It seems a bit comical when you have this giant square building that is dwarfed by another but is slightly taller because of a tall pole that looks terrible. The Burj Khalifa is one of the only buildings where the spire looks like it belongs on the building and wasnt just added for more height.
@@crazytigerspy9420 yeah but the spire looks like it's a part of the building, it fits in with the design. Most other buildings just have massive sticks
"Increased attempts at climbing skyscrapers by middle-aged men ever since recent redesign efforts by architects have lead to grumpiness in this age group of men, research says"
I'm on team "highest floor" (highest point a person can reach without special equipment). Which part is architectural is debatable. And putting a pole on top feels like cheating to me.
Stijn De Bruyn, same here !! Where can two people safely put their two feet down without any safety devices ! With that said, Willis Tower wins this against both the Petronas towers and the WTC !
Fun fact: in the race for the tallest building the Chrysler building was competing with the Bank of Manhattan building downtown... To try and win, the Bank added on a flagpole. In response the Chrysler building secretly built the spire inside the crown, and pushed it out through the top after the flag pole went in. Of course then someone built the Empire State Building a few years later.
Agreed. Highest floor where someone can reach without safety gear. So a rooftop garden or observation deck could be the highest point. But a spire or a tower could never be.
I agree, If they were going to be counted we should also count TV and radio antennas around the world as buildings. A lot of them are over 500 and even 600 m tall but they are hardly ever spoken about.
I live in Poland and many people have problems with Varso and its total height of 310m with actually 80m high spine. I understand them, but we should not forget that most high-rises use the same trick.
The ironic part is that the Willis tower’s spire (radio tower) is actually technically usable (as a radio tower) unlike most other spires which are completely unnecessary and just used for vanity lol
I know right. Seems to me that's it's more of an inadequacy problem. Like skyscrapers don't already look like phallic symbols enough. Now they gotta add on a giant rod at the end to make it look EVEN BIGGER.
It’s not stupid at all. Of course every skyscraper city that would want to have the tallest one. Do you have any idea how many tourists would come visit that building?
It should definitely be the highest usable floor. Full stop. Otherwise, you might as well hold a 1km antenna on your house and claim the title of the highest building.
Well your house could be the tallest if it is 2km height adding up to the 1km length of the antenna due the new regulations that any pole should be less or equal to 50 percent of the structural usable height of a building. And also your house still wont be in the list if the original submitted drawing didnt include the antenna. So what i would suggest is to hire a new architect to design from scratch a 2km height house with 1km long antenna (for communicational reason i suppose) then only u can be the tallest building in the world.
It looks so ugly when buildings have a flat roof and a massive spire. I'm okay with buildings like the Petronas Twin Towers and Burj Khalifa counting the spire heights because it looks natural that they taper off to the spire. Tapei 101 looks great too because it has a decorative spire that matches the rest of the building.
Personally I prefer to measure building height by highest -habitable- usable floor. If the silhouette of the building is clearly taller than one beside it which has a tall spire, I think the former is bigger.
One thing I really do like about the B1M videos is how you have a truly global outlook, that rather than just talking about American or Asian regions you also include Arab, European and Australian examples. Great work, keep it up! Also I would go with highest usable floor, after all whats the point of a sky scraper if you can't get general access to the highest floor?
@@TheB1M Can you make a video on the stagnant state of Panama City, Panama. It's irritating not knowing what's going on over there; there skyline would've been better than Miami if the boom hadn't suddenly stopped.
Height of the roof, spire not counted. or engineer will put an 499 meters spire on 501m building and claim "our building is 1 KM tall" because spire is counted as long as it didn't surpass 50% of building height.
@@prehistoricplaysyt3690 no it means they can be equal in height. In the video it showed the Burj Al Arab with 39% vanity height which is more than the 33% that would be the max the way you interpreted it.
But if we use your method they will just make a Thick roof. It has to be more definitive so people can’t cheat so easy. One thing about humans, they love to cheat.
Highest architecture top may be acceptable. e.g. in Dubai Hotel, the exceeding construction is definitely part of the idea. But those silly funky antennas adding next 100 or so meters for no reason are pure shit.
@t c I could not agree more. I may also add that Petronas Towers are looking good with the antennas. Even if they were made just to create the tallest building in the world at that time.
I agree. I think that for example the Burj al Arab is acceptable. BUT I think that the Kuala Lumpur tower spire is not acceptable even though it has been designed. I think that it just doesn't fit like the Burj al Arab's thingie.
In Warsaw not only Varso Tower,but also Q22 have,or will have,stupid piece of shitty spire to rise total height. Q22's spire gives this building additional 40 meters,the same on Warsaw Spire, but Varso Tower will have a spire a twice as long as Q22 or the Warsaw Spire...80 meters of pipe...Disgusting...
The problem is there is no objective way to rule which spires are part of the idea and which were tacked on just for height. Height to highest usable floor is the only objective measure.
