slkinsey
-
Posts
11,151 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by slkinsey
-
-
Right... it all depends on what you are counting. I mean, the National Restaurant Association may be counting breakfast at BK as a "restaurant visit." When I think about it, I eat out more like 7 times a week, because I buy all my lunches in midtown during the week. But personally, I don't consider those five lunches "dining out" and wouldn't report them as such unless they were at a "real restaurant."
-
Very nice pictures, too.
-
Katy Sparks now heads the Compass kitchen, replacing Andelbradt, according to the NY Times.
For posterity:
KATY SPARKS is now in charge of the kitchen at COMPASS, 208 West 70th Street. Ms. Sparks who was the chef at Quilty's in SoHo, which closed, had been trying to open her own restaurant. . . . She described her new menu at Compass as global, with some Germanic touches like spaetzle, horseradish and pumpkinseed oil. She replaces Mark Andelbradt. The front room of the restaurant is to become a wine bar. -
Steven, that is a very good point about the type of restaurant normally visited by New Yorkers.
I was initially questioning your assertion that NYers are roughly equal with the rest of America in terms of restaurant visits per week, but when one figures in all the stops at McDonald's and their ilk I can see how the numbers might be roughly equal. On the other hand, if one compares non-chain, non-fast-food restaurant visits per week, I am sure that NYers are well above the national average. And this may contribute to a certain cultural literacy among NYers in terms of eating out, because let's face it, one is not likely to have a lot of interesting conversations about what the new chef at Applebee's is doing with the fiesta lime chicken (although I can imagine some spirited debates on the merits of the McRib sandwich).
How often do you suppose that the average middle to upper-middle class NYer eats out per week?
-
Unlike the Dallas Observer that solicits reader's votes on "the best of", D Magazine does their own thing time and time again and I have yet to come across a food article that is useful. Heck, when they have their "best of" issue they try 5 (count 'em) margaritas, 5 salsas, 5 barbeque sandwiches, etc. It's absurd.
Presumably, though, they arrive at the list of which five places or products to test by some kind of process, though. Right?
For example, although there are hundreds of pizza places in NYC, if I were writing an article I wouldn't have trouble deciding on at least a preliminary list of ten, after which time I would perhaps visit the places I had not yet experienced and reduce the list further to the final five. I also wouldn't necessarily feel like I had to devote a few column inches of my article to a description of that process. Needless to say, however, some people would feel that I had slighted their favorite place by not including it.
As for soliciting customer input in making the ratings... it inevitably ends up being a popularity contest that favors establishments that are the most effective in getting their patrons to submit votes, rather than a true gauge of quality. I see that kind of thing as "Most popular ____ in ____" rather than "best of."
-
Good review of Masa here by S. Irene Virbila in the LA Times food section. Scroll past the stuff on Per Se (registration required). Some interesting tidbits:
We have Keller to thank for luring one of L.A.'s two four-star chefs away to Manhattan. Masa Takayama's style is so personal that without him, Ginza Sushiko, his Beverly Hills restaurant, could never be the same. So he closed it.Like Keller, Masa is leading with his strong suit in New York; the menu the night I ate there was made up of his greatest hits. The format is the same as at Ginza Sushiko too. It's omakase only, but here it's $300 to $500 per person, more than it was in Beverly Hills. But then again, he's not intending to have two seatings. "I thought about it," he says, "but no. People don't want to be looking at their watches. They want to feel relaxed." Part of what you're paying for at Masa is the luxury of time, along with the exclusivity. -
ps: there's a really good description of the food in my colleague s. irene virbila's piece in the food section yesterday.
Of course, when one says "the food section" in the NY forum, it makes sense to mention which paper if you don't mean the NY Times.
Anyway, here is the story (registration required).Some interesting tidbits:
[Time Warner Center] developer Kenneth Himmel approached Keller first, and Keller struck a deal for his restaurant and the right to choose the other chefs who would go into the space. He picked [Masa] Takayama, the only other Californian, along with New York's Jean-Georges Vongerichten and Gray Kunz, and Chicago's Charlie Trotter.Keller had the right to choose the other restaurants in the space? Did we know this before? Interesting.
