Considering Silverseas or Raddison but have some questions!

We have cruised several times on mass market lines (Princess, Celebrity, NCL). We have considered taking the step up for our 15th anniversary, but here is my question: Will it just be another cruise (albeit a very nice cruise) or is it different in other respects too? We are also considering a land vacation to Italy.

My other concerns are getting into port with 5000 other people (I know the smaller ships don't have that many but there will probably be more than one ship in port). Do you feel like cattle (we are considering helsinki, copenhagen, st petersburg) in such special places? It is one thing in St Thomas, but Helsinki?

Help.

Thanks

We have cruised several times on mass market lines (Princess, Celebrity, NCL). We have considered taking the step up for our 15th anniversary, but here is my question: Will it just be another cruise (albeit a very nice cruise) or is it different in other respects too?

I haven't been on the cheaper lines but SS is just like having your own ship.

My other concerns are getting into port with 5000 other people (I know the smaller ships don't have that many but there will probably be more than one ship in port). Do you feel like cattle (we are considering helsinki, copenhagen, st petersburg) in such special places? It is one thing in St Thomas, but Helsinki?

 

Help.

 

Thanks

You do not feel anything like cattle on SS. You can also make it "better" with early embarkation and disembarkation.

I think it is a completely different world and experience.

Go for it.

Jeff

The advantage of a smaller ship,especially in large ports of call,is that one will have disembarked,and be on the coach,long before passengers from the larger cruise ships.

Re St.Petersburg,I do not know if the size of Silversea's ships confines them to mooring with the larger vessels outside the city,or whether,like Seabourn they are able to anchor at one of the river ship terminals in the city centre.

have been on both...Silversea, is far & away superior.....fewer people, a bit more upscale....Your name & preferences are known pretty quickly

I agree with the above posts. For my money, Silverseas is the way to go, particularly if you are on a port-intensive cruise.

Silverseas and Raddison are different and cater to different clientele. SIlverseas is a bit more formal. It is certainly more "luxurious" than Radisson in almost all respects. Radisson's ships are larger (700 or so passengers), albeit not as large as the mega-ships. Radisson will also have more activities on board, which should not be a consideration if you are on a cruise that spends most days in port. I have not been overwhelmed by most of Radisson's onboard activities, although some of the speakers are quite good. Cuisiine on Silverseas is distinctly superior.

To me, the biggest difference is in the service, and it shows at all levels. On Silverseas, you will feel that the whole point of the trip is your enjoyment of it. I did not have that feeling on my last Radisson trip.

I appreciate all the input. I have NO DOUBT that it will be a superior cruise experience. My question however, was, will a silversea or radisson cruise experience be different ENOUGH to make it as special as a land vacation to Italy.

I know it is subjective and that no one can make the decision for me, but my concern is that a silverseas cruise would be an exceptional cruise but not a once in a lifetime vacation.

What do you think?

You've asked a difficult question, in that what may be a once in a lifetime experience for one person may fall short for another.

What exactly do you mean by "once in a lifetime"? The Silversea experience is such a good one, I can't imagine only doing it once!!!

Denyse

jwave, here are my two cents and that is probably all that it is worth. We have been on all the lines that you posted including Silversea, but have not yet sailed on Radisson.

When we sailed on SS last April, the cruise director apologized for the mass of humanity that was in port the day that we embarked in Antigua. They go out of their way to make sure that they do not get into port the same time that the mega ships are there. Their cruises usually set sail during mid week instead of on Saturdays or Sundays like other cruise lines.

There is no waiting for embarkation or disembarkation and it is very easy to get on and off in ports. Many times they do not have to tender like other ships. It is truly a first class experience.

Is it better than a land based tour of Italy? I guess it depends on what is important to you. Will it be a once in a lifetime experience? I guess that depends on you. When we were young we thought that many of our vacations were once in a lifetime, only to find that now they pale to some of the experiences that we are having now. Next year will be our 35th anniversary and we are still searching for that once in a lifetime experience. They just keep getting better and better.

Decide what is important to you and go for it. If you like being at sea and having romantic evenings looking out over the ocean, then do it and do it in elegance. If you prefer to stay in one place and take in all the ambiance of the area, then go with a longer stay in Tuscany or Venice.

when you are comparing SS to a land based vacation in Italy I hope on that land based vacation you book suites in all your hotels, eat only at the finest restaurants in every city and insure that every detail is taken care of for you. otherwise it is not a fair comparison. having said that there are certain advantages to traveling on land in terms of ability to get to places that a ship cannot. each traveler is unique and so only you can decide which is preferable. why not start your SS cruise with a few days on land before and end it with a few days after. that way you have the best of both worlds.

