The Auswine Forum

Maybe I'm becoming a grumpy old man (or already one). Over the past few years I've noticed the amount of food on a restaurant plate seems to be getting smaller to the point where some mains are almost the size of the old entrees. A lot of effort goes into presentation but volume is tiny. Is this being done to make sure we have at least 3 courses? Recently in Margaret River (Voyager Estate restaurant) an entree billed as grilled sardine salad had what looked like no more than 3 (maybe 4) tiny sized and a few salad items. About 3 mouthfuls in all. The mains were very small and after dessert I could have eaten the whole lot again.

We are going to the US in Sept/Oct for 6 weeks and I've decided to go for good quality diners that serve healthy portions of wholesome food. Ideas are coming from the TV show Diners, Drive-ins and Dives. We may come back carrying a little extra weight but at least we will be well fed.

Anyone else experiencing the same issue?

Carl

I think food portions are getting smaller at fancy or 'in' restaurants. Theres a whole lot of wierd and wow presentations and a big move to share plates too. I prefer the family style places with big portions and byo.

But I mostly have preferred to eat at home. I love cooking, its often better than restaurants and you get to drink better wine per $.

I think we are seeing a bifurcation of serving sizes. In pub-style venues the serves are approaching American-sized servings. While at the fancy cuisine wankery venues the sizes are diminishing. Hopefully some middle ground will survive!!

Cheers

Michael

Cactus wrote: But I mostly have preferred to eat at home ... its (sometimes) better than restaurants ... and you get to drink better wine per $.

My sentiments exactly................Mahmoud.

So much better to stay at home and do my own cooking after either harvesting from my own veggie / herb garden and buying fresh ingredients from local markets. Love opening a nice wine to enjoy while I am preparing and cooking the dinner with music on while looking out to the garden from the kitchen.
Last one was a slow cooked crispy skinned duck with a bottle of 14 Timo Mayer Pinot - Superb.

Chuck wrote:We are going to the US in Sept/Oct for 6 weeks and I've decided to go for good quality diners that serve healthy portions of wholesome food. Ideas are coming from the TV show Diners, Drive-ins and Dives. We may come back carrying a little extra weight but at least we will be well fed.

Carl

Another show to check out before you go is Man vs Food. Each episode seems to revolve around some form of food challenge (biggest, hottest etc) but in each location he reviews some of the most iconic eateries before heading to the restaurant with the challenge and its these places, I found were worth knowing. Enjoy.

I don't mind smaller portions...I like a lot of different things rather than a lot of one thing.

The US portions are obnoxiously big....You get used to not finishing and taking the rest home..the problem is you often sit there and eat more than you need to because it is there...

Lotsa great little diners and stuff..and the Internet has really helped more pop up and stay in business...should be a fun trip..

Cactus wrote:
But I mostly have preferred to eat at home. I love cooking, its often better than restaurants and you get to drink better wine per $.

+1. Better bang for your buck. And for anyone living in Adelaide we tried the Sneaky Pickle restaurant last night. Cheap and cheerful US diner experience with pulled pork and brisket and slaw burgers washed down with a fine US pale ale. Chilli chips with cheeze sauce and beans to start with. Real artery hardening stuff but great tasting and satisfying on a chilly night. Goodwood road Kings Park. Replaced the adult toy shop just past the railway underpass if you knew where that was.

And it's comfort food time so Saturday will be Ozzo Bucco or lamb shanks and a fine bottle of aged cabernet. What more could you want.

Maybe we should start a winter comfort food thread.

Carl

Chuck wrote:

Cactus wrote:
But I mostly have preferred to eat at home. I love cooking, its often better than restaurants and you get to drink better wine per $.

+1. Better bang for your buck. And for anyone living in Adelaide we tried the Sneaky Pickle restaurant last night. Cheap and cheerful US diner experience with pulled pork and brisket and slaw burgers washed down with a fine US pale ale. Chilli chips with cheeze sauce and beans to start with. Real artery hardening stuff but great tasting and satisfying on a chilly night. Goodwood road Kings Park. Replaced the adult toy shop just past the railway underpass if you knew where that was.

And it's comfort food time so Saturday will be Ozzo Bucco or lamb shanks and a fine bottle of aged cabernet. What more could you want.

