199 replies to this topic

[Jason Perlow]

Click Here for the Marco Canora Q&A/Hearth Pictorial

[jeunefilleparis]

This is a bit late, but better late than never, right?

Beth and I went for a late night dessert run 2 saturdays ago and it was just incredible.

I was very impressed by the way they changed the space. I had eaten at Tappo once a couple of years ago and I remembered it to be rather different.

Anyways, we chose 3 different desserts * hey they re small ok!!*

The first dessert was the apple donuts with apple compote and maple cream. The donuts came out hot and fresh. This was my favorite of the night. They were not too sweet at all, and the apple compote and maple cream were lovely dipping sauces. I could eat a whole dozen of them! They should sell them in the morning!

the second dessert that we had the goats milk panna cotta with huckleberry compote. This panna cotta was perfect. It was really creamy and smooth, with a slight goat cheese taste. The huckleberries, which I dont ever recall trying previously, was a very nice twist and added a nice semi sweetish taste to the dish.

The 3rd dessert was a banana cake layered with mascarpone icing w. sweet potato icecream. This one was a bit less interesting than the other two, but delicious none the less. I mean, really, how can you go wrong with mascarpone icing? The sweet potato icecream was not too differen than a pumpkin icecream.

All in all a great, warm, inviting place! I go back in a second!

Edited by jeunefilleparis, 17 February 2004 - 11:58 AM.

[Pan]

Thanks for dropping in to post that, Lauren.

[jeunefilleparis]

I m going to Jean George tonight and I promise to actually post about it in the next day or so!

[Pan]

I hope you had a great time!

[johnjohn]

I had a really nice dinner while sitting at the counter in the kitchen at Hearth last night. Service was awesome. I was a solo diner which always makes me feel weird, but the staff made me feel very comfortable. Marco seems like a great guy. He answered all of my questions about the products or how things were prepared. It was also pretty cool to watch the guys work at their stations in the kitchen.

Started with the Red Snapper Crudo - A great way to open the meal. It was bathed in a spicy, but fruity olive oil with fried rosemary leaves and a dusting of sea salt. I liked how the frying of the rosemary tamed it's flavor - I usually find it to be too strong an herb. The sea salt added a nice crunch to the dish.

Next, was a plate of the Gnocchi with a sauce of butter, parm, and S&P. Awesome. The second best version I've ever had (first being Giorgio's Gorgonzola covered ones on the UES) - Very light and fluffy. I did think they were salty, but in a good way. I only bring this up, because the person next to me also ordered them and commented on the saltiness.

Braised Lamb Shoulder and ribs with Escarole and Barlotti Beans was my main course with a side of polenta. Really soft and flavorful meat with perfectly cooked beans (not mushy - with a little bite) my only comment (and not a necessarily a negative) was that the shoulder and rib had the same mouth feel - I guess I would of preferred a piece of the loin or something more fibouris to chew on. This was the first time I ever tried soft polenta - it was good, but I don't think I'm a fan of the texture - nice flavor though.

My dessert was the Goat Milk Panna Cotta with Huckleberry Compote. I am a huge fan of panna cotta and order it when ever it's on the menu (which seems to be at every restaurant). The panna cotta was soft and creamy with a nice tang. I have never had huckleberries before - I don't know - they really didn't seem to do anything for me. Two small cookies followed with a solid cup of coffee.

Wines were paired with each course - I know nothing about wine, but I really liked the ones they picked.

johnjohn

[SobaAddict70]

The trajectory of mystifying NYTimes restaurant reviews continues, and Hearth is the latest victim.

It starts off promisingly with this:

A dish of hen-of-the-woods mushrooms, direct from Craft, could not be better. The mushrooms are roasted and served on a solitary white plate. Have your fork ready when they arrive; even good friends will betray you.

However, we next see this:

The main walls are covered with thick panels of white felt, affixed with gigantic copper staples. They look like big bandages, actually. Big cozy bandages. Just like home, if you live in an infirmary.

