Just wanted to report on my dinner at ADNY, but the other ducasse threads were invaribaly cluttered with discussions of other impertinent things, as these trends have a tendency to do, so I thought I would create a new one. I was flying solo on this mission to extract the very best that NYC dinning had to offer, and while I'm not sure I had the best meal possible in New York, I had a better overall dinning experience than I've had in quite a while. A separate question is whether the meal at ducasse is worth the excess marginal cost as a meal at another 4 star or should be 4 star place like JG, Atelier Lespinasse etc... I was a bit tardy for my seven o'clock reservation on account of the weather but the staff was most gracious when I called to inform them of this fact. Score one for Ducasse; over the course of my nearly four hour dinning experience, the staff proved inflappable if not always responsive. I entered, pleasantries were exchanged, I was surprised to see a lot of the old crowd, including my old captain, had apparently departed or been forced out (the staff was reluctant to discuss this point), my coat was taken and I was quickly taken to my table, in the corner of the main dinning room directly across from the door to the kitchen. Not the best table in the house by any means, but acceptable. I had vowed to resist the extemeley heavily marked-up chamapaigne cart, but as it came around, my willpower dissolved in the face of bubblly temptation--the story of my life . I opted for the tette de cuvee they were pouring this evening: vueve cliquot le grande damme, 1995. Though young, (I believe this is the most recent vintage available), the wine was, as usual amazing; the only thing that bothered me was the inevitably huge mark-up which did not disappoint weighing in at about 50 per glass and 365 per bottle. (I should note that for that money one could (last year) obtain a first growth bordeaux at Morrel WIne bar, and I had a glass of the '94 d'Yquem for the same price last Feb. during my birthday celebration at Lespinasse.) However that being as it may, the vueve cliquot was frutiy (but not super dry) perfection. The gougres filled with bechamel that accompanied the aperetif were equally amazing. And like that we were off! I was offered a sniff of the last of the season's black truffles, and given a menu with a great many choices. THough the aroma was tempting, I decided to pass on the truffles (I did try the black truffle menu last year but felt it was overpriced and the dishes didn't showcase the truffles as well as say the dishes available at Jean-Georges did for a fraction of the cost). Being a die-heard pork lovver, I chose the suckling pig entree, and my interest in foie gras raviolis and the lingering aroma of the black truffle led me to choose the ravioli of foie gras and truffle in a duck connsume. After an extensive cosnultation with my captain, I chose the St. Pierre, fed exed from france as the fish course, and we were off. Well, actually, first there was the small matter of selecting the dessert. Unlike most restaurants in France or here in New York, ADNY asks that you select your dessert right after you select your dinner. However, the dessert selection is handled by the waiter rather than the captain, and the different levels of experience are placed in high relief. After some discussion, I made up my mind: this was a celebration and I was going to celebrate in style so I asked for two desserts (I'll keep you in suspense for the time being ) Next, the sommelier brought over the wine carte which consists of incredibly (and I do mean incredibly) marked up wines with few bargains to be found in the reserve list, though I should state that I'm not familiar with current auction prices and I may well have stumbled past them. The sommelier has a palrty (think one or two) selection of half bottles available. SInce none of those sounded particularly appealing, I asked the sommelier to pair a wine with each course and he agreed to do so (they've always done this but now they've institutionalized the practice on the menu with a set charge of three glasses for 90 dollars and five for 120). Finally, I could stop making decisions for a while and allow the experience to cruise along on autopilot! The evening began with an amuse bouche of a parementier of beef--I didn't let the description get any further as I had to send it back due to religous restrictions against the consumption of beef. The waitstaff remained composed and soon returned with the other amuse of the nigh, a cocotte (sp?) of a single egg with a fricassee of incredibly crunchy vegetables that were apparently (acording to the captain) cooked for a long time with pimiento peppers. The peppers added a bit of kick at some places and left the dish notably flat in others. Now that I think about it, that might well be a metaphor for my experience this night incrediblely complex and interesting when all elements came together but somewhat flat (but still rich and sometimes tasty) at others. In general, I felt that the entire amuse could benefit from a little bit of fluer de sel, but where the peppery taste was evident, it was a beautiful counterpoint to the unctuous richness of the egg yolk and the dish spoke to me with a simplistic clarity. Where the peppery quality was missing, I was left with a rich, unctuous bite with some interesting moutfeel, but lacking the flavor profile I have come to expect at a restaurant of this caliber. The next course as mentioned was the ravioli of foie gras seved in a duck consumme (made in a 'cappucino' style) and though truffles were prominently mentioned, they were represented in the dish as a series of the tiniest specks (calling this a dice would be incredibly generous) I've seen in some time. Despite the deinal of the waiter, I'm convinced that the duck consumme in addition to being fomed, included a heavy dose of butter and or cream as an enriching agent, and the tiny flecks of truffle provided an earthy counterpoint to the richness of the ravioli/consumme. I just wish there were bigger truffle shavings--one of a number of examples of the restaurant's comparative