JohnL

hi wilewil, what's your area? I have never heard of Bonefish. Yes, there are a lot of local joints that are really good a bunch of em all the way up the coast to Maine!

Viejo: I am just behind you in age. I also dined with John Foy and have eaten at Mr Egg's Inn. My cellar is a bit larger than yours. The fact is the wine list at P and O is quite exellent especially in price. There are no restaurants in NJ -I can think of, that match it across the board. We can haggle over the definition of "decent"--another fact--neither I nor many others go there for the food. Yes there is quite a bit of room for improvement in the food and the decor areas. It is also a fact that the place is successful so a lot of people are ok with things there. To be fair, I believe one can find menu items that will do just fine--if one is primarily interested in the wine (suprised no one has suggested they institute a BYOF policy!). Anyway--I also enjoy a good hot dog or burger or a slice of pizza as much as I enjoy "haute cuisine"--if you and others want to "trash" the food at P and O that's ok. I can say that there are precious few restaurants offering equally great food and wine at low prices.--the lesson here is--you can't have everything!

You could probably provide a number for a debit card. unfortunately (I think) we are moving rapidly toward a "plastic society!" It has been proven that when people use plastic rather than cash to pay for things (especially meals) the average expenditure rises dramatically! for eg:MacDonalds average check has increased since they started accepting credit cards. the truth is: people are less dilligent about spending when they charge things. that is they are more aware of what they are buying and paying when they have to actually count out the money and hand it over. In the "old days" no one really had any grasp of what their healthcare really cost--Blue Cross/our employers "payed" for it. we rarely saw a or looked at a bill. The only time I ever personally got into credit card debt of consequence was due to charging food! The moral is: for whatever benefits there are to charging there are a lot of downsides. We need to be careful! As for the restaurant reservations charge issue--too many people are too careless when it comes to etiquette here--those of us who are dilligent about confirming reservations and showing up or calling ahead to cancel will just have to put up with this!

"...brooding syrah with bloody iron and grilled meat aromas flecked with black cherry and blueberry highlights with toasty boysenberry and vanilla flavors. Exceptionally balanced....." Again, I think wine can be such an incredibly complex and evocative substance. we are dealing with smell, and taste and our experiences. Actually most of the wine's complexity comes via aromas as we can taste only salty, sweet etc (ok there's umami too). We can identify literally hundreds/ thousands of aromas! There are also flavors and aromas that "evoke" sensory memories" (Florida Jim has a current tasting note that describes a "sensation" evoked by a wine--fresh water" etc. Pulling out one element of a tasters notes removes any context. ( see above). The "bloody iron" note taken in context renders a more complete (and appealing) flavor profile for the wine in question. The aroma of "bloody iron" is quite different than the "taste" of it on the palate. (I would argue it renders the wine more palatable). Just as that notes of "shit" and "undergrowth (decaying leaves etc) one sees applied to Burgundies are aromas more than actual tastes (on the palate) one hopes ( the taste of decay on the palate would indicate a bad or foul wine). Perhaps this is what is so beguiling about wine: "notes of decay on the nose while the wine can have an explosion of fruit (cherries etc on the palate). It is this confluence of aromas and flavors (nose and taste) combined with evoked experiences that makes wine the most complex beveridge imaginable! I thank Brad for the original post because it really made me think about tasting and tasting notes. This was quite an interesting and informative thread.

First--someone mentioned that raw cheeses are all but unavailable in the US. I can say that here in the NY area raw milk cheeses are very available. Murray's, Fairway, Balducci's, Whole Foods etc all offer raw milk cheeses. A while ago-I was at a cheese tasting and Howard Dorman (an importer) noted that most serious wine shops offer raw milk cheeses simply flouting the law which obviously is not enforced to any great degree. Second--the Guardian's cheap shots aside--both the US and Great Brittain have made tremendous advances in food over the last fifty years. better foods better restaurants etc. However, I wonder if American produced cheese and wine are available to any great degree in Europe. I believe that we here in the US have one of the most diverse and wide ranging selection of foods and wines from around the world. Much of Europe is extremely "provincial" in this regard. One can certainly make a good case that this provincialism has fostered the great products Europe has produced over the years. Ironically, the success of the US in offering locally produced cheeses, wines etc is due to our becoming more provincial--local artisinal vs mass/nationally produced etc. It seems also ironic that the "globalization" of Europe via the EU is actually "Americanizing" (if that's a word) their food and wine production. They and the US are actually going in opposite directions! I would say that "sons" and "daughters" here in the US are now looking at farming and cheese and wine production as noble and worthy enterprises--to the benefit of all of us here as consumers. This trend was inspired in no small part by what Europe has achieved over several centuries. It is a shame that Europe seems to be moving away from this just as we are steadily moving toward it!

