Random header image... Refresh for more!

Mid-range disappointments in pictures

An interesting conversation broke out this week on the Houston Chowhounds mailing list when someone asked if there is a secret to having enough money to always eat well. Unlimited supply of money is the easiest way to ensure you eat well more often than not, but money is only part of the problem. For me it all comes down to time and value. Every bad or average meal is an opportunity lost.

I find that I get the best value on the ultra high-end or the ultra low-end range of the dining spectrum. Both require a considerable amount of energy and research, but a meal costing $6-10 seems just as likely to be revelatory as a 4 hour multi-course dinner that sets you back over $200. Meals in the middle often disappoint and rarely exceed expectations.

The reason is simple. At most average mid-range restaurants you pay for a nice setting, access to alcohol and food that won’t confuse casual restaurant goers looking for a good night out. You are less likely to find a talented cook trying rise above the fray. Why bother when you have nice decor or a never ending supply of half naked chicks at the bar?

At least the folks at Zula had the decency to make indecency the main feature of the restaurant, so the rest of us don’t wander in there expecting decent food. Far too many other mid-range restaurants continue the charade, however.

No sooner than I formulated my thesis my cloaked friend over at Food in Houston published a review of a recent dinner at Quattro, which illustrates my point quite nicely. My lunch there was beyond disappointing. It’s not that it was particularly expensive, but it was so painfully average that I still feel the empty space in my wallet once occupied by the money I spent  on the food (and that was before valet parking).

I have trouble deciding if I hated the Aramark inspired German chocolate cake more than the greasy tasting french onion soup with nasty little toast points. Or maybe it were the rubbery ravioli stuffed with some sort of a green leafy vegetable that tasted like they spent a bit too much time in the fridge? I picked around the plate, but called it quits when I came across a tin can flavored artichoke topped with mysterious orange sauce and went back to work hungry. Screw it. Just because I paid for bad food, doesn’t mean I have to force myself to eat it.

 

Exhibit 2: Prego used to be one of my favorite restaurants in Houston, but has recently slipped into the unfortunate “mid-range and average” mode. It’s is still far more edible than Quattro, but the prices have gone up and quality of cooking has slipped. At a recent lunch, John Watt, Prego’s long time chef, was at the restaurant, but seemed kind of disinterested in what’s going on in the kitchen. The food, meanwhile, was being turned out by some guy wearing a Trevisio toque.

Some of the John Watt’s food back in the days seemed really inspired. I didn’t think twice about ordering a premium priced special, knowing that he probably got his hands on some stellar baby coho salmon or soft shell crab. Now the special always seems to be the veal chop. The outstanding rabbit dishes I ordered there for years are no longer on the menu either, so I have been gambling with the menu and mostly coming out the loser.

 IMG_9325   IMG_9327

Take my word for it and stay away from the bland and flabby bowl of cheese  that passes for veal meatball lasagna at Prego, although that’s not the only pothole on the menu. Even the safe standbys of pan roasted chicken or veal with a pan sauce and mashed potatoes seem lackluster now. During a recent visit the chicken was rubbery and under seasoned. The pizza crust topped with government quality mozzarella was so limp it flopped over like a dirty sock.

Not everything was a complete loss. The bread is good as ever. Skip the formalities and stick to the bread basket if you do decide to go.

Related posts:

  1. Da Marco really is good. No, really. It really is. I remember reading a piece by a guest critic in...
  2. My lunch date with Karl Rove at Ristorante Cavour (HOU) Entering Hotel Granduca is a little like following the rabbit...
  3. Good things happening at Cafe Annie I have been mostly disinterested in Cafe Annie for the...
  4. Chefs missing in action Strange trend emerged over the last few years. Some of...
  5. British invasion: Feast brings Nose-to-Tail cooking to Houston I couldn’t make it to Feast for almost week after...

7 comments

1 neverfull { 08.04.08 at 1:52 am }

agreed although my price points maybe a little different from yours. since you’re on an italian tangent, another case in point: http://imneverfull.blogspot.com/2008/08/raias-italian-market.html

2 anonymouseater { 08.04.08 at 9:23 am }

The difference between dinner and lunch at Quattro is like night and day. Like you, I had a disappointing lunch there recently — a mediocre foccacia sandwich with greasy fries. At dinner, though, the room is less crowded, the menu is completely different, and the prices are much, much higher. I also think quality improves some at dinner, although the food is not that exciting.

Keating once gave me a tour of Quattro’s enormous kitchen. It reminded me that the vast majority of Quattro’s food production is for meals outside the restaurant — room service, banquets, parties. When a restaurant kitchen makes a lot of banquet food, it is hard not to slip into banquet-quality food for the restaurant itself. While he was here, Keating managed to keep the restaurant food special. His successors have had less success.

3 Food Princess { 08.04.08 at 1:20 pm }

Apparently Neverfull and I both put up our mediocre reviews of Raia’s today http://foodprincessreports.blogspot.com/. Some of my best meals in Houston have been at the less expensive restaurants. I was curious about Quattro but your review is enough for me. Thanks!

4 plinio { 08.04.08 at 5:29 pm }

i never really thought about the quality of a meal based on its price. i just went where i craved and tried the food. money was not an issue. but now that you brought this up, it makes perfect sense that mid priced food tastes the way it does. it has to! it has to appeal to the masses. hence all the chains. food’s edible, but its not exciting or delicious.

5 ChuckEats { 08.05.08 at 2:38 am }

I completely agree w/ your post. Eating out at a mid-range restaurant can cost $80-150 for 2; and it’s usually sloppy food, no matter how hard they try. I’d rather skip a meal, save the money, and buy a $300 for 2 meal.

6 MC { 08.12.08 at 8:15 pm }

Prego has slipped so far it’s now off the list permanently. And it was a regular Saturday long lunch place for us. New management was horrible, food quality went south and stayed there. Haven’t been back in 2 years. T

7 Megan { 08.13.08 at 1:57 pm }

Misha - Unfortunately I agree with you re: Prego. The first time I went was with my boyfriend, now my husband. We went back a few weeks ago for an anniversary dinner, and my pasta was okay (it was a bit too chewy for my taste), the mac and cheese side dish with the veal special had no seasoning, and the prosciutto on my husband’s veal chop was really tough. Plus, I thought the veal was oversalted. I guess I should start looking for a new restaurant for special occassions. T’afia has always intrigued me but Allison Cook’s last blog post about the restaurant itself gives me pause.

Leave a Comment