15 ms·

This is cool! As someone who's into fine dining, a few thoughts/tips for people starting out: 1. Don't go into a michelin level restaurant expecting "well it's

This is cool! As someone who's into fine dining, a few thoughts/tips for people starting out: 1. Don't go into a michelin level restaurant expecting "well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better", think of it as its own category of food, that happens to have a really high buy-in price. Lots more crazy flavors, presentation, exotic ingredients, etc. It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different. 2. Many very high end restaurants have great lunch deals, which can really cut the price to try them.

regulation_d 5y ago
Point 1 is very similar in high end coffee. Sometimes very expensive coffee in the US is substantially better than what you get in the grocery store, but often it's just much different. It might taste like blueberries or strawberry candy or wine. Not necessary better, just weird, hopefully in a whimsical way.
- ethanbond 5y ago
  Coffee is definitely one of the items that I've found the lowest correlation between price and perceived quality (as a quasi-distinct measure than my own subjective enjoyment). Even among wines, things on the expensive end that I really don't personally like, I can at least convince myself that there's a reason it has the price that it is. Coffee: no discernible relationship.
  - asah 5y ago
    I used to think that about everything that was "better than Starbucks" and then I had fresh civet coffee from a legit place in HCM. It's... the sh*t!
  - regulation_d 5y ago
    I spend a fair amount of money on coffee, but I know what styles and roast levels I like, and I know roasters that do those things well. If you like weird varietals processed with some experimental anaerobic processing method and a light roast, Onyx and Black & White, for example, both do really well with those styles. And they aren't cheap, but I enjoy them. If you favor medium to dark roasts, then Dunkin Donuts brand coffee in the grocery is pretty darn good.
silisili 5y ago
These are really good points, and mirror my experience - though we are opposite - I'm definitely not into fine dining. I didn't get point 1 til years later, after more reading. I'd tried uber fancy restaurants a few times, and each time left disappointed and really almost feeling cheated. Odd flavors (to me), small portions, a lot of art on the plate. I never really judged it based on anything but the value and taste, and if you do that, you'll likely be disappointed as I was. I guess I realized I'm just a simple guy who likes common foods, but hey, we're all different.
- makeitdouble 5y ago
  Value is too subjective to be discussed, but if we settle for “normal” portions at less than 300 bucks a meal, restaurants pushing to the top tier on taste also end up in the Michelin. If you’re into traditional “at home”, no nonsense cuisine, I don’t think you’ll be disappointed by the ones making it to the list. Perhaps the deception is on thinking that any “excellent” restaurant will be pleasing to everyone who can afford it. If you don’t like oysters the best oyster spot in the world will be pretty meh, same way if you’re not into trendy stuff, the price tag won’t make it magically work for you.
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different. Well said! Also, don't be the guy who goes in on a mission to dunk on the expensive restaurant. That's about as cool as the person who watches a popular TV show just so they can smugly complain about it. Just don't.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  > Also, don't be the guy who goes in on a mission to dunk on the expensive restaurant. Don't burst your bubble, right? Jay Rayner would like a word :-) The west's fetishisation of fine dining is so far away from the Japanese model that it allows for this idea that the most expensive thing can still be unsatisfying, laughable or misleading, because it's "in its own category". It is a trope to say "people starve elsewhere in the world" but it is also a truism. If expensive food is not objectively better food, reject it, and seek better food that isn't expensive.
  - hedora 5y ago
    Heh. Go watch the Japanese Iron Chef episode with the guy from SF. Japanese gourmets definitely do the "ridiculously expensive, questionable choice" thing too. The beef episode made me want to cry.
- jjav 5y ago
  So if a restaurant is very expensive, it must be immune from reviews? Not in my world, no. In fact the expectations should be higher so it better deliver much higher quality of food.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- indigochill 5y ago
  I took a theater criticism class in college and the main rule I remember is "Never say something is good or bad. Describe it." or something like that. The point being even if you're personally not into something, convey the strengths and weaknesses together so others can get a better sense of whether it's for them because people aren't all looking for the same thing from an experience.
vincentmarle 5y ago
3. Don't expect to fill your appetite.
- gnicholas 5y ago
  My wife and I have gone to In-N-Out after fancy dinners on a number of occasions.
  - 0_____0 5y ago
    how did that work out? the best meal i ever had in my life was at Bar Crudo on Divis in SF. owners pivoted to a taco place, for reasons unfathomable to me. had a dinner that blew my conception of food open, went to a show nearby after. got home at 3AM and made myself a bit of sausage and toast and to my surprise the experience of my prior meal persisted, and in contrast my late night snack seemed like it was made of cardboard.
    - gnicholas 5y ago
      Taste-wise, delicious! It is a bit odd to wear a tux or suit to an In-N-Out at midnight, but after a few times you get used to it.
      - nomel 5y ago
        What's the main allure for you?
        gnicholas 5y ago
        The burgers, for sure. I've never been a fan of their spongy fries. I'd be happy to eat elsewhere as well, but there aren't a lot of options at midnight.
        spear 5y ago
        I always order fries "well-done" at In-N-Out now.
vidarh 5y ago
To the "experience" point, one of my all time best meals was crab at a three star restaurant. I like crab but it's normally not special to me. This was crab and almost nothing else prepared in four different ways that made the taste and texture entirely different. I'd never have ordered a dish described like that at a lower rated restaurant. It's not a meal I'd want to order over and over. But it's a meal I still remember fondly more than 20 years later.
matwood 5y ago
> Don't go into a michelin level restaurant expecting "well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better" Very much like wine.
- seanp2k2 5y ago
  I've found that many of the finer things in life, after a certain point of thing thing serving the purpose well, it's more about variety and taste than one is objectively better than the other. Will a $1000 guitar sound and feel way better than a $100 guitar? Absolutely. Will a $10,000 guitar sound and feel way better than that $1000 guitar? Probably not, more just different. Is a Bugatti Chiron "faster" than a Pagani Huayra ? Sure, in some regards, but they're entirely different cars made to do different things and feel very very different, despite both being "hypercars". Art is subjective after a certain point of being well-crafted and well-executed. Most food is more or less for utility and much less for art. Fine dining is much more art than utility, just like so many other things in life.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    > Will a $1000 guitar sound and feel way better than a $100 guitar? Absolutely. Nope. Not absolutely. Not even close.
