CtznCane

Granted it has been many years (1983) but it was not bad but horrendous attitude by the staff at the restaurant portion of Chez Panisse that made me vow never to return. I still went to the cafe part though where I found the food to be good and the service to be pleasant. The food at the restaurant was however good, though pricey for the time period. Great service can improve even mediocre food, but even excellent food cannot compensate for poor service.

I remember as an illegal age drinking teen in the late '60's and into the 70's that Smirnoff was perceived then as the high end stuff., Then when was it, the late 80's? Stoly became the in thing. Having never been a vodka drinker and only on rare occasions having had mixed drinks with it, I was brought up hearing and perceiving that all vodkas were essentially the same. That vodka has no taste (other than being alcohol) and that the difference was only a question of purity and hence smootheness. Not taking into account the flavored vodkas (hmm, if it had flavor why the need to flavor it?) is what I've heard true or false? What is the taste of Vodka? What to look for. My main interests here are that my SO likes vodka and that I"m interested in using it to cook with (I make penne a la vodka) and want to know what flavor it is bringing to the party. Obviously I"ll have to try some straight along the way as well.

I'm trying to curb my soda intake and go for the diet stuff. A friend recommended Diet Rite because they use splenda and I liked it. Never looked to see what Fresca uses but that has always been a refereshing drink though I'm not big on the grapefruit taste. The worst I've tried however is Diet Pepsi and I like regular Pepsi. Absolutely no taste to it at all I thought.

Being a loyal California native and an enjoyer of riesling's I wish I could say we have some nice ones. Late Harvest wise we do but not much in the way of other rieslings that are not Late Harvest. Perhaps I haven't looked hard enough but I'd be interested in trying some of the better New York ones. Any ideas as to Bay Area (San Fran/East Bay preferred) sources for them?

While not a newcomer to drinking (being 52 and having started young) I am a newcomer to Bourbon. While I've cooked with bourbon for years it wasn't until I bought my son a bottle for his 22nd birthday (nope, didn't try it when I got him a bottle at 21) that I started drinking the stuff myself. In terms of whiskey I was a Scotch man. I think many ( I sure was one) prefer one or the other but not both. While my son likes Makers Mark or Booker's, I wound up buying him a bottle of George Dickell 12 year old and getting myself a bottle. Since that time (last Novemer) I've been drinking and enjoying bourbon as well as Rye. Still though I haven't found a better bottle for the price than George Dickell 12 year old, and their 8 year old is also good and lower priced. For cooking, and at a reasonable price Early Times has seemed to work well and is not unpleasant on its own. (I only drink bourbon, or scotch for that matter -other than single malt) straigt up on the rocks or with a splash of water. From what I've read on this thread I think I'll pick up a bottle of the Evan Williams to try for cooking and that occasional extra nip now and then. Another that I like is Old Overholt Rye whiskey. Perhaps on vacation I'll toss down the ducats to try the Van Winkle which I'm also interested in. I do wonder, and would like to hear, how many people are primarily just scotch or just bourbon, as well as how common the crossovers are. After my bourbon baptism and rebirth via Geoge D, I seldom find myself having or considering a glass of scotch even.

Thanks for the old link. In looking at that old link I liked what you said. "As a thumbnail sketch of an analysis of the mark "champagne", I'd venture to say that it suffered genericide a long time ago. "Genericide" is trademark lawyer slang for a mark having fallen into generic usage and lost all capacity to identify a specific producer. Like kleenex, or xerox (despite their attempts to head that off), and (maybe) tivo." Dead on for the most part, though I believe people still recognize the brand name as well. (Same thing could be said of Coke and cola.). Xerox is synonymous with making a copy, and kleenex is, well kleenex, I can't even think of calling it by another name, and for the same reason I usually by it by brand name as well. In the same way, I for one would think that from a business and economic standpoint that the fact we call it (right or wrong) champagne in a generic way probably leads to more purchases of French Champagne. In terms of sales from a purely psychological standpoint, if one is looking for a bottle of champagne (thinking domestic) they've opened themselves to buying a bottle of Champagne from France. If we think of sending something over night somewhere it is almost generic to say FedEx it. Could we use or even be thinking about another means such as DHL or Air UPS? Sure, but just that seed of the name might lead one to use FedEx. In some ways it fits that old creed of no such thing as bad advertising. Name recognition. It is not what we label it, it is what we call it.

