When 3 LTHers post about the same place re: “actually good sushi”, I figure it was at least worth a try, even if there are some warning signs…
I've dismissed Toro as a place my cousin who won't eat raw seafood would like
…and yet, I felt the same way walking in. So many sushi places on either Halsted or Broadway look so alike, and since most of them serve a god awful product, things don’t look good at first sight.
Thankfully, LTH doesn’t disappoint. I’m happy to say that that Toro can live up to the moniker of actually good sushi. 90% of this battle is won on fish, and there’s solid work there — well sliced, no off tastes, nor is anything clearly defrosted. You’re probably never going for nigiri or sashimi, and they don’t have their namesake or even particularly impressive tekkamaki, but the futo rolls benefit from their ingredients.
Service was pleasant, opting for the “neighborhood spot” vibe right down to the Christmas cards and thank you letters hung on the walls. Mitch cares about his operation, and though I hesitate to draw too many comparisons, at a high level I think it’s fair to draw parallels to Sushi Mike in that both seem to emphasize rolls to suit their customers tastes, not simply to cover up subpar chefs or ingredients.
With some pleasant surprise and pleasantries out of the way, some issues:
• given the solid-enough fish, why so many attempts to cover it up? It makes sense that sushi may require more introduction to certain demographics, but everything is mayo this or cream cheese that. While I'll admit to being a whore for unagi sauce, there's so much more to be had, and if the North Side sushi is trending towards less old school Japanese, and the trendy is more towards "experiential" and omakase, perhaps to be actually good need to offer what represents their view of the product and not just what Judy off Sheffield thought tasted good back in 1999?
• food is king, food is first. service is next, leaving little left for presentation. Also, I'm hardly the type to try and wade into this sort of discussion when the cuisine itself is fraught with cultural mixing, marrying, family and the like. Still, The Sign. Is it really necessary? Do the 's' added on make it better? Can you blame someone for judging a book by its cover for thinking that regardless of the awesome benefits sushi may provide in someone's sex life, that doesn't help convey respect for your food?
Back to LTH, it sounds like this Itto place was pretty solid. I'll have to look back through and see why it closed. In the meantime, Toro is a surprising eye raise that gives hope for fresh fish between Clark and the Park. But this is primarily a place for when you want a bit of LP Maki, and ask Mitch to hold back on the mayo.
Next up: Juno.