JLenart wrote:Why are everyones undies so tight around here lately. First the whole "Offensive terms" thing now this.

Can't we please focus on the food and establishments?

I think this is an example of the only-middle-of-January-lots-of-annoying-winter-still-ahead dynamic.

My 2 experiences at Les Nomades were both great but probably too long ago to be comparable to recent ones.

=R=

Darren72 wrote:

aschie30 wrote:I disagree. In addition to the information about food and service, these are the type of honest impressions that I look for in any LTH review. In fact, it comports with my understanding of the clientele at that place and what others have told me about it. Yes, it's a generalization, but so what? I think we all understand that it's just a generalization and take it for what it is.

I wasn't complaining that it was a generalization per se. That's obviously a big part of what we do here. I was complaining that this particular generalization seems to be based on little very little evidence.

Darren-

This is DML's work product. Who am I, or anyone else, for that matter, to cherry-pick his phrases, judge that it diminishes from his review in general and then demand that he cough up evidence to support his statements? He's giving us his impressions - let's leave it at that. There's way too much oversensitivity on this board lately, IMHO. Let's all take a deep breath lest it lead to a chilling effect.

Darren72 wrote:I have many relatives who are loud, older, and wear fur. But they know good food. When they dislike the food or service at a particular restaurant, they don't become any less old or less loud (and they certainly don't pick their outwear based on the quality of the service).

Perhaps this is the reason for your reaction? I, too, know fur-wearing people (which matches quite nicely the multiple face and eye lifts -- sorry, not kidding there). But so what? They're great people, although a tad stereotypical, I admit. Whether or not they know good food depends on the day and their mood. But I get it. It's just a stereotype.

Christopher Gordon wrote:

JLenart wrote:Why are everyones undies so tight around here lately. First the whole "Offensive terms" thing now this.

Can't we please focus on the food and establishments?

Agreed. What is this? Antioch in the early-90's?


This BS PC virus rampaging thru the forum will hopefully run it's course. I prescribe Absinthe(now! fresh! legal! hip!) and foie.

oy veh

It should be clear that none of the contributors in this thread were expressing offense.

aschie30 wrote:

Darren72 wrote:

aschie30 wrote:I disagree. In addition to the information about food and service, these are the type of honest impressions that I look for in any LTH review. In fact, it comports with my understanding of the clientele at that place and what others have told me about it. Yes, it's a generalization, but so what? I think we all understand that it's just a generalization and take it for what it is.

I wasn't complaining that it was a generalization per se. That's obviously a big part of what we do here. I was complaining that this particular generalization seems to be based on little very little evidence.

Darren-

This is DML's work product. Who am I, or anyone else, for that matter, to cherry-pick his phrases, judge that it diminishes from his review in general and then demand that he cough up evidence to support his statements? He's giving us his impressions - let's leave it at that. There's way too much oversensitivity on this board lately, IMHO. Let's all take a deep breath lest it lead to a chilling effect.

Aschie, frankly I have no idea what you are talking about. Oversensitivity?

Can you point to where I demanded he cough up evidence? You've mischaracterized the point I was trying to me.

Look, it was a really useful review. I went to Les Nomad a number of years ago and had been meaning to return. Based on this review, I'm not sure it's worth my time. But the point of having a discussion board is that we discuss stuff. If someone wants to speculate on the opinions of other diners, that's fine. But I don't think it should be off limits to inquire how the OP arrived at those judgments.

aschie30 wrote:

Darren72 wrote:I have many relatives who are loud, older, and wear fur. But they know good food. When they dislike the food or service at a particular restaurant, they don't become any less old or less loud (and they certainly don't pick their outwear based on the quality of the service).

Perhaps this is the reason for your reaction? I, too, know fur-wearing people (which matches quite nicely the multiple face and eye lifts -- sorry, not kidding there). But so what? They're great people, although a tad stereotypical, I admit. Whether or not they know good food depends on the day and their mood. But I get it. It's just a stereotype.

I think you've missed my point. I wasn't trying to defend the good name of my relatives by bringing them up. I was trying to give the OP a counter example and suggest that if the food and service at Les Nomads was better, I am not sure the clientele he and his wife experienced would have been any less noisy.

