Porter House New York

[rich]

I didn't read it as a comparison to Outback and it was a positive review overall.

I thought some of the remarks on STK were genuinely humorous.

←

The entire review wasn't a comparison to Outback, but when it's mentioned in the first paragraph it has more of an impact and in this case a negative one.

What's more interesting is he didn't think it worthy of a stand-alone review. Even though the overall tone was more positive than negative, I'm sure the people at PH aren't very pleased this moring. But as OA stated, its probably critic proof anyway, so it doesn't matter.

Edited November 22, 2006 by rich (log)

[Nathan]

Virtually every Outback I've ever seen was in a strip-mall (or in the parking lot of a mall -- which is standard for chain restaurants these days); indeed, the one in NY is in a strip-mall of sorts.

Thus, I think the reference point was "steakhouse in a mall"...but these are minor quibbles.

Rich: I think they're probably perfectly happy at Porterhouse. They wouldn't have minded two (it reads as a strong one) and the double review only helps them as it emphasizes Porterhouse positively in comparison to another steakhouse. If anything, this is better for Porterhouse than if it had been a one-star stand alone review.

(Frankly, I've never understood the revered self-importance of the steakhouse genre....)

[rich]

Rich: I think they're probably perfectly happy at Porterhouse.  They wouldn't have minded two (it reads as a strong one) and the double review only helps them as it emphasizes Porterhouse positively in comparison to another steakhouse.  If anything, this is better for Porterhouse than if it had been a one-star stand alone review.

←

Valid point Nathan.

But look at it from another angle. Since neither received a totally positive review and that first Outback paragraph sticks out like a sore thumb in my opinion, a large number of people will come away with a negative feeling. If the reviewer was trying to put PH in a positive light compared to STK, then I don't think he achieved that goal.

I know if I owned PH, I wouldn't want to share a column with a place that's received generally negative reviews. I would ask, isn't my place worth a whole review so the food could be explained in more detail?

I could see it both ways, but the public (non-foodie) perception is the issue and therein lies the problem.

[Nathan]

"I would ask, isn't my place worth a whole review so the food could be explained in more detail?"

I guess this is where I don't get the whole steakhouse thing. I'd be fine with putting four in the same review.

[oakapple]

Since neither received a totally positive review and that first Outback paragraph sticks out like a sore thumb in my opinion, a large number of people will come away with a negative feeling. If the reviewer was trying to put PH in a positive light compared to STK, then I don't think he achieved that goal.

Surely he did, since PH received 1 star, and STK received zero. If that doesn't convey that one is better than the other, I don't know what does. People do tend remember the star rating, long after the actual details of the review are forgotten.

I know if I owned PH, I wouldn't want to share a column with a place that's received generally negative reviews. I would ask, isn't my place worth a whole review so the food could be explained in more detail?

←

That's indeed the question they're probably asking today, to which Frank Bruni's answer is a clear "no." I think Lomonaco was positioning PH to be "more than just a steakhouse." By consigning this restaurant to a dual review, Bruni is suggesting that neither one is important enough on its own. That's partly because the steakhouse format is so well trodden that it need not be explained in much detail, and partly because (as he sees it) neither restaurant is sufficiently important.

If memory serves me right, Bruni has written rated reviews of four steakhouses before today: Wolfgang's and Keens received two stars apiece; V Steakhouse and Harry's Steak received one. For PH and STK to receive 1 and 0 respectively makes it pretty clear where he thinks they stand.

But I'll reiterate that, although Lomonaco no doubt thought he deserved two, I don't think this review will be bad for him the way one star was bad for V Steakhouse.

Edited November 22, 2006 by oakapple (log)

[Sneakeater]

In case Leonard Kim is busy for the holiday, don't forget Craftsteak with one.

[rich]

Since neither received a totally positive review and that first Outback paragraph sticks out like a sore thumb in my opinion, a large number of people will come away with a negative feeling. If the reviewer was trying to put PH in a positive light compared to STK, then I don't think he achieved that goal.

