slkinsey

The question is whether #2 would make them any moncy versus having a guy do it by hand. My guess is that it wouldn't.

There are two stages to preparing fresh fava beans. Step one is taking the beans out of the pods. This requires no blanching. Step two is removing the skin from the individual beans. This is most easily accomplished by blanching the beans in copious boiling water for several seconds, and then shocking in ice water. It is then easy to remove the skin by making a slit in the skin and squeezing out each individual bean. The goal is to cook the fava bean as little as possible, so that they retain their texture and best flavor. Watch out for that glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency, though!

So, here are your questions: (1) Do you suppose that people who might be likely to order those drinks would order them if made by a machine? and (2) Do you suppose that bars that might be interested in serving those drinks would be likely to purchase such a machine? As for restaurants, I think that's a nonstarter. Either the bar volume at the restaurant is running at a sufficiently slow pace for the bartender to make these drinks entirely by hand or the bar is busy enough to be considered a "bar" rather than a restaurant for the purposes of this discussion.

So, Roger: Let's see a sample setup (what bottles, what juices) and a sample list of cocktails that the machine could produce.

I would suggest that the consumers of frozen Margaritas from the slurpee machine are not, on average, discerning consumers of classic cocktails. More to the point, a machine like this is a one-trick pony. Roger's machine seeks to be one that makes a number of different cocktails to order at the push of a button. Some questions for Roger: How many cocktails do you think your machine will make given 5 spirits, 2 juices and 1 bitters? No liqueurs (e.g., Cointreau)? What are some cocktails you expect this machine to make? Are we talking about a machine that can make you a Pegu Club or a machine that can make you a Gin and Orange? What do you see are the advantages of using your machine over, say, batching 5 to 10 house cocktails under refrigeration?

Sorry, I'm sure you've already mentioned the reasoning behind this, but why wouldn't you want a disk bottom fry pan? If you've got a nice saucier for wet/dry applications and are just using the fry pan for browning and whatnot I don't see what the problem would be with a disk. Just like I said: "A lot of frypans I find have sides that are too tall and too steep, making them more like curved saute pans." As I point out in the article, you want short flared sides in a frypan, because this aids in the evaporation of steam and thus facilitates crisping of the food surfaces. In addition, most disk-bottom designs do not have a base that extends all the way to the edge. Since frying involves letting foods sit still in the pan (as opposed to the constant movement of sauteing), you do not want a situation where part of the food item is over the disk and part of it is not. Since you would like to maximize your cooking surface in a frypan, straight gauge makes the most sense.

Frozen Margaritas are a drink that are specially amenable to being served from a machine. The "margarita machine" maintains a constant slurry of Margarita slush. That's a far cry from having a machine make a Martini or a Sidecar.

Roger, if you want to make a successful go of this, you need to consider your potential clientele, and more to the point you need to consider their clientele. No one who is interested in a cocktail with bitters, or who cares about fresh juices, or who wants a classic cocktail is going to order a drink that's made by a machine.

I can't speak for Toby, but I think if you consider the stroke he's using there, you'll see that he's hardly applying any force to the muddler. If you're actually "pressing" the mint, you're applying more force -- and you're most definitely bruising more aggressively if you're pressing and turning. Also, the fist-sized bunch of fresh mint he's using means there is going to be a certain "cushioning" effect that will further lessen the force applied the herbage.

That is correct, it only has one handle. I haven't found it difficult to lift, but some people do. I have strong forearms. I find that the handle design also aids in lifting the pot -- you grip the handle close to the body of the pan and anchor the length of the handle along your arm.

The earliest recipes I've seen, in the Stork Club book and the Savoy Book, call for lemon juice and a little fizz water. No bitters. That said, I think that lime and mint often makes a more felicitous combination than lemon and mint. I believe it's Dale DeGroff who says that the Southside came from the 21 Club in NYC. Laura Donnelly says in this NPR piece that the Southside comes from Chicago's South Side and dates to the Prohibition era -- but she seems a little too eager to accept the Chicago story as historical fact, and it seems improbable to me. Eric Felten also disagrees in the WSJ and suggests that it comes from the Southside Sportsmen's Club on Long Island (which would explain why this is an iconic East Coast country club cocktail and not an iconic Chicago cocktail today). The article points out that it is simply a Tom Collins with the addition of mint, which makes it unlikely it came from South Side gangsters in Chicago. Note also the spelling: "Southside" on Long Island, and "South Side" in Chicago.