Darren72 wrote:
It should be clear that none of the contributors in this thread were expressing offense.

Really? Perhapsd I misunderstood.

Darren72 wrote:
Although I understand the type of people who you are talking about, I'm not sure how you could make such a judgment. This is a really a sweeping generalization based on (presumably) a limited number of people at the restaurant on one particular night. Maybe they were similarly disappointed in the restaurant.

I'm not disagreeing that this may be the crowd Les Nomads attracts. But I think adding this bit to your review (and including it in the title) detracts from an otherwise excellent review.

if I did misunderstand I appologize.

LTHForum the Chicago - based culinary chat site

Darren72 wrote:

aschie30 wrote:

Darren72 wrote:

aschie30 wrote:I disagree. In addition to the information about food and service, these are the type of honest impressions that I look for in any LTH review. In fact, it comports with my understanding of the clientele at that place and what others have told me about it. Yes, it's a generalization, but so what? I think we all understand that it's just a generalization and take it for what it is.

I wasn't complaining that it was a generalization per se. That's obviously a big part of what we do here. I was complaining that this particular generalization seems to be based on little very little evidence.

Darren-

This is DML's work product. Who am I, or anyone else, for that matter, to cherry-pick his phrases, judge that it diminishes from his review in general and then demand that he cough up evidence to support his statements? He's giving us his impressions - let's leave it at that. There's way too much oversensitivity on this board lately, IMHO. Let's all take a deep breath lest it lead to a chilling effect.

Aschie, frankly I have no idea what you are talking about. Oversensitivity?

Can you point to where I demanded he cough up evidence? You've mischaracterized the point I was trying to me.

Then I must have misunderstood you. My apologies.

For the record -- I took no offense to any of the comments on my review.

Maybe I just like to argue, but I found the discussion of my review interesting and entertaining.

I thank the people for their comments and strongly encourage them to make similar comments in the future.

DML wrote:one of the main rules for fine dining: Never dine at a place with great views.

On our honeymoon in Wailea a few years ago we were those people who fell for the "gourmet" private dinner on the beach scam that is so heavily advertised there. The view, obviously, was spectacular and there were actually whales breaching off in the distance. The food, however, was comically bad. We could have brought a blanket, a box of Hamburger Helper, and a box of Franzia (not that there's anything wrong with those) and saved the $400.

HB wrote:

DML wrote:one of the main rules for fine dining: Never dine at a place with great views.

On our honeymoon in Wailea a few years ago we were those people who fell for the "gourmet" private dinner on the beach scam that is so heavily advertised there. The view, obviously, was spectacular and there were actually whales breaching off in the distance. The food, however, was comically bad. We could have brought a blanket, a box of Hamburger Helper, and a box of Franzia (not that there's anything wrong with those) and saved the $400.

One the best meals we ate was fish tacos off the Jawz truck parked in Makena. We ended up taking it back to our resort and having a picnic in the FS gardens.

I know that FS charges like $800 for the "ultimate romantic dinner" which is a private meal with great views. We've never seen the point. Capische and Ferraro's (very good food, outstanding service, and about 20 yards from the beach) both cost about $300 for dinner for two.

To get back to the point -- In Chicago, Spiaggia and Everest may be the only two places that have both great views and great food. I can't think of any others.

DML wrote:To get back to the point -- In Chicago, Spiaggia and Everest may be the only two places that have both great views and great food. I can't think of any others.

NoMi

DML wrote:
To get back to the point -- In Chicago, Spiaggia and Everest may be the only two places that have both great views and great food. I can't think of any others.

Huh. I thought the food and the view at North Pond both quite good. But that's obviously just my opinion.

Disclaimer - I'm not named Chad (or Trixie), don't own any fur, and am pretty poor at accounting . . . though after a few drinks I am told I do tend to talk a bit loudly.

Kman wrote:Huh. I thought the food and the view at North Pond both quite good. But that's obviously just my opinion.

Absolutely, another one added to the list.

There has to be more than four...........

There are a few with decent views, but they would never be destinations if they had average food. Four Seasons Dining Room and Avenues come to mind in that category, as does Cafe Spiaggia.

