lotus125

I had a good dinner here. Terrific mapo tofu and dandan noodles. Real sichuan peppercorn but reasonably restrained on heat. Great flounder hot pot. It had a lot of leeks and cabbage, which were especially good. I thought the sichuan stringbeans were strong but not as good as at Hong Kong Palace.

The cumin fish is even better! Good mapo and sichuan string beans too. As good as Rockville options but much closer to DC.

We'd been a bit skeptical of Le Diplomate. Bistro food seems to have a known ceiling. (Think Balthazar, Pastis, Artisanal, or Bouchon). And the waits have been out of control. But tonight we happened to see an opentable reservation at just the right time, so we gave it a try. The room is gorgeous. They've done a fantastic job giving a rustic feel to a new space -- even down to the scuffed looking mirrors and slightly-grey ceilings (which I assume comes from years of cigarette smoke in a real bistro?). The bread basket, although not as transcendent as some have suggested, was quite nice. We started with a Tuna Carpaccio with leek vinaigrette that was excellent. Also to start, we had the radishes with butter. The plate was lovely but unfortunately covered in black pepper. I like pepper fine, but not with radishes and butter. It was hard to get salt without pepper, and I thought the pepper competed with the radish for bite. We also had a mushroom tart. The top -- mushrooms, pecorino, and truffle flavor -- was great. But the pastry itself was notably bad. It was dry and flavorless and caused me to abandon the dish. My dining companion commented that frozen puff pastry tastes better. In the end we scraped some of the mushroom topping off of it, but the tart was a failure. For entrees we had trout amandine and scallops with peas, orzo, and carrot. The trout was nice -- properly cooked, a good brown butter, good haricot verts. I might have used a bit more lemon or salt, but that was just my preference; the dish was as advertised and well executed. On the scallops, the sauce and the orzo were both terrific. I think there may have been a bit of curry powder, but used subtlety. There were also sliced bits of pea pod. These were notably good. The scallops themselves were unfortunately a bit chewy; I'm not sure if they'd been slightly overcooked or if the restaurant just hadn't gotten dry scallops. Given how good the orzo and sauce were, it did not detract too much. But I would have enjoyed the dish as much (or more) with a different protein. For dessert we split the grapefruit sorbet with financiers and cinnamon cream. It was all very tasty, but we were surprised that it was layered in a glass, like a parfait, rather than plated. We did not love digging through the slightly over-proportioned whipped cream to enjoy the lovely, light sorbet. My one other nit is service. Our waiter was nice and knowledgeable, but inattentive at times. There was a long wait before we received appetizers, and even after we finished our drinks no one came by to see if we wanted another round or assure us that the appetizers were coming. Likewise, it took a long time to flag someone down to take the check. My impression is that this is an enjoyable restaurant but not worth an insane wait. I hope that after the hype and crowds die down, it will be easier to get into. (It would also be a fantastic place for late-night food and drinking. They currently close at 12; I wonder if zoning prohibits later hours). The atmosphere is gorgeous and the food strong enough that it's a welcomed addition to DC.

A good friend lives near Big Bear, and I've been in for coffee once or twice and always wondered about the food. Finally, in a search for light, summery food, we decided to give a try for dinner. The place is very good. Certainly not the creative oomph of a restaurant like Ripple or refinement of Palena, but the food was surprisingly sophisticated -- kind of like what a terrific home cook would make -- and very enjoyable. We started with a terrific melon gazpacho -- lots of acid set it apart from the standard, sweet melon soup. We also had a great middle eastern walnut spread with cucumbers and crostini, and an interesting plate of pickled vegetables which included little pattypan squash. All very good summer food. For entrees we had a roasted fish (rockfish I think), done with nicely roasted potatoes and vegetables, and a pasta with peas and corn. Although I usually like fresh pasta, I thought that a more al-dente, dried pasta might have been more successful. But both were solid entrees. It's worth noting as well that Big Bear is very reasonably priced: appetizers were all under $10 and the entrees around $15. Definitely a restaurant worth trying.