Maybe we should start a winter comfort food thread.

Carl

Been there, liked it, didn't love it (Sneaky Pickle) ... no signs, queue up to get in.

.

Gavin Trott wrote:

Chuck wrote:

Cactus wrote:
But I mostly have preferred to eat at home. I love cooking, its often better than restaurants and you get to drink better wine per $.

+1. Better bang for your buck. And for anyone living in Adelaide we tried the Sneaky Pickle restaurant last night. Cheap and cheerful US diner experience with pulled pork and brisket and slaw burgers washed down with a fine US pale ale. Chilli chips with cheeze sauce and beans to start with. Real artery hardening stuff but great tasting and satisfying on a chilly night. Goodwood road Kings Park. Replaced the adult toy shop just past the railway underpass if you knew where that was.

And it's comfort food time so Saturday will be Ozzo Bucco or lamb shanks and a fine bottle of aged cabernet. What more could you want.

Maybe we should start a winter comfort food thread.

Carl

Been there, liked it, didn't love it (Sneaky Pickle) ... no signs, queue up to get in.

.

For a moment Gav ( before reading the end of your post) i thought you were referring to said sex shop. Lived in Victoria street for 13 years, know the area very well. At one stage there were 4 adult book shops from the tram line to the underpass, more than anywhere else in Adelaide. Remember a journo doing a story for the local rag years ago...perhaps that's why Goodwood has so many hipsters and young kids.

I haven't been to the pickle, but my lads probably have.

Back on topic, have had two meals at Fino Seppeltsfield in the last month...both beautiful and surprisingly generous serves.
I left the wankery of Adelaide two peas on a plate( supposed five star dining) years ago. Not surprisingly there is only one of those places ( out of about 10 that come to mind) that are still trading today

Cheers
Craig

Nope, just the restaurant, the Pickle .. leave the sex shops to others!

.

Rocky wrote:So much better to stay at home and do my own cooking after either harvesting from my own veggie / herb garden and buying fresh ingredients from local markets. Love opening a nice wine to enjoy while I am preparing and cooking the dinner with music on while looking out to the garden from the kitchen.
Last one was a slow cooked crispy skinned duck with a bottle of 14 Timo Mayer Pinot - Superb.

Couldn't agree more
Restaurant wine mark ups are ludicrous & home grown produce is simply the way to go
Great service as well

Michael McNally wrote:I think we are seeing a bifurcation of serving sizes. In pub-style venues the serves are approaching American-sized servings. While at the fancy cuisine wankery venues the sizes are diminishing. Hopefully some middle ground will survive!!

Cheers

Michael

Spot on.

The goal of those Wankery venues though is to give you space to actually stomach an entree, a main and a dessert. There is nothing worse than seeing a dessert menu with a Bombe Alaska on it that you cannot have. I personally prefer variety in my meals, so if I can get an entree, a main and a dessert and feel less full than one oversized main I am pretty happy.

I'm not exactly going to wankery venues for a value for money reason.

Hi Diq

It's not and issue of money for me either but I don't want to be forced into three courses. I think a restaurant should leave you satisfied (not so full you think you need to undo your pants, not so hungry you need to have a kebab afterwards) with either Entree/Main or Main/Dessert. And if you want Dessert after Entree/Main then you should be pleasantly full.

It's a personal thing!

Cheers

Michael

Had an interesting experience in Trento (Tre Garofoni restaurant) recently.

When the plates came out, the portions looked a little light, but the intensity of flavour was very good across all the dishes. None of us felt hungry afterwards. Is there a connection I wonder?

Ian S wrote:Had an interesting experience in Trento (Tre Garofoni restaurant) recently.

When the plates came out, the portions looked a little light, but the intensity of flavour was very good across all the dishes. None of us felt hungry afterwards. Is there a connection I wonder?

I'd be suspecting the salt, cream and butter factor...

and don't forget the polenta

The in thing in Perth now is to offer an undersized main and then have a set of sides on offer to top up.

But it's a tough game restaurants. Not a lot of margin in food so they have to make it up on the drinks list.