@@goodial Does it really matter if the Tokyo tower is taller than the CN Tower? Anyway the CN Tower is nicer looking. The Tokyo tower looks like a large version of the Crystal Palace transmitter tower
@@robtyman4281 the original post was about being the tallest with the least usable floors, so another another similar structure being taller kind of does matter a bit. It also was never really about the looks ;)
5:11 Merdeka Kuala Lumpur Tower is like the kid who styles his hair upward just so he can say that he's taller than his brothers. No Brian, it doesn't make you taller than me!
@@mcmac9565 do you think that building worth it? or do you think its a waste of money that can be used in other place such as education, healthcare or infrastructure in villages or edges of the country?
Hiro As a Malaysian, I don’t like any “record breaking attempts” done by Malaysians, especially those sponsored by the government. They don’t have any practical use, don’t benefit the people certainly don’t make Malaysia great. It’s like in Shrek where Lord Farquad built a tall castle to compensate for his height, Malaysia does the same too.
I’m actually impressed Chinese skyscrapers don’t do the spire or decoration trick. The Bottle opener has a higher observation deck than the Burj. The Shanghai tower only has a slight decoration on top. The observation tower is even higher there. The view is really amazing there!
still i cant get how new yorkers accepted terrorists to define their skyline... if they had a little of love for themselves they should have built exactly the same building destroyed.
In the ranking of skyscrapers (ie: inhabitable buildings), only the top floor should count. In the ranking of any human made structure, the total height should count. The architectural height is too debatable to be included, as many would take unfair advantage of it.
It would be interesting to apply the 'highest usable floor' rule to other buildings that have held the title, such as the Great Pyramid at Giza and Lincoln Cathedral....
@@antheajohnson4234 I do realise they're not skyscrapers but that was rather my point, in order to see how well other buildings that have been the tallest would fare under those rules.
Remark is nice, with little mention that the pyramids were not tallest man-made buildings, but structures. This allowed their comparison with other related, like obelisks, for example. So then, the term "usable floor" would be not so appropriate for the function. However, for the measurement, I find it more logical to compare pyramidions, then antennas or spikes.
The criteria should be measured according to habitable floors. The sphires, aptly called vanity sphires, is nothing but a short cut to earn the title of being called the tallest building.
Chicago's Willis tower in 1997: i am the highest building on the world Kuala Lampur's petronas towers: hold my antenna *Petronas towers become the highest building on the world in 1998* Willias tower in 1998: *surprised pikachu face*
Ping-an Financial Center in Shenzhen as well... it is 599.X meters. The funny thing is that the original design included a giant communication antenna, helping the whole construction reaching 630m, which supposedly surpasses the Shanghai Center. Due to air control (an airport near by), they simply cancelled the antenna.
In the ranking of the "world's tallest tower" or "world's tallest structure", the spire height can be counted but in the ranking of the "world's tallest building" or "world's tallest skyscraper", it shouldn't be counted and the highest assessable floor should be.
Why, its the HEIGHT of the BUILDING....just make it 2 battles. One for the HIGHEST BUILDING and one for THE HIGHEST BUILDING PPL CAN VIEW OVER THE CITY or smth
I draw the line at "intentionally designed" vanity height hikes. If it 'feels' wrong to include a massive spire in the official height, it probably is.
mc Mac yeah same here ive seen in person last dec..the tower is super thic and its surrounded by others hotel make the tower looks awkward..but the detail of the towers is amazing!”
I love this channel! I've always been fascinated with buildings and contents like this is something I really enjoy. Very informative, too. Keep it up! 👍😊👏
Im glad that you arent like some of the pther channels that use clickbait and make their videos so long just to get more ad revnue, you are straight to the point and i like that
if it’s actually tapered and not a flat roof with a giant stick coming out of it, like the patronas towers, it counts. if it’s like the last skyscraper you mentioned, the one being built in 2021, or like the 1 World Trade Center, no.
I like this idea Because that one mean such building as the burj Khalifa would remain at its current height Which is fair enough because it tapers all the way up.
1. Build a skyscraper 2. Add a spire wide enough to have an elevator running through 3. Add a toilet on the tip of the spire Maximum usable height and tourist attraction at the same time
Me as a Malaysian laughed when the 2 building that cheat the way through the list are from Malaysia. Not proud, but it makes me question, where are we even going with these skyscrapers?
@@readone_9718 i ashamed of that Freedom tower but not Twin Tower. We made two of those when other country only have one each. You know how a feat that is. What if those two building combined. Its kinda disappointing to hear that some Malaysians still things its a bad decisions from us.
The highest usable height of Shanghai tower is 587 meters while that of Burj Khalifa is 584 meters. So from now, Shanghai tower is the tallest building in the world for me
If you're going to include spires, then include antennas. Sears tower (I'm from the Chicago area if you can't tell) and the Hancock haven't had their antennas increased or reduced in height. They form part of the buildings' identity.
