PalenQ

9 days ain't much for Spain where main areas are a long haul apart. London would be neat but for 9 days but you may yes want to do day trips from London - easily done by train to likes of York (2 hrs), Bath (90 minutes) - two of Britain's most gorgeous and interesting cities - Salisbury (for a steak) and Stnehenge east to do in same day; Stratford-on-Avon and of course Oxford or Cambridge, etc. Trains are great and you can book long-distance trains like to York or Bath at big discounts at National Rail Enquiries - Official source for UK train times and timetables if book early enough to get the limited number of discounted tickets. Check www.seat61.com for oodles of advice on booking own discounted tickets and for general info on trains and where to go with them also BETS-European Rail Experts and www.ricksteves.com.

And yes like all big tourist cities London can be expensive but as others say it needn't not be necessarily. But don't neglect the Britain surrounding cosmopolitan London.

TDudette

I vote for Spain by a hair. Here's my TR for London and Madrid. It was my 3rd visit to London but first to Madrid.

Madrid and London

Enjoy!

danon

Although, free museum/ gallery entrance is a huge bonus in England, I find in Madrid ( and especially in
smaller Spanish towns ) I get better hotels and eat much better for less than in London.

But for the first visit to Europe , London may be the place to visit because it is one of those
mayor cities in the world ....like Paris, Rome , New York ..

kja

But as already discussed above, there are MANY interesting places within easy reach of Madrid, and FWIW, I would consider 9 days in that area ideal.

cdnyul

Spain by a country mile.

Spain: food, scenery, atmosphere, people.

England: none of the above.

PalenQ

9 days in Madrid? Of course could be neat but some don't think Madrid as let's say romantic as say Seville, Cordoba, Barcelona, etc. But easy to combine I guess in 9 days Madrid and Sevile and Cordoba. But granted any large European city could wondrusly occupy weeks. And September weather in Spain would be warm but at least not as cool as Britain can be.

kja

Madrid for 4 days, Toledo for 2 days, Salamanca for 2 or 3 days. Or replace any one (or more) of those days to make time for Segovia or Avila or Cuenca....

I'm not saying whether the OP should go to Madrid or London -- either could be an excellent option! And I'm not saying the breakdown I just suggested would suit all travelers -- that depends on what the OP wants to see and experience. But I would at least like to see that the OP gets accurate information about the options.

janisj

>>Spain: food, scenery, atmosphere, people.

England: none of the above.<<

Simply ridiculous. England has ALL of those things in spades -- as does Spain of course. Both are lovely places to visit. But to generalize about England like that - one would have to have been terribly unlucky.

PalenQ

English cunryside wins hands down over typical Spanish desolate often cuntryside. OK food maybe but even that that England has no good food is idiotic - England folks you can actualy talk to - atmosphere too nebulous to consider.

cheska15

PalenQ The train trip from Bilbao to Leon was pretty spectacular.

thursdaysd

Try the train trip from Glasgow to Mallaig. Well, OK, Scotland, but that's still the UK.

danon

“English cunryside wins hands down over typical Spanish desolate “

depends on what one prefers..

i find English countryside lovely but rather repetitive,
Spain has
mounties, beaches, olive trees, palms, the green North , and yes dry and desolate areas.

PalenQ

This is so subjective and prejuicial it's an interesting debate but no one more right than another. Beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder.

janisj

>>i find English countryside lovely but rather repetitive,<<

Not repetitive if one gets out of the south/home counties.

kja

I've had some delightful conversations with people in England and in Spain and, for that matter, every where I've traveled, and I've done that with barely a smattering of words other than English. And there are parts of the British Isles where accents are so heavy that I found it hard to carry on a conversation.

I'm not sure how gross oversimplifications or overgeneralizations help the OP....

danon

one can offer only one’s impressions and ,of course , completely subjective.preference.

As I said, for the first time in Europe, London might be the place to visit .

For my personal preference, Spain has my heart.

PalenQ

Well a benefit to me at least having visited Spain maybe a dozen times and UK about 50 is that being a non-Spanish speaker In just casual conversation with folks you met in travels like in restaurants, stores, cabbies, on trains or folks in pubs, etc it's a bit nicer to speak the same language.

But like said some of those British dialects are often hard to understand at normal speed - like some folks on Coronation Streeet!

And also daily newspapers if old enough to still rad them. And TVs in hotel room- radios if driving, etc.

A bit easier all in all perhaps for first-time travelers who always seemed overly concerned about not speaking the language.

But having to exist in a foreing-language country has its merits too and escitement though dauntng to others.

xcountry

I have no idea where you should go. But if I wanted to make a few friends, I would stay in hostels.

bilboburgler

wow, no holding back then ;-)

bilboburgler

Given the five languages of Spain and some very strong accents I suspect communication can be hard here too. In most tourist places you'll find English spoken.

Both interesting places, nice people, good food, you'll be fine wherever you stay, hostels is the place to stay if you want to meet people but you will also find B&Bs not bad, the worst solution is an international hotel.