Blue Hill (NYC)

[macrosan]

Steve, I really don't have the problem. I know plenty of great restaurants where I can have great food without going through the contortions of making advance arrangements, where I can order exactly what I want to eat without having the chef's specific approval, and where I don't have to be patronized by retsaurant staff who think they're doing me some sort of favor, or giving me undue special treatment

And I still don't accept that the kind of arrangement making you describe, and seem to relish, gets you any significantly better food than I get. It may make you feel better about it, and I have no problem with that, but I don't think there's any objective reality to it.

I'd love to have you explain to me why you think you get better food than a walk-in at Blue Hill (apart from perhaps fresher cepes). The answer needs to be some sort of objective test you've carried out, not a series of asumptions on your part.

At this stage, the only objective analysis I can think of is if you say that all the experts who walk into Blue Hill report that it's a poor restaurant, while all the "specials" report it's a great restaurant. But neither of those statements is true, is it ?

[Kim WB]

It would indeed be interesting to have the chefs at Blue Hill comment on this.

My experience with "special menus", specifically a menu developed by the chef for a certain guest and not available to the general public, is that the menus are not made from superior ingredients..but rather, are more in tune to the chef's perception of that guest...such as an adventurous eater, or a person who loves shellfish, or a person with superior food knowledge, etc. It gives the chef an opportunity to adapt their performance to a specific audience, therefore increasing the chances that the guest will be "wowed" by the meal.

I often visit Stanley Novak, who was the former sous chef at the River Cafe, during the Palmer/ Burke days. He has a lovely Inn in Ringoes, NJ. When it is just my husband and myself, he might ask to prepare a "special menu". Stanley knows my fondness for duck, foie gras, goat and sheeps' cheeses, and souflees, and will often incorporate some of these favorites into the menu. He also knows that I have an adventurous palate, and might try different applications or combinations than what he offers regular diners. I am always suitably impressed by the special menus. However, next week we will be entertaining 2 other couples there, and will order off the menu. While I don't expect to be "blown away" with my meal, I certainly expect top quality ingredients and wonderful food.

Of course, this is just one client's perception of special menus, and without any Blue Hill experience. Perhaps the idea of special menus should be a seperate post, as it can apply to many other restaurants besides BH.

[Steve Plotnicki]

I'd love to have you explain to me why you think you get better food than a walk-in at Blue Hill (apart from perhaps fresher cepes). The answer needs to be some sort of objective test you've carried out, not a series of asumptions on your part

Macrosan - You are still not paying attention. I didn't say that I think I get better food, I said I did get better food. To save you the trouble of rereading what I wrote, I said that I used to like both Blue Hill and Craft much less then I do now. And the difference has been allowing the chefs to choose my meal for me. And I don't make any special arrangements, I just make a reservation like anyone else and I just don't ask for a menu. All I will tell them is what I am allergic to, or what I hate to eat, but other then that I let them choose my meal. And it isn't that I will get special cepes. I get the same cepes as everyone else. But if you go to Craft they must have a dozen vegetables on their menu. How is one to know the cepes are special that day? Well you can't unless you somehow comunicate to the kitchen that you are looking for that information.

And before you say anything, a restaurant is a business. They want to sell everything they have in the house. And if the salmon is from yesterdays delivery, but the turbot just came off the plane from Schiphol, the odds are that nobody is going to disclose that information to you unless you ask. In fact they have an incentive to sell the salmon. But as I said before, most people don't want this. They want to be safe and make sure that what is on their plate won't be offputting. They would rather eat day old, no two day old salmon and complain about it rather then eat a strange fish named turbot. But for anyone who is interested in having the best and the freshest, these types of menus are available to anyone who asks for them. But you have to ask.

[jaybee]

i'm pretty sure that i'm not the only one who thinks that asking a restaurant to prepare a special meal is presumptuous and borders obnoxious.

I didn't read anythng about asking a restaurant to prepare a special meal. My first meal at Blue Hill (which started this thread many moons ago) was very enjoyable. The waiter came over and said "Michael would like to cook for you tonight" and we said yes.

Oddly, the poached duck was one of the best items we were served. I loved its texture, flavor and its juiciness. It was anything but bland, as you decribe it, Macrosan. Here's what I said about it then:

Somewhere along the char we began drinking an '85 Bonne Mares from Roumier which had been decanted about an hour earlier. This was a real treat. Wonderful perfume with a bit of chalk and much fruit. It was a perfect accompaniment for the final dish, poached duck breast served with a stew of beets finely chopped with lime juice and sautéed spinach. The duck was moist and chewy with a rich meaty taste. A second winner. I would return just for this dish.