When he began planning, Keller said the New York restaurant was not going to be the French Laundry "per se" so often that the two words became the name. But at first encounter, Per Se seems very much the French Laundry East.The meal was every bit as good as those I've had at the French Laundry — phenomenal for a restaurant that had only been open five days.I have to echo Russ' recommendation of Virbila's review. It's an interesting and informative one. Also has interesting information on Masa.
-
See... the thing is that you can get a liter of top-grade kickass evoo straight from the first pressing (actually straight from the first pressing is bitter and nasty -- it has to wait a while) most anywhere in Tuscany or Sicily or Liguria for around 30 bucks.
-
As far as the size of DC, you have to figure in that most people who consider the Nation's capital their home live "just outside of DC" -- Arlington, Bethesda, etc. That adds a lot of people to the mix. But it's still much smaller than NYC.
Well, yes. But if you start figuring in "just outside of NYC" (a.k.a. "metropolitan New York") then NYC gets even more outlandishly huge in population.
-
Hmmmm...
You know... I can understand what might make one bottle of aceto balsamico tradizionale worth a hundred dollars where others are worth fifty because you can taste/experience a clear difference (more aged, thicker, etc.). But I am at a complete loss as to what could make one liter of evoo worth a hundred dollars where other amazingly good bottles cost fifty dollars or even thirty dollars. I mean, what could this guy be doing that is so different from what everyone else is doing, and does it make a difference? I have to wonder whether Per mio figlio evoo would be a clear winner against, say, Rocca della Macia evoo in a side-by-side tasting.
-
A dear friend of mine grew up on Long Island and now lives in Westchester, and the class diference between the two of us is underscored every time he tells me that he went to a Chinese restaurant and ordered egg rolls and shrimp with lobster sauce and lo mein. That stuff is delicious, no question, but -- to my mind, at least -- it's also a clear class-marker; your upper-middles moved past kung pao chicken a few decades ago.
Ah... except that it's making a comeback, at least at Grand Sichuan International Midtown, it is.
-
Forget about the restaurants. What about the patrons - the local ones - not the out of town patrons like me? If someone's an upper middle class person - or beer and pretzels rich - how many times a year does that person dine in these places? So - even in a city like New York - isn't there a premium placed on being new and trendy? If you're only going to go to a 4 star 2 or 4 or 6 times a year - isn't it better to go to the ones with the current buzz - as opposed to the older more established ones - so you'll have something to talk about at cocktail parties?
I think that's probably true of a certain set of people in New York. But, in a city of this size, I don't think one can overestimate the number of fabulously wealthy people who live here. There are plenty of people in NYC who eat out at three and four star restaurants 5 to 8 times a week. Certainly it is not unusual for a wealthy businessperson to eat lunch at a top-tier restaurant (perhaps even the same top-tier restaurant) every day during the work week. I know relatively young people in big money-making careers who eat at a three or four star place on at least a weekly basis. For these people, I don't know that trendiness and newness makes a big difference.
Now, I certainly do know a whole crowd of people for whom getting their early or (preferably) first while the scene is still hot is a major big deal. For example, I have friends who would much rather have gone to Per Se in the opening week than 6 months later when the restaurant had really started to hum -- and it's not like going both times was financially possible. Besides, Per Se won't be the hip, new "scene place" in six months. But, I don't think these are the diners that keep a restaurant alive and vital, and these are not the diners who are going back to AD/NY and Mix, Daniel and Cafe Boulud again and again.
-
Babka, I think this has to several things...
