BAIC SUSHI: Has anyone been to Sebo in SF?
VIP Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,425
From: Under your bed, in your closet, and in your head
Car Info: Corvette Z51
Forester Specialist
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 3,985
From: Sonoma County
Car Info: '98/'04 Foresters (S & XT)
VIP Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,425
From: Under your bed, in your closet, and in your head
Car Info: Corvette Z51
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 211
From: Pleasanton, Ca
Car Info: 09 WRX Wagon, and 99 RS
Okoze Sushi in Russian hill has really fresh fish in my experience. Really highly rated if that matters. Arguably the best that I have been to...not that I have been to a ton of places.
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,225
From: SF Bay Area - Peninsula
Car Info: 04 psm wrx sedan
for sushi, i always go to shimo, im a little biased though as i know the owner, been friends with their family for a while now..but i know that he catches his own fish a lot and i know the care and preparation put into their food
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 8,228
From: 631 Railroad Ave. Fairfield, CA
Car Info: A Laptop
After I came back from Tokyo, I couldn't eat even what I considered to be the best sushi back here in the Bay. The stuff in Tokyo was a different food entirely compared to our mostly flash frozen fish here. It took me a good 4-5 months to get back into eating the sushi out here. I'd love to find a place that could even come close in terms of freshness and quality!
-- Ed
-- Ed
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 211
From: Pleasanton, Ca
Car Info: 09 WRX Wagon, and 99 RS
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 8,228
From: 631 Railroad Ave. Fairfield, CA
Car Info: A Laptop
. We ate about 2 blocks away from the market.
VIP Member
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,425
From: Under your bed, in your closet, and in your head
Car Info: Corvette Z51
Hmmm, if memory serves me correctly, much sashimi/sushi-grade fish is flash-frozen on the fishing ships, even fish that is meant for domestic Japanese markets.
What makes the difference between the quality of neta between the US and Japan is 1.) domestic Japanese fish is of higher quality (at least in a subjective sense) than the fish used in American restaurants that don't get their fish shipped from Japan (there are a number of factors that account for this, including ocean conditions, variations in species of fish, etc.); 2.) for those American restaurants that brag about shipping fish from Tsukiji or Japan in general, one must account for the transit time of the fish -- in other words, even if you get a JDM-quality (haha) hunk of fish, it's at least a day older (oftentimes more) than if it were served domestically in Japan, and for seafood, even a day makes a huge difference in quality; and 3.) given the notion that if the exact same piece of fish were proverbially used by two different osushiya, the itamae with superior skill will prepare his nigiri in such a fashion that it WILL taste better than the other restaurant -- this is not only due to preparation of the neta (selection of section of meat, cutting technique, etc.), but also the preparation of the shari, which is just as important as the neta if not moreso (shari can't be too big or too small -- it should provide a good, hitokuchi mouth feel in conjunction with a properly sized and proportioned neta; also, shari can't be too compact, otherwise it becomes tough and gummy; nor can it be too loose, otherwise it will fall apart -- good shari must not only be quality rice like koshihikari, it must also be prepped well enough to have the right ratio of air to rice). Neta is what separates the trained from the untrained, but shari is what really separates the men from the boys. High quality fish and fine rice will practically guarantee a good chirashi, but nigiri needs a talented, properly trained itamae before it can really shine.
And rolls, ha, rolls...
