BryanZ

Not that I'm even a huge fan of Chef Kaplan, but her presence should certainly improve the sweet side of things at Del Posto. I think the cuisine and vibe of the restaurant will suit her, too.

Finally, got around to reading the review and agree with the comments (based on this and past reviews) that Bruni is averse to traditional formality. With that and price taken into account one could possibly surmise how Bruni could possibly award three stars to The Bar Room. Still, this seems like a discrete inflation to me. Eleven Madison Park epitomizes a three-star restaurant. As I've stated emphatically, I believe the best of the food is among the absolute best in the city. Still, I feel that they're a bit too big for their own good and perhaps Bruni (and certainly others here) have picked up on this. What happens with their pastry department will also be interesting over the next few months. I personally would like to see more desserts analagous to Chef Humm's cooking than Chef Kaplan's. I found the first smacks at GT somewhat inappropriate. However, Bruni clearly needed a theme to link this review together so why not call up the other USHG big guns. While Danny Meyer isn't in all the restaurants all the time, USHG still serves to link them together. The fact that they serve very different cuisines and have very different energies is irrelevant to the review as Bruni sees it, and I kind of agree with him. Bruni's remarks at the end, suggesting that the new upstarts have overthrown the storied powerhouses, was applicable, and I think illuminating to the larger dining public who still consider GT and USC among the best restaurants in the city. Bruni's comments don't change the fact that both restaurants are and will remain dining institutions, but do encourage people to perhaps look elsewhere. That's not really a bad thing.

Considering I haven't read the review yet, this post may be pointless. With that said, I think FG is right in that it does somewhat cheapen Chef Humm's awesomeness to give three-stars to The Bar Room, too. The Bar Room is not a three-star experience, but rather a very chic two-star one. Still, given my preferences and assumptions, I would've predicted that Bruni would have given The Bar Room one star as opposed to three.. I'll try to find time to read the review and make worthwhile commentary soon. As others have alluded to, I'd say this is Bruni pulling the trigger about as much as he could have.

Those look like wonderful, beautiful, delicious plates.

Both of those look great, Ling and John. My question, however, is how Chef Chang keeps his so moist. It really seems closer to a semi-braise then a straight up roast.

I agree completely. ← I actually disagree here. This doesn't really pertain to the fine-dining aspect of this thread, but I'm living this life right now, in 2007, and I will say you do have to know where to go. While it's certainly harder to procure alcohol in NC, where I go to school, it's not like I can waltz into any quickmart or liquor store in the city and buy alcohol. Most everywhere I know will card, and it all comes down to how much they scrutinize IDs. Personally I don't have a fake ID, though I'm about the only of my friends who doesn't, probably because I'd rather spend my $20 on a glass of wine at dinner than on a handle of Smirnoff to get ripped on. I know of stores and bars where you can get stuff without being carded, but at least for me these locations aren't exactly widespread and must be sought out. But then again, maybe I'm not cool enough. When hanging out at NYU over the summer with friends in those dorms, I'm not one of the literally hundreds of underage kids who get into clubs using really, really cheesy fake IDs. I think NYC may have become more strict with underage drinking in recent years, and perhaps for good reason. Thankfully, from my perspective, this trend hasn't yet reached fine-dining restaurants, and I don't think it will. As long as large groups of kids keep getting into trouble at clubs and liquor stores, as others have said, there are more important things to worry about than the occasional glass at a fine-dining restaurant.

