Crush or Lark?
We'll be in Seattle for one night and have narrowed the dining choices down to Crush or Lark. Can anyone give us advice on how to choose between the two?
Both are among the top 5 restaurants in Seattle, IMO. But they are very different.
Lark's dishes tend to more elemental and simple, showcasing fresh, mostly local/organic ingredients. They have a sort of modified version of the small plate concept: I think most people dining there don't just get one appetizer and one entree. Rather the items are organized by "fish", "vegetables", "grains", etc.
Crush is more in the vein of modern haute cuisine, which is becoming increasingly hard to find in Seattle. The items on the menu read two or three lines, with complex preperations and precious ingredients featuring into them. But they are executed with flnesse and unusual imagination.
While I find Lark's digs warmer and more appealing than Crush's stark minimialist renovation, I think Crush is the better meal by a slim margin. I also like that it accepts reservations while Lark does not. This means you wind up drinking at the lounge next door, which is also quite nice.
Love Love Love both restaurants. For special occaisions, I definitely prefer Crush because I hate not having a reservation. I will say though, that if you're going out with vegetarians, I'd give the edge to Lark. Because of their small plates, it's easier to put a meal together there. Plus, Crush is pretty meat focused. So you can't go wrong with either, but they do have slight differences.
My vote would be for Crush too although its hard to go wrong with either. I like Crush's menu as opposed to Lark's small plates (very small) priced like entrees. You should check out both menus on their sites, but I've found that you end up getting a bunch of small plates at Lark and spending a lot for them. Great if you're on an expense account though.