U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Best food city after NYC?
Los Angeles 46 22.44%
Chicago 53 25.85%
Washington DC 5 2.44%
San Francisco/Bay Area 26 12.68%
Dallas-Fort Worth 5 2.44%
Philadelphia 25 12.20%
Houston 18 8.78%
Atlanta 6 2.93%
Miami 7 3.41%
Boston 4 1.95%
Other 10 4.88%
Voters: 205. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-19-2012, 07:31 PM
 
1,574 posts, read 2,470,517 times
Reputation: 1106

Advertisements

I live in Houston, but I am not blown away by the food scene here. It is very good, but I would not call it great. Houston is kind of a weird city. There is a lot of upscale dining, Tex-Mex, and then authentic ethnic food. Houston lacks a lot of the quirky, hole in the wall joints you would expect a city of this size to have. Now, there are plenty of ethnic holes in the wall. You just need to be brave enough to go hit them up. To me Tex-Mex is terrible. There is great MEXICAN street food here however. Houston has incredible taco trucks. The only bad part is that many non-Mexicans won't journey out to find them. Also, the food truck scene is growing here (not to the scale of Miami, NYC, or Austin obviously). The only bad part is that many owners are trying to go "upscale" from a truck. Spending $40 from a truck just seems ridiculous to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-19-2012, 07:52 PM
 
Location: Manhattan
1,168 posts, read 2,450,307 times
Reputation: 1349
I'd say SF, LA, and Chicago are pretty much tied for 2nd best. They are all culinary paradises.

After those 3, I'd personally say Philly, with Boston not too far behind. Houston is probably up there with those two as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2012, 09:30 PM
 
Location: NY
269 posts, read 322,357 times
Reputation: 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp Point View Post
I know you are probably the most not biased person on this site but some things you say are just wrong.

Give me 3 reasons how SF beats Philly in foods? Also who's side are you on?
They are both tied to me when I think about it and personally Philadelphia has more of a variety of ethnic foods than San Francisco. The only reason people are saying San Francisco is just because they know San Francisco is noted as a world class city therefor what ever it is, it's better than any other city in "insert item". That's not true though. Any foodie who travels this country would know that Philly is at least tied with San Francisco, if not BETTER. They're no negative views of our food most of the time anyway.

OH And look at that, Philly just took 3rd place. But I'm sure SF will catch back up.

On point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 12:51 AM
 
Location: In the heights
20,175 posts, read 21,776,227 times
Reputation: 10258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp Point View Post
I know you are probably the most not biased person on this site but some things you say are just wrong.

Give me 3 reasons how SF beats Philly in foods? Also who's side are you on?
They are both tied to me when I think about it and personally Philadelphia has more of a variety of ethnic foods than San Francisco. The only reason people are saying San Francisco is just because they know San Francisco is noted as a world class city therefor what ever it is, it's better than any other city in "insert item". That's not true though. Any foodie who travels this country would know that Philly is at least tied with San Francisco, if not BETTER. They're no negative views of our food most of the time anyway.

OH And look at that, Philly just took 3rd place. But I'm sure SF will catch back up.
It's not just a world class city though. SF is known for its great food, and I don't think this is up for argument. Philly is nowhere close to being tied because SF's establishments are far more varied and there is a much more discerning clientele. The food in SF has been so much better than Philly's in variety and opportunity that I'm curious as to how anyone would think otherwise. You can check the hoi polloi (and better) crowd sourced systems like chowhound and yelp or you can check established professional guides like Michelin and they will tell you without a doubt that SF is better. Better yet, you can check yourself and go to both places and see how the general quality of food in SF is really high for most joe-schmo restaurants. It is a very careful attention to what is good and unique in SF that makes it so wonderful. It is the far more diverse city and metro area of SF/Bay Area that gives you more variety than what Philly offers.

I'll say that Philly is pretty good, but SF/Bay Area is better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 04:37 AM
 
Location: Berkeley, CA
528 posts, read 968,931 times
Reputation: 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
LA is less established than SF and Chicago, but it's still great.

The Bay Area has had an undeniable influence on US's food scene. Thomas Kellor's The French Laundry is responsible for training many of the best chefs today including the chef of Alinea. The Bay Area actually has more Michelin stars than Chicago does.
Arguably the Bay Area has had the most influence of any city in how america eats. But Thomas Keller doesn't come close to being the most influential the bay area had to offer. Chez Panisse, with the whole California cuisine/organic locavore movement was the last great food movement of the United States having an effect in this country and overseas. Basically there is no living American chef that comes close to the influence Alice Waters had on American cuisine. She revolutionized America's relationship with food.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 08:15 AM
 
Location: The City
21,958 posts, read 30,839,883 times
Reputation: 7495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp Point View Post
I know you are probably the most not biased person on this site but some things you say are just wrong.

Give me 3 reasons how SF beats Philly in foods? Also who's side are you on?
They are both tied to me when I think about it and personally Philadelphia has more of a variety of ethnic foods than San Francisco. The only reason people are saying San Francisco is just because they know San Francisco is noted as a world class city therefor what ever it is, it's better than any other city in "insert item". That's not true though. Any foodie who travels this country would know that Philly is at least tied with San Francisco, if not BETTER. They're no negative views of our food most of the time anyway.

OH And look at that, Philly just took 3rd place. But I'm sure SF will catch back up.
I am not on anyones side. I love Philly and the food scene but on this aspect overall find SF to be better. That isnt a slight against Philly. Especially on higher end foods. SF is the real deal; to me only surpossed by NYC and Chicago in this category.

I have lived in SF and still visit a few times a year for work and always have a great meal while there. Also the sorrounding areas of SF are better in general than Philly; not saying the sorrounding areas are bad in Philly, they are not but again feel is ahead and to me it is pretty cleanly ahead. I do think Philly is closing the gap pretty quickly but honestly am not sure it will ever surpass. Both are great food cities; and as someone who likes to eat the more the merrier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 10:10 AM
 
637 posts, read 745,799 times
Reputation: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidphilly View Post
I am not on anyones side. I love Philly and the food scene but on this aspect overall find SF to be better. That isnt a slight against Philly. Especially on higher end foods. SF is the real deal; to me only surpossed by NYC and Chicago in this category.

I have lived in SF and still visit a few times a year for work and always have a great meal while there. Also the sorrounding areas of SF are better in general than Philly; not saying the sorrounding areas are bad in Philly, they are not but again feel is ahead and to me it is pretty cleanly ahead. I do think Philly is closing the gap pretty quickly but honestly am not sure it will ever surpass. Both are great food cities; and as someone who likes to eat the more the merrier.
Well, considering that the surrounding areas of Philadelphia are NYC and DC, and the surrounding areas of SF less populated, I think it is sort of an unfair comparison.

What about SF particularly makes it better than Philadelphia, in your opinion?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 10:28 AM
 
Location: The City
21,958 posts, read 30,839,883 times
Reputation: 7495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huge Foodie 215 View Post
Well, considering that the surrounding areas of Philadelphia are NYC and DC, and the surrounding areas of SF less populated, I think it is sort of an unfair comparison.

What about SF particularly makes it better than Philadelphia, in your opinion?

Freshness, diversity, offerings, and care to detail in general. Oh and taste; again Philly has tremendous food I just personally find SF better and many agree with me; but for everyone it is preference. I just SF in general is better

Both have more than than their fair share of great places I just personally find SF a step above and overall a little more diverse and consistent
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 11:26 AM
rah
 
Location: Oakland
3,315 posts, read 7,894,339 times
Reputation: 2492
The amount of Philly boosting going on on this website is quite hilarious at times. It's a good food city, but overall it really isn't better than SF, and I'm not sure it's better than LA either.

As kidphilly said, SF has the edge on diversity of food options, not to mention the close proximity to year-round fresh produce is a big plus. And there are tons of good places at all price ranges, from cheap street food to ultra expensive places with Michelin ratings. The same can be said for LA, though to a lesser extent on the high-end of things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2012, 03:21 PM
 
Location: Center City
6,564 posts, read 7,314,568 times
Reputation: 8635
Quote:
Originally Posted by rah View Post
The amount of Philly boosting going on on this website is quite hilarious at times. It's a good food city, but overall it really isn't better than SF, and I'm not sure it's better than LA either.
When I look at the voting, with a few exceptions, most people are voting for the city where they live.

Imagine that happening on CD.

Last edited by Pine to Vine; 03-20-2012 at 04:19 PM.. Reason: correct misspelling
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top