Oceannaire Seafood Washington Square

[Vadouvan]

Anyone been ?

[KatieLoeb]

It's a shame it's dinner only, since I'm usually working those very same hours at another restaurant. I would totally check it out for lunch were they open.

I'm game to go on a reconnaissance mission with you V, but I won't have a free night off for a couple of weeks.

[Greg Ling]

I went last week with a friend and some of the food was good but nothing exciting.

We had from the raw bar the shellfish plateau, for 50 bucks you got a half dozen oysters ,a half dozen steamed mussels, 2 sets of snow crab legs ,four big ass shrimp, a couple of crab claws and half a chick lobster. The oysters were bland and the smoked mussels at sansom street are better.

We had a BLT salad ,it was steakhouse style (iceburg and slicing tomatos).

Clams casino were really good classic style ,nice big clams.

We got the Fried seafood platter ,don't remember what they called it but it had alot of food on it .ten ounces of cod ,three oysters , scallops, crab cakes and the largest plate of fries ever. the plate was about a 18 inch oval with a mountain of fries. scary!!!

The place was empty except for a table in the back and it is a good looking space, but too early to review it.

[KatieLoeb]

Professore Fentoni and I checked out Oceanaire this evening for a snack/drink at the bar. The space is very nicely done in a cruiseship Deco style. It's a good re-use of the space. It isn't quite as pretty inside as Striped Bass, which is a similar upscale-fish house-in-an-old-renovated-space, but they certainly did a nice job with the decor. Big dining room in the back, a lounge area and raw bar/bar up front, 2nd floor dining rooms and private dining areas. Big sweeping staircase with nice views. It's a cool room.

First quandry was ordering a glass of wine. There's a nice by the glass selection, but the glasses of wine all start in double digits. It seemed a bit steep and we opted for one of many very reasonably priced bottles of wine to share instead. We shared a bottle of the Au Bon Climat Pinot Blanc/Pinot Gris 2004 that was well priced at $45. I was racking my brain trying to figure out why the wines by the glass were so expensive ($11-16, most around $14) and the bottled wines had many selections in the $30-55 range for some very nice choices. This math fit no metric I could imagine. There was no logic. Just as my head was about to explode the manager explained that their glass pours are 10 oz!! That's a double sized glass by most people's standards. (To be fair I overhead another waiter telling a guest the pour was between 8 and 9 oz., but that's still a pretty big glass) Finally the oddly expensive glasses didn't seem quite so steep anymore. But if I have someone with me sharing a well priced bottle is always a good way to go. And if you're sitting at the raw bar they'll just stick the bottle right in the crushed ice for you right in front of you to keep it handy and cold.

The raw bar area has blackboards all around that tout the fresh seafood that day. We were assured by our very solicitous waiter that everything was flown in that morning. Several interesting types of oysters, lots of Alaskan and Icelandic fish varieties, as well as Australian Barramundi, New Zealand Orange Roughy and Shetland Island Salmon. The menu is large and pretty classic. We decided to try the Steamed Littleneck clams with Prosciutto and Rosemary Cream sauce ($10.95), the Escargot Bourgogne ($8.95) and the Lancaster County mixed salad ($8.95). To begin, we were served a relish tray with some raw veggies, olives, pickled tomatoes and a bit of very tasty pickled herring. Everything we ordered was quite tasty, although we both decided that squeezing the wedge of lemon on the clams was a mistake. We had some very good soft bread to sop up sauces with. Nothing was an epiphany, but it was fresh and well prepared. The salmon the gentleman to my right was eating looked quite good, and the mixed raw bar seafood platter the other ladies sitting nearby had also looked very good. For dessert we decided to have the Baked Alaska, because, well, we could. When was the last time any of you had Baked Alaska, hmmm? It was a good choice. A ginormous block of brownie with frozen Moose Tracks ice cream arrived slathered in meringue. It was doused in flaming 151 rum and the meringue got crispy and toasted. Yum! It smelled like marshmallows. The ice cream had big peanut butter filled chocolate drops in it that exploded in your mouth. Good stuff! The presentation with the flambeed rum was pretty awe inspiring as well. All together our check came to about $89 before a generous tip to our kind waiter. Not bad for two appetizers, a salad, dessert and a nice bottle of wine.