    - williamdclt 5y ago
      Come on, that's just being contrarian. Sure there's going to be anecdotal exceptions here and there, but yes I'd absolutely expect almost any $1000 guitar to be better in sound and feel than almost any $100 guitar.
      - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
        No, sorry, I don't think it is. Better, almost certainly (I have played a terrible $1000 guitar -- it was a Gretsch and if you have played guitars you know what I mean by this). But that isn't what the comment I am replying to is saying. It says absolutely and way better. And that just isn't supported by evidence if you ask me. Not least on the playability: if you treat the $100 guitar to the same setup as a $1000 guitar, you may well get an extremely similar experience. $100 guitars, particularly the ones from Aeirsi, can be extremely good. OK so the gap between $100 and $1000 is much bigger with acoustic guitars, as you'd expect. (That is if we stipulate there is much of a $100 acoustic guitar market. Can't be many). But a $100-ish Encore Strat clone in the right hands? not so much. And it's especially true of lap steel guitars, IMO. Some of the best ones are cheap, some expensive ones are terrible, and the 10x price multiplier adds less than you'd expect.
2-718-281-828 5y ago
Interesting perspective - never thought of it that way. Seems almost obvious.
dkasper 5y ago
Agree about the flavor and ingredients. Reminded me of this vox podcast I listened to recently about the loss of food/flavor diversity, which basically means large scale farming has mostly crowded out all kinds of strange heirloom plant and even animal varieties and their corresponding tastes. I think high end Michelin type restaurants can play a part in preserving a lot of these unusual types of foods and flavors. Even if it becomes a niche thing it’s great to retain unique foods from an evolutionary perspective. Link to the podcast https://pod.link/voxconversations/episode/54c858cc8d026dd5b4ddac386c7fdc54 https://pod.link/voxconversations/episode/54c858cc8d026dd5b4...
mikestew 5y ago
2. Many very high end restaurants have great lunch deals, which can really cut the price to try them. That was one of the greater discoveries I've made about expensive restaurants. My wife and I had previously spent over $400 on an anniversary dinner at the Metropolitan Grill in Seattle. We're "common as muck", too; just a couple of country hicks from Indiana. It was nice, glad we went, wouldn't likely spend that kind of money on a meal again. Then I started a job literally across the street in the Exchange building. Boss wants to go the "the Met" for lunch. On my salary?!?! That's when I found out that for $12, one can get one the better burgers one will ever eat. I recommend that steak salad, too. * Note: all prices from like ten years ago.
- Wistar 5y ago
  I love the Met but have never tried it for lunch. Will now.
  - changoplatanero 5y ago
    sad. i just noticed it's no longer open for lunch
- soared 5y ago
  Vacations work the same :) visit Puerto Rico now because everyone thinks it’s destroyed by natural disaster and political problems. Yeah it’s destroyed, but stunning beaches, resorts, golf courses, restaurants, etc for a fraction of the price. Best golf course and lunch I’ve ever had were at the royal isabela in PR. Absolute ghost town, but $90 all in. Stunning place.
  - hammock 5y ago
    I escaped to St Martin during the lockdowns. Still damaged from hurricane but rebuilding. French side best side, best food, beaches and people, and extremely affordable. Plus a busy airport with lots of flights because it's where the billionaires park before hopping on their yacht to St Barth (I saw roman abramovich's plane on the tarmac)
  - 5y ago
hervature 5y ago
I agree 100%. Fine dining should really be framed as part of the entertainment category. You are paying for an experience. Just like people don't talk about the Incan Trail as a $1,000 hike, a Michelin restaurant is not a $150 meal. When framed like this, it is obvious that some people would derive more utility out of a Michelin starred meal as opposed to buying 2-3 new video games.
- kjafdkhjadfs 5y ago
  Ok, as entertainment. Well, well, I think that is a perspective I'd simply never have realised until you said it. Thanks. Edit: why on earth did anyone flag this?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
rectang 5y ago
> Don't go into a michelin level restaurant expecting "well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better", think of it as its own category of food, that happens to have a really high buy-in price. Lots more crazy flavors, presentation, exotic ingredients, etc. A hobby of mine is picking a neighborhood and going to every single eatery, from possibly-illegal hole-in-the-walls and popups to fast food chains to bakeries and delis to cafes to fine dining establishments. I think I've only been to one Michelin-starred restaurant though — there aren't a lot of those. Restaurants have to cater to their clientele, even high-end ones. If you offer something creative on your menu, odds are there won't be a large market for it because most people want familiar fare. There are a lot of expensive-yet-conservative Italian restaurants in the US, for example — with lots of patrons who love them! The chefs may chafe at the constraints, but running a restaurant and bringing pleasure and satisfaction to your customers is a different endeavor than exploring the possibilities of cuisine. If you want to experience unfamiliar flavors, presentations, and ingredients your best bet is to go to places run by and primarily frequented by first-generation immigrants. It's not that such eateries are any more adventurous — the same economic forces constrain them — but they target a clientele with different tastes. The 80 eateries I've visited in San Diego's City Heights district offered way more variety and novel-to-me fare than the 70 or so restaurants I checked out on a tour of downtown San Diego. That's because City Heights has large enclaves of Mexican, Vietnamese and Somali immigrants, enough to sustain businesses which cater primarily to the tastes of those enclaves. I can think of some high-end restaurants that had very interesting menus, but in my experience there is only a weak correlation between price and adventurousness. It may be different though for specifically Michelin-starred restaurants, since that's a curated list.
- mandevil 5y ago
  Tyler Cowen's ethnic food dining guide: https://tylercowensethnicdiningguide.com/ https://tylercowensethnicdiningguide.com/ Suggests that, in the US at least, the ethnic enclave suburbs (not the richer ones or the exurbs) are often better choices for food than the trendy downtowns, for that very reason. I'm sure he's right about his home in the DC area, but NYC is its own thing- effectively Queens and Brooklyn function like suburbs in his dining cosmology.
munificent 5y ago
Point 1 is an excellent observation. By analogy, don't think of fine dining as a big-budget blockbuster film. It's not better than other movies by having the biggest setpieces, the most explosions, the hottest stars, and the loudest soundtracks. It's not just more more more. Think of it more like an arthouse film. Fine dining should be some of the best food you've ever had, but it should also be different from what you've had. Since much of their clientele eats out often, they are seeking not just quality but novelty.
- seanp2k2 5y ago
  +1 on novelty / variety; fine dining restaurants also change their entire menus a lot and may only keep a few signature dishes between menus. Part of that is due to availability of things and what is in season, part of it is whimsy / novelty / the chef trying out different things.