The views at Spiaggia, NoMi, and Everest are spectacular. Even without first class food, those places would probably do great.

Aside from Spiaggia and North Pond, the only other place with a view that I have patronized was The Pinnacle, the rotating restaurant that used to be atop a Holiday Inn somewhere. This was homecoming, 1987. I had the filet, the lady the lobster. In researching whether it still exists, I found that 2 of every three restaurants calls itself the pinnacle of ______ in Chicago. Then there's Les Nomades, about which Sherman Kaplan said: "Les Nomades remains one of a dwindling handful of French restaurants in Chicago at the very pinnacle of consequence." There is no higher compliment for anything or anyone.

A brief update:

After reading an outstanding review of Les Nomades, my wife and I returned on Friday. It definitely seemed that the food has improved. It still has a lot of traditional influences, but what was put on the plate worked extremely well. Unlike our last visit, this time the food really was exceptional. The scallops with lentils stand out, but each course was a joy.

The clientele on the other hand has not changed. I just don't understand it. I've seen more loud rude people there than in any similar place. This time, it was a loud table of four featuring a monlogue (complete with interruption to answer her loudly ringing cell phone) but one guest. They were bad enough that we almost considered asking moving from our upstairs table to a downstairs table

The service was not what I had hoped for. Plates were placed perfectly in unison, water glasses filled promptly and unobtrusively, no one hovered, and many little things were done exactly right. However, our server was impersonal to a fault. As dishes were presented, he recited components in a cursory fashion (not counting the courses he didn’t bother to do even that) and his lack of warmth simply didn’t invite queries, much less conversation.

I start off with a precis of our only real criticism because the rest of this review will sound a completely different note. The meal we had at Les Nomades two days ago was the best meal I’ve had this year, bar none. Probably in the top three or four meals I’ve had in Chicago in twenty-five years. Presentation, execution, appeal, taste...it was that good.

Lord knows that wasn’t my expectation going in. I last ate at Les Nomades about a dozen years ago, perhaps a year or two after Mary Beth Liccioni opened it to the public in the mid-1990s. I don’t remember much about that meal, though, save for the room.

I would never have thought to choose Les Nomades. It was not on my radar. But then, this was my birthday dinner and the Lovely Dining Companion chose and told me at the last moment. I’ve learned to trust her judgment. Ignoring my vigorously professed lack of interest in Alinea, she went ahead and took us to dinner there a few years ago. And so I’ve learned to trust her judgment. She knows my tastes better than I do.

We went to Les Nomades Saturday night without many preconceptions. We were taken upstairs, a smaller, darker, quieter room. Given the restaurant’s reputation (at least its one-time reputation) for serving a specific older, moneyed, clientele, I was surprised that most of the diners (at least upstairs) were in their 30s-50s. We were a bit dismayed to find that on a Saturday night the restaurant was, at most, three-quarters full. The lighting—at least upstairs—is subdued and the sound level is (in Phil Vettel’s word) hushed. Quite. The food is French, classic with a modern twist. Old-fashioned as only a 36-year-old chef (Chris Nugent) could make it. Well, lemme tell you: for all its old-school touches, this is not your father’s Les Nomades. Not by any stretch of the imagination. At least not to judge by our experience.

The menu is not extensive: six appetizers, four first courses. Then a choice of two fish or six meats. And yet eleven desserts. You also have a choice of four courses for $115 or five courses for $130. (There is also a chef’s tasting for $165 and boy, am I sorely tempted.) We both opted for the four-courses.

A few notes: we have no photographs because the menu, at the very bottom, requests that diners not use cell phones, cameras, and so forth. In keeping with the distinctively genteel atmosphere, I decided that the least I could do was to simply honor the request without quibbling. So I did, though I am terribly sorry not to have pictures.

Bread service was a bit disappointing. Particularly when compared to, say, L2O. The bread was very good and enjoyable, but it clearly isn’t accorded the same extraordinary attention that it is at a few other places. It would have been nice, too, if the bread hadn’t simply been placed on the table. Perhaps someone might have taken a moment to describe to us what the different breads were. But no one bothered. Disappointing and in keeping with the somewhat disengaged service.