Another visit, another success. I particularly love the bamboo fish, dry fried eggplant, and mapo tofu.

Thanks for posting the number. I just tried it on the way back from Richmond. It has basically the same menu as the other Peter Chang's in Richmond. The food is great. The chef was there.

A week or two after opening, I just tried Azur -- the new restaurant from Frederik de Pue (of Table) in the Cafe Atlantico space. We love seafood and had high hopes. Unfortunately, we were a bit disappointed. I'll give it a few months and try again. The space is very nice. They've taken the old Cafe Atlantico and installed a french coast / St. Barts style, with medium toned woods, whites, and blues. I think the space is lovely, but found the music unpleasant at times -- a lot of loud, techno-ish music (picture a too-trendy, french nightclub). To start, I had a nice wheat beer, and my guest has a cocktail. Her first attempt at a cocktail was supposed to contain wasabi vodka, black pepper vodka, tomato water, tobasco, and caviar. (Yes, the caviar seemed strange, and the $20 price tag was not justified by the very tiny bit of it on the garnish). The drink was very disappointing. There was no detectable trace of wasabi, pepper, or tobasco. It basically tasted like tomato water, vodka, and fish (presumably from the caviar?). Bland and in need of salt. Upon asking the waitress if perhaps an ingredient was mistakenly omitted, my guest was offered a different drink and got a version of a bees knees that was pretty good. To start: We ordered a tile fish crudo with black lime, pickled cilantro, avocado, white asparagus, and espelette. The lime, espellette, and little blossoms not identified on the menu had nice flavor. But the crudo tasted a bit fishy (presumably not as fresh as a crudo needs to be, although I'm not familiar enough with tile fish to be sure). The avocado was turned into a paste that reminded me of guacamole though needing more flavor. We also had oyster croquettes with black truffle, micro celery, and old bay aioli. The truffle/celery combo was nice. But the croquettes themselves were a bit soggy and overbreaded. For entrees we had scallops with asparagus, pine nut purée, grapefruit sections, puffed red quinoa. The dish sounded very interesting, but I didn't really get how these flavors went together. The puffed quinoa provided nice texture. The scallops were underseasoned (or even unseasoned). We also had tubot with hakurie turnips, celery, grapes, broccoli, and roasted almond espuma. Here I understood the flavor combination (more or less). The turbot was cooked beautifully, well seasoned, and had great flavor. The accompaniments were a mixed bad. The almond espuma was great, and we remarked that we would have preffered a big layer of it rather than just a little dollop on the side. The grapes added nice bursts of sweetness. Some of the vegetables were a bit bland. The turnips, for example, desperately needed salt and acid. The celery and broccoli were a bit better. The best food, by far, was dessert. We had honeyed grapefruit with brown sugar meringue and prosecco granite. The genius of the dish was an ingredient not listed on the menu -- a chiffande of basil. We loved the savory basil flavor against the sweet but cold granite, the firmer meringue, and the softer fruit. The even better dessert was a "strawberry mint salad" with puff pastry crisps and balsamic gelato. The highlight here was the balsamic gelato -- terrific. The strawberries were solid, though had only a tiny bit of mint on it, so the dish was probably not well named. There was also an undescribed cream between the puff pastry crisps. Although the desserts were good, none of the four savory items were standouts, and three had noticeable flaws. I like the space and concept, and I'm really hoping the place hits its stride.

I tried Del Campo a few days after opening. I think the place has great potential. The space is very pleasant -- warm decor, nice soundtrack, and a faint smell of the grill. The cocktails were very good. The food has great potential. Almost everything on the menu has components that have touched the grill (including crudos and salads). I love smokey flavors, so this was quite pleasing. To start, I had a crudo of hamachi, sweet potato and corn. The dish had good flavors but tasted a bit flat. I think they needed to amp up the acid and possibly salt. I also had an appetizer of grilled scallop, with soy citrus, and smoked uni. This dish was less successful but I think can be tweaked. The scallop was served on sushi rice, like a nigiri. The soy flavor, unfortunately, was overpowering. It basically tasted like soy sauce with a bit of smoke mixed in. For an entree, I had the seafood stew. It was excellent (and a stark contrast to a similar item that I got at Mio a few weeks ago, which was actually unpleasant to eat). My only nit is that it was quit expensive -- $32 -- for a fairly small portion. I look forward to returning.