I liked this place and will undoubtedly return. I want to try some of the fresh fish soon and see if it can live up to the hype.

edited to add: Note to V: I ended up not having to work last night and tried to call you to come join in. Sorry we missed you.

[brescd01]

I have mixed feelings about this place: is it evil because it is part of a chain?

[KatieLoeb]

Is Capital Grille evil because it's part of a chain? Heck - some of the Stephen Starr outposts are now there own little chains. Morimoto? Continental? Are they evil?

I just started working for a chain. There's a lot to be said about how a big corporation can afford to take care of their staff. If the food and service are good I don't have a problem with a chain. If the food and service are bad I have a problem regardless of whether it's a mom and pop or one of a thousand outlets.

[MarketStEl]

Is Capital Grille evil because it's part of a chain?  Heck - some of the Stephen Starr outposts are now there own little chains.  Morimoto?  Continental?  Are they evil?

I just started working for a chain.  There's a lot to be said about how a big corporation can afford to take care of their staff.  If the food and service are good I don't have a problem with a chain.  If the food and service are bad I have a problem regardless of whether it's a mom and pop or one of a thousand outlets.

←

Boy, we're back to the very subject that introduced me to eG in the first place!

Put me down with Katie on this. Chains are not inherently good or evil. As with independent establishments, they rise or fall on their own merits. There are excellent chains and Gawd-awful mom-and-pop places. The only problem I have with some chains (and you know which ones these are) is more the fault of the diners than the restaurants: Namely, the patrons become so comfortable with the familiar mediocrity that they then shy away from trying something different and potentially better.

Carry on as before.

[lancastermike]

When we were in San Diego this summer Oceannaire had just opended in the Gaslamp district and was a mob scene. We did go in for a drink, but did not eat. In any case, it received great reviews from the San Diego press.

Katie and Sandy are right, chains are not by nature evil. Unless it is Olive Garden

[brescd01]

Olive Garden is evil. Are there other chains that are evil?

Which chains are good?

I am torn on this . I lived for a year in a town (Twin Cities) slowly being eaten by chains, not pretty for its downtown.

Edited November 15, 2006 by brescd01 (log)

[Mano]

What they're saying is judge a restaurant based on its own merits and don't generalize.

Evil? I don't know about that. Restaurants are good or bad or someplace in between. I had a business lunch at an Olive Garden in Pittsburgh last Tuesday. The food was fair, not bad. The staff and service was pleasant and attentive. The noise level was better than at most places. Mediocre, yes, evil no.

[MarketStEl]

Olive Garden is evil. Are there other chains that are evil?

Which chains are good?

I am torn on this . I lived for a year in a town (Twin Cities) slowly being eaten by chains, not pretty for its downtown.

←

Among the high-end chains, Ruth's Chris Steak House delivers consistently superior steak with courteous and efficient (but not obsequious) service.

The restaurants in Four Seasons hotels are also uniformly first-class.

If you want to go down the price scale a bit, I've been pleased with the dining experiences I've had at Chili's, Fuddruckers and especially Maggiano's Little Italy. All three chains serve high-quality food (well, okay, Chili's is a notch or two below the other two) and run their shops well. (I note that Chili's and Maggiano's are sister chains.)

And for fast food: Popeyes. White Castle. Need I say more?

--Sandy, who still hasn't watched Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle in its entirety

Edited to add postscript: Nonetheless, I must agree that a big-city downtown with nothing but national chain restaurants is not my idea of a dining destination.

Edited November 15, 2006 by MarketStEl (log)

[Mano]

Olive Garden is evil. Are there other chains that are evil?

Which chains are good?

I am torn on this . I lived for a year in a town (Twin Cities) slowly being eaten by chains, not pretty for its downtown.

