Daniel

[herbacidal]

boulud stepped back from day to day at daniel officially?

how long as bruel been at exec?

Stepped back? I believe Alex Lee was executive chef from the day Daniel opened. I know he was executive chef at the time the restaurant moved to its present location. Jean François was made executive chef when Alex moved on. Jean Francois has been with Daniel a long time and I believe he has worked in all three of Daniel's NY restaurants.

really? my mistake.

so boulud's title was owner/chef or some equivalent?

[Bux]

boulud stepped back from day to day at daniel officially?

how long as bruel been at exec?

Stepped back? I believe Alex Lee was executive chef from the day Daniel opened. I know he was executive chef at the time the restaurant moved to its present location. Jean François was made executive chef when Alex moved on. Jean Francois has been with Daniel a long time and I believe he has worked in all three of Daniel's NY restaurants.

really? my mistake.

so boulud's title was owner/chef or some equivalent?

I worked on Daniel's first web site. As I recall, he was always referred to as chef/owner and Alex was listed as Executive Chef. I'm less sure about the early day's in the old 76th Street location. It's possible that Alex might have been referred to as sous chef in those days. At 65th Street, there were usually as many as three sous chefs under Alex. Towards the end of Alex's association, the hierarchy may have changed and become more complex.

[herbacidal]

I have no personal knowledge of any sort of the situation.

I had originally assumed just that Boulud was exec chef because that's what I'm used to owner-chefs being referred to as.

I do recall in Brenner's 4th Star that there were 4 sous chefs.

thanks for the clarification.

[MobyP]

Forgive me for coming late to this particular party, but isn't this news rather extraordinary? Given the talent involved, the fact that Alex Lee's next place isn't a major NY opening, or SF, LA, Chicago etc (if Boulud contractually kept him from the NY scene) - isn't that news in itself?

A country club? What the hell is one of the country's major talents doing in a country club?

[D. Peckham]

Do you have a family moby ? or worked at a top restaurant? think about it.

[MobyP]

Ah Moby, how ingenuous of you not to see that which is so self evident to everyone else?

Sorry. If you expect people to read between the lines, you better leave a bit more space.

[Fat Guy]

Moby, I do think it's big news for exactly the reasons you stated. Alex Lee was a superstar -- the Number One Son to the Number One Chef (or at least one of the top handful of chefs) in New York City. All indicators pointed to him eventually opening a three- or four-star place of his own and being in the vanguard of the next generation of top New York chefs. Unless the country club thing is temporary, it seems as though he has chosen a total change of direction. If so, one wonders why he put in so many years at Daniel in the first place. Most people who want to get out of The Life for family-related reasons do it a lot sooner than this. It's sort of like making partner at a major law firm and then deciding you want to be at a smaller firm -- that decision is typically made earlier along the career path.

Herb, I'm with you in thinking Daniel's nomenclature is a bit confusing. Alex Lee's role at Daniel is not what I think of when I think of an Executive Chef position -- to me, Daniel Boulud plays the role I think of as the Executive Chef role. I would normally call someone in Alex Lee's position the Chef de Cuisine. In the US, in my experience, that's the standard designation for the top guy in an individual restaurant where the restaurant is owned by a chef-restaurateur who has several other restaurants (especially when that restaurant is the flagship). While there are no standardized definitions of these terms, I think of the Executive Chef title as implying either ownership/partnership or stewarship over multiple kitchens (as in a hotel with multiple dining operations). There's also a question of attribution: whose cuisine are we supposed to be eating when we go to Daniel? The answer is, emphatically, Daniel Boulud's cuisine.

[jeffperez62]

After putting in the long hard hours in a restaurant some chefs are ready for a change. I understand Alex has young children and the restaurant lifestyle has BRUTAL effects on a the married life. I think the top 3 professions for getting divorced are :1) doctor 2) lawyer 3) chef ! I know it is shocking to some that one of the top Sous/Chef de Cusine in NY has made such a drastic change, but I know alot of friends in the industry that re-evaluated their lives after 9-11 and decided to make changes. Some of these changes included leaving Manhattan. The club lifestyle can be quite nice for some chefs. Some of the clubs on the Gold Coast (Northern Nassau county and Southern Fairfield county) pay very well and would give Alex free reign in the kitchen. Club chefs work very hard in the Summer and usually work 1 or 2 days a week in the off season so they can lead somewhat of a normal life. Either way Alex is a great talent and for sure we will see more of him in some capacity in the future.