Joined eatmywords and Nathan at Perry St. for lunch today. This was my second time at Perry St. and first visit since they implemented the three-course $24 lunch. It is indeed a great deal, but I'm not necessarily sure if it's a better deal that Jean-Georges, the flagship. Perry St. is more casual, easier to eat at, you don't need a reservation, and more "chill," but I think I still prefer the fine dining feel. In terms of perceived value, they're very close; it really comes down to preference. As others have reported, the amuse right now is sunchoke soup with a bit of truffle puree. Not exactly all that technically exciting but it was smooth, tasty, and ill-fitting for the bizzare 65 degree day we had today. Other than that, you can't really go wrong; I don't blame Perry St. for not predicting the weather. Anyway, I had the chicken poached, roasted, with crispy skin and brussel sprouts for my first course. A very solid dish with bold but simple flavors. This isn't really haute cuisine, nor is it trying to be. I have certainly had individual poached and roasted chicken dishes that were better than this, but on the whole, the dish the really worked. I like to think of this as the type of food JG might cook for friends. I also was able to sample the crusted tuna and the barley risotto with dried cherries. The crusted tuna is better than it should be and actually surpassed my expectations. The risotto was nice and comforting in a modern kind of way--I especially liked the dried cherries--but was only risotto. I've not been blown away by a risotto yet. For mains, four out of five diners had the tenderloin, probably because Nathan talked it up so much. While I won't say it's one of the best beef dishes in the city right now--I don't eat enough beef in places like this to know--I will say it is an incredibly complex one. The tenderloin it self is merely a grilled tenderloin but the broth that is poured atop it is incredibly rich and salty. By salty, I don't mean overly-salted but rather dark and complex, as if salt could be caramelized. The butternut squash ravioli is also incredibly complex, picking up super-caramelized flavors, taking it way beyond sweet into salty pleasantly bitter. The chanterelles were actually the lightest aspect of the dish. In the end, this is a beef dish for adults (not that very many children eat here, but you get my drift). I had one bite of the black bass in a truffle broth with mashed potatoes and frites. After the beef dish, this creamy, starchy, truffley fish dish seemed light. Anyway, it was delicious, especially the broth. Similarly to many of the fish dishes at JG proper, the sauce really elevated it. I thought the desserts were a little bit underwhelming, perhaps because there were only two real options, in addition to a collection of sorbets. The pear crumble was effectively a freestanding pear tart and while fine, was overpowered by rosemary. I'm not a huge rosemary fan and if I was pairing pear with an herb somewhat similar, I would've turned to thyme. I really enjoyed Nathan's apple glace, as it really blended the line between clean sorbet and rich ice cream, exactly as it should have. eatmywords' lovely girlfriend, whom I've now had the pleasure to meet twice, noted that some of the food might have been too salty. While I can see this as a valid complaint, I had no problems with the seasoning. While I'd imagine my mother would have agreed on the seasoning front--my roasted chicken was literally coated in coarse black pepper, the skin component with visible flakes of salt--I see this as JG's take on modern bistro cooking. Although JoJo may have been his baby, it is Perry St. where his current food takes on simpler form. In doing so, JG's tendency to rely heavily on spices comes through in an assertive fashion, perhaps bordering on unpleasant for some. With that said, none of us tried any of the lighter dishes such as the sashimi or lighter fish courses, so perhaps this is only present in the lower-half of the menu. Regardless, a very enjoyable meal for a fair price. If I lived in the city, I'd go a lot, probably more than JG proper. Since I commute and have to plan my meals anyway, I might still prefer the Columbus Circle restaurant. To each his own, both a great bets.

I was back at JG for lunch on Tuesday with my mother and sister. It was their Christmas present from me. I'm very giving, I know. Anyway, things were nice as always. Although I preferred the hamachi in the previous amuse to the cured salmon in this one, a poblano foam draped over a slice of pinapple was totally delicious and unexpected. I had the foie, as always. Also got the scallops, snapper crusted in nuts with sweet and sour mushroom broth, and the turbot with chateau chalon sauce as first courses among us. I just wrote about the scallops and foie. Well actually I didn't write much, but not a lot changed in 13 or so days since my last visit. I had never had the snapper before, and I think this was the first time I'd had the turbot. Anyway, both dishes were excellent. JG is a sauce man and here it showed. The turbot was actually surprisingly firm but that chateau chalon sauce is totally insane. Does anyone know how to make it? I looked online to little success. It was the sauce, too, that made the snapper, not the crust. Although it added a bit of texture and complexity to the dish, it was the broth that again made the dish excellent. Heirloom tomatoes added further bursts of acidity. I highly recommend those dishes, probably more so than the escolar that I had on my last visit. The mains were actually a little bit disappointing, especially in comparison to the first courses. We had the grilled sweetbreads, lobster, and signature quail dish. The sweetbreads were fine, but not great. I would've like them crispier and less pasty. The lemon "puree" they were served with was very, very interesting. It would've been at home on a wd~50 menu to be sure. The lobster I had sampled on a visit a while ago was worth the $5 supplement to be sure, but this lobster dish was merely good. The quality of the lobster wasn't all that great, but it did have a very nicely spiced, apple-y sauce that I really enjoyed. My mother, however, didn't really appreciate the sauce, as she thought it overpowered the lobster. I'm pretty sure the quail has been on the menu since forever and it's still a good dish, but I actually prefer quail in simpler presentations. In this dish and in the lobster dish, the spices tended to overwhelm rather than complement the star of the dish. If I have one technical criticism of JG's cooking, it is this. Regardless, another enjoyable meal that helped me on my way to financial ruin. Lunch for one may be cheap, but for three, with drinks, it is not.

