Jump to content

foodhunter

participating member
  • Posts

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by foodhunter

  1. I do get the sense that it's a Manhattan-specific problem, as I frequently hear about a wide retail selection in other boroughs. And yes, I've visited the wine/beer/liquor emporiums in other cities and am looking for a similar selection in New York. That's probably a little unrealistic though. But again, something beyond Brooklyn Brewery and the occasional Dogfish Head would be nice.

  2. Is it just me or does there seem to be a temporary Luxardo Maraschino shortage in New York City? Can't seem to find it anywhere, but have only checked online inventory. Astor, Union Square Wine & Spirits, and Beacon all list it as out of stock (I have seen and purchased it at those three places previously).

  3. Incoming! Bruni does Ushiwakamaru and 15 East. Just read what seemed to be a portion of the review, should be interesting to see the ultimate verdict (in terms of stars) as well as the conclusion. But from what I've read so far, I think the review reinforces the fact that: (a) Bruni doesn't get sushi, and (b) Bruni doesn't get wine. That's just my opinion.

  4. Regarding Nobu sushi, does sushi bar vs. table service make any difference? I've only tried sushi at Nobu (Next Door) once, and was frankly a bit underwhelmed. I remember feeling the same way at Jewel Bako the first time I was there (at a table), and then returning another time to sit at the sushi bar. I found the experience, and the quality of the food, completely different the second time around.

  5. Smith & Mills is on N. Moore St in Tribeca, right across the construction site for DeNiro's new hotel I believe. I don't think it has any sort of signage. It's a nondescript entrance. Look for a door that looks like it would open into the back of a restaurant kitchen and chances are you'll stumble right on the place.

    Nathan -- do you have a recipe for the Martinez? The ones I've come across don't call for Marschino.

  6. I decided to test them and went a few days ago, asked for some off the menu cocktails that they didn't know how to make. I asked for an Aviation but our bartender proposed an alternative. I'm not even sure I saw Maraschino behind the bar that night.

  7. I stopped in a few days ago and I'm not sure I get the concept of this spot. I was under the impression that it was a cocktail-driven bar owned by one of the Employees Only folks. But it seems more like a restaurant, with very little (if any) emphasis on cocktails.

  8. By raise the bar, I simply meant to echo Sneakeater when he said Room 4 Dessert has defined a new standard for what he (and I) expect from a dessert place in terms of how interesting the menu and how complex the execution. I don't blame the restaurant's owners for its popularity, in fact I applaud them. But I walked in there to check in with the hostess and was immediately turned off by the layout. Those customers sitting at the bar had a sea of people loitering behind them, watching them eat (and probably willing them to eat faster). It's similar to getting the seats at the end of the communal table at Momofuku Ssam on a busy night. It's a level of discomfort that I'm willing to endure for dinner, but probably not dessert.

  9. I've been to Room 4 Dessert twice, and have generally been impressed by what was put before me. While I've never been to Chickalicious, the above sentiment (that Room 4 Dessert has simply raised the bar on this genre) pretty much reflects my view as well. The one time I tried to eat at Chickalicious was last winter, and was met with a line snaking out the door in 30-degree weather. Frankly, the idea of waiting in line to eat dessert at a counter with 20+ people breathing down your neck is slightly ludicrous to me. While Room 4 Dessert's former space was not much better, it felt much less claustrophobic.

  10. Marc, your comment about Diner's Journal was timely. Bruni often laments the limited space he has to review restaurants (only 52 columns per year, just one or two restaurants per column, in a city with over 13,000 restaurants, etc etc). But it's hard to sympathize when faced with another of his irrelevant blog entries -- his latest on the Top Chef 3 premiere is a complete waste of time. Add to that entries that simly reiterate what he's already written in the Wednesday paper, his random musings on the Philadelphia dining scene, and his multiple updates on a pointless survey about diners' attitudes towards reservations. It almost feels like New York restaurants are the last thing he wants to talk about these days.

  11. While I've eaten at the restaurant a number of times, I actually order delivery from Otto at least once or twice a week and have done so consistently for at least the past year. While delivery is definitely not the same experience as dining there, I like how it frees up a meal for something else (Lupa, for example) while still ensuring I get my regular Otto fix. Being able to get their seasonal ramps pizza delivered straight to my door is, for me, one of the greatest pleasures of living downtown.

  12. Nice pictures. By the way, are those Riedel Vinum Extreme cocktail glasses they're using? They seem larger than what I've seen at other places, though it might be the zoom.

  13. I'm anxious to hear how it goes. I've been there once, and I wish I liked it more. The price point is definitely good, and the quality is most certainly a cut above the average, no-name, corner joint. But it's always perplexed me why Ushi is so often compared with some of the higher-end spots. The fish quality is there, but I've always felt it isn't always just about the freshness and variety of the fish.