[Bux]

Forgive me for coming late to this particular party, but isn't this news rather extraordinary? Given the talent involved, the fact that Alex Lee's next place isn't a major NY opening, or SF, LA, Chicago etc (if Boulud contractually kept him from the NY scene) - isn't that news in itself?

A country club? What the hell is one of the country's major talents doing in a country club?

Two obvious factors shouldn't be dismissed. Alex is a very devoted father and chefs rarely see thier kids when they're awake. The country club in question is very near where he lives and I'd guess his hours are fewer. I'm not saying this information should be taken and the simple and complete answer to everyone's questions. Others have speculated here that they expect to see Alex back in Manhattan in due time.

I could speculate on any number of reasons why Alex might take his present job for a period of time even if he were looking to eventually open his own restaurant in Manhattan. If nothing else, he gets a window of time to be with his family and he's probably in a better position to make plans for any new projects than he'd be if he was still in the Daniel Kitchen.

[GordonCooks]

He has quite the organic farm at home - maybe he's going the Blue Hill route.

[SteveW]

This would also apply to exclusive Private members' restaurants? Lesley Chesterman's(eGullet Montreal forum host) husband Bertrand Bazin is the head pastry chef of a very exclusive Montreal Private members' restaurant called Le 357c. I should add that Le 357c is a whole complex, which includes a restaurant. It caters to the rich & powerful of Montreal. I've been trying to get in as a guest for the past year, but they have a secret members' list. Bertrand toils away in obscurity, but he's dealing with a select upscale clientele who can afford the steep annual membership(by Montreal standards).

-Steve

Edited December 1, 2003 by SteveW (log)

[herbacidal]

does anyone know:

how old is alex lee?

how old are his children?

perhaps he might return to the high profile manhattan scene after they're in college?

yes FG, I originally expected alex lee's former title to be chef de cuisine as well.

[markabauman]

If you look at the dedication in the beginning of "Letters to A Young Chef", Daniel Boulud refers to Alex Lee in terms of the dates (not sure of the beginning, don't have the book in front of me) -2003. Sounds like past tense.

[MichaelB]

If you look at the dedication in the beginning of "Letters to A Young Chef", Daniel Boulud refers to Alex Lee in terms of the dates (not sure of the beginning, don't have the book in front of me) -2003. Sounds like past tense.

The dedication in total:

To Alex Lee, whom I met as a passionate young cook, and who worked worked alongside me as a chef de cuisine from 1993 to 2003, for the thousands of dishes we enjoyed cooking together.

[PaulaJK]

A celebratory ocassion pointed us towards Daniel's.

Bar: stools are implausibly petite....drinks are poured 'short'.

The martini & cosmos glasses were only half filled. I

witnessed some orders being returned to be 'topped off'.

Why impress people negatively?

Room: elegant, pretty, fully occupied & noisy

Service: lots & lots of personnel....but 5 different people

asked if we would like to order wine, two of them after we

had already done so. sommelier returned with a bottle that

was a year younger than proposed on the menu.

Rest of service was professional & non-intrusive.

Menu: interesting w. lots of asian influence...also offering

of his classical dishes. We decided on the $120 tasting

menu where there was a choice between 2 items in @

category.

Amuses: petite white ceramic pots almost lost in their service

on a large silver 3 tiered tray... minscule beet salad, tasty

macheral seviche and tres petite parmesan tuile w. goat cheese

Course #! Tourchon of foie gras or terrine of squab & foie gras.

I found the latter to be the tastiest item of the evening. It was

presented w. a 'spot' of cherry coulis and a few micro greens

Course #2 We both ordered the zucchini blossom stffd w. peeky toe crab.

We anticipated a gossamer, tempura style batter but it was

encrusted w. breadcrumbs...came out looking like those olde

italian potato croquettes. No seasoning detected, but the products

are gentle. Served tepid.

Course #3 Spouse had the skate..declared it delicious but some

bites were very, very salty

I ordered the salmon 'medium'. It may have been seared, but was

very far from medium..salty...but good enough

Course #4 Spouse ordered the beef & short ribs, quite good but

very small portion. I ordered the veal which consisted of 1 piece

of tenderloin approx. 1.5-2 inches in diameter and 1 inch thick,

accompanied by 2 bites of sweetbread and some veggies.

We are neither amazons nor piglets...but this is the only upscale

venue that I have ever left hungry!

Course #5 was that all-too-familiar molten chocolate cake or a

grapefruit prep.

Frankly, I don't understand why they have 4 stars.