In my home city, Philadelphia's Comcast Technology Center uses vanity space in its beacon spire to look from the west like a Minecraft middle finger but in glass. It stands at 1,121 feet, making it the tallest skyscraper in the western hemisphere that's not in Chicago or New York. The flat-topped Comcast Center next door appears taller by roof height (I'm not sure what the highest habitable floor height is).
Highest point accessible to ME when I go there. So highest usable floor plus accessibility to the public. I don't care about spires, they're like towers: not in the equasion here!
Yep, in 20 years of following skyscrapers, i've never agreed tip should be the record breaking number. Roof height seems more logical. Glad you bought this up.
A lot of skyscrapers increase the height of the usable floor space by adding observation decks to the top of buildings, they should somehow include features like this within the spire. Spires in traditional buildings like churches and minarets served a practical purpose of calling to prayer, so it should be impossibly in the modern context
I feel that people should just apply the "structure" and "building" definition to parts of buildings. If the CN tower is a structure and not a building, it can´t become a building by placing it on a building. By that approach, putting a tower on a bulding doesn´t make it part of the building and therefore isn´t included in the buildings total height.
That last panoramic view made me realise we're slowly but surely heading into what science fiction writers imagined society would look loke in the past.
Both 'highest floor' and 'height to tip' have more meaning. The current definition (architectural top) is just a way to artificially inflate statistics.
Highest usable floor
Highest inhabited usable floor by living humans
Highest waste of money floor.
So put a Porta Potty on top of an antenna and call it a day.
@@anthonycbrown1952 I'm amused you felt the need to narrowed the definition to 'living' humans. Lol
This.
So the tall spires are like high heels for buildings
Wonderbra
Yep ... seems like it
Except they on head.🤷♂️
platform shoes
That's a good example.
It seems a bit comical when you have this giant square building that is dwarfed by another but is slightly taller because of a tall pole that looks terrible. The Burj Khalifa is one of the only buildings where the spire looks like it belongs on the building and wasnt just added for more height.
The spire on pnb 118 represents our founding father's hand raised when he proclaimed "independence" 7 times.
The burj was built for the record 29% cant even be used
@@crazytigerspy9420 yeah but the spire looks like it's a part of the building, it fits in with the design. Most other buildings just have massive sticks
Beautifully designed building can't tell they wanted records it's more design then anything else
Thats like saying you wore 3feet stilettos and coverd it with long pants so no one would notice.
This is like my 5'2" self claiming "I'm a giant" because I'm holding a broomstick over my head. Just a little bit ridiculous.
FR4NC35pr it counts when it’s attached permanently to your head 👍
What do you mean by 5’2”
@@rolypoly1689 😂 Apparently it would count in this situation. But I'm not going to test that.
@@newspacia👀 ?
- 5 feet and 2 inches of height; or 158 cm to the rest of the "sane" world.
- It's a joke about my height?
Did I answer your question?
Laughs in 6'7"
They should put a toilet on top of the spires to make it "usable"
Genius, and you should work as an architect
It would look nice too
"Increased attempts at climbing skyscrapers by middle-aged men ever since recent redesign efforts by architects have lead to grumpiness in this age group of men, research says"
There's a urinal near the very top of the Burj Khalifa.
Someone stole your comment or you stole that persons their both 1 month so I don't know
the top should be measured by "the place where the designer is willing to sleep for a night"
hahaha nice
Likely not on the spire xD
Hehe lol
Architect*
*engineer
I'm on team "highest floor" (highest point a person can reach without special equipment).
Which part is architectural is debatable. And putting a pole on top feels like cheating to me.
YOU SIR , ARE CORRECT !!
Stijn De Bruyn, same here !! Where can two people safely put their two feet down without any safety devices ! With that said, Willis Tower wins this against both the Petronas towers and the WTC !
Fun fact: in the race for the tallest building the Chrysler building was competing with the Bank of Manhattan building downtown... To try and win, the Bank added on a flagpole. In response the Chrysler building secretly built the spire inside the crown, and pushed it out through the top after the flag pole went in. Of course then someone built the Empire State Building a few years later.
@@ascott2168 HMMMM . . . . . DO FIND INFO ON THE NORDSTROM TOWER (aka THE CENTRAL PARK TOWER) !!
Agreed. Highest floor where someone can reach without safety gear. So a rooftop garden or observation deck could be the highest point. But a spire or a tower could never be.
Two categories should only be used:
Overall height and highest usable floor.
Define usable floor. I think the architectural top is more interesting.
@@brewed544 To which extent?
Bombur To the extent that they are able to stand in the room without dying.
@@winnermatt1180 Do maintenance hallways count as rooms?
@@brewed544 But their definition as rooms is questionable. That being said, good, I'd count them too.
The highest useable floor should be the hight recorded, spires are cheating.
i agree
I agree, If they were going to be counted we should also count TV and radio antennas around the world as buildings. A lot of them are over 500 and even 600 m tall but they are hardly ever spoken about.