lostapathy 5y ago
> 1. Don't go into a michelin level restaurant expecting "well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better", think of it as its own category of food This cuts both ways. Cheaper, unique or local places shouldn’t be thought of as the same food you’re used to just a different place. Like if you order an omelette at Waffle House expecting something like you make at home, you’re gonna be disappointed. But that’s not what it’s supposed to be, it just shares a name with that you’re used to.
rosndo 5y ago
> Lots more crazy flavors, presentation, exotic ingredients, etc. It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different. Not all Michelin starred restaurants offer the kind of modernist fare you describe. There are many michelin starred restaurants serving exactly the normal-but-better food. For example the Michelin starred curries in London tend to fall in the normal-but-much-better category. Michelin starred sushi is usually normal-but-better, sometimes with weird fish options. France is full of normal-but-better French restaurants with stars.
- showerst 5y ago
  That's true, especially among the one-stars and bibs. On that top comment I was really thinking of tasting menus, which tend to be more out there. There are for sure plenty of places with an a la carte menu of very recognizable roast chicken and steak or whatever. I think on average in the US, Michelin caliber of places (stars or no) tend more modernist/experimental than in Europe.
- deckard1 5y ago
  I've been to a Michelin star ramen place in Japan. Nothing at all fancy about the place, other than the fact you need to get in line around 6am if you want a seat at noon. When it's time to eat, you punch in the number of the item you want in a very typical Japanese ticket vending machine. You sit down at the bar with about ten others, hand the ticket to the guy at the counter, and soon you're in a rush to eat your ramen. Because everyone is just sucking down their food as if this were your regular corner ramen place and they have to get back to work ASAP. I can't say the ramen was better than any other decent place, since the peer pressure to finish your meal is rather intense. You'll sit there and ponder how the Japanese eat such incredibly hot noodles so quickly. Tim Ho Wan is another cheap place with a star. They are a chain, even.
jointpdf 5y ago
My experience with a Michelin star restaurant (Maydan, in DC) was “what I normally eat, but better”—much, much better. The menu items themselves were not exotic (hummus, beet purée, pickled vegetables, ribeye, chicken kabobs), but the execution and complex cascades of flavors were on a whole new level of reality. The prices/portions are generous as well (e.g. $10 for the best hummus you’ve ever tasted, $50 for a cut of ribeye that would cost $30 at Whole Foods).
- showerst 5y ago
  I guess I should've clarified that I was thinking more of tasting menus on really _different_ comment. There's plenty of places (e.g. maydan, rose's, taro in DC) that have great but perfectly recognizable menus too. On the other hand I haven't had it in me to blow the money on pineapple and pearls, but if I did i'd want to see something weird =).
- zdragnar 5y ago
  Maybe my expectations are off, but I would not expect to find a fantastic ribeye that cheap outside of one or two places I can think of (one of which is in a small village of <3000 people and daily has 2-3 hour waits, no reservations). Good ribeye, sure, but not steakhouse fantastic ribeye. Seems like a good find indeed!
  - mod 5y ago
    Best ribeye in my region is pretty unanimously thought to be found at the back of a gas station. An older man has been grilling Ribeyes out the back door for like sixty years or something, I think only two days per week. It comes on a styrofoam plate with no sides. You eat it in an ugly back room on cafeteria chairs, past the stand of ho-hos. It's like $20.
- tssva 5y ago
  Rooster & Owl in DC has for the most part has spins on recognizable food and is $75 for a 4 course meal. Each course has a selection of 4 dishes and the food is served family style, so going with a group of 4 allows everyone to try the entire menu.
tikhonj 5y ago
> well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better When I went to Chez Panisse for the first time—not Michelin starred, but still well-regarded—I didn't know what to expect. What surprised me was that it was just "what I normally eat" but better. Not fancy, not exotic, not flashy; at a surface level, it was less interesting than food I've had at "normal" restaurants... but it was somehow just better. It surprised me because I hadn't realize just how much room there was to improve on the details and execution of, well, "normal" cooking. I've occasionally seen something similar with codebases. Most code does what it needs to do, more or less, and hopefully it's not awful, but there are all kinds of sharp edges, inconsistencies, extra sources of friction—when I need to make a change, it's doable, but even the happy path has a bit of extra friction here and there, things that are clearly missing or in the wrong place or a bit hacky. And then, once in a while, I run into code that doesn't have those problems. Everything just somehow comes together; when I need to do something, there's an obvious way of doing it; when there's something odd in the design, it ends up addressing something I hadn't thought about. Somebody wrote the code with experience, attention to detail and the will to do quality work for its own sake. I don't know if it's the same with cooking, but with this kind of code, it generally took less time and effort for the people writing it than I'd expect from teams working on messier codebases. Running into things like this is a visceral reminder that even "normal" things—normal food, normal code—can just be better. A lot.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  > Running into things like this is a visceral reminder that even "normal" things—normal food, normal code—can just be better. A lot. Right. I am away from home at the moment, staying at a house which doesn't have all the things I need. Like, there are only tiny frying pans, there aren't any spices/condiments/salt etc. So I have been buying the minimal things I need to cook food I like, and working with what is there. I took a tin of cheap, mass-produced fish out of the cupboard that I did not buy and was probably a mistaken purchase (everything in that cupboard needs to be used up), and on the basis that wasting food is a crime, I cooked it and added the simplest things alongside; some broccoli and a baguette. The meal I ate is one of the best things I have ever eaten, and it has improved my relationship with food, overnight. On that basis, if I go to an expensive restaurant and do not get food that is qualitatively better and not just different and in its own category, then I am being taken for a fool. So I am glad to hear that your Chez Panisse experience was what it was.
unfocussed_mike 5y ago
> It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different. On the one hand, no. It really, really, really does need to be qualitatively better food than you can get cheaply. (Especially for a Michelin star, the awarding of which still tends to somewhat resist the reality distortion field around gold-encrusted steaks). On the other hand, it is motivated reasoning like this kind of thing that gave us Jay Rayner's (wonderfully withering but occasionally joyful) restaurant columns in the Guardian. It's an absurdity (and a moral hazard, IMO) to ask for people's hard-earned money for food and then not give them food that is better, not just different. (And just as I expected, I am being modded down for this -- go for it guys)
