@SQC (Closed)

[bloviatrix]

I think the problem is that UWSiders had to travel out of their neighborhood for so long for quality food, that when it's available locally, they treat it as they would any other neighbor place. They don't associate quality and fine dining with their neighborhood. So, they behave at SCQ in a way they never would if they had to travel to a similar place.

The other thing, and Steve, this is directed to your experiece last night, is that people never think their kid annoys other diners -- that's why they perpetuate in taking them out. It's the "my shit doesn't smell" school of thought. This isn't unique to the UWS. It's a problem everywhere.

[Felonius]

I eat lunch at SQC several times a week (ate there yesterday). I especially like the cold shrimp salad, with bacon bits, haricots vert, and tomatoes.

The service has been inconsistent. Some days I've waited forever for a glass of water, a menu, or the check despite the fact that I was one of two or three customers in the entire place. The staff tends to stand around and gossip during off hours and ignore the tables. Also, there is a middle-aged lady (the owner's wife perhaps) that acts as hostess, who alternates between sugary-sweet and downright snotty. One time at brunch, I watched her skip my name on the waiting list 3 times in order to seat people she appeared to know. I pointed this out to her and she did it again, so my date and I left. I haven't been back for brunch since, preferring to make the detour to Vince and Eddie's during UWS brunch rush-hour madness.

At other times the service has been efficient. Everyone has always been friendly except that lady at the door.

I agree with Steven that the food is definitely a cut above most, if not all of the nearby alternatives. I'm still waiting for the crowds to subside so I can try 'Cesca......

[slkinsey]

Yes. The FOH problems are a real Achilles' heel for SQC. But, given the presumed source, it's hard to know what they can do about it. I am a regular there (1-2 times a month when I'm in the City, sometimes more, and I'm usually there with people who go multiple times/week) for dinner and have experienced all the things you describe.

I actually don't have a big problem with bumping regulars to the head of the line, although doing so with four parties is a bit too much IMO -- especially when you would appear to be a very regular regular there yourself. In fact, the one issue for me is that they don't treat their regulars with the same deference one would normally expect. Compared to similar restaurants where I have been a regular, it is extremely rare for us to be comped a drink, appetizer or dessert at SQC. This is amplified by the extremely high turnover for FOH managers, so we are constantly having to establish a relationship with someone new. It's really more a minor annoyance than anything else, but I think it is an indicator that the restaurant could be dramatically improved if they ironed out their FOH issues.

I keep going back because I think the food is great, it's a good value, I am friendly with the waitstaff and bar staff, and I like Scott and Linda personally. That's pretty much what you're looking for at a somewhat upscale neighborhood place.

[Fat Guy]

I actually couldn't get into 'Cesca or SQC a couple of nights ago. Amazing, if those restaurants had to compete on East 20th Street I can't imagine they'd be even half full.

bloviatrix, there are definitely people who think that way, and there are definitely people who don't think that way. It seems to me the UWS has a higher ratio of dos to don'ts than most other neighborhoods in Manhattan, at least insofar as restaurant behavior is concerned. I think the folks on the Upper East Side are just as fertile as on the Upper West Side, yet I rarely encounter poorly-behaved kids in UES restaurants whereas in UWS restaurants the problem is ubiquitous.

[slkinsey]

I actually couldn't get into 'Cesca or SQC a couple of nights ago. Amazing, if those restaurants had to compete on East 20th Street I can't imagine they'd be even half full.

As-is, I agree. But I think they would be selling entirely different food if they were on East 20th Street.

I think the folks on the Upper East Side are just as fertile as on the Upper West Side, yet I rarely encounter poorly-behaved kids in UES restaurants whereas in UWS restaurants the problem is ubiquitous.