Next up, Spires with a 'usable floor' at the top.
@@DrThunder2004 1x1 square meter with a door, only reachable by ladder.
Height is hight, however they achieve it is said and done. How can adding something like a spire be called cheating.
I still cringe when spires are used as official height...
I live in Poland and many people have problems with Varso and its total height of 310m with actually 80m high spine. I understand them, but we should not forget that most high-rises use the same trick.
Skyscrapers with spires is like when you ask a man how big their genitalia is. It's always 20% bigger than it really is.
John Peric Exactly, I made a video calling the Central Park tower America’s tallest building and everyone lost their minds. ROOF HEIGHT BABY
@@johnperic6860 IMO counting an antenna is more justifiable (though still wrong) since at least it's still functional height.
F in the chat for Shanghai Tower 😔.
Spires shud not be taken into account.. it’s like wearing a top hat and saying u 6’4 instead of 5’11 🤣
Axel Sama 😂😂😂
I was thinking of a mohawk haircut! Agree :)
What wrong with that 😂
By the new building height rules, the top hat would count if it was permanently attached to your head. Slash would be in this category.
Shut up Billy you just have big hair
The ironic part is that the Willis tower’s spire (radio tower) is actually technically usable (as a radio tower) unlike most other spires which are completely unnecessary and just used for vanity lol
69 like
SEARS TOWER IT WILL ALWAYS BE THE SEARS TOWER
Sears gentlemen, SEARS!!
Good point! Just like the 362 foot tall radio mast on the North tower of the old world trade center, making the building's highest point 1,730 feet!
Sears tower*
Highest useable floor is the thing that makes a building grand
depend on where the highest point....
@@campkira no
Agreed. If someone wants to build the world's tallest sculpture, fine, let them count the spire, but buildings are for people to use on the inside.
Already see building with spire and on top small room
@@MilosCsrb That wouldn't fit the definition of a building: at least 50% of height must be occupiable.
Highest usable space.. I don’t understand why they had to complicate that.
So what height is St Peter's?
Useable space is important, but architectural design is important too.
I know right. Seems to me that's it's more of an inadequacy problem. Like skyscrapers don't already look like phallic symbols enough. Now they gotta add on a giant rod at the end to make it look EVEN BIGGER.
define usable then?
troy charles Lol really? If you actually use & access the space... ya know... useable.
What if there's a basket on top, used for storage, that is accessed by delivery drone
It's like for some humans: The top part is unusable space.
Yeah. What are they gonna do with that mohawk.
Hahah... I don’t get it
@@javierescuella731 the brain is not used
@@javierescuella731 stupid people dont have a useable brain
Whereas the bottom half is always usable
"How tall are you?"
"6'8, almost 6'9."
"What? You're shorter than I am and I'm 5'11...!"
"Well, you don't have a mohawk."
Yes mohawk is a better analogy than high heels.
😂😂😂
open.spotify.com/album/7CaZK2LkrHRpFETurEMhBk
@@CantEscapeFlorida yes because heels can easily be taken off while spires and mohawk will become part of the person/building
Nice
1:47 I am totally getting some kind of Angry Birds character 🤔
Woahhhh 🤣 good eye
Hahaha, Eagle vision
Same. Yellow bird
LMFAO
Me too 😂😂😂😂so funny
It all comes down to a stupid game of mine-is-bigger-than-yours.
It's not that stupid
It’s not stupid at all. Of course every skyscraper city that would want to have the tallest one. Do you have any idea how many tourists would come visit that building?
@@ape2533 yes its not stupid its the opposite
@@ape2533 Yeah, and after one year it won't be the tallest skyscraper anymore because another city will have a taller one.
Martin Daniel Umm so? The way you think is ridicilous
It should definitely be the highest usable floor. Full stop. Otherwise, you might as well hold a 1km antenna on your house and claim the title of the highest building.
lmao
I cannot stop laughin'
@Neel Javia That's still too arbitrary, Neel. It's too arbitrary.
Well your house could be the tallest if it is 2km height adding up to the 1km length of the antenna due the new regulations that any pole should be less or equal to 50 percent of the structural usable height of a building. And also your house still wont be in the list if the original submitted drawing didnt include the antenna.
So what i would suggest is to hire a new architect to design from scratch a 2km height house with 1km long antenna (for communicational reason i suppose) then only u can be the tallest building in the world.
haha, I've just updated my comment like yours. thank you.
As a Chicagolandian it's spelled Willis but pronounced Sears.
😂
Most of us call ourselves Chicagoans but you're spot on about the Sears.
😂😂😂
I got confused by this. Not from Chicago, but I remembered it as Sears.
Chicagolander.
If spires count then antenna should count too
Yeah
It looks so ugly when buildings have a flat roof and a massive spire. I'm okay with buildings like the Petronas Twin Towers and Burj Khalifa counting the spire heights because it looks natural that they taper off to the spire. Tapei 101 looks great too because it has a decorative spire that matches the rest of the building.