American arrogance? Seems to me the French are the ones hoisted on their own pitard. Politics shouldn't enter into what we call our sparkiing wine though it should play a role in whether or not we purchase French sparkling wines. For all we've done protecting their freedom over the last 100 years, yeah the French can put it where the sun doesn't shine. It seems to me to be quite a double standard to be ethical about purchasing food or other items based on ecology or some other moral lines yet saying we'll still buy French wine because we like the way it tastes. Ufortunately I've given in to weaknesses and still purchased some Frecnh wine. From a moral standpoint I shouldn't buy it. From an I want to drink it standpoint I occasionally give in. When I first started this thread, I did so because something was irking me about calling, or feeling a need to be (in terms of some of the wine community) politically correct in calling California (or any other Domestic) sparkiling wines by some other name than champagne. After seeing the responses here I am convinced of two things. One is that it is wrong for us to label Californai wines as champagne, and secondly that it is 100% fine to refer to them as champagne. In terms of labeling give them their due and appease them and don't label it champagne. As to calling it champagne? That is what (I believe) it is in the minds of most Americans. Is it a ripoff? Or trying to capitalize on the name? BS! If voyeurism is the homage that virtue pays to vice, then so to is our calling a glass of bubbly champagne the homage that we pay to Dom Perignon and the French for their creation of this type of wine. Words take on new meaning over time. Look at the phrase "The gay nineties" and apply it to 1890 and 1990 and the perception/meaning will come acrfoss entirely different.

Scrhamsberg picked their first grapes at Trefethen Oak Knoll Vineyards on July 28th as well.

The Germans have a nice one word name Sekt. The Itallians Prosecco. New Yorker's have their own Language. We Californians and other American's, untill we find a one word name for it that we like better call it Champagne. To repeat once again though, I (and I feel many others) call it Champagne due to its style of wine. That the particular style comes from that region is just how it happens to be. If this is so odd, then why, oh why do people say something like "I had a nice French Champagne....." and don't tell me you haven't heard the terminology "French Champagne" used on many occasions.

I've gone several directions in bringing my own wine to restaurants. One way has been to choose the wines we've wanted to have and then order our food around the wine. Our second way has been to take the wine we want to drink irrespective of what we decide to order. (This I might say we've found least ideal.) The best way I've found is to discuss the wine selections beforehand (when making reservations) and asking the restaruant and enlisting their help. At least for a special occasion this last way is ideal, though it can be a little more costly. I'd only do this with a restaurant though that I had confidence in.

The Napa Valley ruling is what fueled my question. Labeling a product to mislead people on where it is from is a different story than the name of a style of wine in my opinion. 35 years ago, when nobody read labels or knew too much about wine over here, maybe they had more of a bitch, at least with Chablis or Burgundy. Perhaps though they should have been most offended at what was being offered about at that time. I can even go along with them taking offense at a bottle of Andre's Cold Duck being called Champagne. It is hard now to imagine anyone of drinking age not being able to understand that wine from California is not French wine, German wine, or whatever. If Champagne is such a region oriented name, tell em to take Epernay or Reims. To me that is like having a Cabernet and saying Napa Valley or Alexander Valley. Cabernet is the style of wine, the latter where it is from. So, here it sounds like Champagne is the style of wine and Epernay is where it is from. Grape names I can live with. Both in their actual name, the way they roll off the tongue, and for their abbrevated names. Give me Cabernet/Cab, Pinot Noir/Pinot, Zinfandel/Zin, Chardonnay/Chard, and so on. But what? Give me a Bubbly? A sparkler? Nah, sorry, this is the one wine we (the collective we, me, myself, I and all other like minded opinonated sobs) should, can, and will call Champagne. With as much as we've done for the French and the little they've done for us over the last 100 years you think they'd say fine. But no, and probably less so now that our Champagne is better than theirs. Perhaps the goal of the wine industry, hell, let's have a contest, should come up with a nice one word name for domestic Champagne so that we will no longer offend those ne'er do wells. Until then, when I want a good champagne, I'll reach for a Califronia Champagne.