We tried the Daikaya Izakaya and really enjoyed it. The short version is that this is very modern/fusion-ey izakaya food. Much of it had dominant flavors from outside of Japan (Contrast to Izakaya Seki). Our dishes were mixed, but now that we know what to steer towards or away from on the menu, it'd make a great meal. The food highlights were a roasted garlic with miso (we ordered a second); the broiled oysters (which have parmasean and remind me of the ones at Hank's); fried monkfish (with a tangy, mustardy sauce),and grilled cabbage (supposedly napa but looked like bok choy) with apple, yogurt, and roe (amazing). The meat eaters really enjoyed pork fat rice balls and brussel sprouts with pork. I agree with Don that the Rickey San -- a gin rickey with yuzu and green tea -- was great. The only glitch here was that when we ordered four broiled oysters, we were served two real ones, and then two lids with traces of oyster meat and cheese. When we complained, they appologized for the "small" oysters and gave us more. (They were not small; they just were the shucked lids . . . ) The ankimono (monkfish liver) was solid; very fresh, but served medierean style with eggplant, cipolini, roasted peppers, and tyme -- I didn't love the combination, though a tablemate did. Shishito peppers stuffed with gouda wasn't bad. It's not the light bowl of shishitos you're used to, but a tasty snack. Crab croquettes with old bay were good, though tasted nothing like Japanese food. Spicey cod roe spaghetti tasted a lot like fettucine alfredo, with a tiny bit of roe and/or seaweed flavor. The assortment of vegetables was fine but small and a bit plain -- not nearly as great as what Izakaya Seki does with veg. The frozen salmon dish which has gotten some discussion here was a subject of slight confusion. It's pieces of frozen salmon served with onions, wasabi, ginger, and a sauce. It tasted fine, but we thought the frozen aspect detracted from the dish. Basically you hold it in your mouth until it defrosts. One minor nit: The host stand is still learning to manage seating. About 10 minutes past our reservation time, we'd had no contact from the host stand. Finally they noted that our table was still drinking and offered our group of four a row of four seats on a two-sided communal table. A row of seats, of course, is not great for a group larger than two or three because it's hard to talk from one end to the other. We noticed that the only folks seated there were a group of three also sitting in a row. We suggested that perhaps they'd like to sit two and one across, so that the four of us could sit two and two across and not be having a conversation directly in their faces. The hostess wasn't sure if she could ask whether the three would prefer that and then disappeared for a good while without letting us know what was going on. We were eventually seated (about 20-25 minutes after our reservation time) at anothther table. No big deal, but they may need to work on managing reservations, managing the communal table, and offering drinks as reservation times come and go.

Because there hasn't been recent commentary on Ripple, I thought I'd drop in a quick post. I discovered Ripple through this board. So much good commentary about a restaurant I'd never heard of. I gave it a shot and was amazed: I really could not have imagined such a seamless blend of innovation with earthy, homey cooking. I remember sitting there and just thinking about how much talent there was in the kitchen. Ripple has remained one of my favorite restaurants in DC. And I've remained surprised that it never became as popular as other DC places, some of which are nearby. I was therefore sad to hear of Logan Cox's departure. Last week I glanced online and saw that the menu had changed a bit in format but seemed to have kept the same basic philosophy. Time to give it a try. I had a great meal, though I think I see some differences in the approach. We had three appetizers that all felt like the Ripple I know: Spice roasted beets with smoked egg and frozen yogurt (and a pickled vegetable I think . . . ); Tuna crudo with kohlrabi and pickled raisins; and a sunchoke soup with razorclams and roe. The first two were just fantastic. Really innovative but oh so tasty. The soup was strong and certainly interesting. For entrees we had halibut with favas and spring onion; and spaghetti with tuna, breadcrumbs, and chili. These were both very good but seemed different from the old Ripple. The halibut was a good, simple spring dish: well-cooked fish over spring ingredients. The spaghetti had a nice, rustic feel and flavor. It was interesting that entrees were so much simpler than the appetizers. I don't know if this was just a product of our ordering but seemed notable. I enjoyed Ripple and will certainly keep going. I look forward to seeing how it evolves.