First, New York is, as you may well imagine, a gigantic city. This means that one is almost always able to find a fairly large group of people who share even a relatively obscure interest. What this means is that people like Steven and Bux and me and et cetera are able to accumulate a decent sized circle of friends who like to talk about food, and certain aspects of cuisine, to the same degree that we do. This element, I think, is not to be underestimated. For example, compare New York with Washington DC as others have done in this thread. Washington is by no means a small town, but consider the following: The population of NY as of 2000 is 8,008,278. The population of DC as of 2000 is 527,059. NYC is roughly fifteen times the size of DC. This means that, assuming that the culture of both cities is exactly the same, there would be fifteen intellectual foodies in NYC to every one in DC.
Second, of course the cultures of various cities in the States is not the same. For a variety of reasons, NYC is the "cultural and high art capital of America." This is to say that we have more arts institutions, more leading arts institutions and a more highly developed art culture than any other city in the US. This goes from places like the Lincoln Center entities (Metropolitan Opera, NY Philharmonic, etc.) and Carnegie Hall to the Museum Mile entities (Met Museum, Gugenheim, etc.) and similar cultural institutions to Broadway and Off-Broadway and Off-Off-Broadway (etc.) to the SoHo galleries to the Fashion industry to the Publishing industry and so on. People with a professional or strong personal interest in these things tend to gravitate to New York, and as a result we tend to have a higher percentage or people who like to analyze and talk about the subjects that interest them much the same way they might talk about the theater or a sculpture or a piece of literature. Similarly, I am sure that many discussions and ways of looking at things common to Los Angeles are influenced by that city's position as the center of the television program and movie making entertainment industry.
Going back to the earlier comparison, what this means is that there will be more like one hundred intellectual foodies in NYC to every one in DC. In my own personal experience, conversations like those used as examples in this thread are not all that unusual. This is not to say, of course, that there aren't plenty of great things about other cities in the US and plenty of great reasons to want to live in them -- nor that there aren't plenty of bad things about NYC.
All that said, however... to be honest, I think that the effect you have perceived on these boards is more due to the fact that users like Fat Guy, Bux, etc. happen to live in NYC. Now, it may be the case (and indeed I am making the case) that NYC generally has more of this type of person than other American cities. But if it just so happened that these members lived in, say Portland -- and I am sure that such people are to be found there -- you might be saying the same thing about discussion in the PNW forum.
-
Yea, lunch is an amazing bargain -- probably one of the best in the city for a restaurant of that caliber. I'd go back for that in a second.
The other thing I forgot to mention... we me there for lunch at 1:30, which didn't strike me as all that late. But it quickly became apparent that we were their last lunch seating, and we more or less had the place to ourselves from 2:15 to 3:30. What was great about that is that we were totally comfortable, didn't feel like eyes were on us, didn't feel any pressure to hurry our meal, basically were made to feel that it was their pleasure to have us there for a long lunch. When it came time to ask for the check, I had only to look back at the waiter's station where I immediately caught our waiter's eye and he came over with the check already prepared. This highly trained, entirely unobtrusive yet always available service that is not stuffy or overly formal is really something I appreciate and one of the things I feel makes a big difference between a two star and a three star place.
Oh, and one other thing... It was very interesting for me to eat at what is more or less a neo-French fish restaurant, because I tend to favor more simple, elemental fish preparations such as one finds in Italian cooking. Both JJ and I agreed that the dishes there, while really quite excellent, did not necessarily highlight the essence of the main ingredient the way they do at, say, Esca. This is to say that the halibut dish, which I really enjoyed and would order again in a second, was not exactly bursting with halibut flavor. Rather, the chicken liver jus seemed to play the starring role and the halibut was a textural companion offering some flavor accents. Indeed, if I were to get really picky I'd say the halibut was slightly overcooked to my taste when I tried it on its own, and could have been moister. But, interestingly, this didn't really detract from my enjoyment of the dish the way it might have in a more minimalistic Italian-influenced presentation.
-
JJ, great write up, dude. I am not sure I have much to add to what you have said. Since we talked about the dishes as we ate them, you've captured my impressions very well.