←

And for fast food: Popeyes. White Castle. Need I say more?

Edited to add postscript: Nonetheless, I must agree that a big-city downtown with nothing but national chain restaurants is not my idea of a dining destination.

←

Just In 'N Out Burger! I sure am glad they're pretty much only in California, otherwise I'd weigh about 350 lbs.

[Yannii]

well this subject is a vast one, certainly deserving of it's own thread and/or forum (probably already in existence) but i thought i would add my two cents.

for me, there seems to be two distinct criteria to judge chains by...

restaurant quality and social responsibility.

IMHO, Chains have, IN GENERAL, lower food quality than local/ mom and pop places. of course there are exceptions (both high and low) but, in general, the fact that food is transported from greater distances and recipe / kitchen control is bureaucratic and off-site, means less fresh, less interesting, less varied, less healthy, less innovative, less "loved" food. simple high quality ingredients like good steaks and seafood are the least likely to be affected (and in fact can be considerably better due to economy of scale purchasing and such), but even these places (capital grille, mccormick and schmicks, oceanaire, devon, ruth chris, etc...) are all affected by homogenized menus, atmosphere and service. the people who work at chains (i did for a while) are subjected to mandated speeches and "steps of service", selling frequent diner memberships and such. economies of scale are great for widgets and factories, but not especially great for food and service. the linkletter / schollsenger movie "fast food nation" comes out friday, everyone go see it....

now, more important to me, social responsibility. chains suck money out of localities. no two ways about that. profits get sent to corporate HQs and the like. in addition, chains (food or otherwise) often receive tax breaks (out of our pockets) for their development, and have associated political clout. chains often have very poor environmental habits (whether it be food sourcing, shipping practice, trash handling, parking lots, etc..). also chains often treat employees unfairly en mass.

i could go on forever, but this post is way too long already. suffice it to say chains are indeed EVIL. there are lots of studies show their negative impact on local economies (walmart, etc...) and every time we eat at one (famous dave's) we close another local business (smoked joint).

eat local, stay healthy, ALWAYS LOVE.

[aaronwcpa]

Given a choice I will always select a locally-owned place to a chain. Just returned from five days in Minneapolis and did not dine in a single chain. Every city has ample local restaurants that offer quality and much of the time at much more reasonable prices.

Dining should provide a few surprises. What can a chain offer but the same in every city.

[brescd01]

Just to be clear, I wil go to Oceanaire. But it is the sort of place that I would get someone else to take me to, rather than spend my own money at.

So I would have a sales rep treat me to Capital Grille, but I would spring for Barclay Prime or Saloon. Isn't Devon part of a very small chain? That makes it better doesn't it?

But no one does decadence better than the chains.

[Vadouvan]

well this subject is a vast one, certainly deserving of it's own thread and/or forum (probably already in existence) but i thought i would add my two cents.

for me, there seems to be two distinct criteria to judge chains by...

restaurant quality and social responsibility.

IMHO, Chains have, IN GENERAL, lower food quality than local/ mom and pop places. of course there are exceptions (both high and low) but, in general, the fact that food is transported from greater distances and recipe / kitchen control is bureaucratic and off-site, means less fresh, less interesting, less varied, less healthy, less innovative, less "loved" food. simple high quality ingredients like good steaks and seafood are the least likely to be affected (and in fact can be considerably better due to economy of scale purchasing and such), but even these places (capital grille, mccormick and schmicks, oceanaire, devon, ruth chris, etc...) are all affected by homogenized menus, atmosphere and service. the people who work at chains (i did for a while) are subjected to mandated speeches and "steps of service", selling frequent diner memberships and such. economies of scale are great for widgets and factories, but not especially great for food and service. the linkletter / schollsenger movie "fast food nation" comes out friday, everyone go see it....

now, more important to me, social responsibility. chains suck money out of localities. no two ways about that. profits get sent to corporate HQs and the like. in addition, chains (food or otherwise) often receive tax breaks (out of our pockets) for their development, and have associated political clout. chains often have very poor environmental habits (whether it be food sourcing, shipping practice, trash handling, parking lots, etc..). also chains often treat employees unfairly en mass.

i could go on forever, but this post is way too long already. suffice it to say chains are indeed EVIL. there are lots of studies show their negative impact on local economies (walmart, etc...) and every time we eat at one (famous dave's) we close another local business (smoked joint).

