MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin
Guide MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), By Michelin will always give you favorable worth if you do it well. Completing guide MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), By Michelin to check out will certainly not end up being the only objective. The objective is by getting the positive worth from the book till the end of guide. This is why; you should find out more while reading this MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), By Michelin This is not just how fast you check out a publication and not just has the amount of you completed the books; it is about what you have acquired from the books.
MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin
Free Ebook MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin
For carefully researched, objective recommendations to more than 450 scrumptious restaurants, representing more than 40 different cuisines, MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country, celebrating its tenth annual edition, is the go-to source for locals and travelers looking for great places to eat. The MICHELIN Guide pleases all palates and pocketbooks. Local, anonymous, professional inspectors use the renowned Michelin food star rating system to create the restaurant selection. All restaurants are recommended, so readers can feel confident in their choices.
MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin- Amazon Sales Rank: #69324 in Books
- Published on: 2015-10-22
- Released on: 2015-10-22
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 7.58" h x .65" w x 4.48" l, .0 pounds
- Binding: Paperback
- 408 pages
Where to Download MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin
Most helpful customer reviews
13 of 13 people found the following review helpful. Diligent, independent, useful. Editing still needs work. By Max W. Hauser I've bought and used each edition of this Bay-Area Guide, and I checked them all while writing this. (I've voraciously read and saved Bay-Area restaurant criticism since the 1970s, and occasionally written it for print.) I've also used other US Michelins, and earlier (before US editions started) used them in Europe where Michelin is a social institution, much relied on. I know a few of this edition's reviewed restaurants intimately (from many more visits than Michelin's inspectors), which affords some checking on the Guide's reviews.First thing to be aware of: Most of the Michelin's value, or substance, to diners isn't visible in the sub-lists of restaurant names singled out for rare praise ("stars") or value favorites ("Bib Gourmand"). Those lists come out as press releases in advance of each US Guide, to encourage buzz and sales. Yet the Guide's real content is the full reviews of its 500 or so recommended restaurants -- still a select group, a percent or two of the region's restaurant population, but far more numerous than you'd guess from just the "lists" (which don't even give their winners' justifying reviews). The annual Autumn public discussion of each new star and bib-gourmand list occurs mainly among people who don't actually buy the Guide, use it for restaurant information, or even know about most of its content.Strengths and weaknesses in this 2016 edition and the Bay-Area Michelins generally:• The US Michelins' research methods (detailed some years ago in the New Yorker article "Interview with 'M'") yield concise independent assessments of high objective quality. They aren't perfect, they make gaffes of detail (examples below), but they're good at spotting what a restaurant is about, and what's most important for diners to know. Being independent, the Guide lacks the interest conflict facing news media that also sell advertising to restaurants. And very unlike online crowd-sourced criticism, Michelin inspectors hold professional culinary credentials, are tested for abilities to identify ingredients and capture details without taking notes during the meal, and can't tell people they do it (especially not their parents -- deemed a security risk when the NYC guide began, given the parental boast instinct). Restaurants often get multiple inspection visits, and if they're star candidates, multiple tables per visit.• The reviews can be incisive. One quiet Chinese restaurant I know got justly wider notice after a cuisine-knowledgeable Michelin recommendation identified its kitchen's unusual regional specialization, and suggested good regional dishes the general public might not otherwise think to order. (Contrast that critical discernment with another Chinese restaurant example I know, also with appealing uncommon regional specialties, but written up on Y*lp. Only 2 of 200 commenters there even noticed the regional cuisine.)• As the previous point illustrates, the Guide's practical utility can include finding exceptional but less-famous restaurants. Unless you're a diner motivated by boasting rights, it's helpful to learn of great restaurants before everyone's heard of them -- which can bring higher prices, and crowds that go there because everyone else goes there (unlike Yogi Berra or me -- and we had a favorite restaurant in common, but that's a long story). In this role, I've found the US Michelins less useful than their European prototypes, whose longer-term local knowledge and more nuanced shorthand symbol set could signal great but unpolished talent, or restaurants en route to star status. The SF Michelin bestows some stars on new restaurants at their first appearance in it; other times, Bib-Gourmand status prefigures a star (possibly the US star-watch equivalent of those articulate European Michelin symbol codes). Still, many restaurants later "starred" appeared first in the SF Guide simply recommended, with promising reviews -- a source completely off the radar of those who know of the Michelin only through its published star lists.