What makes the difference between the quality of neta between the US and Japan is 1.) domestic Japanese fish is of higher quality (at least in a subjective sense) than the fish used in American restaurants that don't get their fish shipped from Japan (there are a number of factors that account for this, including ocean conditions, variations in species of fish, etc.); 2.) for those American restaurants that brag about shipping fish from Tsukiji or Japan in general, one must account for the transit time of the fish -- in other words, even if you get a JDM-quality (haha) hunk of fish, it's at least a day older (oftentimes more) than if it were served domestically in Japan, and for seafood, even a day makes a huge difference in quality; and 3.) given the notion that if the exact same piece of fish were proverbially used by two different osushiya, the itamae with superior skill will prepare his nigiri in such a fashion that it WILL taste better than the other restaurant -- this is not only due to preparation of the neta (selection of section of meat, cutting technique, etc.), but also the preparation of the shari, which is just as important as the neta if not moreso (shari can't be too big or too small -- it should provide a good, hitokuchi mouth feel in conjunction with a properly sized and proportioned neta; also, shari can't be too compact, otherwise it becomes tough and gummy; nor can it be too loose, otherwise it will fall apart -- good shari must not only be quality rice like koshihikari, it must also be prepped well enough to have the right ratio of air to rice). Neta is what separates the trained from the untrained, but shari is what really separates the men from the boys. High quality fish and fine rice will practically guarantee a good chirashi, but nigiri needs a talented, properly trained itamae before it can really shine.
And rolls, ha, rolls...
Last edited by Choku Dori; Jul 25, 2010 at 12:51 PM.
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 8,228
From: 631 Railroad Ave. Fairfield, CA
Car Info: A Laptop
Hmmm, if memory serves me correctly, much sashimi/sushi-grade fish is flash-frozen on the fishing ships, even fish that is meant for domestic Japanese markets.
What makes the difference between the quality of neta between the US and Japan is 1.) domestic Japanese fish is of higher quality (at least in a subjective sense) than the fish used in American restaurants that don't get their fish shipped from Japan (there are a number of factors that account for this, including ocean conditions, variations in species of fish, etc.); 2.) for those American restaurants that brag about shipping fish from Tsukiji or Japan in general, one must account for the transit time of the fish -- in other words, even if you get a JDM-quality (haha) hunk of fish, it's at least a day older (oftentimes more) than if it were served domestically in Japan, and for seafood, even a day makes a huge difference in quality; and 3.) given the notion that if the exact same piece of fish were proverbially used by two different osushiya, the itamae with superior skill will prepare his nigiri in such a fashion that it WILL taste better than the other restaurant -- this is not only due to preparation of the neta (selection of section of meat, cutting technique, etc.), but also the preparation of the shari, which is just as important as the neta if not moreso (shari can't be too big or too small -- it should provide a good, hitokuchi mouth feel in conjunction with a properly sized and proportioned neta; also, shari can't be too compact, otherwise it becomes tough and gummy; nor can it be too loose, otherwise it will fall apart -- good shari must not only be quality rice like koshihikari, it must also be prepped well enough to have the right ratio of air to rice). Neta is what separates the trained from the untrained, but shari is what really separates the men from the boys. High quality fish and fine rice will practically guarantee a good chirashi, but nigiri needs a talented, properly trained itamae before it can really shine.
And rolls, ha, rolls...
What makes the difference between the quality of neta between the US and Japan is 1.) domestic Japanese fish is of higher quality (at least in a subjective sense) than the fish used in American restaurants that don't get their fish shipped from Japan (there are a number of factors that account for this, including ocean conditions, variations in species of fish, etc.); 2.) for those American restaurants that brag about shipping fish from Tsukiji or Japan in general, one must account for the transit time of the fish -- in other words, even if you get a JDM-quality (haha) hunk of fish, it's at least a day older (oftentimes more) than if it were served domestically in Japan, and for seafood, even a day makes a huge difference in quality; and 3.) given the notion that if the exact same piece of fish were proverbially used by two different osushiya, the itamae with superior skill will prepare his nigiri in such a fashion that it WILL taste better than the other restaurant -- this is not only due to preparation of the neta (selection of section of meat, cutting technique, etc.), but also the preparation of the shari, which is just as important as the neta if not moreso (shari can't be too big or too small -- it should provide a good, hitokuchi mouth feel in conjunction with a properly sized and proportioned neta; also, shari can't be too compact, otherwise it becomes tough and gummy; nor can it be too loose, otherwise it will fall apart -- good shari must not only be quality rice like koshihikari, it must also be prepped well enough to have the right ratio of air to rice). Neta is what separates the trained from the untrained, but shari is what really separates the men from the boys. High quality fish and fine rice will practically guarantee a good chirashi, but nigiri needs a talented, properly trained itamae before it can really shine.