I tried Barmini with a few friends, several of whom are real cocktail experts. We enjoyed it. Yes, the drinks are on the pricey side. And yes, DC has MANY other good cocktail options (not just bars but also at many restaurants). But it is enjoyable. And I'm really impressed by the depth of their menu -- over 100 drinks, and the bartenders seem quite adept at experimenting off menu. I should add that many of the bar snacks are excellent. A great grilled cheese. A great uni sandwich (though it'd be better with less aioli). Definitely worth trying.

I've been twice. The place has potential. The space is lovely -- especially if you like a Dwell-style, modernist room (light wood, white marble tops, plants growing on the wall). Service has uniformly been great. They have a good, reasonably-priced wine list. I wish there were cocktails (I heard somewhere that they are limited in the liquor license they can get on account of neighbors' experiences with prior occupants of that space). The food is simple but often a bit interesting. I really enjoyed the frogs legs in pad thai sauce on my first visit, but it was not on the menu when I returned. The mushroom appetizer and snails appetizer are both very good. I've had several good (but simple) fishes there. The only real disappointment was a vegetarian pasta: the sauce bordered on bland. I look forward to watching Table develop (and to the chef's forthcoming restaurant in the Penn Quarter).

I went with a group of 6 and had a very interesting meal. The short version is that the food was very high variance, but the restaurant has a tremendous amount of potential. The restaurant has a lovely vibe. Warm, but not cluttered. Gracious service. Casual dress code. Absolutely terrific. We started off with two bottles of wine. The sommelier has assembled a nice, reasonably-priced list, and was very helpful. He directed us to a white rioja that everyone at the table loved. The amuse was a carraway seed cracker with a creme that I cannot recall. Everyone thought it was solid, but it didn't stick out. The first course was the much discussed course of vegetables (including celery root and beet) with brown butter and arugula granita. I really enjoyed this course, but there was disagreement around the table. Several people thought that it was too sweet (some of the vegetables were candied). One thought that the arugula granita was too much -- cold and bitter. But I thought it was balanced and an interesting and hearty take on a winter salad. Next up was a raw fish dish (I'll explain in a moment why I'm not naming the fish), with an eggplant paste and husk cherries. The menu said it was kampachi, but I believe the server said it was mackerel, and the strong fishy taste suggests that it was mackerel. The table was unanimous in not liking the dish. The fishy taste was too overpowering; the eggplant didn't add much. The use of husk cherries was very clever and shows the talent in the kitchen: wonderful bursts of acid and sweetness. But there was not enough acid elsewhere in the dish. Several people didn't finish theirs. Next was a dashi custard with scallop and sea bream. Creamy, and savory, with bursts of other flavors. Most of the table loved the dish. My only nit -- and it's a small one -- is that the texture was a bit firmer than I'd expected. I assumed it would be soft, like a chawan mushi. It was creamy but surprisingly firm -- reminding me of a panna cotta made with too much gelatin. I don't know if that was intentional or not. And I really enjoyed the dish regardless. But perhaps a small point to play with. One or two people at the table thought that the dish was too heavy. Perhaps a textural change would help. But one suggestion may be to adjust the ratio of topping to custard -- more scallop and vegetable, a bit less custard. The next dish was the mussel dish people have discussed here. Mussels and purple potato gnocchi. This was the other very disappointing course. The table was unanimous. I love mussels, but the whole thing tasted a bit fishy and just flat. Some people's mussels had grit. I don't think anyone finished it. One of us has a shellfish allergy and received, instead of the mussels, the pumpkin and blood pudding dish on the 4 course menu. She thought it was awful. Several people tasted her dish and described it as actually "disgusting." (One friend's facial expression when he tasted it was like a child eating a lemon). Next up was "fowl" -- guinea hen with oats (which had some kind of a nut butter in it, I think), sunchokes, and broccoli powder and slices. The entire table liked this dish a lot. The savory oats, in particular, were amazing. There were two minor nits. First, the sunchokes were rather cold. I don't know if that was intentional, but several people found it jarring. Second, for the two pescatarians at the table, the dish was simply served without the hen (possibly with an extra sunchoke). Perfectly fine at a dinner party, but not a good accommodation at a restaurant, especially when the restaurant had a week's notice of a common dietary restriction. An obvious fix would have been to use fish instead of hen. Or, the ingredients on the plate could easily have been transformed by adjusting proportions, e.g. a bowl of savory oats with sunchokes on it. But the mostly-empty plate was disappointing (especially as the hen eaters raved about the bird). The next dish was pork with tahini, kale, and daikon. (For the pescatarians, the pork was replaced with a few baby leeks). People really liked the dish, and raved about the pork. Several thought that the daikon was served too cold. (Again, I'm not sure if the kitchen likes having a cold item on each plate or if that was just a glitch). As with the hen, the pescatarians wished that there had been a fish or something more substantial than a few leeks. The desserts were both terrific. One was apple-based, but I can't remember the details. (It's been a few weeks). The other was based on hazelnut, and included a great, cold, foamy cake, which reminded me of the cakes made in a microwaive with an isi whipper. I'm sorry that I'm short on the dessert details. But I want to say that everyone loved both desserts. All and all, a lot of potential. Were it not for the mackeral/eggplant and mussels/gnochhi dishes (and the pumpkin/blood pudding substitute), we would have left dazzled. I hope that the restaurant is listening to feedback, because I'm really excited about the place, and I think it could become one of DC's best.