So perhaps there is variability in their cooking, which is not unheard of. The food is prepared so that the main ingrediant is the star of the dish, and everything that is done to it is to enhance its flavor, taste and texture, and not overpower of divert the taste buds away from it. I have not been back yet, but it is high on my list of places to go next.

The few times in my dining experience I was told the chef "would like to cook for me" were all memorable meals. Jean Troisgros did that for six of us and I doubt that I could have orchestrated a better meal. I think that is part of the trick here. it's not that the chef prepares a dish that the ordinary diner can't order, it's that he conceives the entire meal as a progression of tastes and flavors and builds from one to the next in a way that someone less familiar with the nuances of his cooking would be able to do.

Years ago a famed three star French chef told us our meal was "on the wrong track." He explained the sequence of dishes we'd ordered was not the best to appreciate his food. It was our introduction to the idea of a "track" for a meal, and it makes a lot of sense to order that way. Who can do it better than the chef?

Edited December 2, 2002 by jaybee (log)

[macrosan]

...a restaurant is a business. They want to sell everything they have in the house. And if the salmon is from yesterdays delivery,  but the turbot just came off the plane from Schiphol, the odds are that nobody is going to disclose that information to you unless you ask. In fact they have an incentive to sell the salmon.  

I'm frankly appalled, Steve. Are you saying that :-

a) Blue Hill is a top end restaurant

b) There is something inherently inferior about two day old salmon

c) Blue Hill will nevertheless sell two day old salmon to its customers

d) And yet Blue Hill is a top end restaurant ?

But as I said before, most people don't want this. They want to be safe and make sure that what is on their plate won't be offputting. They would rather eat day old, no two day old salmon and complain about it rather then eat a strange fish named turbot.

What planet have you moved to, Steve ? What makes you think that you're the only person in the USA who knows what a turbot is ? You're just being patronising without the benefit of any knowledge or understanding of the people you're patronising.

Let me repeat my previous challenge to you. What objective proof do you have that you get better food when you let the chef choose than when you choose for yourself ? It's quite probable that you want to believe you're getting some privileged benefit, so you're allowing your judgement to be swayed.

As a matter of interest, how many other people do you know (acknowledged experts) who have had your experience of disappointment when choosing from the menu, and significantly greater satisfaction when taking the chef's choice ?

[macrosan]

Jaybee, I absolutely accept that a meal specially prepared for you by a great chef will be a memorable experience. I would also remember such a meal. The point at issue here (in my debate with SteveP) is that he is claiming that the quality of food served in a special preparation significantly exceeds the quality served to the adjacent table to the people ordering off the menu. I do not accept that in any fine restaurant.

Also, in your case the chef offered to prepare a special meal for you. Steve, by contrast, proposes that people should ask the chef to prepare a special meal for them. Although I find Tommy's view of this a little stronger than my own, I agree in principle with him that such a request by a diner is arrogant.

It's interesting that your poached duck dish was served with entirely different accompaniments from mine. Perhaps the cooking method was also different. What is clear is that the dishes we were served were indeed totally different in effect, to a degree that could not be explained (I think) by variability in cooking. Maybe the chefs were different, and they deliberately cook the dish differently ? Certainly I will confirm that my dish was as bland a piece of duck as I have ever eaten.

Oh how I hope that someone at Blue Hill, or maybe from the kitchen of another fine restaurant, will enter the discussion

[jaybee]

The point at issue here (in my debate with SteveP) is that he is claiming that the quality of food served in a special preparation significantly exceeds the quality served to the adjacent table to the people ordering off the menu.

Are you saying he's saying that the same exact dish served to him and the to people at the next table will differ in quality if his is part of a "special" meal and theirs is not? I know Steve takes extreme positions, but I don't think he'd go that far into nutsyville....would you Steve?

[robert40]

Just look what I started?

I'll wait to tomorrow to post my account of Blue Hill because I'm having way to much fun observing.

[macrosan]

Are you saying he's saying that the same exact dish served to him and the to people at the next table will differ in quality if his is part of a "special" meal and theirs is not?

No I'm not saying that (yet). He is claiming that the special meal will contain better quality ingredients and (I think) that it will also be cooked better.

