dccd

Good value, great food, not great service and no wait to get in. ← What did you have?

Thanks ... can't wait . We'll be living in Napa City, I believe. To Melkor: Thanks for the info, we'll try to check a few of them out ... "free of drunken tourists" is definitely what I would prefer.

New Yorker/Texan uprooting to the Napa Valley. We will be moving to the area and loved to seek out the hidden gems of NY and the little shacks with great Q and Mex in Tex. Just wanted to know if any of you could suggest any great dive-type or off-the-beaten-path-type places that serve really good food ... any style or ethnicity. Any recommendations appreciated ... Thanks, D

(From another thread) Pan: "I don't miss Grimes. Bruni may not have "gotten" Mas - I don't know because I haven't been there - but I like his writing better than Grimes'. But as for the star rating, I don't think it's 1 1/2 stars: I think it's 1 star, with a wish that the place will get better, from Bruni's viewpoint (whether that viewpoint is justified or not). " dccd: "Which should be more important - the writing, or the actual review? " pan: Oddly, I meant it as a rhetorical question, but to give you the opportunity to add your more substantive answer, I have reposted. I think the basis for rating restaurants in the first place is to establish a frame of reference by which readers unfamiliar with the establishment can learn. * Reader: "This place is 2 stars, and so is this one, they are similar because of this, so I will try it because I have this occasion. This one is 4 stars, so this occasion would warrant trying this one. This one serves this and this, it is not for me." I don't think that it should be an outlet for the reviewer's restaurant comparisons (Wolfgang's and Lugers) or possible restaurant vilification (Bouley). I think the review should present factual information ("His almond-crusted soft-shell crab, seasoned with paprika and paired with bacon" - Mas review ... distortion of dish) as well as founded opinion ("The delicious trout appetizer makes me wonder why I have always played favorites with more glamorous species of fish" - Mas review ... becausssseee?). I'm beginning to believe, after re-reading past Bruni reviews, that although I too am happy to read more about the food, it is becoming apparent that he might not understand the food and must rely on other cues to make judgment, typically negative ones. It also seems as though he has a predisposition as to what the restaurant rating might be, and then as it falters, he takes away. I think this is fundamentally wrong in many ways and I hope it is not true. I would hope that the NEW YORK TIMES has specific criteria and the critic comes to a conclusion within their scale.

What makes you think that Per Se doesn't support eGullet? And what is your definition of "support"? reading, donating, posting?

Of the recent appointment of Frank Bruni to Times food critic, she says: "This was a move that had desperation written all over it..." - Regina Schambling, former deputy editor of New York Times' "Dining In/Dining Out" I now understand what she meant ... Since his inception as food critic for the NYT, I have tried to stay by the wayside, merely reading the reviews and taking them with a grain of salt. Without wanting to begin yet another thread on Bruni (he needs no more exposure, if you ask me), I can honestly say that I believe this guy just does NOT get it. I think he doesn't get the subtleties and the nuances of the cuisine he is attempting to critique. This is a Mas thread, so I will remain within the scope of his review of it. This dish is meant to have a firmer texture as it is a vegetable terrine. The spinach puree, set with the use of gelatin leaves is intended to stand up and have a toothfeel among the flavor of these fresh vegetables. I admit, it is not what someone who may have spent the last couple of years eating salumi may be looking for, but in my opinion, it is vibrant with flavor and enjoyably dense. This is a dish that, in my opinion, will never please an Italian. It will never please someone who has become accustomed to layers of pasta, then ricotta, then sauce, then pasta, then ricotta, then sauce and so on and so on. It is not intended to be analagous. It is a dish that is deconstructed and designed to be fresh, and light and, yes, a bit brothy ... a nice mix of wild mushrooms stewed in a mushroom broth yielding full mushroom flavor, accented with ricotta cheese that has been mixed with herbs and garlic, not bound by it. As for the pasta, one can tell by looking at the freshly made sheets decorated with herbs within, that it is not Ronzoni with ruffles. Limp? Not how I would describe it - delicate. Even in his praise, he is mistaken or falls short on description. The crab is not seasoned with paprika, but is accompanied by a sauce that contains it, not dissimilar to the broth of a boullabaise. And bacon? I don't think that three or four lardons sauteed with the green constitute being "paired". Then the trout... please Mr. Bruni, tell me something about it, you have told me A LOT about what you don't like, but when it comes to what you do, give me a frame of reference, something so I can say, "Oh, oh yes, I see." My point is this ... is this the future of restaurant reviewing? Not previously understanding the nuances of the cuising - as in Mas? Apparent bias towards the critics familiar territory - as in Babbo? Spending half of a review comparing the intended restaurant to ANOTHER restaurant - as in Wolfgang's? Utilizing other diners complacency as a benchmark - as in Bouley? NYT act of desperation ... yup --- Herein, trusting NYT restaurant reviews ... nope. Come back, Mr. Grimes, come back ...

