Dave the Cook

I took a look at the recipe just now, and I suspect your problem has to do with heat control. Keller says to heat the oil over medium-high heat until the oil starts to smoke, then turn it down. This sequence ensures that 1) the pan will be hot enough to initiate browning; 2) that you won't experience a significant temperature drop when you add the fish; and 3) the surface of the fish will start to steam immediately, which will push oil away from the persillade. As soon as the crust starts to develop (Keller says about a minute), you remove it from direct heat and stick it in the oven to finish. The oil will still be hot enough to continue browning the crumbs; as that dissipates, the oven heat takes over. None of this will work if the oil isn't hot enough -- either because the cook hasn't brought it up to proper heat, or he crowds the pan (like Paul did one time), causing a temperature drop from which -- because the whole thing cooks so quickly -- he will not be able to recover.

Really? Powders are more convenient than just keeping a lemon or lime in the fridge for a quick cut-and-squeeze? And that's significantly less convenient than opening, shaking and closing a bottle of vinegar?

A couple of thoughts: Table salt almost always includes calcium silicate, which prevents clumping. In other words, it will resist water absorption. If you're using table salt, you might get better results by switching to kosher or pickling salt; check the ingredients list first, though. Sugar is extremely hygroscopic (though I don't know how it compares to salt). Why not try sugar instead?

1 and 3 are correct. 2 is sort-of correct, and the misunderstanding is probably my fault. A refiner can make pretty much any sized sugar crystal it wants; it's a simple matter of seeding and milling, and has nothing to do with the source of the sugar. This is reflected in some packaging -- it's common to see sugar labeled "extra-fine," for example. But there are no legal standards for crystal size, so one company's unlabeled sugar might be finer than another's ultra-fine. Either or both could be be beet- or cane-based. Does that make more sense?

I've made the pave from Ad Hoc, too. Having been through Keller's stuff, I was not in the least surprised that it was an exacting, time-consuming recipe. Sometimes that exactly what I want. But I also expect the results to be worth the effort. Usually, with a Keller recipe, it is. Those potatoes, though, were not. That doesn't mean I'm disappointed in the book as a whole; I'm barely into it. But it's not an auspicious start.

The conclusions drawn by the San Francisco group have been debunked several times, including by me, for a piece I wrote for the Daily Gullet in 2003 (the article itself is in an archive that hasn't yet been restored since our latest upgrade). Differences that are attributed to beet v. cane sugar can be explained a number of ways, including -- most significantly -- granule size (more on that in a minute). In any case, even the American Sugar Alliance, a consortium of beet and cane sugar companies says, "There is no difference in the sugar produced from either cane or beet." As Jason points out, sucrose is sucrose, and refined white sugar is 99.95% pure. Even assuming that that last 0.05% is wildly different in beet and cane sugars (it's not, but whatever), there are so many other variables in baking that that tiny bit -- especially that tiny bit accompanied by many other ingredients -- is insignificant. Sugar producers are not required to state sources, because all refined white sugar is the same. It's entirely possible that unmarked sugar is cane; the producer doesn't say so because changing labels for individual production runs is expensive, and limits the producer in terms of sourcing. Beet sugar is prevalent in Europe because cane doesn't grow well in that climate -- not to mention that, last time I checked, the EU was nearly as protective as the US when it came to protecting an indigenous industry, even when cheaper sources were available. So beet sugar is used in Europe, and recipes were developed with it. More important than cane v. beet is consistency of the product. If you develop a recipe with one granule size, and it's a recipe where granule size matters, there's a chance that changing brands will require reworking of the recipe. Correct. From the aforementioned article: "Imagine that a sugar granule is a cube (it's not, but for purposes of this mental exercise, it's easier to think of it that way). One gram of standard granulated sugar contains about 5000 granules, and they would all stack neatly together in a cube, about 17 granules on a side. Now imagine a cube made up of granules that are half of the original granule in each dimension. You still have the same size cube, and it weighs the same, but now it comprises 20,000 granules. The effect this would have in melting, dispersion, cooling and recrystallization would have tremendous impact on finished goods -- I'm guessing far more than whatever difference there might be between cane sugar and beet sugar. The brownie and dry sugar tasting results [two of several experiments described in the piece] were affected by granule size and the greater dispersion smaller granule size afforded. Once in solution, granule size was no longer an issue, and the differences between cane sugar and beet sugar disappeared."