We had a seven-course degustation menu yesterday, which was excellent but easily outweighted by the single course kid's meal we ordered for our toddler.

Jim wrote:We had a seven-course degustation menu yesterday, which was excellent but easily outweighted by the single course kid's meal we ordered for our toddler.

Just flicked over to Masterchef and watched the last 10 minutes as contestants gave everything including many tears to cook a few tiny joints of quail (served in smoking herb box) with a couple of fancy looking things including about 60ml of some fancy herbed tea that passed as a main course. Probably took 2 hours to produce and it was laughable watching the 3 judges trying to divvy it up using surgical instruments it was so small. About 1.5 mouthfuls each by my reckoning - say 4-5 mouthfuls in all. More an entree serving to me.

Carl

Agreed Carl, it was simply laughable.

This is what I call absolute wankery, 44 ingredients and about 50 processes.
Now I know the discerning ladies and gents here probably don't drop a 1 kilo schnitty or a 600 g rib eye, but there has to be a balance between something that you need a magnifying glass for and the coronary to avoid.

Bring back the Goddess...Ms. Lawson, then we know we would be getting a decent feed.

Cheers
Craig

Not sure where you guys are going for food. I've never been to a restaurant that served smaller portions one year than in previous years. And that's over a lot of years.

Yes, there are some that would like you to taste a number of things on their menu and allow this by having portions smaller - but I guess if you don't want to broaden your horizons, then don't go there. I can think of a number of places that would suit the quantity over quality crowd (Smorgy's, anyone?)

When I go out to a restaurant to do more than just fill-up on protein and three veg, I am not fussed if the portions are small. How else am I going to taste more than one thing (and enjoy it) - as I don't like leaving stuff on my plate unless I'm in Thailand (where it's considered rude to clean your plate). I can often bring the idea home and beef it up in size if I want to enjoy too much of a good thing.

And, at home, I am prepared to start the cooking for a good steak dinner a week beforehand (mostly the jus). People can call it wankery if you like - but many others would consider paying $100+ for a bottle of wine and then cellaring it for 15 years to be the height of lunacy also (and if you compare the two - 44 ingredients doesn't look so foolish).

Cloth Ears wrote:Not sure where you guys are going for food. I've never been to a restaurant that served smaller portions one year than in previous years. And that's over a lot of years.

Yes, there are some that would like you to taste a number of things on their menu and allow this by having portions smaller - but I guess if you don't want to broaden your horizons, then don't go there. I can think of a number of places that would suit the quantity over quality crowd (Smorgy's, anyone?)

When I go out to a restaurant to do more than just fill-up on protein and three veg, I am not fussed if the portions are small. How else am I going to taste more than one thing (and enjoy it) - as I don't like leaving stuff on my plate unless I'm in Thailand (where it's considered rude to clean your plate). I can often bring the idea home and beef it up in size if I want to enjoy too much of a good thing.

And, at home, I am prepared to start the cooking for a good steak dinner a week beforehand (mostly the jus). People can call it wankery if you like - but many others would consider paying $100+ for a bottle of wine and then cellaring it for 15 years to be the height of lunacy also (and if you compare the two - 44 ingredients doesn't look so foolish).

Well said.

Cloth Ears wrote:Not sure where you guys are going for food. I've never been to a restaurant that served smaller portions one year than in previous years. And that's over a lot of years.

Yes, there are some that would like you to taste a number of things on their menu and allow this by having portions smaller - but I guess if you don't want to broaden your horizons, then don't go there. I can think of a number of places that would suit the quantity over quality crowd (Smorgy's, anyone?)

When I go out to a restaurant to do more than just fill-up on protein and three veg, I am not fussed if the portions are small. How else am I going to taste more than one thing (and enjoy it) - as I don't like leaving stuff on my plate unless I'm in Thailand (where it's considered rude to clean your plate). I can often bring the idea home and beef it up in size if I want to enjoy too much of a good thing.

And, at home, I am prepared to start the cooking for a good steak dinner a week beforehand (mostly the jus). People can call it wankery if you like - but many others would consider paying $100+ for a bottle of wine and then cellaring it for 15 years to be the height of lunacy also (and if you compare the two - 44 ingredients doesn't look so foolish).

