oakapple

The Cafe at Country didn't really float my boat originally, but I'm excited by the new stuff Loughhead is doing—especially the charcuterie—and it's on my list to pay a return visit. However, we did have dinner in the main dining room a few weeks ago (report here). The menu up there was a real snoozer, with none of the excitement Loughhead is producing in the Cafe, or that he did at the Bar Room. It was also too short a menu (not enough choices), and meat entrées were over-cooked on the Saturday night we were there. We've been to Country four times since it opened. We love the room, and the service team is first-class — almost Danny Meyer-esque. They serve two amuses-bouches and have a petits-fours cart almost as good as Ducasse had at the Essex House. Oh, and I agree with FG about the risottos. The seafood risotto we had was a knockout. But due to the overall lack of ambition on the upstairs menu, coupled with two entrées overcooked, we wouldn't be inclined to return to the main dining room, but for the fact that we've had so many wonderful meals there in the past. So we'll give it a few more months and then try again.

There has been no official word from Team Ko.

Tuesdays were only just added, with the first service on May 27th (source: Eater). However, lunch service will make it easier for everybody, since those who can go at lunchtime will no longer be competing for dinner rezzies. I wouldn't be surprised, though, if lunch is offered only on weekends—at least initially.

Oh, I agree that they probably do—and I'm as impressionable as anybody. I'm just saying that the objective reality, to the extent we can discern it, ought to have nothing to do with the difficulty of getting in. I don't know if I can get behind that. I'd consider it more of a course or an amuse.I guess the litmus test would be if you asked for a second English Muffin during your meal. Knowing some of the attitude of the organization I wouldn't be surprised if they said no. ← They probably would say no, but it doesn't change the fact that Ko's English muffin is the "functional equivalent" of a bread service, in that it's a bread-like substance served at the same point in the meal as bread is typically served. They do it with a twist, because they do everything with a twist at Ko. And you don't get a choice, because nobody gets a choice at Ko. But I've no doubt at all that when Chang and his band of merry men were designing their menu, the English muffin was their answer to the traditional bread service.

I may be in the minority here, but I actually like the Ko rezzie system. At some point, rezzies are likely to be a lot easier. They're now open seven days, and lunch service is coming soon. Ko may be one of those rare restaurants where the demand won't subside in the foreseeable future, but at most places it eventually does.

I don't place any value on exclusivity. Although Ko is a very good restaurant, it doesn't become better just because it's harder to get in. One may feel psychologically predisposed towards enjoying the experience, after one has expended so much effort to score a reservation.I think Ko is fairly priced. It's neither a bargain nor a rip-off. It is in line with other restaurants of its caliber. You have to bear in mind that Ko does have a "bread service": it's the English muffin they serve at the very beginning.

Actually, I had both of those — the first suggested by the bartender, the second my own choice. I wouldn't go so far as "best drinks I've ever had," but both were very good.The one that slightly disappointed me was the Poquito Picante (?sp). I was expecting it to pack some heat, but the jalapeno pepper floating on top seemed merely decorative. (Update: review here.)

I was there last night too, also a first-timer. I'm afraid the drinks I had weren't as interesting as those Pan mentioned, though not bad by any means. A couple of times I saw something going out, and said, "Now, why didn't I order that?" By then I'd had three, which was enough for one evening.

I'm not so sure about that. The dinner menu at Gramercy Tavern is $82, compared to $85 at Ko. That menu is nominally only three courses, but after you count bread and amuses, you're getting food comparable to about six of Ko's "courses," and there's no doubt the service is in an entirely different zip code.

Not really, because all pork is derived from pigs (one genus among the mammals). Fish includes an entire class. The appropriate comparison would be, say, a meat tasting menu (allowing any meat, not just pork).Of course, Chang isn't serving only pork; he just relies on it to an unusual degree.

