We are going to NYC in November to see Spamalot and just do a lot of walking and seeing the neighborhoods. . I can get both of these hotels for nearly the same price. Could someone guide me as to the areas surrounding them and the disad./adv. to either. Thanks!

They are both perfectly pleasant hotels that get generally good reviews. The poor reviews are usually from people unaccustomd to New York hotel room size and prices - and expect 5* luxury - which you won;t get at this price point.

The Westin is closer to Times Square - for me a major disadvantage since this is an area I avoid except for the theater. But many tourists seem to like being in the middle of the noise, glitz and neon.

The location of the Micehlangelo is also convenient - but not quite so loud and tacky - but still close to shopping and theater.

Have you looked at tripadvisor.com?

I prefer the Michelangelo over the Westin for location and overall hotel.

The Westin and Michelangelo are both in the same neighborhood, Midtown. Times Square is in Midtown West.

The Westin is right in Times Square on West 43rd while the Michelangelo is about eight blocks north on West 51st.

Same neighborhood but the Michelangelo is a little quieter because it isn't ground zero for Times Square.

I too would much prefer the Michelangelo but I think you're more likely to get a room with a view at the Westin. I think the Westin is dramatically larger (more rooms and more floors). Check on tripadvisor.com.

I would definitely choose the Michelangelo, unless you want a room with a view, in which case Westin is the only choice. At the Michelangelo, you should actually request an inside room, since they are quiet, if dark--you wouldn't get much of a view, since it's not a high-rise, only crazy street noise from 7th Ave. Westin hotels are usually very nice, but I just find the immediate vicinity of this Westin sort of undesirable, being right across from the bus terminal, and though they carefully situated the main entrance on the side, on 43rd St., you're still very close to the tackiness of 42nd St. The Michelangelo is a classy, comfortable oasis in the frantic atmosphere of midtown west.

The points everyone has mentioned are exactly what I can't decide about. I love having rooms with views that are not dark. On the other hand, I dislike having to walk through tacky areas to get to my hotel-I prefer the surroundings to be clean and pleasant.
It sounds like I can't get both of these with these two choices. Any other recommendations for clean surroundings and a pleasant view. It doesn't have to be in midtown-we like to walk ALOT. I'd like to stick to $350 tops-but that looks almost impossible.

Unless you are paying for a suite with a view, you will not have a sunny hotel room.

Sunlight and views are at a premium and usually only come with penthouse suites on high floors.

Remember, Midtown is the home of the highrise and both these hotels are surrounded by them.

The main light into your room from Times Square will be from the light bulbs not the sun.

I have the same pet peeve and for some reason, it isn't an issue with me in NYC.

Also remember the highrises cause it to get dark earlier in Manhattan.

The higher floors of the Sofitel should have views but don't know about the price in Nov. It's also in the TS area but not in a tacky bit. Le Parker Meridien is another tall skyscraper where you'd have views on higher floors. It's a bit further north almost at Central Park. I don't care for the look of their furniture but you can't have everything. The Millenium UN Plaza has a lot of rooms with views but it's all the way east near the UN and the East River. Both Le Parker M and the Millenium UN Plaza have rooftop enclosed pools with great views.

mclaurie, any of the rooms in Le Parker Meridian with a view would be facing the park correct? The upper floor rooms of LPM are pretty much blocked south, east and west so the sunlight would be only for a short time because of the angle of the sun and the time of day it sets?



(okay, the above is weird but I tried to work this out previously)

GoTravel, this is not correct. The building is not totally blocked west or south, and I don't know how much park view you'd get from north-facing. Like McLaurie, I've never been crazy about the Parker Meridien. I think the Michelangelo is a much nicer hotel. And while no one could love a view of the twinkling lights and bridges of Manhattan more than me, quietness is also a big point to consider--and you won't find it at every hotel. Some of the views from the Westin, considering its location, might seem more grungy than glamorous. For the best views, I guess you'd have to pay mega-bucks at the Mandarin Oriental or Trump.

We've had a nice view of the park from Le Parker Meridien but we were quite high up. But I don't know if you'd be able to get anything there for $350. The lowest rate I've seen there for a while is in the $400s.

I've read all the tripadvisor reviews and both come highly recommended. If we were to stay at the Michelangelo-you would request interior(perhaps looking at a brick wall, as opposed to 7th Avenue high floor?)
I've also wondered about the Westin Essex or something like that nearer
Central Park, Giraffe, Elysee or Warwick.

I'd definitely choose the Michelangelo and I'd definitely request a room facing OUT, not a brick wall. The higher floor the better. Incidentally, unless you are an extremely light sleeper, noise will not be a problem facing a street. Windows are heavy and with draperies closed over them -- I sure wouldn't worry about the noise.

Thanks, Patrick, that's what I needed to hear! I hate looking out at a brickwall. So you have stayed there? What did you like about it and do you recall which type room you had? We are in an "executive" room-I think it's their lowest priced room-but not sure.

I have stayed at the Michelangelo, in a jr. suite facing the street, and noise wasn't a problem. A friend had the hotel's smallest room at the same time, and while the bedroom was cozy, the bathroom was quite large by any standard, which kept the room from seeming too tiny; and the bath was all marble, very bright and pretty. I'd be happy to stay in the small room any time for the price and location; plus, the hotel really feels like an oasis of quiet and calm at the end of the day. Enjoy your trip!

It's been a good seven or eight years since I stayed there, but we had the standard room -- yes, "executive" could be it. The room was furnished beautifully, and I think was the first place I ever stayed with a TV in the bathroom. The bathroom was exceptionally nice and quite large as E says. And I was surprised that our room was sizeable for New York. But we did have an interior one facing a brick wall and it felt like night in the middle of the day.

I wish there was some way to guarantee location of room, but that never seems to be the case in less you go up in price. I think sometimes that getting a room that faces walls can make a great hotel seem bad-at least for me.

I think if you make that request right up front with the reservation, it will go a long way to getting an outside room. Tell them you are concerned about getting an inside room which would be very disappointing. I doubt that most people make such a request so if you show that it is important to you, you are likely to get it -- just a guess on my part, though.

I think you are right though-that's the most you can do. I'll try it.
What's near the hotel for good eating?
We love all types of food.