First of all, the smoked joint closed because of ineptness, inconsistency, a bad business plan and mediocre food not because of famous daves.

Chains dont have lower quality food, what they have is lower culinary ambition due to standardisation.

There are lots of mediocre Italian Byo's in center city for example that people troop to like lemmings and swear that the food is as good as thier great grandmother used to make in Apulia.

I am not a defender of chains but all the above points apply to all restaurants except the few that are chef driven and have some sense of social responsibility. The issue of siphoning profits away from the locality also isnt an issue because of the city wage tax, business priviledge tax and other miscellaneous philadelphia F.U. taxes. They also contribute a ton of rental revenue to local landlords and this is how ther hurt the dining scene the most.

Most property owners would rather rent to an established chain with deep credit worthiness and thus all real estate gets priced out of the realm of all but the deepest pockets.

What I personally hate most about chains is the thinly veiled second tier diversification games they play by opening bullsh*t restaurant concepts like ROYS (outback steakhouse) or DEVON (Houlihahns) ect ect......

[Yannii]

vadouvan, i simply disagree with most of what you said. here are some more details / opinions that may sway people into doing the right thing...

the chain restaurant i worked at sent roughly 1 million dollars in pure profit to their corporate hq that year. that is money that might be used /invested locally otherwise. (wage tax affects employees, and the place i worked had no business privilege tax for whatever reason, probably political breaks).

chains don't have lower quality food? aside from the required standardization (which we all agree is a very bad thing, there will be no snackbar, ansil or marigold chains anytime soon) can you really argue that the food at Appleby's / chilli's is as good as Good Dog / royal tavern or some similarly priced concept? the food at the majority of these chains is flown / shipped in (at a detriment to the environment) frozen (ever eat a steak at tgi friday's or chilli's it tastes like plastic) reheated in a microwave and served with corn starch based sauces. they purchase genetically modified foods from corporate farmers (who squash the little farmers like bugs), over fish the seas, are cruel to the animals they raise, etc... their food is not delicious (IMHO), it's unhealthy (cancerous?) and bad for the environment. (did you know that mcdonalds french fries can not even be classified as potatoes because they are so genetically modified with pesticides - Supersize Me)

honestly, as someone as into food as you are Vadouvan (i have read a lot of your other posts) how can you begin to defend chain restaurant's food quality. it's baffling to me. i have read you rants about bad italian byobs before, but seriously, wouldn't you rather go to l'angolo (or Melograno or wherever) than the olive garden or the italian bistro (possibly the worst restaurant in philly) any day of the week.

i understand what you said about rents (which is just one of many ways chains squash little local competition, think starbucks) but the tone of your post is supportive / defensive of chains (or at least dismissive of my criticisms) which i think is sort of argumentative. CHAINS ARE EVIL that is the truth as i see it (do you really disagree? if so feel free to email me directly). maybe i'm a zealot or whatever, but reminding us of the city wage tax isn't gonna be enough to convince me otherwise (were you joking?)

and just to be clear brescd01, there are LOTS of chef driven, socially responsible places in this city (as vadouvan mentioned sort of), and those are the business i think we should support, whether it's your money or someone else's.

ps the thing about the smoked joint (which was a generalized point that we just couldn't leave alone i guess) was kind of a cheap shot. i know the chef and owners and what you said was a little unfair. i wish people could just get behind local business a little more. maybe try thinking of philadelphia restaurants as a team or something...

[Vadouvan]

Yannii, you can disagree and it's OK to disagree, the first amendment allows that.