[bleachboy]

I'm sorry to hear you didn't enjoy your experience at Daniel to the fullest. I ate there about a year ago, and was quite impressed. We arrived about 45 minutes early, and sat at the bar and ordered a bottle of champagne. The waiter brought out a multi-tiered silver platter with assorted amuses, mixed nuts, etc. Very nice.

The meal was impeccably presented and perfectly prepared. Two dining companions declared it the best food they had ever eaten. I would not go that far, but it was undoubtedly world-class.

Granted, it's not a "so full you might vomit" kind of place. McAppleback's (courtesy Mayhaw Man) provides that. But I wasn't expecting that either. I left sated but still ready to go out and spend a night on the town in lovely NYC. I heard a lot of complaints in your post about small portion sizes (at the bar and on the table), which leads me to wonder if you knew what to expect. Fine dining's not a diner.

I, too, noticed the Asian influence. I can't remember exactly what I had, but I know that I passed on some favorites (potato wrapped sea bass) to try the more Asian inspired dishes.

Do you know if Chef Boulud was actually in the place the night you went? He said goodbye to us as we left, so he was definitely there. The presence of the executive chef often makes the difference between a good meal and a great meal at these types of places.

[PaulaJK]

We didn't see Daniel Boulud, which doesn't necessarily indicate his absence.

I can assure you Bleachboy that I am well acquainted with

the differences between fine dining and gorging, diner or other

location. I do not enjoy 'leaving stuffed' and do not seek it. Nor

do I expect to leave hungry after a $120 meal.

Last night we had a delicious dinner at Veritas. The amuse of tuna

[larger than my veal tenderloin at Daniel !] was superb; all of us

would have been happy to have it as a dinner entre. Every aspect

of the sauteed foie gras w. fresh peaches was excellent. My roast

chicken was up there among the most enjoyed and my friend's lamb

was perfectly cooked and quite delicious. Another friend raved over his cod.Although there were no silvered trays of slivers, we left happy

with our dining experience and hope to soon return. Of course, the wines

were also excellent.

I realize that different folk enjoy different restaurants. I simply

wondered if anyone had had a similar take on Daniel. Cocktails being

returned to be topped off didn't leave me anticipating that all customers

were going to be enthralled from start to finish!

[Bux]

We were there earlier in the month and fared much better. We asked for a five course menu and left feeling rather on the verge of being stuffed. Although blessedly all of the individual courses were small, a course less would have been sufficient to sate our hunger. I noticed that courses served at tables having the standard menu seemed much larger than our courses. I honestly don't remember how many course came with $120 menu. I think Chef Boulud may have still been in France when you were there. I know he was when we were there. Daniel is one restaurant that has over the years been so well run and staffed, that I really don't care if he's there or not when I go there.

I will note that I've had a very close relationship with this restaurant and with Daniel Boulud himself, although it all stemmed from being overwhelmingly impressed with what I found years ago when he opened the original Daniel. Members of my family have worked for Daniel and I was involved in the layout of his original web site. I have friends and acquaintances in the office, dining room and kitchen. Although my food and service were always superb when I was unknown. It's been many years since then and I can't swear I don't have a better experience than others now, but outside of certain gestures such as a complimentary coupe of champagne or extra dessert, I think I experience the real Daniel and suspect there are high rollers who are treated better.

I can't comment on the cocktails. It's something we never order. It may be a generational thing. I only recall sitting on the bar stools but once or twice. I honestly don't recall them being uncomfortable or particularly unusual. I will comment on the adjectives you use to describe the very delicate amuses meant not to feed the diner but to tease and stimulate the appetite. "Petite," "almost lost," "miniscule" "and tres petite," all suggest you arrived looking for a heartier style of restaurant. Interestingly enough, my sense is that Daniel has evolved into a place serving finer, more elegant and more delicate food than it did when it opened. The negative spin might be that the food is fussier, but that's subjective. I don't see the same signs I used to see of Lyonnaise cooking. Then again it may be the season.

I rarely look at the menu when I'm there and just let them know how good our appetite is. Mrs. B noticed the zucchini blossoms on the menu and requested they be included in our menu. In fact, tiny ones were part of a plated course for both of us and then they brought her a larger individual serving as a gift. The menu, which I'm reading online, describes them as "crispy." The term "tempura" is used elsewhere on the menu to describe the garnish in a chilled carrot soup. I don't think it was fair to expect a gossamer tempura style batter on the blossoms. The layer of bread crumbs on our peekytoe crab stuffed blossoms was no thicker than an eggshell and about as crisp. In terms of the execution, I thought it was a tour de force. To have preferred another technique seems a subjective criticism apart from the objective quality and they were like potato croquettes as peekytoe crab is like potatoes.