I think this is a socioeconomic culture thing. I think one finds in general that the higher up in the class heirarchy one goes, the more importance families put on decorous behavior in children. It is likewise true that higher socioeconomic classes (and especially the older monied among them) tend, on average, to be more comfortable with the idea of having someone else do much of the rearing of their children. Hence, an old money UES family is likely to A) have a full-time nanny, and B) be perfectly comfortable with the idea of leaving young children at home with the nanny when they go out to a restaurant. The main solution for the less-monied, less tradional families in this regard is to do what my parents did: hardly ever go out to eat.

[Felonius]

Yes.  The FOH problems are a real Achilles' heel for SQC.  But, given the presumed source, it's hard to know what they can do about it.  I am a regular there (1-2 times a month when I'm in the City, sometimes more, and I'm usually there with people who go multiple times/week) for dinner and have experienced all the things you describe.

At least I now know I'm not the only one. I'll continue to be a regular, because there aren't many other palatable options nearby.

I also don't have a problem with holding a few tables for regular customers. That's just good business. But watching FOUR tables being given away on a busy Sunday, while I stood around with my date in the cramped doorway like an idiot for 30 minutes was a bit much. Add the fact that I AM a regular (I have been eating at this place 1-2 times per week), and that I specifically told the hostess I needed to get a table in time to make a matinee performance, and the whole thing was just ridiculous. She kept assuring me that I could have "the next table", and then continued to give the tables away right in front of us to people she knew better than me as they walked in. It was one of the more blatant "fuck you's" I've experienced in a NYC restaurant. If she had been a man I might have grabbed her by the collar and slammed her up against the wall! The funny part is, I saw the same woman during lunch a few days later, and she walked up to me and tried to make friendly small talk by saying, "Gee you look familiar, havent I seen you here before?". I somehow managed to keep my mouth shut and gave a polite smile. Ah, the things we go through on the UWS to get a decent meal.....

[Felonius]

I keep going back because I think the food is great, it's a good value, I am friendly with the waitstaff and bar staff, and I like Scott and Linda personally. That's pretty much what you're looking for at a somewhat upscale neighborhood place.

Do you have any favorite dishes you'd recommend? I've been to SQC primarily for lunch, and would love to hear what I should try for dinner.

[bloviatrix]

I think this is a socioeconomic culture thing. I think one finds in general that the higher up in the class heirarchy one goes, the more importance families put on decorous behavior in children.

I've got to disagree with you on this. In my experience, the wealthier the family, the more obnoxious and bratty the kids seem to be. And mom and dad let them get away with it. Partially because they're so removed from child raising that they don't want to ruin the few hours they spend with their kids on discipline.

[Fat Guy]

I think it has to do with whether you grew up on the West Side or the East Side.

[Felonius]

I did find, just eyeballing things, that the portion sizes were a bit small -- this is probably one way SQC holds the line on prices. But it's not like you leave hungry if you eat three courses.

Reading this thread yesterday lured me back to dine at SQC last night. I ordered only a main course, venison, as I was in a bit of a hurry. I believe it was a loin of venison, served in its own jus with an assortment of mushrooms, pureed butternut squash, and a pear that had been poached in red wine. Every time I've ordered Venison in NYC (and I've ordered it many times at many places), the tenderloin always comes from the kitchen sliced, and is usually a miniscule portion. This time there were two large pieces of tenderloin arranged in a vertical fashion on the plate (the flat end where it had been cut was placed face down on the plate, and the round ends of the tenderloin were pointing towards the ceiling). Anyway, I thought it was kind of interesting to see it presented this way. The meat was also a bit gamier than most venison served in NYC restaurants. It actually tasted like venison, which I liked. The poached pear was served whole on a bed of pureed butternut squash. A fine winter dish overall.

The portion size of this dish was fairly substantial, and it was certainly the largest serving of venison I've seen in NYC. A chicken entree that passed by my table also looked fairly generous in size.

Hmmm, maybe these guys are reading eGullet after all.

