Sure, here are my favourites, not in any particular order. Zinho The Cafe at the Frick (Desserts and light meals) Udupi (S. Indian) Taj Mahal (N. Indian) La Prima (Espresso) Casbah Spice Island and it's big brother, The Road to Karakash Ones that are OK: La Feria, Kaya, Soba (RIP), La Cucina Flegrea (it used to be better), Cafe Allegro. Still not sure: Orient Kitchen @ Baum, seems like the closest I found real Chinese, will stabilize opinions after a few more visits. My criteria is not really complicated: The real thing, please. Doesn't have to be fancy, just be honest. If it's ethnic, don't Americanize. No mayo in my sushi, please. A good recipe, the best ingredients, no substitutions, no shortcuts. Upscale is fine, but make sure you know what you're doing. Get a good pastry chef. Understand wine. But it seems that in Pgh you can fool all of the people all of the time. Take Pasta Piatto in Shadyside, for example. Full house every night. Awful "bread" (you can probably get it at the Giant Eagle bakery), bad pasta, pointless sauces, iceberg lettuce salad... and people consider it as one of the best restaurants in Pittsburgh. You'll never see Italians there, by the way. -- Garmi Peach wrote: > Garmi, > > What are your 5 or top 10 Restaurant picks? > > Thanks, > > Joe > > Garmi G. wrote: > > Agree completely. Her reviews are a joke. On the other hand, is there a > > place for a restaurant reviewer in Pittsburgh? I am not sure. There are > only > > a handful of restaurants worth visiting, and they can be covered in a > month > > or two. > > > > JN wrote: > > > I just wanted to gripe in general about Woodene Merriman's reviews in > > > the PG. OK, forget the annoying factor of the whole HH thing, her > > > general style and lack of originality -- but it amazes me how she rates > > > restaurants with her 'star' scale. I've seen occasionally where she > > > posts the scale and what each level corresponds to, and she follows the > > > general "one star=good through four star=outstanding" scale -- or so she > > > claims. I know this is silly and petty, but I wanted to see if it drove > > > anyone else crazy. She'll talk about a restaurant having really good > > > dishes and then problems she found in other dishes, and STILL assign 3 > > > 1/2 stars or 4 stars. In fact, the only time I've seen two stars is when > > > she reviews a diner. A diner getting two stars from any respectable > > > reviewer damn well better be a hell of a diner. And 3 1/2 stars really > > > shouldn't go to a restaurant when the preceding review says things like, > > > "the chicken was wonderful, but too bad they used canned vegetables on > > > the side." > > > > > > It is as if she doesn't want to hurt feelings or else she thinks PGH is > > > not sophisticated enough to understand what the ratings mean. > > > Understanding the obvious response to the last statement, I suggest she > > > post the rating scale on every review, as most major papers do, so that > > > the less sophisticated reader understands that one star still means > > > "good." If a New Yorker were to comb the past reviews, they'd think we > > > have an awful lot of Nobu contenders, what with all the three and four > > > star ratings PGH restaurants get. > > > > > > OK, I'm done ranting. Just wondering if it got on anyone else's nerves > > > the way it gets on mine. > > > > > > > > >
Pittsburgh, PA