HOME > Chowhound > General Topics >

Discussion

Nigiri Sushi

Whenever I see sushi discussed here, I personally want to know how good the nigiri(fish on top of rice)and ONLY the nigiri is. I don't care at all about the Godzilla roll, or the Titanic roll or the(fill-in-the-name-of-the-city)roll, etc. IMO, the only way you can judge the true worth of a sushi bar is by the freshness and quality of the nigiri. As far as I'm concerned, those who go for the "chef's creations" or to try the latest rolls aren't eating sushi, they are just being trendy. I only eat nigiri(with a very occasional california roll)and I don't even use soy sauce, just straight wasabi. Is anybody here of the same persuasion?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. Well... I think it really depends.
    To be honest, I rarely even order NIGIRI and prefer to order sashimi or occasionally the chirashi zushi. And this works for most times I feel like having delicious fresh fish.

    Sometimes, though, I will admit it's nice to have a roll and there are some innovative chefs here in the US who are doing good and interesting things with rolls. I really don't think there's anything wrong with a cuisine being adapted to meet the tastes of locals in a country and sometimes this can grow to become a delicious thing of it's own.

    In general, though, I agree that when asking for sushi reccommendations, I would prefer to know primarily about the freshness of the fish.
    One thing, though, the fish ontop of the rice in nigiri sushi is generally referred to as the "neta," not the "nigiri." Just thought I would mention it.

    2 Replies
    1. re: linlinchan

      neta is just the fish. I was referring to the fish AND rice, the entire combination.

      1. re: calabasas_trafalgar

        Sorry. Rereading your post, I can see what you mean.

    2. Nope, not me, not of the same persuasion. I love to see what combinations the chef might use to give different flavors and textures. I love the Dragon roll and the combo of the eel and the tuna is great. i usually order a platter of sushi and a couple of rolls, one an old standard and one a new try-for.

      To your point of wanting comments on the fish. Maybe asking people comments on sashimi versus sushi will give you more desired results. Its the rice in the dish that's the sushi, not the fish.

      I do not understand why anyone who likes sushi orders a California roll. No guts no glory and eating cooked bottom eaters shaped and colored to look like a crab leg, a little avocado and some sushi rice is not my idea of dining.

      1. I'm with you. I generally judge a "sushi" restuarant by its sashimi.

        1. I base it on the combination of the sashimi & nigiri-sushi.

          Sashimi, for the fish itself; and the nigiri for how the rice is prepared (loose/packed tightly, amount of vinegar, how well the rice is cooked, taste of the rice, ratio of rice to fish).

          My mother goes one step further: she, like linlinchan, also considers chirashi sushi. Though in her 70s, she can still use her mojo to obtain samples of what the chefs are preparing amongst--and for--themselves.

          1 Reply
          1. re: OCAnn

            I too love chirashi and, when available, will usually order that on my first visit to a sushi bar. It lets me judge the quality of several fish types, the sushi rice, and the artistic sense of the chef. I also consider it a better deal as I usually get more food for the same money as I would with a nigiri combo.

            ed

          2. I am the same. If I am trying out a sushi joint the first time, I will definitely go for sashimi or the nigiri. After that, I may order a 'special' roll but I typically stick to the nigiri sushi. www.mishsplayground.com