marcus

I find Rovani to be excellent, even the best, for white burgundies. I would be interested as to whether this is a common view, or whether I am off base.

Mikec -- I guess there's alot of personal preference here. You don't mention your opinion of the 89 at all. I like the 79 quite a bit and consider the 83 to be significantly better than the 85, which I found to be an underperforming year for Beaucastel.

MartyL -- I agree that the 83 is also very good, although a half step down from some of the best. I find your comparison of the 89 and 90s unusual perhaps strange, you must have ascetic inclinations. Clearly the market is valuing the 89 as worth about 70% more than the 90 which doesn't grab me at all. Steve P -- I think that we are basically agreeing on price for the 81. I have imported small amounts, 2 cases, of wine from the UK and when you add in customs brokers on both sides, packing and shipping, you are adding about $150+ dollars a case. In Parker's last book on Rhone wines, he felt that the 81 was at the end of its plateau of maturity, last tasted 12/96 with a recommendation to drink within the next 5-7 years. I have had it several times in the last few years and found it generally fine, don't believe that it was cooked. I actually bought a mixed case of Beaucastel at Christies last year which included 78s and 81s and others, the first three bottles were completely spoiled so I returned it. However, I don't think that the problem was shipping, but long term storage. In general, I've observed that Parker's intense liking for, and overrating of, Rhone wines has created a market pricing difference between the US and Europe. I've observed that you can often find a single vineyard Guigal Cote Rotie from a top year in restaurants in France for $200-300 which is below NY auction price and I saw the 78 La Chapelle on the menu at ADPA the last time I ate their, about 18 months ago, for under $300. This wine sell here at auction for at least $500. For whatever reason, Champagne is also significantly less expensive in France. On the other hand, Bordeaux are more expensive in France than the US, but somewhat less expensive in the UK when purchased in bond. When you add in their exorbitant VAT the prices equal out.

Steve -- The 1981 Beaucastel has unfortunately been discovered and has been selling recently at auction for at least $110. The brilliantly opulent 1989 costs about the same. I haven't tried the 1998, but wouldn't think that it is at all ready. The Hommages Jacques Perrin was made I believe for the first time in 1989. These are $200+ bottles and my understanding is that they are very backward. I've haven't yet had the opportunity to try any.

Steve Klc -- Thanks for your comments and observations. I saw no sign of a sommelier, although I assume that they must have a wine director. Wine orders were negotiated and handled by the waitstaff. I didn't notice any offer of a wine pairing option, but I could easily miss this as it's not my thing. I don't know whether this is normal practice, but I was clearly so unhappy about the quail for pigeon substitution that they offered us a table in the cafe, which I declined. Although a credit card number was required in advance, there was no advance billing and I'm sure that they don't invoke this except for the most egregious no shows. MsRamsey -- I took another look at my credit card slip and you are at least partially correct. It does say in small capital letters on top that 15% service is included on your bill and tipping is not necessary. I did not notice this before. What I did notice is that the tip is folded into the amount and is not separately visible on the slip. What are shown individually are an amount and tax which are then added together to show a Subtotal in large capital letters. There is then a space with a $ to add something additional followed by a Total in large capital letters. If you don't want to leave a tip, you still need to carry down the subtotal to the total line. They are clearly encouraging you to leave an additional tip, if they weren't they could have had just a printed total.