My measley two cents... I must agree with Mushroom and RDailey I have been to Hudson Valley Foie Gras and also to the Tyson Chicken Factory. I don't think anyone who has had the opportunity to see both factories would ever eat chicken (and definitely not from a a company like Tyson's, anyways) again. Egg laying hens stacked 10 high in a building that can house 22,000 chickens. On any given day, one of these factories will slaughter up to 300,000 chickens. I completely understand that no one is opening these chickens' mouths and forcing them to eat, but which do you find more cruel? I have seen the tretament of geese at HVFG during feeding time. I have my answer. The point that I want to add is this: The ducks (geese) ARE being over fed by a means which may not be agreeable to some, but 1) where is the compassion for the other animals and 2) If these ducks (geese) were not being used for foie, what would they be used for? "According to the USDA, Americans consume about .34 (1/3 pound of duck per person yearly, down from .44 pound in 1986). Consumption of goose is less. " (Ag Marketing Resource Center, Iowa State University. October 2003) This 1/3 of a pound yearly, INCLUDING specialties like foie ... What was the production output at the Sonoma plant again? Maybe I am not seeing the big picture - maybe the enclosures of chickens is more "humane" or the treatment of pigs and cows at an IBP plant is more "humane" (only seen video of that) or the use of chemicals to enhance vegetable output is more "humane" ... I don't know ... Maybe someone will enlighten me soon ... D

$200 Wusthof? I don't think I have ever seen one that expensive. Before I began to use Japanese knives primarily, I owned (still own, I guess) a Wusthof Culinar french knife and santoku. I used the french knife for about a year and the santoku about 2. I have the great pleasure of utilizing knives everyday, so the wear and tear is obviously a bit more compared to the average home user. I understand that. However, if one were to look at my santoku, one would see that the steel has been ground almost 3/4 of the way up the hallow ground grooves. The knives I now use everyday, are certainly not $2000, but a bit more expensive than most of the German ones, and the degradation has been much less severe over the same period of time. The reason, I have found, is the quality and mix of the steel and the processes by which it is transformed into a cutting tool. On top of that, for my uses, the edge holds much longer and the need for steeling throughout the day is much less. I think there are many many factors that drive the price of cutlery much in the same way it does for watches, or cars, or anything where perceived value is subjective. I think the key is to research and then define them for yourself. D

I have been going to Korin for over 4 years now and I have to say that I have recently become increasingly disappointed. Admittedly a knifeophile, I tend to have a slight obsession for cutlery stores. As Korin has become more poplular, it seems that they have begun to hire actual "Sales People" who are more concerned with their commision rather than the loyalty of their customers. These new "Sales People" also do not seem to be fully informed of the products. I have only a slight foundation in the production of knives and other utensils, but I think the "Sales Person" should have more knowledge than me. I miss the nice ladies that speak little or no English, but can still describe Rockwell Hardness, or steel origins, or proper maintenance. I miss the fact that Korin used to be a "find".

Just my humble opinion ... I have been fortunate to be able to eat at many wonderful restaurants and experience the many varied plateaus of dining. Being a cook, I lean towards deriving an opinion of a restaurant, or any eatery for that matter, from the quality and flavors of the food. HOWEVER, when it comes judgment time for an establishment, ALL things must be considered. One must remember that a rating from the NYT, or ZAGAT or many other of these systems is not solely intended for the likes of me (and many of you, I assume) whose primary focus centers around what is on the plate. The point of these ratings systems, I believe, is to introduce diners to a restaurant which they may have never been, or maybe even to re-introduce them if they have - ALL diners. It is intended to acclimate them with all aspects - food, atmosphere, service. This way they can have a frame of reference when deciding which one for which occasion, on whatever the chosen merit. ----------------- In recent posts, writers have repeatedly used the phrase "4-star food". That, being a phenomenal accolade from gourmands like yourselves, is not substantial enough for Matthew Alibaster Diner III whose evening plans require quite a bit more soignee than for average Joe Diner. Matthew III is seeking a 4-star RESTAURANT, not just 4-star food. What he will seek out, or recall is a RESTAURANT review, not just a food review. Things relevant to the restaurant, are also relevant to a restaurant review, ergo the rating, ergo affecting the options for the Diners. Of course, I will agree that the rating of food is subjective. However, room colors, sound levels (music, or otherwise), proximity of tables, level of service quantified by time and timing, informativeness and the like are all not subjective. If I am told one cannot hear his dining partner, there is little room for doubt, in my mind. I think the same holds true for the Diners who are also review-readers. I say it is possible the eat "4 star food" even without being in a "4 star RESTAURANT". The opposite however, should never be true. I guess that's why I continue to religiously read those damn reviews.... D

I have come across this place and seen a couple of pictures on the web. Can't seem to come across a menu or a detailed review. Do any of you have any information? I would greatly appreciate any feedback... The place sounds interesting. Edited: It is located in Seattle - Queen Anne Blvd if I am not mistaken... Thanks in advance, dccd

Speaking of reviews, I have heard it through the grapevine that Bouley will be the restaurant reviewed this upcoming Wednesday in the Times. True or not, time will tell. My personal experiences lead me to believe it should not be on the 4-star list. My humble opinion - I think that there needs to be an update to the rating system. Maybe 1/2 stars given or some other method. Having said that Bouley is not 4-stars, however, (because of incosistencies, not faxing wine list, and several other reasons), it is certainly on a different playing field from Babbo, which received 3 as everyone here is aware. It's a difficult ruler by which we measure these restaurants. I think with the advent of so many new places that are outstanding in different respects, the format has become antiquated.

What did the menu read? that the chateaubriand came with "sweetbreads"? And that they didn't list it as "ris de veau" was an issue? I don't understand...

Dover - happy to oblige! Ain't a bit o' info' grand? Couple of things... First, when's the party, because it sounds great and I think I am going to crash your little soiree. Second, are you, or are you from "Dover Canyon" the wine producers? in CA?

Oakapple - have you eaten there yet? Has anyone else? I also saw it in a New York Magazine Article I have read the review above and the other two, and am extremely curious about people's responses about this place. And also - (off topic) - I am a bit unfamiliar with this reviewer. In your opinion, and all who reply here, is she very credible? I tried to search for some of her past reviews to form an opinion, but was unable to find archived articles.