...followed by this:

In some cases, the food's visual clarity is not matched by the power of its taste. The red snapper crudo comes with six snowy pieces of fish, each crowned with a mince of red pepper and a fried rosemary leaf — lots of flavor, none from the snapper.

Hearth (Amanda Hesser) (from today's NYTimes DIGEST update. You may have to scroll down for the appropriate link.)

Is it me, or is there a disconnect in this review? Two stars is not quite the rating I would give based on what has been said regarding Hearth on this and other threads.

By the by, a friend and I have a dinner reservation there in two and a half weeks, and very much looking forward to it.

Soba

[Lesley C]

This review, I liked.
I found it very positive, almost gushing but not quite. Lots of those unique, Hesser-style food descriptions, no snide tone like last week. It sounds like the kind of restaurant one would visit time and time again, not some foodie destination. And I think the stars are bang on. This doesn't sound like a restaurant striving for four stars. Two sounds right. And don't forget, two equals "very good."

[Jason Perlow]

Nah, this is wrong. The place is serving 3 star cuisine. STRONG 3 star cuisine.


The review itself is good, but the star rating is completely off.

[Lesley C]

OK, I haven't been. Also, she doesn't say anything about the service. But, from the picture, it looks pretty casual. I can't quite see bar service (meals served at the bar) at a strong three-star restaurant. I, for one maybe, like a tablecloth in my three-star restaurants.
Jason are you saying this restaurant is on a par with places like Grammercy Tavern and Craft?

[JosephB]

I, for one maybe, like a tablecloth in my three-star restaurants.
Jason are you saying this restaurant is on a par with places like Grammercy Tavern and Craft?

I am also troubled by the absence of tablecloths -- too casual for a 3rd star. Casualness and decor also hurt WD50.

[Jason Perlow]

OK, I haven't been. Also, she doesn't say anything about the service. But, from the picture, it looks pretty casual. I can't quite see bar service (meals served at the bar) at a strong three-star restaurant. I, for one maybe, like a tablecloth in my three-star restaurants.
Jason are you saying this restaurant is on a par with places like Grammercy Tavern and Craft?

Yes, the food and service is on par with GT and Craft.

[Varmint]

I thought Ms. Hesser did a solid job with the review. Notice how she gave much more attention to the food this time around -- she must have been listening to us!! To me, this review gave me a great feel for the restaurant, what it's trying to do, and how well it does that. I don't think they should be embarrassed with 2 stars.

[Fat Guy]

If Craft and Gramercy Tavern are three-star restaurants, we hit a conceptual problem if Hearth gets three stars as well, especially since Hearth has so overtly been designed to feel like Gramercy Craft Cafe. The cuisine at all those restaurants is on a similarly high level of technical accomplishment and quality, but the luxuriousness of the ingredients and settings at Gramercy and Craft are in a different category. To me, the stars should roughly correspond to:

**** - The absolute highest level of cuisine and luxuriousness available in NYC

*** - Restaruants that serve four-star-worthy cuisine but lack the luxuriousness of the four-star restaurants; also, this rating should encompass restaurants striving for four stars, with all the trappings of four stars, but that somehow fall short

** - Very good restaurants that are worthy destinations, but that serve cuisine one notch below that of the four- and three-star restaurants and/or offer very casual/informal atmospheres, service, cuisine, and presentation; the two-star rating is also useful to designate three-star-potential restaurants that somehow fall short.

* - The finest examples of neighborhood restaurants, and the two-star-caliber restaurants that are underperforming.

This, it seems to me, is the language the better NYT critics have spoken in their better moments.

On that scale, two stars is probably the most appropriate position for Hearth. The problem, of course, is that the Times has awarded some real howlers of three-star ratings over the years. Nonetheless, it's difficult to find fault with a two-star rating for Hearth. As much as I think Hearth pushes at the three-star boundary, this is probably the rating I'd have given the restaurant if I had to assign the stars. And in the text I would make clear that Hearth represents the very best of two-star dining, with three-star-worthy cuisine prepared by a tremendously talented chef in a casual, approachable setting and at a very reasonable price point.