My wife and I had dinner for the first time at Chez Panisse's restaurant on a recent Saturday evening, a restaurant that we had been planning to try for decades. Chez Panissse's reputation for obtaining the finest ingredients and cooking them simply and to perfection embodies a very appealing approach, and we went with every expectation of being enchanted. Our experience, unfortunately, was problematic and as Chez Panisse is such an icon, I have been debating for awhile whether to make this report based on a single visit. However, the extent to which this restaurant is structured to satisfy its own purposes, rather than the needs of its customers, convinces me that a report will be useful. We made our reservation the required month in advance for a relatively OK dining time without any significant problem, just a few busy signals. There are two seatings per night, so all reservations are either in the 5:30-6:30 or 8:30-9:30 timeframes. The restaurant posts its menu a week in advance, there are absolutely no choices. They offer a three course menu on Monday for $45, four courses for Tueday-Thursday for $65 and with an aperitif on Friday and Saturday for $75. Providing diners with no food choices has got to immensely simplify the entire process of running a restaurant, from purchasing, to interacting with and serving customers, to preparation and cooking. I felt quite pleased, however, when I saw that although the appetizer was a salad, the two main dishes would be based on striped bass and pigeon, both of which are appealing. The restaurant is composed of 2 contiguous sober wood panelled rooms seating about 60 diners, with an open kitchen. The cooks, about eight, all well decked out, were ranged around a rectangular working surface, and appeared to be impressively choreographed. The impression was one of high seriousness and competence. The diners were dressed relatively informally, and appeared to be primarily local East Bay people with some tourists. It did not appear to be a San Francisco or a particularly foodie crowd and a number of birthdays were being celebrated. My first surprise when I received the menu was to discover that quail had been substituted for pigeon. This was a real downer. I asked our waitress about this, expressing my disappointment, which elicited a surprised response. She stated that a number of customers had told her that they were quite pleased at the substitution. I thought that this comment provided an interesting insight into their clientele. After further prodding, she asked in the kitchen and came back to tell us that the pigeon were continuing to molt for a third week and so were not ready. She told us that at least the quail was sourced from the better of the two farms that they deal with for this item. I believe that this information could have been known at the time that the menu was posted, showing a level of sloppiness in planning, on the other hand it wouldn't have made a real difference, as there is no choice in any case. Overall, Chez Panisse has very limited capability to respond to any diners particular needs. With regard to the quail dish, a woman at the next table over did not touch this dish, and it was left in front of her, no questions asked, while her partner finished his, and then it was removed. We turned our attention to the wine list which was largely disappointing. The majority of the wines offered were from no earlier that 1998 and I recognized a number that I new were not ready to drink. The selection of wines were drawn from around the world and the large majority were under $100, but the markup appeared high, although not at the exorbitant NYC level. I really couldn't find anything that I wanted and asked the waitresses advice. Her initial recommendation was a CdP Vieux Telegraph, a wine that I particularly don't like. She then offered a Bandol, Domaine Tempiers, Cabassaou, 1994. I do very much like the single vintage Domaine Tempiers, but felt that 1994 was not a particularly good year in the south of France. She assured me that this was one of the best wines on the list, and then stated the old saw that a good wine from a bad year can be better than a lesser wine from a good year. In my own experience, I disagree entirely, I blame my own hopefulness, the recommendation, and the barrenness of the wine list, for listening to her and ordering this wine for $122. The wine was well made, well structured and in fine condition, however, I found the flavor to be poor and we particularly didn't like it. In the course of the evening, we were never asked our opinions regarding the wine. The Meal: 1-An aperitif -- This was a small, less than two ounces, pour of an indifferent Prosecco. It was served with warm almonds heated with an herb. I expected the almonds to be definitive, but they seemed only ordinary. I would be perfectly willing to and would prefer to pay an additional tariff of $10 for a Friday or Saturday seating supplement, which this really was, without receiving this course. 2- Persimmon and fresh hazelnut salad with Annabelle's chicories -- This was a composed salad that played off the bitterness of the chicories against the sweetness of the persimmon. The hazelnuts also contributed nicely to the flavors of the dish. This dish was really quite excellent, definitive of its type, and I really respected it, although it is not something that I would ever order as my appetizer if I were given a choice. My wife felt that the bitterness of the chicories overwhelmed the dish. Unfortunately, from my perspective, this turned out to be the best dish of the evening. 3-Sauteed striped bass with brown butter and roasted winter squash -- The squash was very nicely prepared, lightly sweetened with clean and intense flavor and not at all stringy. On the other hand the striped bass was seriously overcooked. It had been finished under the broiler and had a thick and heavy crust and the fish was dry. There was not much flavor and I don't know whether that was due to the fish itself or the overcooking. It was not as all as good as the striped bass that I had purchased from the blue moon fish stand at the Union Square greenmarket the prior Wednesday and simply broiled, or the steamed black sea bass that I had at Great Eastern the night before. Notwithstanding, we finished the dish, and when it was being removed we were asked whether we liked it. My wife responded that it was overcooked which caused serious consternation. We were offered another dish of the same, but this was obviously not what we wanted. 4-Grilled Wolfe Farm quail with braised bacon, Savoy cabbage, white turnips, and crispy potatoes --This was another Jekyll and Hyde dish. The vegetables were wonderfully prepared, each with fine texture and clear lucid flavor, melded together by the pronounced, but light, bacon flavored deglazing sauce. Chez Panisse is known for its Mediterranean cooking, but there were few if an such touches this night, but much more of a winter vegetable Northern European feel. The problem was the quail around which this dish was constructed. From my table I was able to crane my neck to look at the large floor level, I believe wood fired, grill on which were placed the large number of quail. A cook would walk over periodically to turn them over. The end result was that they came to the table under-processed. The quail had a slack feel to it, there was no crispiness and no infusion of flavor. There was no evidence of the hand of a fine chef drawing out the essence of the foodstuff and surprising and enlightening the diner, it was just there on the plate. It was OK, nothing really wrong, nothing more. 5-Cheese -- At this point we were offered a cheese course which was not on the menu. I assumed that it was a complementary offer in compensation for the overcooked fish and I accepted. I hoped that we would receive some of the excellent local California artisanal cheeses which I was very interested to try. The waitress then suggested that we really might want to share this dish rather than have two portions. I was no longer sure that we were being comped and I went along with her suggestion. What came out was a plate with three tiny slices of French cheese, one each from the Basque area, the Loire and Savoy. The brebis was excellent and the other two good, but nondescript. In the end we were not charged for the cheese, but directing us to half portions ultimately displayed an attitude of stinginess rather than generosity. 6-Walnut tart with warm Barhi dates and clove ice cream -- In line with our previous dishes the dates were sweet and intense, the ice cream excellent, and the walnut tart was a void in the center, lacking the flavor intensity necessary to balance it against the accompaniments. The check at Chez Panisse is presented with a fifteen per cent service charge added. However the credit card slip also provides an additional line to allow the customer to add a tip. I find this to be confusing and in the US almost deceptive, as people here are not used to bills which already contain service charges. My own practice in this country is never to add anything on top of a bill which contains a service charge. Overall a disappointing experience, especially considering that to justify such a focused menu with no choices, there needs to be close to perfect planning and execution. My feeling is that the Cafe upstairs may be a better choice, as they do provide choice, still focus on fine ingredients, but I believe aim at simpler preparations with which they are more likely to succeed. That will be my choice for next time, who knows when.

