rockefeller666

Steve KLC & Sandra Levine & Glenn-- You guys have gotten me very intrigued about Graffeo. I can't believe I lived in SF for 27 years and I never once heard about it. Nobody ever talked about it and nobody ever served it to me. But Peet's, Spinelli's, even the defunct Pasqua, all were brought to my attention. Graffeo, neve heard of it. I will get some when I return to SF and try it out. How do you guys like it compared to Peets?

jaybee-- pasqua coffee of the chain that was absorbed by starbucks? that was great coffee. I really liked their coffee. Personally, my favorite coffee is still Peet's. I've never tried Graffeo, though I think that's definitely next on my list when I return to SF. I've tried multiple, expensive Kona blends when I was out in Hawaii, but I was not impressed at all. Surprisingly, Agata & Valentina on 79th & 1st has great french roast that's very reasonable: $5.99/lb. It's actually really good.

phaelon-- I am a huge coffee drinker, and I checked out your site of coffeegeek.com. Unfortunately, it's all machines. They don't really rate different beans from different suppliers, or do they? I couldn't find any. Personally, I don't own an espresso machine. I don't want to deal with the cleaning, the hassle and the expense. I own a plain old drip filter (cone #4) coffee filter which was given to me free for ordering a 1lb bag of Gevalia coffee (which I do not like). But when I throw in some great beans (like Peet's), the coffee that comes out of that little piece of plastic is amazing. It blows away 95% of the coffee I can get at most restaurnats & coffee houses. Personally, I really think the beans are the biggest difference. Yes, water & equipment matter, but not as much as the beans. You can buy a $500 espresso machine and use $5 bottled water, but if you've got maxwell house in there, you ain't gonna get good coffee. But anyway, do you know of good sites which rate coffee beans themselves?

Jaybee-- That was very informative. Thank you so much. I'll hold off on buying for now unless your opinion changes. I do like Peet's personally, though I still need to try Graffeo. It's funny that I've never even heard of the beans, being a San Francisco native. I have heard of the roastery itself, but I've never bought beans from Graffeo nor have I ever drunk any of their coffee. Most of the time that I see the roastery Graffeo, it's always on one of those shows for tourists--thrown in with Alcatraz & cable cars--so I've never really paid attention to Graffeo. But if you think it's good, perhaps when I go back home next time, I'll give it a shot.

glenn-- what is graffeo and where can I get it? Is it a brand of coffee?

Jaybee & Glenn-- So what is the word with the meinl? Thumbs up or thumbs down? Give us your opinion? Should I go out and buy some meinl? I was thinking about it. I personally like great coffee, just the plain old filtered stuff. I don't make espresso, nor do I have a desire to. I love Peet's coffee; I prefer the dark, rich, bitter taste of it. So do you think meinl matches up to the Peet's (or is better)? If you do, i'll go get some.

peter b wolf-- I agree with you wholeheartedly. There have been times on which I've reported about coffee--and how it sucked--and others would chime in with their espresso experiences. I don't think there is any comparison, and they should be discussed separately. Plain old filter coffee is highly highly variable from place to place/bean to bean/maker to maker. But espresso is much more constant relatively. Sometimes I notice some espresso that sucks, but for the most part, espresso tastes quite the same to me.

Jaybee-- That's very interesting that you thought the Cafe Sabarsky coffee not strong enough. I have been a long time complainer of New York coffee, and I actually thought Cafe Sabarsky coffee quite good. That's very interesting, since this whole meinl thread is based off that Sabarsky one. But if you don't think it's strong enough, then perhaps it's not all that it's cracked up to be. I have a question regarding the comparison. Have you ever tried Peet's coffee? What do you think of the meinl compared to the Peet's? Do you think it's worth ordering?

okay guys, start brewing! you're keeping us in suspense!!!!

Wilfrid-- I think it's great that you've totally broached this subject and have brought it out into the open. This was something that I had hinted at in an earlier post sometime ago in the "Montrachet" thread. That you had dined alone at times was something that I had inferred from some of your posts, but it certainly wasn't something that you'd openly complained about (getting rebuked as a solo diner, that is). But as I had stated earlier, I think it's great to eat alone. In many ways, not wanting to eat alone has prevented me from certain dining experiences which I wish I could have had. The reasons I think dining alone is preferable are: 1) So many people don't want to spend so much money on food. I'll easily drop $30-$45 for lunch at JoJo, Nougatine, or Bouley (and I'm NOT rich) whereas most of my friends wouldn't dream of spending more than a couple of bucks for chinese takeout or pizza. Most people won't go to Daniel for dinner when they can go to the local pasta joint. 2) The only way to get these aforementioned people to go to these places is to have them save up for a "special" occasion. Then, of course, the whole time, they're complaining about the money they're spending. They say it's such a waste and they could have spend $10 on linguine instead. Of course, that totally ruins your meal. It's so painful. 3) Finance the other people's food. Of course, I can't afford to do this very much, but once in a while it's okay. But for the most part, you're paying double for what you'd generally eat as a single person. So for the above reasons, I think that dining alone is just better sometimes. Sure, it's nice to be with a big group in a festive family style restaurant, but sometimes it's also nice to have a great meal by yourself and really enjoy the money that you're spending. Good for you Wilfrid!