I suppose it depends on what you're trying to do, but I think Mary Ann's come up with a solution that doesn't really have a problem. You can wait 15 minutes to sort-of peel a partially cooked potato (and dirty two vessels), or you can take 45 seconds to peel an uncooked potato.

It might not be a big deal given the significant and complicated ingredient lists in tiki drinks (or maybe it's just adds another layer of complexity), but the archetype of orange curacao is not Cointreau; it's Grand Marnier. The difference is the base spirit: in Cointreau (or MB triple sec, Combier or Citronge) it's grain neutral spirits. Grand Marnier (or Grand Gala or Prunier Orange Liqueur) use cognac as the base. I'd look for something that says "cognac" on the label, and boasts a decent proof: somewhere between 70 and 80.

The butter seems a bit over the top, if you've got a quality bird, but hey, if you like butter, why not? The oysters: run your finger along one side of the backbone. There will be a tender spot just north (towards the neck) of where the thigh joins. On a three-pound bird, it's a little bigger than a quarter. You can usually just push it out with your finger -- and Keller is right, it's the best part. I'll agree to the consensus here that lemons add little if anything to a roast chicken, and I'll raise you a beer can: another myth.

Can you give us some photos?

Dave, only 4 kinds? Oh, I was just trying to count what I could make out in cramper's freezer! To me, "exotic" is having two different brands of gin on the shelf.

Reminder: time to buy up a year's supply of frozen pearl onions before they disappear for ten months.

. . . not to mention that you stock at least four different types of ice.

Me too. Actually, mostly I do without Salsa in the dark times. I keep thinking that one must be able to make a salsa that is at least as good as a canned salsa out of canned tomatoes, no? Still not 100% sure where to start. . . . . You could start by dispensing with the notion that tomatoes are essential to a good salsa.

At one of the stores here (Atlanta), we couldn't find it -- after preaching about it to our students, of course. The clerk at the information counter said "We're not carrying it anymore." I don't know if that's a chain-wide decision or not, but subsequent searches at other TJs in the city also came up puffless.

Three random thoughts: The 2004 edition of On Food and Cooking wasn't just a revision; it was a complete overhaul -- so much so that everyone I know who already owned the first edition (1999, I think) nevertheless felt compelled to buy the second. Would it be helpful to distinguish between good books and influential books? Alinea is a wonderful tome, but I suspect it preaches to the converted. Its influence might be felt more in the publishing industry than in food circles. Contrast that with Charcuterie, which sent so many of us off in search of pink salt, hog casings, home smokers and retrofitted wine coolers. Mitch might be correct that, in the long term, Under Pressure will turn out to be enormously influential. But I have to put in a plug for eG Forums here: it seems unlikely to me that Keller's book has a greater reach than our own sous-vide topic.

Amazon appears to have it in stock; here's a link that puts a few pennies in the Society coffers without costing you a thing: click here. I have to ask, though: is this specifically for making stock and soups? If you're just talking about large quantities of relatively thin liquids, you don't need anything so expensive.

Saying that you can’t control quality and costs through centralized purchasing disregards basic economics. Done properly, large scale purchasing and distribution keeps costs down. That's why most Mom and Pop places use the same purveyors as many chains -- Sysco being the most obvious example. In the case of the largest chains, regional commissaries serve the same purpose. Right. In many places, a chain offers the best food available. If you're on a business trip, the predictability of chains is a good thing. You understand the value proposition, know what you'll be getting, and will never be questioned about an expense report. I don’t always have time to investigate the local possibilities, and relying on the indigenous population is risky. As Calvin Trillin pointed out, most people don’t know where the good restaurants in their communities are, not to mention that being part of the local color doesn't exempt you from the "90% of everything is crap" rule. Sorry, but most M&Ps just aren't very good. A notion expressed earlier in this topic -- that chains suck money out of the community -- is just unsupportable. Most chains are composed of restaurants owned and operated by independent local or regional franchisees. They employ local people, pay local taxes, and are encouraged if not required by the franchise agreement to support community activities.

The standard for measuring salinity is total dissolved solids (evaporating the liquid and measuring the residue). Conductivity, which is what Wolke used, is typical in process applications. I've never heard of using specific gravity to measure salt concentration (until now). Right. It's not about the potatoes. It's about the soup.

I have yet to meet a kid that didn't like chicken fingers. Chicken breast (or thigh) strips, flour, egg wash, panko, then bake or fry. Sauces make the dish: ketchup, tonkatsu, honey-mustard, applesauce . . . If you have the supplies, they also like pizza, and if you make the dough (you've got just enough time), they can pick the toppings (whatever you have on hand will be fine), thus alleviating the picky factor. If you can't make dough, split a loaf of bread lengthwise and top that.

Those of you with an abiding interest in Rose's, as well as Gimlets, should enjoy Janet Zimmerman's take on the two in her Daily Gullet column, Any Other Name.

Just two of us as well, though my kids will be coming over for hors d'oeurves and a drink before they head off to have dinner with their mom and her sister. We'll be giving them: Chile shrimp bites -- chopped shrimps and flecks of poblano, bound with shrimp mousse flavored with scallion and a little pepper sauceChicken satayBouchees with Wild Mushroom and BrieCocktails TBD, but something using sparkling wine and another, non-alcoholic, option Tomorrow: Corn soup with seared scallopTurkey breast, boned and rolled with mushrooms and roasted garlic, then cooked sous vide. Some sort of reduction sauce, which we'll figure out as we go, but will be based on turkey stock.Two-tone potatoes Anna -- white and sweet potatoes layered in a cast-iron skillet.Wilted autumn slaw -- shredded Brussels sprouts cooked gently in rendered bacon fat. Corn and red bell pepper are added for color and sweetness, finishing with a jalapeno dressing and the bacon bits that gave up their fat.Poached pear salad with candied walnuts and Cougar Gold cheddar. Yeah, that sounds like two salads, and it sort of is, but the pears will sit in as dessert.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but sweetening is added to offset the salt from a taste perspective. When it comes to the chemistry of brining, sugar plays no part.

He does: 5 ounces to two quarts of water -- and he recommends Diamond Crystal. This is a pretty standard formula (it's what I use). agray, I'd try Keller's recipe again if you used Morton's -- just weigh it or follow Janet's measurement. But to answer the question as to time or salt concentration, you should adjust concentration. Brine penetration is a constant, so if you want evenly seasoned meat, you have to give it enough time, regardless of how much salt you're using. There's more information in the eGCI course.

Perhaps it would be useful to distinguish among three reasons to clean as you go. One: you intend to reuse equipment and can't afford to do thing any other way. Two: you just work better in a tidy space. Most of us probably don't have adequate room to start with, so sequestering the mess by dumping it in a sink, relegating it to a dishwasher or cleaning and replacing is a matter of maintaining not just physical but mental order. The third reason -- and one no one's mentioned so far -- is to avoid that late-night or early-morning Superfund clean-up that paulraphael alluded to. Sure, you made a great dinner, you sat down and enjoyed it with a group of close friends, you made a wonderful pot of coffee and served terrific port with generous portions of amazing cheeses that you smuggled in from France in your underwear (of course, with these cheeses, no one could discern between provenance and transport). None of that will subdue the monster you created and left behind to multiply -- if you didn't clean as you went.