Tasting Menu vs A La Carte

[tomcbell]

I am planning on going to GR @ RHR in early August with my family, and was wondering what menu option to go for. I went last year and had the set lunch (as was always the plan given my budget limitations at the time), but now (since I'm not paying!) I will be free either to have the Tasting Menu or the a la carte.

My question is this: in terms of having the best overall experience, is it definitely preferable to have the tasting menu? For it has occurred to me that in order to experience the best food that can be offerred there, then having three larger, more complex plates might achieve this more so than with a larger number of less complex plates. Does anyone share this view? Does anyone know, for instance, if the 'main courses' of the tasting menu (i.e. the meat course) are simply smaller versions of the a la carte mains? Or are they 'simpler', with fewer flavours and ingredients?

I do not doubt that either way I will have an amazing meal, of course!

Many thanks,

Tom.

[fisherman]

why do you assume that larger dishes from an a la carte will be more complex? if my (by no means exhaustive) experience of tasting menus is anything to go by, the dishes offered are if anything more complex. In my opinion, tasting menus give the chef a chance to shine, and do something different, if one is offered, I always choose it

[CarolineLD]

I went to RHR and ate a la carte, my sister had the tasting menu. (I couldn't as I was vegetarian). The tasting menu looked superb and she really enjoyed it, I didn't get the sense that anything was less complex, just sometimes smaller. I certainly want to go back and try it now I'm eating meat again!!

[Jon Tseng]

Prefer the alc - you still get all the amuses, mignardaises, pre-deserts and what-nots so its more like five courese than three...

I agree I never feel tasting menu "dishes" (read "thimble-fuls") as integral as full-sized alc dishes (this is a general comment, not a GR-specific one)

Plus the tasting menu is normally fairly unadventurous (although have to set in context of menu as a whole at GR which is relatively unadventurous). Betcha the meat course will be choice of either canon of lamb or fillet steak. There will probably also be a seared foie gras lurking in there somewhere - all fine and good but nothing you haven't had many times before...

In fact the more I type the more I feel you should just skip GR and go to Tom Aikens instead...

J

Edited July 1, 2005 by Jon Tseng (log)

[tony h]

no way to tell up front

Tom Aikens - good tasting menu but I prefer alc there

Raymond Blanc - tasting menu is fairly dull (apparently there's two be two TM's from september – why? looking for a third star i guess?)

Le Capitol - I really didn't like the tasting menu (then again - I prefer lunch there to dinner)

The Square - miserly portion for tasting menu

Patrick G (Dublin) - dull TM - I haven’t had alc

Fat Duck - sublime (but loses its sparkle second time round)

Le CS - not so much a tasting menu as an experience when David cook’s for you - staggeringly good

Pierre G - you feel pummelled either way alc or TM - about as good as it gets imho

Pied a Terre – mixed feeling about this one – some dishes good, some not

Arzak & Akelare (San Seb) – no tasting menus that I remember but they let you order half sized dishes – both a riot

Can Fabes – very dull TM

Martin B (San Seb) – f**king awful TM – some truly offensive cooking

Gordon R – I have alc & TM at Claridges – both fine but not adventurous (mind you, the TM was the chef’s table and they throw one hell of a party). RHR alc was fairly special but then again it was my first 3 star

Of course – Michel Bras – stunning TM

There are others in France but I can’t recall (also realised – maybe this is why I’m so skint)

[dellis453]

I'd go for the tasting menu if the one at Martin Wishart's in Edinburgh is anything to go by. The tastes are exquisite and complex. At GR if you are not likely to go back again soon, I'd go for the tasting menu any day.

[cachan]

Since you're already booked to visit GR@RHR, the simple answer is to go for the Prestige menu at ninety pounds. As others have said, the dishes are never less complex in any restaurant, they are simply more numerous and smaller in quantity.

And it's more of an experience to be served more dishes, you get the feeling of being spoilt, and why not go the whole hog the first time, then go ALC or set lunch subsequently. You will find that a fair proportion of punters at GR@RHR have the Prestige menu even at lunch-time.

And these tasting/gourmand/degustation/prestige/exceptionel menus are never set in stone, the piper payer can ask for alternatives for a dish, we were served a lovely risotto with girolles and cep instead of the standard fois gras.

[MobyP]

(This seems to be my repeated theme, but) If the prestige menu doesn't have the dishes you would like, substitute with ones that you would. I did exactly that, and had a very nice meal indeed.

[sarah w]

Do any of you find the more Tasting Menus you have the harder the become to stomach

I am finding on the whole i get to full these days (obviously depending on the restaurant)

Tetsuya's in sydney's tasting menu was generally light so i coped despite extra courses being added

I found instead with Ramsays that despite being very enjoyable i just got to stuffed

Considering with the A'La carte you get the amuses etc anyway they can often compete in touches

My problem is the moment read the menu's on arrival at a restaurant i am nearly always craving all the courses on the A'La carte and find it hard to make the decision of only 3 courses

Better if someone else decides !

Next meal is midsummer house in July, not sure what i will choose there !

Sarah

[tony h]

Do any of you find the more Tasting Menus you have the harder the become to stomach

I am finding on the whole i get to full these days (obviously depending on the restaurant)

←

avoid the bread - sometimes this is very difficult

I also tend to skip the cheese course (Pierre G's - not just slabs/slices but three dishes made from cheese - hard to resist; the place in Lyon (on the island) also served wonderful jellied kumquatt's with the cheese course - fab)

oh, and try to avoid seconds (not easy, particularly Guy Savoy's artichoke & black truffle soup!)

pre-drinks are also a no no - but not having wine during the meal is also bad

TMs on consecutive days - also a no no

but, most importantly of all, train, train & train some more! TMs are not for the faint hearted

[Gary Marshall]

TMs on consecutive days - also a no no

but, most importantly of all, train, train & train some more!  TMs are not for the faint hearted

←

as my wife discovered on an early trip to france, bursting into tears in charles barrier in tours saying 'I just can't eat any more'.

we cut a day off the holiday and returned home, where i promptly went to winteringham fields for lunch. That's the difference between amateurs and professionals!

[cachan]

Yes, as Tony Higgins says, rule number one is to keep off the bread, even if it is full of creativity as at Tom Aikens or the Capital.

[PoppySeedBagel]

Gary - I had a similar edperience - staying at a Michelin 1* in the Champagne region (so v. rich food) for 3 nights - on the last night for about half an hour, I just couldn't face the restaurant. Then (being a Yorkshirewoman) I picked myself up & trudged off. A bottle of champagne restrored my appetite amazingly.

I find TMs often have over-large portions of puddings - that's what tips me over into feeling sick (!) - they often have 2 or 3 rich puds, when I would prefer somethings lighter and fruitier.