Still, we didn’t go for the bread service and, whatever our issues with that portion of our experience, you won’t hear a peep from me about the dinner. Not a single plate presented to us was less than stunning. Each was beautifully composed, designed with care, thought, and precision. Colors, textures, shapes, and sizes all worked to compose highly attractive plates, inviting—indeed, demanding—that you dig in.

Dinner began on a high note: the amuse was roasted corn soup with a cheese-filled “crouton.” Impossibly rich, every nuance of the corn brought out, sweet as only perfectly ripe corn can be, a portion generous enough to enjoy without being too filling for what followed.

LDC began with “Herb roasted Maine lobster, Chantenay carrot purée, sugar snap peas, Madras curry natural jus.” (FWIW, a $10 upcharge.) I was generously allowed a single bite. Had it been my dish, I wouldn’t have been so generous. Impossibly rich and unctuous, set off nicely by the sharp sweetness of the peas, the curry jus a nice foil.

I chose the “Roasted veal sweetbreads, Spanish chorizo, smoked paprika and potato.” That hardly begins to describe this dish. Served with “potato.” “Potato” meant potato three ways: an ethereally light football-shaped potato puff (or, more precisely, pommes soufflés) atop perfectly crisped veal sweetbreads. The sweetbreads, in turn, rested on confit potato rings baked in duck fat with a bit of garlic and thyme. Oh, did I mention that the potato rings were filled with Spanish chorizo? To the side, a beautiful design of whipped potato and veal reduction. The sweetbreads were dressed with a bit of sauce Foyot (tarragon and tomato paste which, though it may sound like a strange pairing, worked beautifully). Oh, and veal reduction also drizzled over the entire creation. (You can find the recipe, complete with small photograph, online.)

These appetizers were stunning in every possible way. The performance was perfect. We were quite impressed and a bit anxious about what would follow. I could not imagine the entire dinner being sustained at this level.

I was wrong. And I have rarely been so happy to be so wrong. Next course: for the LDC, “Roasted Heirloom Tomato Soup, provençal vegetables, shrimp, goat cheese.” For a variety of reasons, I would not have selected the soup, so my impressions of it are a bit skewed. I liked it; indeed, it was again beautifully presented and offered a surprising depth of flavors. Most attractive of all was the freshness that burst through in a cooked soup. In the end, though, impressive as it was, I was pleased to have my choice: “Crispy farm egg, asparagus, morel mushroom, parmesan and Iberico ham.” Once again, an enticing, wonderfully composed presentation. A bed of perfectly poached white and green asparagus, atop which sat the egg—poached then breaded and very lightly crisped. Just enough to give it a crunch. That crunch, followed by the oozing yolk—a delight. To then top this all with a bit of morels, Spanish ham, and a few slices of parmesan. The only issue was composing each forkful so that a bit of everything made it to my mouth. We should all have such challenges.

The main courses: “Sautéed Kona Kampachi with sunchoke purée, Tokyo turnips, leeks, preserved truffle, langoustine jus.” A single bite was sufficient to convince me that I would have been equally happy with this entrée as my own. Cooked precisely, the fish came through beautifully, with accompaniments that truly accompanied. There were just a few other flavors but they complemented the fish, letting the fish be the star. With the possible exception of the jus. That jus was finger-licking good and had it been my plate, the kitchen wouldn’t have had to wash it. Rich, velvety, intense...as plush a sauce as I’ve had. And again, in the service of the kampachi. (By the way, what are “Tokyo” turnips? That’s a new one to us.)

I had “Veal tenderloin, wild mushroom ragoût, pommes purée, preserved lemon, sauce Périgueux.” Three slices of tenderloin each nestling atop a different bed. Given my enthusiasm for everything preceding, I think it best to say merely that this dish was lovely in every way. From the presentation to the execution, from the description to the tasting. There was not a single thing I would change. It was exceptional and I loved it.

Dessert was on a par with what preceded it in every way: beautiful presentations, exceptional food. LDC had a trio of crème brûlée: vanilla, chocolate, and passionfruit. While we agreed that chocolate doesn’t lend itself (at least to our palates) to crème brulee, there was no arguing with the execution. My fresh apple tart with green apple sorbet had to be pre-ordered. I love apple tarts in all their many varieties and incarnations and have had more than my share at some pretty fancy places over the years. While I’ve had a few that measured up in terms of quality, I can honestly say I’ve never had a better one than I did last night. Magnificent.