George, I'm trying to pin down exactly what your conception of the cobbler is. It seems like you're using as your basis something like: base spirit, liqueur, sugar muddled with lemon twists and crushed ice. This seems like it's going in a rather different direction from the cobblers with which I am familiar, and which seem to reflect the heyday of the cobbler, which were not made with distilled spirits at all but rather with a base of wine (either fortified or not) together with sugar, copious fruit (sometimes shaken together with the ingredients but always ornamenting the glass) and crushed ice. One sees the occasional recipe for a cobbler with spirits, starting with JT's whiskey cobbler. But this always struck me as a perfunctory add-on consisting of a simple repetition of the sherry cobbler recipe with a spirit base rather than the usual wine base (and resulting in a ridiculously large amount of spirits). More to the point, while one sees the occasional rare recipe for a spirit-based Cobbler, one never reads of anyone drinking one. All of which is to say that I'd be interested to hear your basis for what you think constitutes a Cobbler. For me, the things that make a Cobbler a Cobbler are (1) the crushed ice; (2) a (fortified) wine base; and (3) lots of fresh fruit, some of it lightly muddled, but always plenty to ornament. I could see making an Icewine Cobbler or an Amaro Cobbler or a Vermouth Cobbler, but somehow a Whiskey Cobbler seems like a Julep without the mint. Is every crushed ice drink that includes neither bitters nor citrus juice a Cobbler?

Copper is much more expensive than aluminum. Whether a 7 mm aluminum base is better than a 2.5 mm copper base for a sauté pan is a matter of opinion and preference, and depends on what you like to do with the pan. As I've said on any number of occasions, most American home cooks don't actually sauté.

Mirto is the Italian word for "myrtle." It is also the name of two drinks made from the myrtle plant, famously in Sardinia. Mirto rosso is made with the berries, and mirto bianco is made with the leaves. Zedda Piras makes both a red and white mirto di Sardegna.

Sloe gin falls is defined under 27 CFR 5.22(h)(1), which says simply that sloe gin is "a cordial or liqueur with the main characteristic flavor derived from sloe berries." There is no further specification as to proof. As it turns out, Plymouth's sloe gin is sold at something like 26% ABV. Plymouth's sloe gin is produced by steeping sloe berries in low proof Plymouth gin and a touch of sugar for several months, then bottled. If you've never had Plymouth's sloe gin, it is remarkably different from any brand available in the United States -- primarily because (i) it is much more "natural" tasting; (ii) it is much less sweet; and (iii) it has much more intensity of actual sloe flavor.

What does "economically sugared" mean? ETA: 27 CFR 5.22(h) defines the Standard of Identity for "Class 8; cordials and liqueurs" as "products obtained by mixing or redistilling distilled spirits with or over fruits, flowers, plants, or pure juices therefrom, or other natural flavoring materials, or with extracts derived from infusions, percolation, or maceration of such materials, and containing sugar, dextrose, or levulose, or a combination thereof, in an amount not less than 2.5 percent by weight of the finished product." 2.5% sugar by weight is not all that much sweetening, when you consider that plenty of liqueurs are over 20% sugar by weight. So there's no reason Plymouth couldn't make their sloe gin relatively dry and still qualify as a "liqueur" under 27 CFR 5.22(h).

Plymouth's sloe gin is not particularly sweet. There is some sugar added, but not much more than is required to balance out the sloes.

A saute pan can be excellent with a heavy stainless body and extra thick disk bottom. That said, I am personally not super-fond of Paderno's saute pan design. The sides are too tall for mty liking. Sitram Catering has a better saute pan design, IMO. You may also want to poke around some restaurant equipment sites to see if you can get a good deal on a heavy disk-bottom saute pan with an encapsulated "all the way to the sides" base. For a fry pan, I'd say you want straight gauge and not disk bottom. You also want something with short flared sides. A lot of frypans I find have sides that are too tall and too steep, making them more like curved saute pans. If you want a curved sauteuse, then straight gauge is the way to go. Either stainless lined copper or the thickest aluminum you can find. It's up to you and your budget. If you do go ahead and get one of these, you might consider buying the saute pan in extra heavy carbon steel, since you could use the saute pan for dry-only applications (i.e., real sauteing) and the curved sauteuse for dry/wet applications. As for the saucepan, it really depends on the intended use for the pan. I find that very few people actually use their saucepans in a way that demands a fancy design.

