Cru vs. Urena vs. Venue vs. ?

[Rob Simmon]

I'm in the midst of a serious molecular gastronomy kick, and I'm looking to hit a restaurant in or around NY soon. Where in NY should I go (I've already been to WD-50)? In general, I prefer inventiveness to tradition (if that wasn't already obvious). The lack of a wine list at Venue doesn't bother me ...

thanks

[mcattaneo23]

I have been hearin a lot about Gilt, it sounds as if this might be what you are into

[foodexile]

I think Cru is the least molecular.

Urena sounds amazing.

[BryanZ]

I've been to all relatively recently (save for Urena) and find Gilt to be the most impressive. Also the most expensive, however.

Venue is a somewhat different restaurant than the others, in my opinion. Definitely "molecular" or "hypermodern" or what have you but on a scale that is more overt than the others you mentioned. It's hard to compare Venue in that mix.

Edited February 7, 2006 by BryanZ (log)

[Bond Girl]

wd-50. Nothing molecular about Urena.

[Nathan]

other than a couple foams, Urena is not molecular at all. ditto for Cru.

Some of the publicity for Urena (which appear to be on its way to being a very good restaurant) over-emphasized Urena having briefly worked at at El Bulli. In actuality, he is solidly in the Bouley school.

[Sneakeater]

Is there a way to ask what and where Venue is without sounding COMPELETELY clueless?

[Bux]

Is there a way to ask what and where Venue is without sounding COMPELETELY clueless?

←

On Google, I suppose. That said, the only useful link I found was to a place in Cambridge. Unfortunately, a search on "venue" brings a lot of irrelevent hits as might "per se" or "cru."

[Sneakeater]

Ah-HAH!

It's in Hoboken!

[plattetude]

Another option is to search these boards. More specifically the NJ boards. Or just click here.

Christopher

[Sneakeater]

I searched this board, but since this was a New York thread in which the place was mentioned, I limited my search to the New York board. (If you do a general board search for the word "venue", you get an awful lot of irrelevent uses of the common word "venue" -- as in fact you do on the New York board, since as I now know the restaurant is in New Jersey. There was nothing in the reference above to indicate that, though.)

Thanks for the link.

Edited February 7, 2006 by Sneakeater (log)

[plattetude]

Point taken, and no snarkiness intended.

A useful feature of the search option available in the eGullet portal is to limit the search to thread titles only, in which case, you could've searched all of eGullet and come up with a pretty targeted result set.

(And I post this here rather than as a PM since it may be good knowledge to share with others as well.)

Christopher

[Vadouvan]

Definitely Gilt for inventiveness.

The word "molecular" by the way is being grossly misused by the entire food world just because a couple of chemicals are used as ingredients. There is very little "Molecular" about "Molecular gastronomy".

[Bond Girl]

Actually all cooking is technically molecular gastronomy, people just have been doing it for centuries without rationalizing why they are doing it.

[Vadouvan]

My point exactly so the use of the term "molecular gastronomy" is just Hype BS ?

Maillard reactions happen in griddled hot dogs as well as Sous vide Mishima ribeyes....ect ect

Why dont they just use the term creative ?

[Nathan]

My point exactly so the use of the term "molecular gastronomy" is just Hype BS ?

Maillard reactions happen in griddled hot dogs as well as Sous vide Mishima ribeyes....ect ect

Why dont they just use the term creative ?

←

its not b.s. if people understand what you mean. just because all cooking is molecular in a pedantic sense doesn't change the fact that when someone uses the term we all know they're talking about something from the Adrias/Ramsay/Achatz school.

"creative" doesn't cut it because Gramercy Tavern is creative, just not in that way. perhaps "avant garde" would work? titles, by their nature, must be exclusive, otherwise they become meaningless. we've already seen that in this thread where posters thought Urena was something that it's not.

[dRock]

I would go to either Venue or Gilt. You wont be dissapointed with either one of these choices.

[Rob Simmon]

I would go to either Venue or Gilt.  You wont be dissapointed with either one of these choices.

←

Seems like the concensus ... I'll see what reservations I can score.

[Rob Simmon]

Definitely Gilt for inventiveness.

The word "molecular" by the way is being grossly misused by the entire food world just because a couple of chemicals are used as ingredients. There is very little "Molecular" about "Molecular gastronomy".

←

But you understood what I meant, no? I guess "hypermodern" would also have worked.

[tan319]

Some of the publicity for Urena (which appear to be on its way to being a very good restaurant) over-emphasized Urena having briefly worked at at El Bulli.  In actuality, he is solidly in the Bouley school.

←

I don't want to seem contrary but hasn't Bouley done a lot of hanging out at "the lab" of the El Bulli guys in the off seasons?

It seems with the various clouds that have been on Bouleys menus and such that their (Adrias) influence can be felt.

Just wondering, is all

[reachej]

Actually all cooking is technically molecular gastronomy, people just have been doing it for centuries without rationalizing why they are doing it.

←

molecular gastronomy n. in cooking, the study and application of chemistry, physics, and other scientific principles on its processes, preparation, and materials.

Actually only a few who cook are knowingly involved in the application of the specific chemistry. I might argue that almost none are actually, truly involved in the study. As to who is and in which restaurant, I'll leave that to others to judge. I do agree that just using a few "chemicals" doesn't make for it. Afterall, many use corn starch.

[chefboy24]

Actually all cooking is technically molecular gastronomy, people just have been doing it for centuries without rationalizing why they are doing it.

←

thank you.

i'm in lurrrrrrrve.

[Edward Quinn]

Sorry to butt in from Aussie, but I'm not sure that molecular gastronomy always has a great deal to do with the use of chemicals in food?

Rather the molecular `study' of ingredients, in order to establish similarities between their structures. Thus creating a scientific approach to flavour marriages, as opposed to purely being creative. I use Heston Blumenthal, as an example in his discovery of the similar properties of white chocolate and caviar in order to create a new dish.

I agree that simply recreating dishes based on `new flavour marriages ' established as a result of molecular study, does not warrant the term, `molecular gastronomy'.

I hope this adds a new angle to the interpretation!!

[Vadouvan]

Actually only a few who cook are knowingly involved in the application of the specific chemistry. I might argue that almost none are actually, truly involved in the study. As to who is and in which restaurant, I'll leave that to others to judge. I do agree that just using a few "chemicals" doesn't make for it. Afterall, many use corn starch.

I dont even think the interest in studying the application of the specific chemistry matters. The term "Molecular Gastronomy" is essentially esoteric embellishment. I agree with Bondgirl that people have cooked and baked for years while not being aware of the specific chemistry that makes dishes sucessful (cornstarch, Cream of tartar, temperature of proofing dough, Jello,salting ham for Proscuitto/Serrano).

A new awareness of how those things work (Physics and Chemistry) may be referred to as the "molecular study of gastronomy" but to say any chef practices "molecular gastronomy" or any particular restaurant is a good place for "Molecular Cuisine" is frankly wrong and silly.

Sorry to butt in from Aussie, but I'm not sure that molecular gastronomy always has a great deal to do with the use of chemicals in food?

Also correct.

the current vogue is to use chemicals that have been traditionally used in mass produced food and agro-industrial business in the forum of small scale fine dining.

Referring to :

carageenan

Xanthan Gum

Gellan Gum

Methylcellulose

Transglutaminase

Sorbitol

Isomalt

Dextrose

Ect ect....

While the applications are interesting on a small scale, they arent "new" per se.

You could basically claim to be involed in "molecular gastronomy" simply by dressing a salad at home with any bottle of commercial salad dressing containing one or more stabilizers or emulsifiers.

Much the same way as you could have a hamburger at White Castle........

"A La plancha"

Edited February 11, 2006 by Vadouvan (log)

[akwa]

the term molecular gastronomy as defined by the people who coined the phrase this/kurti

indicates a pursuit of science in the understanding of the long observed "rules" of the kitchen

it includes an attempt to understand why commonly held beliefs are held, if they are indeed true, or just fiction, or a mix;

using chemicals (albeit an interesting choice of word for products which are all natural derivatives of plant and seaweed) has nothing to do with this pursuit at all.

from this, by definition chefs cannot be scientists because they are trying to make something rather than learn something with no end point. this change in vantage point is interesting, but i am not sure it is compelling.

"avant-garde" "mg" are thrown around pretty easily these days without much consideration of the derivation of the ideas and meanings

if you are looking for an understanding of the aesthetics of cooking, also fundamental to this' scientific approach, gilt is probably the best bet; if you are interested in the application of science, known as technology, wd50 is probably the best bet; if you are interested in how technological applications produce more consistent tastes and textures cru is probably the best bet.