• Images
  • Text
  • Find a Couple + Registry
GO
Kentucky-Louisville

And for the last time.... Hurstbourne CC or The Olmsted?

We cut our guest list and are considering swithcing from The Olmsted to Hurstbourne. 

Hurstbourne is gorgeous and will have great photos, and we wouldn't have to meet a minmum like we do at The Olmsted. And the space is much smaller. I have no idea what the food is like here.

The Olmsted would probably be better food I don't know and they are more experienced in weddings. But it is also really big.

Anyone know anything about Hurstbourne weddings?

Re: And for the last time.... Hurstbourne CC or The Olmsted?

  •      Both are great facilities. I have attended receptions in both. The only drawback to The Olmsted is the split rooms. Guests have dinner in one room, then have to leave their tables to go to the entertainment room.
  • edited January 2012
    They would have to do this at Hurstbourne. One room would be dining and the room directly behind it would be the dancing.

    The Olmsted we could actually do dancing in the same room. Or use the pretty middle section.

    How was the food at Hurstbourne?
  • No one in Louisville knows wedddings more than Brenda Bush at the Olmsted.   She's the best by far.  Everything will go smoothly at the Olmsted  Food is excellent.

    I've been to weddings at both, and both are beautiful.  But with the Olmsted you have NOTHING to worry about.
  • My reception will be at Hurstbourne in June.  I think Hurstbourne is beautiful, and I knew I wanted my reception there so I didn't look anywhere else.  The drawback for me is definitely the separate rooms,  but everything else about it is great.  With regard to the food...we just had our tasting last week and the food was phenomenal.  Tony, the catering manager at Hurstbourne, has been a joy to work with.  He is really nice and really easy to work with.  He's been very helpful, even about wedding stuff that has nothing to do with Hurstbourne. 

    I wouldn't let The Olmstead being more "experienced" influence your decision at all.  My sister got married 15 years ago and had her reception at Hurstbourne.  They're not new to the business at all. 

    With all of that being said, I've also been to weddings at The Olmstead and I like it there too. 


    You really can't go wrong, as you are deciding between two really wonderful venues.     

    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • Yeah, it is a really hard choice! I think we would have nicer photos at Hurstbourne but I would have to change my centerpieces to fit the classic look of the rooms. Like you, we would be using two rooms.  One room for dinner and the other for dancing.
  • edited January 2012
    I am a photographer and have shot at the HCC :) There were LOTS of fun and beautiful areas to use and I wished I had more time to shoot the couple!

     I have a wedding booked at the Olmsted this year, too. Personally i think either would make a great choice! I am looking forward to shooting at The Olmsted though. I visited recently and it's beautiful! :) - Sheryll Lynne
  • We ended up sticking with The Olmsted for a lot of reasons. Hurstbourne would have been crowded. And my friend just got married there and said that the catering manager/ person who runs the weddings wasn't available during their reception when they needed a few things. That is a deal  breaker for me. Other reasons as well but I won't get into those.
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards