degusto

Robert, I have read your review from last summer on Le Louis XV and to be quite frank I am not sure I understand why you think it is a dying quail or why you say it has hit the skids. In your review it seems like not much was to your liking but there is no explanation why. To quote you from another occasion: I am quite sure that Frank Cerrutti will not stop laughing if you ask him if he lacks resources. Although you are more than welcome to have your opinion, even if I get a sense you never miss an opportunity to take a piss on Le Louis XV for the sake of it, I think it is fair that Gareth is enlightened that your opinion that Le Louis XV is a dying quail or has hit the skids is hardly the prevalent opinion amongst people with some authority. Even if we completely discredits my opinion in this matter, which Gareth can read here, the fact remains that Le Louis XV is one of only very few restaurants that is top rated by virtually all the French restaurant guides. When they last year asked the top French food journalists which restaurants should be downgraded from three stars, Le Louis XV was one of only a few that did not receive any votes at all. I know that it is one of the favourite places for some of them. To Mr. Hayler (scroll down on the page) who has eaten through all the three stars of Europe, it is his number one favourite. There is more but I stop with this. In the light of the rather resounding positive ratings of Le Louis XV, it is quite fair to ask for that an opinion that Le Louis XV has hit the skids or is a dying quail should be little more elaborated than being supported by just sweeping assertions that certain dishes were not to ones liking or that Cerrutti lacks resources. Personally, I find this lack of resources issue enigmatic since I have no clue what resources you have determined he is lacking. If it indeed is a dead quail, I am quite sure it is a fat one that was a fed on superb green peas from the old lady in San Remo and that it is stuffed with pristine black peak of the season truffles from Alpes de Haute-Provence. Lunch at Le Louis XV is doable under the budget Garth has indicated. The multiple-choice lunch includes simple but correct wine, water and coffee. Other restaurants on the Riviera worth trying is the very simple but charming le Cabanon in Cap d’Ail with a fantastic setting on a small peninsula in Cap d’Ail. Food is very simple, inexpensive but often very good and almost always prepared with super fresh ingredients. It is mostly patronised by locals and few tourists finds it due to its somewhat secluded location. The wine choices are limited and service can be slow. As for restaurant la Terrasse in Juan les Pins, mentioned by Robert, it could be noted that it is closed and consequently lost its two stars this year. I have no news as to why or if it will reopen in another shape. I would agree that la Colombe d’Or is no culinary oasis to say the least. Hostellerie Jerome in la Turbie is a very good informal restaurant that serves food that can border exceptional but it is quite irregular. My most recent meal there was a bit of a rollercoaster with some exceptional dishes and some prepared with less than fresh seafood and a few obvious execution misses. But it is still worth going to and on a good day it is one of the better restaurants on the Rivera after Le Louis XV. Gareth may also consider crossing the border and try one of the seafood places in Italy.

Pâte brisée, pâte feuilletée and pâte sablée all derive their names from the resulting texture rather than how they are made.

I agree with what Marcus said about the dining room at ADPA. Indeed it probably takes the price as the most charm lacking dining room of all the three stars not only in France but in Europe. IMO the top restaurants in Paris are Pierre Gagnaire, Arpege and Ambroisie. Just below this come Les Ambassadeurs and ADPA and possibly le Cinq. I have not been to Ledoyen yet though. I tried les Ambassadeurs at Crillon a little more than a month ago, a month after Piege took charge of the kitchens. The food I was served here was clearly on a three star level. In my opinion it does not yet reach the level in terms of clarity, definition and overall greatness of what can be found at l’Arpege, l’Ambroisie or at Gagnaire when Gagnaire is on. But it is very well made stuff and it is made with rarely seen pristine raw materials and I would rank it as better than the low tier of the French three stars. Piege is still young and going here may be the most interesting place in Paris right now, as he will be trying very hard to get three stars, for which as far as I am concerned the question is not if he will get them it but rather when. Les Ambassadeurs, which its nice dining room, is currently ranked on a one star level in the Michelin but that has very little with reality, as the second star was lost last year under the management of the former chef Dominique Bouchet. Service at les Ambassadeurs was quite poor though, but I am sure that if it has not changed it will change. Piege has the potential to become the next real super chef of France. It just remains to be seen if he will make it up to that level. I appreciate the no fuss food made with perfect ingredients at l’Ambroisie served in the most beautiful dining room in the world (the middle room) by very competent staff. Cheeses at l’Ambroisie are not up to snuff though. I also like the minimalist food of Passard with ingenious associations and creative preparations of simple and or luxurious ingredients also always of extremely high quality. I think Ducasse’s food is best had in Monte-Carlo. The food at les Ambassadeurs is likely to be enjoyed by more people than the food at l’Arpege or at l’Ambroisie. I have not tried Alleno’s food after he left Les Muses or in fact not after he got two stars there. As for Lucas Carton I can agree that it has a gorgeous dining room, but it is clearly not the place to go to for the food. A recent meal here just confirmed earlier poor performances. In essence you eat one star food but pay three star prices.

Jellybean, how do we find this store please? Georges Bataille 18 r Fontange ND du Mont 13006 Marseille Tel: 04 91 47 06 23 As for Sete. As Bux says it is a nice small town. They have a few interesting specialities but it is not a gastronomic epicentre of Southern France.

This is the place I was thinking about when I wrote earlier in the thread about walking around in le Panier, the old part of Marseille, and just grab a pizza. It is in the heart of le Panier, a part of Marseille with lots of soul.

menton1, You are speculating, you have a vivid imagination and you do not seem to have read my posts. That is the only logical explanation to your charges that I am just “thinking in an "Haute Cuisine" mode” when I claim that Marseille is a desert from a gastronomic point of view. What I have said is that in my opinion it is a desert. I have made that conclusion after extensive eating in the city and after discussing this issue with several Marseille people. My assertions that it is a desert have been backed up by facts, namely the relatively very small number of restaurants recommended by for example Michelin. I hope you do not claim that all restaurants listed in Michelin are to be considered as haute cuisine. Besides your notion that there are restaurants that guide inspectors simply won’t go to or recommend, simply has no support in reality. Michelin and other guides are full with simple eating-places. This is not to say that there are no restaurants worth visiting that are not in the guides. If you read my posts in this thread you would have seen that I have recommended Le Lunch in Marseille and chez JuJu in Beauduc and none of those are to be found in the Michelin guide and cannot be called haute cuisine from any set of references. I have used the relatively few restaurants recommended by the most credible guide in the world as a proof that the restaurant scene in Marseille is highly underdeveloped. I repeat what I have said before. Michelin lists about only a bit more than a dozen restaurants in Marseille and of those only one is a Bib gourmand. By contrast Michelin recommends more than 40 restaurants for Lyon and of those there are seven Bib gourmands. I also claimed that the seafood restaurants in the Marseille area do not live up to the level of the ones found in Italy. Personally I do not think this comes from the side effect of Michelin as vmilor suggests, but the reasons for the relatively low quality level eating in these restaurants as well as on the Marseille restaurant scene as a whole can be found in socio-economic reasons that I am not going to explore in this forum. As Jonathan says I am taking the analysis a bit further. Not only are there in guide books a significantly smaller number of restaurants, simple or not, recommended in Marseille but guide books also list a surprisingly very small number of high quality restaurants, regardless of whether they would classify as haute cuisine or not. And no serious food journalist has to my knowledge contradicted this conclusion. As with everything the presence of high quality top-performing businesses drives the quality of the whole value chain from producers to suppliers to restaurants to customers. Jonathan points out Lyon and it is a good example indeed of this phenomenon. The high number of top restaurants has created a culture where customers are more demanding, restaurateurs are more knowledgeable and suppliers are supplying better raw material e t c. This is one reason why simple bistro eating in Lyon is vastly superior to that in Marseille and the selection of good simple and informal dining places is vastly larger. What I have said does not dispute that you may have enjoyed fun eating in Marseille or anywhere else for that matter. I have made a point of the surprisingly low importance Marseille has from a gastronomic point of view and I believe that if you are looking for good or very food, simple or haute cuisine, Marseille is not the place to go to. I have made that conclusion from my own experience and compelling arguments backs it. So menton1, read the posts and do not let your imagination draw speculative conclusions.

Robert, I cannot agree more than I do in this respect. In fact I feel like you are reading my mind.

Yes, I have been to le Tiboulen de Maïre. It is a somewhat boring cement structure not too far from Callelongue. I agree it is not touristy. In fact the coastline area from where Ave. Prado ends by the sea all the way to Callelongue and even a bit further to Cassis is an area that absolutely should be visited. It is quite unspoilt in the sense that this part of Marseille has probably looked the same the last thirty or forty years, and it is not at all touristy. But one has to remember that Marseille is not very touristy to begin with. So is le Tiboulen great? Is it the freshest of fish perfectly cooked? Well…… I wouldn’t say it is better than any of the other 5-10 small restaurants serving mostly “fresh” fish along the coastline. Most of them are located just on any of the many small fishermen’s ports along the coastline. I mentioned one of them earlier, which was Chez Aldo. The advantage with le Tiboulen is that you can park there and that can be quite a hassle at Chez Aldo. But in my opinion, these restaurants are very much “un jour a la hausse, un jour a la baisse”. None of them has had any impact on my view that Marseille is a desert in terms of gastronomy. The probably most interesting of all these places is Le Lunch, which I also pointed out earlier and it is located a bit further away after Callelongue towards Cassis. Food is not necessarily great there either but the setting is spectacular. So even on a bad day you have a view and the sound of the ocean. Le Lunch is also an odd cement structure like all these restaurants are. What strike me as odd is that Le Tiboulen is featured in NY Times, but on the other hand I can easily see that any of these restaurants will render royal service on the right day when someone comes in and says he is a big journalists from NY Times. So maybe that is the way to tackle the inconsistency. I am more surprised that Le Lunch is not featured more often because of its absolutely extraordinary setting, whilst having a certain wild and authentic charm. None of the restaurants – even on the good days - compare with the seafood temples found in Italy for instance. I am greatly disappointed they don’t, considering the access they have to fresh seafood in general and the presence of a few very interesting seafood specialties in the area. For anyone going to the coastal area remember that these restaurants are popular among locals and most of them are packed for lunch and usually very quiet for dinner. So either make reservations or be there early, which is also wise if you want somewhere to park. The other place that Menton1 mentioned, Le Marseillois I do not know of. I was on that side of the old port quite recently but I cannot say I paid any attention to any restaurant yacht there. If I try it next time in Marseille I will let you know. But even if it turns out to be the next Ducasse, Passard, Pacuad or Veyrat cooking himself in the kitchens it would not really impact my view of how far Marseille has to go to be a gastronomic player in France, but it sure would make me happy. As I said before only a dozen restaurant are mentioned in Michelin and only three with stars and at least one of those (Michel) is inexplicable. So compare that to Lyon a city of the same size. Some may say that is not fair because of Lyon’s deep culinary traditions. Fine, compare it to Copenhagen, a city of the size of Marseille with a relatively recently born food culture like in Spain, and you will see that Copenhagen has about three to four times as many restaurants mentioned and 10 of them have star ratings. I do not think that I have overstated Marseille’s poor culinary level. I could have amplified it by saying it is a really dry desert. But yes maybe I am too discriminating against food that is just average to good when it easily could have been - if not exceptional - at least very very good.

There have been numerous articles like these in French, Italian, Scandinavian magazines and so on. The tourist organizations of Marseille have hired PR companies and spent considerable money to strenghten the profile of the city and increase the inflow of tourists. They need it as has no importance today from tourism point of view. What I have read so far about food in Marseille have been these obviously "bought" articles that have nothing to do with reality. From a gastronomic point of view Marseille is a desert.

Jonathan is right. There are basically two types of cream in France. Crème and crème légère. There are regulations governing these and each must contain a minimum percentage of fat to be called crème and crème légère, I think it is 30% and 15 % respectively. In addition to this the French distinguishes between crème liquide and crème épaisse. Crème épaisse is slightly sour and thick because it has been fermented. Crème liquide is unfermented cream. Both crème and crème légère can be found as liquide and épaisse. As Jonathan says crème liquide can also be called crème fleurette or crème fraîche liquide. Crème épaisse is also called crème fraîche épaisse and sometimes, if rarely in writing, crème solide or crème fraîche solide, although usually they then refer to the more artisanal (or rather claimed to be artisanal) creams that are so thick and with heavy fat content they are almost hard. When French say just crème fraîche is it normally understood that it is the thick fermented cream they are talking about. If it is not understood you will get the question: Liquide ou épaisse? Crème liquide is the equivalent of whipping cream. But with berries it is quite nice to mix the liquide and épaisse and make a whipped cream with a bit of suger in it. Proportions after taste.

Oh please save this guy. Advice him immediately of the five pages with fine print, which the Restaurant Magazine has compiled in which all disclaimers, representations and definitions are lined out. He can obtain the fine print by addressing the Restaurant Magazine with a written request together with sufficient UK postage stamp for the delivery of the fine print. I think that in that fine print within the section of definitions it says something along those lines: DEFINITIONS . “The 50 best restaurants in the world” - Defined for the purpose of The List as a restaurant which is not necessarily one the 50 or even 1000 best restaurants in the world or even in Europe. If The List would have been compiled with some level of methodology it is likely that many of the restaurants appearing on The List would not have gained a single vote." . No seriously, I think he should go to Balthazar. I would have liked to see that place on the spot behind l'Atelier within the top five in the world. By the way, why did not Bibendum win? Bibendum, Aux Lyonnaise, The Lean Chicken, l'Atelier and Balthazar would have been the top five that would have made more sense.

Thanks Jellybean. Indeed I am looking for restaurants that are not necessarily haute cuisine but display some integrity to the region and the ingredients. You say Le verger des Kouros servers simple food...is it GOOD simple food? I would not call the food at la Celle haute cuisine. It is very authentic Provencal cooking that can be had both at lunch and dinner. Le verger des Kouros can be ok depending what you expect. I am not sure a lunch at la Celle necessarily would have to be that much more expensive. It would be a lot better.

We stopped for lunch at Chez Bru several years ago on our way to Marseille to meet friends. We stopped on the basis of a GualtMillau selection of the chef as an up and coming chef to be watched. We greatly enjoyed lunch by this young Belgian serving his take on Provencal cooking. I have also had very good experiences from Chez Bru and have warmly recommended it on egullet before. But the last two meals there, the latest the last week, have been so uninspiring that I do not think I will return there again at least not any time in the near future. Sure as Robert Brown says, there are no safe harbours, but the decline here cannot only be explained by a poor day. Last time the food was so nasty that it was impossible to enjoy a 99 Lafon Monthelie, although a bit young normally delicious wine. Even the cheese service was poor, which has not been the case here before.

The Moulin is closed on Mondays -- which is one reason we went to the Auberge de la Fenière -- report is here. Food was good, some of it very good; wine list excellent value, service sometimes reminiscent of Fawlty Towers. Well worth a visit, though. Actually the Moulin is open on Mondays. It is closed on Tuesdays and Wednesdays at least part of the day and the hotel is open even during those days unless they have changed that. Once when we were there we asked them where to eat the day it was closed mostly to see if they recommended la Feniere, but they did not. Rumors of rivalry between the two seem correct. Maybe it was when they had their annual closing in February that you passed by.

What possible interest could it have to discuss the restaurants on the list and those that did not make the cut? Any such discussion must inevitably also include an analysis why they did make it or why they did not make it and that is a pointless exercise. As has been concluded in this thread the reasons why certain restaurants get votes are obscure. In fact, so obscure that this list must be criticised because of that. It was stated by Andy Lynes earlier in this thread that, 300 people were asked the question which five restaurants ‘did you enjoy most'. It was pointed out that “It wasn't purely about food, cost, service or Michelin stars - it was the overall experience”. What is the overall experience? But ok let’s say that it is clear for the 300 people voting what the overall experience is all about. The problem is just as Marcus so correctly have pointed out that the restaurants that will be up for voting are basically the ones that these 300 people dined at over the last year. It is likely that the restaurants that had most visitors among the 300 are likely to get a larger number of votes. Maybe the cumulative number of restaurants - that would reasonably be considered to go onto a list - that these 300 people have visited amount to only 100 or 150. In that case the list is a list of the fifty best of the 100-150 restaurants visited during the year. I would doubt it is that many more considering what small duck’s pond it is that the voters come from. Furthermore, no one has any idea why these 300 people voted on a particular restaurant or why they have ranked those five restaurants each. What liaisons or financial motivation have influenced the voting? Since the criteria was the best overall experience, the field is open to speculation. From a consumer point of view I cannot see anything positive with this list. It is a PR and marketing gimmick and nothing else. I actually question how serious food writers can participate in this type of event when the reasons for the votes are so obscure and the whole result list gives a wrong impression to the restaurant eating public. It has been claimed in this thread that the rules are clear. Maybe so but the list is used in the wrong purpose and it is deceiving people and the major motivation for it is to give the restaurant magazine and certain chefs publicity. Even on the restaurant magazine website do you get the impression that it is a much more comprehensive list than what it actually is. I am mainly interested in the food when I eat at restaurants. If I was to be presented with a top list of restaurants I would certainly like it to have an emphasis on the food aspect. But since l’Atelier comes out as number 4 on the list and votes went to other places with at best average food, the list lacks any credibility from a food point of view. The list should go down the trash bin. It has no interest whatsoever.

Robert is certainly not the only one finding the B-movie setting of San Remo appealing. I second Robert’s opinion on Carletto. I have eaten there many times but the last three times suggest it has fallen fast and hard. It is sad since I have had many memorable meals there but I do not think I will return any time soon. Via Romana has never impressed me but it has never been bad on the other hand. Baia Beniamin is a must go for the dream like setting. Food can be ok but it is too expensive and the Fawlty Towers-like service can be amusing when one is in the right mood or very annoying when on is not. I have not been to Balzi Rossi in a while but I is worth trying. There is a small trattoria in Dolceaqcua. I am not sure of the name but it is located on the main street and it is also a wine shop. The food is simple and ok and the wine selection is very impressive. The woman in the couple who runs the place is one of Italy’s top sommeliers and she is very knowledgeable. Prices in the wine shop are high. Buying wine is better at Il Forletto in San Remo where the selection is vast and prices are reasonable. A word about Paolo & Barbara in San Remo. This restaurant has its followers. The food is made of high quality and fresh ingredients and technically most of the time it is on a high level. The problem is that the food is overly complicated with often much too many disparate ingredients served at the same time. There is just no harmony in the food with many “garnish”-tastes too pronounced. The wine list is extraordinary with many bargains. Giannini is ok but it is not near the quality Carletto displayed was two years ago. Of the restaurants close to the French side I will give Giappun in Vallecrosia a few more chances. In Genova, Zeffirino has served me good homemade pasta but it was very expensive.

Robert, I have been to Osteria Dell Arco and my memories tell me that wines were much better than food but it is worth going to if you are in Alba.

La Celle is quite good. GM's rating is a bit generous but it is pretty consistently serving very good food that respects its Provencal ingredients. The staff is usually very professional. In its surroundings there are few options. Le Lingousto in Cuers can serve good food but just very rarely. The chef has enormous talent but can very tired of being a chef. Le Verger de Kouros serves simple food. I would probably lunch at la Celle as well.

Robert, I am sorry you had a bad meal at hotel du Port. But as you said about Clos St Pierre there are no safe harbours. I actually went to Clos St Pierre another time after Jonathan and I was there and although two courses were really delicious and totally in line with what one expects from a one star place, the main course was so disgusting that it made me regret I went there. A sea bream with a garlic sauce that had such garlic force that it took me two days to recover. When Jonathan and I were there the wine we intended to order was gone and on my second time another two wines on the list were gone. No good statistics. But it is a charming place. However, you may remember Robert, that I recommended you to go to the place as I had had recommendations from a very trustworthy source to go there myself last year but never had a good opportunity. Anyway, it turned out that it was in fact not Clos St Pierre that I got the warm and nice words about but another very small restaurant in the same village. I expect to try this any day soon. A few words about Bruno in Lorgues. Clement Bruno has built a small Disneyland outside Lorgues in what used to be his home. It is usually one of the most lucrative restaurant operations in this part of France. People flock from everywhere to eat here. It can partly be explained by the fact that there are few alternatives in that area despite affluent habitants. Is this a place to go for a real food experience? It depends what one is looking for. If one wants rustique food made with lots of fat and food that have a bit of pre-la nouvelle cuisine era over it, then Bruno is a place to go. Otherwise, save your money for something else. Chateau de la Chevre d’Or has a new chef. I have not been too temped to try it out since he took over last year after Delacourt left for Parcours. The reason is simply that they started to display photos of the dishes he does on their web site and it did not look like a high priority to go to. But I will try it some day. And yes Menton1 is right that it is one of the nicest dining rooms anywhere with one of the most extraordinary views one can think of. However, it is not that much fun to eat there a rainy evening in November with heavy thunder storms. I cannot see how it can be a match to Le LouisXV. It was never before when Delacourt was there. Le Louis XV is IMO one of the maybe five to seven restaurants anywhere that are capable of serving a meal on a level that from my point of view is close to perfection. It is quite simple as the network from which they source their raw material and the closeness to much of the raw material is matched by few, the master chef Cerruti in the kitchens is maybe the one who has understood the Mediterranean raw material better than anyone, they have a well staffed kitchen and a style in the cooking which is actually quite creative and always a joy to eat. I had one of those perfect meals a few months ago. The problem with Le Louis XV is that there is inconsistency, maybe due to high staff turnover at certain times. When on the highs, which it is most of the times, it is matched by few. But on a bad day, the food will still be better than when most others on this level have a bad day, but coupled with the phenomenon of slow service that happens at certain times for a certain reason, it can be a little disappointing. There are a number of ingenious dishes that just get better the more times you taste them.

I think they are 7 MOF's including himself. One in the dining room, himself and five in the kitchens. Without getting into the argument how it should be rated, I think he should retire.

Marseille is a complete desert in terms of gastronomy. It is evidenced by the fact that there are only 13 restaurants mentioned in the 2004 Michelin guide and that is not a lot for a city that is slightly larger than Lyon. Marseille’s restaurant scene is hard to understand considering the access restaurants in the city have to pristine raw material from the ocean and elsewhere. There is superb rouget de roche, small cigales (a real rarity), langoustes, anemone de mer e t c. Yet, no place serves sublime food or even acceptable food for the prices charged. If I had to stay in Marseille for two weeks I would absolutely get my hands on a car and travel to the Aix-en-Provence area and elsewhere, such as to chez JuJu in Beaduc in Camargue to eat. A few notes on some of the restaurants mentioned in this thread and on the ones that usually come up on people’s lists: Le Lunch – Located east of Marseille in one of the calanques. You go here on a beautiful day for the picturesque setting and hope that the food is good that day. It can be good. Une Table au Sud – The chef of this 1st floor restaurant overlooking the old port has quite a following and has been dubbed a future great chef by Gault Millau two years ago. I have eaten here several times. I wonder why, but the only thing that I am sure about is that the food has been as consistent as it has been bad. The food is rarely made of top ingredients, execution is usually poor, taste combinations not well thought through and presentation can be bizarre. Others I know have had better luck but it is no surprise that Michelin has not awarded this guy a star. The wine list is ok but used to be a joke. L’Epuisette – As Marcus says, the view on Chateau d’If is quite something. This is a restaurant that serve high quality raw material but most of the time gets it wrong with poor to average cooking and overly complicated dishes that lacks definition and clarity. I have never had anything better than average dishes but admittedly made with very high quality ingredients. It is also, as Marcus noted, expensive. Much too expensive for what you get. There is a lunch menu at a reasonable price, but most of the time it is made up of less elaborated dishes. The one star rating borders to mystery. The wine list is very good. Got unbearably hot inside last summer. But well, maybe one of the top two restaurants in Marseille. Miramar – Famous for its bouillabaisse. Changed hands last year and lost its star. Was and still is a very expensive place serving uninspiring food. Michel – Avoid Le Petit Nice – As Marcus says a very expensive two star restaurant. Prices are on par with the prices at Le LouisXV in Monaco. However, there is a good value lunch menu including wines. The wine list is remarkable and there are bargains. The dining room has an odd decoration featuring old photos of the chef Gerarld Passedat’s grand mother. The view is better than at l’Epuisette. The overall impression when eating a menu with eight dishes here is that one will typically find one or two dishes that are on a three star level but the majority will be below what one expects from a two star and some dishes will be on a level that should have gone into the trash bin. One should try it for lunch and go for the lunch menu. It is most of the time less complicated dishes, as the food here tends to be overly complicated (too complicated to execute for the kitchen) and often overly creative (creations that does not make any sense) on the a la carte menu and tasting menus. Still probably the best food in Marseille. Les Arcenaulx has a nice interior but food is mediocre. The same goes for la Cote de Boeuf close by. But la Cote de Boeuf has on the other hand one of the best wine lists in France. Peron – a trendy modern restaurant on the cliff close to l’Epuisette with what could be called modern comfort food at very high prices. Chez Fonfon – one of the Marseille institutions. I hope it is not famous for the food. La Ferme – Avoid. Expensive food that was more in fashion twenty or thirty years ago. Chez Aldo – Another famous seafood restaurant in the popular les Goudes area. Amazingly it also serves pizzas, something that is very often the case in Marseille. There are many other restaurants that appear in various guides but I have never eaten better than average to mediocre food. The price quality ratio of Marseille restaurants must from a consumer point of view be the worst in France. Marseille can be very windy. This means that le Petit Nice and l’Epuisette can be really unpleasant at times. Not to miss in Marseille is a visit to the traiteur and cheese affineur Georges Batailles, one of the best cheese stores in Southern France. To get a sense of the old Marseille, go to le Panier, walk around a bit and just grab a pizza or something and drink some wine from nearby Cassis.

If people are going to Camargue there is one place not to be missed. It is Chez Ju-Ju in Beauduc. It is not mentioned in many guides. It is the single most particular restaurant in all of Southern France. It looks like a shack. The toilettes are outside, the wine list sucks and it is quite a trip to go there. But they have fresh tellinnes, the great specialty of this region, and fresh fish grilled in the dining room (if it can be called a dining room). But reserve well in advance as it is very popular.

