“Best” Sushi Worth Discussing?
Friday, September 29, 2006 9:56Someone asks about the best sushi in LA on a Chowhound post and the board erupts like a cage a poo-throwing monkeys!
Is this topic even worth discussing in such general terms? If Urasawa could somehow be proven as having the highest quality ingredients and prep, does its $500 price tag for a dinner for two bring it down a notch for all but those on unlimited expense accounts? I could do five dinners for the same price at Echigo and be very happy!
I like spicy tuna rolls and even wacky creative rolls. Is that not sushi? There are times when I want a dinner of pristine nigiri and other times when I’m in the mood for some avocado additions, and maybe even a little fake crab.
The issue seems to be that the term “sushi” covers a broad range of cuisine. While some people can not, or will not, fork over $100s for raw fish, others automatically discount any sushi joint that doesn’t require three references and a secret handshake to be “allowed” to sit at the bar.
There is no doubt in my mind that sushi is a true delicacy and that you mostly get what you pay for. But keep in mind that although there are customs and traditions associated with sushi, sushi serving, sushi serving and sushi chefs, it is not a centuries old institution:
The origins of sushi are in fact more Yo! than Nobu or Sawada. It was a street food, a working-class dish - as so often, haute cuisine borrowed and tarted up a staple of the poor. Modern sushi - in the sense of raw fish served on vinegared rice - began at a street-food stall in the city of Edo, now Tokyo, in 1824. The stall’s owner, Yohei Hanaya, was the first person to shape vinegared rice with his hands and then crown it with a slice of raw fish - prompted, it’s said, by impatient customers, who couldn’t be bothered to wait for the traditional pressing in a box.
Excerpted from How Sushi Ate the World.
So, dare I ask, what is the best sushi in Los Angeles? Do you judge purely on the merits of the fish, and if so, which fish is your “decider”? Do you prefer a sterile, silent service, or blaring reggae music and black lights? If you were having the last sushi meal of your life, where would you go, what would you order?
[update] Now a more civil thread has broken out about the “Best (Inexpensive) Sushi in LA”
By Jonah (see more of his posts). Jonah is the founder of la.foodblogging and also created Digesty, a food blog aggregator and Cheww.com, a spam free foodblog search engine.
Jonah says:
September 29th, 2006 at 3:38 pm
A few of my favorites:
Echigo: Probably the best value for the money. It’s not cheap, but not outrageously expensive. The fish is about as good as you can get and is served edo style, that is with warm rice.
Mori: Probably one of the nicest places that serves something “spicy”. They serve spicy tuna tacos, chopped spicy tuna on a wonton crisp. The miso black cod is awesome and apparentyl the rice is hulled on site to keep its moisture.
Sasabune (post move to Wilshire): Also edo style, but a bit more pricey than Echigo. Sasabune uses more different sauces that Echigo, but has similar quality fish. I ordered off the menu, but the Sasabune omakase has an esteemed reputation.
Hamakawa: One of my favorites, not just for the sushi, but for the whole menu of Japanese delights. Also the place where I was introduced to shishito peppers. The yellow tail nigiri and sahimi here is consistantly the best.
Zooma Sushi: Secluded in Malibu, just near Paradise Beach, Zooma serves tremendous original creations, without being too outrageous. Rumor has it, if you get sushi chef Toshi drunk enough, you may be treated to some Opera Singing…in German.
California Roll and Sushi Fish: Where I like to get my “creative” rolls and not have to drop a ton of cash. Not necessarily the best of the best, but a good value play.
Uzen: Another consistent option with fairly standard offerings. Share your favorite jokes with Mikami-san and you might find some goodies on your plate.
Jeff says:
September 30th, 2006 at 10:53 am
You’ve opened a can of worms Jonah, but I’ll
take a few nibbles:
I’m more for the sterile environment. If I’m going to enjoy a meal, I’d prefer not to have to shout in order to talk to my dinner mates.
Last meal would have to be the Hump for me. Been to Sasabune (at the new location) and wasn’t that impressed. It was like a conveyor belt. But the thing that did it for me at the Hump was the Oo-toro. I’ve never eaten anything more delicious in my life. It was eating butter. Simply amazing. I would just go there and order upon order of Oo-toro and then probably collapse from sheer joy.
gregory says:
October 1st, 2006 at 3:10 pm
“But keep in mind that although there are customs and traditions associated with sushi, sushi serving, sushi serving and sushi chefs, it is not a centuries old institution”
Unfortunately this angle of argument doesn’t hold water when someone wants to seriously discuss “the best sushi” anywhere, but especially in Los Angeles where there are plenty of mid-priced establishments that can satiate the desire for sushi that doesn’t involve some cheezy twist to cover up the fact the fish isn’t all that great and the sushi chefs just graduated locally at a sushi academy. According to the argument implied, someone could argue that the humble origin of the taco justifies Taco Bell’s bastardization of cultural cuisine. This is not to say that americanized/cross cultural interpretations can’t be delicious or a cuisine all their own, but just as most asians wince when someone mentions P.F. Chang’s during a discussion of good “chineseâ€? food, I’m going to lean toward the side of purists in this case, and continue to recommend places like Sushi Ike and Tama Sushi, where quality handpicked seafood is carefully handled and served with a nod to their humble beginnings all at a fair price. It’s not the age or history, its the care and context of how food is prepared. And I doubt many places blaring reggae music with black lights is all the concerned with the food itself.
In terms of a decider, I’ll mention my uncle’s recommendation: pick the saba (mackerel). If a sushi chef cannot handle that humble choice of fish, then it’s very unlikely he’s of any skill at working with more expensive choices such as hamachi, otoro or uni.
sneakypeteiii says:
October 1st, 2006 at 5:35 pm
Actually, I would argue for tamago (sweet egg) as a decider. If they know what they’re doing, the difference in quality is really like night and day.
Binkley says:
October 2nd, 2006 at 7:28 am
I have a Japanese friend who told me the same thing about tamago. He uses it to judge whenever he goes to a new sushi place.
MaxMillion says:
October 2nd, 2006 at 11:04 am
Well, how do you determine what is good tamago?? The sweetness factor? The texture? Any other criteria?
Although I gather that tamago is a skillfully made item, it seems an odd way to gauge a FISH chef…
Does anyone have any more details to divulge? Precisely what are we looking for when we judge a sushi place?
Gregory’s taco analogy was exemplary, btw.
Peter says:
October 2nd, 2006 at 12:33 pm
One indicator that I’ve been told to follow from close friend and sushi chef, is the rice. We all know that “sushi” refers to the rice and not the fish.
The rice should about body temperature. There should be a nice balance of vinegar and sweetness. My friend says he often has Japanese customers that ask to taste his sushi rice before they order.
My favorite sushi restaurant is located in Woodland Hills, it is called Erukamu.
Jonah says:
October 2nd, 2006 at 1:42 pm
I found a number of references to Tamago being used as a good way to judge a new sushi place, including from SushiFAQ:
sneakypeteiii says:
October 2nd, 2006 at 3:53 pm
When judging tamago I tend to look at texture (smooth and velvety on the inside), sweetness (complex and lingering, not a white sugar-type sharpness), and whether or not they serve it with rice (I never got it with rice in Japan).
Sometimes I’d rather have good tamago than most other fish (o-toro and hamachi excluded).