And rolls, ha, rolls...
The wise one speaks the truth
I used to be able to knock out a killer chirashi when I had access to good fish, but getting nigiri just right is a whole different story!
And the rice is definitely just as important as the fish. I recently had a ruined sushi experience because the rice was way overcooked and mushy. It completely ruined the texture and flavor of the nigiri!
-- Ed
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 86
From: SF CA
Car Info: WRX 04
Sebo is probably the most polarizing sushi restaurant I know of.
Everyone either loves it or hates it.
I'll paraphrase the haters first...
"only japanese people can make sushi"
"portions are tiny"
"it's over-priced"
"they don't have [insert type of roll or type of fish or something vegan] and that sucks"
On the other side of the argument... I'm an ex-chef. Spent 14 years working back of the house. A lot of my friends in SF still work in the biz. Go ask 10 SF area chefs what their favorite sushi is... 8 of them will say Sebo. ****... go ask 10 SF area chefs where they would go for dinner if someone else was paying, I bet 5 of them say Sebo.
Is it spendy? Hell yeah. But "over priced"? If you think that you have no idea what kind of ingredient cost those guys are working with. And when you're doing something like sushi... ingredients matter.
If you want to have crispy rolls with mayo and spicy sauce or people shouting and throwing wasabi or big huge chunks of farmed salmon or lots of non-scary fish or are going out for dinner with someone who has food hang-ups -- avoid Sebo. You'll hate it.
If you want volume for money -- avoid Sebo. You'll hate it.
If you have "your things" that you always order at a sushi place and you won't be satisfied if you can't get them -- avoid Sebo. You'll hate it.
On the other hand, if you want amazing fish (and different types of fish than you usually get) of the utmost freshness, served simply and appropriately and you've got an open mind about all of the sushi "mystique" -- go to Sebo. You might love it.
Everyone either loves it or hates it.
I'll paraphrase the haters first...
"only japanese people can make sushi"
"portions are tiny"
"it's over-priced"
"they don't have [insert type of roll or type of fish or something vegan] and that sucks"
On the other side of the argument... I'm an ex-chef. Spent 14 years working back of the house. A lot of my friends in SF still work in the biz. Go ask 10 SF area chefs what their favorite sushi is... 8 of them will say Sebo. ****... go ask 10 SF area chefs where they would go for dinner if someone else was paying, I bet 5 of them say Sebo.
Is it spendy? Hell yeah. But "over priced"? If you think that you have no idea what kind of ingredient cost those guys are working with. And when you're doing something like sushi... ingredients matter.
If you want to have crispy rolls with mayo and spicy sauce or people shouting and throwing wasabi or big huge chunks of farmed salmon or lots of non-scary fish or are going out for dinner with someone who has food hang-ups -- avoid Sebo. You'll hate it.
If you want volume for money -- avoid Sebo. You'll hate it.
If you have "your things" that you always order at a sushi place and you won't be satisfied if you can't get them -- avoid Sebo. You'll hate it.
On the other hand, if you want amazing fish (and different types of fish than you usually get) of the utmost freshness, served simply and appropriately and you've got an open mind about all of the sushi "mystique" -- go to Sebo. You might love it.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 86
From: SF CA
Car Info: WRX 04
Oh... if you want more "credentials".... worked as a chef in NYC and ate a lot of sushi at the best places there. Have spent time in Tokyo and in Kyoto and ate a lot of sushi there. Have had sushi at the 2 places in LA everyone points to as "best".
Is Sebo the best in the US? No. Best in SF? Yes.
Is Sebo the best in the US? No. Best in SF? Yes.