nashman1975, A few personal notes on addresses in the Riviera towns and their surroundings that you have indicated you want to go to. Monaco Menton1’s description of Monaco is fairly accurate. But it has to be seen. Monaco is full of very poor rather expensive restaurants. Le Louis XV is the best restaurant, by far, on the Riviera, and I hold it as one of my top five restaurants anywhere. There is a bargain-like lunch menu including wine at Le LouisXV but the food on the a la carte menu or the dinner menus (also available at lunch time) is usually more elaborated and made with more expensive ingredients. Sometimes, before a menu change they display the coming a la carte dishes on the lunch menu. Ask for a table on the terrace if it is not too hot. Another good restaurant in Monaco is Bar & Boeuf, serving basically only sea bass and beef. It is another Ducasse restaurant in a very special setting on top of the famous Jimmy’z night club. It was designed by Phillipe Starck and it is semi-outdoors and only open five to six months a year. The food is rather modern and creative and almost always on a very high one star level. If you like beef, this is the place to go as they serve the exquisite Simmental beef. It is quite expensive but I think its setting and use of top raw material justifies the prices. There is also a very good restaurant in the new Hotel du Port. The restaurant is located on the roof with a splendid view of the port and the palace on the rock. I would not be surprised if it gets a star in the next Michelin guide. The food made from high standard ingredients is creative and well made. To watch out for in Monaco is a new to be opened (in May) restaurant with Cussac (formely La Reserve in Beaulieu-sur-Mer and Robuchon as consultant) located in the refurbished le Metropole hotel. It is said it will be a casual restaurant serving good reasonably priced food. If you speak Italian there is a very good Italian restaurant in the port of Fontvielle called Saliere. But they will treat you bad unless you are known or speak Italian or are with Italians. It is reasonably priced food for Monaco. Another usually ok place for reasonably priced food is Castelroc opposite the palace on the rock. La Turbie In la Turbie, a very charming old village, you find Hostellerie Jerome, a very small casual restaurant serving very good food that most of the time merits its two Michelin stars. It can be a bit irregular but when Cirino is on, the food can approach the very top of the two star restaurants. Beaulieu-sur-Mer There is as Menton1 has written a harbour with various restaurants. African Queen is a pretty popular place among locals serving very crappy food. There is a relatively new place called Max in the harbour serving quite good reasonably priced food. The lunch menu with a glass of wine is usually a bargain. La Reserve has changed chef and it is not as good as it was under Cussac. Villefrance-sur-Mer I have had little luck with the seafood restaurants here. But I agree that the setting is pure magic a warm spring or summer evening. But food is at best just acceptable from my point of view. Nice In Nice you will find the best inexpensive restaurants. La Merenda and la Petite Maison have already been mentioned I think. They serve simple food. Jouni is another restaurant that gets people's attention but I do not like it. The starred restaurants in Nice merits little interest. I have yet to try Chantecler after famous Michel del Burgo took over. Reports I have had have been a bit mixed. Outside Nice in Falicon you find Parcours, a new very good restaurant that this year earned one star in the Michelin guide. The view is spectacular, the interior is modern and prices are still acceptable. Food here is very good, respecting the ingredients it is made of. Saint-Tropez Lei Mouscardei is the place to go to. Laurent Tarridec is a master chef. No further explanation is needed. If you want to get a sense of what Saint-Tropez is all about, go to Club 55 but read Peter Mayle’s rather spot on story about it first. You do not go to 55 for the food…… Finally to the question about car. If you want to go to the villages a bit off the coast then a car is a must. Driving to Saint-Tropez from any direction is a nightmare in the summer. But when in Saint-Tropez it is not that bad to have a car. Monaco is not as bad as they say. If you go there go before 10.30 a.m. and you will avoid the rush in the morning and the rush before lunch. Also, Monaco is full of underground garages so you do not need to worry about finding a place to park the car. If you go to Monaco during the Grand Prix, do not bring the car. By the way, the best seats are in the Sainte-Devote corner.

Lard is in French actually used for cured or fresh pork fat. It is also used for streaky bacon. But normally one uses words like lard de poitrine, lard paysanne or just poitrine when referring to streaky bacon. However, lard de poitrine smoked or salted never tastes the same as British bacon. The French can also call virtually any kind of salted pork cut in small pieces lardons. It can be confusing. Michel Bras likes using pork fat in various preparations, such as mixing it in sauces or drying it to crispy crackers. I do not remember eating the dish referred to in this thread but my guess is that he for the dish in question uses pork fat cooked, grilled or fried at high temperature that is then mixed with everything else into an emulsion.

Loubet worked in Veyrat's kitchen, which I think is the important relationship. He is often referred to as a strudent of Veyrat and this is probably where he developed his interest in herbs. Robert Brown wrote a quite negative review of this restaurant a couple of years ago. Loubet ended up in Veyrats kitchen mostly because he is related to him. That is at least how I understood it. You may also know the story behind why he left Veyrat's kitchen. Anyway, tell Loubet he is a student of Veyrat and see what he says. I know Robert did not like the place and I agree on many things Robert said and I have discussed it with Robert. If you read what I wrote, I have put down quite a few reservations. I have probably had a dozen or more meals there, some extraordinary and some mediocre, and as I said the service is poor and a lot of things can be different but there is one thing very important with Loubet. He has a style and that is something very very few chefs have. This is why this is still a place worth visiting despite the lofty prices charged for the food.