Dinosaur BBQ (NYC)

[slkinsey]

This is the sort of review that challenges even a writer's fans. It begins with an unprovable premise ("New York will never be a great barbecue town") backs it up with nostalgia ("Regional food tastes best in its region") and then falls into the abyss of self-fulfilling prophecy, not to mention questionable research (I would not be so quick to complain that a North Carolina-style barbecue sandwich is "more chunked than pulled," given that North Carolina-style barbecue sandwiches are supposed to be more chunked than pulled).

Hmm... I am not so sure I totally agree with you here.

I don't think it goes out on too much of a limb to suggest that NYC will never be a great barbecue town. It's like suggesting that Lexington, NC will never be a great pastrami town. Perhaps in the strictest sense both assertions are unprovable, but they are so close to being absolutely true that it strikes me as acceptable to say it. There are serious barriers, such as economics, history, infrastructure, ingredients, experience, expertise, culture, etc., to making outstanding barbecue in NYC. Even if we had one truly great barbecue joint (which we don't) I'm still not sure that would be enough to qualify us as a "great barbecue town." So, let's say that it is extremely unlikely that NYC will ever be a great barbecue town -- which is one small step away from "never."

And, by all reports, including most in these forums, it would seem that Dinosaur NYC is serving barbecue that, while perhaps pretty good by NYC standards, is relatively mediocre relative to the highest standards. Indeed, I haven't heard even the most fervent Dino fan claim that it's on a par with the best (or even very good) places in the barbecue regions of the US. It's not clear to me that anything said in this review (as opposed to Sietsema's, which contained some spurious information) is incorrect about the place -- or at least it's not out of line with that I've read and heard from trusted parties.

Hey... NYC is a tough town. I do agree that the author doesn't help herself by missing the boat on NC barbecue, though.

[Fat Guy]

There are serious barriers, such as economics, history, infrastructure, ingredients, experience, expertise, culture, etc., to making outstanding barbecue in NYC. 

←

Just like with sushi.

The argument would be that every place that any particular food is good, it was at one time or another new. New York has a long history of assimilating cuisines from all over and making them well here, and sometimes improving them. It requires neither large immigrant populations (we have very few Japanese and French here) nor anything more than a critical mass of people willing to pay for quality. We may have that critical mass of ready consumers here in New York City, and if so then history teaches that it is only a matter of time before New York City is at least a good barbecue town and possibly a great one.

Either way, the business of sweeping predictions is not necessarily a good one for reporters to get into, especially when it gives the appearance of self-fulfilling prophecy.

Nor are your arguments the ones made in the review. The review stakes its claim on the theory that "Regional food tastes best in its region. Ever eat a Chicago-style hot dog in Seattle or a bagel in Salt Lake City? Take a Mission-style burrito out of San Francisco, or Maryland blue crabs from their shoreline, and you're just asking for trouble." Well, my friends, that's simply incorrect as a matter of provable fact. Two pieces of food that are the same taste the same. Even the examples given aren't particularly compelling: you can get Maryland blue crabs in New York that are the same as the ones you can get at a crab shack in Maryland. They may be more expensive, but if you cook them the same way they'll taste the same. You can get good Chicago-style hot dogs outside of Chicago at, for example, the Shake Shack in Madison Square Park. No, Salt Lake City doesn't have good bagels, but there are plenty of good bagels all over the Northeast. There's good pizza in Berkeley, CA. There's good Mexican food in Dundee, Oregon. Etc. If it's good, it's good.

In terms of barbecue, you can probably get better pork here in New York City than in most of the South, not to mention better brisket. You can also charge more money in order to support a better class of ingredients. There's a lot going for New York when it comes to barbecue. I'm optimistic. I would not, however, let that influence my opinion of the barbecue being served at a given establishment were I writing a review. The food at Dinosaur simply is not as bad as the New York Times reviewer claims. It's not bad at all. But of course, having already decided that it's impossible for it to be good, how could the author ever conclude otherwise?

