NY vs. London/ Then and now

[BevvyB]

Jules' post on another thread got me started

New York / London

Two great cities, but what's the music vibe, culture vibe, and street vibe like, and 'who's best', and 'who's worst', and what's changed over the last 10 years?

1. Which is best for live music, which was best 10 years ago?

2. Which is best for clubbing, which was best 10 years ago?

3. Which was best for 'culture', which was best 10 years ago?

4. Which had more 'musicial innovation', which has it now?

etc

I love both places, this is not a US/UK thread!!! It's about the culture of two cities, neither of which are much like the countries they inhabit.

Who had/has the buzz?

If neither have it, who has??

And as a quick aside, how many people here who 'do' NY regularly have been to London, and how many people who 'do' London regularly have been to NY?

[petermeechanuk]

As a Londoner who's been coming to NYC on/off for 10 years and is in the process of moving here, I can let you know my thoughts -

1. Which is best for live music, which was best 10 years ago?

Definately New York Now - London consists of only a handfull of decent live venues for up and coming bands (Monarch, Dublin Castle, Water Rats, Bull & Gate being the top 4 - other venues aren't worth a look in) and people only go if they know the band. Many bands come down to London from elsewhere in UK with the dream of playing to a new crowd to find themselves playing to an empty room, even on a Saturday. New York seems to have bands playing every night and there's allways some sort of crowd. London used to have a good music scene 10+ years ago where people went to gigs whoever was playing just on the off chance of finding something new, but not anymore.

As for larger venues, whilst London has some great places, New York seems to have decent bands playing (or at least the ones I like) on a more regular basis.

2. Which is best for clubbing, which was best 10 years ago?

I haven't been a clubber for several years, but back then the London scene was larger and more mainstream (You better like house). New York seemed a bit cliquey.

3. Which was best for 'culture', which was best 10 years ago?

Erm - do you mean musicals or art shows ?

4. Which had more 'musicial innovation', which has it now?

I'm not sure if Londond OR New York are that innovating when compared to other cities. Uk has seen more innovation from Manchester over that past 20 years than it has from London (but then a lot of that was rehashed 60s beat). As for USA, I'm sure people from Seattle, Philladelphia and LA might have ideas on who's had the most innovation.

I think I'll stay out of that one.



-Peter

[Jules]

1. Which is best for live music, which was best 10 years ago?

Pass

One thing is for sure the sucess of The Strokes has been a shot in the arm for the 'vintage clothes' / retro indie set in NYC. Mood is up, sales of velvet jackets & striped trousers must be through the roof. But who cares? (not me)

2. Which is best for clubbing, which was best 10 years ago?

Hmmm...

Small bar scene has overtaken large clubs for far longer than 10 years now in NYC IMHO

A remarkable fact is that due to zero 'carding', kids as young as 15 (the extreme end being girls who can dress up to look older) sneak in to all types of UK music clubs & bars. Therefore clubbing in New York makes for a more solid 'adult' experience & environment (welcome!) which is in stark contrast to clubbing in the UK.

3. Which was best for 'culture', which was best 10 years ago?

Pass, I am shamefully uncultured.

4. Which had more 'musicial innovation', which has it now?

Pass

Life in NYC is more 'hard bitten' & faster paced than in London, this CAN lead one to the assumption that 'artists' that can survive there must be more sophisticated, agile adaptable and altogether more "clever" to withstand the metropolis AND make art... But who knows where innovation might strike next? Does the ability to cope well with a speedy metropolis have anything whatsover to do with innovation? I think not.

___________________________________

Interesting question, NYC is the obvious 'next step up' to a Londoner that enjoys fast paced life, doesnt have good weather as a life priority and is looking to gear up a notch. I have always got half an eye on NYC and relocating there. If I have a 'hit' recognised throughout the music industry in the future, I would seriously concider that time to make a move over.

On my last visit I was assured by an industry insider that overall music business was migrating to NYC from LA and that the bi-coastal system for the industy was on it's way out. I would like to belive this as LA doesnt hold nearly as much fasination for me and I have good contacts in NYC.

Personally I was disapointed to hear of the recent demise of Balducci's (an Italian high class food store) it was a lifes ambition to spend at least a few years living round the corner from it.

[quasimodonyc]

On my last visit I was assured by an industry insider that overall music business was migrating to NYC from LA and that the bi-coastal system for the industy was on it's way out.

Gawd, I hope this is true. Here's to you LA! fuuck

Kidding, kidding.

1. I just saw Satanicide at the Mercury Lounge so I will have to say NY. Plus, I played the Monarch and the 100 Club a couple of years back and it pretty much sucked.

2. Couldn't care less.

3. I love museums and both cities are loaded with excellent ones.

4. Pass.

Best thing about England is the pub. It's like a little community in and of itself. I worked on a record in London last year and it was pretty much get to the studio in the morning, work until 7 or 8, get to the pub (same one every night, same staff, same clientele) , pub closes at 10, get back to the studio and try to work but mostly end up cutting up with the assistants and the band drinking and smoking 'til late. Everyone at the pub knows everyone at the studio and vice versa. All I get when I'm working at studios in NYC is takeout, the food is better but it's not as much fun.