Actually, Jaybee, your question is more interesting than mine, so I hope Steve will answer that too

[tommy]

i'm pretty sure that i'm not the only one who thinks that asking a restaurant to prepare a special meal is presumptuous and borders obnoxious.

I didn't read anythng about asking a restaurant to prepare a special meal. My first meal at Blue Hill (which started this thread many moons ago) was very enjoyable. The waiter came over and said "Michael would like to cook for you tonight" and we said yes.

oh. yes, the difference is obvious. my bad. carry on.

oh, wait, yes, i already realized this a few posts back:

however, if we're talking strictly about a tasting menu that is offered to everyone on a given night, then i agree that it's no doubt the way to go if you want to sample what the chef thinks is spot on that day

from now on, every time i walk into a restaurant, i'll say "no need for a menu, i am putting myself in the chef's hands." i'm sure to get the best, no doubt.

Edited December 2, 2002 by tommy (log)

[Liza]

I'd like to suggest that perception is a very large part of the dining experience. When one believes that the chef is preparing a special menu, one could easily believe that the meal is somehow better than what others are receiving.

I've been treated to a number of special meals, special in the "we're changing the meal you've ordered to include these specials because the chef wants to please you" way. And honestly, sometimes the chef isn't in the kitchen. Sometimes, the chef is in the kitchen at the beginning of the meal and is gone by the time I want to send my thanks to him/her. But regardless of the presence of the chef, the meal is always fine.

[robert40]

While My son and I had a special menu which was out of this world, Two ladies next to us told the waiter they wanted poached salmon and nothing else No apps No dessert No sauce No nothing!

Could they have walked away believing they had a memorable meal? I doubt it.

Bottom line restaurants must accommodate a wide range of taste. Sometimes they hit sometimes the miss.But the winners are the ones that hit MOST of the time.

[jaybee]

No I'm not saying that (yet). He is claiming that the special meal will contain better quality ingredients

Why is that so hard to believe? I often ask a captain or waiter to recommend between two options on a menu (say two fish dishes) and he'll say, "take the "x" -- a special order just came in today and it is really superb. It is going fast." Aren't I being told the "x" is a better choice than "Y' on that particular day. I have also had chefs or captains who know me say. "tonight we have some wonderful morels and shitakes. If you like I can (ask chef to) make a fricasee with a little butter and garlic for you." These are not on the menu, and are in limited supply. I assume that this offer is not made to every one but first to regulars, or people for whom the chef is "cooking" e.g. a "special meal."

I expect to get the very best that the house can do when I let the chef "cook for me." Does that mean people who don't, don't get the very best the house can do? That's not an issue I care about. I only care what I ( and the people I'm eating with) get.

Edited December 2, 2002 by jaybee (log)

[robert40]

Lisa.

I could not have said it better. I totality agree.

[Charles Smith]

from now on, every time i walk into a restaurant, i'll say "no need for a menu, i am putting myself in the chef's hands."  i'm sure to get the best, no doubt.

Yep- that's it. You'll eat better than if you choose off the menu.

Is there any argument that your best bet at any top sushi restaurant is omakase?

Isn't that what we're talking about here?

Menu items are selected to sell the most possible inventory- that doesn't mean that they're bad, but often when you order "off the menu" the chef will choose new items, of dishes that he/she has been experimenting with, or is is inspired by that aren't going to sell on the menu- The porchetta I had a Lupa last week was "bombing" according to the waiter and it was the best thing in the house that night- The staff knew I'd like to be adventurous and steered more towards it-

isn't that all a special menu is?

and you should also be asking about the wines not on the list ;-)

[Nick]

Since I'm not one that dines out often, I'll gingerly wade into these waters.

I don't often agree with Steve P., but in this case I will. If you're acquainted with the chef and the chef knows what might interest you, you'll probably come away with a good and interesting meal. Maybe better than you could have done yourself by ordering off the menu. It wouldn't necessarily involve ingredients not available on the menu, just put together differently. It may be that you'll, in fact, get some stuff that ought to be used up, that other diners may consider not the freshest. But, they may not realize, for instance, that cod that's several days old is better than fresh. Or, it may be there's an excellent cut of meat that doesn't fit the menu. On and on.

I think that as long as one doesn't get puffed up with self-importance, letting the chef (or if you don't know the chef, a trusted server) suggest the meal this might bring rewards.

[Liza]

I'm uncertain about the business model of this type of restaurant. Color me unenlightened, but I've always thought that to encourage the returning diner, one should serve an exceptional meal. Regardless of whether the diner orders it or not.