Only building that looked good with flat roof and spire was the original North Tower of old WTC.
@@ajsnagratin6504 that wasn't a spire that was an antenna
You do realize you can keep all that while not including it in the height right? Lol
The Patronas towers spires isn't even a usable floor count
look in the mirror kid, you're ugly yourself
It's like saying "This is the world's tallest man, because he's never cut his hair and has a mohawk"
And using high heels
Or because he is wearing the tallest hat.
Or hes alphalpha
Or a giant afro XD
You can be the world’s tallest man by having the world’s longest hat
0:54
Only Chicagoans will understand this:
It’s spelled W-I-L-L-I-S but pronounced SEARS
Ye
I think it's the same for the rest of the world. We still call it Sears Tower.
WHAT HOW IS THAT EVEN POSSIBLE
inferno YT Willis holdings group bought it from Sears awhile ago, and changed the name. Everybody will always call it the Sears Tower anyway.
really cool experience to visit the skydeck.
Personally I prefer to measure building height by highest -habitable- usable floor. If the silhouette of the building is clearly taller than one beside it which has a tall spire, I think the former is bigger.
open.spotify.com/album/7CaZK2LkrHRpFETurEMhBk
V
Cool but you aren't the officals that decide
I never knew this was even an issue but now I’m fired up about it. Spires totally shouldn’t count.
you should go on skyscrapercity, talk about the subject and grab popcorn
1:45 is that where the Angry Birds was made?
Shanghai Tower: I’m the second tallest building in the world.
Kuala Lumpur 118: Hold my antenna.
Btw the antenna and the whole PNB 118 is designed by Australian Architect 💁🏿♂️💁🏽♂️💁🏻♂️
But your skyscrapper is build by malaysian designer
More like architecture esthetic than an antenna..
When KL 118 is complete, some of the other towers will just get a spire
@@zae_xa aka a spire.
One thing I really do like about the B1M videos is how you have a truly global outlook, that rather than just talking about American or Asian regions you also include Arab, European and Australian examples. Great work, keep it up!
Also I would go with highest usable floor, after all whats the point of a sky scraper if you can't get general access to the highest floor?
Thanks so much for the great feedback!! 👍
Needs more South America
@@TheB1M Can you make a video on the stagnant state of Panama City, Panama. It's irritating not knowing what's going on over there; there skyline would've been better than Miami if the boom hadn't suddenly stopped.
Height of the roof, spire not counted.
or engineer will put an 499 meters spire on 501m building and claim "our building is 1 KM tall" because spire is counted as long as it didn't surpass 50% of building height.
I think it means that if the building is 500m tall the spire can only be 250m
@@prehistoricplaysyt3690 no it means they can be equal in height. In the video it showed the Burj Al Arab with 39% vanity height which is more than the 33% that would be the max the way you interpreted it.
But if we use your method they will just make a Thick roof. It has to be more definitive so people can’t cheat so easy. One thing about humans, they love to cheat.
So glad you did a video on this! I still don't consider spires as part of a building's height. I feel there will always be an argument on this.
Like: “are you the tallest?”
“Yes, but actually no”
??
@@jacktheflash8478 The antennas and the Usable floors are way different then the actual height, that's the joke
yesn't
i find it hilarious that there exists a council on tall buildings
@DNA yes, the top floor gang
@DNA lol all hail the bald gang
Highest architecture top may be acceptable. e.g. in Dubai Hotel, the exceeding construction is definitely part of the idea. But those silly funky antennas adding next 100 or so meters for no reason are pure shit.
@t c I could not agree more. I may also add that Petronas Towers are looking good with the antennas. Even if they were made just to create the tallest building in the world at that time.
I agree. I think that for example the Burj al Arab is acceptable. BUT I think that the Kuala Lumpur tower spire is not acceptable even though it has been designed. I think that it just doesn't fit like the Burj al Arab's thingie.
The Burj Khalifa's spire is also necessary - it helps with wind resistance an they have huge amounts of maintenance stuff inside it
In Warsaw not only Varso Tower,but also Q22 have,or will have,stupid piece of shitty spire to rise total height. Q22's spire gives this building additional 40 meters,the same on Warsaw Spire, but Varso Tower will have a spire a twice as long as Q22 or the Warsaw Spire...80 meters of pipe...Disgusting...
The problem is there is no objective way to rule which spires are part of the idea and which were tacked on just for height. Height to highest usable floor is the only objective measure.
3:53
Bro, this isn’t called US Bank tower, this is the Maze Bank tower ...
Ha ha , not that many people seem to have gotten that reference! xD
Firstname Lastname and its los santos not los angeles
GTA V?
@@LaVictoireEstLaVie
B-brother..?