Why shouldn't California (or other domestic) sparklers be called Champagne? I hate trying to be politically correct ( and will not be from this point forth) and call them "Sparklers" or "Domestic Sparklers" when in fact the style of wine is Champagne. Only in the Champagne region of France do they bill their sparkling wines primarily behind the name of the region as opposed to other areas that are predominantly named and recognized by the Chateau with the region they are from being secondary. I don't know the answer but do they call their still wines (if any) from that region Champagne? For the most part, we've not had a problem on other wines we haven't had a problem as they are primarily named for the varietal. Better yet American wineries have come up with indiviualized names on their blends. Regardless of whether or not we should label it champagne, for discussion puproses in talking about a wine, champagne just plain fits and rolls off the tongue more easily than 'domestic sparkler' (sounds like fireworks) or 'sparkling wine.' What about Port for that matter? Why isn't Portugal up in arms? Perhaps the difference is that the French may believe people will think it actually came from France. Hmmmmm, it strikes me that perhaps we should be complaining to the French about their labeling. I want to see a nice label on that insanely overpriced Chateau Petrus calling it Merlot. So much for my rant, at least I've eased myself of the burden of calling a champagne styled wine by any other name than Champagne.

there is a fine recipe for Cochinita Pibil (Slow Roasted Achiote Pork in Banana Leaves in Rick Bayless' book "Mexico One Plate At a Time." I've used this recipe several times now and have gotten nothing but raves when I've made it.

I remember doing a salt encrusted sirloin tip roast about 20 years ago from a San Francisco (perhaps great chefs series) cookbook that called for the roast to be browned first before being encrusted. I believe (my ex-wife wound up with the book) it called for both regular/kosher Salt and for a certain amount of Rock salt, with there being roughly about 5-6 lbs of salt in all. I've been interested in doing one again, I like the cheese cloth aspect of it. Whether I'd use the same recipe again I don't know but I wish I could find a copy of it. (The recipe I used 20 years ago.)

Perhaps it doesn't belong here, but what if people were to list where they found or one could find some of these particular wines? Not that it will help all of us due to various locations around the company, but it might, for many, give people a direction in which to go. Just a thought.

I like this Thai style tomato soup with shrimp and noodles which was from John Ash at a recent class: 2 two-ounce packets of cellophane or bean thread noodles. 7 cups rich chicken stock simmered with shrimp shells for 5-10 minutes. 2 T - asian fish sauce (or to taste) 1T - asian chile-garlic sauce (or to taste) 3 cups canned diced tomoatoes in juice 1 cup green onions, sliced diagonally and thinly 2 t hot pepper sesame oil (or to taste) 1 pound medium shrimp , shelled and deveined (31-36 count) 1/2 cup lossely packed cilantro leaves 3 T finely sliced garlic, crisply fried in veg oil. soak noodles in a bowl and cover with warm water and soak utnil softened 20-025 minutes. drain the noodles and dump in a tangle on a cutting board and cut through crosswise and lengthwise to form roughly 4-inch lengths. strain the shells from the stock and return to the pot and bring to a boil. Stir in the fish sauce, chile-carlic sauce, tomatoes ith their juice, green onions and hot sesame oil. Add the noodles and sand shrimp and simmer for a minute or two. (If serving at the table the the shrimp will actually cook by adding and just taking to the table, by the time served they will be done.) Ladle into warm bowls and top with cilantro and fried garlic. This, as I mentioned, is a John Ash recipe. Easy, quick and quite tasty I think.

Perhaps slightly off topic but certainly relevant is the farming practices on Tiger shrimp. At a recent John Ash class (on shrimp) he talked about how he saw them raised in thailand. Basically they dig a pond, seed it, and use it until it will no longer sustain life. Then abandon it, go down the road, and dig a new pond. As he said 'I'd hate to get noe of the shrimp from the last crop'. He made a good point I think about not buying them unless the seller knows that the shirmp are being farmed in an ethically and ecologogically responsible manner. Stick to Gulf Whites and other domestics avoids that question. I'm not a Sierra clubber and am certainly not a radical about the ecological side of things but this one hit me hard and as such I will avoid these shrimp unless the fish monger has a satisfactory answer as to the supplier and how they're raised.

Thanks for sharing this view, Mary. Wine making is a passionate and intense profession and this post gives us more insight on that passion and intensity.

While there may be some age biased opinions (I'm 52 with tattoos, etc.) I think it more comes down to expectations we have for the eating experience and just how pierced or tattood the server is. The real key is whether it takes our focus away from the meal and overall ambience. If it fits in within the image that's fine, if it alters our perception then it is not fine and I wouldn't be pleased. Right or wrong, good or bad is not the issue. As the diner, only what we perceive and how it matches our expectations is important. Then again, I doubt we will really encounter that as usually the restaurant will hire people who fit their image or at least are within its outer boundaries. If the person in question isn't seen or their tats/piercings aren't, then there is nothing for us to know about anyhow.