The consensus seems to be great wine list --decent food. The wine list is truely amazing both in scope and pricing. The menu to me, is all over the map. This is a good thing. First: The "cafeteria" like atmosphere is a very unpretentious setting--you can dine comfortably in casual dress (or a tuxedo) no stuffiness here. Second: If this place got "serious" about raising the quality of the food and the ambiance to "match" the fine Burgundies on the list--the prices would also rise substantially and the breadth of the menu and the wine list would shrink dramatically. As a wine lover this place is just fine (and unique). Whatever you are in the mood for --wine and/or food--you can get here--you can come alone or with a crowd--and the prices are reasonable (many of the wines on the list are almost insanely low priced). The range of food is, apropriately, as varied as the wine list; true, it rarely rises above just decent or good but with a really good well priced bottle (or half bottle or glass) of wine that's all one really needs! I believe that restaurants can be too "serious" in their attempts to offer ne plus ultra food, wine and atmosphere. Few actually succeed--and these are prohibitavely expensive--both the wine and the food! P and O is a place run by people who love wine and want to share that with others (us) in a relaxed convivial atmosphere with good food. Sometimes you just can't have it all!

I never viewed the "original Jasper's" as an "alternative" to LS. Jasper's was a "high end" seafood restaurant while LS had more low to middle end of the market pretensions. The fact that LS has become a "chain" is a tribute to their overall philosophy and management discipline (expecially with a cuisine based upon seafood). I believe they are not a franchise operation which may, in part, be a key factor; and a reason they are several cuts above Red Lobster or any other chain. It would be interesting to hear from anyone who has worked at LS and has a professional perspective on this discussion. In fact, I would posit that LS may be the only chain restaurant that has successfully staked out the "middle" of the market somewhere between McDonalds and true high end seafood restaurants. Their ability to deliver "fresh" product via many locations is a tribute to their philosophy and their abilities to execute that philosophy. As with any operation this size there will be "lapses" --one hopes they will not become "too big!" As for the original Jaspers--this was a high end restaurant and in its time may have been one of the two or three top seafood restaurants in the country. I remember having one of the finest meals I have ever had there--the lobster pan roast--was/is-simply spectacular!

There's nothing wrong with diversity! And there is no question that LBF is a "scene" however, I would argue that the "scene" at LBV is more in service of the food and enjoyment of that food not the other way around--which is what many "newer" restaurants are. I would also suggst that there is an element of the emporers new clothes to many newer establishments. They are more about the sizzle than the steak! Striped bass is an interesting case. Starr knows he can not glitz up the decor much (it was always high on the glam meter) so he is going to :"foodie up" the menu.--I am sure it is fine (I happen to like Portale a lot--Gotham bar and grill here in NYC). It may work it may not. Perrier has done a good job at :"modernizing" (maybe too little too late--we'll see). In the end--as I noted earlier--one hopes that there is room for all these places in the marketplace. Yes--one reads about the demise of classical music every other week just as I remember people saying rock and roll will never last. It's the uncertainly that can make life fun! wanna classic cheesesteak--Pat's want one with glitzy atmosphere?--Jims May the choices remain and thrive and expand--we win!

I think that cost is only one factor in the equation. LBF and Striped Bass are going after the same income demo. Just as Rouge and Brasserie Perrier are going after a specific income demo. The real issue is the people who comprise those demos--what turns them on? Unfortunately, I think that the folks who used to partronize LBF (more old money-the regulars) are "dying" off a bit and boomers (new money) are replacing them. These new folks can afford LBF but would rather spend their bucks in Marimoto or Striped Bass or many other newer "expensive" places. Also those people who are not able to be "regulars" due to income restrictions are more apt to look at newer "hipper" places the few times a year they can "splurge" further depleting the potential "audience" for places like LBF--"hey guess where we ate last nite!" crowd.--it just isn't a status/hip thing to eat at LBF anymore. So-a lot of the dining scene is really contingent upon the demographics and psychographics of the market place! Thank the Lord that Mr Starr is not taking over Pat's anytime soon!!!