lack of generosity. For example, for a ten dollar supplement, at Jean-Georges, I had a dish of scallops and black trufles cut into nearly 1/4 inch cubes and the ratio of truffles to scallops was nearly 1 to 1. Nevertheless, the dish was tasty especially since the ravioli were so well prepared; they seemd to melt in one's mouth mingling seemlessly with the richness of the consumme only to be cut by the earthiness of truffle flakes (if any) in the mouth. An interesting, and shifting flavor profile. One other complaint, though not cold, I think I might have enjoyed this dish if it was a little warmer--please tell me I'm not getting as old as Wilfrid With this course, the sommelier chose to pour a mystery wine, and I learned only after a while that the wine was a riesling from Australia, I believe the producer was St. Mitchells but my wine notes are not handy. This wine wasn't as fruity as a Reisling from Germany or Austria might be. It smelled a bit of petrol but was otherwise uninteresting. If not for the tiny amount of truffle in the dish, it wouldn't have stood a chance; as it was the match was good but not great. This is the caliber of wine (at least to my somewhat inexperiened pallatte) that one should be more likely to find at blue hill rather than ducasse where it was going for 30 bucks a glass (it's hard to ignore the price in a situation like this). I was promised fresh john dory from France, and that is exactly what I received. The fish was incredibly fresh, and only lightly cooked. the flesh was firm and turned out to be one of the more tasty fish courses I've had in some time--I generally am not a fan of the fish course, and had briefly toyed with the idea of asking for the dish of shrimp and asparegus instead. The St. Pierre was served in a reduction whose name escapes me but it was mildly tart and acidic, and my only criticism of the dish is that not only was this reduction spooned around the outside of the plate, but it was also poured all over the fish so that like it or not, it would be part of every taste of the dish. While I enjoyed the interplay of the sauce of the fish, having the dish sauced in such a manner denied me the option of tasting all of the components of the dish with each other, as I am want to do. The St. Pierre was served with 'melting' artichokes that were quite tasty, though I would advise haute restaurants to leave off artichokes as garnishes as they wreak havoc on almost all wines. Overall, this was the dish I expected to dislike the most due to personal prejudices and was pleasantly surprised. To accompany this dish, the assistant sommelier poured a 2000 chasagne montrachet premier cru--I didn't think to write down the name of the producer--it was fills or something to that effect. This was the winning wine of the night (not counting the champaigne). Incredibly delicate and yet still earthy. THis was one of the few times I've actually felt like I was experiencing terroir. The wine worked well with the fish, its sauce and the surpsingly sweet and acidic tomato garnish, but couldn't stand up to the artichoke. After taking in a bite of artichoke, I more or less succeeded in cleasning my pallette with water bread and a small piece of fish. I then proceeded to enjoy the rest of the dish sans artichoke with the wine and took in the artichoke after everything else was finished. Note, while the first pour of the wine was on the skimpy side, a second full pour was initiated when the busser noticed my glass was empty and yet I still had food in front of me. I suppose this is as good a time as any to mention one of the most basic benchmarks of service: the state of the glasses. I would argue this takes precedence over the napkin test championed by mssr. S. Majumdar among others, but I suppose that is a question of some debate that will take generations to resolve. Anyway, I digress, back to ADNY. In spite of the small army of staff floating around, often standing around and intensely discussing the next step for table x or y, I found the level of my water and wine to be neglected a bit more than I would have expected at a restaurant of this caliber. For example, I actually stopped eating for a while hoping to catch the attention of a staff member so that I could initiate a request for more wine. After a while, a busser came to clear the glass and he asked if I might like some more wine. Of course I did and the problem was solved. However, my water glass often suffered from neglect as well suggesting this is an element of service that the staff should pay more attention to--they're more than capable; it just seems like they have a tendency to glide around on autopilot a bit too much. The next and final course was the most intricate of the evening. This meal was a riff on the great taste and wide variety of products derived from the pig. My main criticism of this dish is that given the set-up of Ducasse, and the fact that they don't turn tables, this dish should have been presented in two services. Hey even a restaurant like Cello was able to present a lobster in three services, surely Ducasse can present a main course of such potnetial and such great taste in a more thought out manner; doing this course in two services would have eliminated some of the clutter and brought the dish into a clear focus--after this isn't Gagnaire. The dish consisted of several (4) slices of pork (loin?) that were quite lean but tender at the same time. There was a slice of the fattiest most unctuous pork belly I've ever seen (in terms of the quality of the underlying quality, I think this may have been the best pork belly I've ever had). My problem with the belly was that in an attempt to crisp it, the kitchen sent out a pork belly that wasn't crispy but hard, my langioule (sp?) was no help in cutting through it. I had to bring the whole thing to my mouth to take it apart--I suppose it's a good thing I was there solo as a date would have undoubtedly been disgusted by this practice. A blood sausage (that was milder than expected both in terms of spcicing and pork taste) along with a creamy polenta rounded out the dish. The dish was garnished with roast apples