I've been once. Unum was quite solid. Several terrific fish dishes. A great gnocchi. The only food disappointment was a brussels sprouts that had no salt, acid, or char. I assume it was just a kitchen glitch. The only thing that we thought needed serious improvement was knowledge of the wine list. Our server and then the manager grossly misdescribed every wine we had (and some were served at strange temperatures). But I assume that will come in time.

After my earlier post about Fiola, the Chef kindly invited my dining companions and myself back to Fiola as his guests. Our experience was very different the second time around. I recognize that the restaurant was trying its best, so our meal may not have been representative. (And just to disclose: the meal was comped). But the meal was very good, and I certainly would return. First off, the service was almost the complete opposite of our last trip. (Full disclosure: it was crystal clear that our servers knew that we'd had a bad meal and were back as the chef's guests). We were seated immediately. Our waiter, Michael, was extremely helpful, charming, efficient, and competent. The other wait staff asked before taking away plates. Service was absolutely first rate. Because we were there as the chef's guests, we were not quite sure about what or how much food to order. After a briefly awkward exchange, our waiter suggested that they just prepare a tasting menu for us. Perfect. As I later learned, this is an option that is generally available off menu (perhaps aimed at old Maestro diners who were used to the tasting menus over there). Before I describe the food, I need to flag the overarching theme of the meal: quantity. The sheer amount of food was mind boggling. So much so that some of my companions thought it became unpleasant. I don't know whether this is the normal format of a tasting menu or was the result of the kitchen trying very hard to impress us. But we all left stuffed and with enough leftovers from the final meat course to tide us over for meals to come. In total, three of us were served five appetizers to share, three entree sized pastas per person (three plates of the same pasta, times three courses), a large fish entree (full portion for each person). And then, for the pescavegetarian at the table, another fish entree. And for the meat eaters, a meat entree for two and another meat entree for four. (When they brought over these meats, the waiter served a small portion and then offered to pack the rest to go). They also poured several good wines and served a few desserts. Interestingly, nothing we were served overlapped with anything we'd ordered on our previous visit. And virtually none of it had even been on the menu when we were first in. The conclusion: The food was very good. Probably not as good as Tosca or Bibiana's best (more complex food than Obelisk, so hard to compare). But it was quite enjoyable. We started off with a selection of appetizers. The highlight was a fried mozzarella served over eggplant. This was something of a refined version of mozzarella sticks. Certainly the best mozzarella sticks I've ever had. We also enjoyed a tuna tartare served with tomato and grilled bread. The flavor profile was very similar to the tuna carpaccio, which we enjoyed the first time. There was some kind of flatbread with prosciutto and a plate of prosciutto and buffalo quadrello blue cheese (the cheese was great). Less successful was a cod carpaccio. It was prepared in the same way as the sworfish carpaccio had been done: with oranges and capers. The flavors were fine, but we unanimously thought that the cod