There is the Japanese approach. A top quality Sushi restaurant will cut away and discard all but the most prime portions of the fish and the result will be uniform and excellent. On the other hand, the portions will be small and expensive. My understand is the Freddie Girardet took this approach in his restaurant, but I have no first hand experience. In general, I believe that a very top quality restaurant should lean in this direction. I'm not sure where I would advocate drawing the line from a practical perspective, but pretty close to that point.

I agree with your point, if it is specifically focused on extras. I think that we need to distinguish between baseline and extras. The majority of the discussion on this topic, some of it on the babbo thread, is about variation in baseline, to whit cold lamb chops.

Ajay -- Fantastic! A real tour de force.

I don't know about aging, but most significantly they are grass fed and not put in feedlots and fed corn for the last few weeks before slaughter.

I believe that in top restaurants in France the kitchen tries to do its best for all diners and there is much less of this variability that we have been discussing with regard to NY restaurants. To a very great extent, Europeans pride themselves on their craftsmanship to a greater extent and on their business acumen to a lesser extent. In addition, the restaurants serve many fewer patrons and have larger staffs, which all contribute to their ability to deliver consistent quality. I remember an article in the NYT regarding Jean Georges opening his restaurant in Paris. The restaurant was turning away celebrities that just showed up without a reservation, and his comment was that they needed to understand as in NY that these people needed to be seated.

Although not terrible, Bern's steaks are overrated and not at all exceptional. If she has said that about Peter Luger, then it would be a comment that needed to be reckoned with. My understanding is that Argentine steaks are much less marbled, yet still tender and well flavored. I would love to try, but unfortunately I've never been.

