Mississauga Absolute World | 169.77m | 56s | Cityzen | MAD architects

They mentioned the first tower is complete, does that mean the tops of the towers wont be reclad in a darker shade to match the lower sections of themselves?
 
Last edited:
yyzer said:
some shots from today....

6391871539_03d2fa4bc9_b.jpg


6391871691_f6a9c5429f_b.jpg


6391870989_edaf3ca1ee_b.jpg
Click to expand...

For sure it will match... what builder in their right mind would leave such an eye sore (referring to the few darker panels)...
 
Tower 5 really is starting to stand out! Up to the 29th floor if I'm not mistaken. I'm disappointed to find out that the 2nd floor hallways are not even complete though - only because being on the 27th floor of Tower 5 (Feb 23rd), I feel like we will be living in dust for months!
 
Last edited:
'nuf said:
*although the title is misleading. no views of/from penthouses at all.
[video=youtube;3QOYSEIqdQk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QOYSEIqdQk[/video]

oh man, spot on with the comparison to Marina city in chicago. they're both roughly the same height too as Absolute!

visually, there's nothing like this on the planet... however, i wish the materials were a bit higher quality, especially on the main glass (not balcony glass) for it to truly be world class... but that's just my opinion, most people don't pay attention to those types of things.

and ya, sorta true about it being lost in the mix if it were in Toronto, but i think there would be a few spots in the city that were open enough to accommodate such a thing.

EDIT: another vid:

[video=youtube;afvjAdfGHxE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afvjAdfGHxE[/video]
 
Last edited:
What do you know about "high quality materials" and how can you distinguish these "high quality materials" from "lower quality materials? I'm just curious as to how someone can state that by looking at the buildings at a distance, how could you possible know if these materials are of lower quality than what is available?

I'm almost 100% positive that ALL of urbantoronto defines "high quality" as a building with curtain wall. If it doesn't have curtain wall it is AUTOMATICALLY "low quality"...I just think it's absolutely ridiculous...
 
dcc008 said:
I'm almost 100% positive that ALL of urbantoronto defines "high quality" as a building with curtain wall. If it doesn't have curtain wall it is AUTOMATICALLY "low quality"...I just think it's absolutely ridiculous...
Click to expand...

So true. Same bunch who think it's right to automatically hate precast panels. Absurd.
 
i think you can distinguish between what looks high quality and cheap (if not, at least aesthetically). for example l tower compared to shangri-la... shangri-la blows it away. i think most people can tell just by looking at crystal blu that it is only subpar.
 
steveve said:
i think you can distinguish between what looks high quality and cheap (if not, at least aesthetically). for example l tower compared to shangri-la... shangri-la blows it away. i think most people can tell just by looking at crystal blu that it is only subpar.
Click to expand...

He's right... blue glass is so cheap :p

If anything, couldn't you assume it to be of higher quality due to various dyes involved in the production?

Both statements are illogical - colour means nothing to suggest higher or lower quality IMO, and such claims really should be backed by some sort of fact.
 
sct1984 said:
He's right... blue glass is so cheap :p

If anything, couldn't you assume it to be of higher quality due to various dyes involved in the production?

Both statements are illogical - colour means nothing to suggest higher or lower quality IMO, and such claims really should be backed by some sort of fact.
Click to expand...

Wow, completely missed the point - Crystal Blu is the name of a condo in Toronto with horrible cheesy looking cladding. It is insulting to infer that someone would equate colour with quality.
 
EMP1729 said:
Wow, completely missed the point - Crystal Blu is the name of a condo in Toronto with horrible cheesy looking cladding. It is insulting to infer that someone would equate colour with quality.
Click to expand...

Yep - missed that one, could have been tired while reading your post.

Regardless - you're statement was made as if it was fact - "i wish the materials were a bit higher quality, especially on the main glass (not balcony glass) for it to truly be world class..."

I agree that certain designs can suggest a cheaper "feel", but I don't agree that anyone is able to tell actual quality of any glass panels by simply looking at it from a distance - it's glass.... whether clear or tinted, it pretty well all looks the same. Personal opinion though.
 
sct1984 said:
Yep - missed that one, could have been tired while reading your post.

Regardless - you're statement was made as if it was fact - "i wish the materials were a bit higher quality, especially on the main glass (not balcony glass) for it to truly be world class..."

I agree that certain designs can suggest a cheaper "feel", but I don't agree that anyone is able to tell actual quality of any glass panels by simply looking at it from a distance - it's glass.... whether clear or tinted, it pretty well all looks the same. Personal opinion though.
Click to expand...

I never made the original statement - that would be Steveve. Only pointing out that CrystalBlu is a actual building, and blue colour glass is not automatically "cheap"
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top