did not work well raw. We then had three pastas in succession. One was a large tube pasta (something like a penne but bigger) served with assorted seafood. The dish was straightforward but very good. Next was a fettuccine with mushrooms. The pasta itself was great and the dish very savory. I thought it was a bit too heavy and would have worked better if less creamy. But it was good. And there was a carry over from Maestro: a lobster ravioli made in wonton skins with what I think tasted like ginger (I wish I'd taken notes after the meal; it's been about a week). The three of us all agreed that the dish was good but a bit of a one noter. The ginger and wonton skin gave it a slightly asian flavor that I've had in Venetian food before. Quite yummy but perhaps in need of one other flavor. Moving on to meat/fish. First up, the kitchen roasted a whole fish (I think a dorade) and then served it over smokey, crushed potatoes. I'm a sucker for smokey flavors, and the potatoes were great. The fish was fine but I thought a bit underseasoned. Undersalting was a complaint I'd mentioned in my last review. For what it's worth, I'm not a salt addict, and I rarely think that food is underseasoned. So I don't think this is just a subjective love of salt. I'm fairly confident that much of the food in our first meal was undersalted, and this fish needed just a bit of salt to perk it up. Now we noticed when we sat down that there were two small dishes on the table -- one filled with purple specks and the other with white crystals. We had assumed these were salt and pepper, perhaps a response to our concern from the first meal that much of the food was undersalted and that it was a mistake to offer diners a salt/pepper mix. (No need to add pepper flavor just to add some seasoning). It appeared that ours was one of the few tables with these dishes. I went to sprinkle some salt over my fish, and noticed the crystals were surprisingly small. Then I tasted the fish and I still got no salt. Then I tasted the salt. Sure enough, it was sugar. I assume this was just a glitch; no reason to put a dish of sugar on the table, at least before anyone ordered coffee. As my tablemates and I briefly pondered this, our terrific waiter spotted our quizzical looks, realized what had happened, and ran over with salt. This is an understandable mistake, but I thought amusing. For our next course, our pescavegetarian was served another fish, a black bass with meyer lemon and a seafood brodetto, over the same smokey potatoes. Although serving two courses with the same potato base may not have been a brilliant example of executing a tasting menu, the fish was very good. My only complaint about the fish was that the brodetto was arguably unnecessary. The fish was well seasoned and had pieces of meyer lemon on it. Without the chunky seafood broth, it would have been a great, light fish dish. The seafood broth was nice but may not have meshed perfectly with the lemon -- a light lemon flavor pulling in one direction and a heavier tomato/seafood flavor pulling in another. Two of us were served meat. And a lot of it. One of the meat dishes was a shortrib for two. The other was a loin of lamb, sliced to contain 6 medallions (and we were told ordinarily offered as a portion size for 4 people). These both got rave reviews. Finally, we were served a selection of desserts. As before, they were fine but nothing amazing. All in all, this was a very good meal. I see that many of the problems in our first meal were just new-restaurant hiccups. And after the kitchen has had a bit more time to settle in, I would certainly go back.

