paulraphael

The collective will of the people exerts a strong influence. Diners vote with their reservations and their pocketbooks; restaurant owners have only limited sway. Of course someone like Robuchon might get customers if he insits on tuxedos, but he's in the exalted minority. Most chefs and owners work hard to get people in the door. Creating an environment that diners don't like (and this could include a dress code that's too strict or one that's not strict enough) will hurt business. That's why this debate DOES seem like a kind of negotiation between the restaurants and the patrons (and between the patrons who like to dress up and those who don't).

Merstar isn't just picking nits; in my experience the fat content will make a bigger difference to the success/failure of the recipe than the cocoa solids content. And unless you're dealing with professional couverture, this information can be hard to find. It's actually doubly important to find it, because knowing the cocoa % tells you very little. It isn't actually an indicator of cocoa solids (even though that's the name); it tells you the cocoa solids plus naturally ocurring cocoa butter. This is why unsweetened chocolate is labelled 100% cocoa. But it's cocoa plus cocoa butter. Not all 100% cocoa chocolates will be equally dark or intense, because they will have different proportions of fat to cocoa solids. Confusing, right?

I've just reread the last dozen or so posts, and they all break down to one central conflict: people who like to dress up vs. people who don't. All the arguments are rationalizations for these two sentiments. That's ok-- but let's recognize we're not talking about anything more profound that this. Are there social norms about dressing a certain way? Yes. Have they been changing over the last decades? Yes. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? From the restaurant's and the diner's perspectes? All depends on your feelings about dressing up. Obviously there will be conflicts about this. And it's obvious that arguments about who's right and who's wrong are going to be fundamentally pointless. The interesting issues are what people like (and dislike) about dressing up. And how to navigate the social landscape when the rules have become so vague.

I've read that yolks don't freeze as well, so I haven't tried it. One issue is that they contain fat, so they can rancidify. Not a concern with whites. I Just freeze them in a ziplock bag. I do it any time I use yolks in a recipe, and keep adding to the same bag. When the bag gets big, or a couple of months old, I'll consider making something like financiers. A few suggestons: -double bag them. ziplock bags often leak after being frozen and thawed -squeeze out all the air before freezing -write the date on the bag, and don't keep them around for more than a few months. Honestly, I've kept them for longer than this, with no obvious ill effects, but conventional wisdom says not to. -if you plan to thaw the whites to use a portion of them, and refreeze the rest, be aware of any time spent in the petry dish zone (warmer than 40°F). keep it to a minimum, and if you're not sure, toss.

Most recipes seem to tolerate some slop in egg quantities. If you need to be precise, as always the best bet is measuring weight. Figure 50g per large egg (18g yolk, 32g white). I keep whites in the freezer and always measure them into recipes by weight. Yolks I blindly trust.

I'm interested in if there are different mechanisms by which we perceive piquancy. Supposedly capsaicin works by purely chemical means to create a pain reaction; we then interpret that as a component of flavor, even though it doesn't involve taste receptors in the conventional way. I wonder if other chemicals, like the ones in mustards or horseradish that clear the sinuses, work on us different ways. Part of what makes this tricky is that our brains like to unify these disparate sensations into a unified one ... we take information from our aroma receptors, taste receptors, and other nerves in our mouths and noises, and integrate (or conflate) them into a flavor sensation. As far as the debate over temperature, I suspect you're both right. There does seem to be a threshold below which it all just feels f'ing cold. But I think that threshold is colder than -10F.

How do you define white bread? Is it any bread made without whole grain flour? Or is it a specific style (soft, loaf shaped, usually with dairy in it)? I see it used both ways and wonder if one definition is more standard.

Shouldn't matter at all. The surface is what's in contact with the eggs, and the surface of both kinds is nearly pure copper.

Lore and science support using copper bowls for whipping egg whites; copper ions bond to conalbumin molecules, allowing them to form a stronger and more stable foam. I got a great old copper mixing bowl on ebay years ago, and used to whip all my whites in it. But now that I have an aftermarket balloon-whisk type attachment for my stand mixer, that machine makes life easier even for a single egg white. But the bowl is stainless, and copper replacement bowls or liners cost more than all the meringue in the world. I've been getting by with using acid (cream of tartar) to stabilize the foam. This works, but not as well, and doesn't provide the kind of insurance against overwhipping as copper. So lately I've been experimenting. The common warning is to not use both copper and acid, because you'll liberate too many copper ions, resulting in foam that will taste like pennies and that may even be toxic. So I wondered, why not use the solvent power of the acid to get ions from a very small quantity of added copper? What I've been trying is acidified egg whites (made with the usual quantity of cream of tartar; about 0.4g/egg white)--plus pennies. I just remove tarnish from the pennies and throw them in the mixer's bowl. My starting point is one penny per egg white. So far there's no taste of copper in the end product, so I know I'm liberating too many ions. But I haven't yet compared to penniless foam, so I don't know if I'm liberating enough to make a difference. I'll do an experiment soon and report back. Does anyone else want to try this and see if it works?

Math may bug people, but think weights make it easier. Quick: what's half of 180 grams? Now, what's half of 1-1/3 cups? Everything I ever see is grams and kilograms. Once you get used to those units there's no going back.

I see both sides of this issue, and am divided on it. For the most part, like the Dude in The Big Lebowski, I'm "a man in whom casualness runs deep" ... and side with Anthony Bourdain who feels the food had better be mind blowing if he'll be coerced into a noose just to get in the door. On the other hand, I appreciate the need for occasion. We don't have much of it anymore so it's nice to have something, once in a while, to rise to. That actually might be the distinction: I like dressing up for a sense of occasion, but I'm repelled by any sense of stuffiness. I don't want to feel that the restaurant needs my jacket and tie to elevate it ... I want it to be so inspiring that I'll happily remember how to iron a collar and tie a tie. The other diners? I'm less bothered by casualness than by slovenliness and repellent social habits, but those can't be fixed by a dress code. Of course I'm not thrilled by the woman in the sweat suit spilling out of her chair. But I'm not thrilled by her in my neighborhood bodega either. There is no dress code that can keep her in Jersey. Ultimately, if the food is amazing, I'm not going to pay attention to the other diners, whether they look like royalty or lepers.

I don't know why I never asked this question. Toothbrush has been added to the shopping list. I have the same chinois, and discovered the hard way that banana seeds are the perfect size to install themselves permanently between the wires. Perhaps the tooth brush will be a worthy implement of demolition.

Thanks for reminding me. I still think of that as George Perrier's recipe, but looking back at his version, there's little resemblance anymore besides the poaching. I uploaded it here.

My list would make me sound like someone's grandma. The things I've taken the trouble to perfect are almost all simple ... bread and butter type recipes, heavy on the fundamentals and light on sleight of hand. I don't have the time/talent/resources to perfect anything complicated, so I rarely try. Maybe I should say "apparently simple," since I'm talking about foods that are simple in concept and presentation, though not necessarily execution. Over the last few years I've incorporated a lot of contemporary "molecular" techniques, but I don't draw attention to this. I just want my diners to think the food's surprisingly delicious. They don't have to know that grandma's got a chemistry set, a miligram scale, and a blowtorch. I'd have to include roasted chicken, chocolate chip cookies, a handful of chocolate desserts (cake, brownies, marquise), simple ice creams, and coulis-based brown sauces.

Yeah, no comparison. I get all the spices whole whenever possible (i still buy ground cinnamon because grinding it's a pain). For small quantities I like a mortar and pestle. For bigger ones I'll use an old coffee mill. I find the machine only saves time if I'm doing a big pile, because it's harder to clean.

Ok, I might have have found the holy grail. At least I'm done monkeying around. In an earlier post, I suggested 2/3 chuck and 1/3 brisket. I tried replacing the brisket with hanger steak. Holy god. These were great burgers. Makes sense ... I can't think of a beef cut more flavorful than hanger. I'd been experiementing with sirloin in the mix, but it wasn't adding much. Here's what I liked best, by weight: 66% chuck (ideally chuck eye) 33% hanger (remove the connective tissue in the middle) 0.75% salt 0.25% black pepper I'm finding it easiest to salt and pepper the meat before grinding. If you do this you don't have to physically mix it into the ground meat and risk overhandling it. Just be sure to clean the grinder right away, since salt is corrosive.

If there's a lot of butter in the ganache, you can sometimes avoid problems by letting it come to room temperature slowly before reheating it. But you probably won't have any troubel either way.

I think you can hone in your generalization better by looking at the qualities of wine that get lost during cooking vs those that get intensified. Alcohol content makes no real difference, because all but trace amounts boil off. Most subtle flavors and aromas will be gone. You're left with the broad strokes: acidy, sweetness, fruit. Weather you want a fruity wine or an austere one depends the sauce. For something like a beurre blanc, you want leanness and acid, not fruit ... like a muscadet. But often you'll want the opposite, like in a big brown sauce with red wine and truffles (sauce regence). Here's you probably want body, fruit, and some residual sugar. I'm not convinced the old world / new world thing really holds up anymore.

Often if you're a member of a co-op you can get whatever you want. Then you're technically a farm owner and not a consumer, so if you die there's no one to be sued.

Chocolate ice cream is tough. It's the cocoa butter ... if you use a lot of chocolate, the ice cream will be too hard when frozen and too hard when melted. Making it with cocoa powder is easier, but I don't think as good. I've been experimenting with a blend of both. I'm not 100% there yet but it's getting close.

Ok, I reread your post and think I see where you're coming from. Sure, I think we all fundamentally like some foods more than other. Or respect that some are more decadent, luxurious, or special than others. But, if in your personal heirarchy foie gras is above a hamburger, does this mean that even with unlimited resources you'd ALWAYS choose the foie? Would you eat Thomas Keller's or Masa's food three times a day, and your mom's food never? I think most of us like variety--not just in types of ingredients, but in the style and formality of their preparation and presentation. Even if practical concerns didn't impose this variety on us, i think we'd insist on it. I share your taste for the thick, super marbled rib eye. I just don't want it every day. Sometimes I crave a roasted chicken, and I want it to be a good one.

The dichotomy isn't all that clear to me either. But if a great Neapolitan pizza makes you yawn, I'm left wondering if you've ever had one. Maybe sex at zero gravity would be better ... but I cant say; I've never had THAT.

thanks so much! just don't assume i'm right ... I just don't like it. I have yet to find an application for shortening where I don't feel that another kind of fat would be better. Possible exceptions are greasing baking pans and making decorative spackle for gingerbread cakes. Major exception is frosting for cakes that have to survive outside in hot weather ... but this frosting is functional, not delicious. Two issues: shortening's melting point is higher than body temperature, so it always gives a greasy mouth feel. And it's flavorless. The high melting point makes it easy to work with. But butter is perfectly workable if you know how. Some bakers say there are applications where you want neither the flavor of butter nor the savory flavors of leaf lard, suet, etc... I suppose there could be such cases, but i could never think of any.

That scottish site is brilliant! Here's another take ... my butcher hamming it up on the Gourmet magazine site.

How did you put the mint into the mix? There was a thread somewhere (cocktail forum?) about mint. Aparently most of the good flavor is right near the surface, so you want to mash up the leaves very, very little. The mixologists call it muddling. If you go too far crushing or pureeing it, you end up with vegetal flavors that aren't so terrific.