[zimonsays]

well said...to much regional hype is being placed on bbq instead of judging it for what it is

[GordonCooks]

My perspective on Dinosaur is that the food was much better a couple of years ago. Maybe a victim of the purveyor chain supply management or the lack of the fanatical chef that strarted the rochester location. It's still better than most but boy was it something way back when..........

[oakapple]

The argument would be that every place that any particular food is good, it was at one time or another new. New York has a long history of assimilating cuisines from all over and making them well here, and sometimes improving them. It requires neither large immigrant populations (we have very few Japanese and French here) nor anything more than a critical mass of people willing to pay for quality. We may have that critical mass of ready consumers here in New York City, and if so then history teaches that it is only a matter of time before New York City is at least a good barbecue town and possibly a great one.

←

If anything, it ought to be easier to bring top-flight BBQ to NY than it is for sushi or French cooking. The distances are much shorter, and the prices are much lower. A high-end omakase costs at least $100, but no one would claim that you need to charge that much to duplicate the best BBQ experience. Given the crush of people waiting in line to dine at Dinosaur, the demand is clearly there.

[jogoode]

I received this email from Robert Sietsema this morning:

Hey J.J. --

I appreciate your comments in the Dinosaur thread on egullet, but let me set the record straight on one thing -- I never ever said that the place used no wood, as has been imputed to me over and over in this thread. It's my belief that they use far too little wood. And, just for comparison's sake, here's a picture of the wood yard at Kreuz in Lockhart, Texas that I took a few days ago on my annual barbecue pilgrimage:

Wood for the next day is in the foreground, and the wood hoard is neatly stacked to the horizon on a one-acre lot. Dinosaur tucks a few pieces into their metal smoker and calls it barbecue. I have no sympathy for these technical modern smokers, nor for the comments of Shaw that heat is one thing and smoke another. If you want to do a job, use lots of wood and smoke the hell out of the meat!

--Robert

(I couldn't upload the picture.)

Edited to add picture

[Todd36]

I have not eaten at Dinosaur yet---but given the scathing review given by the NYT, I am not in a rush. In my experience, BBQ from places with broad menus is never good. I like vinegar sauced pork myself, and the best I've ever had was sold by a guy in a parking lot in the public market area of Savannah, GA. He cooked it at home and reheated it on a grill, gas in case you're wondering (I'm sure it was cooked on wood). According to the bar I was in, the same guy set up at 11 PM every night to sell BBQ sandwiches to the bar crowd. The local police ate there too. Second best I've had was somewhere in the backwoods of NC, from a guy selling BBQ from a window in his house.

[jgould]

as stated before, one cannot find good bbq above NC! dinosauer was a no-brainer in terms of bbq. i thought the nyt was generous

its funny, i had thought blue smoke would be a contender, but alas, not even a respected restauranteur can climb that mountain. daisy mae's is also a very sad substitute, tis somewhat discouraging that some believe it is representative of serious 'Q'. btw, has anyone been to robert's steakhouse?

[zimonsays]

Sietsema really knows nothing about bbq...to say heat and smoke are one in the same is wrong!! they are two seperate issues. and if i recall correctly you applaud pearsons and they use the same "technical modern smokers" that you hate so at dinosnore. get your story straight.

I received this email from Robert Sietsema this morning:

Hey J.J. --

I appreciate your comments in the Dinosaur thread on egullet, but let me set the record straight on one thing -- I never ever said that the place used no wood, as has been imputed to me over and over in this thread. It's my belief that they use far too little wood. And, just for comparison's sake, here's a picture of the wood yard at Kreuz in Lockhart, Texas that I took a few days ago on my annual barbecue pilgrimage:

Wood for the next day is in the foreground, and the wood hoard is neatly stacked to the horizon on a one-acre lot. Dinosaur tucks a few pieces into their metal smoker and calls it barbecue. I have no sympathy for these technical modern smokers, nor for the comments of Shaw that heat is one thing and smoke another. If you want to do a job, use lots of wood and smoke the hell out of the meat!

--Robert

(I couldn't upload the picture.)

←

[Jason Perlow]

I have a lot of respect for Kim Severson, she's a very talented, highly respected and intelligent writer, and she's someone who does her research.