I've never tried eating the shrimp shells though when having sushi I love having the shirmp heads fried. I hadn't thought of it till this post but the view point of if the tail shell is on it is okay to use your hands makes sense. Personally, when I cook shrimp I remove all of the shell reserving it for stock. The dilemma restaurant wise, as I see it, is a dish when the tail is on for appearance and pesentation. To me the feelings are mixed, it looks nice but now I have to go through the hassle of taking the tail off which I don't like. Perhaps that is why I will seldom order shirmp dishes in a restaurant. I am going to have to try eating the shells though before making a final judgment.

I'd go for the marinade too. Perhaps oil, bourbon, rosemary, oregano, parsley actually whatever fresh herbs you have around), & Garlic, with a rouch of balsamic. marinade them a few hours then toss em on the grill. I'd concur med rare is best, not overdone, though the marinade will help protect them from toughening a bit if you do cook them a little longer

Mine was back in I believe '84. I called the restaurant (xmas season) told them what wines I was bringing, and to make a meal around the wines, no questions asked. They did. The wine: 1961 Chateau Cheval Blanc, and English Calvert bottling. The restaurant served a combination of Abalone & Veal Picatta (The Sardine Factory in Monterey). After 20+ years I don't have all the details but I can say this. The color of the wine was mesmorizing still retaining its vibrancy yet a little bit subudued taking the shout out of the red. Absolutely liquid silk while being utterly rich and full and capturing the fruit. The finish just lingered on and on bringing a warmth. Utterly exquisite and yes, perfect. Sure, this is all subjective but that is my perfect wine. I've had some awfully good ones since, but nothing close to that one.

We go through a lot of milk. No kids, just us and I'm talking the good old whole milk, none of this 2%, 1% or such and the prices are high out here. WIth one exception. We are in Antioch and out here we have a WinnCo. Hell it is a chain but I'd never heard of them before. Safeway milk is 4.13 a gallon. WinnCo, for Berkeley Farms (which has been my favorite since I was a kid) it is only $2.75 there. Also Whipping Cream. 2.79-2.95 everywhere else and 1.79 there. (And that is up from the 1.38 it was a month ago!) I also find butter there for 2.75 as opposed to 3.65 to 4+ elsewhere. With costs being what they are out here I do have different stores for different things and there is a significant enough difference to make it worthwhile.

I just took a quick peak at some of my Zins:Zin Alley, Rosenblum Richard Sauret Vineyard, Murphy-Goode Lars Dice, Frank Family VIneyards, Paradise Ridge, & Quivira. Only the Quivira, at 14.2 was under 15% To me none of these wines taste like alcohol. Though I've found quite a few lower% wines (not just zins) that to me taste like alcohol, or maybe it is just they don't have the fruit to back up the alcohol. I consider myself lucky in that I enjoy all styles of wines. My SO is quite different and doesn't care for the spicy zins. (Of course I don't mind that since there is more left for me on those wines!) If the publc though did not enjoy these higher alcohol wines they wouldn't buy them. Does that mean their taste is 'bad' or 'unsophistcated'or that they just don't know wines? No, it means they are just different. As to varietal character, that is another story. I still may like a varietal though it doesn't taste like I expected. I won't like it in terms of being a classic x,y, or z, but I may like it as just a pleasant wine to drink. Case in point. I had a rouge champagne last sunday. 100 percen pinot. It had a lot of berry flavor to it. If I sit down to have a glass of champagne it wouldn't fit the bill. I did like it though for what it was and will drink it accordingly. I do not know the answer to this, but why do I find low alcohol wines that taste like alcohol/gasohol when I can drink a huge alcohol wine and have no alcohol taste come across in it?

cost is a factor and I wouldn't go over the top myself price wise. The one I use with the Lobster usually is Concannon Vineyards Late Harvest J. Reisling at about 17.50 per bottle, though 15 since we are club members there. I've also found a pleasant, not great, covey run LH chenin blanc at Trader Joes. The Concannon is a fine one regardless of price, but not all sweet wines are too outrageously priced. I really like the idea of with the duck breast! Gotta try that one.