Marlyn4k
-
Posts
102 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by Marlyn4k
-
-
It's no so much the list that I like/don't like or agree with/disagree with but the research in the narratives by Joe Warwick, along with the other informative sub-articles in the piece. Without wanting to advertise the magazine, you really need to see the article to appreciate the effort...
Someone say something about Thomas Keller? Did he not spend time in a number of Parisian 3 star kitchens? Although english peas? Please.
-
I wasn't up late....I'm in Barbados and so 5 hours behind the clock....surfing on the hotel's free broadband access.
Went to "Tides" last night - less fashionable than The Cliff or Lone Star but very very good and a relative bargain. The chef/patron is an englishman by the name of Guy Beasley, who came out for a chat and said his last stint in the UK was 3 years with the Rouxs back at the turn of the decade before last (when Ramsay was a nipper in Albert's kithcen).
Sorry nothing to do with Tom Aikens....
-
hmmm avant-garde or post-modern art deco?
The taste and texture combinations occasionally bewilder my palette (except the amuses)....more through composition "on speed" than cooking process, although the latter, at times, distinctively avant-garde.
Which reminds me...next time I'm in I must pinch a mother-of-pearl spoon!
-
The October 13th Issue of Restaurant Magazine has a lead article ranking the top 20 chefs of all time. Chef's are marked out of 5 for influence, innovation, success and longevity with a total mark out of 20.
The piece is by Joe Warwick. Regardless of whether you might agree or disagree with the ranking (and those included or excluded) it is extremely well researched, well written and full of interesting comment.
I much prefer this list to the highly publicised World's Top 50 Restaurants - which had some very strange 'celeb focused' inclusions.
The article also mentions as nearly but not quite - Alain Chapel, Michel Guerard, Thomas Keller, Heston Blumenthal, Pierre Gagnaire and a few others. There are some sub-articles like 'one dish wonders' - chefs remembered for one particular dish. Biographies of Peng Zu, Brillat-Savarin and Marcus Apicius and a summary of various authors.
The top 20 are:-
1) Marie-Antoine Careme
2) Auguste Escoffier
3) Alain Ducasse
4) Fernand Point
5) Joel Robouchon
6) Alice Waters
7) Ferran Adria
8) Paul Bocuse
9) Fredy Girardet
10) Marc Veyrat
11) Marco Pierre White
12) Wolgang Puck
13) Michel Roux
14) Alexandre Dumaine
15) Alexis Soyer
16) Adolphe Duglere
17) Andre Pic
18) Charles Ranhofer
19) Jean Banchet
20) Gualtiero Marchesi
-
Roussillon have finally got round to a producing a decent website...
-
It's a futile exercise to judge a broadsheet critic by criteria such as "How do they review and evaluate the food and the cooking process" as it is not a criterion they set for themselves (nor set for them by their editors.)
The critics' job is to assist in selling newspapers and the approach desired by eGulleteers would be considered far too dry for a mainstream audience. The days of informative critical journalism - like informative television - are long gone. It's about personalities, angles and entertainment.
Jay Rayner has been open and honest aboput this on various threads and yet we continue to condemn a critic (VL-S) who probably fits the mainstream for his role.
One should therefore read them with different expectations. My only gripe is when factual inaccuracies are quoted as part of a condemnation. The restaurant has no come back but a dignified silence. In the on-line age, might it not be more equitable for the broadsheets to offer a 500 word right of reply to restaurants to be posted alongside the offending piece within 7 days of its publication. This would further entertain the audience and keep some of the more imaginative (or under-researched) critics honest.
-
So what was the end result of this rumpus...did Shepherd go through with it? Did he win? Are critics liable if they are factually inaccurate causing loss of income?
-
Well the sylvia somebody was actually Caroline Stacey...pleasant little review.
And Jan Moir...a massacre - she even went back for a second try to attempt to be positive; in the end reads like an obitury. Very sad.
-
I've no grudges against the place...will go back some time and with an open mind...would definately ask for a window table in advance...
Would you mind if I published the above as a counter balance on Thymusgland alongside our review of Putney Bridge?
We all have our favourites and I know I react personally to some restaurant criticism (Foliage or Waterside in particular!)
-
Spoke to caterer on-line about the National Chef of the Year Award 2004 - third place was Nick Vardis of British Airways, second was Ian Morgan of King's Manchester and the winner - Steve Love, Love's Leamington Spa - ex Roux scholar and a great guy - just back from honeymoon with Claire as well.
Well done Steve!
-
Foliage promoted to 5 rosettes...yep! Always backed 'em. 8/10 in GFG and two stars to come...
-
And who won the National Chef of the Year competition, and for that matter who were the finalists, was there a 1/2/3 or just first prize? I saw the list of 37 semi finalists on the Craft Guild of Chefs site http://www.craft-guild.org/competitionpage...of%20the%20Year
I was supporting Steve Love...called them today (Love's Leamington Spa) and their answer machine was really 'sweet' - sorry we're closed as Steve's competing in the National Chef of The Year final today
-
Hi
Had dinner at L'ortolan last night...£29 three course set. They showed me their 2 page spread in caterer, I had already seen the bit in restaurant magazine.
