Mastro's or CUT?
Which do you recommend for great steaks and delicious sides? Thanks in advance!
Both are good, but each offers very different experiences.
Mastro's is a traditional steakhouse.
Cut is more a nouveau, haute-cuisine take on the traditional steakhouse.
You're going to get a good dose of bovine protein from both places, it's just a matter of how you want that protein delivered to you.
Sort of like road racing with a Tesla Roadster versus a Porsche 911. Both will get you from 0-60 in under 5 seconds, but do you want to do it in a traditional I-6 gasoline engine from Germany (Mastro's) or live on the edge with cutting edge technology from a VC-funded company and spare parts from a Lotus Elise (Cut)?
Cut has a better steak.
Mastro's has a better "everything else." Better side dishes, better seafood, better atmosphere, etc.
Mastro's. I found Cut to have a very poor price/quality ratio, which is not surprising as it is a hotel restaurant. I've had better steaks at Ruth's Chris for less than Cut.
I like both the bone-in filet at Mastro's and the 35-day dry-aged petit cut New York at Cut. However, if I were going for steak in Beverly Hills, I would skip both and go to Wolfgang's. IMHO, that is what a steakhouse should be. Well, a steakhouse should be Peter Luger, but we don't have one of those here.
CUT has great kobe beef. I would recommend the American Wagyu, not as good as the A5 but pretty close and the price is fairly reasonable. The steak tartar and tuna tartar are excellent.
Mastro's is good too, but I have seen an ever so slight decline in quality. I would choose CUT.