I think it only fair to return a moment to the service. It was not without faults. I ordered a glass of wine; LDC doesn’t drink alcohol. Her wine glass was removed. Did anyone take a moment to ask what she would like to drink? Does Les Nomades have only wine or water? I don’t think this is a nitpick. The mignardises were set down without a word—no identification, nary a word. Whether a server is warm or not is a matter of personal interaction and other imponderables. We found our server too cool. We can live with that. But I fault him for his presentation of the dishes. Don’t repeat what the menu says. Tell me what’s here, please. And for god’s sake, don’t present a dish and walk away. That happened at least once. I may not be a regular, I may not be spending hundreds of dollars on wine and I may not be your idea of the ideal customer. But let’s pretend, okay?

Phil Vettel recently commented that “the default mode is reserved.” I think it’s a bit more than that. I think the default mode is disengaged. Professional, highly experienced, precise and correct. And disengaged. Expertise is a wonderful thing, but a little human warmth goes a long way and I only ever felt that we received that humanity from the staff who filled the water glasses and those who whisked away our empty plates. Even in those small tasks, they looked at us, engaged us however briefly, and smiled. They established a human connection that we never felt with our server. And that’s too bad. When a restaurant aspires to and meets such high standards in other respects, this is a fault.

When I first wrote this post, I was concerned that I might be being a bit overenthusiastic. But it has been several days now and I am not a whit less enchanted. While the evening wasn’t perfect (as our complaints with the service attest), I am truly hard-pressed to find fault with a single dish. As I look back on the meal and think about each course, I wonder to myself, “what would I wish had been done differently/better/another way?” I can’t think of a thing. I don’t know that anyone reading this post will have the same experience we had; we can only hope so. Good luck!

We went to Les Nomades a few weeks ago and were really impressed. The half-empty dining room was a disappointing sight based on the quality of the dinner that we enjoyed.

I won't go blow by blow on what we ate since most of it was actually pretty similar to what was in the meal that Gypsy Boy posted above. Disappointing since our meals were almost a year apart, but I don't think Les Nomades is a place you go to every week.

Anyway, some standouts from our meal included any soup that was brought to the table (roasted carrot, roasted corn, duck consomme...all fantastic), housemade pates, and some perfectly cooked fish preparations. The attention to detail in the cooking was evident on each plate, with meticulously prepared vegetables showing off just how much care the kitchen takes with everything sent out. Just about every plate was built on a foundation of old school, really solid French cooking. The dishes themselves, though, were certainly contemporary and not "stodgy" at all.

Service was as it should be at this price-point. Based on this one dinner alone, I would say that Les Nomades deserves to be in the very top tier of Chicago restaurants...right there with the likes of Alinea, Avenues, etc.

Anyway....the wife and I went last night and Les Nomades exceeded our expectations. We both had the 5-course prix fixe. We both ordered differently, so 10 different dishes...11 if you count the amuse. All were outstanding. Service was very good, but not perfect (had to ask for a coffee refill). Downstairs is a very small, romantic room. The place is very French, just needed a little cigarette smoke. If you are a Francophile, you have to come here at least once. If you go the whole nine yards, dinner is going to be in the $500-$600 range for two.

BTW, furs or boors were in absence among the decidedly older crowd.

Les Nomades has been around 32 years, hopefully it will be around a bit longer.

I had been aware of Les Nomades from as as early as I could read the dining section of the Chicago Magazine that sat on my parents' coffee table growing up, but I was never moved to make a reservation there until the Chicago Tribune announced that the eight year tenure of cuisinier Chris Nugent would be ending on November 5. So at the next available opportunity, my partner and I cabbed it down to the townhouse on Ontario Street for what we thought would be a study in culinary, though tasty, camp. It turned out to be lovely experience all around.