←

Every time I see an injustice like this perpetrated on a hard-working, conscientious restaurateur who is trying to improve the New York food scene and is showing early signs of success, I grow even more disappointed with the community of New York City restaurant reviewers. Dinosaur no doubt has flaws, but it also serves some really good food. It did not deserve this slam or the one from Sietsema.

←

I see her premise as conventional wisdom, Steven--although I can see the point of view that such could be construed as a lazy and unfair shortcut. Admittedly her thesis is that the restaurant is somehow inappropriate from its inception, but she does give a lot of supporting very food-specific objections to prop that up. This is versus Sietsema, who basically just made stuff up.

←

You know, it hurts me as well to see something like this happen to a nice bunch of guys like John Stage's crew at Dinosaur. And its a rough assessment, to be sure. But I spoke to Kim about this, and she went to the restaurant five times, and oversall she wasn't pleased with the food. I only went there once and I enjoyed the experience a lot. The only rational explanation I have is that the restaurant was batting .1000 when I went (and even still, there were things we liked more than others) and when Kim went on those five occasions, she got unlucky every single time -- that, or Dinosaur has some serious issues to overcome. I know Kim's writing well enough that she's anything but irresponsible in her reporting.

[Burt1961]

I am simply amazed at Robert Sietsema narrow mindedness. To say that the only way to cook BBQ is with lots of wood and smoke is simply not true. By his definition the Mitchell Brothers would not be making BBQ. Their preferred fuel was regular old Kingsford charcoal, so much so that they brought their own rather than using the hardwood lump provided at the Block Party. Little Tony (size is all relative) said that hardwood lump burns to fast and too hot for their kind of cooking. I guess in Mr. Sietsema's eyes, their kind of cooking just isn't BBQ.

It scares me when a person with Sietsema's influence makes such broad and sweeping statements. Based on his assertions, no matter how good the food might taste, if it isn't cooked by his proscribed method, by definition it can not be BBQ. I think he needs to get his head out of his wood pile and I hope when RUB opens we see him eat his words...

[ghostrider]

What bugs me about Kim Severson's piece is that the real subtext seems to be that New York will never be a great BBQ town, but Syracuse already is (at least to some extent), thanks to the same people about whom she's writing. That raises a host of issues that she doesn't address.

I wish she'd stick to the food-specific & establishment-specific criticism, where I have something tangible to consider.

Is sweetness in fact the dominant flavor profile at Dino NYC? (Is that also true in Syracuse?) To me that's crucial. I don't get that sense from the eG folks who've been there.

Anyway, as usual, I feel I've learned more about Dino & BBQ from the eG diners than from the established media. eG is the future. Thanks y'all.

[jogoode]

...

Based on his assertions, no matter how good the food might taste, if it isn't cooked by his proscribed method, by definition it can not be BBQ.  I think he needs to get his head out of his wood pile and I hope when RUB opens we see him eat his words...

←

Yes, no matter how good the food tastes, if it's not cooked with wood smoke you could make a cogent argument that it's not barbecue. I think most Society Members would agree with this. You can steam brisket in a bucket; even if it were good it would not technically be barbecue. And he won't eat his words when R.U.B. opens because he said nothing about it. He just said that he doesn't think Dinosaur is good, perhaps because it doesn't use enough wood.

What bugs me about Kim Severson's piece is that the real subtext seems to be that New York will never be a great BBQ town, but Syracuse already is (at least to some extent), thanks to the same people about whom she's writing.  That raises a host of issues that she doesn't address.

←

It raises a host of issues, yes. It raises so many, in fact, that she can't address them in her short $25 & Under review. All she was doing is providing some context: New Yorkers have been promised great barbecue many times before and no one has delivered. It might be time, she was saying, to accept that no one may ever deliver. I think that's valid. Tell me who among you would dare say Dinosaur or Blue Smoke or even Pearson makes brisket that compares to the better Texas places?