Edited December 5, 2003 by Felonius (log)

[slkinsey]

The dinner dishes I recommend are:

• Butcher's tenderloin of beef. Usually comes with truffled mashed potatoes, foie gras & port wine or reduction sauce
  
• There is usually a seared duck breast/confit combination. Sometimes with blood oranges, sometimes with cherries, right now with figs I think
  
• They usually have a pan-roasted half chicken (entirely boneless) that's nice
  
• The fish dishes are usually good, especially salmon. Also, they sometimes have a seared tuna "deconstructed salade Nicoise that is very good
  
• They sometimes have a dish of braised oxtail, montrachet ravioli and marrow bone. This is a very poetic dish as the diner can select from the various items on the plate to mix, match and contrast the earthy, tart and rich experiences provided by the three ingredients
  
• Do not miss the Smoked tomato and cheddar cheese tart with chilled tomato soup and mustard ice cream appetizer
  
• do try the she crab soup starter when they offer it
  
• The lamb dishes are usually very good.
  
• If they have the Apple pie with Vanilla Ice Cream and Sauce Caramel, give it a shot. It's interesting: a little apple crisp served with a little bowl of house made vanilla ice cream, a little piece of interesting cheddar cheese and a little boat of bitter caramel sauce. You can mix and match as you please. Like the oxtail dish, it's nicely poetic.
  
• As previously mentioned, the hot chocolate is a serious experience, and theirs has been mentioned in print as among the best the city has to offer. It's even better as "Fire and Ice" with a generous scoop of the caramel ice cream.
  

[slkinsey]

Hmmm, maybe these guys are reading eGullet after all.

Actually... I've mentioned the site to Scott a few times. His answer is always something like: "How the hell does a working chef find the time to read and post to an Internet discussion board?"

[Pan]

Admin: threads merged.

A search produced no results for this restaurant (I'm guessing that "@" and "." don't count as characters for a search). So I'm starting a new thread.

Tonight, I was out with an old friend who lives on W. 68 St. We didn't decide in advance where to have dinner, with the result that we lacked reservations on the Upper West Side on a Saturday night. My friend mentioned that she prefers less "exotic" food, and I know she has an appreciation for classy things. While walking toward Artepasta, I noticed @SQC. and remembered that it has gotten good mentions here, so I suggested we go there. My friend was happy with that idea, and they did have room for us. Turns out, she's a regular there and friends with Chef Campbell, who came by and talked to us before we had ordered. He was nice, and I mentioned that I was kind of excited to be there because his restaurant had gotten good press on eGullet.com. He wasn't familiar with eGullet, and I suggested that if he has time, he might like to check it out. (My friend is also a natural for eGullet when she gets her computer running properly, as she is a wine connoiseur and loves to cook, too. We had an interesting discussion about the difference between tasting bottles of wine for cork only and being given a taste of an already-open bottle to choose whether or not you want to purchase a glass.)

My friend likes spare ribs a lot, so we started off sharing an "Intermediaire" of spare ribs with chocolate sauce. These were three nicely barbecued spare ribs with some chocolate in the barbecue sauce. A couple of pralines were a nice touch.

For "Grandes," my friend got chicken with puree of some kind of orange squash with pine nuts. It was nice, but both of us liked my dish better: Duck breast with blackberries (or something related), which I got sort of rare. It came with a side of bok choy that had been steamed and then I think flash-sauteed with garlic.

All of this was very pleasant, so I ordered dessert: a pecan tart with Vermont maple ice cream, which came in a cup with some good strong mint leaves (I think my friend ordered a decaf cappucino). We were comped some of their excellent hot chocolate and shots of liqueur - pineapple for her and cherry for me.

With the meal, we had two glasses of red wine apiece, Cabernet and Syrah, of which each of us had one of each. The Syrah was a simple but good table wine and the Cabernet was a little more complex and interesting, or so I thought at first, anyway. Both went fine with the food.

