Lure Fishbar versus Catch
Which is better for food and atmosphere?
Have not heard of Catch.
But if you like an obviously showy, yet unrefined and somewhat crass (imho) atmosphere, then Lure it is. Service pretty much suits the atmosphere I described, with the obvious pretentiousness of trying to be a cool restaurant. Food ranges from a B- to a B+.
I've been to both and I like Catch a lot better. What type of food and atmosphere are you looking for? I think the food at Catch is great for sharing and everything I've had there has been delicious. The atmosphere at Catch is fun, trendy and young and I like going to the rooftop afterwards for drinks. I agree that the noise level at Lure is unbearable. I sat in a booth last time and could barely hear the people next to me talk. I can't think of another way to describe the atmosphere at Lure besides loud. Been to Lure twice and while the food is not bad, it is definitely not good enough for me to go back again.
I've never heard of Catch. Lure I've been to several times. Depending on what you're looking for, Lure is good for a big group. It is loud however, so if your group is loud that will work out really well. The design of the place I think is great, and I bet they spent a nice buck on getting that "yacht" look.
The fish is fresh at Lure, they are always packed , therefore the turnover. I disagree with RCC on the crass ,pretentiousness. I've always had nice servers there. However, if you are looking for good fish in SoHo, I would surely go to Aqua Grill, which is far better than Lure.
Never been to lure, but went to catch Friday night with some friends and has pleasantly surprised. It is a scene, but the food was tasty - albeit very pricey.
Sushi was surprisingly good. Had some very untraditional rolls that were good, baked clams were good, beef bourginon potstickers were awesome, as was spicy tuna tartare on rice cakes.
Mains werent as good. Went with the whole black bass stuffed with olives and some other things, and the whole Dover sole with chili sauce. Both were huge portions (should be for $70+ per entree). Dover sole was really good, lightly fried and tasty. Black bass was overcooked.
Drinks were very expensive (my manhattan was $18).
Still, fun place, with a good scene and good to very good food.
I've been to Catch a few times last year and I really like it but it's pricey. I'm surprised the other posters have never heard of it since it's very popular. It's run by someone from Top Chef (unsure who he is since I've never really watched the show) If that means anything to you. Catch kind of a Spanish-Chinese-Italian bent to their dishes. I really like the crispy snapper and lobster (shared dishes) i had a pasta dish once which i didn't care for. I've never ordered from their raw bar or sushi menu so I don't know what they're like.
I have also been to Lure a couple of times, but not recently. I had crab cakes both times which were really good, but the menu is more straight forward American surf/turf.
It's hard to compare the two because they really do/did completely different things to their dishes. Atmosphere I prefer Catch 100% over Lure. I love the second level dining room, if you go, make a specific request to be seated there.
Btw, if you like crab cakes and don't mind putting out and having your wallet felt up and sodomized :), Sea Grill makes two of the cutest golfball size crab cakes, for like $19 a piece with nothing, and I mean, nothing else on the plate, lol.
Now that I come upon this thread, again, I can't help but find it funny that both restaurants that you are asking about have similar connotation in their names:
Lure vs. Catch.