[Fat Guy]

You know, it hurts me as well to see something like this happen to a nice bunch of guys like John Stage's crew at Dinosaur. And its a rough assessment, to be sure. But I spoke to Kim about this, and she went to the restaurant five times, and oversall she wasn't pleased with the food. I only went there once and I enjoyed the experience a lot. The only rational explanation I have is that the restaurant was batting .1000 when I went (and even still, there were things we liked more than others) and when Kim went on those five occasions, she got unlucky every single time -- that, or Dinosaur has some serious issues to overcome.  I know Kim's writing well enough that she's anything but irresponsible in her reporting.

←

When you make an absolute proclamation of closed-mindedness, you are a lot of things but you are not open-minded.

If a reviewer is operating under the assumption -- the "axiom" and the "simple, irrefutable truth" -- that it's impossible for the food to be good, it undermines the credibility of the conclusions. This review does everything but say outright that if the reviewer had gone 100 times, no matter what she was served, she would have viewed every bite of food in the worst possible light.

It would be as if a film reviewer were to say "All action movies are bad" and then proceed to review an action movie negatively. What a surprise!

It would be as if I were to review a Jewish deli in Tokyo, and I started the review off with "It's impossible to have good deli outside of New York and maybe Miami. It just doesn't taste the same outside of where it belongs, no matter what." The decision is already made. There is no opportunity for the deli to disprove the hypothesis because it's not a hypothesis it's an "axiom" and a "simple, irrefutable truth." It doesn't matter if the ghost of Katz himself goes over there and teaches the Japanese guys the exact craft of deli production and they produce pastrami to his specifications. I will never give it a positive evaluation. The reader should stop right there, because the rest of the review is meaningless.

[Fat Guy]

...

Based on his assertions, no matter how good the food might taste, if it isn't cooked by his proscribed method, by definition it can not be BBQ.  I think he needs to get his head out of his wood pile and I hope when RUB opens we see him eat his words...

←

Yes, no matter how good the food tastes, if it's not cooked with wood smoke you could make a cogent argument that it's not barbecue. I think most Society Members would agree with this. You can steam brisket in a bucket; even if it were good it would not technically be barbecue. And he won't eat his words when R.U.B. opens because he said nothing about it. He just said that he doesn't think Dinosaur is good, perhaps because it doesn't use enough wood.

←

I think Burt is referring to the implication that 1) "these technical modern smokers" are illegitimate, and 2) that the only barbecue methodology acceptable to God is to "use lots of wood and smoke the hell out of the meat!" I've got to say, I think we could pretty quickly find a number of widely acknowledged barbecue masters to disagree with both claims. It seems to me that the average actual pitmaster in the South is less dogmatic about barbecue than the New York Times and Village Voice reviewers.

[phaelon56]

It would be as if a film reviewer were to say "All action movies are bad" and then proceed to review an action movie negatively. What a surprise!

Thanks FG... for injecting that dose of common sense perspective into the discussion. I have yet to try Korean food that I actually enjoyed (apart form some rockin' kim-chi). I also never tried Indian food that I really enjoyed until I visited Mina when they were open in Sunnyside Queens. I'm not a professional reviewer (that's an understatement!) but I wouldn't dream of wasting the bytes or the ink to post or print my comments on a cuisine that I don't fully understand or oen in which I lack the ability to discern qualitative issues. Thus you do not have my reviews of Korean or Indian restaurants to look forward to (but you'll all get over it rather quickly I suspect)

I suppose the "BBQ" that I make with my cheap electric H2O smoker is not "real" BBQ either but that little $70 Char-Broil with some proper rib prep, a good rub and some hickory chips for smoke consistently delivers ribs that blow away everyone who's tried them. Invariably people tell me they'e the best ribs they've ever eaten. That doesn't mean they compare to ribs cooked with traditional prep methods over nothing but hardwood embers but they're still pretty damn good.

I do agree that the Dino sauce tends toward the sweet rather than the savory but for cryin' out loud - just ask for it without the sauce if that's your deal.

My only comment on the NYT "$25 and under" review is to note that "Meet The Fockers" was the #1 box office draw three weekends in a row. Despite having been trashed by nearly every major critic out there it has been wildly successful because people like it. I saw it - thought it didn't quite measure up to the original but it WAS funny and provided a welcome does of comic relief. It was worth the price of admission. I went because people whose opinions I respect had seen it despite the reviews and told me they enjoyed it.

