Best "canal" city: Amsterdam or VENICE or some place else?

Love Venice but you've never been to Amsterdam which is a wonderful canal city to explore. I vote Amsterdam on this trip.

I say do both and enjoy the contrast. We did, and thought it was a neat idea. I especailly liked the guide in Amsterdam stopping the boat to dip a glass in the water and drinking it. "See! Clean water, not stinky like Venice!" When we got to Venice, I did not find the water stinky at all, but clear, (didn't try drinking though, its salt water). Ever notice how Amsterdam is "The Venice of the North", Colmar has its "Petite Venise", there are tons of "The Venice of (fill in the blank)". Venice never calls itself any thing except "La Serenissima".

Yes, Venice is magical, but it is out of the way for your itinerary and you will be right in Amsterdam...why not at least give it a chance? Amsterdam is maybe my favorite city in Europe, so laid back, wonderful city center, great things to see, great people. It would be a shame to not at least spend a couple nights there getting over jet-lag. Also, depending on where else you have already been, on your way to France, you could sidetrip to Bruges, Belgium for a night, another "canal city".

I vote for Amsterdam. As much as I love Venice and can't wait to go back (no stinky water for me either), you will have a much easier trip if you don't have to travel out of your way. Enjoy Amsterdam and all it has to offer. Happy Travels! Jessica

OK Trishia, looks like Amsterdam is going to win this battle. I enjoyed the contrast in that in 1500 Venice was the richest city in the west because of it access to the Orient and its efficient water born transport. 150 years later, it was a has-been, superceded by a city that made an end run around Venice to the Orient, again taking advantage of water born transport. Who says you won't amount to anything living in a swamp.

Merci beaucoup for everyone's input. I think it's the romantic image of Venice that keeps pulling me....I unjustly used the word 'stinky' in describing its water (an accusation I've heard others make) but mostly what I noticed was oil/gas from the fast boats...I have been to Brugges and loved it, too! Too many temptations and choices:)!

I liked Delft much better than Amsterdam!!

I've frequently visited both places and just want to suggest that they are completely different from each other. Amsterdam is a land city which has several concentric canals. It is very Dutch, with much of the day-to-day life dominated by the numbers of bicycles and trams. The architecture is very Dutch and crossing the canals is easy - they are quite narrow really. Venice is a water city with many linked developed islands. The Grand Canal is very wide, the Guiadecca Canal much wider than that. Everything revolves around the canals and all the small calles and bridges. Popping around a corner and discovering a hidden campo is just so much fun and unlike anything anywhere else. Needless to say, the architecture is Venetian. I struggle to think of an equivalent comparison as an example. Maybe Yosemite and Banff. Both are mountain parks, but they are so very different.

Go for Amsterdam!! There are many differences between Amsterdam and Venice. For instance: 1. Amsterdam is a city with real people working and living in it. Venice is more of a tourist attraction. Little people live there all year round. 2. Everybody speaks English in Amsterdam. Few people in Venice speak English. 3. The food in Venice is better, but the food variety in Amsterdam is much larger. Amsterdam for instance have some of the best Indonesian restaurant out side of Indonesia (former Dutch colony) 4. Amsterdam has many more parks 5. Amsterdam is bigger 6. Amsterdam is more arty and more relaxed 7. Amsterdam has more attraction and there is an enormous amount of things to do
8. Amsterdam has more bicycles You can also check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venice and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam

Nigel, I really appreciate your comments. Your comparison of Banff and Yosemite helps me to clearly see the 'error' in my reducing the two cities into simply "canal" cities. Now, my indecision is Amsterdam or Delft at the beginning with Venice the final dessert:)

To expand on what Nigel said; Picture in your mind a neighborhood - street, sidewalk, small front garden, facades of row-houses. Now picture one out of every 3-4 streets being replaced with a canal of the same size, but sidewalks and front yards remain, as do all the other streets, so there are still plenty of cars parked, driving and dodging, plus thousands of bicycles. Now picture that same neighborhood, but eliminate EVERY street with water. There are no cars at all. There are no bicycles at all. Walk or boat - that's your only option. Squeeze the facades closer together and eliminate all the little front gardens. You have nothing between facades but water or narrow alleys. It's really a completely different look and feel, to say nothing of the different architecture and culture. There is only one Venice. Every other city or town with some canals is just a city or town with some canals.

