|
Which city is better San Francisco or LA? (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Clovis86 |
| I :wtf: 'd for a second time! |
|
|
| lim f(x) = f(a) |
| bay area > socal |
|
|
| dj_bas |
| Josh doesn't deserve to live in California. He should just move back to Cracksmoke, Ohio where he belongs (thanks Randy!). |
|
|
| ivanbee |
that thread in teh c0r was mint.
josh4 :wtf: |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by ivanbee
that thread in teh c0r was mint.
josh4 :wtf: |
haha yeah it was! |
|
|
| PicottoIsGod |
| quote: | Originally posted by SVGmethod
LA hands down....cuz we're getting sasha and zabiela!!!!!!!!!!! |
lol probably not one of his major pivotal/decision-making points but ide havta say KUDOS to that 1 |
|
|
| PicottoIsGod |
| quote: | Originally posted by lex400sc
in la there is a tonne more people and a tonne more traffic, but with that comes bigger and nicer clubs and more international dj talent (although we got digweed, tenaglia, and svd and you guys didn't! ...for once :rolleyes: ). weather, there's no doubt sf wins... the air is always fresh, no smog or haze, never ever gets too hot, and a million microclimates in the bay so if you don't like 60 degree weather you can drive 30 miles east and get 90 degree weather on the other side of the foothills. sf, or anywhere on the penninsula will be more expensive living than most of la though. the night life in la is better, but if you like outdoor activities, sf/bay area wins. surf in santa cruz all day, drive to tahoe and snowboard the same evening--it's been done :). there's yosemite 3 hours east, tahoe 3 hours north, monterey 2 hours south, plus in the city of sf itself there's ALWAYS something happening no matter what you're into. the best part about that is everything's a mile or two drive/walk away, whereas in la it's much more spread out. if you can't live without beaches though, then la wins. the summer heat makes for perfect beach days, though the beaches have been getting more ghetto over the last few years. hb to sd ftw. for the most part la lifestyle is much faster, people are more abrasive, but the chics are hotter. they are both great places in different ways, but i'd say socal fits the young party lifestyle more, and sf is better for the more laidback leisure lifestyle. probably cause our chronic is better! :wtf: |
1st of all buddddddddddddy....we got digweed
and 2nd of all....wtf is chronic....? the kush that SanFernandoValley supplies, keeeps me warm in between my thighs..... |
|
|
| PicottoIsGod |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis86
lol...i've been there
/me is fired.
Still..we should get Sasha and Digweed to play there.
We'll bring some funktion 1 speakers. |
whos we...? u have Funk1 speakers and ur holding out on me...? |
|
|
| Alain |
Both areas are good it just depends
San Francisco
- When the weather peaks IT IS better than Southern California. However Southern California has much longer periods of warm weather days. If you were to compare LA’s nicest day of the year to SF’s. San Francisco wins hands down and its simply because the air is much cleaner. The fact the city is basically a peninsula between the ocean and bay balances out the weather better on hot days.
- As any metro city the traffic can be bad, fortunately for SF this is usually during certain hours of the day. 7am-9am and then it flexes between 3pm-7pm. Its usually 5pm – 7pm. In LA there’s always traffic at ANY hour of the day on at least one of the major freeways. I mean that literally.
- The restaurants and food up north are way better. It’s not an opinion it’s a fact, 3 restaurants up north are ranked in the Top 50 in the world (This is based on 4 listings from culinary reviews). There’s not a single from from Southern Calfornia that makes the list. The majority of the states agriculture is up north anyhow. Even from cheap to formal though the food up here is great. IMO out of all the coastal cities from Vancouver to San Diego, LA is my least favorite place for food.
- The summer season. As I mentioned the agriculture is on the northern half of the state. Our food festivals are amazing! There’s one every weekend until the tree leaves fall off. Let alone during the peak of the season there can be at least 3-4 major festivals (art, music, food), street fairs and parades going off in SF in one weekend. Put it this way the city lets us shut down the biggest and busiest street to throw a party for a whole day and allow us to use city hall as the vip section for the festival; not only that city hall has allowed a rave to be organized in their own building.
- All the clubs are a cab hop away within a 4 mile radius, based on the dance culture. SF has a much more intimate vibe and since the city is pretty small compared to others, it inspires people to collaborate on many dynamic levels.
- The parking can be considered bad, but throughout my travels its nothing compared to other major cities like Tokyo and New York. Its pretty much just the downtown area, everywhere else in SF people come and go pretty quick.
- Actually the public transportion is pretty good, at least half of my friends don’t even have cars in the city or use them. The city is under a 7 mile radius so you can get everywhere fairly quick once you get use to the area.
Los Angeles
- There’s a lot more activity going on down there and it has a much more active nightlife and I don’t just mean clubs, I mean in general. The shopping is way better on all levels.
- There are more and better public beaches
- Its close to Las Vegas, San Diego and Mexico |
|
|
| lex400sc |
| quote: | Originally posted by PicottoIsGod
1st of all buddddddddddddy....we got digweed
and 2nd of all....wtf is chronic....? the kush that SanFernandoValley supplies, keeeps me warm in between my thighs..... |
1: this thread/post was made in january. that was at a time where digweed, tenaglia and svd dropped in on sf and not la, which is why i made mention of it. in general though, since the los angeles population center is twice that of the bay area's, your clubs and promoters can afford to stack talent like sf can't.
2: norcal bud is the best in the nation, arguably the continent, arguably the world. from santa cruz to humboldt, norcal has the best climate for argriculture as alain mentioned. san fernando valley is a valley surrounded by arid desert. i'm sure the buds there still get you ripped, but the trichrome count is naturally higher up north. you guys have vineyards for wine too, but your wine still has no worldwide recognition like napa valley's.
btw josh4, since you made this thread under the pretext of deciding where you wanted to move in california, and since you've insisted la is superior to sf, why the hell did you end up moving to sf? HMMMM???? |
|
|
| lex400sc |
| quote: | Originally posted by ivanbee
that thread in teh c0r was mint.
josh4 :wtf: |
josh4 knows all and sees nothing! |
|
|
| lex400sc |
btw for those who don't know about josh4, he moved to sf from ohio about 6 months ago and has never been here prior. from his time here, he's concluded that:
- sf is dirty and overrated.
- sf's parades and street fairs are overrated excuses for commercialism.
- sf used to be a great party city in 2000 (a time period he was not around for), but now it's just dirty.
- sf's night life can't hold a candle to la, nyc or miami
- sf has widespread homelessness, trash on every block and a mediocre club scene.
sounds like some bold assertions yeah? here's the kicker: josh4 has never been to any edm club events in sf or la :wtf: josh4 can't even name his 10 favorite djs :wtf: josh4 refuses to name any of the venues he's basing his opinions on :wtf: josh4 refuses to elaborate on what his criteria is for judging sf's night life :wtf: and as we all know, josh4 has never posted anything on anyone's roll call or review thread for any event posted in his forum :wtf: you probably don't recognize josh4's user name because he doesn't post in any music or party related forums on this site, only the chill out room :wtf: |
|
|
|
|