Asian influences in haute cuisine, whether in Paris or NY, is hardly news these days, although I think it has passed a peak in some ways. One way is that there's less of it. The other is that some things have been so completely incorporated into contemporary food that I don't see them as influences any more than I see potatoes and tomatoes as new world influences. Nevertheless, I don't really remember much in the way of actual Asian touches and I can't find them on the Daniel web site menu either. Mrs. B had a Vodka and Beet-Cured Hamachi with Horseradish Cream, Baby Beets, Crushed Walnuts and a Watercress Salad, which would not qualify as Asian inspired although hamachi has entered the restaurant vocabulary for sashimi grade yellow tail. That was the least successful dish of the evening in her mind. It was hardly a disaster and nice enough, but too many elements seemed to have a canceling effect. I had the very minimalist dish of thinly sliced scallops and matsutake mushrooms run under a salamander just long enough to heat them without actually changing the texture. They're served drizzled with an herb oil. With the possible exception of the foie gras, this was the hit of the evening. We were surprised to learn this was a fairly old dish in the repertoire. Neither of us ever recalled having it before.

I'm glad you were pleased with your foie gras, because that's the one course where we did receive special treatment. I had two small plates on a tray. One contained a thin slice of torchon and the other a piece of warm fresh foie gras. Both were appropriately garnished--with figs or fig derivatives. Mrs. B received the treat of the evening and with the exception of a demitasse spoonful, did not share it. One plate was a slice of the foie gras and (perhaps) squab terrine. On the other was a cup of foie gras ice cream garnished with a fruit compote. There was nothing weird or unreasonable about this, and it was a show stopper. My understanding is that it's prepared at the last minute in a pacojet and that there's some degree of disruption in the kitchen when a serving is made. It is not on the menu and usually served only to those ordering the seven course menu.

I am fully aware that your dining experience includes the world class restaurants in France and the US, but like bleachboy, when it comes to the main courses, once again, I'm reading portion size as the major complaint and the overriding factor in your displeasure of the evening. I don't think I've heard that complaint about Daniel before. I don't have an adequate answer, but based on your two reviews here, I suspect you and I look for different restaurants.

Many years ago, at the old Daniel, a member of our dinner party had a veal dish that was too salty. It can happen. I trust "gentle" is not a pejorative term. I think I understand what you mean by tepid if you are referring to temperature. A thick steak or a bowl of soup may be served piping hot. Delicate portions of intricately plated food are going to arrive less so.

[ewindels]

Took my aunt to Daniel this past Christmas as my gift to her, and while I wouldn't go so far as Paula, I must admit I was a little disappointed. But one has to recognize that it is, and is intended to be, an old-world, old-fashioned, slightly stuffy restaurant, and that its focus is not on the sort of daring, inventive (occassionally too much so) cooking that restaurant enthusiasts (particular New York ones) largely take for granted. It's straight out old-fashioned high-end French cuisine, with ambience and service to match, and if one goes knowing and expecting that, there's no reason you shouldn't be dazzled. At the same time, a few things were not quite up to standard: with all due modesty, I make a better gougere than the ones we were served, and the amuses on the whole were unimaginative and bland. Some people might argue that they have no reason to be otherwise, but at nearly $200 a person I was expecting a little more panache. Everything was fine, perfectly cooked, nicely (if staidly) presented, etc. -- but flavorwise nothing dazzled. For that kind of money these days, I would much sooner recommend Asiate, or ADNY, or Per Se.

[R Washburn]

didn't leave me anticipating that all customers

were going to be enthralled from start to finish!

Is there such a restaurant in New York? I think most of the people who are very critical of Daniel (and ADNY) feel that at this price point the restaurant should achieve total perfection. They feel cheated when the restaurant doesn't live up to their expectations.

I would say that my best meals at Daniel are probably the best meals I have had anywhere in NY, and my absolute worst meals there were still very good.

Frankly, I don't understand why they have 4 stars.

I was more surprised when the NYT gave them 3 stars! Now THAT was a crime.

Edited July 29, 2004 by R Washburn (log)

[robyn]

This is a bit off topic - but we'll be dining at Cafe Boulud in Palm Beach this Monday. It's certainly not Daniel - but we liked it a lot when we ate there last year (and I don't think anyone here has mentioned the place since I mentioned it then). Monday is "wine night" (half price wines) - and I'll be interested to see what that's like. Doubt Daniel Boulud will be there unless he's working on his fishing or his tan . Robyn

[robyn]

Many years ago, at the old Daniel, a member of our dinner party had a veal dish that was too salty. It can happen...

