Harold suggested: >You might want to try a place off of University across from Miyake's. I >haven't personally been there, but others I work with say it's pretty good >for all you can eat. Ooooh, nooooo, doooon't dooooo it! Miyasato or Miyajima or Minamoto or whatever it's called is really ..<pause for breath>.. vile. Horribly, repulsively vile. There is no worse sushi on the pen, I guarawntee it. Rage away, meg
San Francisco Bay Area, CA
All you can stomach sushi...
Meg W. wrote: >Harold suggested: >>You might want to try a place off of University across from Miyake's. I >>haven't personally been there, but others I work with say it's pretty good >>for all you can eat. > >Ooooh, nooooo, doooon't dooooo it! Miyasato or Miyajima or >Minamoto or whatever it's called is really ..<pause for >breath>.. vile. Horribly, repulsively vile. There is no >worse sushi on the pen, I guarawntee it. Actually, having been to this place and Sono Sushi, I'd rather go to this place. I think you can sum up Sono by its name, as in So, no sushi tonight, huh? Val
Re Minokichi (the name finally came to me), I had written: >> Ooooh, nooooo, doooon't dooooo it! Miyasato or Miyajima or >> Minamoto or whatever it's called is really ..<pause for >> breath>.. vile. Horribly, repulsively vile. There is no >> worse sushi on the pen, I guarawntee it. Cyndi writes: >What didn't you like about it? >And what time did you go? I've found their sushi is best just after they >open (they close for a couple hours between lunch and dinner so either >opening is okay). They do refresh the sushi throughout the night as it's >eaten, but the quality declines as the hours wear on. I've been dragged there twice for lunch; never been for dinner. My primary complaint was the rice. It was barely-seasoned long-grain, possibly held together with a touch of gelatin. Also, the second time I could tell that the rice was old, as in, about to turn. Yes, I'm afraid I have kept rice in my rice-cooker long enough to know what rice-on-the- brink tastes like. But the non-rice bits (and we're talking *bits*) of their sushi weren't much better. The fish in the maki was clearly trim; the nigiri items were of poor quality; the tamago wasn't even proper Japanese tamago. Basically, it struck me as sushi prepared by someone who has never had sushi before, only seen pictures. Now, I don't think that's the case, but it's clearly made by folks who don't have their tastebuds oriented along washoku (Japanese) lines. >Are you picky about your sushi (meaning you dislike anything but the best)? >Or perhaps you hit them on a bad day? I suppose I could have hit them on a couple of bad days, but no one I know (except for the person who drug me there) likes them either. And while I'm not shy in my criticism (am I, gang?), I'm not really a sushi-snob; I eat happily at Tomi, Yakko, Fukizushi, Jidaiya, et al. And while I don't *like* it much, I'd rather eat at Sono than there. And to answer Harold's question, Miyake's sushi is much better, even if Minokichi's atmosphere is more to my liking. Rage away, meg