But how many times do you want to eat that radicchio or beet?
On the other hand, I don’t think I could pass by without checking to see if there was a seat at the bar so I could get an order of rolls and butter.
1 Like
It’s a fair point. I don’t know that it’s a place I would want to make a part of my regular rotation. But I could certainly see myself dropping in here two to three times a year.
1 Like
What do you mean by this? Do you mean that you would not choose to order these dishes again? Why?
I was planning to order both of these.
order both of those as well as the potatoes
1 Like
Agree with many on the thread. All the veggies here are great
rolls
beets
radicchio
potatoes
sundae
1 Like
I had the radicchio and beet twice each. Great but I don’t know if I’ll want to order them again. Most of the other dishes I’ve had I wouldn’t order again and the ones I’m still curious about cost a fortune. They don’t change up the menu enough to give me much reason to go back. I’d like to try the chicken but what else would I order?
The potato sucked when I had it. David Chang said the same thing. There must be some execution issue.
1 Like
Is the menu much different in SF?
No.
the potato dish i believe is a little different. Up in the Bay Area, its one big potato, down here its cut up into 4 parts.
also from @PorkyBelly’s reports, there was another dish that they didn’t have down here. i forget what it was and I’m too lazy to add links and stuff.
The menus vary day to day depending on availability but they’re generally quite similar, and some of the standout dishes are identical. (Comparing the online sample menus is misleading as the LA one is from last June and the SF one is from January.) Biggest difference might be that SF is open for lunch.
I certainly encourage anyone who can afford it to eat there. I just wonder about the business model.
@Starchtrade… this is just my two cents and this is based on my one visit to SF Angler back in early January.
I suggest you start with some of the smaller bites and see how it goes and play by ear. The entrees (like the $80+ lobster) could be hit and miss and unfortunately the lobster was a huge miss for me. Grilled on embers and nicely medium rare, but dry and smokey to the point where it caused an aged Alsace Riesling Cuvee to become bitter and astringent. I looked at my mom and commented that lobster at the high end Cantonese seafood restaurant would have been a much better choice, she laughed and agreed with me…
A few of my very well traveled gourmet friends basically say the same thing…it’s a good place for a bang bang, great cocktails, small bites, and a nice but very pricey wine selection (LA might have more choices, not sure) but the food has been consistently mediocre when comparing it to other places. I find that Angler is a big hit with the younger crowd and is definitely a place to go to be seen. So if you love Saison, then you’ll likely find little fault with Angler.
The morphing of flavors from being Japanese centric to incorporating Chinese and Taiwanese flavors here and there, does not really improve nor add any nuance. The consomme that I had with cordyceps in SF was rather appalling and bland, at least the texture of the cordyceps was good…any competent Cantonese chef could have come up with a better soup stock (conpoy, Chinese ham, mature chicken) than what Angler provided.
The sundae is spectacular though, if that ends up being a lifesaver. That was the highlight of my visit. Granted I didn’t get the luxurious items that many here did for LA. And anyone can chalk it up to the fact that I ordered incorrectly, but I stand firm into thinking Angler is overhyped. I’m sure some SF Bay Area chefs think the same but they’re afraid to say it…not kosher to slam a place in public.
For what it’s worth, after having the raw clams and oysters at SF Angler, I thought Connie & Ted’s blew theirs away easy. But then again grass always greener in the South for certain things.
5 Likes
I didn’t love the mushrooms and broth, though I thought the broth was quite flavorful. It was more a texture issue with the mushroom. But the next day, I ate the leftovers cold straight from the fridge and the dish was wonderful!
1 Like
I find the level of execution at the LA location much better, which is something I don’t find myself often saying. The two times I’ve been to the SF location they were shockingly disappointing. Service is a complete 180 from LA and I just didn’t find the food to be as good as LA. Lobster for example in SF(Maine) was also a miss for me, but in LA(spiny) it is a highlight.
1 Like
Ahhh then SF Serigo < LA Sergio for Angler.
Thank you for sharing your perspective of the two locations!
Though that’s just too weird for this inconsistency of a known brand.
I just want to caveat this by saying ive not been yet but from listening to the Skenes visit to David Chang’s podcast that he brought many of his top lieutenants with him -maybe he didn’t leave as much support there as needed. Also he plans to open more so how does the quality stay in LA when they leave to open Angler Chicago (or where ever)?
Cost of living’s a lot more reasonable in LA, wouldn’t surprise me if a lot of SF’s staff decided to move given the chance.
I’m not sure the business model would work if they had to airfreight the live seafood.
yes the potato is different. sf also has scallops, swordfish, quail, and heirloom tomatoes. la has banana pancakes and caviar.
5 Likes
SF has had caviar with banana pancakes. LA has had heirloom tomatoes and swordfish (both seasonal).
word on the street is that Angler LA is hiring for a bunch of FOH and BOH positions. Not sure what that’s all about.
Hmm.