They tell me that Jan Moir and Sylvia somebody from the independent both ate (separately) there in the last week...
-
Disappointed by this review. Don't think enough thought or effort went into the writing nor enough notes made during the experience...resulting in falling between two stalls - neither informative nor entertaining.
-
Well I only had to look up about 5 words so compares favourably with Jonathan Meades (what the hell was he ever talking about?).
Before Judging in haste I await a top end restaurant review, perhaps Victor's command of the language will stretch to vivid descriptions of taste/texture/technique and genuine appraisal.
However describing the 'experience' is also of merit as no doubt the majority of customers judge their value for money based on the experience rather than the fineries of technique.
-
We had a chat with Alan afterwards and he said that Michelin had been in contact to find out when they were opening etc, he thought that they would make up their minds by November (??) so was hopeful to keep it partly on past track record.
He had apparantly been in negotiation with the owner of the building since January - the menu was cheaper than when he left and contained some of his old stalwart dishes. Part of the reason for his leaving originally was because the owner (internet millionaire) was enforcing 7 days a week opening and pushing the prices up. The deal he's negotiated is effectively a lease so he has overall control of everything about the restaurant along with his busioness partner Abbey (ex Manoir - looks after front of house).
-
At last L'Ortolan has reopened and sure enough Alan Murchison is back in the kitchen. Went for lunch today - 3 courses for £21, they do a three courses for dinner £29 as well.
Had the set lunch, there were a few items with supplements - tasting plate of duck starter £5 supplement, an a la carte Lamb dish £10 and sorbets £5.
I was pleasantly surprised that at £21 there were canapes - spiced aubergine mousse with dipping toast (but yuk), a pork based nibble and something else which I forget.
The amuse was a cup of flavoursome and comforting sweet potato soup
Started with the duck tasting plate which consited of confit, topped with foie gras (terrine) rounded off with foie gras jelly, brioche on the side; on the other side of the plate were slithers of smoked duck on top of some pickled cabbage and in between some cinnamon spiced cherries. A rich dish indeed - reminded me of something I once ate at Pied a terre.
Main course was a generous mound of untuous braised lamb shoulder on a bed of crushed garlic potato, can't remember the what the bits and pieces of other vegetables were that bathed in some broth. Again quite rich and big on quantity.
A pre pud of lemon creme brulee.
To round it off came a large chololate souffle with pistachio ice cream.
The chocolates included a chocolate covered sorbet, a maccaroon and a couple of others.
Found a red 200 Lirac for £24 that was fiarly light but eminently drinkable.
If Alan has not come back too late I'm sure the Michelin Star is safe - clinical cooking, generous portions, not over complicated nor over ambitious - does what he does very well. Clean flavours, natural combinations and no fuss.
-
And how was the Waterside?
-
Suzi
You have to guess which one you can afford...or be safe and say white non vintage.
The lamb - presented in a fan - had a sauce with morels, new potatoes and sweetbreads. We were told afterwards about the detail of marination process and the impact that this was designed to have on the flavour of the lamb - I had not noticed because of the sauce which accompanied the dish. It was not a dish of separate components on a plate, each having clean distinct flavours that balanced each other nor designed for interersting contrasts in textures. (This is an observation and not a criticism) The lifting and enhancing of the lamb was done (for me) by the sauce rather than me being aware of the flavour benefit of the marination process....the end result was very enjoyable and generous, no complaints.
-
Went to Pearl last night, having not eaten at QC I couldn't comment on the change to the decor but the end product is pretty impressive. Interesting tables with a built in light that shines through the centre from underneath: pretty but not ideal for reading menus. Apart from the larger than life chandeliers very little other lighting from above.
Had the three course a la carte at 42.50, they were actually quite busy for a Tuesday night and the atmosphere in the large marbled space was much better than expected from AA Gill's review.
No canapes
Amuse: Tomato consomme with a cucumber sorbet on the side. Very good, refreshing clean flavours that lingered and lingered. Worked well together.
Similar concept for pre-pud (there was one) which was a blueberry 'soup' with a yoghurt sorbet. Less successful, partly because I found blueberry to be an uninteresting flavour.
First Course: Pan Fried Foie Gras with beetroot tart tatin. Very generous slab of foie gras, not so keen on the beetroot tart tatin, the thin slivers of beetroot were lost in the excessive amount of pastry and added little to the foie gras for me.
Main Course: Three fish, duck, lamb or veal - maybe a bit limited in choice. I chose Lamb, sweetbreads, new potatoes, morels etc. The lamb had been marinated to tenderise plus lift and enhance the natural flavours of the meat. The sum of the parts was a hearty, earthy and gutsy dish which made that degree of prep out of place, that said I thoroughly enjoyed it. My fellow diner's fan of magret duck was almost retro save such detail of the confit being delivered in a spring role, again generous portions, wholeheartedley enjoyed.