I consider cruise vacations a sampler. You do not have time to get to know any one local in depth. But you sure can cover a lot of grounds with no hussle. It is such a painless way to travel. On a ship like Silversea you know everything is taken care of, even the sightseeing. Ship's excursions usually cover the major highlights. No schelepping suitcases either. But you aren't likely to have the thrill of lingering over coffee after a wonderful dinner in a hole in the wall, or having the town all to yourself after tourists are gone. You don't feel you know the town intimately. At the same time approaching Venice or Istanbul from sea is a magical experience. Those cities were meant to be approached from sea, and that would be difficult to do if you are land based. Both can be a once-in-a-lifetime experience. You just have to decide what's more important to you.

I know it is subjective and that no one can make the decision for me, but my concern is that a silverseas cruise would be an exceptional cruise but not a once in a lifetime vacation. What do you think?

As another poster said, a cruise is like a sampler, so it's hard to compare a cruise to a land vacation--unless, of course, you're traveling between a number of cities and towns during your trip on land. If that's the case, a Silversea cruise offers at least three advantages:

1) You unpack and repack once, and you aren't constantly checking into and out of hotels.

2) Transportation is mostly at night, with a helmsman and the ship's computer doing the driving while you dine, watch shows, and sleep.

3) You're insulated from the tourist crowds once you get back to the ship, which can be appealing during high season.

On the downside, you'll probably have less contact with the locals than you would if you were on a land vacation, and you'll feel more like a visitor to different places than in different places, if you get my drift.

Have you considered combining a relatively short cruise with a few days on land at either end of the voyage? For example, if you took a 7- to 9-day cruise that began or ended in Venice, you could tack on a few days for Venice (possibly with a day trip to Padua, Vicenza, or one of the nearby hill towns like Asolo) for a total trip length of two weeks. You'd get the best of both worlds: the relaxation and variety of a cruise, plus the chance to experience one of Europe's most beautiful and unique cities in greater depth than you would with a cruise alone.

Thanks to all, you all make excellent points. wripro, I am talking about a land trip with suites and top restaurants. So I think it would be a lovely way to see Italy, and a Silverseas cruise would be a lovely way to see Scandinavia. (We are not considering an Italian cruise because the sights we want to see are all inland and I would rather not waste ANY of my short time in each port on a bus to the sites. In Scandinavia, the sights I want are by the coast.) I had not taken the packing and unpacking and checking in and out into account. I don't know why not, since it is why we cruise to begin with. It would certainly help. I think it is the lack of time in each port that is killing me. I don't want to rush and get only a glimpse of each port OR feel that each day of my trip is rush rush rush.

Again, thanks for all your input, I think I have a tough decision to make.

Durant made a good point though. Why not do both. We are sailing on the Silver Whisper on May 12th from Civitavecchia (Rome) and end up in Villefranche (Nice). We are doing a 3 day pre cruise at the Hotel De Ville Intercontinental in Rome and a one day post cruise at the Beau Rivage in Nice. Other than the port of Livorno for Florence, none of our ports are out of the way of the major sights and even then we are in port from 8am all the way till 11pm. We also call on Portofino, Italy (which is best seen by sea), Port Vendres, Marseille, and St. Tropez.

You can also choose a ship that overnights in Venice or some of the other ports to maximize your time.

Good luck on whatever you decide to do and enjoy your anniversary.

Durant made a good point though. Why not do both. We are sailing on the Silver Whisper on May 12th from Civitavecchia (Rome) and end up in Villefranche (Nice). We are doing a 3 day pre cruise at the Hotel De Ville Intercontinental in Rome and a one day post cruise at the Beau Rivage in Nice. Other than the port of Livorno for Florence, none of our ports are out of the way of the major sights and even then we are in port from 8am all the way till 11pm. We also call on Portofino, Italy (which is best seen by sea), Port Vendres, Marseille, and St. Tropez.

You can also choose a ship that overnights in Venice or some of the other ports to maximize your time.

Good luck on whatever you decide to do and enjoy your anniversary.

Exactly. We're doing the same out of both Rome and Istanbul where we're going to spend three days at the Four Seasons. Mrs uk1 says a few days in jail will do me good. A combination of a few days before, early embarkation on "the day" seems like the way of making the experience better.

Don't worry - enjoy a good few days on land around the cruise.

Jeff

We are doing the same, traveling 10 days in Italy before getting on the ship in Rome. Best of both worlds!

There were pictures I think on here in one of the other forums about 9 ships in St. Maartin in one day. No matter what cruiseline you go with, you could find yourself in port with a lot of other ships. Point here is even if you were on a land tour, your city of the day if it is a port city could be hit and hard with cruise passengers.