Suvir-- Just wondering what your opinion is on Banjara, on 6th & 1st. I've personally felt that it is a wonderful place, just shy of Tamarind quality, but still reasonably priced. If you've been there, I was wondering what you thought of the place.

Had lunch today at Bouley. It was outstanding, absolutely outstanding. It was almost a steal at $35. Absolutely a steal. Anybody who can take time off for lunch, definitely get this 5-course lunch at Bouley. The menu is on the internet. It's definitely a $60 meal at $35. Amazing lunch. Service was absolutely impeccable. Absolutely impeccable. It is a fantastic place. One of the best meals I've ever had in New York.

We had dinner last night at Balthazar. It was actually quite good. I've ready many reviews which stated that the quality of the food was slipping and that the service was poor. We found the food quite delicious and the service very reasoanble. My compatriots & I skipped any appetizer since we had wolfed down a couple handfuls of peanuts & the cheese bread at the bar (one guy even ate one of those hard boiled eggs). I had the duck confit prepared with mushrooms & crisped potatoes. It was quite excellent. It was juicy on the inside, perfectly crisp on the outside. It was just like I had had it in France. The mushrooms, the accompanying sauce, the greens, and the crisp potatoes all perfectly complemented each other. It was truly one of the best dishes I had had in a long time; it was certainly better than the lamb shank I had had at Montrachet. My compatriots both had the Mahi mahi (don't ask me why the two of them come to a French restaurant & order Hawaiian fish), which was quite good--tender, succulent, but not particularly flavorful. For desserts, the 3 of us split two: the creme brulee and the warm chocolate cake with the white chocolate ice cream. Both desserts were outstanding. I actually had had the creme brulee at Balthazar before, and it was better this time. The creme consistency was perfect--not too hard nor too soft--and the shell was perfectly done, just crisp enough with a touch of cinnamon. It rivaled the best creme brulee I had ever had at this small french bistro in Farmington, CT. The warm chocolate cake was extremely well done, and the the ice cream complemented the dessert perfectly. While these weren't he most "imaginative" or "nouveau" desserts, they were extremely well done. And they had to be, given that they were such common findings in many restaurants; they couldn't just rely on novelty of fusion of flavors or the like to make them good desserts. When we bit into these desserts, we said, "Wow, these are delicious." Overall, just outstanding desserts. The unfortunate thing was the coffee. And this is something I and many San Francisco transplants have noticed: New York coffee just sucks. I mean, the balthazar coffee wasn't "okay," or "decent," or "unremarkable,"; it was really BAD. It sucked. It was horrible. Being an American, I never appreciated it when an Italian woman called American coffee, "dirty water." But now I can; this coffee was "dirty water." You're having this wonderful meal, and they pour you a cup of bad coffee. It's the equivalent of putting cheap polyester into the seats of a Mercedes S-class, or framing a Picasso with a high school kid's woodshop project, or wearing a Canali tuxedo with cheap, black basketball sneakers. It's something I still just don't get about New York; why can't they make good coffee? And Balthazar is a French place! (I personally still think the best coffee I've had here in New York is at Cafe Sabarsky). But I've found mediocre coffee at Le Bernardin & even Daniel. New York just has awful coffee, and I simply can't explain why. Not only is there restaurant market which is incredibly competitive but there is also such a huge European influence here. Universally, every single San Franciscan who has come here has indepedently, without being prompted, asked me, "How come the coffee in New York is so bad? Do you know where I can get a good cup of coffee?" And, unfortunately, I reply, "Sorry, I think Starbucks is the best you're gonna get in this town." Anyway, coffee aside, I was thoroughly impressed overall with the meal at Balthazar. It still has its luster, and I still think it's a wonderful restaurant.

Sandra-- That is incredible. I am goign to go buy some Peet's tomorrow.

Steven-- Just out of curiosity. Where will your trip end? Are you going as far west as California? San Francisco?

Thanks for your replies. They add good perspective on the Le Bernardin experience. While I don't dispute the quality of food at all--Le Bernardin truly is an outstanding restaurant--I wish they gave more. I too don't like to eat until I'm stuffed; it usually happens because the food is so good, I can't help myself. But at the same time, I don't like to walk away from a table hungry, especially after dropping $150. It's just not right. And if you read the reviews on NYCitysearch, I'm not the only person who left the restaurant hungry. I avoided eating much bread, since I was anticipating better dishes. I am a man, not huge (170lbs), but I eat a lot for my weight. So while I'm not a sumo wrestler, I'm an average sized man who left this restaurant hungry. I will say that quantity aside, Daniel has the edge in quality. The halibut I had was basically a truffle/butter-based sauce with asparagus puree which was very flavorful, but not particularly interesting. At Daniel, I had some fish with truffles that just blew me away. The desserts at Le Bernardin was quite tasty, high quality without a doubt. But the desserts at Daniel were amazing. So all in all, I would say just spend the money at Daniel.

