Skip to main content
The Kitchen Archive

Eats Archive › California › San Francisco Bay Area

San Francisco Bay Area, CA

All you can stomach sushi...

3 posts · Nov 23, 1998 to Nov 25, 1998

Meg W.Stanford University, CA 94305, USANov 23, 1998
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
ValerieNetcomNov 24, 1998
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
Meg W.Stanford University, CA 94305, USANov 25, 1998
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
Share this page