[Jinmyo]

Liza, that would be silly. Then just anybody could walk in and eat there.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Let me repeat my previous challenge to you. What objective proof do you have that you get better food when you let the chef choose than when you choose for yourself ? It's quite probable that you want to believe you're getting some privileged benefit, so you're allowing your judgement to be swayed.

I haven't offered any proof other than my saying that I have noticed that when I allow the chef to choose my meal, the quality of the meal is usually better then if I order myself. And I pointed to Blue Hill and Craft as two places where the difference in quality has been material. In fact I never used to enjoy eating at Craft but since I let them do the driving I love eating there.

Also, in your case the chef offered to prepare a special meal for you. Steve, by contrast, proposes that people should ask the chef to prepare a special meal for them. Although I find Tommy's view of this a little stronger than my own, I agree in principle with him that such a request by a diner is arrogant.

If you don't want to be treated like every other diner, it's your responsibility to somehow convey to the restaurant that you want special treatment or that you are particularly knowledgable about food and that you would like them to perform at a certain level. I have found that the base meals in many restaurants in this city are not up to my expectations. But many of those same restaurants have a high gear they can shift into when need be. It's my job as a diner to shift the gears. Because if I am a stranger to the restaurant, they might mistake me for you or Tommy and serve me what everybody else eats.

So if you want to call that arrogant, well then yes indeed. But better a well fed arrogant then a mediocre fed shmuck.

Jaybee - Your question isn't really relevant because much of what you get isn't even on the menu. This is even more the case at a place like Arpege where the dishes on a chef's tasting menu might not appear on the printed menu at all. So it isn't a matter of getting a better poached duck then someone else. It's a matter of being served baby beef when it's not on the menu, or beets baked in a salt crust when they are not on the menu while other tables are eating poached duck. Or maybe it's a matter of getting a slightly different preparation then they are offering on the printed menu.

I find Macro and Tommy just not getting this concept. People who do creative things for a living love catering to those who appreciate their craft. Whether it is a concert hall full of adoring fans, or a restaurant full of people who understand their cuisine, it's a more rewarding experience for them then cooking for a smartass from NJ and a middle aged business man from the U.K. And it's not that those people can't get a good meal in a restaurant because of who they are, it's just that in my experience the odds improve if you display what Robert B. calls a little connoirsseurship.

(added in after) Yes Charles is correct and the concept is like Omakase. Omakase is about more then the chef choosing, it's about the chef choosing the best ingredients he has on hand.

[jaybee]

Jaybee - Your question isn't really relevant because much of what you get isn't even on the menu.

I was asking the question to make a point, the same point you are tryng to make. but now it's time for the Sopranos, so the hell with food.

[ajay]

Steve P. and I disagreed on a rather similar point (debated around the meta-issue of the role of a critic) a while ago, and while I'm not sure he's completley won me over, I have been following this discussion with interest.

I should also add that as a result of reading about the meals Cabrales Steve P et al had at Blue Hill, I got on the phone and requested/begged the crew to cook for me, and cook for me they did. But, in my view the results were uneven (i.e. some brilliant dishes and incredible ingredients were accompanied with some only average dishes--this was especially true of the pre dessert and the dessert), and I would love to go back, and given the tenor of this conversation, I think i will ask them to cook for me again, whereas before I was considering trying the signature dishes I missed like the crab lasagna and poached duck.

Anyway, I mention these two points as background to the question I would like to see members address: when one asks the chef to cook for you, or requests a surprise menu without a prior acquaintance/relationship with the restaurant or the chef, isn't equally likely that the chef will dump on you the ingredients or dishes that have not been moving?

More than one member has mentioned that restaurants are a business, and all businesses have to do their best to move unsused inventory that is just waiting around. So, in putting one's self in the chef's hands is not one equally likely to not get the good cepes but the barely acceptable braised fennel instead? I ask because my dad is a salty businessman, and the first time we tried a surprise menu he expressed similar concerns. While such behavior is unlikely with a repeat customer or one who can quickly establish his/her bonna fides as a discerning diner, does someone with compartively less experience run such a risk?