- 2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
  I guess that's why the word "better" is in quotes. I've never been to a fancy restaurant and been served food that was cooked worse. It's always been cooked better on any objective measure. But there are quite a lot of dishes that I wouldn't want to eat everyday even if I could afford to. Sometimes it's even been a bit lacklustre even though if you had to look at all the elements, it was all superbly done.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    > I've never been to a fancy restaurant and been served food that was cooked worse. I have, and it's not like I make a habit of fancy restaurants (I'm a freelancer so I don't make a habit of fancy _anything_ now.) There's a lot of motivated reasoning around food and wine. People who tell me they can't cook and then cook me a meal are proportionately more likely to outdo the expectations they set than a high-end restaurant; some of the best meals I have had have come from people who tell me they can cook only three things. Coffee shops often serve coffee that tastes worse than an aeropress at home, but costs more than a whole month's worth of good beans. Home coffee "experts" who are surrounded by the acquisitions of their motivated reasoning don't improve over that aeropress either. And even Aeropress experts make Aeropress coffee worse with their optimisations. Wine tasting experts sometimes can't tell the difference between red and white wines in blind taste tests, and yet still insist that reds and whites have specific associations. Fans of "fine dining" are often in the same zone. Expensive meals in restaurants have a veneer of quality even when the food is average and the service is objectively worse than an Angus Steakhouse. The truth is that -- like buying your fiancé a diamond ring -- the consumer often falls for their own motivated reasoning, either in making the purchase in the first place or post-justifying it afterwards. One thing makes food better: eating it with friends or loved ones. And you can do that with sandwiches on a park bench.
DrBazza 5y ago
In the UK, at least, one Michelin star (or AA rosettes) is more expensive than a regular restaurant but not by a large margin. In fact, in my area, it’s entirely possible to spend the same at a ‘regular’ restaurant. The only difference is wine.
thaway2839 5y ago
At some places you may even want to set aside money to have a cheeseburger at a fast food joint afterwards. But that's not a bad thing. Filling you up may be part of a fine dining experience, but it isn't necessarily so, and it's the least interesting part of it.
scelerat 5y ago
very much this. If you want a fantastic taco, the truck down the street is as likely to kill it as any linen sit-down, but there are some restaurants which serve up a unique experience you simply cannot get anywhere else.
Xcelerate 5y ago
> well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better During the early stages of the pandemic when a lot of restaurants switched to carry-out only, Lazy Bear (a two Michelin star restaurant in SF) started Camp Commissary, where you could pick up different food items and meals to go. My wife isn’t into fine dining and would never eat the main tasting menu at their restaurant (which I had once before the pandemic), but she absolutely loved the to go items, because they were essentially what you describe: normal types of food cooked by Michelin star chefs (maybe with a fancy twist, like Morel mushrooms on a grilled cheese or fermented local vegetables). I had the best pimento cheese chicken biscuit, duck sandwich, pop tarts, blackberry cocktails, snickerdoodle cookie, pea soup, lamb chops, tomato pie, pasta, and pork & beans of my life. There’s got to be a market for regular food cooked REALLY well. We spent tons on that place, and it was worth every penny (well, except one of the salads, which had like two pieces of lettuce and a grape).
- archagon 5y ago
  I feel like Gregoire in Berkeley hits that spot. Ordinary food, for takeout, prepared really well.
Amasuriel 5y ago
I would add that sometimes there are some truly magical food experiences lurking in there if you have an open mind, and Michelin restaurants are a good place to try new things. A few years ago I ate at the modern in New York. Most of the tasting menu was good, as you might expect, but honestly not particularly memorable. But they had this one dish, eggs 3 ways or something like that, which was a play on a soft boiled egg with toast, but the egg yolk had caviar and some other stuff in it, and was served with this toasted sourdough…I am salivating 4 years later thinking about it. Truly one of the best things I have ever eaten, and it was something I never would have ordered from a menu.
rodgerd 5y ago
To your first point, there was an absolute classic (https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2001/oct/14/foodanddrink.jayrayneronrestaurants.restaurants https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2001/oct/14/foodanddrink....) where a Guardian food writer took his kid and their friends to Fat Duck. Two of the kids and the restaurant staff both enjoyed the experience - noting in particular that kids have far fewer preconceptions about what food is "ought to be like" than adult.
34679 5y ago
Even among Michelin star restaurants, there's a huge variance. Take for example The French Laundry vs Terrapin Creek. The French Laundry is an experience that spans hours. Terrapin Creek is a small cafe that locals can pop into for a sandwich. Both have great food, presentation, and service. But they are completely different experiences.
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
Would add that in some places, particularly in New York, there are affordable Michelin-rated restaurants, e.g. Casa Enrique [1] or Casa Mono & Bar Jamon [2]. [1] https://casaenriquelic.com/dinner-1 https://casaenriquelic.com/dinner-1 [2] https://casamononyc.com/menu/#dessert https://casamononyc.com/menu/#dessert
stjohnswarts 5y ago
3. Lots of high end restaurants have "happy hours" with half-price meals (or so) on those days that have low points. You can also be a little bit less dressy.
Jack000 5y ago
Michelin restaurants can be good value from a certain perspective. I went to a 3 star place in Japan that cost $500 a seat, but there were only 8 seats and two rounds a night, with maybe 6 people behind the counter. You do the math and they're not making much money.
chrismcb 5y ago
If it isn't better, but just different, then it is most likely just a waste of money. Why did I spent a ton more to have did that isn't as good as the $12 bbq joint? Because it is different? What I have seen is that the service is usually outstanding and secretary steps above. But the food should also be better as well.
- calf 5y ago
  In mathematical terms, there's no well-ordering of restaurants despite what reviewers and the food journalism industry would have us believe. So actually different can have value.
speby 5y ago
> It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different The high-end places are not only about 'better' food per se. It's all about the ingredients, the preparation, the presentation, the uniqueness [of the dishes, menu, ingredients, etc] and perhaps as or more important than the food itself is the level of service. Combined, it's the full experience you're paying for, not just 'better' or 'different' food. Essentially, you are paying significantly more to sort of 'upgrade' everything about the entire dining experience. It is not only about the food (Though the food is indeed very important).