that brought (at least to me an unwelcome element of sweetness to the dish) and were after experiementation with each component ignored. (the apple worked the best with the unctuous belly but the belly polenta or belly loin combination was more compelling). The saucing consisted of a meat reduction liberally sprinkled with those nearly microscopic flecks of black truffle, though they made a smaller impact on this dish than the ravioli where the earthiness of the truffles actually contributed a vital charactersitic to the dish. My only other complaints here were that the sauce was at the early stage of congealing and the dish, though warm, could have stood to be bit hotter--Geez I'm turning into an old fart, but there is no substitute for a hot dish. A cheese course was offered but declined as I was desparate to get to my desserts. I ordered a soufle of exotic fruits, the most dominant of which was passion fruit, though there was a cocount element as well. the soufle was accompanied by the most amazing sorbet, which was a mixture of coconut milk, bannana and mint. Alone, the soufle was unbelievably and almost unedibly tart and acidic, but in combination with the soothing sorbet, this dessert was among the more amazing specimens offered in NYC (the only desserts I recall being on this level in NYC are the desserts P. Caliot sent out during my b-day dinner at Lespinasse last year, but alas, Caliot seems to have departed for greener pastures.) Not content with one dessert, I asked for another: the cheesecake ice cream with a berry compote and almond crumble. Again, as in the soufle, the berry compote was unbelievably tart, but the combination was a strong one. The cheesecake icecream had a flavor that was more representative of a curd, but after some digging, I found a semisolid cheesecake like substance that substantially imporved this dessert as well. All in all, I found these two desserts to be amongst the best I've had at DUcasse (the other standout being a pinapple dessert that is served on occasion) and indeed in all of NYC. The macaroons and truffles served with dessert were exquisiste as always. After the main dessert, I was brought a sorbet of yougurt flecked with black pepper in a pasionfruit mango sauce. WHile I've never understood the point of having a sorbet course of this sourt AFTER dessert, it was enjoyable--especially the hot pepper and the cooling sorbet, though at this point I was done with tartness and basically left the fruit soup part of the composition alone. No one asked about coffee, so I didn't have any. Another minor gaffe occurred with the post dessert cart; it was brough while I was still inundated with the sorbet and was still sampling the macaroons (chocolate and vanilla this time--I prefer the strawberry ones that are often on offer), and I asked that the lolipop and caramels be packed for me as there was no way I was going to eat them, but requested that waiter give me a few minutes of a breather and then return with the absolutley amazing candied fruits. However, he must have gotten busy as he never returned. Since I figured I had already ingested enough calories to feed a starving african country for a week, I decided to leave, but in retrospect, as I think about the amazing strawberry and pineapple candies, I am wishing I had been more insistent (I had enough wine such that I believe I asked for the candies again at the time the check was brought with no response but I couldn't swear to that.) A very hefty check was presented and paid, and I was off. When I got home and went to examine the treats I planned to take into the office tomorrow, I found that the restaurant has become quite stingy witht he packing of caramels; I didn't even get one of each flavor where as in the past I had often received a bag that was overflowing with multiple amounts of each. Sometimes they even let me pack my own selection--the course I shall request in the future as I am now faced with the cruel dilemma of taking the candy in for my coworkers (which i more or less promised to do) or trying it myself as I no longer can do both. To say the least, I'm a bit upset with the restaurant's stigniness in this regard (especially in light of previous generosity I supose they donn't have to provide any candy to go, but when practically everyone takes candy to go, to offer such a paltry amount strikes me as a bit of a faux paux.) All in all, then, the experience I had at Ducasse was amongst my most poisitve there, though the service was a bit iffy, and I might have made some minor alterations to the dishes. My basic complaint is despite some striking acts of generosity, I still felt the restaurant was being stingy on little things that no competant host or even manager would allow--especially to a repeat customer. Similarly, there were errors in service that I was very surprised to find a in a staff of what I know to be such quality. Perhaps they have been lulled into complacency by the fact that Grimes gave them their four stars and now ADNY is recognized as one of the best tables in all of NYC? I don't know, but a little tweaking is in order. The problem is that while mistakes are inevitable, the high marginal cost of ADNY compared to other top tier places in NYC is commanded in large part because the restaurant seems to be assuring its dinners that they will not have to deal with some of the vagaries just mentioned that often crop up at other four star restaurants. So when ADNY partially fails to deliver on that promise, I tend to be a bit more critical (rightly so in the only view that conts: mine). But overall, despite my nitpicks, I think I would go back again, but would much prefer to go back if someone else were futting the bill! Hope this review helps others in their evaluaiton of whether or not to take the plunge and try Ducasse. (Surprisngly the dinning room was pretty full, though the tiny room at teh very back of the restaurant was not opened.) I have to say, though, that the staff and kitchen could barely keep up with the diners that were ; they should think twice about using the extra space without more staff behind the stoves and in the dinning room.