I should really just STFU. I hope it's a cute picture.

I've been to the main Red Lobster in Times Square many times, and for my last birthday some friends took me to Otto Enoteca. So, the answer is "no," then? At the risk of sounding like a total douche (which many people probably think I am anyway, so no real loss there), I honestly thought markk's post was a joke. Please tell me it is. I'm sorry to say you're going to have to stop eating out in the city. At least you'll have your moral high ground. ETA: That HAS to be a joke. You people are with me on this, right?

The former, the former!

Mayur, that was a nicely articulated post. In regards to the smoking question, that's not really on-topic at all, but I'll run with it anyway. As Sneakeater said, there hasn't been precedence for lighting up in fine-dining restaurants since I've been dining out. In effect it's not a widely occuring practice as pouring wine is. With that said, I consider the two things (wine v. smoking) completely different . Some old-guard libertarian who's been dining out for decades might believe otherwise, but he likely patronizes establishments where they do look the other way, and that's fine. If a restaurant becomes known for being a place where cigar smoking or hookah or other types of smoking are commonplace, even if technically prohibited under the law, that's fine with me. This type of establishment is not the fine-dining restaurant we've been discussing here. Additionally, removing the enforcement of the law by police officers, federal agents, etc, smoking presents a much more real annoyance to other diners in the restaurant. Yes, by serving an underage diner alcohol the "parade of terribles" could be unleashed ultimately leading to the end of the end of the human race. I admit, it's possible, though pretty unlikely. As soon as someone lights up a cigarette, much less a cigar or a joint or starts taking bong rips, the dining experience for other paying customers can be severely diminished. This is an incursion on the right of others to enjoy their meal and should be confronted by management. In fact, I'm of the camp who thinks that managers have the right to speak with overly boisterous or "intimate" parties. I don't envy the staff's position in these circumstances, but to me this type of behavior posts a much more real threat and annoyance to the experience of others.

Ilan's, Betty's, and Sam's attacks on Marcel were disgusting. There's never the need to be so immature and inappropriate with another individual. One-on-one confrontation or debate is fine to an extent, but it was not as if Marcel actively sought to bring them down. Let him think that his ideas are better than yours, it's not hurting you. Thankfully Elia and Michael generally stay quiet. Cliff seemed restrained after the debacle with Mia. Marcel, your foams are useless. This is coming from someone who loves, makes, and serves them.

A couple weeks in advance you'll be fine. There are really only two difficult tables to book in NYC, Per Se and Babbo (I'm not sure about Atelier and Ramsay now). Other than that, with a couple week's at most notice you'll be fine.

It wasn't at all lackluster. I really enjoyed it. It just wasn't awesome. It met my expectations but didn't surpass them. $12 on the char, $17 on the egg/lobster.

Had a quick lunch at The Bar Room yesteray. This restaurant maintains its buzz to it and seems to be the most "exciting" of the USHG restaurants. Exciting not necessarily in the food but in terms of the energy of the space--and a different type of excitement than say the Tavern Room at Gramercy Tavern. The waitstaff did a nice job of getting me my two courses and check in hand in 40 minutes, as I had requested. Service, in feel and literal time, was generally brisk across the room. I had the artic char tartare. It was good, but I would've liked a bit more salt. The trout roe added a nice bit salinity, but I would've liked it slightly more aggressively seasoned. I think there was basil oil, too, which added some bitter green notes that helped cut the fatty fish. I liked it a lot but wasn't in love. Next was the poached egg with roasted salsify, uni foam, and lobster. This could have been a great dish but fell just short. Still, it was very tasty, bordering on very good, but the lobster wasn't cooked quite properly or wasn't a great speciment. The flesh was a little stringy in parts and wasn't bursting with lobster-y sweetness.. A very nice dish, though.

