I agree (although I haven’t the funds to go to any of the really special restaurants, but I do read a lot of reviews and experience a whiff of the joy vicariously). It’s about how you appreciate value. Some people might thoroughly enjoy a trip to the theatre - others might say “I can’t believe we paid to watch a bunch of people playing make-believe on a stage!”
I think it depends. Is the steak at Morton’s much better than the steak at Bennigan’s? Oh yeah, much much better.
But is the Steak at Morton’s much better than the steak a Ray’s the Classics (a local chain of more affordable steakhouses), not by much.
I’ve had great meals at little hole in the walls and crappy meals at pretty expensive places. But for just an insane level of good eating, nothing ever topped my meal at the Inn at Little Washington, not only was the food just amazing, but also the service is insanely good.
My GF and I once received a gift certificate for a dinner for 2 at Volt, run by the losing Top Chef brother. It was a 7-course dinner consisting of very large plates with a tiny amount of food arranged artfully in the middle, surrounded by drips and smears of sauce. It was beautiful to look at and absolutely delicious, and I’m sure the entire meal was thousands of calories as I’m certain everything had been both marinated in, then doused with butter, but we both left the restaurant still hungry. We stopped at Cracker Barrel on the way home and got a proper meal.
We’d never have gone if we were paying. I would not have been happy had I been the one ponying up $300 + wine for 7 oz. of food for two.
I understand the “whole dining experience” argument, and if that’s your thing then I’m happy for you and hope you enjoy it, but when I go out to eat I go out to eat.
Have you been to Victory 44? I’m an idiot about fancy places, but their tasting menu was the closest thing to an expensive restaurant experience I’ve ever had, and totally reasonable, especially on Tuesdays when you get a free bottle of house wine with 2 tasting menus.
Reading this thread makes me feel like a total rube, though, sitting here thinkin’ that my fancy $30 tasting menu experience was awesome and special. There’s a part of me that would love to have $100 meals… not at my own expense, though!
“Party of teeming millions, I have a table for you in Cafe Society. Party of millions, Cafe Society.”
Nope. Pre kids I went to the now defunct Goodfellows a few times, which I do miss, we really havent found a replacement for that experience yet. I’ve been to Heartland a few times, but it was way better in its former smaller incarnation, it was disappointing last time. Meritage. We live on the St Paul side of the world. We are regulars at the strip club, but I don’t consider that fine dining. I love the craftsman, but again, not really fine dining and a little out of the way.
There is a difference between an upscale chain (Ruth Chris or Morton’s) and a true chef run upscale restaurant.
The upscale chains are better than the other chain, but only marginally so. The two or three times I’ve been to a Local Upscale Restaurant (they were more common five years ago, before the economy tanked), the food was incredible. More importantly though, the service was unmatched by anything I’d ever experienced. The wait staff went out of their way to make each guest feel special.
We’ve been eating out a lot lately, mostly middling chain restaurants like Applebees and Kirbys, and a couple of pricey local places that actually cook food for you, not just warm it up like the former. I myself much prefer the local places that cook with fresh ingredients, the food IS better. The chain restaurants, it’s always the same things. Burgers. Fajitas. Salads. Everything covered with bacon and cheese. The point of this being, I do believe more expensive restaurants DO have better food simply because they actually cook real food. Not just ladle cheese sauce over heated up stuff and throw on a side of onion rings or fries.
It can be worth it, though. I fondly remember several meals the wife and I have had that came in around $300 for the two of us, without wine. Above that point I start to get nosebleed, if for no other reason than I have observed that a lot (most?) of the restaurants above that price point make it a point to serve ingredients I won’t eat. The chefs have to justify their reputations, so they show you how fancily they can prepare organ meats and bizarre seafood. No thank you. I’d rather let a mid-level chef show me how well she can roast a chicken and bring out the natural flavors of produce instead.
Not that I’d turn down a free meal at Meadowood ot The French Laundry, mind you. But I wouldn’t pay for it.
When I eat, I tend to eat at holes in the wall and nothing that would be classified as much more than middle-brow. Honestly, the pub is my favorite place to go out to eat. But I like to think I know where the quality-for-price is.
