Jammed bistros v. spacious restos: price/quality ratio

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Host’s Note

I decided to split this off from the Regalade topic because it seemed to stand by itself as a topic for discussion.

John

Well, I do think that La Régalade is still by far one of the hottest bistrots in Paris. Mostly, I think it remains the model for "bistronomiques", and that few offer that food quality at that price, actually applying grands restaurants techniques and care at a great price. I was so excited to discover that good truffles have finally appeared this year, and not looking forward to the 230 eur of the feuilleté belle humeur or the 350 of the Rostang menu. La Régalade sounded like the way to satisfy my longing without having to reinforce my stake in organised crime.

Anyway, some pictures and more specific comments here.

Edited January 20, 2008 by John Talbott (log)

[julot-les-pinceaux]

It's me again. More pictures from the next truffle festival meal, even better can be found here. scallops, hare pie and duck this time.

I think La Régalage is actually too good. At some point, I am not sure that it makes sense to present that level of art (or craftmanship, I am not interested in that debate) in such an informal setting. Of course this is the logic of hard discount: they can only sell for that low a price because they have significant volumes, so the room is packed and they rotate tables three times a night. And I am happy that I can eat really top notch food for non-Arpège prices.

But really, I am asking the question: does that whole frenzy of bistrots make sense in the end? Do we always want to spend less time and money on food? Can't we just eat less the rest of the time and take more time when we're out? Don't get me wrong: I am uninterested by the whole decorum and circus of le Meurice or le Plaza, the role of social mirror of the restaurant, the rituals and the rigidity, the dress code, etc. But frankly, the hard work of cooks, farmers, and the others, deserve better than the bistrot model, noisy, tiny, speedy and, yes, affordable. Can't we show more respect?

[Ptipois]

But really, I am asking the question: does that whole frenzy of bistrots make sense in the end? Do we always want to spend less time and money on food? Can't we just eat less the rest of the time and take more time when we're out? Don't get me wrong: I am uninterested by the whole decorum and circus of le Meurice or le Plaza, the role of social mirror of the restaurant, the rituals and the rigidity, the dress code, etc. But frankly, the hard work of cooks, farmers, and the others, deserve better than the bistrot model, noisy, tiny, speedy and, yes, affordable. Can't we show more respect?

←

I don't think the quoted post makes much sense, but from what I have gathered, I can at least ask this:

Are you mourning the fact that a reasonable number of people in France can still afford eating at a bistrot? I wouldn't worry, it's only a matter of time until you're perfectly contented.

Edited January 19, 2008 by Ptipois (log)

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Well, first I think that 32eur for a dinner is hardly affordable. This does not result from any decision about it, from Sarkozy or Trichet or Doucet (though I am always tempted to blame the first two), but from a general price structure. I am sure that those guys (restaurateurs) can only offer very good food at these comparatively decent prices by offering it in these conditions: tiny, speedy and noisy. They could not make ends meet otherwise. So if few people can afford restaurants or bistrots, it is not because prices are arbitrarily excessive.

No one in today's middle class in France can afford that kind of prices on a regular basis. Even at Régalade prices, going out to eat is an event for a regular French budget. La Régalade, just like most restaurants in Paris, is just full of "bobos" that are very well-off.

That said, my point is that la Régalade (and a few other places) offer some of the best cooking skills and ingredients, and that it is actually a shame to have to eat this perfect duck on a table where there is no room for the plates and glasses, unable to move my elbows, and hardly able to follow a conversation with my guest, not to mention that I have to free the table in 40 minutes. There is such a thing as the conditions of a meal.

A contrario, I say that this demonstrates that there is some sense in the usual fine dining takes place: with more room, more time, more service, and yes, at accordingly higher prices. It does not have to be like le Meurice, but having some room and some time and some calm is not irrelevant. And yes, it has a cost.

Good ingredients well cooked are the exception in the world we live in. They are luxury. It's just a fact. It is a consequence of the amount of qualified labour it requires, and the cost of it. You may regret that fact, and I may regret it too.

Since very good meals are de facto exceptional, I am saying that we should treat them with more respect (and me too, by the way). I am also saying that, if we are serious about enjoying and honoring the hard work of talented people, a more traditional restaurant is more appropriate than a bistrot, which in and of itself is designed to grab some quick meal on the run, not to seat for a special moment.

And while I'm it, I am also saying that it may make more sense to eat a few almonds as a meal more often, and to accept to pay a bit more for quality cooking. That sure is not the way it used to be. But the World changes.

Edited January 19, 2008 by julot-les-pinceaux (log)

[Ptipois]

Thanks for clarifying. Well we're not in agreement about these subjects, Julot (though I'm OK with your first three paragraphs), but you know all about it.

My main disagreement is about this: "Good ingredients well cooked are the exception in the world we live in. They are luxury. It's just a fact." There is some truth to that, but no, it's not a fact. Not all-encompassing, not devoid of variations and nuances, and above all not inevitable. And certainly not universal. As often, you stay stuck on the notions of upscale, luxury and exception without taking into account the many options that are available outside of the much-trodden path of the restaurant and "fine dining" world. And also the interesting variations of products, their availability, their quality, which ones rise, which ones go down, in the course of decades. For instance, affordable chicken is of much better quality in the 2000s than was affordable chicken back in the 1960s and 1970s if you weren't shopping at farms on a regular basis. As is baguette now in the Noughties, as compared to baguette back in the Eighties.

About the second part of your post, I am a bit perplexed. I think I see your point but I'm not sure what you'd recommend. Or am I gathering that you are advocating the death of the French bistrot by suggesting that the good bistrot chefs move to more bourgeois surroundings with white napkins, fringed lampshades and well-spaced tables, thus becoming upscale restaurant chefs and charging accordingly, just because they happen to cook good food?

And then, if I follow your reasoning path, leave the remaining bistrot chefs (the mediocre ones) to their chipped, close-apart oak tables, noisy crammed rooms and cabinet-drawer kitchens because that's all their diners deserve?

I agree that one would sometimes prefer eating a good andouillette without getting an elbow launched from the next table in your eye and without needing earplugs. But that has, to some extent, always been part of the bistrot tradition. And is that a sufficient reason to advocate such a drastic "social purification" of restaurant settings and standards?

Not to mention the fact that you may also eat utterly terrible food with all the time you need, in a quiet and graceful setting, with a generous number of penguins attending to your desires. Why necessarily equate the setting with the quality?

Edited January 20, 2008 by Ptipois (log)

[John Whiting]

As the Western economy goes belly up, to condemn a good bistro because it is too cheap takes on the complexion of a joke.

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Thanks for clarifying. Well we're not in agreement about these subjects, Julot (though I'm OK with your first three paragraphs), but you know all about it.

My main disagreement is about this: "Good ingredients well cooked are the exception in the world we live in. They are luxury. It's just a fact." There is some truth to that, but no, it's not a fact. Not all-encompassing, not devoid of variations and nuances, and above all not inevitable. And certainly not universal. As often, you stay stuck on the notions of upscale, luxury and exception without taking into account the many options that are available outside of the much-trodden path of the restaurant and "fine dining" world. And also the interesting variations of products, their availability, their quality, which ones rise, which ones go down, in the course of decades. For instance, affordable chicken is of much better quality in the 2000s than was affordable chicken back in the 1960s and 1970s if you weren't shopping at farms on a regular basis. As is baguette now in the Noughties, as compared to baguette back in the Eighties.

About the second part of your post, I am a bit perplexed. I think I see your point but I'm not sure what you'd recommend. Or am I gathering that you  are advocating the death of the French bistrot by suggesting that the good bistrot chefs move to more bourgeois surroundings with white napkins, fringed lampshades and well-spaced tables, thus becoming upscale restaurant chefs and charging accordingly, just because they happen to cook good food?

And then, if I follow your reasoning path, leave the remaining bistrot chefs (the mediocre ones) to their chipped, close-apart oak tables, noisy crammed rooms and cabinet-drawer kitchens because that's all their diners deserve?

I agree that one would sometimes prefer eating a good andouillette without getting an elbow launched from the next table in your eye and without needing earplugs. But that has, to some extent, always been part of the bistrot tradition. And is that a sufficient reason to advocate such a drastic "social purification" of restaurant settings and standards?

Not to mention the fact that you may also eat utterly terrible food with all the time you need, in a quiet and graceful setting, with a generous number of penguins attending to your desires. Why necessarily equate the setting with the quality?

←

I am indeed focusing on the exception. Totally guilty of that.