*happy gta noises*
I like how Toronto’s CN Tower isn’t on this list, it’s definitely the tallest for having the least useable floors. 🤣 it has around 5 floors
TV Towers are not in the same category as skyscrapers. Also: Tokyo Skytree is taller than CN Tower ;)
@@goodial Does it really matter if the Tokyo tower is taller than the CN Tower? Anyway the CN Tower is nicer looking. The Tokyo tower looks like a large version of the Crystal Palace transmitter tower
@@robtyman4281 the original post was about being the tallest with the least usable floors, so another another similar structure being taller kind of does matter a bit. It also was never really about the looks ;)
The Warsaw radio mast was 646 meters tall before collapsing in 1991. The current world's tallest TV mast is the KVLY tower, which is 629 meters tall!
@@robtyman4281 Dude, Tokyo tower, and Tokyo skytree are 2 different things.
"Don't be racist, I am a building"...
😂🤣😂🤣
Ah yes.
Brilliant!
"And i've got news for youuuuu"
Hachimajig “Hey there Steven! Blacks and Whites are even”
5:11 Merdeka Kuala Lumpur Tower is like the kid who styles his hair upward just so he can say that he's taller than his brothers.
No Brian, it doesn't make you taller than me!
lol
Oddly specific... lol
@@mcmac9565 do you think that building worth it? or do you think its a waste of money that can be used in other place such as education, healthcare or infrastructure in villages or edges of the country?
Hiro As a Malaysian, I don’t like any “record breaking attempts” done by Malaysians, especially those sponsored by the government. They don’t have any practical use, don’t benefit the people certainly don’t make Malaysia great. It’s like in Shrek where Lord Farquad built a tall castle to compensate for his height, Malaysia does the same too.
Hahaha
0:26 Every time I go down to Sydney, I always think that building is under construction because of its design
It's like for SIFC without the spire, the roof is 429 and the top floor is 396 roughly 120 story shorter than most building
Seeing shanghai tower get knocked down to third place on the graphic at 5:10 made me laugh
Same
Chinese government oppressive not allow human right violation
That example really shows how ridiculous it is
Hmm.. Interesting sense of humour.
I’m actually impressed Chinese skyscrapers don’t do the spire or decoration trick. The Bottle opener has a higher observation deck than the Burj. The Shanghai tower only has a slight decoration on top. The observation tower is even higher there. The view is really amazing there!
I hated when the 1 World Trade tower was unveiled with a huge spire. Should have actually build it 1776ft tall in my opinion.
We have a video on that coming soon!
still i cant get how new yorkers accepted terrorists to define their skyline... if they had a little of love for themselves they should have built exactly the same building destroyed.
@@croquervictor4216 I say go bigger or go home! I'm right with ya man.
New York should've built the petronas twin towers on steroids. That would've been impressive.
Croquer Victor no one would want to go in there
In the ranking of skyscrapers (ie: inhabitable buildings), only the top floor should count.
In the ranking of any human made structure, the total height should count.
The architectural height is too debatable to be included, as many would take unfair advantage of it.
It would be interesting to apply the 'highest usable floor' rule to other buildings that have held the title, such as the Great Pyramid at Giza and Lincoln Cathedral....
Very good point
They aren't skyscrpers though
@@antheajohnson4234 I do realise they're not skyscrapers but that was rather my point, in order to see how well other buildings that have been the tallest would fare under those rules.
you cant count a great pyramid as a skyscraper anyway its the highest structure
Remark is nice, with little mention that the pyramids were not tallest man-made buildings, but structures. This allowed their comparison with other related, like obelisks, for example. So then, the term "usable floor" would be not so appropriate for the function. However, for the measurement, I find it more logical to compare pyramidions, then antennas or spikes.
The criteria should be measured according to habitable floors. The sphires, aptly called vanity sphires, is nothing but a short cut to earn the title of being called the tallest building.
Ayoung k open.spotify.com/album/7CaZK2LkrHRpFETurEMhBk
Chicago's Willis tower in 1997: i am the highest building on the world
Kuala Lampur's petronas towers: hold my antenna
*Petronas towers become the highest building on the world in 1998*
Willias tower in 1998: *surprised pikachu face*
When I saw the Citic Tower in Beijing in 2018 it looked so tall! That's because it has got no spires, it is a really simple shape which I like a lot!
Ping-an Financial Center in Shenzhen as well... it is 599.X meters. The funny thing is that the original design included a giant communication antenna, helping the whole construction reaching 630m, which supposedly surpasses the Shanghai Center. Due to air control (an airport near by), they simply cancelled the antenna.
It's like having a chip bag with 70% air and 30% chips.
Like doritos
Its to protect the chips, next time look at the wieght, its more reliable. Then you’ll stop complaining in life.
You mean lay's
Julien Guillot *NOBODY CARES*
This is like counting hair as part of someone’s height
Hahaha well said man !
Marge Simpson, the world's tallest person
In the ranking of the "world's tallest tower" or "world's tallest structure", the spire height can be counted but in the ranking of the "world's tallest building" or "world's tallest skyscraper", it shouldn't be counted and the highest assessable floor should be.