Three other big differences between Venice and Amsterdam are: 1. the houses in Venice are mostly direct on the water, whereas in Amsterdam there tends to be a street between the water and the canal houses. 2. Amsterdam is known throughout the world for its many houseboats. In the 1960's people started living on these houseboats. Mostly hippie's. Today these houseboats have become rather expensive and young yuppies tend to live on them
3. both cities are best appreciated from the water. I can highly recommend one rents a private boat to explore the city canals. In Venice it is not very easy to rent a private boat and explore the cities canals on your own. I found one company in Venice that rents out little boats with diesel engines called Brussais Boat In Amsterdam they are more equipped and have several little rental companies that rent out small electric boats such as Boot Amsterdam

I don't love Amsterdam at all but it is worth seeing and shouldn't be skipped - especially if you're there. I'd plan a canal boat tour, visit the Rijks and Van Gogh museums and walk around to see the center. The architecture is a highlight for me.

Please don't forget about Bruges, Belgium. It's such a surprise treat.

Please don't forget about Bruges, Belgium. It's such a surprise treat.

Been to both three times. Like food better in Amsterdam, and its cheaper, but Venice is definately more magical,, Amsterdam is wonderful , but not "magical".
And just so you know, neither is my favorite city in Europe, I like both, I am just saying they are not my favorites so you understand that my bias towards Venice is simply because it really feels wonderful .

I've been to Amsterdam 3 times and can't wait to show it to my kids. I will see Venice in July. Can't wait. So Pat, what are your favorites?

Probably worth mentioning that Venice is a VERY LONG side trip from either France or Spain. Interesting how many cities claim to be the "Venice of" something or another. Several dispute the title "... of the North", such as Amsterdam, Delft, Brugge, Utrecht, Ghent, Hamburg. Even Breda tries to stake it's claim. I've seen Strasbourg identified as the "Venice of France", Copenhagen as "Venice of Denmark/Scandinavia", and St. Petersburg "the Venice of the Baltic/Russia", and even promotional literature for Schwerin as the "Venice of Mecklinburg". And here's a nice old song about Amsterdam's canals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhdQ59LHorQ

Am thoroughly enjoying everyone's advice and opinions! Thank you, thank you! A decade ago when I last traveled internationally, Venice was easy to get to: a night train from Nice. Went there twice that way. I believe that option is no longer available but there's a night train from Munich??
I have been to Brugges and loved it! But again, not that 'completely surrounded by water' feeling that Venice has....

Jan, I would rate in order of preference and personal tastes/interests, and I would return to any of these places: Paris as number one, London and Rome tied, Venice, Amsterdam and then, rating these smaller cities/towns on their own scale : Tossa De Mar Spain, Zermatt, Paros-Greece,Wengen and St Malo, Bath. I would not go out of my way to return to , but did enjoyed seeing the once, these places: Brugges, Bayeaux, Lucerne, Barcelona ,Cannes, Nice, Monaco, Brighton, Munich. Keep in mind these choices are based solely on my personal tastes and interests, I love love love museums, so most of my big city picks have many great ones, and tons of stunning history. Most of my small city/town picks are based on atmosphere or physical beauty.There of course exceptions. I think in these "which place " or "where should I go" threads that a person really personal, and people need to examine what THEY want out of their trip, and try and figure out their tastes. Many people love a certain city, and can wax on and on about it( for me its Paris) but someone else goes there and gives it a 4/10 rating. The only time I really jump on stuff like this is if a person is really misinformed or has some silly prejudicies. ( like: all the food in Paris is strange and exotic, or Rome is den of pickpockets, etc)I especially hate it when their "information " is based on what some one at work said|( or their roomates sisters cousin, etc) , and that person had either never been or was once 10 years ago on a bus tour for a two day visit) No one can pick either Amsterdam or Venice for OP but , there are other considerations based on the travel time and route and budget considerations, that may make one place preferable to another on a trip. Just saying if OP doesn't mind the travel and extra expense , then I would choose Venice!