But I am also focusing on a qualitative approach as opposed to a quantitative one. Exceptional food is not only about the quality level. There's something more to it, a sensitivity, an art if you like. That's the case at La Régalade. What I say is that art, that level of commitment, that way of putting yourself at risk, which Doucet does every day, does deserve more attention and better conditions than the bistrot conditions. I am not in any way equating fancy dining with quality, less again with exceptional food. Of course you do have bistrot food in some penguin restaurants, not even a good one at that. I say that there is such a thing as the adequation between the food and the place, and that we diners could think about it instead of focusing on prices.

I am not advocating anything in terms of closing bistrots and making career. Market takes care of that and my views usually have no impact on it. Actually, all my favourite places tend to close. My only focus is on my pleasure and the one of those who listen to my advice or exchange views with me.

Yes, I do feel that there is something absurdly low in the Régalade prices. Again, it's like playing a Beethoven quartett in the métro. You can have music in the métro, maybe. And it can be pleasant and appropriate. And I'd be happy to have the Alban Berg Quartett playing for me on line 4. But I'd rather have the chance to listen to them in better conditions of calm, silence, concentration. And I am not shocked that it would cost more.

You are absolutely right about the quality level. I mentioned the Paul-Bert as a place that does not raise the same issue as la Régalade. Actually, it is all in all a rather expensive for a bistrot, whereas la Régalade is cheap for a gastro. Food there neither requires nor deserve the kind of attention that Doucet's food deserves.

So my statement "good ingredients..." was indeed wrong. What I meant was "exceptional ingredients cooked with passion and sensitivity...". You're right that good ingredients decently cooked are available here and there, and even more and more so.

Edited January 20, 2008 by julot-les-pinceaux (log)

[pierre45]

INteresting discussion and a smart move on john's part to divorce the topic from La regalade.

I agree with most of the points made by Ptipos.However what Julot is saying is that there is a need for restaurants that provide outstanding food in less hectic surrounding at relatively reasonable prices,lets say at 50 euros/person.The fact is such restaurants exist and let me name a few

-Sensing

-Versace

-gaya rive gauche

-Le violon d'ingres

-spring

etc and etc

THis list is subjective ,of course.but let's be honnest when it comes to food its always personal

[plafield]

INteresting discussion and a smart move on john's part to divorce the topic from La regalade.

I agree with most of the points made by Ptipos.However what Julot is saying is that there is a need for restaurants that provide outstanding food in less hectic surrounding at relatively reasonable prices,lets say at 50 euros/person.The fact is such restaurants exist and let me name a few

-Sensing

-Versace

-gaya rive gauche

-Le violon d'ingres

-spring

etc and etc

THis list is subjective ,of course.but let's be honnest when it comes to food its always personal

←

Pierre, Thanks for the list. Of course it's subjective, but when folks who really care about and are knowledgable about food make recommendations, there is often overlap and that's where I usually cull my lists from. I agree with Julot that there are times when I am willing to pay more for a less hectic, crowded atmosphere in which to enjoy a truly high quality meal but am not looking for the high end, outrageously expensive experience. I'd love to hear other's recs for this "between" type of dining in Paris.

[Carlsbad]

Speaking of this kind of restaurant, is it true that Les Ormes is closed?

[julot-les-pinceaux]

They turned to a traiteur.

[John Talbott]

They turned to a traiteur.

←

Really, the last time I went they were offering one hot dish (at lunch) and typical cheese & sausage boards. Wonder what happened?

[Carlsbad]

This seems to go against the idea that more space for a little more money will work.

[Pork Belly]

Host’s Note

I decided to split this off from the Regalade topic because it seemed to stand by itself as a topic for discussion.

John

Well, I do think that La Régalade is still by far one of the hottest bistrots in Paris. Mostly, I think it remains the model for "bistronomiques", and that few offer that food quality at that price, actually applying grands restaurants techniques and care at a great price. I was so excited to discover that good truffles have finally appeared this year, and not looking forward to the 230 eur of the feuilleté belle humeur or the 350 of the Rostang menu. La Régalade sounded like the way to satisfy my longing without having to reinforce my stake in organised crime.

Anyway, some pictures and more specific comments here.