Surely he did, since PH received 1 star, and STK received zero. If that doesn't convey that one is better than the other, I don't know what does. People do tend remember the star rating, long after the actual details of the review are forgotten.

[

←

Fair enough Marc, but I didn't make myself clear. Sure I think PH comes off better than STK, but by placing them together, the public may perceive neither as being very good. I could understand this thinking: well PH got a star and STK didn't, but they were both put in the same review so they're probably not much different.

He certainly gave all the others (steak houses) their own column - that alone suggests the level of importance. If he ever does Luger or Sparks, I'm sure they won't be together.

What's interesting is the ambiance isssue he has with STK. Again (as in Babbo) he appears totally annoyed at the music (nightclub) and noise. It's a open question whether that was the deciding factor between a star and satisfactory.

I do agree with you about PH being critic-proof, so all this is probably moot.

[Sneakeater]

From what I've read (elsewhere than just Bruni) about STK, it sounds like the ambiance issues at STK go far beyond just having music playing, and have been taken into account (rightfully, if their descriptions have been accurate) by just about everyone who's reviewed the place.

Eater even said that it's "only a restaurant [as opposed to a nightclub] insofar as it serves food."

[oakapple]

He certainly gave all the others (steak houses) their own column - that alone suggests the level of importance. If he ever does Luger or Sparks, I'm sure they won't be together.

←

This could be part of his evolution as a critic. He may have said, "Steakhouses are formula restaurants; I've described the formula several times in the past; Neither of these places deviates from the formula in an important way; Ergo, combined review." Had he never written a steakhouse review before, his view might have been different.

Actually, I think a combined Luger-Sparks review would make a lot of sense, and if you look at the past examples of double reviews, it would fit the pattern.

[rich]

Actually, I think a combined Luger-Sparks review would make a lot of sense, and if you look at the past examples of double reviews, it would fit the pattern.

←

I guess that would work since both have been reviewed prior.

Does anyone know if this is the first time he has used the double review format with two new places? I know he's done it with restaurants that were already reviewed.

[Nathan]

what are you guys talking about?

http://events.nytimes.com/2004/06/30/dinin...4f1e56b&ei=5070

Bruni double-reviewed Wolfgang's and Luger's -- he just didn't assign a ranking to Luger's (I think simply because he wasn't changing it).

[Fat Guy]

I'm not sure that counts as a double review, and I'm even less sure that it matters.

I think, just as most reviews are neither "positive" nor "negative" but rather a combination of the two, the folks at Porter House are likely to be neither pleased nor displeased but rather have mixed feelings about the review. Lomonaco is too much of a pro, too much of a veteran to dwell on it very long, though. Chances are, even this one-star review will generate additional interest in the restaurant if only because it will reach people who didn't even know the place had opened. Whether Porter House wins those people over when they do come in to check the place out depends on Lomonaco and his team -- I'm sure that's what they're focusing on.

[Fat Guy]

As a reality check, we went back to Porter House Monday night with three friends (party of five), which allowed for much tasting. Reality checked out: I like Porter House even more after a second visit than I did after my first.

I had planned to wait until January to revisit Porter House -- I do as little dining out between Thanksgiving and New Year's as I can -- but a friend from North Carolina came to town with two business associates (bankers) and they wanted steak. The Porter House decision-making calculus worked, I think, as intended: I considered that we had a woman in the group, a fish-eater and two people with meat-and-potatoes tastes, and Porter House was all of a sudden at the top of the list.

Each of the five people in the group couldn't have been happier. I mean, it's possible that the steak eaters would have been happier with their actual steaks at Peter Luger, but there's no way they'd have been happier with the overall meal experience. The steak lovers got first-rate T-bone steaks (as good as at any non-Luger traditional steakhouse in town), hash browns, onion rings and creamed spinach (the creamed spinach is amazingly good, but the portion size needs to be doubled -- the potato sides are more appropriately sized). Our dainty female had a filet mignon which, despite my prejudice against tenderloin, I found delicious thanks to superior quality, a nicely maillardized exterior and a coating of maitre d'hotel butter -- and due to her daintiness I got to eat about half of it. The fish-eater had the chili-roasted lobster with tomato and basil (out of shell, a plated fine-dining restaurant dish), and pan-roasted mushrooms.