I just ate at oceannaire, while it was no striped bass or kinkead's, it was not bad food,certainly not superexciting but i would go back if I was in the area and it is certainly a hell of a lot better than Washington Square in terms of meeting it's ambition.

I am not defending chains, I am noting that a lot of generalisations that are not accurate are being made. The biggest problem with the zealots of buy fresh buy local dont ever eat at chains is that they make sweeping broad generalisations that border on hypocrisy. That diminishes the argument.

It's the same logic as the weapons of mass distruction theory that was sold to justify the Iraq war.

Just the places you mention, Ansill, Marigold, Snackbar, I can guarantee you 75% of all thier ingredients are not locally produced or grown. They are still mostly excellent places to eat. Far as I know ESCOLAR isnt a local fish and in comes into America frozen solid but it becomes socially responsible when you serve it a Marigold with a tasty sauce ?

DOVER SOLE at Radicchio which isnt Dover Sole, its grey sole and it is also frozen.

Oceannaire at least has a good shellfish program.

You are confusing Quality with creativity.

Relatively the same people deliver food to most restaurants period.

I have sat in front of Rouge watched a delivery person take stuff into Devon and come right next door to rouge.

Re: Smoked Joint.

It's certainly ok to defend your friends but your assertion that they went out of business because a crappy chain barbecue restaurant that uses liquid smoke and is located in the middle of a stripmall on delaware avenue put them out of business may be worse than my reasons.

[Vadouvan]

Yannii, you can disagree and it's OK to disagree, the first amendment allows that.

I just ate at oceannaire, while it was no striped bass or kinkead's, it was not bad food,certainly not superexciting but i would go back if I was in the area and it is certainly a hell of a lot better than Washington Square in terms of meeting it's ambition.

I am not defending chains, I am noting that a lot of generalisations that are not accurate are being made. The biggest problem with the zealots of buy fresh buy local dont ever eat at chains is that they make sweeping broad generalisations that border on hypocrisy. That diminishes the argument.

It's the same logic as the weapons of mass distruction theory that was sold to justify the Iraq war.

Just the places you mention, Ansill, Marigold, Snackbar, I can guarantee you 75% of all thier ingredients are not locally produced or grown. They are still mostly excellent places to eat. Far as I know ESCOLAR isnt a local fish and in comes into America frozen solid but it becomes socially responsible when you serve it a Marigold with a tasty sauce ?

DOVER SOLE at Radicchio which isnt Dover Sole, its grey sole and it is also frozen.

Oceannaire at least has a good shellfish program.

You are confusing Quality with creativity.

Relatively the same people deliver food to most restaurants period.

I have sat in front of Rouge watched a delivery person take stuff into Devon and come right next door to rouge.

Re: Smoked Joint.

It's certainly ok to defend your friends but your assertion that they went out of business because a crappy chain barbecue restaurant that uses liquid smoke and is located in the middle of a stripmall on delaware avenue put them out of business may be worse than my reasons.

You shouldnt take anything on the internet seriously.

These are just spirited discussions.

[brescd01]

I am anti-chain, I think they are evil. Olive Garden is PURE evil. There weren't WMD's in Iraq? I thought Santorum found them?

I digress...

Now that you know whose side I am on (of the restaurant thing I mean), the economic arguments against chains are balderdash. Whether someone is paid by a corporation or by Mom and Pop, they still spend their salary locally. Objecting to corporate profits presupposes that a mom/pop restaurant would make similar profits and spend them locally, which I think is a tough argument to make. No one criticized Toyota for building plants in America, for example.

The problem I see with chains is cultural, it homogenizes downtowns, the USAToday-ification of America, if you will.

I do not know what the turnover is in Philadelphia, but the restaurant business is tough (in NYC where I grew up I think more than 1000 restaurants open and close every year). Its major problem is that each restaurant needs to be adequately capitalized from the start, something that is more likely to be the case for some part of a chain. All restaurants hold the seeds for their own destruction on opening night, they have to tough it out.