I may be completely heretical on this, but I believe that wine is completely unnecessary to the enjoyment of food and vice versa. In fact, poor wine can detract from fine food and great wine can compete with it to the detraction from both. Certain foods don't go with wine at all, such as strong cheeses. Some fine wines don't go with food at all such as Condrieu (I know that there is a lot of disagreement on this point). However, with proper selection, great wine with simply prepared food and good but simple wine with complex food, do create synergistic benefits. All that being said, my own approach is to largely ignore pairing considerations and just to order the particular food and wine that I want, the wine selection being driven by choosing a wine that I am interested in trying in and of itself.

baphie -- As I mentioned in a prior post, very inexperienced wine drinkers have been shown to be able to order a set of wines as to quality much in line with expert opinion. Of course this doesn't get to many of the nuances addressed on this thread, but does indicate that objectivity exists at least from a high level view. How would you take this into account in your analysis?

L'Ardoise has only the most basic decor and their service is very rushed. They probably turn over their tables faster than any other restaurant it Paris. When we last ate there, the wine arrived at the table so late that we sent it back. However, the location is excellent, very near to the Place Vendome, and the quality of the food for the low price is extraordinary. I have a clear recollection of an extremely succulent veal dish with a brown sauce that had a stunning impact. I don't recall the desert at all, but I often do not include desert in my overall evaluation of a restaurant. It is also open on Sunday.

Interestingly, tastings held with very inexperienced wine drinkers have shown that many people can accurately rate the relative quality of a set of wines, in line with expert opinion, despite their lack of experience. What they can't do is explain their decisions and there is no implication that they would be willing to pay the premium required to drink the finer wines. This tends to indicate that wine quality and value is to a considerable extent an objective characteristic, and not an extraneous one driven by snobbery, etc. No doubt, the real enjoyment of wine will come from greater knowledge and experience along with a love of gustatory things. I believe that food lovers, as participants in eGullet are, who wax eloquent about all aspects of food, should be equally interested in wine. The issue is that as expensive as fine dining may be, fine wines are far more expensive, and restaurant markups further exacerbate this problem. This is the underlying theme of this thread. The solutions are to either find better value wines, not an easy thing to do on most restaurant wine lists, or to spend much much more, which is not an option for most. Faced with this dilemma, many posters strike out against both the wine industry and the consumers who are perceived to be driving up the prices for "wrong reasons". There have been many assertions, but overall they are not valid. The wine market is a fully rational supply and demand market where there is a lot of demand chasing a very small and inelastic supply of top quality wine. Prices are so high, that the vast majority of buyers are only in it because they love the stuff. Steve P's point that there is a level at which wine transforms from a commodity to art is quite profound. There is no overall solution, but there are ways of obtaining the same quality for less. To oversimplify, the price of a wine is based on its brand name, production volume, vintage year, quality, flavor profile and region. Let me focus briefly on bordeaux, which is what I know best, to illustrate. Petrus is a great wine, but its extravagent price is to a large extent driven by its small production. Gruaud Larose is an excellent wine that often sells for less than its peers because of its very large production. Graves, such as Haut Brion, typically sell for much less than their peers such as Latour and Cheval Blanc becuase the flavor profile is considered less desireable. I am not an advocate of buying fine wines in off years, this is really often just paying for a label, but in every year certain wines outperform others for a variety of reasons, but will sell for less than their quality value if that year is considered less than great. Pichon Lalande 1983 is an example. I recognize that these are all relatively expensive wines, but the same technique can be applied to the next level down as well.

I find that ballast regime's posts re Trotter's have provided the most complete and credible analysis and characterization of this restaurant and have helped me put my own impressions, I've only eaten there twice, into perspective. I really do appreciate. Awbrig -- I do not personally impugn your overall knowledge of food and restaurants at all, but with regard to Trotter's. I have to discount your views entirely. You have honorably made clear your close personal relationship with the chef and the restaurant, but as a result I cannot accept that you are an objective observer. I do not think that you are being deceitful, but as human beings it is very difficult for us to unravel our inherent conflicts of interest, just as many parents can't evaluate their own children. If there is a Trotter's super enthusiast on the board without special ties to the restaurant, I would be interested in hearing from that person.

Cabrales -- "Aggressive posters" was genuinely not meant as a criticism of you or any individual. I recognize the right of anyone to be forceful and to post frequently. I believe that one can be overaggressive, but that is not a term that I used. My concern is that we have too few influential posters, which is leading to a lack of balance. I agree with La Nina's point, but from the perspective not of being discouraging, but that we need more posters who are knowledgeable and aggressive. I do believe that BH has been way overdone, not because of any individual, but because possibly the board lacks the critical mass of active participants necessary to be self correcting. Without this critical mass, I thought that an authority figure such as Fat Guy could possibly help.