Wine descriptors are often used to reflect "impressions" or what a wine "evokes" and should not be taken quite so literally. That is the taster in question is describing an impression or an evocative note or sensation. Obviously the Syrah is not literally equivalent to a glass of "Blood." also-- most of what we experience in wine is "smell" which is the major part of "taste"--for eg in many wines I have impressions of "road tar" --this is an element of many Italian barolos etc.--that is I have never actually tasted road tar (maybe once when I was three years old-I don't remember!) but I have smelled it! Also along with the sensation of road tar-I am getting flavors of fruit-of cherries, dried plums etc.--I am not actually drinking a wine that is only "tasting" of road tar. This is why a wine can have notes of cat piss yet be quite enjoyable! The other flavors offset or work with that note--lemmons, grapefruit etc. great Burgundy often does have notes of "shit" and "decay"--these are olfactory and comingle with other more pleasant flavors like cherries and black fruits and cedar and vanilla etc This is why wine is so amazing a drink! It has mystified scientists with its complexity and ability to "evoke" a mind boggling array of tastes and odors and sensory pleasure. Look at pheremones--most are not particularly "pleasant" but boy are we attracted to them! we encounter this complexity in other foods--calf's liver also tastes of blood and iron (no brainer there) and oysters can have a "metallic" note to them. It would be interesting if Brad would provide the complete tasting note for the syrah (if there is more).

"Turning the Tables" by Steven A Shaw Chapter one. The reservations thing is covered nicely.

Wow, that is really depressing. Steven Starr restaurants. Feh. ← It *sucks*! LBF was where I learned that food could be art. I took my then-wife there because it was "fancy" - if it isn't clear yet, I had absolutely no kind of clue. I first loved them because they made her feel like gold, and she was really uncertain about belonging. But the epiphany came when I had the rack of lamb. I'd never had food that was as *true*, as truly realized, as that dish was. I'd never *imagined* food like that But he costs more than I can afford, and I will afford a lot more than I should. I cannot (financially) dare to love his food, and I would dearly love to. I'm sorry, but when I look at the price structures of his competition, I cannot help but think that he has dug... about two-thirds of his grave, shall we say. I wish him all the best, but I would rather be able to put my wallet where my mouth is. ← Unfortunately, the direction of the restaurant "scene" these days seems to be toward, just that, a "scene." Restaurants have become "hot" destinations "you gotta go!" These places are falling over themselves to create that "scene" with striking decor, garish lighting, plenty of bar area, lottsa buzz --noise really. (check out any of Mr Starr's "scenes." ) Then there are the chefs around whom many of these "scenes" are built. Hot chefs, "artistes", clebrities as big as those who flock to the "scene."-- "where's so and so these days? --we gotta go! " Many of these chefs are looking to "dazzle" the palate to "shock" us to suprise us--because--well--the food is now a "scene." Chefs are "pushing the envelope" in attempts to be unique to live up to the press, the "buzz." Can't find a hot chef (or wanna pay one)--that's ok--get a hot consulting chef or anyone that can "design" a dish. Yes, sometimes it seems as though chefs today are designing dishes, we hear about architecture--"tall food" etc (Mr Portale) or "product" food is like construction materials. At first chefs looked to "reinvent" the classics, hence steak tartare becomes tuna tartare now chefs are "deconstructing the classics! Let's see steak tartare? Ok I will put some raw sliced beef on the plate here and then I'll put an anchovy over here, how about a raw egg yolk right here..... My point is- yes, a lot of this "scene" stuff works but people like Mr Perriere who aren't about suprising or startling diners--who don't espouse "new" ways of cooking or looking at food--they don't have great appeal to the foodies who, yes, respect them but are really looking to be startled and amazed--dazzled, if you will. And Mr Perrier is not as interested in creating a "scene" --ever look at the bar space in LBF? His idea of a scene is Brasserie Perrier next door--he does the decor and bar thing but he's not going all the way with "scene food." I had many wonderful meals at Bec Fin. I also had a number of very good meals at the first iteration of Striped Bass the food was simpler more "classic" there--the stunning decor was enough in those days--simple food, striking environment. Mr Starr knows he must push the envelope more he's gotta deliver a "scene" by today's standards. It would be interesting to see what he would do with Bec Fin! One would hope he never gets the chance and one hopes there is room for Mr. Perrier in any gastronomic "scene." One hopes that there is room for marimoto AND Susannah Foo. One hopes..............