regulation_d 5y ago

Point 1 is very similar in high end coffee. Sometimes very expensive coffee in the US is substantially better than what you get in the grocery store, but often it's just much different. It might taste like blueberries or strawberry candy or wine. Not necessary better, just weird, hopefully in a whimsical way.

ethanbond 5y ago
Coffee is definitely one of the items that I've found the lowest correlation between price and perceived quality (as a quasi-distinct measure than my own subjective enjoyment). Even among wines, things on the expensive end that I really don't personally like, I can at least convince myself that there's a reason it has the price that it is. Coffee: no discernible relationship.
- asah 5y ago
  I used to think that about everything that was "better than Starbucks" and then I had fresh civet coffee from a legit place in HCM. It's... the sh*t!
- regulation_d 5y ago
  I spend a fair amount of money on coffee, but I know what styles and roast levels I like, and I know roasters that do those things well. If you like weird varietals processed with some experimental anaerobic processing method and a light roast, Onyx and Black & White, for example, both do really well with those styles. And they aren't cheap, but I enjoy them. If you favor medium to dark roasts, then Dunkin Donuts brand coffee in the grocery is pretty darn good.

silisili 5y ago

These are really good points, and mirror my experience - though we are opposite - I'm definitely not into fine dining. I didn't get point 1 til years later, after more reading. I'd tried uber fancy restaurants a few times, and each time left disappointed and really almost feeling cheated. Odd flavors (to me), small portions, a lot of art on the plate. I never really judged it based on anything but the value and taste, and if you do that, you'll likely be disappointed as I was. I guess I realized I'm just a simple guy who likes common foods, but hey, we're all different.

makeitdouble 5y ago
Value is too subjective to be discussed, but if we settle for “normal” portions at less than 300 bucks a meal, restaurants pushing to the top tier on taste also end up in the Michelin. If you’re into traditional “at home”, no nonsense cuisine, I don’t think you’ll be disappointed by the ones making it to the list. Perhaps the deception is on thinking that any “excellent” restaurant will be pleasing to everyone who can afford it. If you don’t like oysters the best oyster spot in the world will be pretty meh, same way if you’re not into trendy stuff, the price tag won’t make it magically work for you.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago

> It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different. Well said! Also, don't be the guy who goes in on a mission to dunk on the expensive restaurant. That's about as cool as the person who watches a popular TV show just so they can smugly complain about it. Just don't.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago
> Also, don't be the guy who goes in on a mission to dunk on the expensive restaurant. Don't burst your bubble, right? Jay Rayner would like a word :-) The west's fetishisation of fine dining is so far away from the Japanese model that it allows for this idea that the most expensive thing can still be unsatisfying, laughable or misleading, because it's "in its own category". It is a trope to say "people starve elsewhere in the world" but it is also a truism. If expensive food is not objectively better food, reject it, and seek better food that isn't expensive.
- hedora 5y ago
  Heh. Go watch the Japanese Iron Chef episode with the guy from SF. Japanese gourmets definitely do the "ridiculously expensive, questionable choice" thing too. The beef episode made me want to cry.
jjav 5y ago
So if a restaurant is very expensive, it must be immune from reviews? Not in my world, no. In fact the expectations should be higher so it better deliver much higher quality of food.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
indigochill 5y ago
I took a theater criticism class in college and the main rule I remember is "Never say something is good or bad. Describe it." or something like that. The point being even if you're personally not into something, convey the strengths and weaknesses together so others can get a better sense of whether it's for them because people aren't all looking for the same thing from an experience.

vincentmarle 5y ago

3. Don't expect to fill your appetite.

gnicholas 5y ago
My wife and I have gone to In-N-Out after fancy dinners on a number of occasions.
- 0_____0 5y ago
  how did that work out? the best meal i ever had in my life was at Bar Crudo on Divis in SF. owners pivoted to a taco place, for reasons unfathomable to me. had a dinner that blew my conception of food open, went to a show nearby after. got home at 3AM and made myself a bit of sausage and toast and to my surprise the experience of my prior meal persisted, and in contrast my late night snack seemed like it was made of cardboard.
  - gnicholas 5y ago
    Taste-wise, delicious! It is a bit odd to wear a tux or suit to an In-N-Out at midnight, but after a few times you get used to it.
    - nomel 5y ago
      What's the main allure for you?
      - gnicholas 5y ago
        The burgers, for sure. I've never been a fan of their spongy fries. I'd be happy to eat elsewhere as well, but there aren't a lot of options at midnight.
        spear 5y ago
        I always order fries "well-done" at In-N-Out now.

vidarh 5y ago

To the "experience" point, one of my all time best meals was crab at a three star restaurant. I like crab but it's normally not special to me. This was crab and almost nothing else prepared in four different ways that made the taste and texture entirely different. I'd never have ordered a dish described like that at a lower rated restaurant. It's not a meal I'd want to order over and over. But it's a meal I still remember fondly more than 20 years later.

matwood 5y ago

> Don't go into a michelin level restaurant expecting "well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better" Very much like wine.

seanp2k2 5y ago
I've found that many of the finer things in life, after a certain point of thing thing serving the purpose well, it's more about variety and taste than one is objectively better than the other. Will a $1000 guitar sound and feel way better than a $100 guitar? Absolutely. Will a $10,000 guitar sound and feel way better than that $1000 guitar? Probably not, more just different. Is a Bugatti Chiron "faster" than a Pagani Huayra ? Sure, in some regards, but they're entirely different cars made to do different things and feel very very different, despite both being "hypercars". Art is subjective after a certain point of being well-crafted and well-executed. Most food is more or less for utility and much less for art. Fine dining is much more art than utility, just like so many other things in life.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  > Will a $1000 guitar sound and feel way better than a $100 guitar? Absolutely. Nope. Not absolutely. Not even close.
  - williamdclt 5y ago
    Come on, that's just being contrarian. Sure there's going to be anecdotal exceptions here and there, but yes I'd absolutely expect almost any $1000 guitar to be better in sound and feel than almost any $100 guitar.
    - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
      No, sorry, I don't think it is. Better, almost certainly (I have played a terrible $1000 guitar -- it was a Gretsch and if you have played guitars you know what I mean by this). But that isn't what the comment I am replying to is saying. It says absolutely and way better. And that just isn't supported by evidence if you ask me. Not least on the playability: if you treat the $100 guitar to the same setup as a $1000 guitar, you may well get an extremely similar experience. $100 guitars, particularly the ones from Aeirsi, can be extremely good. OK so the gap between $100 and $1000 is much bigger with acoustic guitars, as you'd expect. (That is if we stipulate there is much of a $100 acoustic guitar market. Can't be many). But a $100-ish Encore Strat clone in the right hands? not so much. And it's especially true of lap steel guitars, IMO. Some of the best ones are cheap, some expensive ones are terrible, and the 10x price multiplier adds less than you'd expect.

2-718-281-828 5y ago

Interesting perspective - never thought of it that way. Seems almost obvious.

dkasper 5y ago

Agree about the flavor and ingredients. Reminded me of this vox podcast I listened to recently about the loss of food/flavor diversity, which basically means large scale farming has mostly crowded out all kinds of strange heirloom plant and even animal varieties and their corresponding tastes. I think high end Michelin type restaurants can play a part in preserving a lot of these unusual types of foods and flavors. Even if it becomes a niche thing it’s great to retain unique foods from an evolutionary perspective. Link to the podcast https://pod.link/voxconversations/episode/54c858cc8d026dd5b4ddac386c7fdc54 https://pod.link/voxconversations/episode/54c858cc8d026dd5b4...

mikestew 5y ago

2. Many very high end restaurants have great lunch deals, which can really cut the price to try them. That was one of the greater discoveries I've made about expensive restaurants. My wife and I had previously spent over $400 on an anniversary dinner at the Metropolitan Grill in Seattle. We're "common as muck", too; just a couple of country hicks from Indiana. It was nice, glad we went, wouldn't likely spend that kind of money on a meal again. Then I started a job literally across the street in the Exchange building. Boss wants to go the "the Met" for lunch. On my salary?!?! That's when I found out that for $12, one can get one the better burgers one will ever eat. I recommend that steak salad, too. * Note: all prices from like ten years ago.

Wistar 5y ago
I love the Met but have never tried it for lunch. Will now.
- changoplatanero 5y ago
  sad. i just noticed it's no longer open for lunch
soared 5y ago
Vacations work the same :) visit Puerto Rico now because everyone thinks it’s destroyed by natural disaster and political problems. Yeah it’s destroyed, but stunning beaches, resorts, golf courses, restaurants, etc for a fraction of the price. Best golf course and lunch I’ve ever had were at the royal isabela in PR. Absolute ghost town, but $90 all in. Stunning place.
- hammock 5y ago
  I escaped to St Martin during the lockdowns. Still damaged from hurricane but rebuilding. French side best side, best food, beaches and people, and extremely affordable. Plus a busy airport with lots of flights because it's where the billionaires park before hopping on their yacht to St Barth (I saw roman abramovich's plane on the tarmac)
- 5y ago

hervature 5y ago

I agree 100%. Fine dining should really be framed as part of the entertainment category. You are paying for an experience. Just like people don't talk about the Incan Trail as a $1,000 hike, a Michelin restaurant is not a $150 meal. When framed like this, it is obvious that some people would derive more utility out of a Michelin starred meal as opposed to buying 2-3 new video games.

kjafdkhjadfs 5y ago
Ok, as entertainment. Well, well, I think that is a perspective I'd simply never have realised until you said it. Thanks. Edit: why on earth did anyone flag this?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

rectang 5y ago

> Don't go into a michelin level restaurant expecting "well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better", think of it as its own category of food, that happens to have a really high buy-in price. Lots more crazy flavors, presentation, exotic ingredients, etc. A hobby of mine is picking a neighborhood and going to every single eatery, from possibly-illegal hole-in-the-walls and popups to fast food chains to bakeries and delis to cafes to fine dining establishments. I think I've only been to one Michelin-starred restaurant though — there aren't a lot of those. Restaurants have to cater to their clientele, even high-end ones. If you offer something creative on your menu, odds are there won't be a large market for it because most people want familiar fare. There are a lot of expensive-yet-conservative Italian restaurants in the US, for example — with lots of patrons who love them! The chefs may chafe at the constraints, but running a restaurant and bringing pleasure and satisfaction to your customers is a different endeavor than exploring the possibilities of cuisine. If you want to experience unfamiliar flavors, presentations, and ingredients your best bet is to go to places run by and primarily frequented by first-generation immigrants. It's not that such eateries are any more adventurous — the same economic forces constrain them — but they target a clientele with different tastes. The 80 eateries I've visited in San Diego's City Heights district offered way more variety and novel-to-me fare than the 70 or so restaurants I checked out on a tour of downtown San Diego. That's because City Heights has large enclaves of Mexican, Vietnamese and Somali immigrants, enough to sustain businesses which cater primarily to the tastes of those enclaves. I can think of some high-end restaurants that had very interesting menus, but in my experience there is only a weak correlation between price and adventurousness. It may be different though for specifically Michelin-starred restaurants, since that's a curated list.

mandevil 5y ago
Tyler Cowen's ethnic food dining guide: https://tylercowensethnicdiningguide.com/ https://tylercowensethnicdiningguide.com/ Suggests that, in the US at least, the ethnic enclave suburbs (not the richer ones or the exurbs) are often better choices for food than the trendy downtowns, for that very reason. I'm sure he's right about his home in the DC area, but NYC is its own thing- effectively Queens and Brooklyn function like suburbs in his dining cosmology.

munificent 5y ago

Point 1 is an excellent observation. By analogy, don't think of fine dining as a big-budget blockbuster film. It's not better than other movies by having the biggest setpieces, the most explosions, the hottest stars, and the loudest soundtracks. It's not just more more more. Think of it more like an arthouse film. Fine dining should be some of the best food you've ever had, but it should also be different from what you've had. Since much of their clientele eats out often, they are seeking not just quality but novelty.

seanp2k2 5y ago
+1 on novelty / variety; fine dining restaurants also change their entire menus a lot and may only keep a few signature dishes between menus. Part of that is due to availability of things and what is in season, part of it is whimsy / novelty / the chef trying out different things.