I had the best thing of all, though: the "natural veal porterhouse chop." This was one of the best pieces of veal I've had, served on the bone medium-rare and thick. For an appetizer three of us had the scallops with brown butter, capers and crispy parsley -- this is a great dish and I considered that a double order would make a fine entree. Someone else had the lobster bisque. I need to talk to Lomonaco about his lobster bisque method -- I think there's room for improvement in that dish.

The pineapple upside-down cake, trio of puddings and cheesecake were the best of the desserts. The "1927 Ultimate Martini" is my new favorite cocktail. Service was technically proficient and very accommodating of our staggered arrival times and last-minute change in party size. Our server for dinner was amazing, though when we were in the bar for a bit before dinner our server there was kind of perfunctory. Both were women, which I note because that's atypical for steak places.

The formula works.

[Marlene]

My husband joined me in New York for the weekend, since I've still got another week here, and we went to Porter House last night.

We were both extremely disappointed to say the least. While the sides of hash browns and ginger carrots were very good, the porterhouse for two that we had was tasteless. There was nothing wrong with the way it was cooked, it was nicely medium rare, but there was no taste to this steak that we could discern.

For the price, we won't be back. There's too many other good steakhouses in NY. In fact, I think I'll wander over to Wolfgang's tonight.

[Nathan]

Does anyone know if they serve the menu at the bar here?

Or for that matter if Wolfgang's does?

I have a perennial dining problem in that my birthday falls on a certain Hallmark holiday next week which makes normal dinner reservations and/or tables a difficulty.

[Eatmywords]

Does anyone know if they serve the menu at the bar here?

Or for that matter if Wolfgang's does?

I have a perennial dining problem in that my birthday falls on a certain Hallmark holiday next week which makes normal dinner reservations and/or tables a difficulty.

←

"Where Should I Eat on Valentine’s Day — Alone?"

http://nymag.com/daily/food/2007/02/how_to..._on_valent.html

[Nathan]

yeah, I read that.

Babbo's going to be packed, packed with V-day diners.

steak's my idea of a birthday dinner.

[Eatmywords]

yeah, I read that.

Babbo's going to be packed, packed with V-day diners.

steak's my idea of a birthday dinner.

←

What about Tad's? -multiple locations and free refills!

[Fat Guy]

Does anyone know if they serve the menu at the bar here?

←

We were sitting at one of the bar tables having drinks the other day, and they said we were welcome to have dinner at that table. We didn't, but it was presented as an option.

[Nathan]

thanks...I'm leaning towards that then.

[johnder]

Stopped by Porterhouse with a few people last night around 10pm for a late night snack and a cocktail or two. The restaurant itself was pretty packed, but their bar area was empty enough to allow our pretty large group (7ppl) to sit together in the bar area.

Cocktail List

Funny enough our entire group got the Negroni's to start, and it was a big hit. The addition of the Montenegro Amaro gave an interesting twist to the drink, unfortunately the small shell ice they use diluted the drink down pretty quickly.

They also had a Diamond cane cocktail, which sounded great, but I found to be a little unbalanced, although the crushed ice the used worked well in this drink, and it became better as it diluted. I am thinking Bonded applejack would have been better than the calvados in this drink. Also, I think the mint was out of place as a garnish.

Diamond Cane

Negroni

We just got some snacks at the table, very well executed onion rings and french fries, and some very tasty sliders.

Onion rings

Fries

Sliders

I asked about the "special bitters" they used in the 1927 martini, and got a sketchy reply back saying it was a "secret" -- but closer observation at the bar it was just Fee's. Oh well.