Well put-Daniel! You have provided a lot of perspective. Somehow, after reading your post the world seems more ordered and at peace! There is an interesting thread in the Pennsylvania board: "A Tale of Two restaurants" that participants in this thread might find worth reading. Briefly, it looks at meals at Le Bec Fin and Striped Bass--two approaches to high end cooking. It touches upon the "classical" vs the "innovative" debate quite nicely.

I ate at Flemmings last year. It was ok--certainly nothing to write home about. The service was very good--steak ok--sides--ok nothing more nothing less. IMOP-Mignon's is way better--across the board-steak-sides-and BYO aspect is a real plus. On a good night Mignon's holds its own against all but the very top steak houses.

I don't see this as a 'big deal." If a restaurant is going to abuse your credit card--they will do it as easily when you hand it over to pay for a meal in person (how many of us walk the card over to the terminal and watch every move as a waiter runs it?) Frankly, a phone line (landline of course) is probably more secure than the internet. Also--as we are liable for fifty bucks (I think) then simnply checking one's bill every month is a no brainer. ps I was also called and issued new cards by my bank due to "breach"--it was explained to me that the banks are now very cautious whenever they suspect even a chance for a problem. As for the practice of securing a reservation--I understand it. Giving a number and being liable for a fee if one does not show up --assures that a real committment is being made and that the person will be aware of the need to confirm and also to call/inform the restaurant of any problems. Unfortunately, too many people are cavalier about reservations these days and restaurants are, in business to make a profit!

Blood has Iron in it (unless one has a deficiency--anemia etc). The taste of blood (my own via paper cuts etc) has a metallic note. (I am sure that greatest of all blood tasters Vlad the Impaler would recognize this immediately! he once gave a young scullery maid's blood a ninety eight!!!)) Blood also has a definite consistancy. Syrah does produce gamey, minerally wines that have a thicker than water consistancy. One also gets an irony/metallic flavor note from well aged beef (there is certainly blood present in a good steak (less one prefers one's porterhouse "well done"). I like the descriptor--"I know what he's trying to communicate."

I think that any restaurant --when it becomes a chain--faces quality control problems the further away from "home base" the empire extends and the larger that chain/empire becomes. Legal Sea Foods IMOP--does best with simple things. (actually sea food is always better simply prepared--in most cases). I still find their clams and oysters to really shine and simply prepared broiled fish dishes are pretty good. Again the best meals I have had are at the Boston area locations.--close to home base!

I am a bit confused. If a service charge is added to the check, is a customer "expected" to tip in addition? I can see tipping over and above a service charge only in the very rare case of some service that clearly goes "above and beyond" the standard of good service one expects. I still see the benefit--from the consumer POV-- as being one of simplifying the dining experience.

I think there is a bit of variation from location to location. (understandable with a chain). My favorites are those in Boston--Chestnut Hill, Copley Sq etc. It seems the overall cooking is better at these spots than at the more far flung outposts. I eat quite a bit at the Palisades Mall location (horrible mall atmosphere). Basically I stick with the simple stuff-the raw clams and oysters are across the board-excellent and very fresh-the chowder is very good (probably based on a mix etc). Lobster Roll is good and the wine selection is fine. I like to eat at the bar.

I feel your pain Rich! lol I think that what's going on at the Times is not just reflected in the restaurant reviews --its the whole paper. In fact it is reflective of what's going on with print media in general. The current restaurant scene in NYC is all over the map. The grande dames are fading--the traditional three and four star places. Serious food and dining is not just French anymore---hence the confusion with the star system--believe me the Times is as confused as we are. Reichl got this (Asimov gets it too). Bruni, as I noted, seems to be a reporter. Yes, part of a restaurant review is a "report" but there is a lack of gravitas in the reviews. There is a sea of "good" restaurants in NYC now--many of these are part of a "scene" -young hip etc. Frequented by people (there are a lot of these folks) who are not so much dining but rather are "socializing" over food. The Times sees these people as the "future" and, I believe, is trying--sometimes desparate--to reach them. It is not a coincidence the Times has begun to look at Brooklyn a lot more these days. I think Bruni is ok here--how much detail about the food can one get into--how much do we need?

