A few weeks ago I enlisted your help for a "crowd-sourced" review of the East End's Little India, which has been under new management since its former (and beloved!) owners sold it to a new crew earlier this year.
I'm not only happy that you responded, but also that we're pretty much on the same page when it comes to the restaurant's current iteration.
The verdict: It's not bad, but it's not the same.
That's no surprise, I guess, since even two different cooks following the exact same recipe will most likely yield slightly different results. But when longtime customers have grown accustomed to their favorite dishes tasting a certain way, even the slightest change can turn folks off.
Sounds like that might be happening a little bit here. Many guests I've talked to have shared stories of dishes that didn't quite have the wow-factor they once had. Some haven't been able to pinpoint exactly why, while others have described sauces that weren't quite as rich and flavors not quite as deep.
That's been my experience, too.
For the fairest comparison, I first ordered my standard go-to Indian dish, lamb korma, featuring cubes of lamb cooked in a creamy almond-cashew sauce. I enjoyed it so many times under the previous owners that it would be easy to see how the new version stacked up.
And, well, it didn't. It tasted OK, but the same depth of flavor you get from such a complex blend of spices just wasn't there.
A few days later I stopped in for the lunch buffet, giving me the opportunity to sample several items at once. Although I thought the chicken tikka masala was a tad bit better than before, most other items fell in the average range - with a slight vinegar-heavy taste replacing the sweet-spicy-tart balance I always appreciated before in many dishes.
I didn't necessarily leave disappointed, but I also wasn't yearning to go back any time soon. Many of you agree.
"I was blown away when eating off the menu, but the buffet wasn't as awesome," reported Courtney Crabtree. "When I went back for the buffet a second time, it seemed like they just had a hard time keeping up with it and the tikka masala wasn't as yummy as it had been when I ordered off the menu. But that could just be the issue of serving food on a buffet."
She does, however, recommend the garlic naan bread.
"When I ordered garlic naan off the menu it had fresh herbs on it as well as the garlic and, oh my God, it was out of this world! And the raita had fresh veggies in it as well."
"I've eaten at Little India back when Meena and Harish had it and also the lunch buffet with the new owners," wrote a reader who preferred not to share her name. "I think the new owners are trying very hard to retain old customers by following Meena and Harish's old recipes exactly, but I wonder if they gave themselves creative license to try out some of their big city recipes and expertise if they would do better.
"The first week when both old and new owners were there, I thought the food was slightly better than just with the old owners."
She went on to say she always patronized Little India instead of Sitar because they had soup, but added that lately Sitar has been offering soup that is better than Little India's.
"I've been gravitating toward Sitar's lunch buffet more and I think they do a pretty great job. The cabbage is not overcooked. Each dish tastes different than every other dish. Things are not dry from sitting out too long. I like how Sitar arranges the cold salad ingredients in strips instead of tossing."
Reader Shawn Means also has found himself bouncing back and forth between the city's two Indian restaurants through the years, but is ready to pledge allegiance to only one.
"When Little India first opened, I thought the food and service were very good - and my favorite Indian restaurant, Sitar of India, had been in a bit of a slump," he said. "So I went to Little India regularly for the first year and a half it was open."
But he said as time went on he gravitated back to Sitar, mostly due to a perceived decline in food quality and service at Little India.
"So after an absence of two years or so, I decided to give Little India and its new owner another shot. The food quality was OK, but the service was still lackluster. The restaurant was nearly empty that evening, yet our service was still very slow. I think that while Sitar has had its ups and downs as management has changed, it still has the best Indian food in town."
I was interested in Shawn's back-and-forth between Sitar and Little India, because I also used to do the same thing before finding Little India to be far superior in terms of food quality and service.
But with the shine fading on Little India of late, I ventured back to Sitar for the first time in many, many years.
My issues with Sitar have primarily been more with inadequate service than food, and I'm happy to say service was pretty good when I stopped by a few weeks ago. (However, as the only guest dining in the entire place during the dinner hour, there wasn't much else for the staff to do but keep checking on me.)
On the food front, I ordered the Thali sampler so I could try tastes of several different dishes at one setting. The basmati rice, pappadam, tandoori roti and tandoori chicken were fine, the chicken curry was good and the spinach-spiked lamb saag was fantastic. Given that relative success, I probably will stop back in again soon.
All in all, I can't confidently say which spot I'd choose over the other right now.
But the good news is this town is definitely big enough to support two quality Indian restaurants. So I hope Sitar and Little India both step up to the plate.
Steven Keith writes a weekly food column for the Charleston Gazette-Mail. He can be reached at 304-380-6096 or by email at dailymailfoodguy@aol.com. You can also follow him on Facebook and Pinterest as "DailyMail FoodGuy," on Twitter as "DMFoodGuy" and read his blog at blogs.charlestondailymail/foodguy.