[tommy]

steve p is treading dangerously deep into a pool of personal insults. this, of course, dilutes his point. and this is a shame, since he's obviously trying to enlighten us. from his heart of course of course.

aside from that, i've read that most people who agree with the concept of somehow informing the chef that you're a super-taster and expect only the best somehow have a relationship with that chef going in (not you plotz, so put your two index fingers down captain). again, i'll restate that although it's obvious that the chef knows what is best on any given day, and is capable of preparing the best for people who "ask," this doesn't apply to everyone walking in off of the street, as it couldn't because all of the "best" ingredients would be gone after the first seating, leaving the super-tasters and super-foward with the mediocre crap from the menu. :shudder:

when one asks the chef to cook for you, or requests a surprise menu without a prior acquaintance/relationship with the restaurant or the chef, isn't equally likely that the chef will dump on you the ingredients or dishes that have not been moving?

thanks ajay for asking a question so simple that i thought it need not be asked. apparently, it does, and i'm glad you have.

and honestly, more people like mediocre fed shmucks than they do well fed arrogants. now if you want to debate how going through life an un-liked arrogant is somehow better than going through life a well-liked shmuck, i'll have to sign off, 'cause i already know the answer.

Edited December 2, 2002 by tommy (log)

[lxt]

Previously there were several threads discussing the concept of whether a restaurant’s performance differs and to what extent if it does when a reviewer/”special guest” is identified by the restaurant staff. If the general consensus is that at a top-end restaurant the difference will not and should not be dramatic, then Blue Hill simply doesn’t fall under that category, which would’ve been all right had it honestly been conveyed by members whose experience was favorable due to their patronage and a “shifting the gears” practice. If the main purpose of the discussion is how to get the best meal out of a restaurant, then carping about the quality of on-menu meals is immaterial. However, if the purpose is to get an objective review of a restaurant based on a typical meal, then Blue Hill fails to fit the criteria for a place to return for many members.

No one argues that Blue Hill has potential and may serve an extraordinary meal on occasion or as a result of a special order; however, it has never been explicitly stated previously that all prior praise is irrelevant unless evaluated from a completely different perspective where the quality of the meal depends upon how well you know the chef or how well you can “shift the gears.” That is where the frustration of certain members comes from.

Moreover, I’d say that a restaurant should be a business and trying to sell yesterday’s salmon may not be a wise business decision if it will turn a potential patron away from the restaurant and will affect his decision to never return.

Assuming that Blue Hill exercises the approach of “as little intervention in the cooking process as possible” where the quality of the ingredients play a critical part, it is the responsibility of the chefs to design a menu that guides all diners toward full appreciation of the chef’s efforts. In other words, as much responsibility as one can put on the shoulders of a connoisseur to strive for the best available experience, it is also the responsibility of the chefs to provide the best possible menu arrangement to achieve maximum appreciation.

[lizziee]

I have never eaten at Blue Hill and can't comment on that part of the topic. However, in every single case where I have left the menu up to the chef, my meal has been much more memorable in all aspects.

This holds true in restaurants where I am a regular as well as those where I am a "newbie." It all comes down to the attitude of the diner. I have said this many times before, but if you approach a restaurant meal with excitement, enthusiasm, open-mindedness, willingness etc., this immediately gets translated to the staff, both front and back. I don't see this as snobbery or arrogance. I am not insisting that I get something better than the next guy. But, I think my own enthusiasm energizes everyone: a chef willing to take chances and hear feedback, a sommelier willing to suggest a little known winery, a server anxious to please and so on. This is not an affectation or an attempt to get what table A can't get, but rather my own desire to experience a memorable meal.

The point is that anyone is capable of being a VIP. It doesn't take money. It really is so simple - be willing, open and enthusiastic.

As an example, my first experience at French Laundry was as a single diner at lunch. I didn't even pick up the menu. I just said I was so excited to be here and I can't wait to experience Thomas's food. I got there at 12:00 and left at 5:30 when the first seating for dinner was arriving. I was a nobody. They didn't know me at all. I didn't wave any money around. I just was really excited to be there. That was it and as a result I experienced one of my most memorable meals ever.

[La Niña]

I'll chime in with a Blue Hill experience. We went to the tomato tasting dinner (so did other members). I was clearly known by the staff and chefs, who came out to greet us, and it was clear that this was to be a special meal. I noticed that there was no foie gras course in the tomato dinner, and several people had told me to order one of the foie gras appetizers in addition to the tomato dinner, so I did. A few moments later, someone appeared and told me that the chefs would like to make me a special foie gras dish that was not on the menu, since I was so enthusiastic about it. Well, it turned out that the tomato tasting menu was good but not spectacular, and the foie gras dish that was made special for me was by far the best thing we ate that night.