[Jason Perlow]

Steven I generally agree with this assessment with some reservations, but as you say, if Hearth is a 2 star serving 3 star food, it requires that the entire "3 star" restaurants rating at the NYT be re-evaluated, because so many NY restaurants that have received 3 stars certainly don't merit them at all.

Overall I have a problem with rating restaurants on stars alone, because you get into problems in some restaurants (like Hearth) with the food and service and decor being in totally different ranges. Hearth would be a 3 star restaurant in -your- value system if it wasn't for its setting and casual nature.

The luxuriousness of the settings at Hearth compared to GT and Craft may be at issue here, but not the ingredients and service. The ingredients and food served there are on par with those other two places.

The tight quarters and casualness of the restaurant may be what's hurting its star rating as far as the Times is concerned, but the only thing that matters for me at the end of the day is the quality of what is being put on the plate.

[Fat Guy]

Absolutely, Jason. It appears manifestly unjust for Hearth to get a two star rating when restaurants like Bolo, 5757, JUdson Grill, L'Impero, Park Bistro, and Patria are hanging on to undeserved three-star ratings. Hearth is significantly better than any of those places.

Were the three-star rating properly limited to the restaurants that deserve it -- restaurants like Craft, Danube, Gramercy Tavern, Nobu, Picholine, and Veritas -- then two stars for Hearth would be a no brainer.

An interesting comparison to Hearth is Bid, another restaurant from a Colicchio protege. Bid was clearly a more luxurious restaurant on all fronts than Hearth. I think it was a slightly better restaurant as well. It also received two stars. And that was probably the right rating. Nonetheless, I'd find the three-star argument for Bid to be more compelling than a three-star argument for Hearth.

[Lesley C]

The tight quarters and casualness of the restaurant may be what's hurting its star rating as far as the Times is concerned, but the only thing that matters for me at the end of the day is the quality of what is being put on the plate.

Jason, that's you. But you would be surprised how many people care about the rest. Hearth looks too casual to be an "occasion" restaurant, and, IMO, a three-star restaurant has to fall into that category (it's a must with a four-star restaurant). When restaurants garner high ratings, they become destination restaurants, and a destination restaurant has to offer more than great food. Again, IMO, of course.

[Fat Guy]

To amplify what Lesley said, readers have a certain expectation of a three-star restaurant. As a reader, one would have a right to be surprised upon visiting Hearth if one had gone there with the expectation of a just-shy-of-four-star, destination/occasion-restaurant experience. Of course, the language of the review can clarify some of this, but the stars have to make sense on their own because so many people rely on them exclusively (and stupidly).

To many people, of course, casualness is a plus -- they'd rather go to Hearth than to a place where most men are wearing coat and tie. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that preference, but the langauge of the star system presupposes the opposite set of expectations.

Overall, I thought it was a very good review. Hesser is an excellent writer, and this time around I think her judgment was on par with her skills as a wordsmith. I also appreciated that the knowledge she has gained over the years as a reporter covering restaurants came into play in her review. For example, her discussion of Paul Grieco and the cocktail/beer/wine program was no doubt informed in part by her extensive reporting on Paul and Gramercy Tavern over the years. This is the sort of thing that William Grimes -- despite being the author of a book on cocktails -- typically missed because he kept himself at a distance from the people behind the restaurants.

[Rachel Perlow]

since Hearth has so overtly been designed to feel like Gramercy Craft Cafe.

Yes! That's it exactly!

[bpearis]

They really do need to rethink the servers dress. Those jeans and awful striped shirts make them look like country musicians.

The food is completely ace, though.

[slkinsey]

The mushrooms are roasted and served on a solitary white plate. Have your fork ready when they arrive; even good friends will betray you.

Interesting... It's like she went to Hearth with Ellen Shapiro.

[Ellen Shapiro]

You snooze you lose!

[Lesley C]

OK, wait, the waiters are wearing jeans?
No way waiters can wear jeans in a three-star restaurant. Not to mention striped shirts!

