Tri2Cook

Stopped by the local LCBO store after work just to see if there was anything other than the usual stuff that's always there. Stumbled across this... ...and decided to try it. 4% abv Ginger Beer. Well under $4... so no big loss if it sucks, maybe an interesting addition to ginger beer containing drinks if it doesn't suck.

I have. Did it for last month's mixology monday. I'm not claiming it's great, I don't have much experience creating drinks, but I was happy with it.

Sounds good to me, this is where I'll start.

Not sure yet. I just got my hands on a bottle of LH 151 so something tiki is likely but I'm open to suggestions outside of tiki-land. You mentioned in an earlier post that you went with less sugar in a batch and never looked back so I took that as good advice and did the same. I'm happy with the result.

Finished, aged for 5 weeks and bottled (that's a clear glass bottle, it's just really full)... With nothing to compare it to, I have no idea how close it is to what it's supposed to be... but it's very smooth and very tasty.

The LH 151 has a date with Beachbum Berry Remixed.

I feel worse for the 18,000+ people that are losing their jobs than the disappearance of the Twinkies but I did eat a fair share of them when I was kid.

With a little (actually, a lot because only one of these is available in Ontario and none locally) of help from my friends, my cabinet now contains a bottle each of Cruzan Black Strap, Lemon Hart 151, Smith & Cross and Coruba rums.

I don't know what your recipe uses as the chocolate component but it's been my experience that any ingredient that introduces fat to the formula messes with the texture resulting in a denser, less aerated marshmallow with a texture that could easily be interpreted as gummy. Chocolate, cocoa, peanut butter, coconut milk and spray dried coconut milk powder all had that effect on marshmallows I've made. I've never been able to get a marshmallow with the traditional texture when including a fat-containing ingredient. The taste was fine, the texture not so much.

I agree... but it seems that the desire is to accompany the cake with something. Just in my opinion, a sorbet or granita that will contrast an extremely rich chocolate cake with a warm chocolate cream oozing through it needs to be pretty well thought out or it's just going to seem harsh and out of place. Some may disagree but I think contrasting is a tougher job to do well than complimenting. If I'm in a position where I'm asking for suggestions, which means I'm not confident in what will work, I'd definitely want to do a test run if I'm just going to pick from a list of ideas that sound refreshing. What would be refreshing on it's own may be something else paired with that cake.

I agree. If you really want something to accompany it, a nice scoop of whatever style vanilla ice cream you prefer would be my choice as well. I've never had that cake but, looking at the recipe, you're not going to tame it with a little scoop of sorbet... so embrace it. Make it rich, make it decadent, make it too big to finish. Dessert used to be just that. Back before the days of "oh, I don't like dessert to be sweet" ( ) or "a teaspoon of plain water sorbet is the perfect end to a meal" ( ).

I'm definitely going to have to try that one.

prasantrin: I don't want to inconvenience anyone (although Kerry might say I couldn't prove that by her ), but I'll keep it in mind and may come back begging. I really appreciate the offer. Kerry: I checked the site you mentioned, didn't see anything like what I'm after but it's entirely possible I missed it. Their website says "wholesale only" but I could probably contact an actual store directly and ask. Thanks!

If it makes you feel any better, when it's available at the LCBO, which it isn't right now, it's $35. They still have it listed on the LCBO website but there's none currently available at any location. Mine is almost gone, I hope it still being listed means they intend to restock.

Anybody know an in-Canada source that ships? One with an online store would be preferable but not completely necessary. I'm looking for the stuff you brew yourself, not a concentrate or ready-drink. I can get it from importfood.com in the U.S. if I have to but I'd rather order within Canada if I can.

That's exactly what "modernist cuisine" is to me. Looking at new and/or better ways to do things with food. Something that's been going on as long as there's been food but at a point in time when information and criticism are easily shared and thus requiring a special label to help it stand out in discussions. At some point somebody decided to stick their chunk of bronto-steak on a stick and hold it over the fire. A few said "hey, let's check that out". A few said "that's not how it's done, I refuse to accept it". And there was the inevitable group that actively rallied against it and said that we never should have cut that chunk of bronto-steak off of the animal in the first place... "What happened to simply gathering around and burying our faces in the carcass?". The tricks and gags of "molecular gastronomy" demonstrated what some of these new ways of thinking could accomplish but the ideas behind a lot of it had valid uses in cooking in general thus creating the need to seperate the whimsy (molecular gastronomy) from the techniques (modernist cuisine) so that we could use those techniques without everybody expecting dessert to look like a fried egg or their sauce to arrive in little drops in a caviar tin. Many look down their nose at that sort of thing now but it was a valid stage in the evolution of cooking and will leave it's mark on how things are done in the future.

Which is why it's best just to honor such requests. It's not difficult to just not serve something they ask not to be served and we don't always know as much as we think we know. Maybe they are just being dramatic to underscore the point that they don't want something. Maybe we think they can't possibly be allergic to this because they eat that. Maybe we're wrong and kill somebody or make them very sick. Not worth the risk as far as I'm concerned. If they say they can't eat something, as far as I'm concerned, they can't eat it... even if I happen to strongly suspect that they simply don't want to eat it. I don't consider eating preferences or food allergies part of customers being right or wrong anyway. Allergies are a medical thing and preferences aren't right or wrong, they're preferences.

I plan to add Nonino, and maybe Ramazzotti, to the Lucano, Fernet Branca, Cynar, Campari and Aperol that I already have and call it good enough for a while. I've been going a touch overboard with the cabinet stocking for my budget and need to slow it down a bit. So, with that limited selection, a substitution chart will be a very handy thing to have around.

That's always been my thought as well but I have about 2 dozen 12-cavity non-stick trays that are close to 15 years old. I inherited them after my mom passed away. She used them for years to do her christmas baking in, I used them for a few years for catering work. I agree with you that they are a royal pain in the arse to line, which is why they don't get used much anymore, but they're still in perfect condition.

I have a big stack of what I assume are supposed to be mini muffin pans that are no bigger than 1.5" across the bottom, They may actually be a little smaller than that, I'd have to check. They're non-stick and don't have removeable bottoms but they work great for bite-size tarts. They also don't get as much use as they used to because I have to be feeling particularly dedicated or getting well paid to want to make all of those %@&! tiny shells.

Exactly. I would agree with much of what has been said if the question didn't start with "as a beginning personal chef". A personal chef who tells the clients what they won't do because it's not authentic is in the fastlane to no longer being a personal chef. It's fine to offer advice and guidance but at the end of the discussion, what the client pays you to do is what you do. We can trot out examples of dictatorial chefs who tell the customer what they will or won't do and get away with it but I'm willing to bet almost anything that every one of them put in a lot of years of doing whatever the customer wanted before they got to that point in their success. Customer wants brown rice with their waterfall beef, customer gets brown rice with their waterfall beef... without a side of "that's wrong".

True.

I'd say the 0.01 accuracy isn't better, it's a must for the majority of the hydrolloids, sequestrants, buffers and stabilizers used in "modernist" cooking.

And to supplement what Digijam said, I'd argue that, while undoubtedly nice, a Thermomix is not at all necessary. I don't have one. It's on the short list of "someday" but not in the budget at this time. I've done many recipes that call for one and never had a recipe fail from not using one.

Perish the thought!