The one thing I'd mention is that it is damn reasonable for lunch at a 3 star place. We ate a lot of food and ended up spending around 80 bucks a person. Probably would have spent around 65 if we had each had a glass of wine instead of the half bottle of riesling.
-
Speaking of UWS, has anyone tried "Carne", the steakhouse on Bway and 105?
Yep. That's in my 'hood. The service was terrible when they first started out, but now it is a pretty damn good place. The best things on the menu also tend to be the least expensive (skirt steak and pork chop), which is nice. Not sure I'd travel to eat there, but it's a good neighborhood place.
-
Hey Sam and JJ,
Any chance of doing this either this weekend or March 21st weekend?
Preferably March 21st.
Although I would really like to come up this weekend, I don't think I can.
I'd prefer trying to make it a as cheap as possible good offal day,
although I do need to try a Batali place before long.
Not that Batali's places charge an arm and a leg, but I'm still trying to delay
it until my cash flow improves.
Tacos de cesos sounds good. Donde?
By East Village spleen sandwiches, do you mean First Ave. Foccaceria?
Me gusto Pampa por mixed grill.
Sounds cool. Eric Malson told me about a great place for an even bigger, guttier mixed grill we have to try.
-
The mushrooms are roasted and served on a solitary white plate. Have your fork ready when they arrive; even good friends will betray you.
Interesting... It's like she went to Hearth with Ellen Shapiro.
-
Aaaaaaaw, Momie!
Personally, I think you guys should have gone in there and taken one for the team.
-
What I get out of this is that your Italian MIL uses home-canned tomatoes 95% of the time instead of factory-canned tomatoes. Well, by all means, people who have access to home canned tomatoes should certainly avail themseves of that product for their sauces.
But still... the fact remains that very few fully-cooked tomato sauces in Italy are made with fresh tomatoes as opposed to canned/jarred tomatoes.
-
(ahem) Get your ass back to work, Shaw!
-
Well... first of all, I'd lose the fresh tomatoes. Do what they do in Italy and find yourself a big can of peeled whole San Marzano tomatoes. Fresh tomatoes should only be used in quickly cooked sauces that are designed to emphasize the freshness of the primary ingredient.
Second, what are you going after for your pizza sauce? If you want something simple, subtle and robust for the pizza, I'd suggest using nothing more than salt, pepper, hand-crushed San Marzano tomatoes and plenty of good quality evoo. The reason your FIL's sauce is more subtle and yet better is likely because it has better primary ingredients and less other stuff. No onion. No garlic. No herbs. Maybe a little top-quality concentrato (tomato paste) if you think it needs to have a thicker consistency. Cook together for around 30 minutes, dress with additional evoo off the heat. Cook the concentrato alone in the oil before adding tomatoes if you want to use concentrato. All herbs, etc. you can add raw to the pizza when you bake it (or, better yet, after you take it out of the oven). This is a reasonable facsimile of the Neapolitan way, the main difference being that a wood fired oven is to hot that the sauce wouldn't be cooked at all -- the canned tomatoes, evoo and salt would be put on the crust raw and would cook in the heat of the oven.
If you really want to add the onion and minced garlic and use a slow cooker, make sure you cook the garlic and onion in a little evoo before adding it to the cooker. Onion and garlic will never cook properly if they are just simmered in the sauce rather than being softened first in fat.
-
So, on our way out of the parking lot of Graham's, Ellen points to the big road-sign in front of Twin Tops. And do you know what it said in fire-engine red letters:
"Check us out on HollyEats.com"
This is why I hate Holly Moore.
Dude. That is fucking awesome.
-
Bibimbap, as it is usually spelled, is basically a bowl of rice with vegetables and sometimes meat on top. Sometimes in a stone bowl. Good information may be found in this thread.
NYC Culinary Cultural Fluency
in New York: Dining
Posted
Good points, Hest88. I would also bet that there is much more discussion on these boards about things like "sustainabilty, nutrition, food marketing, etc." from the members in your neck of the woods, reflecting the higher degree of interest and general fluency in these topics over there.