Regardless, if a chef serves a truffle tasting menu nobody assumes the menu is uncreative simply by virtue of having truffles in every dish. Rather, in order to judge the creativity of the menu, we have to look at how the truffles are utilized. Two chefs could do truffle tasting menus, and one menu could be totally dull and unremarkable while the other could be brilliantly creative. And if that chef did a small-format restaurant with a set menu, and served only brilliantly creative truffle menus all season long, it wouldn't make it any less creative. ← But I'm not aware of any chef in this town that has made a truffle tasting menu the central element of a restaurant. It's normally a special-occasion thing, or one option among others. Yes, Chang has found more ways to use pork than most of us thought possible, and it's a very creative concept. To be clear, I very much liked Momofuku Ko. But it is possible to like something, and at the same time recognize its limitations.

I wouldn't call it a pork restaurant either, but I do think Chang's repertoire runs the risk of being overly narrow. It would be as if Eric Ripert served a tasting menu with salmon recurring in five out of nine dishes. Mind you, it would still be terrific, but it wouldn't be to his credit if he kept doing that.

I think that if pork came up over & over again in a long tasting menu at any other 3 or 4-star restaurant, as it does at Ko, it would probably be considered a weakness.

Compared to other long tasting menus I've had, Ko did not seem unreasonably heavy. But there is a lack of variety here, and it speaks to Chang's limitations as a chef.

Perhaps I'm naively assuming most people wouldn't fall for that; it was so blatant.

I don't really put it in the Spice Market genre. It doesn't have the blow-the-doors off décor, it has a minimal bar, and the menu structure adheres more closely to the standard appetizer-entrée meal structure.

I think it's possible to have a decent meal here...but the word is "decent," not particularly distinguished. As Nathan did, I also found a tendency to upsell. I agree that the cocktail list is pedestrian. Perhaps my server's best advice was to give them all a pass...which I did. I wouldn't go that far, but I agree it is overpriced in relation to the quality.

Thompson is a serious chef. It looks like they're trying to put some sparkle into the kitchen here. They need to focus on front-of-house, too; When I visited, service was spotty.

One would like to think so. Working against it, though, is the fact that Hanson wants to open a chain of Wildwoods across the country. I think what'll happen is somewhat analogous to the BLT restaurants. If you're focused on expansion, then you're probably not focused on making your flagship restaurant better. I don't think we're anywhere near saturation. You'll see more BBQ in New York before you'll see less.

Even though my own review was mixed, I totally agree with you: it's worth a visit. In fact, I will probably go again, as some out-of-town acquaintances have expressed an interest in visiting the next time they're in town.

Being located on Park Avenue South and having a David Rockwell-designed interior have an awful lot to do with it.

I expected less than Hill Country for two reasons:1. Stephen. 2. Hanson. My expectations were met. Not terrible, but certainly not a patch on Hill Country. Review here.

If you look at restaurants that are in Per Se's class, this isn't so. To give a few examples, at Le Bernardin the long tasting menu is $180, and the wine parings are an additional $140. At Eleven Madison Park, the long tasting menu is $145, and the wine pairings are an additional $115. At Del Posto, the long tasting menu is $175, and the wine pairings are an additional $125. I couldn't find an online menu that showed the price of the wine pairings at Daniel and Jean Georges, but I am sure they're in the range shown here.Per Se's long tasting menu is $275 (that includes 20% gratuity; the others' do not). They have fewer seats than the restaurants mentioned above, with an average of only 1½ turns per table. Also, in my experience the ratio of servers to guests is higher at Per Se than at most of these other places, if not all of them. All of these factors need to be considered in the question of whether Per Se's prices are reasonable.

The wine pairing at Per Se is probably the best in town, because there is no set pairing. They create it based on your preferences and budget. If you ask, "What will the wine pairing cost?", they will generally try to steer you somewhere north of $200 a head, but as another post noted, they'll go down to around $150 or perhaps $100. Given inflation, you might not be able to go down to $100 any more. The tasting menu is now up to $275, after yet another price increase.

Unfortunately, Loughhead's nose-to-tail program hasn't made it upstairs, where we dined on Saturday night (review here). Appetizers were great, but entrées were snoozers, and not very well prepared at that.