NYT and Village Voice reviews will come and go but people will keep coming to the NYC Dino. Tell me this.... could all the eGullet members who are food fanatics and have posted generally favorable and in some cases glowing comments about the Dino all be wrong? I think not.

[jogoode]

I do agree that the Dino sauce tends toward the sweet rather than the savory but for cryin' out loud - just ask for it without the sauce if that's your deal.

←

Guys, is it impossible to accept that the reviewers didn't like Dinosaur? The criticism goes far beyond talk of overly sweet sauce. The titles argument -- this is barbecue, this isn't barbecue -- is moot here. Neither reviewer said, "The food is great, but how dare they call it barbecue!" They each criticized what they thought was poor food. And, presumably, Severson made her comment about irrefutable truth after she ate at Dinosaur -- and I doubt she meant it as a Nostradamian prophecy. When I read it I took it with a grain of salt. If Dinosaur were good, she would have opened the piece differently.

[Burt1961]

This thread has gone beyond whether Dino is good or not and has risen to the discussion of what is BBQ. I for one am not going to be pigeon-holed into the fallacy that if it isn't done on wood alone, it isn't BBQ. We are not talking about whether boiled brisket tastes good, we are discussing what qualifies as BBQ. The words that will be eaten are that you need to "use lots of wood and smoke the hell out of the meat!" because it's just not true.

Lets try a simple equation: Paul Kirk is a BBQ expert; Paul Kirk has cooked great BBQ brisket on an electrically assisted smoker; ergo, an electrically assisted smoker can make great BBQ brisket. Am I missing something (of course I am and within a very short period of time someone is sure to point it out), was what was served last summer not great BBQ? For all of you that got to see and taste the brisket last summer, was it what you expected it to look and taste like? Did it look like a meteorite on the outside, all brown and crusty? When it was sliced was it tender and moist, yet retaining the texture of meat? Was there a balance between the Smokey flavor created by smoldering wood and the spices of the rub? Did the smoker belch-out copious amounts of smoke. If brisket cooked in one of these smokers doesn't qualify as BBQ, then what is it?

[phaelon56]

Guys, is it impossible to accept that the reviewers didn't like Dinosaur?

Of course not. It's totally reaosnable and more than just a bit possible to accept that. If I've been reading most of the dissenting viewpoints correctly (mine excepted since I can barely read my own writing much less make sense of what I've said ), the rub mostly seems to be the reference point that the two reviewers in question are operating from. That includes

• * the preconceived notion (and explicit implication) from the Voice review that indicates
  a) good BBQ is impossible with long smoking over a heat source that includes only wood
  b) the protracted "search for evidence" of wood being used was fruitless and indicates that perhaps it was just smoke flavoring in the sauce that substituted for real smokiness from wood
  * the supposition that good barbecue simply cannot be produce outside of a region known for barbecue (by the way - I'm a native of Syracuse and it is NOT known as 'barbecue region' by any strecth of the imagination despite there being some good barbecue here.
  

I'm not sticking up for the Dino just because I'm from Syracuse and if the reviewers don't like their food that's fine. I do see a bias that exists in both reviews that almost seems to push them through to predetermined conclusions.

[ghostrider]

What bugs me about Kim Severson's piece is that the real subtext seems to be that New York will never be a great BBQ town, but Syracuse already is (at least to some extent), thanks to the same people about whom she's writing.  That raises a host of issues that she doesn't address.

←

It raises a host of issues, yes. It raises so many, in fact, that she can't address them in her short $25 & Under review. All she was doing is providing some context: New Yorkers have been promised great barbecue many times before and no one has delivered. It might be time, she was saying, to accept that no one may ever deliver. I think that's valid. Tell me who among you would dare say Dinosaur or Blue Smoke or even Pearson makes brisket that compares to the better Texas places?

←

Context, yes. But the repeated references to her Syracuse colleagues' reactions implied that they felt that Dino Syracuse produced better food. Severson couldn't come right out & say that because she hasn't eaten at Dino Syracuse. Still, she raised the issue and it's fair game. It also contradicts her assertions about regional food; Syracuse isn't NC or KC etc.