[Jinmyo]

La Hesser gave Asiate a one star compared to two for Hearth.

Any comments?

[Jason Perlow]

To many people, of course, casualness is a plus -- they'd rather go to Hearth than to a place where most men are wearing coat and tie. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that preference, but the langauge of the star system presupposes the opposite set of expectations.

Steven I think that in the post 9-11 world, many, many people would prefer to go to a casual restaurant than your typical dress-up environment that the "3 star" and "4 star" provides. With more and more places like Mix and Hearth opening up, we're going to see this whole two star/three star conventionality being put to the test as more and more fancy "destination restaurants" start tanking and restauranteurs have to completely re-think about how to make money and make diners happy. I think people want substance and good value in dining, even at the high end -- and dragging them out of their homes to go out to eat has to be a no-brainer and effortless.

[SobaAddict70]

OK, I haven't been. Also, she doesn't say anything about the service. But, from the picture, it looks pretty casual. I can't quite see bar service (meals served at the bar) at a strong three-star restaurant. I, for one maybe, like a tablecloth in my three-star restaurants.

Babbo is a strong three star restaurant that serves meals at the bar.

If it isn't three stars, it very well should be.

Seems time to reinvent the star system, methinks.

Soba

[jogoode]

Babbo is a strong three star restaurant that serves meals at the bar.

If it isn't three stars, it very well should be.

Seems time to reinvent the star system, methinks.

Soba

Ah, Babbo! Good point, Soba. I was trying to think of a casual three star.

[Jason Perlow]

I, for one maybe, like a tablecloth in my three-star restaurants.
Jason are you saying this restaurant is on a par with places like Grammercy Tavern and Craft?

I am also troubled by the absence of tablecloths -- too casual for a 3rd star. Casualness and decor also hurt WD50.

Mix doesn't have tablecloths either. At least, I don't remember them having them when I had lunch with Fat Guy there recently.

And Mix is again another 2 star that was robbed of a 3 star, correct? Or is it a 3 that was robbed of a 4?

[Lesley C]

Yeah, but Babbo does.
This is turning into the tablecloth thread.

[Fat Guy]

I think it would be reductionistic in the extreme to lay down axiomatic rules such as "No tablecloths equals no three stars" and "Bar menu equals no three stars." Surely there would be enough counterexamples to refute any such claims. Times change, and even at the highest levels of dining everything is far more casual today than ever before. Is there a single restaurant left in New York that requires a necktie for gentlemen? I'm fairly certain none of the four-star restaurants do -- at most they require a jacket, which really is not a big deal since even the dot.com types can wear a jacket over a tee-shirt and still meet the dress code.

Still, although times change, there is a certain continuity to the system of rank-ordering restaurants. Today, it's not formality as such but rather a certain level of luxury -- stylish surroundings, a certain amount and quality of service, extensive beverage programs, and other indicia of a significant investment aimed at creating a high-end experience -- that brackets each of the star categories. Babbo is a beautiful restaurant in a historic building -- the old Coach House -- offering extensive wine service. Yes, it's relatively casual for a three-star, but it's still in the three-star ballpark. Lupa, on the other hand, could simply never be a three-star restaurant -- no matter how good the food; not even if it served the exact same menu as Babbo.

Mix is casual in the sense that it lacks a lot of the old-style formality but it is a very stylish and modern place. I don't think anybody would argue that there's an absolute two-star limit on a place like Mix, where something like $8 million went into making the modernist statement. Mix does currently carry two stars, but that's a nutty rating for a place that serves four-star food in a three-star setting and manner.

Hearth is a terrific restaurant. I have nothing negative whatsoever to say about the place. My meal there was highly enjoyable, the chef is as talented as can be, and I would recommend it to anybody who loves good food. It also offers very good value. But there's a difference between loving a restaurant and thinking it should have a certain number of stars. Hearth is a lovable two-star restaurant -- it represents all the best in a two-star place. I would choose it over many three-star places. But that doesn't make it a three-star restaurant.