rich

The location may be better, but it certainly sounds as if the food isn't. I actually enjoyed the small, cramped room. It gave the place a unique character. I know it was uncomfortable for some, but it reminded me of days past. Going through those doors was going back into a simpler period of New York City.

The old Tasting Room was one of my favorites. After reading the reviews here, I'm not sure I want to visit the new version - it would be too depressing.

I know it got me interested. I'm planning on trying it just for the wine list - when the weather gets a bit cooler.

Absolutely awe inspiring.

Interesting review. Very little of positive things to say about the food (unless you think a lot of fat surrounding lamb is a good thing), yet it received a star. Read more like a "satisfactory" to me. Maybe it earned the star because of its interesting wine list.

I find the food at Blue Hill in Manhattan to be as good as that up at Stone Barns, but I don't order from the menu and when I reserve, they know they will just feed me whatever they choose. If anything, Blue Hill in Manhattan is more relaxed, or at least less formal, than up at Stone Barns. Stone Barns with its architecture and farm, is the more fabulous evening. WD-50 is the other "relaxed atmosphere" restaurant in NYC that I consider a "destination" worthy of the attention given to the more formal top places in the city. Show stopping to me, means more than just "good food" or even very good food. The food must be noteworthy. ← I agree Bux - with all three places. When I went to Stone Barns, I thought the food was simply over the top. It reached a level that I have rarely had the pleasure to experience. And while I think the food at BH in Manhattan is outstanding, it never reached that level. Maybe if I made the reservation under your name, I would get to experience your meal. Let me know when your not going and I'll call.

It's always very convenient to blame a third party for failure. Why take the heat yourself when there are so many out there to blame?

No Nathan, I have no axe to grind with the Times at all. Been (and still am) a home subscriber for the last 27 years. Never worked there, never applied for a position there. My issue (I prefer that word) is the total disintegration of a once great paper. And it's affected every department from news to sports to food. I don't think a Times review, whether by the current reviewer or another, holds the weight it once did. Unless a place gets the 4-star treatment, most reviews are forgotten within a month and most people who say they will visit based on a review rarely do. The guy who currently reviews for them just reduces the "fogettable" period to about 2-3 weeks.

That's a negative????? They should only know.

Remind me to woo you sometime.

You should see how many high-end McDonald's we have.

IMO the best first date restaurant in NYC is Annisa. The food is terrific, the room is elegant and the neighborhood allows for options after dinner. If the evening is going well, just walk two doors west and go To One If By Land for drinks afterward. There's a piano player who will take requests. Sit by the fireplace, enjoy an after dinner drink and listen to music in one of the city's great rooms. It's quite a unique date. I like the private car idea, but be careful, it may be a bit over the top for first date. Now on a second date...

Yoy're absolutely correct Tug. Sometimes people just direct an individual to a thread that's a year or more old. It serves no purpose. Just keep asking - someone will answer. I ate at USC about 10 days ago. It was excellent as always - ask for the room behind the bar - it's more intimate and cozy. If you get lucky, you will even get to watch a show (a couple being quite amorous as I explained in the USC thread). The food at USC is very American, very tasty and impeccably prepared. The service is friendly, helpful and accommodating. You can't go wrong there. The wine list is extensive, reasonably priced and well maintained. The entire experinence rates as a very good value. Hope this helps.

Thanks Nathan, that's one I fogot to add. Aquavit is a terrific choice. The Bar Room at Modern is one I want to check out. The meal I had at the formal restaurant was mixed.

Based on a discussion in another thread this subject came up. What are the consistently show stopping food spots that have a more relaxed atmosphere - yet still have top tier surroundings? It's a difficult category. I'll go first. (by the alphabet) Cru Devi Eleven Madison Park Gramercy Tavern WD-50 Honorable Mention goes to Blue Hill at Stone Barns because it's outside the city limits, otherwise it would top the list.

At the Last Supper - Wine into Blood is tough to beat.