Overall - and N.B. that this is only a very preliminary remark based on just this one meal - my feeling is that the food at @SQC. is really solid, but with some little extra twists that delight. If you're looking for one firework after another, you might not be satisfied, but if you're looking for pleasant food that has just enough complexity to tickle your brain, you'll enjoy yourself.

The bill came to around $112 plus tip. I am still very full!

[docsconz]

Nice report, Michael. It sounds like a nice place. What's with the terminology?

[JosephB]

Hmmm, maybe these guys are reading eGullet after all. 

Actually... I've mentioned the site to Scott a few times. His answer is always something like: "How the hell does a working chef find the time to read and post to an Internet discussion board?"

You should mention one more thing to Scott. Tell him that the extra cost of changing the silverware between appetizers and the main course is small compared to the return in customer satisfaction. Mind you, @SQC is hardly inexpensive. When I was there for dinner recently the waiter put our used forks on the table (no tablecloth) after he picked up our appetizer plates. Not good. Otherwise the food and wine are very good at this place.

Boy, I'm being a real bitch today.

[slkinsey]

I've been a regular at @SQC pretty much since they opened. It has its ups and downs -- especially with respect to FOH and service -- but the food is rarely less than excellent and I think it's the class of the UWS among restaurants of its kind.

John: @SQC stands for "at Scott Quentin Campbell's." Scott is the chef and owner. The restaurant is usually called "SQC" rather than "At SCQ" by locals and regulars. This is probably why Michael couldn't find the original thread, which left off the @.

Michael: it's interesting that Scott says he's never heard of eGullet, since I've told him about it at least a dozen times. He usually says something to the effect that he can't understand how a working chef could possibly have enough free time to play around on a discussion site.

[Felonius]

Admin: threads merged.

Just returned to NYC last night and noticed a big "FOR RENT" sign in the window of @SQC. Anyone know what happened?

I'm sorry to see them go. It was one of the better restaurants in our neighborhood.

[ASM NY]

I am very surprised as well... I thought it always had a decent amount of people. Never easy to get a table for brunch.

[gingersweetiepie]

From the folks at eater:

2) UWS: They fought the good, long fight, but business is doneski at neighborhood mainstay @SQC (who doesn't love a phantom website?) From the ground: "Apparently the folks at @sqc have decided that providing sustenance to the stroller set on the UWS is no longer worth killing themselves."

more closings that week at

http://eater.curbed.com/archives/2006/07/shutter.php#more

[larrylee]

The problem with the entry from Eater is that it isn't substantiated in any way. "Apparently" sounds more like speculation than anything else.

2) UWS: They fought the good, long fight, but business is doneski at neighborhood mainstay @SQC (who doesn't love a phantom website?) From the ground: "Apparently the folks at @sqc have decided that providing sustenance to the stroller set on the UWS is no longer worth killing themselves."

[Sneakeater]

I think the "apparently" modifies the statement of the reason for the closing, not the statement of the closing.

[larrylee]

Sneakeater,

Rightly so. I didn't intend to challenge that the restaurant was closed. I just found Eater's reasoning to be unhelpful speculation.

I think the "apparently" modifies the statement of the reason for the closing, not the statement of the closing.

←

[Sneakeater]

That's for sure.

[gingersweetiepie]

just a little off topic, but eater's good at serving wrong information with a side of attitude. to give them credit, they do preface their reports by saying that they come from unverifiable sources/anonymous e-mails (to which i ask, 'then why publish it?'). so yeah, i just quoting them since some asked.

never did eat at the restaurant but i'm sure campbell will reappear in a new spot.

[sadie_siamesecat]

I can't verify Eater's sources, especially as that is not a site I frequent--However the sign that was on the door at @SQC (last weekend I think?) basically said that they were exhausted with running the restaurant (though no mention of "stroller set" was included). I also seem to recall some mention of wanting to have a family and not even being able to see each other (due to the demands of the restaurant).

If anyone with a photographic memory cares to add a more detailed description of the note--please do!