L’Ambroisie – Paris (Rating: 19/20)

L’Ambroisie is one of the favourite places for many well known gourmets such as Jacques Chirac, Jean-Pierre Coffe etc and has a very high number of returning guests. Dinner reservations are difficult to obtain with short notice. There is no mystery it remains this way despite fairly high prices since the chef, Bernard Pacaud, consistently serves top quality food made with extraordinary ingredients and often with a magic touch in the dishes that lifts them to a level of greatness rarely seen elsewhere.

Pacaud is one of the most season respecting chefs to be found. Pacaud will never serve any produce that is not in season. There are no canned truffles, no dried morels no South African ceps e t c. This is highly admirable as the vast majority of Europe’s multi-star restaurants often use many ingredients that are not in season to impress the less knowledgeable diner. Furthermore, at l’Ambroisie one can rest assured that only superb truffles, glorious Osetra gold caviar, perfectly fresh fish and exceptional meat will be served.
At many multi-star restaurants the menu changes rarely and even when it does, changes are very subtle. At l’Ambroise changes can be quite significant indicating a change necessary whenever the supply of pristine ingredients requires such changes.
Does Pacaud have a style? It is difficult to describe the style of Pacaud. When hearing people talk about Pacaud the discussions are very focused on traditional cooking and superb seasonal ingredients. But how could his style be described? There is no doubt that Pacaud is very focused on deliciousness and of what is served. This is not a place where the clients are guinea pigs which is the case at many other restaurants. No “prototypes” are served. Presentations are very simple and understated and they do not in any way pretend to be pieces of art. Food at Pacaud is to be savoured and tasted for their tastes and extraordinary ingredients and exceptional taste marriages and taste calibration. It is a place where you eat. Someone who once asked Gagnaire what food he likes to eat himself got the response that “I like Pacaud’s food, you know he with Ambroisie. But he does not like mine.”
But to go a step deeper in his approach, it strikes me that the dishes span different conceptual philosophies, a very large sphere of tastes and great variety of used ingredients. There is a multitude in the cooking which is rather unique. At other top restaurants it is possible to find a pretty clear philosophy, which comes back in most dishes. This is for example the case at Arpege and in a sense even at Gagnaire and absolutely with Ducasse’s food. It is also true for el Bulli although the philosophy there makes little sense to me. But at Pacaud there are on the one hand dishes that are extremely traditional and give a feeling of being perfect and modernized versions of an original from the fifties or sixties, such as his fabulous chicken dish. On the other hand, there are also dishes that feel very modern and creative even today, when some chefs, less interested in the resulting dish, choose the imperfect to try to move cooking forward. I know that Pacaud has said that he does not yet have a style of his own. It may be taken as a very modest comment from the maybe most modest and laid back chef on the top level, but at the same time it does give an explanation of why the seemingly so very different dishes are served at this place. It may also explain why it happens, although quite rare, that dishes, although exceptionally well executed, just feel like less well made assembling of perfect ingredients. Sometimes one can get the feeling that Pacaud creates his dishes from a, perhaps somewhat limited, list of currently available ingredients such as asparagus, morels, chicken, lamb, tomatoes and “new” dishes are really just a different assembly of the listed ingredients plus a sauce variation. I would be surprised to see Pacaud go outside this list and his normally used techniques to find inspiration. This is perhaps the only real criticism that can be levelled against Pacaud.
The most recent meal here was in January 2005. L’Ambroisie had just started to serve the season’s truffles. Truffles have matured late this year but the truffles at l’Ambroisie were the first together with some I had earlier in the week that started to show that deep very pungent, complex and smoky taste of truffles that I adore. They still have some time to go before they are truly exceptional. The day before I ate at Ambroisie I dined at Gagnaire and the truffles were even a week or two behind in maturity. At Ambroisie the truffles had a very dark grey colour close to black, whereas at Gagnaire they were just dark grey. Gagnaire had also just started to serve truffles on the menu because they were later than usual. When he came out to talk he conceded that they had just started to get really good and in another week or two they should be exceptional. He thought the harvest would be quite large and of very good quality this season and that the season would last long.
Let us go back to Ambroisie. As “snacks” we got a slice from a small baguette with finely shaved truffles and radish. An extraordinary amuse followed. It was a carpaccio of scallops that were perfectly cut, not too thick and not to thin so the texture and taste of the super fresh scallops were present. The scallops were perfectly seasoned with sea salt, oil, some barely traceable lemon juice and very tasty small sprigs of different herbs.
First course was poached oysters with watercress purée or cream and gold caviar. It was a new dish for me. I have seen it before but had not tried it. The oysters were just warm but had not lost their raw texture. The watercress purée was extremely powerful in taste. The three tastes were astonishingly calibrated and lifted the dish close to perfection.
After followed the Bresse chicken. It is now stuffed with truffles and served with truffles in various ways. The chicken was as good as usual. I rated the dish a tad lower than usual (usually a perfect dish) because the sauces with the chicken did not have the truffle taste of fresh truffles as it should. Perhaps a very tiny issue but if one has to find something that could be improved then that is it. The chicken was served with finely cut and perfectly cooked oignon blanc enhanced by finely diced truffles and braised salsify. The onion had a superb taste of onion but without any hint of the force or sharpness onions.
The meal ended with the tarte sableé au chocolat, glace à la vanille. The chocolate tart was as good a usual. From a technique point of view it is an exceptionally impressive creation. It is very light but provides a powerful if not rich chocolate taste. I was less impressed with the vanilla taste of the ice cream this time. It was a notch less perfumed than it usually is.
Should you go? Yes I think any serious gourmet need to try this place at least once. Service is very good, the wine list does contain a number of reasonably priced wines, and the dining rooms, and especially the one in the middle is one of the most beautiful dining rooms in the world.
This is not the place to go for those who feel that the way we dine and what we eat at restaurants need to be challenged and changed. Well actually maybe it is the place to go to for all those since Ambrioise provides good evidence that there is no urgent need to change the way we eat or what we eat, but instead that there is a need for the vast majority of chefs to focus more on what ingredients they serve and what they do with them. Once they have sorted that out they can try to reinvent food.
Gastroville rating of l’Ambroisie: 19/20
/MJ