That’s what I’m saying… Night Market is imho way better…
I haven’t eaten at every single one, but almost all of them.
I’ve been to a ton of Michelin-starred restaurants in SF, NY, Chicago, LA, and Vegas. Nothing in Europe, sadly.
Eater LA’s top 25 means something very different than hypothetical Michelin Guide because adheres to a certain “standard”. Eater’s Essential 38, which is updated four times a year, is the closest thing we have to that. That list is 100% my own (though with some input from other city editors).
1 Like
I had a pretty spectacular bowl of drunken noodles at Kin Khao a few months ago. Remarkably fresh veg and bright flavors. I’d certainly return.
You’re saying Eater’s top 25 (or 38) adheres to a certain standard and not a hypothetical Michelin Guide? That’s interesting. I would actually argue for the opposite 
Thanks for the reply and helping me understand how you came up with that list.
Now can you please do “Tony C’s top 10 dishes to get at Jitlada to make us understand how good it really is”?
1 Like
I think Tony was one of the early proponents of Jitlada back in 2008. He and I actually did a dinner there together once (maybe, my memory is foggy). Way. Back. When. Sheesh.
The 38 doesn’t adhere to a “standard” just what I, as an editor of Eater, think is essential to the city’s dining scene at that given time. It’s subjective, but also kind of comprehensive enough that covers high to low, American/traditional to ethnic.
I respect that Kin Khao is sourcing their ingredients so well. There is not a single restaurant that wouldn’t benefit from that. Now only if they cooked dishes more interesting than drunken noodles and massaman curry.
Like namprik long rua?
And where is it that you go? 
Inquiring minds want to know.
Michelin standards in Europe differ from those in the U.S. Even in the U.S. the standards vary across the various cities.
Exactly. European standards are more rigorous and less variable. US ones seem dumbed down and more relative within a city. Not that it’s a guide of what is actually good but in the context of 3 star Europe vs 3 star US. There is a big difference.
True, they seem especially generous in the US cities lately. Michelin is very relevant, arguably the most relevant widespread food guide, but it’s not a perfect arbiter of taste as they’ve diluted themselves a bit in the past couple of years (particularly in the US, in my opinion, with being fairly liberal with 1 and 2 stars). With that said, one can still have a pretty good sense of what a Michelin star-calibre restaurant is. The line may be fuzzy around the distinctions between what passes for 1 and what is elevated to 2, but if they maintain their strict standards, it’ll still be a rather reliable indicator for the most part. But, even considering all the noticeable slackening of standards and respect for maintaining a clearer delineation between the various stars, I personally think that the Eater LA list is pretty off. Off from how one would reasonably expect Michelin to grade LA’s restaurants. Off enough that it doesn’t really resemble a Michelin list, but rather Eater’s own take on restaurants it deems to be very good. Which is fine, and ostensibly there’s a significant, near complete, element of subjectivity at play here in dreaming up this Hypothetical, but at what point is it really Michelin? Why not just make an “Eater’s Take on Grading The City’s Best Restaurants” or something?
I’m more familiar with restaurants in SF, where they seemed to have been on a spree. Not all 3 stars are the same, some of the 2’s are a stretch in my opinion, and I’m fairly disappointed by what might garners 1, as well. It’s been a while since Michelin was in LA - but even if their US standards have been inconsistent, I still think the list would look a good deal different.
Haha!
Actually, where I go isn’t as important as the fact that I have a long relationship with the people at the restaurant. (I give them something for Christmas every year.) That’s the most important thing to get service and Sushi that’s above the usual in my experience besides finding a place that has good Sushi - establishing that you’re a good customer, e.g., you sit at the bar, understand the etiquette, know how to evaluate Sushi, are open to trying whatever is offered, and aren’t arrogrant.
If you’re a new customer anywhere decent, the Sushi chef will likely be evaluating what kind of customer you are from the moment you sit down. I’ve heard the story from numerous Sushi chefs about how customers come in and say they know all about Sushi, order Omakase, and one of the first things they do is fill up the Shoyu dish with Shoyu and mix in a ton of Wasabi. Another thing is that people order Omakase and then proceed to say they don’t eat certain things or ask for specific things; Omakase is the chef’s choice - if you choose, it’s not Omakase, so you clearly don’t understand what Omakase is. And, if you only order a certain style of fish, e.g. fatty fishes, then you’re not going to ever see anything interesting because that shows you’re not interested in other types of fish.
There are a number of places in LA that offer good fixed price Omakase. Find one you like, be a good customet, establish a relationship with a chef, and you’ll likely get better Sushi than if you bounce around from place to place hoping for the Holy Grail.
2 Likes
I do agree with this sentiment. The developed relationship between chef & customer is extremely important, and highly prized within the norms of dining out in Japanese restaurants.
But there are other ways to impress your taisho aside from going omakase and behaving well. Sometimes on a first visit, I sit at the bar and order okonomi (a la carte) (yes, some sushi-ya’s are omakase-only at the bar, but many others allow okonomi). If you are keen on etiquette, and ask good questions (about seasonality, shari, provenance of items, or even how 'bout them Dodgers, etc.), you’ll find the second visit to be generally a much better one. Just my experience.
1 Like
Pretty much sums of life, not just sushi.
Karma works both ways.
2 Likes
Well said, and in my experience applies to most any restaurant ( not just sushi) where you are a regular or hope to be!
1 Like
Based on my admittedly dated experience, the difference between a * and a *** in France includes utensils of real silver (and replacement of same throughout the meal), tablecloths and napkins, the quality of the amuse bouche, the quality and number of mignardises, decor and lighting, the gems on the wine carte, the free flow of wine (Taillevent would often provide wine beyond the bottle ordered to coincide with the pace of the meal), the variety and quality of the cheese cart offerings, the attentiveness and unobtrusiveness of service, and, yes, the quality and execution of the actual dishes themselves.
Alas, those days are long gone. Taillevent no longer has 3 stars. Free wine did not flow from either Gagnaire or Arpege when I visited. And “gems on the winelist” has different meanings to different people. To me it means bottles that we can’t find in the US at reasonable prices. To others it would mean DRC, Leroy, Comte Liger Belair, etc.
But yes, service, utensils, everything figures into the formula. I think it’s probably 75% accoutrements of dining and the 25% food itself even if they claim otherwise.
Hey, as somebody who has just recently been able to afford decent sushi, where should I start in regards to learning etiquette, good questions, etc.
I’ve had good omakase meals but will easily admit that I can much easier talk to you about the nuances of papaya salad or the variances in regional Mexican, simply because that’s the stuff I could afford!
What’s your suggested approach to acquiring knowledge about sushi?!
Hmm, I think Michelin is becoming much more lenient across the board because I don’t think they really know how to interpret places like Alma which is very similar to the chef-driven, no fuss places popping up in Paris recently. Spots like Le Chateaubriand, Septime, etc.
I do think Eater’s List has too many spots, but I think the likes of The Bazaar, Orsa and Winston, Republique, Animal, Bestia, Ink, Le Comptoir, Taco Maria, Trois Mec, Providence are all deserving and comparable to tons of new places garnering Michelin stars in Europe.
They are just gonna be a lot different than the old school places that used to be the pinnacle of cuisine.
Yes, it has to be “correct.”
But yes, you are right about the wines unknown or unavailable to us that the sommelier can suggest.