Looks to me like a piece written under deadline, and a writer who wasn't able to think through the implications of her context-setting.

I can certainly accept that she didn't like the food, she backs that up with details. I wish she'd done more of that & dropped the pointless profundities.

[Todd36]

Lets step back for a second and think about what Dinosaur BBQ is: it's a large, popularly priced volume restaurant with a menu that sounds like a theme restaurant. When I look at their menu on the web, I think "Olive Garden" or "Chili's." They have things on their menu like "Druken Spicy Shameless Shrimp." Not to mention things like a Cuban Sandwich. It's a theme restaurant!!! It's possible they make decent BBQ. Maybe I'll go up and find out. But I've never seen good BBQ from a place like Dinosaur; the menu is too big. Commenting on the NYT or Semesta as having an agenda may be interesting, but they gave stinky reviews. And isn't there a third bad review as well? There is a pattern.

[ghostrider]

Could someone verify the number of Oyler units are in the NYC location?

Is it just the one?

3 Oyler Units, totalling 2400 pounds of smoking capacity.

←

....I suspect they are possibly cooking briskets and butts in one unit, ribs in one other unit, and chicken in the third. My suspicions are based on my cooking temperatures....

←

The reports of varying degrees of smokiness in the meats reported by eG folk above would seem to bear this out.

[zimonsays]

i would like to know also....can any of you bbq experts help us with this?

"Did the smoker belch-out copious amounts of smoke. If brisket cooked in one of these smokers doesn't qualify as BBQ, then what is it?"

...

Based on his assertions, no matter how good the food might taste, if it isn't cooked by his proscribed method, by definition it can not be BBQ.  I think he needs to get his head out of his wood pile and I hope when RUB opens we see him eat his words...

←

Lets try a simple equation: Paul Kirk is a BBQ expert; Paul Kirk has cooked great BBQ brisket on an electrically assisted smoker; ergo, an electrically assisted smoker can make great BBQ brisket. Am I missing something (of course I am and within a very short period of time someone is sure to point it out), was what was served last summer not great BBQ? For all of you that got to see and taste the brisket last summer, was it what you expected it to look and taste like? Did it look like a meteorite on the outside, all brown and crusty? When it was sliced was it tender and moist, yet retaining the texture of meat? Was there a balance between the Smokey flavor created by smoldering wood and the spices of the rub? Did the smoker belch-out copious amounts of smoke. If brisket cooked in one of these smokers doesn't qualify as BBQ, then what is it?

←

Edited January 13, 2005 by Jason Perlow (log)

[woodburner]

I'm a bit shocked.

Two restaurant reviewer's, saying there is not enough smoke flavor.

Did the dino recently acquire apple wood, since just about a week or so we received word that only hickory was being used.

Meats cooked over a burned down to embers pit, with hot fat dripping into the heat, releasing plumes of white smoke to bathe the meat leaves a unique taste and flavor.

Meat cooked in a steel pit, bathing in wood smoke alone, produces a flavor just as that.

My point being, I really don't think either Robert Sietsema, nor Kim Severson has a clue.

Blame the city of New York for not allowing open wood fired cooking, and leave John Stage out of it.

woodburner

[jgould]

I think Burt is referring to the implication that 1) "these technical modern smokers" are illegitimate, and 2) that the only barbecue methodology acceptable to God is to "use lots of wood and smoke the hell out of the meat!" I've got to say, I think we could pretty quickly find a number of widely acknowledged barbecue masters to disagree with both claims. It seems to me that the average actual pitmaster in the South is less dogmatic about barbecue than the New York Times and Village Voice reviewers.

←

as a point of reference, i don't believe it would be possible to find "real" southern BBQ pitmasters who WOULD agree with the above 2 statements. while it is probably true, the actual pitmaster IS less dogmatic than the NYT/VV reviewers, that does not necessarily "imply" they would agree with suppositions made by those who somehow think their overall knowledge of foods can be applied to such a regional dish, as well as assume those who do this for a living or even as a serious, & i mean serious, hobby, have the same viewpoint as those who do not understand the value of tradition.