My (short) experience with Cunard and Holland America

[vagporto]

I enjoy reading the CC threads comparing personal experiences in different cruise lines: they really helped me when researching what would be my choices for cruising. Thus, I now add my short experience to this and briefly describe my thoughts on HAL vs Cunard, focusing on some comparisons that I have not seen in similar threads. Be aware that I am a newbie cruiser (two cruises only) and that these thoughts may not reflect other ships or itineraries from the same lines. Alert note: this ended up being a long text...

 

I will not say which cruise I prefered (mainly because I enjoyed both and I know better than going on putting defects on good vacations). There were aspects in each that I truly liked, and ultimately my line of choice for future cruises will depend on itinerary and cost, since I had a very good experience with both lines.

 

The cruise with Holland America was on the Volendam, in June 2015, an Alaska Inside Passage roundtrip from Vancouver. The cruise with Cunard was an eastern mediterranean on Queen Victoria, in August 2015. On the Volendam I had an inside stateroom on deck 3, the deck with the wraparound promenade; on QV I had an aft balcony stateroom on deck 7. The type of cabin did not affect my overall cruise experience (am I the only one who does not mind insides?).

 

On the Volendam I had a feeling of being in a ship rather than in a floating hotel: the smaller size of the ship, the cramped atrium, the "technical" stairs connecting the several aft decks, the absence of glass panels on any exterior railing, the easy access to the bow, and the constant subtle vibration of the ship, contributed to this feeling which I truly enjoyed (and that is well suited for an Alaska cruise). I liked the feeling of being in a "living" machine. I felt more distant to the sea in the QV: one thing that contributed were the visual obstacles in the wraparound promenade - one cannot see from one end of the promenade to the other end as in the smaller HAL ships, since there are several places with rafts, boats, and expansions of the structure that narrow the deck, block the vision and forces you to make a turn when walking. I believe this is also true in the larger HAL Vista ships, but I have never been in one to compare. One other difference on the QV is that every square inch of space in the upper decks was occupied by rows of sunbeds, which also did not happen on the Volendam (maybe this is just a difference of Med vs Alaska). And finally, the QV simply did not vibrate (well... a bit in the theater area, but nothing compared to the humming of the Volendam).

 

In contrast, the interior of QV was much more inviting: I acknowledge that the beige color palette is a bit boring (to say the least... with the exception of the Golden Lion Pub, all interior spaces look exactly the same and have similar furniture) and some of the "faux" details felt cheap when they probably had the opposite intention. But I take the elegant boredom of the QV over the colorfulness of the Volendam (the atrium glass sculpture and some carpeting being the main examples... and I know that some HAL ships are even worse - Zuiderdam?). The main atrium of the QV feels much larger and imposing than the atriums of the HAL ships (despite being the same size). Moreover, the interior sitting spaces were strangely empty during the day, in contrast with the spaces in the Volendam (a seat at the Crow's Nest was difficult to find most of the times, while I don't remember seeing a soul at the Commodore's before 6pm - again, this may be a consequence of the type of itinerary). The selection of books in the QV library was also superior (the number of nautical books was very very good).

 

I found no significant difference between the MDR food of both lines (although the after-dinner offer of coffee or tea with petit-fours is a nice touch at Cunard). The buffet is better at HAL (particularly the egg choices at breakfast), the HAL burgers are way superior, and the HAL ever-changing menu of ice cream beats the QV single option of shameful choco-vanilla soft serve. I particularly desliked the use of trays in the QV buffet since it made it more cafeteria-like; on the other the QV buffet is open 24/7 and they continuously bring new offers.

 

I am not crazy with strict dress-codes, but after one week aboard QV I have to say that I changed my mind: I do not mind dressing in a dark suit and tie if everybody is doing the same, and that just adds to the overall ambience of the dinner. At HAL I saw a mismatch of tuxedos next to plaided shirts. In general, I have nothing against sports caps at dinner, but I have when in a restaurant with 2 waiters per table. On the other hand, I truly hate fixed seating and being forced to engage in conversation with strangers (although for other this is an highlight of cruising). In Cunard ships you have no alternative. Fortunately we lucked out and got a two-top table with a wonderful team of waiters. And I learnt to appreciate the elegance of a large ballroom in a formal night when everybody is in proper dinner attire.

 

There was a large difference in the size of the entertainment team. At HAL there was a 5-piece band, a jazz trio, a piano man, a guitar man, a classic duo, and a few singers and dancers. At QV there was a 7 piece ballroom band, a 7 piece theater band, a 4 man electric band, a string quartet, 2 jazz pianists, 1 piano man, 1 harpist, and countless more singers and dancers. Moreover, several activities had specific tutors (the dancers tutoring the ballroom classes were not part of the dance team, for example). In addition there were 2 invited guests for lectures, and one invited classical guitarrist that gave two afternoon performances. And they continue to have dance hosts (4 in this cruise) for the ballroom delight of lady dancers. If you enjoy ballroom dancing, then you need to experience Cunard.

 

As I said previously, I truly enjoyed both lines and found more similarities than differences in the overall character and atmosphere. However, I felt that Cunard makes an extra effort in giving a better experience to their "market". They exagerate in the false luxury (most stairwell paintings were reproductions with a thick varnish coat to mimic brush strokes, the cheap plastic pens resembling montblanc models, the complimentary cheap sparking wine, the marble imitation in a few hall panels), but at least their product is coherent and makes sense: the vast majority of people admire and enjoy the atmosphere and contribute to the british serenity and "old liner" ambience. Even the many young kids and teens were suprisingly quiet and well behaved...

 

In contrast, I felt that HAL is almost keeping the bare minimum of service and relying on the loyalty of their guests. This being said, I have to say that the HAL cruise felt a bit like being in a boat with an extended family (and yes of course you have the annoying cousin or the old uncle who disrupts dinner) instead of being a guest in a luxury but impersonal hotel.

 

Bottomline: if you enjoy one of the lines, do not hesitate to try the other and enjoy yourself while doing that.

[jimmybean]

What a wonderful, well-written review and comparison, vagporto! You did an excellent job describing and comparing your two experiences.

 

We also took a HAL Alaskan cruise and although we haven't sailed on the Victoria, we have been on the Elizabeth, which we understand to be much the same.

 

Yes, the petit-fours are a temptation and a pleasure : )

 

Welcome to cruise critic. I hope you have many, many more happy voyages!

 

Jimmybean

[Host Hattie]

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts, I enjoyed our one HAL experience but Mr HH is still recovering from the poor beer selection !

 

I know what you mean about sharing and we used to ask for a table for 2 but we have had great dinner companions on both Cunard & HAL, don't be afraid to try it sometime.

 

Happy cruising,