We were greeted warmly by the venerable Mary Beth Liccioni and led to our two top on the first floor. Given the fact that it was likely that we wouldn't be back for a while, we decided to go nearly whole hog with both a fish and a meat course, with pairings, five courses in all--apparently, though, there is an off-menu 12 course degustation available, as well an abbreviated three course menu upon request. Given the preponderance of eight or 10 or 16 or 21 course menus around town, we thought we could handle a measly five. It turned out, though, because Nugent cooks with things like butter and cream rather than tapioca maltodextrin, we had to be wheeled out of the restaurant at the conclusion of the evening.

I won't go on at length about the food given that the chef will change next week, but all of it was of extremely high quality and deftly executed. In true French style, the highlight of the meal was the series of complex and deeply-flavored sauces, which accompanied a selection of familiar yet perfectly cooked proteins ranging from lobster and scallops to venison and duck. My sole two complaints: nearly everything could have been slightly warmer, and it seemed strange that there were only two fish selections available, while one could chose from an exhaustive list of more than ten desserts!

Given the fact that the menu warned diners to speak in subdued tones and to keep cell phones and cameras at bay, I had been expecting a rather comatose atmosphere, as well as a rather elderly set of fellow diners. It turns out that only the latter was the case. When we arrived at 8:30 (we were the next to last table to be seated that evening!) the room was quite lively, but not exactly filled with People Like Us. In a restaurant filled with jacket-sporting fifty- to seventy-somethings celebrating a special night out, the highlight of the evening was when Ms. Liccioni disapprovingly declined to take a photograph of the giddy sextogenarian couple on their second date. I was surprised that she allowed one of her minions to capture the memorable scene for posterity just moments later. In all, the service was very well choreographed and the room (the downstairs room, at least), was elegant yet relaxed, although it might have benefitted from a little attention, as the cobwebs in the chandelier attest.

Throughout the evening, and particularly as I giddily shoveled a deflating Grand Marnier soufflé into my mouth, I couldn't help but ask myself why people don't dine like this anymore. When I fell asleep on the couch twenty minutes later, lulled into a dull, eleven-hour slumber by a month's worth of saturated fat and wine, I was reminded why.

We went for our anniversary last month and had a great time. Food trended very good, with a couple of breathtaking dishes (mussel soup, veal in sauce Périgueux). The atmosphere is sedate but hardly stodgy. Service was impeccable, and the wine list is an absolute treasure. I was sorry to hear that Nugent is leaving, but excited that his new place is apparently BYO...I've already earmarked a couple bottles from our last trip to France.

Penny Pollack is reporting (tweeting) that Roland Liccioni returns to LesNomadesChi starting this Tuesday, Nov 8.

Edited to add: Apparently I've spent a lot of time dining and writing about this place, with varying success. I've had some outstanding meals (12/31/99), some not so outstanding (the one that started this thread) and later more outstanding meals. In any case, I know there is at least one more thread on the place that I started (Anybody Been to Les Nomades Recently?). I don't know how difficult it would be to combine them, but if it is relatively easy it might be a good idea. My bad on starting two different threads on the same place.

Edited a second time to add: Thanks for combining all three, Cathy!

Went on Nugent's last day and he confirmed the same. Food was excellent, service was formal and mostly well done, and Chef came up to chat with us afterwards - tell us about his new place and the like. I'll be interested to check out the tasting once they are up and running.

http://endoedibles.com

Does anyone have any recent experiences at Les Nomades? My parents are looking at this restaurant for an upcoming dinner. (They've been here before and are familiar with the formalities such as jacket required; we'd just love some recent feedback on the food.) Many thanks!

I was there in early-mid December. I thought the food was excellent. The foie and souffle were definitely the standout courses of the night. I had the 4 courses, while the rest of the table had 3... (Judge away!) and I was stuffed when I left. The food is definitely rich. I had the foie as my first course, the lobster salad 2nd, duck 3rd and souffle 4th. Service was attentive and excellent.

I think the next time I go, I will have the 3 courses with foie, foie and souffle...

Thank you. I've had both the foie and the souffle there, and you're right-- why not make the entire meal out of them? Glad to hear everything is still top-notch.

looking for a venue for the annual Christmas celebration with Mrs. Pursuit. Been a little tardy on making reservations somewhere, but this is available on the 23rd, our traditional dinner date. Anyone been lately? Other ideas?