You bring up a good point SE. What are the places in NYC that are consistently show stopping with respect to food, yet relaxed enough to kick back and enjoy for that special occasion? I don't think Daniel, JG, ADNY, PS, LB, Bouley or Masa fit. Possibly Cru, certainly Stone Barns, but that's not in NYC. It's a difficult category. Maybe a new topic.

Maybe not show stopping, but worth a standing O at the end.

In recent memory, in Manhattan, I can't say anyplace wowed me more than WD-50. Annisa is another choice that's hard to beat for a special occasion. And one more, Devi certainly wows with very upscale Indian food and the room is quite attractive - sit upstairs.

I think this has gone too far. Maybe I'm more sensitive to this type of stuff because I worked in the media for so long and had to be very careful when writing - her comment would have been deleted. If no one understands or knows of the betting stereotype and how it relates to the Chinese than so be it. I'll sign off from this topic - it's not worth the fight.

No SE, I don't know how many wealthy Chinese live in Vegas, but I can guarantee it's much less than live in the other three places we've been discussing. And I am sure wealthy people of all nationalities visit Vegas. Her comment is unfortunate because it gives credence to the stereotype. I only mentioned the other types as a reference. Those nationalities are not linked with heavy gambling - unfortunately the Chinese live with that stereotype hanging over their heads. Since I'm Italian, I'll use this example. I would be offended if a reporter of national prominance suggested she only eats in Italian restaurants when seated facing the door. Now she hasn't said anything wrong, per se, but everyone knows the meaning behind the comment. And that's what I'm saying here. Her reference to the Chinese and Vegas is offensive because it validates a stereotype.

My point exactly. They don't live there. But yet according to her statement that's where the best Chinese restaurants in the country are located. Let me try this from a different angle. She says there aren't any good Chinese restaurants in NYC because Chinese restaurants follow the money and the money is not in NYC. She then states that the best Chinese restaurants in the country are in Vegas. Ergo, that's where the Chinese money is located (by her own theory - not mine). The Chinese don't live there, so what are they doing there? Gambling - duh. She singles out Vegas as having the best Chinese restaurants. She doesn't say it has the best Italian, French, Spanish, Icelandic, Finnish, German, Thai, Austrian, American, etc or any other type of the best restaurants, just Chinese. So let's deduce what she's really saying. Good Chinese restaurants open where there's Chinese money. The best Chinese restaurants are in Vegas. Therefore, Chinese money must be in Vegas more so than any other place in the country because they have the best restaurants. Conclusion: Chinese money exists in Vegas because the Chinese (not the French, Spanish etc) go there in large numbers to gamble (since they don't live there). Unless you think it's Lake Mead that attracts them. If that's not stereotyping, please explain to me what is. And please don't say she never used the word gamble. We all know that's what people go to Vegas to do.

Yes I know she reported it originally. I said you were just reporting her words here (on this thread). I understand she said the restaurants in SF were better than NYC, but then she says the ones in Vegas are the best in the country. Still seems like a disconnect based on her affluence theory since very few Chinese ex-pats live in Vegas. Her meaning is clear and I find it an offensive stereotype. I've never been to Vancouver, but I'll take her word on that.

I guess I need to clarify yet again. I don't take offense to her "affluent Chinese" comment at all. She's just wrong. I take offense to the underhanded inference about gambling and Chinese. And if she did say something to the effect that New Yorkers don't appreciate good Chinese food or the affluent Chinese don't have a need for it, and that's why none exist, that would be fine. It would be her expert opinion as a food professional. Her ex-pat comment as reported by SE makes even less sense. On one hand she says NYC doesn't have good Chinese restaurants because there's not Chinese money here. Then in the other thread, SE reports she said there's Chinese ex-pat money in Silicon and Vancouver. So by her own theory, there should be good Chinese restaurants in those locales. But, no, she mentions Vegas as having the best. If that's not a reference to gambling and Chinese, then I'm really very stupid (something that's quite possible).

Yea, me too. I just hate it when I need to flip through all those picture pages to find where the article continues. I don't think she hates them. I think the words came out before she thought. It happens to all of us.