As others have said, a great meal. I'm not sure who ate the most, but I think everyone put forth a valiant effort. Not even counting the delicious food and drink, it was a great evening with fun, passionate, and incredibly interesting people. So now with all the perfunctory touchy-feely stuff out of the way, let's talk about the deliciousness. First of all, this not typically the style of dining I do in New York, but rather at school in North Carolina. Strangely, while my friends here have the means to eat out at creative, moderately priced, casual establishments like Ssam, they lack the motivation. It seems I've been missing out on this type of dining experience. As most people know, I spend most of my time in NYC "fine-dining" restaurants. Long story short, and I know I said I'd leave the touchy-feely stuff behind, but I need more eG friends so that I have the opportunity to engage in dining experiences like Ssam more frequently. The above comments are applicable to the dinner menu at Ssam because I feel that i enjoyed the culinary side of the experience so much because I was able to try a wide variety of small items shared among my fellow diners, while also having the opportunity to pig out in the most literal sense. This is kind of like combining the best of both worlds but was only possible through assembling such a large group of adventurous eaters. I must also say that the staff Ssam was very accomodating to our large and rather lively party. This is not to say, however, that Ssam is cheap when you sample as much food as we did. At the end of the night, with drinks, tax, tip, and gratuity, it ended up at $80 p/p, but I felt the quality of food and experience were certainly worth the price. One certainly could order much, much less food than we did and/or go without alcohol and stay below $50 p/p for a meal nearly as good. We felt the need to try (multiple orders of) the chawanmushi with black truffles and uni and the huge steak. Replacing these premium items with more of the pickles, hams, salads, and dozens and dozens and dozens of the banh mi and pork buns would be another alternative. I really loved everything I ate last night and have little, if anything, negative to say. I liken this experience to Upstairs. In both instances you have chefs who certainly know what they're doing, offering modern and novel takes on classic dishes, and are obviously sourcing out great ingredients. For example, the steak was one of the more flavorful pieces of meat I've had in quite a while, and Ssam isn't a steakhouse. Granted, I don't go out for steak all the time, so I'm far from an expert, but I really enjoyed the simply prepared piece of meat. The truffles on the incredibly rich chawan mushi were also of better quality than those served at "fancier" restaurants. Donbert and I suggested that they're cooked in a water bath (in the same way I'm doing creme caramels) or perhaps a super low steam oven to get a super soft and smooth consistency. And the bouchot mussles in the seafood hot pot were plump and flavoful when Chef Chang could have easily sourced less notable specimens. The buns were just delciousness personified. The banh mi, too. The sandwich really embodied the full gamut of textures and flavors from sweet to spicy, creamy to crunch. I seriosuly could've eaten several feet of this sandwich. The whipped tofu with tapioca was really, really cool texturally and directly applicable to my cooking (read: I'm stealing that idea if I can figure out how to execute it). The pork shoulder was so moist, almostly strangely so, and tasty. It seemed as it had been cooked in some sort of miso glaze, as it had a slight fermented soybean taste to it, but the recently published recipe denies the presence of that type of seasoning. Strange. Nonetheless, it was delicious. The oysters were fine, but I'm not sure they added that much to the dish. Ripping the meltingly soft shoulder apart was an enriching experience for body and soul. I know there were rumors that Chef Chang et al would be creating on-the-fly tasting menus for diners on some nights in the future. If so, I'll be among the first to go.

In fact, the more I think about this issue, the more interesting it becomes. Let's look at this from the server's perspective or, better yet, I'll put myself in his shoes. First, if this guy cards everyone in his section under the age of the 30, more power to him. He's risking offending some customers, but that's his perogative and he does have the law on his side. Similarly, if I was in his shoes, I might have done the same thing. Under the assumption he was new--and perhaps he was, as he served people in the same way I do, knowing what to do but lacking the fluidity to make it seamless--I would certainly be carding everyone. My first priority would be to keep my job, then worry about upholding my philosophical beliefs on largely anonymous web boards. After getting around in the industry and really seeing how things work from the other side, I might change my tune. Who knows? I still maintain my perspective from the diner's perspective, given my long list of experiences, and continue to blame the hypocrisy of the industry and of the (lack of) enforcement agents. From a completly selfish standpoint, I'm a fan of how things have worked out in reality so far (ie. don't ask/don't tell), but that's not the point of this disccusiion. Does this take a dump on my credibility, make me a realist or a spinless jellyfish? I'm not sure of the answer to that one either.