And it does happen - everywhere. High end places - low end places. Everywhere. Repeatedly. Whenever I eat out these days - I tell the waiter that I do not want any salt put on the top of the dish after it's prepared. If it's not salty enough - I can always add a little extra. Although I order that way all the time - I've never had to worry about the absence of salt shakers on a lot of tables. Robyn

[Bux]

didn't leave me anticipating that all customers

were going to be enthralled from start to finish!

Is there such a restaurant in New York? I think most of the people who are very critical of Daniel (and ADNY) feel that at this price point the restaurant should achieve total perfection. They feel cheated when the restaurant doesn't live up to their expectations.

I would say that my best meals at Daniel are probably the best meals I have had anywhere in NY, and my absolute worst meals there were still very good.

I rather disagree that Daniel is, or even intended to be "an old-world, old-fashioned, slightly stuffy restaurant." but it's possible that different diners have different views on what is old fashioned. I would say that Daniel is intended to delight the diner who has trained his palate on four star restaurants in NY and two and three star restaurants in France. That's a similar statement in a way, but I believe the slight difference is profound. I suppose only the chef and owner can truly speak for the restaurant's intentions. We each have the right to decide for ourselves if the restaurant meets those intentions and more specifically if it meets ours. Those who prefer the exuberant fanciful leaps of chefs who haven't the technical mastery to land gracefully on their feet and thus look all the more creative because of the near misses, will miss the wow here. It's interesting that lately I've been reading the posts and hearing from many people who miss the wow at places as varied as Blue Hill and Daniel in NY and l'Ambroisie and Arpège in Paris.

I don't have enough experience at AD/NY (or AD/PA either) unfortunately to make a full and general comparison, but I found it to offer food that appeals to a similarly trained palate, in a broad sense. Dish for dish, I don't know that Ducasse (in NY) offered any better than the range of food I've had at Daniel. It is a more luxurious experience just in terms of serenity, size of the room and the lack of turned tables. You pay for those things and while they improve the evening and the dinner perhaps, they don't really improve the food. There are those diners for whom just the privilege of being in a room full of people who can afford AD/NY makes the difference in price between AD/NY and Blue Hill worth it.

I have found Daniel far more consistent than most restaurants in its class. Of course it has its good days and bad days as well as hits and misses, but for the many meals we've had there, I've not seen the variance in quality of service or cooking I've seen in some other highly regarded restaurants over the course of two separate meals.

If foie gras ice cream and hot, but raw scallop slices are "straight out old-fashioned high-end French cuisine," I've still got a lot to learn and have really wasted the last couple of decades and more, of my dining.

Frankly, I don't understand why they have 4 stars.

I was more surprised when the NYT gave them 3 stars! Now THAT was a crime.

I've expounded on that more than enough for me to go into my perspective on that yet again at this late date, now that the error of the reviewer has long been corrected. I think the power of the NY Times star awards had ebbed. I feel a bit the same way about the Michelin stars and in both cases it may be my subjective disinterest I am projecting. I am getting less and less interested in comparing restaurants as if they were in a horse race. Lately, I'll follow the lead of someone I know and if I can get to dine with that person, or persons, at a restaurant that enthralls him, or them, it's usually an excellent experience. Their knowledge and enthusiasm usually rubs off.

[R Washburn]

I would say that Daniel is intended to delight the diner who has trained his palate on four star restaurants in NY and two and three star restaurants in France.

Well put Bux, although you don't have to be an expert to enjoy Daniel. What annoys me about these threads is the "Emporer has no clothes" aspect where a first time diner at a highly regarded restaurant exposes the place as a being a fraud. This is very similar to the way the professional reviewers treated ADNY, and I think that it is price related more than anything else.

It is hard to really enjoy yourself if you think you are going bankrupt, and it is easy for reviewers to act scandalized over the menu prices of these top end places.

[ewindels]

Like all discussions, particularly the ones here on the gullet, these opinions are all subjective, including my own, and I completely agree with Bux that one should by no means judge a place on one visit alone. The difference being that at this price point if one isn't happy the first time, one isn't inclined to spend that money making a second attempt at it. After my experience, which was fine but didn't live up to my (possibly unrealistic) expectations given all the press and hype about the place, it's just not someplace I'm inclined to try again. Any number of things could have been happening that night (although we did see The Great Man there, which left us even more surprised at the results). But I've had (to my tastes) better meals at L'Espinasse under Delouvrier, JG, Babbo, and would just be more inclined to revisit those than making a second stab at Daniel.