In my view, comparing Blue Hill to Paris bistros, in general, is an apples and oranges comparison. These restaurants have different objectives and satisfy different needs. Bux has often elaborated very well on this subject of refined versus soul satisfying food. With regard to Wilfrid's plaint as to why so much, in fact too much, attention is paid to BH versus other, probably more deserving restaurants, it is not quite because more members eat there, but because the direction of eGullet, particularly the France and NYC boards, is driven by a very small number of posters. This is unfortunate, but when as few as three of the most influential and aggressive posters are focused on a single restaurant, it is sufficient to dominate the direction of discourse. Where are you Fat Guy. We need you to restore us to a more balanced and rational path.

Steve P -- I had dinner at les Allobroges last December which was my last visit to Paris. I liked it a lot, but it was at the end of 2 weeks of heavy eating and my gall bladder was starting to rebel, so I didn't appreciate it as much as I might have. I don't have a clear recollection of the dishes, but I would certainly recommend the restaurant and plan to return.

Steve P -- I believe that I understand your point much better. I think that the term bisto moderne is being used in two ways, firstly for updated bistro food, this is the way that I use it and hence my examples, and secondly, your way, to refer to restaurant food pared back so that it can be offered more inexpensively and served in a bistro like setting. Les Allobroges is a good example, a very plain restaurant out in the 20th which serves surprisingly well prepared restaurant type meals, inexpensively. The other thing that I think that I understand is that you are not trying to directly compare Blue Hill to Parisian bistros moderne, but are making an analogy: top NYC restaurant is to Blue Hill as top Paris restaurant is to bistro moderne

I also have difficulty with the bistro moderne analogy. Although many bistro moderne straddle the line between bistro and restaurant, Blue Hill is clearly on the restaurant side in terms of elaborateness of preparation. It is also well into the restaurant price range. I would also characterize the cooking as restrained American rather than French. Although I am aware of a few exceptions, most French restaurants, including bistros moderne, target a more oppulent style of cooking utilizing more fat and more sauce. If I were to be served a dish from Blue Hill while sitting at a restaurant in Paris, I believe that I would find it incongruous. To be precise, my examples of bistro moderne are Epi Dupin, Regalade, Au Bon Accueil. Steve P may actually have other examples in mind.

Cabrales -- Interesting post, I'm glad that you pointed it out. It appears that Mao was in a frame of mind to have loved any dinner set in front of him that evening, but perhaps he would like to elaborate himself. We all need to remember, as we fight our eGullet battles, that there are more important things in life than food.

Steve P, I hate to disagree with your kishkes, but I think that your points are a bit arbitrary. I don't think that experiences of certain types of restaurants in France has anything to do with appreciation of Blue Hill. I've had all of those experiences many times over, I absolutely get Blue Hill and what they are attempting, I just don't like it very well. Mao, who is the single most negative poster on Blue Hill, has certainly written extensively on his experiences in France. I don't think that its good form to tell people that they are wrong because your superior experience makes you more qualified to judge. We have to assume a level playing field for this discourse and arguments need to stand on their own without reference to selfstated superiority. As to tasting menus versus a la carte, this has been debated many times and varies by restaurant. I would assert that at Bouley, for example, the a la carte dishes are more elaborate and better prepared. I accept that this is probably not the case at Blue Hill. In France, my experience is that a la carte is superior to the tasting menu at a majority of fine restaurants.

cabrales -- I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "at least good", but I don't think that good is a very high standard. In fact, there have been a number of posts that were less than good. You and Bux are the biggest fans of Blue Hill, and If your posts were removed from this thread it would have a very different orientation, with views all over the place. In a quick review I find that Simon Majumdar, Mao, Macrosan, ajay, Tommy, Yvonne Johnson and myself do not appear to be fans at all. I'm not sure about Wilfrid and La Nina, who are probably a bit more positive or inconclusive. There are certainly others who really like it. My point, however, was that there is an unusually wide variety of opinions, which I still believe. My question was whether this style of cooking particularly led to this wider than normal diversity of opinions.