• Michelin's own radar has limits too. Any review publication doing its own research must screen which candidates to inspect for possible recommendation. I believe that given greater inspection resources, the Guide would find more restaurants Michelin-worthy that it now misses. When the first SF edition appeared, some of us locals wondered publicly about omissions that seemed obvious to us, from experience with those restaurants; the Guide concurred, adding them the next year. Likewise, its selections are seldom true "finds," in that most were already lauded by bloggers and journalists. I don't know if that's where Michelin gets its candidates, but such an approach would risk an information inbreeding I'll dub the Zagat Syndrome: recommending just restaurants everyone else already likes. (The Zagat method, a public popularity poll, inherently favors places widely known -- an approach that works against spotting emerging talents.) I've also noticed far more good low-priced options even among Michelin's recommended restaurants than the Bib-Gourmand lists reveal.• Its ten editions have variously divided up the Bay-Area map, but they seem to allocate separate quotas of total recommendees to SF proper, East Bay, North Bay, etc. I've noticed enthusiastically recommended restaurants abruptly dropped the next year, though the restaurant experience didn't change, or even improved. Other restaurants in the same subregion took their place. This implies that local competition guides the Guide's inclusions, rather than absolute quality criteria.• Gaffes about local detail, or from an overreaching glibness, are traditions in the SF-area Michelin, and constitute its greatest weakness in my view. When the first west-coast Michelins appeared for SF and LA, each region's leading newspaper (itself a competing source of restaurant criticism) rushed to crow about mistakes in this publication that trades so much on its research. 2016-edition goofs I noticed just around silicon valley: In no sense is California Ave. "Palo Alto's main thoroughfare" (p. 277): it's the business street of a neighborhood (formerly Mayfield township), P. A.'s de-facto secondary downtown after University Ave.'s (and neither avenue traverses the town like El Camino, Alma, or Middlefield). The Village Pub's cuisine is "surprisingly" approachable (including sausage plates and hamburgers) only if you fail to mention that combining pub food with high-end dining is its longtime hallmark. One restaurant is less a "go-to spot for local tech types" (the sort of go-to cliché we silicon-valley diners see way too often) than for the hundreds of workers in the law-office building whose ground floor and plaza it commands. Why characterize as "Californian" an Austrian restaurant's dish based on Spätzle, cheese, wild mushrooms, and smoked chicken when similar combinations are mainstream comfort food in Central Europe? The Guide carefully accents European words like Spätzle, façade, and crème brûlée, yet is careless with corresponding Asian diacritical marks, constantly mis-spelling the Vietnamese noodle soup as "pho." The Vietnamese vowel isn't o but ở (a "long schwa," pronounced like variations on "uh"). Therefore, this Guide both uses accent marks unreliably, and also propagates a complacent error that has encouraged Americans to mispronounce phở as "foe." Indeed its editors tend to rehash Current Critic Cliché-ese right from the textbook. Did they not realize that the de-transitivized verb in "the food doesn't disappoint" is a fad cliché usage that lightweight journalistic critics all started copying from each other a few years back, making it virtually their signature? Such an institution as the Michelin Guide deserves more perceptive editing.I'd wish for a more down-to-earth descriptive tone, fewer of the sometimes grating attempts at flourishes. But I still buy it for its restaurant information.
0 of 1 people found the following review helpful. Less useful than the European editions or customer curated guides. By Amazon Junkie Less useful than the European editions or customer curated guides. Used Michelin guides throughout Europe and the UK, but the domestic US guides have less information and fewer restaurants for a given area. Also disappointed that the Bay Area guide does not extend to the full East Bay and, particularly, the Tri-Valley (Livermore, etc.) wine region... one of the truly historic wine regions in California. And, there are now some pretty good chefs and restaurants in the area. Michelin reviewers appear to not fully grasp the west coast food scene.
0 of 1 people found the following review helpful. Michelin guide still offers serious eaters value even in the age of social media By DadofTwo It's the Michelin Guide! Combined with a Amex gift card large enough for two people to go out on ($200? $250)---makes a great gift.
See all 3 customer reviews... MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by MichelinMICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin PDF
MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin iBooks
MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin ePub
MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin rtf
MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin AZW
MICHELIN Guide San Francisco 2016: Bay Area & Wine Country (Michelin Guide/Michelin), by Michelin Kindle
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar