[Dessert names and descriptions]

Wendy--how does your chef describe his dishes? I think you should flow from whatever example he or she sets...and I agree with Ann if a chef is going to employ some humor or wit in naming of savory dishes on the menu, that opens the door for the pastry chef as well. Jason, as far as listing "desserts by primary flavors" that's how Albert Adria did his dessert menus, which we Westerners, Michael included, first heard about back in 1998 or 1999, when "los postres de el bulli" was first released. That's just another example of how the Spanish have shown us that we can be free, much freer than previous conventions. Why not just call a dessert by its primary flavors, say "choco-coco-curry?" Before Albert, no one did a menu that way. That said, that wouldn't work for just any audience, and my guess is it wouldn't work for your current audiences.

I often call desserts by their simple, traditional, expected names--strawberry sundae, lemon meringue pie, rice pudding--and then give them something deconstructed, re-constructed, re-interpreted--far from what they expect formwise but all over it flavor-wise. Also, if you're doing something you've done before for the same audience, or a captive audience like a country club, so say that Black Forest cake, but doing it differently, why not say Black Forest Cake "a new way" or "another way?" Again, it has to fit your work, your chef and your personality.

My wife Colleen just suggested in my ear, as she watches me type this, why not name desserts by colors--red, white--Pierre Herme is fond of assigning colors to his dessert "collections" which he releases seasonally. It's pretentious when he does it but it might be fun in the right former artist's hands like yourself.

[Ray's the Steaks]

I only order the $18.95 hangar, so I'm afraid I'm out of the prime rib loop.

razzar, interesting question this:

"but it seems that what makes it so special is Michael's personal attention to what's being prepared, served, etc. If he opens up multiple locations, wouldn't that level of personal attention be sure to decrease?"

and it's difficult to answer--each case is going to be unique. Why is Ducasse special? To throw out a local example, why is Jose Andres special? Why are the experiences at any restaurant of a chef/owner of multiple locations special? Ducasse and Daniel Boulud, to cite two examples, have given interviews where they've said the executive chefs under them do "them" as good or better than they do themselves. Jose has a few chefs under him that would easily be among the most talented chefs in any city they worked--were they to go out on their own. Not everyone has the energy or creativity or is cut out to lead and motivate this way, nor is it a mark against any chef who doesn't replace himself on the line. Each chef has to find what's best for him or her.

My take is this--the "experience" at Ray's is special because of a lot of factors--from the way your reservation is taken on the phone to how you are greeted at the door to the gentle pricing to whether there is sea salt on the focaccia that day to the way the hangar is aged to the interesting new wines which show up on the list to the relaxed atmosphere to the bare white walls (which I love) and on and on. It's special mainly because Michael cares--and he's not necessarily going to stop caring if he increased his number of covers per night. Is it charming that Michael is at the stove and comes out into the dining room? Undeniably, but it isn't necessarily special because Michael and only Michael does all or even most of these things--it's special because overall it "is" special. I think the "it's better when the chef does it" thing is a myth, it's something that I understand why people feel the way they do about, but certain people cooking in certain styles can mutlitask, and certain people as chef/owners have the ability to hire, retain, train and motivate a team to execute their system or systems concurrently. They know what they can do, what they can't do and what they shouldn't even try to do. Not everyone can do this or even wants to try to do this. A lot of it depends on the system--product, people, execution--and how much confidence and support Michael will have in his ability to put the right system in place and make the right move at the right time.

As long as a chef continues to care as deeply as say a Landrum does--he'll continue to hire good people, pay them well, train them well, and oversee them well even if he expands, moves into a larger space or opens a second location. But the downside to seeing the chef out on the floor is guests come to expect that and he or she lingers too long--or other guests are disappointed when the chef doesn't stop at their table or isn't in the house that night. None of that necessarily makes that hangar any better or worse. That hangar steak is either going to be prepared properly and taste great or it isn't regardless of whether Michael sent it out. And if he's out on the floor more often because that is what most diners perceive as him "giving personal attention" then he's not in the kitchen as much as he might want to be--or should be--and steaks might not be timed just right even if he doesn't expand one seat. So either way it's gonna be a balancing act.

This is pure speculation on my part as well--none of us could predict or project a drop in quality until we're presented with a change--and then see for ourselves. But the upside would be more diners could experience Ray's, more people could get hired and work for a good guy who pays his bills, who doesn't expand beyond his means, and one of the good little guys gets a little further ahead in a very tough business.

[Ray's the Steaks]

Great steaks but not just great steaks. Michael keeps adding little surprises when it comes to food and wine. The first great non-steak dish I reported on was the shrimp scampi, the second one which really impressed me was just the other week--the squid--both are expertly done (and it isn't easy to do squid well--it either has to be cooked very briefly or for a long time with little gray area in between. Maybe 10 people cook squid consistently well in the city.) Both have been on his menu in very reasonably priced half-portions--I think for $7.95--instead of entree-sized portions only. It would be nice if Michael had a website, and especially if his wine list was online, but between Tom Sietsema's coverage (and remember, Tom practically started the Ray's bandwagon) and this thread on eG we've pretty much got Michael covered. As it is he likely doesn't have enough time to check his e-mail since he's one of those chef/owners who just has to be in the kitchen.

What would be really nice is if Michael could attract some backing and support to help him spread his concept, vision and sense of community beyond the present location.

[CityZen Lounge Menu]

Thanks for the wonderful report Don. I haven't had good rillettes in four years and have a craving.

[Vosges Haut Chocolat]

Ted--I think what seems exotic is always going to be in the eye of the beholder--based on whatever your personal frame of reference is, how aware you are of history and traditions, in your country and in other countries, etc. We are a lot more familiar with French cooking, pastry and chocolate than we are with, say, Spanish cooking, pastry and chocolate--the French obviously have been much more influential, and documented, over the past 3 centuries. I don't know what the best Spanish chocolatiers were doing a decade ago, let alone 40 years ago, but we have a much better idea of what the best French chocolatiers were doing! We're only now beginning to realize how the cooking of Spain developed apart from French influences, apart from Escoffier, and how even the current (chic) high-end avant garde cooking of Spain builds upon the traditional dishes of that country. And we still have a LONG way to go to uncover this. (I suspect the El Bulli Book 1 will re-open a lot of people's eyes--and reveal how creative and adventurous they were even then.)

In this case I think Clay's historical example is instructive--even in the mass-market chocolate books or that recent exhibit on chocolate at the AMNH in NYC, which was underwhelming, you're still going to read about those seemingly-exotic ingredients mixed with the crude early forms of cacao--both here in the New World and once it was brought back to the Old--just to make that gritty paste tolerable as a beverage. Cacao itself was exotic and expensive, and the sugar and spices added to it were themselves exotic, expensive and rare outside royalty and affluence. That was part of the allure.

But having that context is a good thing and can lead elsewhere. I remember coming across one of the earlier published chocolate recipes from England, a kind of chaste, poor woman's chocolate which when cool set up like a pudding, so typically English and frugal rather than decadent, French and sensuous, it was in the (still great) Anne Willan "Great Cooks and their Recipes" book, and I remember being shocked it had wine and rosemary in it--and when I first made it (this was maybe 10 years ago, I had been out of my very traditional French pastry school for a few years where we never even discussed rosemary or herbs in relation to dessert) it rocked my world and opened my eyes. So rosemary and chocolate was done hundreds of years ago? All I knew was it tasted GREAT! (Of course, I made it with modern chocolate--a relatively recent invention in the grand scheme of things chocolate as Clay also points out.)

Big picture: all of this once-adventurous chocolate pairing was not adventurous for its time period, that's how it was done in Spain or France or England, but it was then effectively eliminated over time as tastes and awareness changed, eliminated commercially, desserts and chocolate became rigidly codified at the professional/haute level and also at the mass produced level. The flavors and pairings became predictable and standard for close to 2 centuries, thanks mostly to the French who dominated continental cooking.

Read a good culinary history source, like Mennell, which deals generally with the evolution of cooking since the Middle Ages across Europe, and you'll find mention of wonderfully complex "exotic" spice blends and food pairings which rival those of any modern creative chef known for his cutting edge spice blends or fusion of cuisines--like a Kunz or Vongerichten--or examine any previously unfamiliar cuisine you might stumble upon, say an Indian regional style. In the Middle Ages and just beyond you'll find complete commingling of sweet and savory which belies any current trendiness a foodie might be tempted to read into their meal at Per Se, the antecedents of which are hundreds of years old. Mostly everything has been done before, not necessarily done well but done. Dessert has generally been less-well-documented than cooking, but even the not-that-well-documented history of chocolatiers and pastry chefs pairing interesting, eclectic seemingly disparate "exotic" flavors with chocolate is still more than we might realize. Ted, I think you're also right: much of our creative awareness in the modern era got jumpstarted back in what we know as the French "nouvelle cuisine" period, which was say the early 70's and forward, so way before Jacques got his MOF--that's when you first had something considered exotic for its time, say Earl grey tea, paired with chocolate in a sauce or in the ganache of a bon bon. Prior to that--so post Escoffier/but in that Fernand Point handing off to Bocuse and the rest of his disciples phase it was still chocolate and vanilla, or chocolate with very standard flavors like almond or hazelnut or coffee or orange or raspberry or a liqueur like calvados or framboise There was very little spice in pastry beside vanilla, maybe cinnamon but not really often, cinnamon had been purged and supplanted by vanilla, especially with chocolate. No "asian" spices, no minimalism, no exotic Passard tomato--yet. Dessert making was more about codifying classic and repeatable forms, base structures and techniques--it was tarts and gateau St. Honore and Opera and Concord and gateaux succes--and very stagnant when it came to creative flavors.

It's important to remember, though, for most people in the US, chocolate infused with earl grey tea would still seem "exotic," even today. The majority of people would find this "cutting edge."

I'm glad Jacques was mentioned, he's such an interesting, seminal and complex figure. I also was lucky to be asked to write about Jacques for Food Arts right when he opened his place, and I'd been in Le Cirque 2000 to visit with him prior to that (because my wife staged with him.) He had me taste his whole line of chocolates which he had begun producing for Palace hotel guests--they were very French, enrobedly thinly, consummately good, with clean, safe, traditional flavors. They were clearly better than Payard's chocolates. But Jacques is a grounded traditional French pastry chef--with a very traditional approach to acceptable flavors--so he's essentially conservative and to some seemed, frankly, boring. Yes his desserts were fanciful, architecturally challenging and fun but his approach to flavor pairing in them was not daring at all--no chocolate-basil or chocolate-rosemary on his menu--he typified his time and that NYC era and was extremely influential. But, his opening line of chocolates was not adventurous at all--that would go against his heritage and his palate, so why change?--it's not like we had great chocolate all over the place. The best small US chocolate artisans of the time pre-Torres, guys like Burdick, Jim Graham, Donnelly and Recchiuti were working in similarly respectful French styles anyway--and the French chocolate guys they learned from or were influenced by already had exotic and adventurous infusions in their lines. Exotic for Jacques was something like pistachio marzipan, the best pistachio marzipan you'd find in a chocolate but still pistachio marzipan--safe and classic--with the only exception I recall being his more mexican/chili pepper hot chocolate mix but even that had been done by others before. (The Herme chocolate line for Wegmans is likewise safe, French and conservative--and also impeccable--and he also has a pistachio marzipan.) No, what Jacques pioneered in NYC post Le Cirque was the freestanding state of the art chocolate shop, with the best equipment, the best hygiene, sanitation and modern methodologies, driven by his consummate professionalism, work ethic and personal charm--which inspired talented people to work for him and the media to write about him. He knew he had to make a move because he knew there was no long term future as a restaurant pastry chef in the US, even for the most famous one in the country.

Back to pairing chocolate with interesting or complex spices, nuts, seeds, herbs, flowers and essences like a basil or thyme or anise, that began in France in earnest much earlier than Jacques Torres came on the scene as a chocolatier--by the early eighties in that post nouvelle-cuisine period--you had ambitious chocolatiers of the time gently pushing in new directions, even like a Robert Linxe (now we know a little bit more why--it attracted media attention and it helped spread fame and the cachet of chocolate as a luxury product) but they still pushed them within the rules, the code, of that very subtle, very refined French chocolate style--just whiffs of flavor where you had to strain or guess what the essence was, you may only have tasted it after you swallowed--you saw more of this in French chocolate than you did in French desserts, which had very little exoticism and daring until Herme. This subtlety, delicacy and grace of flavor revealed the chocolate itself as a complex flavor, and a vital platform for flavor--especially the enrobed darker chocolates with dark chocolate ganache--so French--which is the opposite of what some of these American chocolate purveyors are doing now: combining nice packaging, cheap shells, molds, garish size or thickness, intense flavors, pretty transfer sheets and/or bright cocoa butter colors swirled in your face. All of which are calculated to appeal to newbies and the culinary fashionistas (rather than savvy veterans) and to cover up the inferior workmanship and the cheap chocolate they're using, which they don't actually want you to taste, assess or talk about. If you think more intense is not necessarily "better" when it comes to chocolate, thick is not better when it comes to chocolate, exotic is not inherently better when it comes to chocolate, and it doesn't matter how well something is packaged or how savvy or cute the marketer is--you're increasingly out of luck. Better is better, be it the chocolate or ingredients used, fresh is usually better; that said, everything deserves to be given a chance.

Looking back in print media and talking to older chefs, I think the really influential/controversial group was the post-nouvelle Michelin-starred chefs who started to create some strong buzz for their use of distinctive local herbs and spices in their food (think Veyrat and Bras,) Gagnaire's stuff from the early 80's was already adventurous, Passard opened L'Arpege in 1984, Olivier Roellinger used imported exotic spices in food and desserts, and if you read his book now seems "tame" but at the time was controversial amongst his French peers, putting asian spice blends in chocolate sorbet and using exotic spices in chocolate desserts--szechaun pepper anyone?--and his book came out in 1994 which means he was doing it 6-10 years or so earlier. Look at this book today, compared to other French books of the time and you'll see how adventurous it was--yet immediately see how dated even that is viewed a decade hence. But things happen when they happen and can be plotted on a timeline, even a very static one like French cooking.) The history of French creativity when it comes to chocolate and desserts is like the Stephen Jay Gould evolutionary theory of punctuated equilibrium--long periods of stasis (think vanilla and profiteroles) and then sudden siesmic changes a la a Conticini. Someone wholly unique and ultimately transformational, like a Careme then or how I think a Philippe Conticini will come to be viewed, the former who revolutionized technique and usage of ingredients and the latter who championed creative freedom and exploded exotic flavor concepts of a Roellinger but to the nth degree, making them into his own layered poetry, and who we've discussed often on eG. What Conticini began conceiving and espousing in the early nineties was rare for France and French pastry chefs. But geniuses like Conticini, or a Careme, come once in every few generations.

Late 90's in the US you know what was considered cutting edge and exotic? The fact that salt enhanced chocolate and caramel--and you had a bunch of trend pieces, including one by Amanda Hesser, talking about Herme and salt, (the great) Claudia at Gramercy and her salted caramel tartlette and the magician/poet Philippe Conticini--I still remember the first time I met him, it was at the very first New York Chocolate Show ('98) when it was in the Puck Building and there's this large, young cherubic-faced guy standing behind the chocolate bar passing out little croutons of cake dipped in melted chocolate sprinkled with sea salt--and it was amazing. Claudia's tart was amazing. Of course the deeper you dig you'd find that chocolatiers out in the outskirts of France (Brittany) had been doing salted caramels forever and the French already knew what American foodies had yet to discover. So much so it had already became a "tradition" there, while the NYC food and dining media was just about to connect the dots at Gramercy with Claudia's tart and Philippe sprinkling fleur de sel on his desserts. So its all a frame of reference thing. I think the deeper any of us look the more of this we'll discover.

Always better to be good than exotic, I say, but then that's a separate issue, and taste is very subjective anyway. I do think it's harder to do exotic well because exotic hasn't been codified and copied ad infinitum like the classics have. And it didn't seem from my reading and research that it was a majority of the nouvelle French pushing the exotic chocolate pairing angles--yes you had an iconoclast like a Roellinger or a Bras or a Veyrat then and an Herme and Conticini more recently--but most French remained very conservative. And even in this new experimentation with the exotics--there were rules and very strange pairings, truly out of the box pairings, were just not done yet. There was too much pressure to conform, from within the industry and without.

One thing we know for sure is it wasn't the Jane-come-lately Vosges crew creating brand new combnations--odds are any groundbreaker being buzzed about today is treading over ground already covered, emulating the real pioneers if you peel back the surface a bit--in this case emulating someone like an Albert Adria and his very representative "choco-coco-curry" dessert in the Postres book, a good example of the typical, evolving El Bulli approach to flavor and cross-cultural inspiration, the recipe of which was in print by what, 1997? but he had done it in the restaurant earlier. Hmm, chocolate, coconut and curry powder. Can anyone say "Naga" bar? (This doesn't preclude the "Naga" from being considered an enjoyable or great chocolate bar or truffle. It just precludes any talk of inventiveness or uniqueness on its part.) About this time some younger pastry turks of NYC were also pushing similar boundaries--I remember tasting a chocolate-curry-pistachio dessert of D. Jemal Edwards in 96 or 97. (And it was good.)

I think at this point it's also worth pointing out that there are differences in successful execution between 1) pure chocolate being infused with flavor, say an oil or essence or coconut and curry, and then molded into a bar, wrapped up and sold as a candy bar; 2) chocolate bon bons with a filling like a ganache infused with flavor and 3) chocolate desserts with those flavors: all three are different animals and require different skill sets and palates to produce well. And all three have to be judged and assessed somewhat differently, in terms of success, because their traditions are different, how and when you eat them will be different, a dessert follows a meal, etc. Of the three, the tradition of 1) is relatively new--a few years old--and Vosges is a pioneer on this front. It is also always possible to give a new twist to someone else's original idea--this is one of the primary tenets of cooking; it is also possible to develop things independently but concurrently. This happens a lot as well. (It would be a whole lot easier if American chefs came back from having, say, a bacon and egg dessert at El Bulli, and then gave credit to that dish as the source of their inspiration when they put their own bacon and egg dessert on their American restaurant's menu. But that's wishful thinking. )

As an aside, since we're talking dates and history, my first brush with a "kind of exotic" chocolate pairing success predates even that first NY Chocolate Show, which was in the Fall of 1998, before I found out who Conticini or Adria was, I'd have to go back in my notes to be sure but in 97 I had a really good "chai" for the first time and a light bulb went off, so informally Colleen and I experimented infusing a homemade "chai" tea mixture into chocolate and eventually settled on a milk chocolate "chai" creme brulee with a paper thin nib tuile (we had just discovered nibs as well) and El Rey, the chocolate I was using at the time, eventually took out a full page/inside front cover ad in Pastry Art & Design to tout the recipe. Our chai-chocolate experimentation pre-dated the impending nouvelle Indian food media tidal wave in NYC which Tabla and others were about to kick into overdrive in late 1998--so it was before most of us knew what "jaggery" was or how to use it or what Indian spice mixtures were or how to toast them to coax out the flavor from the whole spice--those trend articles hadn't been written yet and filtered down. But for me I never cared about how exotic it was, or whether it had been pulled off before, just that it was good and that flavor-wise it spoke to me. Probably just like Jacques with his creations or Vosges with theirs. Someone with a keener sense of history in NYC, or with actual dining experience in London or India might know when someone else may have paired chocolate and chai first or when it showed up on a restaurant dessert menu first, all of which drives home my real point-- we can all always improve our awareness of culinary history, the sense and appreciation of what came before and how things build on what came before, and that's ultimately important here.

Without developing the sense of history and the appreciation you're left with the buzz. Then you move on to the next "buzz." And purveyors of buzz rarely reveal context, importance or significance.

[Couverture: Sources, Favorites, Storage, Troubleshooting]

That was a great contribution Sebastian, thanks and welcome.

[Chocolatiers We Like:]

I've mentioned these guys before, Tarek, have you tried them:

https://www.chuaochocolatier.com/index2.html

They're right down the road from you in Encinitas and I thought they were doing very high quality work when I was there last. They weren't aiming for style over substance, nor flash or faux chic at the expense of flavor and respect for tradition, which some of the more nouveau American chocolatiers succumb to.

[Mayhaw Man gets Mad]

Ruth, I think it is too easy to get seduced by very expensive professional equipment and kitchen design, and we were guilty as anyone--I spent too many hours, my weakness was and still is Italian furniture and design sites--but that helped me think even more about storage, form, function, feel, adaptations I could steal, I mean emulate. Not that we wanted a restaurant kitchen at home--far from it--but that said, there's a reason why certain professional designs and restaurant spaces work--thought went into how such a space would be used, heavily and under pressure, how it would wear over time, be cleaned, even be adapted down the road--and we'd be foolish not to try to learn from that even if we're talking about a home kitchen. In our case being pastry chefs we're both used to very tight quarters, indeed, the space devoted to the pastry chef in most restaurants is an afterthought, a corner, a cutting board next to the dishwasher, somewhere the chef shoves you because, well, you're just the pastry chef, etc. Our small condo space at home was wonderful, expansive, even, given what most pastry chefs get to work with.

Given our dimensions and budget, though, which at this stage would not include any money for serious wall destruction/re-construction/re-wiring, we knew there was no reason for us to think beyond the relatively affordable standard 30" wide gas range--as long as it had at least one strong restaurant-emulating "power" burner. A good one would work just fine for us, since we also had a microwave and a small commercial convection oven already (those were going to be on that IKEA Stolmen freestanding aluminum shelf system on the other side of the kitchen right next to the fridge.) Why the additional Sodir convection oven? Well, I was given it after doing a series of demos a few years ago and kept it so we don't have to heat up the whole kitchen in the summer or use the main oven for something small. We also had two strong portable induction burners which we could move around as needed and had acquired a pretty deep line of Sitram pans over time--which can go from gas to induction and back again.

So financially, we had to swap a good new 30" range in the space left by the old one. Once we saw and researched the duel fuel GE Profile, as I said, for the price we were hooked. I briefly considered a slide-in version, but once I investigated them I found out that slide-ins were usually 1) significantly more expensive at a given performance level than the same freestanding range model and 2) wider, effectively, by an inch or two than comparable freestanding models, which were usually like 29.5" In my situation we had a very tight fit along that straight run side of Corian sink/countertop/dishwasher/range, so we couldn't even consider a slide-in, even after I found several very nice stainless ones at the Sears appliance outlet for like $600--they were 1" too wide and I had no affordable way to make up that inch.

In order to get a slide-in duel fuel range I would gladly have traded down to a narrower width dishwasher that was more European, but those models aren't available in the states affordably. Here, it is 24" or you pay a stiff premium. (Why "prefer" a slide-in? I think it would have been cleaner and more efficient not to have that extra 11" back panel sticking up, which the delivery guys could just bend and crinkle by not picking it up correctly, and better to have the controls on the front instead.) If the duel-fuel Profile you have plugs into a regular old 110v outlet, Ruth, you likely have the same model convection oven we have, with a recirculating fan, our model with the powerful 15K burner, in stainless is JGB920SEFSS. (The model requiring the 240v line is the J2B915--and would be the superior oven for the baker-inclined. If price were roughly equal and the 240v line was not an issue--I'd take the J2B915 every time.) One of my pre-purchase functionality tests for the Profile was could an 18" diameter cake pan fit in the oven perfectly flat. Not that I ever plan to bake an 18" tier for a wedding cake in that oven, but if I had to, could I? If you invert the metal oven rack, it fit.

After we had already purchased the range new, pricematched for $927 from Best Buy, I found the same $1849 model at the Sears Appliance Outlet (the Potomac Mills, Woobridge, VA store) on scratch n dent special for $859. Delivery would have been about $50 additional. So bargains are out there for the lucky and patient, and it seems most of the higher-end/prosumer stock at this Sears outlet was due to delivery guy carelessness--i.e. not picking up the heavier ranges with a strap underneath and instead trying to tilt, pick it up and carry it with their hands. That's how that 11" back piece gets bent, it's not meant to be grabbed, and that's how many of these models get in the outlet.

In general, we refused at this initial remodel point to be seduced by many of things you increasingly see in kitchen remodels and prosumer showrooms--islands, double-bowl sinks or second sinks, slide in ranges, 36" wide ranges, built-in wall ovens--all seem to be particular favorites of designers. I see why ergonomically or functionally in most cases--for instance, why bend over when you don't have to, to get in and out of the oven? Why allow a crowd to build up at just one sink and work grind to halt when you can have another? At this point we have to live with our new space for awhile before we commit to those, in phase two, if at all. Right now I have that $10. IKEA as-is 61" by 39" matching Corian island just leaning up against a wall. And yes I'll try to follow up with some before and after photos, and try to go into more detail about IKEA kitchen in terms of form, function and design, customer service, quality, why we made the specific storage and product choices we did, and where we're likely going next.

[Washington DC Area Grocery Stores]

"I still get the ring, no matter how careful I am, but the eggs always taste good anyways"

If you don't want the green, try cold water to cover, bring to a boil, immediately turn off the heat, cover, 13 minutes, remove. No green. (That's courtesy of Karen Metz, a wonderful instructor for what used to be the Peter Kump Cooking School down here in VA.) If grocery store deli sections could do that, I'd be happy; I'd also be as happy as eunny with a Giant that brought in properly cooked eggs that had taste and texture.

where are you shoppin' for this precious watercress eunny so I know where not to go?

I haven't read anyone mentioning it yet, but the weekday volume at Wegmans seems to me to have really tailed off since opening. I've been making regular drives out since opening day, the parking lot during the weekday is maybe 25% full, and all the construction remains along that strip, so it's always a roll of the dice how frustrated you're going to be. Yet I've faithfully returned because that store is still special. I'm never there at dinnertime or on the weekend, however, so for all I know it is packed and they're doing huge numbers, but should I doubt that this area is supporting that store enough? I don't think Wegmans releases sales volume per store, but I'd like to know how Sterling has fared so far against their own internal expectation.

Is anyone else shopping there semi-regularly and who has the same sense--that this area is not "getting" Wegmans the way it should? or do you think the area is getting it?

[Charleston in Baltimore]

The larger issue, I think, is whether a place is special and appealing because of its location, when judged against the local competition, in this case of Baltimore, and whether the same place would be viewed as equally special and appealing no matter where the restaurant was located. I tend to think good is good, irrespective of location. There will always be controversy over that, though, and it might actually be a self-defeating exercise. But I also think it is possible for people to fairly and reasonably come down on different sides of that issue based on their different experiences.

I agree with John with his general comment "My advice: stick to DC, things are happening there, Baltimore is where DC was 20 years ago." But then I've never lived in Baltimore like you both do and I don't have the depth of experience there that you both do. There are going to be exceptions to every generalization, surprises and pleasant experiences to be had, hence the vital role of eG to open those doors--to raise our awareness--and for a while I have heard that more has been going on in Baltimore creatively and that we should make the effort to get over there. I'm willing. (I think the better, more fair, standard of comparison for the Baltimore restaurant scene, if one were to go down that road, is not DC but Philadelphia--and I'd suspect Philly is also a decade ahead of Baltimore in terms of culinary depth, interest and creativity. But then I've dined in Philly a lot more than Baltimore so even that sense might not be accurate.) What I do know is I'd like to read a lot more about B'more on eG from the neighborhood folks and industry insiders, pro and con. And I hope you get your job simdelish!

I've only been once to the restaurant in question, that was after it was reviewed in the Post, but the more-expensive-than-it-probably-should-be, older, somewhat soul-less, touristy vibe already mentioned seems to peg Charleston for me, and it hasn't warranted a return visit. But restaurants change, chefs and owners evolve and everyone has off-nights which can affect an experience--and that's where some trusted local palates help by weighing in, who've dined there repeatedly and over time. If I make it to the bistro or to Pazo I'd approach them openly and on their own terms just like I approach any restaurant anywhere. Thanks simdelish and misscindy for reminding us of a chef whose restaurants you value and that deserve our consideration--and over time hopefully more people will weigh in on one side or another. And thanks John for your sharp dissent. People will make up their own minds.

[Mayhaw Man gets Mad]

Brooks, I just found this thread and have to say it is an amazing journey--everyone has shared so much. We just re-did our kitchen, we said "it was about time" just like you and to follow in your spirit I figure I'll chime in with our approach, perhaps share some money saving tips, hints that worked for us and other stuff that we did on our own job. That way others might rethink or change what they're planning to do, as you have as a result of this thread. The thing is, often you have to live with what you've done for while to realize what you really should have done or need to do--in terms of placement, efficiency, functionality, etc. It might pay for you to stop and live and cook and entertain for awhile, and purposely plan to phase some final things in later.

The kitchen in our 900 square foot condo is small, 7.5' by 10' and needed a re-model, it wasn't built with 2 professional pastry chefs in mind who do a lot of recipe testing at home, one of whom also likes to cook. (Not me, I like to eat out.) Two holdover items in our condo influenced our design and decision-making, much like the cypress wood influenced yours:

1) a big wooden Italian dining table, which we bought for <$300 from the Pottery Barn furniture outlet (maybe $1300 new) which has a thick, perfectly flat stainless steel top surface;

2) an IKEA Varde sideboard white drawer unit:

http://www.ikea-usa.com/webapp/wcs/stores/...110*10255*10257

which we got from as-is for $150 ($599. new) I had removed its butcher block wood top and replaced it with a stainless steel top taken off of a Pottery Barn sideboard, so it "matched" the dining room table perfectly.

Brooks, early on you said "it will fit the age and style of my kitchen better than most of the ones that I keep looking at over and over again while trying to convince myself that they are worth the money" and that passage really struck home with me--this whole area is so personal, that value and worth are so complicated to determine, and that we're all bombarded with magazine spreads and television shows. For us it seemed the look we wanted, what we'd find worth it, was also expensive--it is kind of a clean, modern, cool, professional look--more commercial than residential. There's cheap stainless and sturdy stainless, stuff that will buckle and stuff that won't--and with these two pieces we had flat stainless surfaces that were sturdy as a rock, much more sturdy than even restaurant kitchen surfaces, and even looked good "worn" as they had become. So we built around them and our kitchen design was influenced by the fact that we wanted stainless and white in the kitchen as well.

We liked the different warmths and tactile feels of corian, glass, granite, aluminum in addition to stainless, so we designed a preliminary but not-as-integrated-as-it-ended-up-space with all five that was at cool, matte, warm, sleek, shiny and smooth--we liked each medium for its different qualities, cleanliness and imperviousness. As opposed to building around wood as you did and as most seem to like, we didn't want any visible wood anywhere in the kitchen. Not even a wood cutting board. Liking everything was also how we ended up with white, gray, stainless, glass, aluminum, granite and corian in about 50% of our condo by the time we finished, but that's at the end of the story. For us going in the plan was:

1) first gut and remodel the entire kitchen space AND then extend the small formal kitchen space out into living and dining room condo space creating 2 connected kitchen lab/storage spaces off of each end of the kitchen. We kept our white fridge because it was only a few years old anyway and the French door/bottom mount freezer models we were seduced by still cost over $2,000;

2) to do this at this scale we needed to save money, so we acquired elements over time and on sale, we even let what we found on sale guide and change our direction at times--and on at least a few occasions this led to a "better" design. We could afford very few splurge items, our taste required we find many sale items & that we do mostly all the work ourselves, which was ok since we're kind of handy;

3) we also courageously/stupidly decided to re-do other significant elements of our condo at the same time, figuring what's a little more upheaval on top of already incredible upheaval, so we had to cut corners even more--we were taking a hit for A) new hardwood floors everywhere else beside the kitchen (which we tiled a coordinating slate gray,) B) a new window sliding shade/panel system along our full sun south exposure (which is wall-to-wall windows, knee sash to ceiling.) So these elements had to be coordinated with the new storage and wall unit areas for the extended kitchen lab spaces, so they'd also all coordinate with the gray/glass/stainless/white of the kitchen. Flow chart-wise, once the kitchen cabs and appliances were in we moved onto installing the wood floors, which required ripping up the old carpet, moving out or giving away the old furniture and wall units, laying the floors then moving in and assembling the new lab spaces on top of the wood;

4) we only allowed ourselves three new, high ticket and/or splurge items: we couldn't spend the equivalent of say a GE Monogram ice maker ($1200+/-) on too many items: for us, that meant we chose A) one custom Corian glacier white countertop with coved backsplash & a large seamless single sink ($1300 installed,) B) a stainless GE dual fuel range (gas stovetop w/ electric convection oven, which we got for $1050 including gas disconnect/reconnect and haulaway of old range), and C) a Vinotemp undercounter wine storage unit ($399.) The rest we got cheaply over a period of 3 months.

I did a little research online here, and with pros and designers and installers, especially in the woodweb and gardenweb kitchen discussion forums which were excellent, learned a little about solid surface countertops and kitchen installs and remodels from the pros and the DIY prosumers, and decided we'd be better off gutting our space completely except for the existing fridge, which we moved around, then re-did it completely walls, floors et al (we'll eventually replace the fridge when we happen upon the model we want at the right price.) We chose IKEA for our kitchen because they had aluminum and stainless options, yet were inexpensive and very high quality compared to other commerical/residential product options. (This was before the Consumer Reports kitchen issue came out picking IKEA 3rd best overall and by far the best for price.)

We ripped everything out, did the floor tile, repaired, primed and painted the walls and ceilings first, then installed the sink/stove/dishwasher side cabinets next--hanging 96" of wall cabs first, so we could get right under them, then installed the base cabs underneath (we purchased all our cabs ahead of time, most were on box sale at 75% off or already assembled from the as-is room.) Then we moved the appliances in to make sure they fit, levelled everything and made minor adjustments--one should do it this way if you're going corian/granite/stone because with solid surface--the countertop template people came to measure--all this stuff has to be in level and true so there are no surprises later. I'm phrasing it this way because we didn't do this--we didn't have our stove in place when the guy measured the template--it was still in the living room with a cat nestled on it--and we ended up with a mismeasured template yielding a just too long countertop which then had to be shaved off very messily with a belt sander on site--as we were sliding the stove in and out, in and out, and that wasn't pretty.

I had read online somewhere about gc's setting up a temp sink and cutting temp countertops, while you waited for the fabrication and installation of the solid surface countertop, so since we didn't have a gc we did that, too and had running water and a drain in the kitchen while we waited the 10 days for them to return. I clamped the old st. st. sink and faucet in place over the new sink bas cab and we were good to go. This was a lifesaver.

Then we began work on the other side of the kitchen--which changed every week or so as we happened on some bargain or new idea.

After 10 days the countertop was installed, plumbing and dw reconnected;

To do this on a budget, we and our cats lived with a little inconvenience (alright, a lot of inconvenience over 3 months or so) we had cabs and appliances and doors and lights and stuff piled/stacked all over the condo, in various stages of assembly. The cats loved climbing and playing on all this stuff. We had trouble seeing our tv at times. I'd make bi-weekly jaunts to the two IKEA as-is rooms near where we live and constantly came up with various goodies and deals--stuff I wasn't sure we'd actually use eventually but had a gut feeling we would.

A key for us was to shop over time and at the places that move/turnover product--IKEA as is, a huge Sears appliance outlet, a large Best Buy with a knowledgeable manager which moved a lot of appliances and would price match/special order, and a large Home Depot which often had appliances on clearance. (And remember, always factor in delivery AND installation.) We happened upon a $700 stainless dishwasher floor model in perfect shape from Home Depot for $250 and walked away with it. Earlier on this thread someone suggested "You can get a dual fuel range--electric convection and gas cooktop" and that is exactly what we wanted--we're both pros who appreciated fast powerful gas burners and electric convection ovens. At Home Depot we had seen that GE had a very nice stainless prosumer Profile dual fuel convection range--self-cleaning, with huge oven space, a warming drawer, a 15K power burner, and great continuous top grates over a sealed burner tray. What we didn't notice (and no signs made clear) is that there are actually two identical models--one requiring a 240V line with a true convection oven (true as in a third, separate, heat source and fan) and another 110V model which just had a fan to force circulate the air from its two heat sources--but $2,000 was too much. One day we happened upon the 240V model in a HD at a floor model clearance price of $997. (Of course at the time we didn't KNOW there was a 240V model.) Delivery was not included at this price and it could not "be" delivered even if you paid for it--you had to take it off the floor and take it home yourself. We weren't up for that.

But we wanted this stove bad--we had been bitten by the bug like no prosumer before us--so we somehow got that great Best Buy manager to price match the HD $997. and special order the same range for us for $927 including free delivery. Boy, we were happy consumers until we took delivery of the range and I saw that huge fat odd electrical plug in the back. We live in an old condo that don't know no stinking 240. So we turned into dumb consumers at that point, and eventually had to swap it out for the similarly-styled 110v model (J2B915 is the 240V model with the killer convection oven inside. This is one maly stove.) That's because we found out what a hassle we'd have with our condo building trying to put this serious 240V model in, and that even if we fought the board and the board didn't win, it was going to cost us $500 just to have the electrician run the new 240 power line to it and buy the breaker for it for our antiquated circuit box which we can't replace. (That's another story.) So, this is the one we settled for after paying a restocking fee, it works great, after living and baking in it for a while we both highly recommend it:

http://products.geappliances.com/ProdConte...SKU=J2B915SEHSS

We had to pay the restocking fee because BB price matched the $997. HD clearance price and had to special order it. Even so, it still was much less than the electrician's bill was going to be. To prove the price to BB, which was at a local competing HD right around the corner, we had to "borrow" the HD sign with the price on it, since their website and sales circular that week had it listed for $1,649.

The Corian we chose, with one large deep seamless sink was ordered through IKEA and the measurement/install was handled locally by another company--a branch of a national outfit called STC Surface Technologies (we did this so we'd have the backing and potential leverage of IKEA, a big company, behind us if anything went wrong now or down the line plus the IKEA quoted price for this was a few hundred dollars cheaper than the price quoted from STC directly, which we had approached independently first.) So it pays to shop around--even with something as price-fixed and rigidly-controlled as Corian apparently is. We fell in love with the galcier white--the whitest of white and incidentally one of the cheapest of Corian colors--once we saw it in an IKEA display kitchen. After those stainless Pottery Barn tabletops the glacier white was the next big design influence we built around.

Some detours, special built-in touches and/or ways we stretched the budget:

--chose the cool IKEA Avsikt aluminum and glass doors for spaciousness above and Numerar stainless steel drawers below--MUCH less expensive than other commercial options for same;

--created our own pull out undercounter trash drawer--since that was not an existing option IKEA has and we didn't have the floor space to have a freestanding can--the key was finding a trash can just large enough to work in that space but small enough to fit on a pullout drawer--and we did from the Container store;

--mounted our small commercial convection oven & our microwave oven on shelves up off the countertop;

--found some Corian dirt cheap in the IKEA as-is one day--an island and matching straight run of countertop for $10 each w/ coved backsplash--from an IKEA demo kitchen which had just been broken down and remodeled itself. Cameo white not glacier white but it looks good together given how the light in our space floats in at an angle, a little dirty initially but I buffed it back to perfect whiteness in minutes. That is a really nice feature of Corian--it is user repairable. I set one piece up on the other side of the kitchen and the unused piece sets us up for further expansion or re-design in the future (this was a $2400 value of Corian;)

--the aforementioned floor model dw from HD saved us several hundred;

--we lucked upon a very nice stylish undercounter st. st. Vinotemp wine storage unit, a bargain even regularly priced at $399. from Costco, which vents in the front and as a result effortlessly sits "built-in" underneath the Corian and alongside the IKEA base cabinets;

--mostly all of our cabinets came from kitchen displays broken down and refreshed over the summer, as IKEA readies for the new catalog to be released in August. So June and July were very good times for the savvy kitchen remodeller to buy total bargain completely assembled cabs with drawers, drawer fronts and handles. Just wait, you'll find what style you want, even stainless;

--IKEA as is was also the place to find their very nice Italian $50 under cabinet halogen light units for $5, I bought 8 because the glacier white cried out to be illuminated; also $100 single hole high spout faucets for $15 brand new--at this price we bought two and could afford to swap them out over time vs. spending on a several hundred dollar model (the IKEA taps have very high quality seals and construction by the way, comparable to most designer taps costing hundreds of dollars--the plumbers oogled;)

--in one of the extended kitchen lab spaces we put in a small island with a 36" x 26" thick granite top as a pastry work surface above a st. st. base cabinet--and because it was small and we were willing to pick it up we got the granite at a remnant price for $225 from Marblesource;

--we also took advantage of the very good return/exchange policy at IKEA--so if we bought new stuff and had it laying around and then found the same items in as-is weeks/months later--back the new stuff went to the store for a full refund, no problem;

--one idea we could have taken advantage of better--looking back--remain open to using things for other purposes than that which it may be intended. Our success: we're probably the first people to use this new IKEA bedroom storage system called Stolmen in our kitchen and lab space--it's all aluminum poles and brackets with white shelves, very airy, open, clean--link:

http://www.ikea-usa.com/webapp/wcs/stores/...385&cattype=sub

Problems which cropped up for us which others might benefit from:

1. know your limitations and don't assume. our building is 45 years old and we're apparently stuck with an unsafe outdated Federal Pacific Electric panel, circuit breaker box, a limited # circuits and amps, we had that aforementioned problem running 240 volt line which necessitated a range swap, delaying us 2 weeks and forced us into the lesser of two evils restocking fee. better to find this out beforehand;

2. didn't know we needed a side panel in between dw and stove to support corian, we had laminate countertops before which didn't need a side panel--so we wasted a tech's trip out to measure template, set us back a week because I had to rig a side panel and get another appointment;

3. wanted a single hole faucet--so our dw drain now connects directly through disposal rather than up and down through an aerator plug. haven't had an overflow, yet, but my fingers are crossed, this is apparently against code;

4. don't do without while waiting for countertop--set up a temporary sink, reconnect old sink with clamps, cut and lay temporary countertop pieces; it works;

5. IKEA requires a plan of attack and calculated strategies. The main thing is, if you go IKEA, you have to learn the products and their system--if you're not willing to do this, then pay someone to install your IKEA for you and you'll still save money since it is so fairly priced to begin with. (Apologies for length.)

[cake decorating]

It might be dexterity, it might be technique--but there are pros who do this better than others. There are little tips and trucs not often talked about that separate us, there are ways to make your italian meringue buttercream perform better by not aerating it too much, by not whipping it on too high a speed, by cranking it down to deflate those micro-bubbles, by not whipping it too much when you add your butter in once the meringue has cooled down a bit, making it ahead of time and letting it rest--reconstituted ital mer bc always seems to be more creamy and dense, less airy, and more cleanly applied; the butter in a good bc means you can go back over the heat and warm it gently anytime you need to, especially if you're working in a cold room; you have to be careful when you add your sugar as well, not adding it too quickly so it cooks some of the egg whites when it comes in contact with it, those lumps stay; also the kind of spatula you use is important, so is how you adjust to your spatula, how it fits in your hand, how coordinated you are.

I use a somewhat flexible straight metal spatula--again, a personal choice among many valid options-- and hold it upside down on the metal rather than on the handle when I do the sides, kind of like I'm holding a ping pong paddle with a Western grip about to put underspin on a shot, to spread and scrape along its edge. I use the same spatula on the top, just hold it differently; on top, my hand is more on the handle, the spatula flat and I spread the bc back and forth more, from inside to the outer edge as I'm spinning the turntable slightly. When I was a student I was lucky to learn this from my first teacher, Mark Ramsdell of L'Academie de Cuisine, a really skilled wedding cake person. I never needed to experiment and try different methods.

I, too, do the hot water thing toliver does--so crumb coat, 1st, 2nd, 3rd bc coats, then let it set up completely hard in the fridge and hot spatula/scrape it before you stack your tiers. Good luck.

[New White House Pastry Chef]

Thaddeus was also Ewald Notter's assistant for a few years. He'll be able to handle the sugar and chocolate work no problem. He's a hotel guy so he should be able to handle the demands of the big state dinners. If Susie Morrison stays on as well, he should really be fine--she stepped into that assistant position after Frenette left and/or got fired--and is a top-notch pastry chef in her own right.

Not many people realize that their shop was usually a two person operation--they only brought in outside part time help a few days before the big events.

[Lenotre vs. Bellouet Conseil]

Anni, in '97 or '98, I took a few weeks of classes (entremets, viennoiserie, chocolate) with Bellouet himself, and highly recommend him, especially if you're interested in the French-style cake production techniques you see on display in his books. He practically defined that genre and the younger MOFs who now teach in France and the US were heavily influenced by him. His work in those 3 weeks was the cleanest I had ever seen up to that point. I didn't go to France for this, but here in DC in a school and production bakery he helped set up with another French pastry chef partner. He's charming, willing to share and a consummate professional with top notch bench skills.

As artisanbaker mentioned, Yssingeaux has a fantastic reputation amongst working French pros, but I don't have any personal experience about what it is like being an American taking classes there.

Anni, one thing though, these French MOF cake guys from a Bellouet, an Yssingeaux, etc. come here to teach--many MOFs basically start making the rounds, paid to demo and teach once they "get" the MOF--so unless you ALSO wanted to go to France, you could take the same specialized courses with the same cake guys who come for a week as a guest instructor: Sebastien Cannone, Caffet, Bajard, etc.

Artisanbaker--are you basing your safe to say comment on firsthand experience--having taught or taken classes as various schools and with various teachers both in the US and France? based mainly on comments from others? and is your experience at these schools more bread than pastry? I'm not sure what you mean and don't want to read too much into it.

[Problems with Medrich's Chocolate Ice Cream]

Typical Medrich. Also, the Fine Cooking folks, in general, are well-meaning but just not that knowledgeable or experienced--there's no inherent problem with this "recipe." There is no need to strain, no need to re-heat. It all comes down to understanding technique, having the right tools and adapting to your situation. And SharffenBerger is no more "problematic" than any high cacao-percentage couverture when it comes to making ice cream.

Make your creme anglaise, pour it over your chocolate pistoles all at once, whiz with your immersion blender, cover loosely with plastic wrap pressed right down to the surface of your mixture, set in an ice bath, cool, stirring occasionally, refrigerate. End of what should be a very straightforward story. (I'd also recommend you don't put your warm chocolate custard mixture in the fridge as Medrich advises--better to get in the habit of cooling down all your custard-based ice creams first in an ice water bath.) So I'm with FWED and Neil on the key role of the immersion blender.

There's less of a need to "strain" your anglaise because the immersion blender will pulverize any little bits of cooked egg, the immersion blender will also emulsify any bit of "separated" chocolate (there won't be any but just in case there were) and the immersion blender will ensure that your 185 degree creme anglaise melts all your chocolate because it will a) help grind up the chocolate itself and b) combine the two mixtures much more rapidly, thereby applying more of the available heat to the chocolate more quickly. A taller, less wide container works best to whiz, so, too, does keeping your blender submerged as I think FWED suggested. You will need to use a rubber spatual to scrape down the sides of the container, once, because some chocolate will stick there, then just whiz a bit after you do that.

(Just an historical fyi--more frequent and more varied use of the immersion blender, like on anglaise or custards or curds, is a Spanish advancement, for a decade the leading Spanish pastry chefs have experimented with cooking these in new ways--"poaching" the mixture in an oven then whizzing, microwaving then whizzing, etc. Part of thinking and re-thinking traditional ways.)

The better "homemaker" and/or "but I don't have an immersion blender" workaround is cook your anglaise, let it cool slightly, then pour already melted but somewhat cool chocolate in a slow stream into the center, stirring with a whisk. Same emulsified result.

(If you use a PacoJet, you can be even more cavalier with a chocolate ice cream or sorbet base--the whizzing of the PacoJet emulsifies your mixture as long as you have your fat and temps balanced.)

[Oldest Restaurants in Town]

But Chris, has the mere fact that you now live in DC changed how you view some of the older haunts out in the MD or VA burbs? Not so much a willingness to make the drive but your perspective of those places once you are there? Or is good food good food on its merits regardless of locale and deserve to be assessed as such? That's what Joe's getting at. Tweaked--will your Ray's or Eve sensory experiences be affected at all going in by the location of the restaurants? I think that's one of the underlying questions Joe raises--another is has the quality of these older places changed, gotten that mailed in feeling about them for some of us but not others based on geography and residence, does our perspective of these nostalgic dinosaurs also change as we move around, get older ourselves, get exposed to more things, etc?

Now when Joe says "I think for those in the industry that look at restaurants like these (and Mrs, K's and the nondescript Crisfield's) and try to understand why they have lasted so long it can be particularly frustrating" I think he's on thinner ice--because I think we eGulleteers in the industry and savvy diners alike know precisely why these places last--nostalgia sells, comfort sells, since 9/11 retro cooking has been in and still is. I'm not sure that's a burb thing, either, but it may be a factor. There'll always be a place for these genres and rightfully so. But these "successful" older places mentioned, places that are still popular and still in business, aren't necessarily serving great or even very good food--it most likely means they have 1) a nice location or 2) tapped into a segment of the marketplace and made that segment comfortable and loyal for whatever reasons. Safety, timelessness, convenience and nostalgia can be as big a draw for some as a cell-phone toting celebrity chef can be for others. More power to them--but credit them for that achievement not the other way around--don't say that achievement means the cooking is really good because there a lot of packed chain restaurants in strip malls (and downtown!) who have also tapped into a comfortable loyal clientele--so much so that when they travel to other cities they seek out the same familiar and safe chain or franchise there as well. That doesn't make the culinary offerings any better either. The food is what it is. And there's plenty of room for many to succeed.

And far from being frustrating, the more inside experience you get in restaurants and in cooking--rather than dining out--the more you realize how many different ways there are to manage, create, inspire, achieve, serve--how many different and seemingly antithetical ways there are to create a positive restaurant experience--you also become a little more confident in yourself to know when you're in a place that doesn't value those things or falls down in some areas. If one thing comes through in terms of the difference between pros and insiders versus foodies it is this--foodies are more often still trying to figure out what they can expect and should expect, what's appropriate and what isn't, what's reasonable and what isn't and most pros are already a little more appreciative and a little more tolerant, tolerant of everything but poor customer service, which there is no excuse for. Like a basketball team not prepared to play hustling defense--you may not have the scorers or the athletes but you better damn well D up. (That's actually something that I think helps drive eG--we're helping to break down these barriers and draw both camps closer--and we're even involving the professional critics, who have their own formulas and competition amongst themselves going, into our circle here as well. We may not agree but we see each side a little more clearly--and we may help overcome any bias or predisposition based on perception.)

There's no sure-fire way to succeed, Joe, no "THE" formula, because success means many different things to many different chef-owners and restaurateurs--and our notions of success change over time. Staying power is undeniably one measure of success as the many successful restaurants listed on this thread indicate--but it ain't necessarily about the food. Paying your staff and vendors on time might be another measure, never repeating a dish on a tasting menu might be another, always repeating a dish the same way might be another, staying open late or being in Georgetown another, getting profiled in Gourmet magazine might be another, drawing a smile out of that 5 year old who has just licked the last drop of your ice cream of her plate can be another. It's up to each place to set their own bar of achievement--and up to diners to address how well they do this in the larger context and how well the diner expectation has been met. And as diners, we have to be able to look past attitudes and perceptions and just taste things for what they are first--new, old, whatever--regardless of geography and then allow the setting, context, attitude and expectation to filter in later. As professionals, I think we have to learn that there is no one formula and that taste is subjective.

[L'Auberge Chez François]

Extremely friendly service caught in a 1970's Alsacian time warp with boring expensive food.

The purprose of this thread is L'Auberge and what it represents to our dining scene first and foremost, so let's try not to get too far away from that. I wish I had seen this sooner, Ralph, I would definitely have said "old" and "old favorite" that may or may not have still held appeal for you. I do, however, agree with Jarad's assessment 100% and I've eaten at L'Auberge as recently as this year and at its brethren in banality off and on for decades.

The only remaining valuable and appealing qualities of L'Auberge to me are 1) the setting and 2) the service, which I'd go perhaps even a little further to praise than Jarad did--I'd call it extremely friendly and professional. Joe's so right in that everyone is gracious and charming and happy you are there, even if you're not old or not suitably attired. But that's it--I couldn't call any dish delicious or wonderful considering how many delicious and wonderful dishes there are at the moment in this city, raisab, though maybe you've been luckier here than me. To me, like Jarad, it's a predictable, well-meaning, serviceable dinosaur of a high-end dining destination which inexplicably still gets raved about and voted onto favorites lists by the numb and/or dumb sheep of our region. Even within this genre of heavy, conservative, steeped in time stuff--a genre I like and can appreciate in small doses, by the way--diners should expect more, should expect that it can be executed on a higher level given its price point than it is being done here--as most anyone who's been to France can attest or who has eaten at other "stuck in time" classic French places in the US. Who on their last French vacation has not dined at an old Michelin one or two star in just about any given town in France that is still hanging on a bit with the same a-little-too-stiff and unoriginal cooking that seemed to do it better than L'Auberge, with fresher fish, better vegetables, more affordable local wines, etc?

I'm not laying this all at the feet of L'Auberge--and I'm happy those folks are still around serving, the owner is a charming woman, and I'm happy those servers still convey a joy and warmth and professionalism mostly unseen at downtown fine dining destinations--but if anyone wonders why DC hasn't grown more quickly into more of an interesting, more creative, more appealing food town stretching back a decade or two (and it hasn't historically, only recently have we started to flex, attract and retain some newcomers and get some depth) I think the "L'Auberge Factor" is part of it. Our media has over-praised average cooking and as a result we're too tolerant of just average cooking.

The fact that it has "stood the test of time" is one of the biggest statements AGAINST our area developing into more appealing dining destination on par with, say, Chicago or SF. Everytime L'Auberge is mentioned it comes at the expense of some other restaurant or chef more deserving. It's because too high a percentage of DC area diners are conservative and un-nuanced when it comes to restaurants and still think L'Auberge is a "great" restaurant, at the top of our dining scene as these popularity lists indicate, when it is merely average food-wise. Too many of our diners accept mediocre food, or don't even realize what they're getting is mediocre or they make excuses for L'Auberge, as Joe tried to do on this thread. L'Auberge has been over-praised since I've been dining out in DC, and since I went to it for the first time, which was circa 1980. Nice setting, unique setting--sure. Wonderful service--sure. Twenty or so years ago its cooking also deserved to be praised but we were at that given level of awareness and expectation and it was a different restaurant in its context then. Now, a much greater percentage of our area should know better. That we're discussing this on eG separates us from other, less diverse venues.

There is a huge chasm culinarily between what L'Auberge does and what Joe just offered up as the alternative: "cutting edge food to die for." Please. There are accessible, classic, conservatively-grounded restaurants of impeccable quality that don't care one wit about being seen as cutting edge but that so clearly surpass L'Auberge--which have taken that same classic grounding yet remained open to personalizing a cuisine and growing a classic cuisine ever so slightly with evolving techniques and outlook. Take Bob Wiedmaier and Marcel's, for instance, who is similarly grounded in these hearty earthy older European cooking influences: what eGulleteer isn't able to appreciate the qualitative difference in ingredients, cooking, thought process and plating between a restaurant like Marcel's directly compared to L'Auberge? Except for the aforementioned country setting and in the service, where L'Auberge perhaps, just perhaps, gets the slight nod, there's no comparison between the two in terms of quality.

I think I'd also be more open to consider the value proposition L'Auberge offers, raisab, if the food itself was just a little better or more interesting. For me, value, setting and service still can't excuse, let alone trump, average food. So my recommendation differs--"old" food can still be done well, still apreciated for what it is--and it is done fairly well all over the country--but in the case of L'Auberge spend your $100-$125 per person elsewhere and leave this to the dinosaurs. There are too many other people around town doing much better work and who are deserving of your support.

[On a Whim... What are you up to...]

Just an fyi about this experimental thread--Jenny's idea is we keep it rolling with more of a social focus on where DC eG'ers are planning to go. Don and I agree this is valuable information to share, if only for others to decide where not to go. (Kidding.) Followups about your meals or experiences, though, should still be posted on regular threads about the stores, chefs, restaurants.

[Asia Nora]

OK Carolyn, I'll bite--where were the other four?

A few other questions--the tasting menu you had was off-menu--were any of the dishes similar to a la carte menu items? Do you think the chef would prepare something similar for any diner who requested it? And what do you think it might cost for someone not in the biz and/or known to the house?

Thank you for a great report and a vivid description of the wine--but did you find that that wine worked well with all the acid, tomato and citrus front-loaded in those first two courses?

(And a special thank you for caring enough to describe the desserts. I'm partial to dessert and dessert-makers. If all pastry chefs had someone with your descriptive gifts behind them we'd be much better off.)

How would you compare Asia Nora to, say, TenPenh?

[Making Caramel Sauce]

Ellen, I'm with Neil, you're not making a caramel sauce but some variation of a "butterscotch" sauce--which is a poor and/or lazy substitute. Think of butterscotch as a too-sweet "pretend" caramel sauce that doesn't approach the depth of flavor of a true caramel. Don't fear a real caramel sauce.

The link that Melissa posted above isn't a good one--I mean, actually, it is helpful only in that we can comment on how unhelpful it is. First, you don't need a candy thermometer at all. Second, the "advice" in the link doesn't actually recommend you to cook your sugar to a "caramel" stage but instead to soft ball, which is clear and gets you nowhere. Third, it doesn't address the reason why you'll often see something like corn syrup in addition to the sugar in a given recipe--corn syrup helps prevent the sugar from crystallizing while you cook it. So make sure the corn syrup is in the pot from the beginning so it can help prevent crystallization later. (This is because granulated sugar, even when melted, wants to return to its granulated (crystalline) state--it will look for any opportunity to re-crystallize. That's why in the link Neil posted you are advised to brush down the sides of your pan with a wet pastry brush--the theory is by wiping down the sides, where some sugar might burn or crystallize you'll be removing what might contaminate the rest of your pot. Of course, some flour or dirt on your pastry brush could also cause your sugar to crystallize! I don't teach using a brush--I teach the theory behind why some people use a brush, though.)

Follow the Epicurious link instead--it's a better basic sauce which you can build on later. Without a thermometer, cook your sugar and water until you get a nice amber to dark brown color. We pastry chefs usually cook it by color and/or smell, until we smell "smoke" but that's really a personal and subjective preference--just because we push the upper limit of color doesn't mean you have to. Feel free to stop much earlier. Don't think in terms of time or temperature--just watch your pan, watch your color and remove it from the heat when you have a pretty amber or brown.

The next step is to deglaze--deglaze in this case is what you're doing when you pour a liquid onto that hot, cooked, caramel sugar--that's what viva was talking about--but here's a key pastry chef truc not mentioned in that Epicurious link: in a separate saucepan warm up your cream mixture (or whatever you deglaze your caramel with--sometimes we deglaze with tea or fruit juice) and add this warm liquid to your hot sugar--it will bubble up less and integrate better. Adding cold liquid shocks and sets the hot sugar.

You should warm the cream, turn off the heat, and just let it sit--so it is ready when your sugar is ready. Also realize that caramel sugar will continue to cook (darken) even after you remove it from the heat--so don't dilly dally: pull it off the heat, add the warmed cream.

And you also can add this warm cream slowly--in stages--allowing it to bubble up and then recede each time--that's another way you can prevent it from bubbling over.

If you are adding butter, don't whisk it in until the sugar/cream mixture has cooled down a bit--so do it when it is still warm but not hot.

Also do not watch TV or answer the phone or turn away while you are making a caramel sauce--it requires your direct attention for those few minutes and you'll be rewarded later.

Whatever recipe you work from and however thick the sauce gets as it cools--you can always re-heat and thin it out with more dairy or water to get the consistency you want. If you're pouring it over ice cream, you want to thin it out even more so it stays fluid even in contact with something so cold.

This can be stored in the fridge easily, rewarmed when needed.

[Galileo files Chapter 11, keeps cooking]

Reading that article, my heart couldn't help going out to the current restaurant staff working for their low hourly wages, who likely have had taxes witheld from their checks all along, servers who have had tips witheld and likely used for other purposes, staff who are just hoping they'll still get a paycheck next week let alone in December so they can pay their own bills. Rather than select that quote from an admitted "Roberto groupie" like Joe, I wish the reporter found space to mention the staff behind this "culinary star" with a $2.4 million debt--the dishwashers, servers, line cooks, the (perhaps) 50 or 60+ people most directly affected by this, who now have to face and fear an increasing likelihood that their paychecks could stop on any day.

Celebrity and talent are, of course, interesting to assess and certainly much easier to worship than business-sense, a litany of past failed restaurants and by now countless lost jobs, loyalty to staff and the intertwined responsibilities all these represent. Professional cooking is still largely feudal, so let's keep the serfs foremost in our minds. My hope is Donna comes through for his most important resource, which is not the $500,000 wine cellar, but his current staff--his professional family.

It is "such a shame," as Joe says, and also "sad," just on other, much more immediate and personal levels than the article by Griff Witte, or the quotes he selected, imply.

[Gelato Tips & Techniques]

Lee--yes, various alginates and carraggenates have been in ice cream and sorbet stabilizers for decades--depends on the brand and blend, along with gelatin, carob bean flour, 0% milk powder, dextrose etc. as well, depends whether you want to stabilize fat in addition to water. Depending on the formulation, measurements are typically 2-6g per kg. (I use Sevarome stabilizers.)

[Pastry Ganache - Fillings and Glazes]

Good point loompa, as we've said time and time again on eG P&B chocolates aren't the same, neither are heavy creams with different fat percentages and neither are the ganache recipes you use them in with different amounts of added butter or glucose. All these water and fat percentages have to be adjusted overall to work with a specific chocolate formulation if you want to approach your ganache-making a little more scientifically and technically and get consistently superior results. I think it becomes an individual choice--more or less important depending on what your standards are and what your intended use is. (I disagree somewhat with my esteemed colleague Nick Malgieri on this ganache issue--Nick in his books and classes has generally advocated a more straightforward approach to ganache-making that eschews any complication--for instance the complicated role fat, water, dry matter percentage and these other ingredients (like butter, glucose, trimolene, etc.) play in a professional ganache, it doesn't take into consideration the now much greater variety of high quality chocolates and couvertures on the market nor the special expertise gleaned from chocolatiers and scientists over the years. We're both on the board of advisors for the NY Chocolate Show and if nothing else this demonstrates there isn't ever only one recommended way of doing things--and I tend toward the more scientific approach, obviously.)

Any readily melting (as opposed to purposely thick) chocolate couverture with a higher cocoa butter percentage is going to seem trickier, finickier, to work with when it comes to ganache precisely because of its cocoa butter and its fragile fluidity--but these are usually the more flavorful, more interesting chocolates which transfer positively into the final product. The very thick dry chocolates that aren't high in cocoa butter usually don't come from flavorful beans and/or aren't conched and processed to the extent higher end couvertures are DO initially appear to produce consistent ganaches--i.e. "they don't break" if mishandled--but you're usually not getting as special and as unctuous an end result when you start which such mediocre product.

To add to the fun--try making a ganache with your favorite eating couverture without heating the cream at all, as we've been doing for a few years now--pour warm melted chocolate into your bowl of room temperature cream, hand whisking slowly in the center as you do forming the emulsion the same way as you would, just reversed. Let set and compare with the same proportions done traditionally (pouring just off the boil cream, slowly, into your bowl of pistoles or chopped chocolate, again whisking slowly from the center out)--which produced a more fool-proof emulsion, a shinier gloss and a smoother ganache after crystallization?

Ask yourself, if the cream is pasteurized and homogenized, is there any reason why you have to boil it? Is there a performance difference? Report your findings. Experiment with cold-infusing your cream--does that work as well as traditionally pre-heating and steeping your cream to infuse?

One adjustment to the traditional method which we use sometimes when we're pouring cream onto chopped chocolate--in addition to adding it slowly, or in two parts--is to add it all at once and then let it sit, don't touch it, for a few minutes, then when it has cooled a bit start whisking, stirring slowly from the center out. So I'm with kew and Karen on these little trucs being helpful.

[daSto]

JPW--agreed almost on all accounts. But if he had been reading eGullet, he might have come across this post by Todd talking about his experience as a white professor teaching at Howard and how that experience might relate to his food coverage:

"But I will say that, having been there, I’m more disposed than ever to think that noticing, in whatever form it happens to take, is not the problem. Not noticing is the problem. Indifference is the problem. Pretending there is no problem is the problem. Claims of colorblindness, claims of innocence, claims of our mutual commonality … these seem, if not empty to me, then certainly dubious. Noticing is not judging. I’m more interested than ever, I think, in the ways that things are not alike, in the ways that difference drives culture, neighborhoods, etc.

And food to me is about so much more than what is set down before you on the plate. I'm interested in where it's coming from, and why. I'm interested in who's making it, and why. Who's eating it, and why. The processes, the economics, the politics, the cultural implications, these things all interest me a great deal."

And for some reason this crystallized for me why eGullet is such a special place--these things interest us all a great deal and eGullet can't be pigeonholed on sophisticated or simple or divisive themes. It was here that "DaSto" was discussed, it was here that Gillian was questioned, noticed and for many appreciated in some new ways, and it was here that Fisher noticed that we noticed--and found his next idea for a column.

I respect your disagreement hillvalley, would it have been nice or preferable if he had gone to the trouble to ferret out the real names of the anonymous users he quoted? Sure, especially if he had the column inches to expand the story--but he didn't and those users also had the option to sign their post with their real name which they themselves opted out of. I wonder if a journalism ethics person might say that what Fisher did was respectfully retain that chosen anonymity?

[daSto]

That might have been more difficult for him to focus on JPW simply because Todd Kliman of the City Paper--also a recent DC eGullet forum Q&A guest--just ran with the dining segregation angle in his very astute profile of Gillian--so Fisher would have had to work out new ways to advance the story a bit and I think when you're writing a column on deadline that's a little tougher to do. This is a good thing all around--the eGullet community made news--the exchange between Gillian and eGullet WAS the news--and was covered not typically in Food but atypically in Metro--that's win-win all around. Anyone who drops in here and cares to look around can make up their own mind about the content here--and how accurately Fisher portrayed the various exchanges. There are shades of gray all around.

One thing to remember, though--only a few of us post under our own names--most who post here do so anonymously and that makes it much more difficult to expect to be quoted in such a brief column when your remarks can only be attributed to a screen name. Does anyone know if Fisher does a weekly WashingtonPost online chat? If so, I think it would be prudent for a few eGulleteers to weigh in.