Well, I finished dining at Le Bernardin tonight. We had the $79 prix fixe menu. We had a nice white burgundy to drink, which was very good. The amuse bouche (sp?) consisted of a sauteed shrimp in this wonderful asian sauce. Absolutely terrific. No question. I started with a progressive tastings of fluke. They were raw pieces of fluke, arranged in marinades consisting of lemony-type stuff to an asian spiced full bodied dressing. It was wonderful. Absolutely wonderful. I then had the halibut with an asparagus puree, covered in a black truffle/lentil sauce. It was great. Really good food. No question, the quality was outstanding. For dessert, I had the pinapple surrounding a pana cotta mount, topped with a crisp shell, some raspberry sorbet and a raspberry sauce. It too was excellent. We finished with some petit fours (sp?), which were quite good. Overall, the quality of the food is outstanding. I will say, it's 11:37pm, I just finished inner around 10:40pm, and I'm hungry. I really am hungry. Not just un-stuffed, but I'm actually hungry. If you threw a slice in front of me now, I'd wolf it down. The quantity of food was just so small. I was reading NYCitysearch, and there was this guy who said he bought pizza after a meal there. I thought he was just one bitter dude. But he's right. He's 100% right. I'm really hungry. To drop $150/person for dinner and be hungry is just morally egregious. I could have eaten at Curry in a Hurry for $8 and be more full with a delicious meal. I will say that the quality of stuff at Le Bernardin was quite high. But I personally think Daniel is better. I also left Daniel stuffed beyond belief. There was so much food, I could barely walk afterwards. And the food was so good, that I wanted to keep eating it. Le Bernardin, a NYTimes 4-star restaurant, is simply not worth the money. It is the proverbial french place which overcharges for very little food. The food was very good--not as good as Daniel--but just totally not enough. Daniel is only $6 more, so if you're going to drop that kind of money, go to Daniel. I remember eating at a Michelin 3-star restaurant in France (3 stars is the highest michelin rating), and I dropped $120/person with wine. I was so stuffed that I had to run the next day and barely eat anything just to burn off the calories. Daniel is similar. Le Bernardin is simply not worth the money. $8 for curry in a hurry or $80 for Le Bernardin; the choice is clear, curry in a hurry is almost as tasty, more filling, and better value.

This is what I thought of the desserts... (I was just there after the NYTimes review came out). We tried 4 desserts, one of which was not on the menu: the hazelnut/chocolate torte, the Linzer torte, the chocolate torte, and the peach torte topped with crumbs. This Klimt torte, "neatly stacked layers of hazelnut cake alternating with firm, bittersweet chocolate," deserved in Grimes' opinion, "classic status." It was okay, nothing great. Nothing to write home about. I didn't say, as I had when eating other REALLY good deserts, "You MUST try this; this is so good." No, it was just okay. The linzer torte which Grimes' described as, "flawless," was bland, unflavorful, and seemed like it had been sitting in the fridge for a few days. It was like one of those raspberry tarts you buy from Safeway in a box. I left half of it to be taken away with our dishes. The best dessert, but still not amazing, was the one not on the menu: the peach torte with crumb topping. It was sort of like a cobbler, though cold. But it was decent enough.

Here is an excerpt from my post on on the NYTimes.com.... Grimes then went on to say that the coffee was, "the best coffee in the city: rich, robust and deep." On this point, I will agree with him 100%. It was perhaps the BEST coffee I've ever had anywhere. It blows away Peet's by a mile, an absolute mile. It was the best coffee I've ever drunk, europe or america. It really is outstanding, and I wish more places would be like Cafe Sabarsky's coffee. It is, however, $4-5 a cup. But it's so good, I think it's worth probably worth it. Truly outstanding coffee.

Thanks for the info. I was dying to try Sparks. I will keep it in mind. I've been to smith & wollensky's twice, and it was great both times. Ben Benson's has also been fantastic. MarkJoseph is supposedly the new hit now too.

Hi-- All this talk of the "new bouley." Can somebody tell me the basics? Isn't it Bouley Bakery? Or is there something even newer? Thanks.

Beachfan-- I saw you said you had wine from your own cellar. Does this mean that Tasting Room lets you bring in your own bottle of wine, like in California? If they do, can you do it during any meal or did you have to make a special request? Also, how much was the corkage? Thanks.

Hey Steven... More pictures!!!!!!