←

Throw in L'Ami Jean into the La Regalade mix. I don't know how many times while I am eating the terrific food at L'Ami Jean and thinking how wonderful the whole experience would be if the tables were a little bigger (I am not a big guy, all 120 pound), the wait staff has a little more room to manuever and the noise level toned down a bit. I've eaten solo seated in a two top and still have to constantly shift glasses, silverware and bread basket to accomendate the plate and casserole. This experience does not do justice to the food. Raise the price by 10E and offer a more pleasant experience, at least to a marginally comfortable level. La Regalade is only a touch better. And to mention my third favorite for food, L'Avant Gout. I almost always eat solo at these three places. For these reasons, I rarely recommend them to friends even though they serve the best bistro food in Paris.

Edited January 23, 2008 by Pork Belly (log)

[Felice]

I completely understand the sentiments expressed here, but on the contrary am very thankful that places like L’Ami Jean and La Regalade continue to thrive in Paris. Sure they could charge a bit more with more space, but then what would that leave us? Inferior places that serve industrial products at low prices? The fact that you can eat very very well at a handful of places for under 40€ means that eating well is still affordable and not only available to a lucky few.

Whenever I eat at an ‘average’ unknown bistro (normally when I am not choosing the restaurant) I always walk away disappointed knowing I could have gone somewhere like la Regalade for roughly the same price but for far better quality. The other night I was with friends and against my wishes went to a terrible place after the theater that served the same mediocre crap you can find anywhere. But unfortunately I was the only one who noticed and cared.

A place like Le Verre Volé uses Bordier butter, Thibault vegetables and Desnoyer meats and so I am sure could charge more if they had more comfortable surroundings but aren’t we thankful that places like this exist, that you can go to a little hole in the wall and eat the same products that they are serving in 2 and 3 star restaurants for a fraction of the price?

I wish that more of the average bistros would care more about the quality of what they are serving and that diners would not settle for the mediocrity that one finds in most bistros in the same price point. I am truly thankful that places like La Regalade exist and only wish there were more of them. I would much rather sacrifice a little comfort of surroundings over quality of the food.

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Of course we are grateful that we can have exceptional food at cheap prices. That was my starting point. And of course l'Ami Jean is the other obvious response.

But my point, once again, is not about quality only. It is about art, the attention it deserves, and the conditions in which it can or cannot be fully enjoyed.

And I disagree with the "can afford" agreement. Prices of those places still reserve them to middle and upper class. The difference between bistrot and gastro is not the clientele, it is the circumstances in which they go there. And bistrots is supposed to be more casual, a place where you go more regularly. My point is that La Régalade food deserves better than a casual attention, and we should recognise that we could have a better overall experience if we agreed to pay a bit more.

That said, it not a little bit more. Imagine having more time and room at la Régalade: Say 30 seats instead of 40 and no rotation in the night. Then the turnover would be something 3 times less. So prices would not be bistrots at all. At 180eur for a meal (three times what I paid for the first dinner), you can totally go to les Elysées or Apicius or Robuchon.

[hughw]

Sure La Regalade and Chez l'ami Jean are noisy and crowded, but what a treat to have great food at a reasonable cost. And in some way, if not exactly part of the charm, the "thrill" of great food for far less than you pay at other places with a more commodius setting probably makes the food taste even better. At those costs, you can forgive a hiccup here and there in service or even in the food. The fun is enjoying your friends, the food, and even your neighboring table (they are close enough to become your friends). Last time we went to La Regalade we met a psychiatrist from Denver who knew some of my therapist wife's associates in New York. On the other side, we met a great franco/british group who were in Paris for the rugby tournement. What I can't stand is going to an expensive or even a moderately expensive place and not haveing a good time due to less than wonderful food, lackluster service, or even too formal a setting. But each to his own. The idea of petit bistots was for great cooks to bring great food to a wider audience using less expensive ingredients, in less expensive parts of town, in closer surroundings, and in that, places like La Regalade excel. A footnote: the two best meals of my life were in the U.S., at The French Laundry and Eleven Madison. The worst fine dining experience was at ALan Ducasse in Paris - all pretense and uninspired food. And an apple fritter from Poilane probably tastes better eaten from your hand on the rue du Cherche-Midi than eaten on the finest China at a three star restaurant.

Edited January 24, 2008 by hughw (log)

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Can we start a "there's nothing good at Ducasse's" club? I feel it is time to go after the big fraud.