically much older than NYC and it’s architectural dynamic is also not comparable - it hasn’t remotely built as much in as wide a variety of styles as NYC has for the past 200 years.
To say NYC “simply cannot compete” with London’s museums is hilarious and reeks of desperation.
“Cultural variety” also undeniably goes to NYC. Utterly unbelievable that a Brit would try to suggest otherwise. NYC has always been more diverse and has incubated a lot more art and music and fashion in the past 100 years.
I think the art and history (for obvious reasons) is much more interesting in London. I honestly don't like the congestion or expense of either city but would choose London over New York any day.
London hasn’t ever been an art capital. New York has, since at least the 1940s. A lot of these are unjustifiable, desperate, biased attempts to boost London
London hasn’t ever been an art capital. New York has, since at least the 1940s. A lot of these are unjustifiable, desperate, biased attempts to boost London
ROFL - so London is not an international art centre according to your analysis.
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.
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.