Also August is vacation month in Europe. I was in the Sistine Chapel in 88 and with local tourists I had people pressing me on all four sides. All I wanted was out of there.

Also August is vacation month in Europe. I was in the Sistine Chapel in 88 and with local tourists I had people pressing me on all four sides. All I wanted was out of there.

There are always - or near enough always - work arounds" if people post specifics and let us locals help.

For example with the Sistine there are some simple rules. Luckily most people don't know these so you get a somewhat precious advantage if this is your "trip of a lifetime."

With the Sistine, you obtain a plan of the Museum before you go from a guide book, queue for 1 hour before the Vatican Museum entrance opens, (if you start to queue as it opens you may not even get in before they shut the doors) are one of the first in, and then go in the opposite direction to the snake and go to the chapel first and then walk backwards against the flow. You'll have the chapel to yourself for around 10 minutes.

Jeff

There are always - or near enough always - work arounds" if people post specifics and let us locals help.

 

For example with the Sistine there are some simple rules. Luckily most people don't know these so you get a somewhat precious advantage if this is your "trip of a lifetime."

 

With the Sistine, you obtain a plan of the Museum before you go from a guide book, queue for 1 hour before the Vatican Museum entrance opens, (if you start to queue as it opens you may not even get in before they shut the doors) are one of the first in, and then go in the opposite direction to the snake and go to the chapel first and then walk backwards against the flow. You'll have the chapel to yourself for around 10 minutes.

 

Jeff

How about Vatican in May? Is the queue still an hour?

and it was awful. There were so many people. I had taken a tour and the guide explained what we'd be seeing on the chapel ceiling by pointing at a poster outside the chapel entrance. Next to us were about a dozen other guides pointing at other posters outside the chapel entrance. It might have been beautiful if I hadn't felt like a member of a herd. It was so very commercial. and, this has nothing to do with the chapel, but the fig leaves that were added to all of the male statues really bothered me. They stuck out oddly far from the body (because they had to cover what was already there) and it was such an abomination to ruin the statue.

LOL as I remember some little boys had them and some did not.

There's always been a problem with the Vatican museum. It's always aproblem because very few are prepared fro the reality of it and so therefore the "dissapointed" outnumber the "fullfilled by 10 to one.

The reality is that in the middle of summer, on the "wrong day" - I mean it quite literally when I say that if you arrive when it opens and join the end of the queue - you won't get in when you reach the door as the simply slam it shut at closing time and the queue can get to many, many hours long.

I've said this before and it started a lively debate. If it's a "trip of a lifetime" and you have to "do" the Sistine, as I said - get up early, don't bother with a guide and get there an hour before it opens and head straight for the chapel. If this is something you have to do, then getting up very early is ok.

Personally, and I state clearly to save the debate, I think the Vatican Museum is a complete waste of time.

This (at random):

http://www.zakon.org/robert/album/trip/vatican/statue.jpg

and the rest of the Vatican (proper) is worthwhile as are many other Rome sights better value.

Jeff

Totally agree with UK1. The Vatican museum is not the best thing to do with limited time in Rome. You stand in a queue for hours to get in, and once inside you continue to stand in the queue to get around the place, together with all the other tourists. In soon becomes boring, even if the Sistine Chapel is a highlight.

By all means, visit the Vatican and St Peter’s, but as for the museum, there are better things to do in Rome. Not least enjoy city and take in the atmosphere.

We were only in Rome for four days (but busy the entire time). This is what I really liked:

* walking the Via di Veneto (where we stayed)

* watching the young people gather (party) at the Spanish Steps and Trevi Fountain early evening (and throughout the evening)

* walking by the river, walking all the districts - and the markets

* sticking my hand in the Mouth of Truth, and seeing a newly married couple in wedding gown and tux pose for photos of themselves with their hands in the mouth

* finding the doorway where you can see the view of St. Peters from the keyhold - it was really beautiful, I can still visualize it

* The museum and gardens of Borghese Gardens

* seeing the Colisseum, just because it is the Colisseum - a little disappointing but, it IS the Colisseum

It was such a great quick visit -- and without a doubt, the Vatican was the only disappointment.

.............. and once again. The colleseum is perfect if you arrive first and go right to the opposite side to the entrance and soak in the atmosphere by yourself, and there is a really unique atmosphere if you are vulnerable to such things.

Sorry to repeat myself. Ostia Antica is one of the best places in the whole wide world and just a little way outside Rome.

http://www.ostia-antica.org/

http://www.ostiaantica.net/index.php

Jeff