lostapathy 5y ago

> 1. Don't go into a michelin level restaurant expecting "well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better", think of it as its own category of food This cuts both ways. Cheaper, unique or local places shouldn’t be thought of as the same food you’re used to just a different place. Like if you order an omelette at Waffle House expecting something like you make at home, you’re gonna be disappointed. But that’s not what it’s supposed to be, it just shares a name with that you’re used to.

rosndo 5y ago

> Lots more crazy flavors, presentation, exotic ingredients, etc. It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different. Not all Michelin starred restaurants offer the kind of modernist fare you describe. There are many michelin starred restaurants serving exactly the normal-but-better food. For example the Michelin starred curries in London tend to fall in the normal-but-much-better category. Michelin starred sushi is usually normal-but-better, sometimes with weird fish options. France is full of normal-but-better French restaurants with stars.

showerst 5y ago
That's true, especially among the one-stars and bibs. On that top comment I was really thinking of tasting menus, which tend to be more out there. There are for sure plenty of places with an a la carte menu of very recognizable roast chicken and steak or whatever. I think on average in the US, Michelin caliber of places (stars or no) tend more modernist/experimental than in Europe.
deckard1 5y ago
I've been to a Michelin star ramen place in Japan. Nothing at all fancy about the place, other than the fact you need to get in line around 6am if you want a seat at noon. When it's time to eat, you punch in the number of the item you want in a very typical Japanese ticket vending machine. You sit down at the bar with about ten others, hand the ticket to the guy at the counter, and soon you're in a rush to eat your ramen. Because everyone is just sucking down their food as if this were your regular corner ramen place and they have to get back to work ASAP. I can't say the ramen was better than any other decent place, since the peer pressure to finish your meal is rather intense. You'll sit there and ponder how the Japanese eat such incredibly hot noodles so quickly. Tim Ho Wan is another cheap place with a star. They are a chain, even.

jointpdf 5y ago

My experience with a Michelin star restaurant (Maydan, in DC) was “what I normally eat, but better”—much, much better. The menu items themselves were not exotic (hummus, beet purée, pickled vegetables, ribeye, chicken kabobs), but the execution and complex cascades of flavors were on a whole new level of reality. The prices/portions are generous as well (e.g. $10 for the best hummus you’ve ever tasted, $50 for a cut of ribeye that would cost $30 at Whole Foods).

showerst 5y ago
I guess I should've clarified that I was thinking more of tasting menus on really _different_ comment. There's plenty of places (e.g. maydan, rose's, taro in DC) that have great but perfectly recognizable menus too. On the other hand I haven't had it in me to blow the money on pineapple and pearls, but if I did i'd want to see something weird =).
zdragnar 5y ago
Maybe my expectations are off, but I would not expect to find a fantastic ribeye that cheap outside of one or two places I can think of (one of which is in a small village of <3000 people and daily has 2-3 hour waits, no reservations). Good ribeye, sure, but not steakhouse fantastic ribeye. Seems like a good find indeed!
- mod 5y ago
  Best ribeye in my region is pretty unanimously thought to be found at the back of a gas station. An older man has been grilling Ribeyes out the back door for like sixty years or something, I think only two days per week. It comes on a styrofoam plate with no sides. You eat it in an ugly back room on cafeteria chairs, past the stand of ho-hos. It's like $20.
tssva 5y ago
Rooster & Owl in DC has for the most part has spins on recognizable food and is $75 for a 4 course meal. Each course has a selection of 4 dishes and the food is served family style, so going with a group of 4 allows everyone to try the entire menu.

tikhonj 5y ago

> well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better When I went to Chez Panisse for the first time—not Michelin starred, but still well-regarded—I didn't know what to expect. What surprised me was that it was just "what I normally eat" but better. Not fancy, not exotic, not flashy; at a surface level, it was less interesting than food I've had at "normal" restaurants... but it was somehow just better. It surprised me because I hadn't realize just how much room there was to improve on the details and execution of, well, "normal" cooking. I've occasionally seen something similar with codebases. Most code does what it needs to do, more or less, and hopefully it's not awful, but there are all kinds of sharp edges, inconsistencies, extra sources of friction—when I need to make a change, it's doable, but even the happy path has a bit of extra friction here and there, things that are clearly missing or in the wrong place or a bit hacky. And then, once in a while, I run into code that doesn't have those problems. Everything just somehow comes together; when I need to do something, there's an obvious way of doing it; when there's something odd in the design, it ends up addressing something I hadn't thought about. Somebody wrote the code with experience, attention to detail and the will to do quality work for its own sake. I don't know if it's the same with cooking, but with this kind of code, it generally took less time and effort for the people writing it than I'd expect from teams working on messier codebases. Running into things like this is a visceral reminder that even "normal" things—normal food, normal code—can just be better. A lot.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago
> Running into things like this is a visceral reminder that even "normal" things—normal food, normal code—can just be better. A lot. Right. I am away from home at the moment, staying at a house which doesn't have all the things I need. Like, there are only tiny frying pans, there aren't any spices/condiments/salt etc. So I have been buying the minimal things I need to cook food I like, and working with what is there. I took a tin of cheap, mass-produced fish out of the cupboard that I did not buy and was probably a mistaken purchase (everything in that cupboard needs to be used up), and on the basis that wasting food is a crime, I cooked it and added the simplest things alongside; some broccoli and a baguette. The meal I ate is one of the best things I have ever eaten, and it has improved my relationship with food, overnight. On that basis, if I go to an expensive restaurant and do not get food that is qualitatively better and not just different and in its own category, then I am being taken for a fool. So I am glad to hear that your Chez Panisse experience was what it was.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago

> It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different. On the one hand, no. It really, really, really does need to be qualitatively better food than you can get cheaply. (Especially for a Michelin star, the awarding of which still tends to somewhat resist the reality distortion field around gold-encrusted steaks). On the other hand, it is motivated reasoning like this kind of thing that gave us Jay Rayner's (wonderfully withering but occasionally joyful) restaurant columns in the Guardian. It's an absurdity (and a moral hazard, IMO) to ask for people's hard-earned money for food and then not give them food that is better, not just different. (And just as I expected, I am being modded down for this -- go for it guys)