I agree with the tallest structure theory. If they want to build spires, they can compete with radio towers under their own logic.
i think a building's height should be how much habitable floor it actually has
Why, its the HEIGHT of the BUILDING....just make it 2 battles. One for the HIGHEST BUILDING and one for THE HIGHEST BUILDING PPL CAN VIEW OVER THE CITY or smth
That's floorspace, not height.
I draw the line at "intentionally designed" vanity height hikes. If it 'feels' wrong to include a massive spire in the official height, it probably is.
Spires height is like wearing high heels and claim that you're 6'2" when you really are just 5'8"
Jet C love this analogy !!
It's more like wearing a mohawk.
What does these numbers mean?
more like putting highheels on the top of your head
0:30 That clock tower building really is an absolute unit, not only in height but overall
Ive seen it in person..because of the tower's huge square foot, it doesn't seem to look tall..but the building is indeed tall
This term doesn’t usually qualify for buildings, but I think it’s safe to say that the Makkah Clock tower is THICCC
mc Mac yeah same here ive seen in person last dec..the tower is super thic and its surrounded by others hotel make the tower looks awkward..but the detail of the towers is amazing!”
Skyscrapers & MegaProjects indeed...i can say that you probably can see the clock at the top of the tower miles away
@@Aaronaa4 hahaha it is indeed thiccc
I love this channel! I've always been fascinated with buildings and contents like this is something I really enjoy. Very informative, too. Keep it up! 👍😊👏
its a BUILDING. TALLEST FLOOR. a structure however is just the tallest point.
But still, Petronas Twin Towers are the tallest twin tower in the world for 2 decades without any challengers until now..
betul tu.That riggt man
that right
the most tower visit in the world
Yet it's bullshit that it's spire counts. Chicago worked harder and payed more and Malaysia just added unusable stick to it.
@@alinec521 true, than they overproud 🤣
Torre costanera, Chile :
Real altura : 265 mts
Con "trampa" : 300 mts
The line should be drawn at the highest usable floor. The rest is just BS.
Highest usable floor, should be the world standard IMO.
what if we make the height of the space between the roof and floor x50 of what you usually see, would that still be the world standard??
@@howwwwwwwwwww count the floor, not the ceiling
@@novelnouvel then again, you can adjust the height to be teeny tiny and get more floors that way.
Hi There I believe he means the height to the top floor, not amount of floors
If your country make highest spires building, you would say the opposite
As feats of engineering, I think the most impressive stat would be highest lateral wind force withstood.
World's Vainest Skyline! Perfect.
Glad you enjoyed that!! 😂 Ps. Great to see your member’s badge here in the comments, thanks so much for signing up! 👍✊️
I'd go with highest contiguous 10 floors so they don't end up putting a chair at the top of the spires.
Lucid Moses imagine being the one guy made to work at the tip of the spire just to maintain your building's world ranking.
@@FinalSentinel Yea, Air Quality Inspector. :p
@@FinalSentinel Jokes aside the main purpose is to rule out observation decks.
Im glad that you arent like some of the pther channels that use clickbait and make their videos so long just to get more ad revnue, you are straight to the point and i like that
I would just build a two story building with a huge pole going out into space just to troll everyone
The spire will be considered if it's less than 50% of the buildings usable height
@@shourjoe shut
@@Thawhid open
@@Pisanggeni this is not how wooosh work, he is juat saying why the joke doesnt work
Dubai creek tower
if it’s actually tapered and not a flat roof with a giant stick coming out of it, like the patronas towers, it counts. if it’s like the last skyscraper you mentioned, the one being built in 2021, or like the 1 World Trade Center, no.
I like this idea
Because that one mean such building as the burj Khalifa would remain at its current height
Which is fair enough because it tapers all the way up.
It has to be a universal rule, yours can't be used
Well, highest point means "highest"... It can be count even if there's only a space for one person to stand
I don’t think it should work that way because that’s giving a pass to a tower that should obviously be shorter than the Willis Tower.
1. Build a skyscraper
2. Add a spire wide enough to have an elevator running through
3. Add a toilet on the tip of the spire
Maximum usable height and tourist attraction at the same time
That's why Shanghai World Financial Center will always be my favorite skyscraper.
This is why I liked the Twin Towers. Full usability from bottom to top.
Agreed. All 102 floors
No
Including spires as the height of thw building is like measuring a guy's hair
It’s like measuring a guy’s hat
The Architectural Top is fine for me if it's a real "architectural" element and not only a spike/dorn as the Twin Towers.
Yeah, the Burj khalifa is not just a pointless spire to make it taller, it adds to the look of the building
@@Deeznutsmynamejeff21 facades are fine but they're not the BUILDING.
@@Deeznutsmynamejeff21 but isn't twin tower also serves the same? Without those spikes... It will be ugly..
@@davidkelly4210 What do you mean "They're not the building"? Of course a facade is.