That said, I’ve been nothing but happy at the very few higher end places I’ve been to. When I go to this sort of place, I want experimentation, I want fun with food, I want to try something different. I certainly don’t want roast chicken. I know great places where I could get a perfect whole roast chicken for something like $20 or less. When I’m at the over $100 a meal price point, the only reason I’m paying that much is for it is creativity (and, of course, impeccable technique, but that’s a given.) Yes, there’s ambiance and service and all that, but I honestly don’t give a crap about that. Give me interesting food.
That said, I just can’t bring myself to pay that kind of money. My brother has been to Alinea three times (I’m jealous), and every time he’s come back, he’s been nothing short of glowing. And he’s just a regular guy, not swimming in money or anything, but saves for special occasions. (Average bill for two there was around $750).
It would be interesting for an sociologist or an economist to try to apportion what value people actually place on the food vs. the experience or reputation of the chef. I think it’s clear there are diminishing returns after a certain level, but I wonder how a group of top chefs would fair against lower status chefs in a blind taste test. They have studied the value of a Michelin star, but it would be nice if there were a general value index available.
One other interesting thing is that although many of these places charge a lot, they often don’t make that much money. ElBulli, the former #1 restaurant in the world prior to its close, lost money regularly.
Brickbacon. There was an episode of Penn and Tellers Bullshit where they did that sort thing. They served four? couples absolute crap outa a can but dressed it up with all sorts of pomp and circumstance. Only one guy in one of the couples realized it was absolute crap.
A related point. In general, are more expensive places better? Sure. But are they better actual values in a goodness to amount paid for it ratio kinda sense?
Using that metric, I’d say random mom and pop / holes in the wall’s are where its at. Some of the best meals I’ve had have been in those sorta places. AND they weren’t even remotely expensive. Therefore the goodness to cost ratio was extremely high. Of course you have to visit somewhere between 10 and 100 of em before you find the OMG that was some good cooking one.
And then again, free dog poop ranks very very high on the goodness to cost ratio scale so no metric is without its flaws.
Yeah, I can see fooling a group of people, but I would be more interested in a comprehensive study. But I will try to check that episode out. Also, I suppose any value metric would first have to figure measure how one values money, and the amount of their disposable income, to be of any assistance.
Agree wholeheartedly, if you are just counting the food itself. It’s the other categories that make fine dining “fine.” But the law of diminishing returns applies to dining just as much as it does anything else. My palate just can’t distinguish things to that fine a degree past a certain point. YMMV, of course. That’s what keeps the 3-star places in business.
Or you find a group of people that share your general tastes and have helped do most of the research for you. The danger is that it turns into a bit of an echo chamber, but it works well. I mean, I will very occasionally check out a random restaurant, but usually, when I’m scouring holes-in-the-wall, it’s via recommendations. With that approach, I’m batting around .500. Probably higher.
Last night I was out with the kids and the restaurant I thought we would eat at apparently closed several years ago so we tried this tiny little tavern across the street. Now Toronto has a great Greek district but I’ve never had better greek food ever. If anyone is in the neighborhood the Athens Restaurant and Tavern at 707 Danforth Ave. is well worth the visit.
We lucked into it but I’ll offer the rest of you the recommendation 
Or…my husband, who has eaten at The French Laundry, points out that the second best burger he has had in his life was at Matt’s, a 3.2 bar in South Minneapolis known for the juicy Lucy. The bar itself smells like a urinal. It isn’t fine dining, but it’s a darn good burger.
There was a freakonomics radio podcast a few days ago where one of the hosts talks about doing that when he was a new professor. They had fancy dinners with all the academics, so he got some expensive wine and some cheap wine then served it to people. they couldn’t tell the difference, but they got mad when he told them about the experiment. Of course that is just wine, not actual dining.
Heh. I’ve done the same thing with my old homebrewing club. They were led to believe that they were tasting homebrew, when what they were really drinking was Olde English 800, St. Ives, Schlitz Malt Liquor, and Colt .45. The comments were all positive, praising the beer and its attributes. then I revealed the labels.