2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
I guess that's why the word "better" is in quotes. I've never been to a fancy restaurant and been served food that was cooked worse. It's always been cooked better on any objective measure. But there are quite a lot of dishes that I wouldn't want to eat everyday even if I could afford to. Sometimes it's even been a bit lacklustre even though if you had to look at all the elements, it was all superbly done.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  > I've never been to a fancy restaurant and been served food that was cooked worse. I have, and it's not like I make a habit of fancy restaurants (I'm a freelancer so I don't make a habit of fancy _anything_ now.) There's a lot of motivated reasoning around food and wine. People who tell me they can't cook and then cook me a meal are proportionately more likely to outdo the expectations they set than a high-end restaurant; some of the best meals I have had have come from people who tell me they can cook only three things. Coffee shops often serve coffee that tastes worse than an aeropress at home, but costs more than a whole month's worth of good beans. Home coffee "experts" who are surrounded by the acquisitions of their motivated reasoning don't improve over that aeropress either. And even Aeropress experts make Aeropress coffee worse with their optimisations. Wine tasting experts sometimes can't tell the difference between red and white wines in blind taste tests, and yet still insist that reds and whites have specific associations. Fans of "fine dining" are often in the same zone. Expensive meals in restaurants have a veneer of quality even when the food is average and the service is objectively worse than an Angus Steakhouse. The truth is that -- like buying your fiancé a diamond ring -- the consumer often falls for their own motivated reasoning, either in making the purchase in the first place or post-justifying it afterwards. One thing makes food better: eating it with friends or loved ones. And you can do that with sandwiches on a park bench.

DrBazza 5y ago

In the UK, at least, one Michelin star (or AA rosettes) is more expensive than a regular restaurant but not by a large margin. In fact, in my area, it’s entirely possible to spend the same at a ‘regular’ restaurant. The only difference is wine.

thaway2839 5y ago

At some places you may even want to set aside money to have a cheeseburger at a fast food joint afterwards. But that's not a bad thing. Filling you up may be part of a fine dining experience, but it isn't necessarily so, and it's the least interesting part of it.

scelerat 5y ago

very much this. If you want a fantastic taco, the truck down the street is as likely to kill it as any linen sit-down, but there are some restaurants which serve up a unique experience you simply cannot get anywhere else.

Xcelerate 5y ago

> well it's expensive so it should be what I normally eat but better During the early stages of the pandemic when a lot of restaurants switched to carry-out only, Lazy Bear (a two Michelin star restaurant in SF) started Camp Commissary, where you could pick up different food items and meals to go. My wife isn’t into fine dining and would never eat the main tasting menu at their restaurant (which I had once before the pandemic), but she absolutely loved the to go items, because they were essentially what you describe: normal types of food cooked by Michelin star chefs (maybe with a fancy twist, like Morel mushrooms on a grilled cheese or fermented local vegetables). I had the best pimento cheese chicken biscuit, duck sandwich, pop tarts, blackberry cocktails, snickerdoodle cookie, pea soup, lamb chops, tomato pie, pasta, and pork & beans of my life. There’s got to be a market for regular food cooked REALLY well. We spent tons on that place, and it was worth every penny (well, except one of the salads, which had like two pieces of lettuce and a grape).

archagon 5y ago
I feel like Gregoire in Berkeley hits that spot. Ordinary food, for takeout, prepared really well.

Amasuriel 5y ago

I would add that sometimes there are some truly magical food experiences lurking in there if you have an open mind, and Michelin restaurants are a good place to try new things. A few years ago I ate at the modern in New York. Most of the tasting menu was good, as you might expect, but honestly not particularly memorable. But they had this one dish, eggs 3 ways or something like that, which was a play on a soft boiled egg with toast, but the egg yolk had caviar and some other stuff in it, and was served with this toasted sourdough…I am salivating 4 years later thinking about it. Truly one of the best things I have ever eaten, and it was something I never would have ordered from a menu.

rodgerd 5y ago

To your first point, there was an absolute classic (https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2001/oct/14/foodanddrink.jayrayneronrestaurants.restaurants https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2001/oct/14/foodanddrink....) where a Guardian food writer took his kid and their friends to Fat Duck. Two of the kids and the restaurant staff both enjoyed the experience - noting in particular that kids have far fewer preconceptions about what food is "ought to be like" than adult.

34679 5y ago

Even among Michelin star restaurants, there's a huge variance. Take for example The French Laundry vs Terrapin Creek. The French Laundry is an experience that spans hours. Terrapin Creek is a small cafe that locals can pop into for a sandwich. Both have great food, presentation, and service. But they are completely different experiences.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

Would add that in some places, particularly in New York, there are affordable Michelin-rated restaurants, e.g. Casa Enrique [1] or Casa Mono & Bar Jamon [2]. [1] https://casaenriquelic.com/dinner-1 https://casaenriquelic.com/dinner-1 [2] https://casamononyc.com/menu/#dessert https://casamononyc.com/menu/#dessert

stjohnswarts 5y ago

3. Lots of high end restaurants have "happy hours" with half-price meals (or so) on those days that have low points. You can also be a little bit less dressy.

Jack000 5y ago

Michelin restaurants can be good value from a certain perspective. I went to a 3 star place in Japan that cost $500 a seat, but there were only 8 seats and two rounds a night, with maybe 6 people behind the counter. You do the math and they're not making much money.

chrismcb 5y ago

If it isn't better, but just different, then it is most likely just a waste of money. Why did I spent a ton more to have did that isn't as good as the $12 bbq joint? Because it is different? What I have seen is that the service is usually outstanding and secretary steps above. But the food should also be better as well.

calf 5y ago
In mathematical terms, there's no well-ordering of restaurants despite what reviewers and the food journalism industry would have us believe. So actually different can have value.

speby 5y ago

> It's not that it has to be 'better' than the best $12 bbq joint you've ever been to, just different The high-end places are not only about 'better' food per se. It's all about the ingredients, the preparation, the presentation, the uniqueness [of the dishes, menu, ingredients, etc] and perhaps as or more important than the food itself is the level of service. Combined, it's the full experience you're paying for, not just 'better' or 'different' food. Essentially, you are paying significantly more to sort of 'upgrade' everything about the entire dining experience. It is not only about the food (Though the food is indeed very important).