Cheese: Shared a plate, thought they were good, well described etc Minor grumble, too few strong cheeses (munster only one really).
Pudding: Too full and asked for sorbets, disappointed to get Strawberry and Blueberry; I never like the former as the natural flavour doesn't seem to fit well with sorbet and I always feel I'm tasteing the syrup; the latter as is a bit non descript in the first place. There were far more interesting sorbets/ice creams used across the pudding menu that could have been presented. The puddings did actually read well, perhaps a tanaka metier that I missed out on?
Coffee and Sweets; Coffee not included and sweets only arrived after we had finished coffee. They were late but good.
Wine List: Too big, jungle. 330 different wines, 1440 bottles stored, heavyweights by the glass dominating the opening pages. A long list in every respect; wines from Lebanon, Argentina, New Zealand, Chile, Canada and everywhere else. When it boils down to it I found few choices under £40 that the average wine drinker (me) could feel confident about. Nor keen on the wheel up the champagne trolley upon arrival with 4 choices, forcing the customer to say white non vintage and feel like a cheap skate (seems common practice these days).
Service: Good, found it had a happy balance between formal and friendly, especially the french sommelier. Had to ask for wine glass to be topped up once and given the wrong bill but minor grumble.
Summary: Jun Tanaka must have cooked in more starred kitchens than anyone else out there...Gavroche, Square, Capital, Restaurant MPW, Oak Room, Nico at ninety etc but not obvious where his inspriations came from when eating his food. The Pearl web site: "Jun believes that ingredients should not be masked and over complicated, but enhanced to bring out their natural flavours, producing a clean and distinct taste." The amuse and pre pud aside I didn't see this...but what I had I liked enough to want to go again. And given the full wine list is now published on the Pearl site some pre prep is possible. They said the menu is changing soon to reflect the season, I may like the main course choice better then.
Total Bill: £88 per head including £45 bottle of medoc plus a glass of white (£7.50)
-
Take any old chef from a top end restaurant kitchen and what could he tell you blindfolded?
The difference between duck and goose foie gras
Whether the lobster had been plucked straight from the tank
Whether hand dived or dredged scallop
Line caught or pair trawled sea bass
The difference reflects on cost, quality and in turn price to customer.
The chef could go on to explain, for any given dish, what was involved in the creation and the degree of difficulty in execution through the cooking process.
Should we expect broadsheet critics to have an in depth knowledge and appreciation of these matters? Or is it a case of packaging some 'infotainment' around an assessment of the end product compared to previous end product experiences? or should we expect more?
As one example, should the role of the critic expand to why we ought to appreciate what is in front of us more than we otherwise might?
-
Tony
You managed to survive the psychedelic journey up the stairs to the padded cell then....heaven forbid a comfort break
-
The last time I went was early April...and in fact the only reason I haven't been back since was the quality of wines that came with the Grazing menu...on each of the four occassions I really didn't think they were good at all.
I also agree with the lack of standard French wines on offer (as at that time)
-
Went to 1880 four times in eight weeks earlier in the year, having been a big fan of Andrew Turner at 1837.
Likes:-
Grazing menus (fab as ever)
Tables well spaced and large
Conor O'Leary (Hi Conor) and Elizabeth Valls, the latter being kind enough to pamper my ego by remembering me from 1837
Grandeur of setting (Ok Vagasesque ostentation but adds to the sense of occasion).
Dis-Likes:-
Wine list - many wines not good enough, not enough selection by the glass, some mark-ups too high. (The 1837 policy with wines by the glass was stand -out good and Benoit Gueret was a charming Sommelier)
Aggressive pouring water/wine.
Basement setting makes appropriate lighting difficult
Must be close to a Michelin Star in January and I'd guess 6/10 in next month's 2005 GFG (which is one better than 1837 received).
Merchant House/Hibiscus
in United Kingdom & Ireland: Dining
Posted
Reading the post doesn't lead me to question "motive" as it reads like the stream of consciousness (not quite tirade) of someone who is genuinely upset. If Pweaver1984 wanted 'revenge' then a more calculating approach would be factual/reasoned piece to each of the guides. Instead he shares his feelings (and that's what they are - emotions) with eGullet.
Equally I understand Andy's initial response - a forum host must feel vicariously responsible for the content of posters. Andy has inteviewed these people and may in turn become somewhat emotional when he sees a rant about them.
Doesn't make either a bad person!
When I read PWeavers post I thought - did they feel underdressed, did they feel too young, did they feel intimated? Perhaps they mocked other guests due to insecurities? When you feel insecure you may easily take a misunderstanding personally and blow it out of proportion in your own mind.
The unexplained in the review devalues an important point; front of house should avoid a confrontation at all costs, and there is always the risk they will be having the dispute with a wider audience. I would advise PWeaver1984 to give Claire a call with an open mind and positive attitude (ie if they did something inappropriate then mention it and apologise) and see the response. Then perhaps we could see a more factual/reasoned piece.