My husband and I are planning a Spain trip this fall, flying into one city and out of the other. Is there any particular reason to do one city first as opposed to the other?

Not at all, but I guess it will depend on the flight arrangements.

None at all.

There are probably minor pros and cons either way. I started in Madrid and finished in Barcelona and am glad I did. Madrid was exciting to me because it was at the beginning of my trip. Although I liked the city and enjoyed my time there I was kind of at a loss for things I wanted to do, so after I did my "must dos" just ended up wandering around different neighborhoods and sitting in parks.

On the other hand, I absolutely and completely fell in love with Barcelona. I arrived completely exhausted from a fast-paced two-week trip, but an hour sitting by the ocean completely rejuvenated me. I just couldn't get enough of the city's architecture.

I could see being disappointed with Madrid after spending time in Barcelona, but on the other hand, there's also a danger that you may be too tired to take full advantage of Barcelona at the end of a trip.

Of course it all depends on your preferences, the length of your trip, the pace of your trip, etc. These are just my thoughts based on my experience.

I'd visit Madrid first and Barcelona last. To my mind, Madrid is interesting, especially considering its art museums, but I think Barcelona is spectacular. The Gaudi buildings especially make Barcelona one of a kind.

Thinking that Madrid is a come-down after Barcelona, but Barcelona isn't a come-down after Madrid.

Two very differen cities...Barcelona is more compact .

do whatever gives you the cheapest flights-if no difference flip a coin.