SD Food Critics

[ginael]

I've lived in SD for 7 years now, a transplant from PHX, and have yet to find a consistently adroit source for food reviews. So far I've really only scoured the UT, San Diego Magazine, City Beat, and SD Reader. All of these periodicals have left me wanting more.
I enjoy reading a critique that either unveils a hidden gem of a restaurant or that provides remarkable insight into the culinary experience in SD (although both needs are certainly met on CH!) What are your thoughts on this topic? I have pretty high expectations, I suppose, because the PHX New Times has had an outstanding string of food critics. Just wondering where else to look or if I am missing something. This post is by no means a SD vs. PHX food scene, so let's please not go into that. I absolutely treasure what this city has to offer. Cheers!

[honkman]

I think restaurant critics are similar to food blogs - just one opinion. I wouldn't "trust" just one food critic or just one food blog in any city. If you are reading multiple blogs and critics you might get a reasonable good idea about the quality of a restaurant.
In addition, talking about restaurants is similar to talking about art. Two people might see the same ("high quality") painting (e.g. Munch) but have quite opposite opinions about it because they prefer different styles of art. You will find many different opinions about the same restaurant on this board and that doesn't mean that only one person is the best or most knowledgable reviewer. It just means that those people prefer different styles of restaurants, cooking. I think a lot of people expect too much from a food critic or a food blog and pay too much attention to single opinions.

[ginael]

Good points, however I am not expecting to agree with the reviewer. As a reader I expect knowledgeable input that is based on the critic's culinary experiences and education. One critic in particular tends to write sweeping generalizations regarding restaurant patrons, in other words, she is very geocentric. I don't think I am posing my question very clearly, although it seems like Carlin gets it.

[honkman]

I guess I wasn't clear enough. What I wanted to say is that there is no general way to write a review and to determine what is knowledgeable input or not. With your comment it seems to me that you think there is some general agreement what is “knowledgeable input that is based on the critic's culinary experiences and education”. The one critic you don’t like because of “sweeping generalizations regarding restaurant patrons” might be the critic I prefer most because I don’t think she/he is writing any sweeping generalizations. People often think that critics (or any journalist) can write objective reviews/articles just based on their knowledge without including any kind of subjectivity. I don’t think this is possible because nobody has the same definition of objectivity and knowledgeable input.

[ginael]

Makes sense. Thanks.

[CarlinCarlsbad]

I also lived in Phx for 17 years SD for almost 13 years and have been in the restaurant business for over 30 and have found that with the new medium of blogs CH is one of the best peer to peer. The periodicals mentioned seem hollow and like movie reviews are only useful unless you have the same "tastes" with the critic or reviewer. I don't have to agree with the review I just want to feel that the comments are well thought of and not positioned or skewed.