Joe, I'm actually not sure whether you were encouraging me to post more or criticizing the post. I appologize that I don't write much on this board. I eat out a lot but tend not to have time to do long writeups. And because the DC restaurant scene does not change as quickly as cities such as New York or Chicago, I tend not to encounter new restaurants all that frequently, especially those about which there is much to say that has not already been said. So I usually reserve my DC restaurant thoughts for friends, and longer reviews, often of out-of-town places, for chowhound or a friend's blog. I appreciate your interest, though. I'll make more of an effort to post here.

Last Friday, I went to Fiola with a group of friends. We tried a good portion of the menu (much to the chagrin of my companions who were horrified by the over-ordering). The conclusion: Although I would not be surprised if Fiola eventually transformed into a good restaurant, it was disappointing and will require some serious work. First off, the service. I hardly ever remember service unless it is exceptionally good or exceptionally rude. While neither was the case at Fiola, the service was lackluster and, frankly, so strange that it stood out and colored much of the meal. The unusual service began when we called to make a reservation. Fully booked, we were told. Fair enough. But low and behold, OpenTable showed a tremendous amount of availability. We booked a table and showed up on time (more or less) for an 845 reservation. The table was not yet ready, and a polite hostess directed us to the rather nice bar. (Although the stools are strangely balanced, they are really lovely). We ordered drinks and waited. And waited. No one came over to apologize or even acknowledge the wait. We ended up getting seated a half hour after our reservation time. Sure, it happens. And we enjoyed catching up with old friends. And when a restaurant is new, it's understandable. But the lack of acknowledgment or apology (or the standard free drink) was a bit strange. The service got stranger one we'd been seated. The menu is long and at times lacking detail. This can be frustrating for a diner and calls upon a waiter to muster some real skill. Our waiter could not. He seemed fairly confident that the lasagna has no meat in it. It turns out that it's a meat lasagna. When asked for opinions between certain dishes, he would resort to his personal preferences. (I'm glad that he likes octopus, but that doesn't help us choose between dishes). Our waiter also seemed eager to take away the wine list and then, without the list present, upsell wine. The other staff also had a strange tendency: they took away dishes and utensils without asking whether we were done. The one time someone asked if I was done with a dish, he had already taken my knife and fork, so I felt pretty committed to letting go of the last bit of the food. Service glitches aside, the food was not very good. I would say that the dishes ranged from "bad" to "good" with an unfortunate number of "ehs." The overarching theme was a lack of salt. (And I was frustrated that when we asked for salt, we got a mixture of salt and pepper; I don't want to add pepper flavor to something that simply is underseasoned). Some of the stronger appetizers were a parpadelle with eggplant that wasn't on the menu but was offered as a substitution once the waiter discovered that the lasagna had meat; and the tuna with tomato (slightly undersalted but not bad; the acid in the tomato did some work). A crod crostini and a stewed octopus were both fine but nothing special. In the category of "has potential but needs improvement" were a salad of artichokes, favas, and peas which had it been prepared with some salt and acid would have been a great dish; and the burrata which was accompanied by a nice pesto but also needed salt and/or acid. The eggplant parmesan (described as having a lemon froth) was utterly bland (and no lemon flavor was anywhere to be found). A swordfish carpacio was a true failure: The fish didn't taste fresh and was tough. No one wanted to finish it. We split several entrees that were also mixed. The lasagna got strong reviews as did a beef cheeks pasta (something like a ravioli) served with mushrooms. The grilled octopus with asparagus came without asparagus. Its sauce and accompaniment were nice, but the octopus itself was luke warm (having presumably sat for a bit before plating). The sea urchin/crab pasta, which has been the subject of controversy on this board, was very weak. Everyone agreed that there was barely any urchin flavor. The crab was not super fresh. And as became the theme of the night, the dish was very undersalted. Desserts were ok but nothing special. I hope that Fiola improves. But I'm certainly not rushing back any time soon to follow up on that.

I go to proof often. Their wine list is amazing (especially by DC standards). Food has its highs and lows. Seasonal specials seem to be strong points at Proof.