And while I am no insider, my wife and I tried Smoke Joint and we enjoyed it, but BBQ is a tough cuisine to eat more than a few times a year. Smoke Joint's competitors are all low rent. Smoke Joint was a big and expensive plant that had to be nourished by an awful lot of diners, which I think is tough for that kind of cuisine, when a lot of BBQ is ordered for take-out.

Edited November 18, 2006 by brescd01 (log)

[Andrew Fenton]

Now that you know whose side I am on (of the restaurant thing I mean), the economic arguments against chains are balderdash. Whether someone is paid by a corporation or by Mom and Pop, they still spend there salary locally. Objecting to corporate profits presupposes that a mom/pop restaurant would make similar profits and spend them locally, which I think is a tough argument to make. No one criticized Toyota for building plants in America, for example.

Not balderdash, exactly. Restaurants have a certain number of expenses that aren't food or employees-- consultants, advertising, printing, legal representation, et cetera. A local restaurant will employ those services locally; a chain will probably find them in the city where they're based. So that's money not spent in the local city.

But whatever; this discussion has been done to death, and isn't relevant to Oceannaire, where the food, at least, is certainly not evil. For specifics, I can't do much more than echo what Katie said. The food is pretty good. I liked the clams, and thought that prosciutto was a nice variation on the more classic preparation of shellfish with bacon/salt pork (in clam chowder) or sausage (in Iberian cooking, or, I guess, gumbo). Treyfalicious!

The escargot weren't quite as exciting; not rubbery (good!) but not more than, well, buttery snails with puff pastry.

The fish dishes I saw looked nice, and if, as advertised, they're super-fresh, flown in daily, et cetera, I suspect that they're quite good.

It's a nice place. Not cheap, but not outrageous either; not breaking any barriers, but as far as I can tell, serving a quality product. They picked a target, and they nailed it.

[CherieV]

Just my $.02 regarding lower end chains in metro areas. They are a sure sign of a healthy tourism. They are sprouting up in Phila and should be viewed as positive from this perspective.

That being said, higher end chains (Palm, S&W, Devon, Roy's etc) are utilized heavily by the business traveller. They create comfort once again, but at a higher level, and should be viewed as positive investments in our city.

I travel quite a bit and many of our Mid-West neighbors wished they had the traffic to support this kind of growth. The small independents struggle because of the lack of traffic that chains can generate. It is a sign of a healthy city. Think about the quantity of chains in NYC and Chicago.

[MarketStEl]

As for giving back to the community: I understand Andrew's point about where a national chain will get its ancillary services from, and it's valid.

I'm also sitting on a $75 Roy's gift certificate that I won at a benefit auction for the Philly AIDS Walk organized by an acquaintance of mine who solicited the donations from every participating business himself. Most of the other participants, as well as the restaurant where the auction took place (Vesuvio), were independent local businesses. I guess all this proves is that some franchisees of national chains can contribute to their local communities to the extent they are allowed to or capable of.

And since someone mentioned the Italian Bistro: That's a purely local operation, based in South Jersey, IIRC.

[philadining]

So.... anybody else eaten at Oceannaire?

[brescd01]

In Minneapolis, Oceanaire is (was?) the fanciest, best seafood restaurant in that city. I enjoyed being taken there by drug reps, but I thought that it represented one of the things I did not like about Twin Cities. Its location was also very unattractive, in a hotel downtown.

Striped Bass, by contrast, is Philadelphia's most famous and prestigious seafood joint, and it is a local non-chain creation. Plus, Philadelphia has plenty of other luxurious special occasion or expense account places. So Oceanaire augments the scene, it does not take it over or replace it. In that light, I am not terribly concerned.

I still think the economic argument is weak. A successful restaurant enhances the local economy whether it is a mom/pop or staffed by robots controlled in Anchorage, and I am not even sure which contributes more. Now, my Internet shopping habits, those probably don't do much for the local economy, but I cannot help myself....unlike food, retail in Philadelphia has no redeeming qualities.

Edited November 18, 2006 by brescd01 (log)