Welcome to eG Jennifer. Although this has been covered before, you'll have to forgive me for singling out your post in particular. I'm not sure if you've read the entire thread in detail, but I'm going to take issue with this statement because it is in direct conflict with statements that have already been made quite clearly and convincingly. First of all, no one is really debating that the law exists on paper and people have been punished for breaking it. This isn't the issue. Secondly, my "expectation" was derived from dozens of experiences over several years in the past. These events actually did happen and are directly applicable to the type of establishment we are discussing. These events justly created some sort of expectation that I would be served, since I had been met with 100% success in the past. I still acknowledge the expectation, however, of being denied. As I've noted, I often don't order wine when dining alone because this expectation outweighs the supposedly more insidious one. (I keep going back to the fact that) I don't hold this against the restaurant, but to say my expectation of being served in this type of establishment is pompous is entirely unfair. Since you're from New York City, please humor me. If you crossed the street when it still said "Don't Walk," is this a pompous act? Under your reasoning, yes because it's brazen disregard for the law. Does that make all people who do this pompous? Is all disregard for law (because it is "the law") pompous? If so, I'm proud to fall under that category. For those who have been intelligently engaged in this thread from its inception, I again note that we've covered these topics with great aplomb (love that word). I would simply like to hear the further reasoning of newer parties.

How was the Au Bon Climat with those noodle and lagoustine dishes? That wine is so out of control (in the literal sense) that I'm having a hard time imagining it with two seemingly subtle dishes. To be honest, I can see their chardonnay being paired with those, but even that wine is total madness. Naturally, I've got a bottle in the fridge.

Tomorrow could be a very awkward day on so many levels. I will say that.

Quiche. It will literally change the way you think about quiche forever.

Totally, and as I said, I totally understand the decision. Customers also have the right to not return or leave or tip less or what have you. None these things happened because I still love the restaurant and actually "blame" the server and the inconsistency in the industry in general for any uncomfortableness I may have felt more than the restaurant itself. All I wanted to note was that this was strange and a first for me in NYC. Everything else we've discussed (philosophically, semantically, societally etc) has been amazingly interesting and fun to participate in but not directly associated with the situation I encountered. And I'm cool with that because this is all engrossing stuff.

No, they have a legal obligation to uphold the law. A legal obligation doesn't imply that an action absolutely has to be done. There still exists the freedom of individual choice, and for this I am forever thankful. I have a deep respect for people who apply their own personal judgement to situations and are willing to deal with the consequences perscribed under the social contact into which they have entered, provided that this judgement is entirely rational and does not directly encroach on the civil liberties of others. So in effect, you're trying to bribe them with monetary compensation to break the law. I would lose respect for a person who knew what the law says and that he shouldn't break it, but who did so anyway for the potential of a higher bill or a bigger tip. And I still maintain that if each and every person in America were allowed to break every law for which he could come up with a good rationzlization for not heeding, you'd find people waiting for you to exit a fancy and expensive restaurant to rob you at gunpoint as you went down a side street, because they'd claim that it's wrong for you to be able to spend as much on one dinner as they need to keep their family alive with food for a month. While I don't agree with every law on the books, I'm glad that we have a book with laws to begin with. ← Respect or not, this is what happens. If there is hypocrisy, the majority of it falls on the industry and the enforcement agents for not upholding the law. All I'm looking for is consistency. The EMP experience was not consistent with my past experiences, therefore I chose to note it In regard to the book of laws, therein lies the key. We must maintain rule of law while also maintaining the distinct rights this country and society are founded on. For me, this includes the right to walk safely on the streets without fear of being hurt based on my beliefs, appearance, faith, where I choose to eat, who I'm with etc. I will gladly pay the state for this kind of protection. I understand that laws are present and I largely abide by them. I have no problem admiting, however, that I do not subscribe to those laws I deem irrational and in direct contrast to the true ideals our society is founded on. I can write on this topic for much, much longer but won't for fear of violating the forum's posting guidelines. I hope that people will be able to individually expound on what I've noted so far to get a clearer picture of where I'm coming from.

I thought they turned out well, but then again I have nothing to compare them to. This was my first choux I've made, and my mom made it once like ten years ago or something. I found the puffing has to do with how it's piped out. Some of mine were round, others not so much. Sadness. Then again Play Doh (I think that's how you spell it) is edible, but I'm not sure TK would approve.