HOME > Chowhound > Washington DC & Baltimore >

Discussion

the Source vs. Corduroy (sp?)

Hi! I am coming to WDC for a birthday dinner... my husband made reservations at both the Source and Corduroy (spelling?) Which has the best tasting menu??? I doubt we will go wrong @ either, but would appreciate some advice.
Thanks so much!

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. I don't think that Corduroy has a tasting menu.

    2 Replies
    1. re: reiflame

      Right, no tasting menu at Corduroy.

      1. re: mselectra

        No tasting menu, but the food is incredible anyway!

    2. we went to the Source.... had the tasting menu with wine parings.....
      my husband called ahead to make certain the chef could prepare a tasting menu with restrictions (he's a vegetarian allergic to seafood - but does eat fish) - they said no problem!
      things were going swimmingly until we discovered shrimp in one of his dishes (big ones!)
      needless to say there was a skid-mark.

      The menu is great - the food was good - we probably won't be going back.

      Have you tried Adour? We stayed @ the St Regis and went for brunch. Gina, the manager was amazing - as was our eggs ben w/ s salmon! YUM!! They have a 'Truffle' tasting menu right now that looks scrumptious.

      7 Replies
      1. re: joannamood

        Well, I can see their confusion. "He's allergic to seafood, but does eat fish". What does this even mean? What are they supposed to do for him? Does he only eat fresh water fish?

        1. re: Jason1

          Shrimp is not a fish but it is seafood. I don't see any confusion. If a restaurant doesn't understand that, the restaurant should ask for clarification rather than sending someone to the hospital, no?

          1. re: Ericandblueboy

            No. If the restaurant thought it understood, why would it ask for clarification?

            I read that phrase as "I'm allergic but eat it anyway," that is, as an "ok" sign regarding a minor allergy of no real consequence. If the allergy was something major, and would send someone to the hospital, why wouldn't someone simply state "no shellfish" or "no saltwater fish" (or whatever, I still can't tell what the statement is meant to get across)?

            1. re: Bonz

              Obviously neither you nor the restaurant understood. My point is, why wouldn't you ask if you don't understand? Sending someone to the hospital because you thought you understand probably won't hold up in any court.

            2. re: Ericandblueboy

              I imagine its shellfish vs regular fish. I have friends who are very, very allergic to shellfish (crabs, lobster etc) but can eat salmon or trout.

              And I totally agree with Eric. If a restaurant is confussed in any way they should make sure to clarify before sending something out to the table. Allergies can be very serious. I would rather take 5 seconds to ask if the diner can eat shrimp then have to carry him out on a stretcher.

              1. re: Elyssa

                If someone is deathly allergic, they have the responsibility to clearly state the problem. Sitting here today, with the benefit of hindsight, anyone can cavalierly assume that there must have been some conscious confusion that the restaurant must have simply chosen to ignore. Leaving aside my doubt that food service operators proceed so recklessly, the way the OP stated it, there was no cause for confusion on the restaurants part at the time the statement was made: it would have heard that the person "does eat" what was being served.

                Let me confess: My wife cannot eat some food or it will put her in the hospital. I am clear about the restriction and take responsibility for making sure that I am not being ambiguous. It does no one any favors for the diner to be unclear in such a situation and then blame the restaurant after the fact.

            3. re: Jason1

              I can see additional confusion in the statement, 'he's a vegetarian...but does eat fish.' Fish, with shells or fins, are animals. So it seems odd a vegetarian would eat animals. I agree that it's hard for a kitchen to satisfy a guest who is not clear about his specific restrictions.

          2. So back to the original post...we did the lunch tasting menu at the Source and it was delicious. As many have stated, there is no tasting menu at Corduroy but the food is also delicious. You really can't go wrong at either place, IMO. If you favor Asian-influenced food, you may want to go to the Source.

            3 Replies
            1. re: joann.hill12

              Joann... do you have any intel on the bar eating at corduroy? Full menu? cheaper? easy to get seats?

              1. re: daves_32

                Unfortunately, I don't. Sorry! I have only been there for dinner...
                wherever you choose, please make sure to report back!

                1. re: daves_32

                  We ate a Corduroy a few weeks ago and it was wonderful. While waiting for one of our friends before dinner, we sat at a bar table, and they said the tables were too small to serve and that if we wanted to eat in the bar area we needed to sit at the bar itself. They were very polite and it made sense. I'd go back there in a heartbeat. It is one of a very few somewhat-expensive places where I actually felt I got good value.

              2. Being allergic to seafood I never would have recommended The Source, as I recall that most of the dishes in the tasting menu are seafood!

                1. well, I have not signed in since my second post w/ a review of the Source. We were VERY clear when we sat down about my husbands SPECIFIC restrictions. We were in no way ambiguous about his shellfish allergy. The server and manager were very apologetic and took all blame for the unfortunate mistake. As I stated - the food was excellent.