Anchor Steam Liberty Pale Ale. This is very flavor placked but has a dry lemony finish--it is quite thirst quenching in addition to being satisfying in the complexity area. Of course-- Rolling Rock if you are into "lawnmower beers." oddly I like my overall (any season) beers in the summer as well: Anchor Steam Lager Sierra Nevada Pale Ale

I would have to say that at a basic level a lot of the comments in this thread are foodies who are unhappy that Mr Bruni is not reviewing/writing for them but rather the broader audience the Times seeks. Foodies seem to "salivate" over long involved "pictoral" reviews (like those found here at eGullet): "just tell us about (describe) the food!--the cooking!" Just like the wine geeks who want nothing more than tasting notes and details about winemaking (hence the plaintive cries when the Wine Spectator added more and more lifestyle coverage) the foodies rail against anything that deviates from the food--"It's about the food..." Mr Bruni's culinary qualifications aside, I believe he is writing for an audience that goes well beyond foodies--or even serial restaurant patrons (though NYers could qualify in greater numbers than the citizens of most other metropolises). Bruni is writing for what the paper sees as their market. The tonality and the focus of the writing is uniform with what the paper is offering these days. My problems with most of the paper's writing has been with style--I have criticisms of the substance, but that is for another day. The paper has been struggling in its attempts and has stumbled --Film reviews: Elvis Mitchell was close to unreadable, Darghis is much clearer--their styles and approaches are similar though(audience appropriate). Restaurant reviews-the mistake of the temp assignment of Hesser (she is a writer not a reviewer) etc. The Bette review is one of Bruni's better pieces. He approaches the restaurant review as a reporter--looking for an "angle" which he attempts to execute in print with cleverness. This can be maddening--see his review of Bar Americaine where he clumsily attempts to use the angle of color (orange)/decor and tie it in to the food. He overdid it a bit with his writing about the BLT empire. (a tad pedantic-ok we get it Frank!). Bruni's angle for the Bette review is its pedigree (owned by someone who made a name for herself via the cult of celebrity) a place to "see" and be "seen." His whole approach to the place is based on that. He gets it. Dining here is clearly not about the food. He does a pretty good job of putting the fare into perspective. I can not argue the star --according to the Times--a star is "good" --certainly Mr Bruni's review leads one to the conclusion that the food at Bette is "good" no better no worse. I certainly can't see much point is going into any greater detail about the cooking here. I still have questions as to Mr Bruni's ability/credentials to handle restaurants whose pretensions are greater than those of say, Bette. It hasn't been the one and two star joints that have concerned me (though the writing as noted before can be clumsy), rather it has been the three and four star reviews that have been troubling. Mr Bruni, often seems to be reporting on the "scene" and in restaurants where the "scene" is most important Bruni seems at home. Where the food is "the thing" --I sense Bruni is uncomfortable--a reporter's appraoach doesn't work as easily--we don't need someone with an "angle" we need someone who understands fine dining and cooking who has perspective and can provide insight. Reichl (I have some nits with her) did this very well--she conveyed the "scene" well--she was on a mission--the Le Cirque 2000 angle was brilliant--but she "got" the food part too. I am not sure about Bruni but the Bette piece is fine--he seems to be in his element here!

I must admit-this was one of the most enjoyable posts I have encountered out here. The wine and food pairings were interesting varied and the notes were informative. I actually look forward (though not as much as you and pur partici[ants) to the next event!!! thanks ps (I am familiar with many of the wines you tasted and the assessments were dead on mirroring my impressions.) I am going to try some similar pairings myself! what a great idea.

Thanks Andre! I will make sure I avoid the Tsantali! lol I am just beginning exploring greek wines any recommendations? we are starting to see more and more on the shelves here in NYC.

Hi rosie! I just heard that Jocelyn's in Maplewood is closing. Is this true? Has it been noted here before? (if so I apologize). anyway a trusted friend recommended this place to me and I was further inspired to try it based on comments here--was going to go this month or Sept--Oh well.......