The differences in quality of different grades of beef is well-known. People who eat it enough can easily tell the difference in taste, texture and fat dispersion of a quality cut versus average and low grade cuts. For much of my life, I assumed that this would be true for most, of not all, meats (even if there’s not necessarily a grading system like the USDA has for beef).
But a former colleague once remarked that the $9.99 lobster at Red Lobster is of the same quality as the $99 lobster at your high end restaurant. The size could certainly be different, and preparation techniques could cause it to taste better, but there is no difference in the actual quality of the meat.
Differently sourced lamb, pork, and chicken will have very different tastes. Depending on the preparation you might not taste it, but it can certainly be noticed. For tuna there is a grading system with at least 4 different grades for quality. I’m sure other fish used in sushi have similar grading system.
The taste and texture of all food we eat varies according to how it is fed/grown/cared for - that goes for lettuce just as it goes for beef.
I buy my meat from a local butcher who only deals in organic/high welfare stock. Their pork of Off The Charts in juicy flavour. It’s a world a way from the fairly tasteless stuff you can buy at a supermarket.
My wife used to be a fishmonger, so she’s really fussy about what we buy. She’s happy to buy salmon and prawns (shrimp) from a supermarket, as most of it is farmed and then frozen anyway and they have a strong enough flavour to carry themselves - perhaps the same could be said of lobster.
But I am basically banned from buying white fish like seabass unless it’s wild (most is farmed) or cod (which is wild but not fresh enough by the time it hits the shelves). For these, it’s a good fishmonger or nowhere.
Differences may be less noticeable in some food, but there’s a still a difference.
I’ve just conferred with the wife on the lobster question. Her fish company supplied fish to the Royal Household, as well as most of the high end restaurants in London. They sourced most of their lobster from Canada, where the lobster tends to be larger, more firmly textured and more flavoursome.
So depending on your priorities, it may not be worth spending the extra $$, but it does make a difference.
LOL, no. Though it may be true for your co-worker.
For you though, go visit a lobster pound in DownEast Maine—I like Young’s, in Belfast, but there are plenty to choose from—have a lobster prepared however you wish, and let me know what you think.
In chickens, there’s a difference between a, e.g., Foster Farms broiler and a similar-sized chicken that’s been allowed to go outside. The second one will be gamier and often richer, if not juicier, which may or may not appeal to you.
Tuna has grades, king salmon from Yukon River tastes different than farmed salmon, and so on.
I do not hunt, but I like venison. A couple of friends hunt, getting licenses in several different states, and so we get some venison from time to time. Meat from deer that live “in the mountains” is nowhere as good as meat from deer that live in farmland, eating a diet that includes corn.
The only real difference is that beef is the only one with a grading scale that we see at the grocery store. When was the last time you saw USDA Grade B butter at the grocery store? Or Grade B poultry? They exist, but most of them are either commercial products, or it’s not something that’s very well identified on the packaging.
Beef, for whatever reason, is sold using the USDA grades as a marketing tool- stores found that they can charge more for prime than choice, and more for choice than select, and more for select than the lower grades that if sold at retail at all, aren’t sold as graded.
I mean, you might go see A or B butter at a low income grocery (most we see is AA), but it’s not a marketing point, so you’d probably have to pay attention.
Maple syrup used to be a Grade A (light, medium, dark), B, and Commercial. The USDA recently changed that to Grade A (Golden, Amber, Dark, Very Dark) and Processing. But neither scale was really about better or worse quality but about taste.
To follow up a little bit; I don’t think it’s quite accurate for the OP’s friend to say that the $9.99 lobster is the same “quality” as the $99 one you might get at a fine restaurant. It is, but only in the limited sense that there aren’t quality grades for lobster like say… beef. What they do is grade them by the time since molting- the most recent ones (new-shell) are the best tasting, but the most fragile, so you rarely see them outside the towns where they’re caught. The next stage (hard-shell) are more sturdy, and can generally handle being shipped across the US if care is taken, but aren’t quite as tasty. Old shell lobsters (ones that haven’t molted yet since the last season) are pretty sturdy, so that’s likely what you see all over the world and in places like your local grocery store.
But within a grade, stuff like where it was caught, how recently, how it was handled, etc… make more difference than anything else, so that $99 lobster, assuming it’s not a hard-shell vs. a 9.99 old-shell, is probably from a known-good vendor/fisherman chain, while the $9.99 one is probably whatever Red Lobster can get at the price they set.