With respect, think you have missed the point.
No one said anything about filling up on meat and three veg, or having to always use a stack of ingredients
The suggestion perhaps is the actual volume of food , not necessarily portion size or indeed the number.
What many appreciate is enough food to be satisfied, not $20 all you can eat at the Leagues club or 2 peas on a plate, but somewhere in between.

In relation to wankery, gourmet theatrics, call it what you like, the process of putting a dish together can be a stress free experience, far from having smoke coming out of a box
Think there is a fair loss of perspective in many cases lately with food preparation/presentation.

Starting a dish a week ahead, nothing wrong with that,
Boiled up the remains of a roast chook from the weekend to make a delicious Thai soup...good simple honest nutritious cooking.

Interesting observation that Neil Perry is putting the cue in the rack, and looking at a more simplified existence.

Not in the position to say much about cellaring wine, other than it sometimes costs a lot less than $100, particularly when you might have paid $10 for a bottle and put it away.

Cheers
Craig

On the subject of Masterchef - I thought the episode featuring the 'Jaffles' or toasties was great. Most of the audience could aspire to knocking up something like that as opposed to the quail dish a few nights before.

I too find there to be a gulf between the serving sizes at 'fine dining' restaurants and pub grub. The fine dining does appear to be getting smaller though. I had a very good eye fillet recently that the waiter said was 160 grams. I doubt it was that. The potato gratin was the size of a stack of 20 cent pieces and the 3 asparagus spears failed to fill me. Highlight of the night was the BYO bottle of Yalumba Signature. Corkage was $5 per person - made it all bearable.

bigtinnie wrote:On the subject of Masterchef - I thought the episode featuring the 'Jaffles' or toasties was great. Most of the audience could aspire to knocking up something like that as opposed to the quail dish a few nights before.

I too find there to be a gulf between the serving sizes at 'fine dining' restaurants and pub grub. The fine dining does appear to be getting smaller though. I had a very good eye fillet recently that the waiter said was 160 grams. I doubt it was that. The potato gratin was the size of a stack of 20 cent pieces and the 3 asparagus spears failed to fill me. Highlight of the night was the BYO bottle of Yalumba Signature. Corkage was $5 per person - made it all bearable.

Hope you didn't drive after drinking on an empty stomach.

phillisc wrote:With respect, think you have missed the point.
No one said anything about filling up on meat and three veg, or having to always use a stack of ingredients
The suggestion perhaps is the actual volume of food , not necessarily portion size or indeed the number.
What many appreciate is enough food to be satisfied, not $20 all you can eat at the Leagues club or 2 peas on a plate, but somewhere in between.

In relation to wankery, gourmet theatrics, call it what you like, the process of putting a dish together can be a stress free experience, far from having smoke coming out of a box
Think there is a fair loss of perspective in many cases lately with food preparation/presentation.

Starting a dish a week ahead, nothing wrong with that,
Boiled up the remains of a roast chook from the weekend to make a delicious Thai soup...good simple honest nutritious cooking.

Interesting observation that Neil Perry is putting the cue in the rack, and looking at a more simplified existence.

Not in the position to say much about cellaring wine, other than it sometimes costs a lot less than $100, particularly when you might have paid $10 for a bottle and put it away.

Cheers
Craig

Hi Craig,

Possibly, or possibly not. I was also around back in the 80's, where I think 'nouvelle cuisine' was all the rage. Basically, take a really good steak, cut of all the fat and make it square (or round or triangular). Rub the potatoes until they're totally round (and about an eighth the size) plus a couple of asparagus ends and voila!

And this was in restaurants that used to produce larger portion sizes.

Now I'll admit that I don't head off to the flashier restaurants much nowadays (Fat Duck not included), but almost every place I've eaten recently seems to provide a reasonable dish for a main. I mean, you wouldn't expect a big tapas dish, would you? So I haven't had to worry about portion size at all - except at the Doppiozero Pizzeria and Wine Bar (where the chefs Antipasto Della Casa is about as big as you can get, even for two).

Yes agreed, many of us "know' where to go for a feed that represents both a quality offering and enough food.

I do like it when I am very much surprised of going to somewhere new that over delivers on both fronts.


Cheers
Craig