@@zae_xa Have you seen a picture of the Empire State Building before they added the spire? It looks odd as hell. :D
Is like saying a person who is 5 ft tall is considered taller than a person who is 5'4" because the other person wears a tall hat
Wow how original
The tall hat isn't fuckung cementing to the 5'2 foundation
Link 24 or a tall hairdo.
or just has a very long cone of a head
is this some kind of joke only short people can understand
I lived in Dubai for 14 years and watched them being built. Magical...
Sir Bob Sprout lucky but I would be so desperate to see them finished
Yes all those slave laborers, must have been mesmerizing.
Damn the Merdeka PNB 118 tower looks amazing
Me as a Malaysian laughed when the 2 building that cheat the way through the list are from Malaysia.
Not proud, but it makes me question, where are we even going with these skyscrapers?
the architects were not from malaysia so you shouldn't be ashamed
@@nou8968 Ah, don't worry. I'm not ashamed of it. It's just funny so I'm not proud of it either
@@readone_9718 i ashamed of that Freedom tower but not Twin Tower. We made two of those when other country only have one each. You know how a feat that is. What if those two building combined. Its kinda disappointing to hear that some Malaysians still things its a bad decisions from us.
those buildings especially petronas towers brought billions of revenue to Malaysia from tourism. its not that bad
Not anything against malaysians but im sure everyone can agree. Singapore better
The highest usable height of Shanghai tower is 587 meters while that of Burj Khalifa is 584 meters. So from now, Shanghai tower is the tallest building in the world for me
If you're going to include spires, then include antennas. Sears tower (I'm from the Chicago area if you can't tell) and the Hancock haven't had their antennas increased or reduced in height. They form part of the buildings' identity.
Highest point a person without climbing equipment can casually walk up to.
In my home city, Philadelphia's Comcast Technology Center uses vanity space in its beacon spire to look from the west like a Minecraft middle finger but in glass. It stands at 1,121 feet, making it the tallest skyscraper in the western hemisphere that's not in Chicago or New York. The flat-topped Comcast Center next door appears taller by roof height (I'm not sure what the highest habitable floor height is).
"It's not the height of the building, it's how you use it."
Highest point accessible to ME when I go there. So highest usable floor plus accessibility to the public. I don't care about spires, they're like towers: not in the equasion here!
Yep, in 20 years of following skyscrapers, i've never agreed tip should be the record breaking number. Roof height seems more logical. Glad you bought this up.
No one:
Burj Khalifa: Why am I even here?
Jeddah tower:you aren’t since I will over take you
Dubai creek tower:hush kids
@@Jdm491 hahahah like this comment
@American Airlines ik why they are gonna make so tall towers
Eifel tower: “am i a joke to you?”
"Not a building"
Eiffel
@@prateekpanwar646 so what is it then
@@aq7127 radio tower.
Ivan Šarić a statue lmfao
I'd say have a specific length of a spire, maybe like 15-20 meters are counted before it's no longer counted.
Highest floor.
"where do you draw the line on tallest buildings?" Idk man, probably the top if I'm honest.
gonna put a bigass antenna on my house and break these records. Ill see you in the books
A lot of skyscrapers increase the height of the usable floor space by adding observation decks to the top of buildings, they should somehow include features like this within the spire. Spires in traditional buildings like churches and minarets served a practical purpose of calling to prayer, so it should be impossibly in the modern context
I go by highest altitude of the uppermost habitable floor.
Every modest home in Nepal beats every building in Dubai.
I feel that people should just apply the "structure" and "building" definition to parts of buildings. If the CN tower is a structure and not a building, it can´t become a building by placing it on a building. By that approach, putting a tower on a bulding doesn´t make it part of the building and therefore isn´t included in the buildings total height.
I saw the video, i checked if it was B1M, it was so i clicked right away!!
Keep it up!
Never thought I'd see the King and Queen buildings in Sandy Springs, Ga in one of these videos.
Highest usable floor should be the standard. Come on, it's not that difficult or complicated.
5:10 that building legit looks like it's giving the middle finger 😂
🤣🤣
Peter Franc stfu up mate it’s a picture of the clock tower in Mecca not that u know ur probably a jew🤫😂😂
@@qasimshaukat4445 chill out bro it was a joke
Qasim Shaukat “Middle FingerTower” lmfao
Peter Franc I think your eyes are messed up
" The council on tall buildings"
LOL! Ppl are a trip. There's really a bunch of ppl making rules about this??
Yup! They are based in Chicago!
yes
stop using "ppl" it's cringey
That last panoramic view made me realise we're slowly but surely heading into what science fiction writers imagined society would look loke in the past.
😐
Definitely highest usable floor, spires are cheating!
It’s the height of the building overall, which includes spires. It’s not even cheating
Both 'highest floor' and 'height to tip' have more meaning. The current definition (architectural top) is just a way to artificially inflate statistics.
I draw the line where the elevator ends!
We don’t measure them by usable space, we measure them as how far mankind can build
That category is called "tallest structures".