  14. Definitely agreed. In no way am I implying that Bruni's position as the Times' lead critic makes his palate or opinion of a restaurant inherently superior to the average diner. All I'm saying is that he enjoys the benefit of multiple visits, multiple dishes, and a knowledge of dining that supercedes that of the average diner because it's his job. He eats on someone else's dime, which allows him to eat out often and eat well. If only we could take that advantage and transfer it to the real-time reporting format that is the Internet food world. With that source of information -- in addition to the purely non-professional opinions already prevalent in the food blogosphere -- I think we would all be better informed and better able to sift through the PR hype of a lot of new (and old) places.

    Your point about taking a large sampling of many opinions on the Internet -- in essence, polling the market consensus -- about a place is certainly valid. But that only works if the market is composed of a diverse set of opinions. That is, from people of different backgrounds, different tastes, and different economic means. As it is, I still find most food blogs are written as hobbies, by authors with scant credentials to opine too authoritatively on the quality of a restaurant beyond his/her own happiness/satisfaction with the experience. These are usually good reads, but don't provide much useful information for the more serious diners among us. This argument is along the same lines used in Mario Batali's recent rant on Eater.com about the food blogosphere, though we don't necessarily arrive at the same conclusion.

  15. I generally agree, except for two things:

    (a) Many food bloggers aren't as well-versed in food, dining, and the NY restaurant scene as a professional critic from one of the local publications is. So at least to me, their opinions tend to carry much less weight.

    (b) Even those bloggers who possess a deep knowledge of eating and eating out tend to post their reviews after just one visit.

    On the other hand, it's often said that the traditional model of weekly food reviews (in print) is fast becoming obsolete in the face of more real-time forms of information dissemination like the Internet and the blogosphere. (Case in point: for those of us who follow these things closely, Fabricant's 'Off the Menu' column seems strangely behind the times). In addition, restaurants these days seem much more responsive to drastic change in the face of a particularly bad review -- either on the Internet or in print. So even a well-researched Times piece could be obsolete the week after it goes to print.

    Thus, I would almost propose ditching the once-a-week review altogether. I think the Times should adopt the Diner's Journal model and have its food critics post regular updates of their dining experiences in a more thoughtful and detailed manner than Bruni does on his blog now. This would give readers the benefit of more real-time information on what's going on in the restaurant scene, with that information coming from well-funded critics who can afford to eat often, eat plenty, and eat well. Basically, it's taking the current world of food blogging and turning it pro.

  16. Does anyone have any notes from a more recent dinner? I'm particularly curious about the setup.

    Is it always done in the same apartment, or do the venues change?

    How many people typically per dinner, and how many tables are set up in the room?

    Are there actual waiters employed for the evening?

  17. I actually buy into the idea that critics provide diners a valuable service by reviewing restaurants in their (relative) infancy. I dined at Provence a month ago and was sorely disappointed. My opinions of the place pretty much reflected the sentiments expressed in Bruni's review. As I posted in the Provence thread, I thought it was a place that relied too heavily on the restaurant's history and its admittedly attractive physical space to draw in the crowds -- at the expense of interesting food and acceptable execution.

    From early reports in the blogosphere, these were already my initial suspicions of the place. But I wish I had read Bruni's review first, to save myself a wasted evening at a restaurant that is evidently not as interested in providing the food of Provence as it is in mimicing the atmosphere of one of its many bistros.

    I suppose Provence would make a perfectly decent neighborhood joint. But its pedigree ensures its status as a 'destination' restaurant. So in my opinion, critics who come out with relatively early reviews of much-hyped spots might save a lot of people a fair amount of trouble. New York dining is a somewhat high-risk proposition, in that the opportunity cost of picking a bad restaurant comes at the expense of a potentially much better one.

    I don't buy into everything that Bruni writes. But I think he nailed his review of Provence -- it could get better, but not fast enough for his (and New York diners') expectations. I would even go so far as to say this one should have been a goose egg.

  18. Has anyone tried Rayuela? A lot of what I've read mentions the cocktail program (managed by Junior Merino from The Modern) as much as the food. I've considered stopping in once or twice since they've opened, maybe to try and beat the crowds before the restaurant gets 'discovered'.

    But I hesitated when I learned the chef was from Lucy Latin Kitchen, a restaurant I wasn't too fond of from my last visit.

  19. Stopped in at Bemelman's a couple of months ago and was sorely disappointed by their cocktails -- mostly in their execution, but also in their conception. They're certainly not doing things in the same vein as the latest round of new "serious" cocktail destinations downtown (PDT, Death & Co, Pegu and the like). On the other hand, wines by the glass were not your run-of-the-mill selections. Although pricey, you'll find things on there you won't normally get to taste by the glass.

×
×
  • Create New...