Why not just put the avocado flesh into the blender with some of the tequila, liquify, infuse, chuck the whole works into the freezer, and filter off the alcohol as usual?

I picked up a bottle myself on Wednesday. Haven't had a chance to play with it much yet. I wonder if this means they're going to put it into regular production?

Above a certain level, each additional dollar buys an increasingly smaller improvement in quality. This is true of all things. Bob, would you say that a $1,500 custom made Japanese kitchen knife is ten times better than one you can get for $150? Is it three times better than one you can get for $500? 33% better than one you can get for $1,000? In my experience, there is no substitute for dry aged superprime beef. Whether or not it is worth it will depend on the skill/experience of the cook and the taste/experience of the diner. A $35/lb dry-aged superprime porterhouse that is charcoal-grilled at home is not likely to seem "worth it" -- especially if you don't have much basis of knowing what you're tasting for. Budget is, of course, also a major consideration. This beef is going to cost right around the same amount of money no matter where it is sold, but income and cost-of-living levels vary quite widely. What this means is that $35/lb is not as expensive to someone working and living in New York City as it is to someone working and living in, say, Lubbock. This is among the reasons that most of the superprime beef that stays in America finds its way to NYC.

Well, I certainly do think that, when one is discussing the different formulae for, say, a Sidecar or a Margarita, then ratios make a good basis for discussion. But when it comes down to codifying a formula, that's when I think it makes the most sense to go to actual amounts.

Sweet. I happened to run into the new American rep for Bols last week, and apparently they would like to bring Bols Genever back to the US.

Yes, I do think it makes a difference, unless you happen to have an oversized shaker you can use for making 2-3 drinks at once (and even this usually will not result in a drink that is exactly like an individually made drink). This depends somewhat on the drink. If you can get a large enough mixing vessel with a large enough amount of ice, stirred drinks seem to come out more or less the same. For shaken drinks, however, it is generally the case that two individually-shaken drinks will come out better than if they were shaken together. Think about it: Unless you have a shaker that is twice the size of your usual shaker, there is no way you can get the same ratio of ice to liquid (which will change the thermal transfer quite a lot) and there is not likely to be as much air space (which affects aeration, etc.). Even with a shaker that is twice the size of your usual shaker, it's not going to be quite the same. But don't take my word for it... try it yourself. It's pretty obvious, IMO. Whether or not the UK liquid ounce is actually used in practice, there does in fact exist a "British Imperial" liquid ounce, which comes out at 1/20th of an Imperial Pint (making it somewhat less than an American liquid ounce). What's interesting is that these standard measures are right around the same as an American fluid ounce, which comes in at 29.57 ml. What is the standard shot in Scotland? This accords with what I know of most bartenders: they give recipes in actual amounts. As you suggest, this probably has much to do with costing drinks, booze control, government regulations, etc.

You may not be concerned about the total volume of a drink, but I certainly am! I'd just as soon pass on that 6 ounce Pegu Club, thank you very much. I'd also dispute that a 3:2:1 Margarita will be "just like you make it" or will "taste the same" at any size. A Margarita made with 1.5 ounces of tequila, 1 ounce of Cointreau and a half-ounce of lime juice will be bracing, cold and refreshing at three ounces. A Margarita made with 3 ounces of tequila, 2 ounces of Cointreau and one ounce of lime juice -- even assuming that your shaker was twice the size of the one you used for the 3 ounce drink, and that you were able to chill/dilute the drink to the same degree (neither of which is likely to be true) won't be the same at six ounces. For one, by the time you get to the bottom of the three ounce drink, it's likely to still be cold and you're likely to be ready for another. By the time you get to the bottom of the six ounce drink, it's going to be warm and cloyingly sweet. I agree that there are different sorts of recipes. A simple drink like a Martini, that has wide variation in formula all the way from 1:1 to 20:1 is usefully discussed in ratios. But still, if I were going to give someone a recipe for my Martini formula, I'd size the drink to 3-4 ounces. For most other drinks, I think it makes the most sense to offer the drink the same way the vast majority of drink formulae have been given going all the way back to Jerry Thomas: in the actual volumes in which the author or mixologist expects the drink to be made. When I'm filpping through cocktail books, I automatically skip over books that specify recipes by parts. It's just too much trouble and, not for nothing is my experience that "parts" recipes don't tend to be very good ones. I'm not sure I follow your idea about substituting a half-tablespoon for a quarter-ounce. Is a half-tablespoon measure a common kitchen measure? I've got probably three or four sets of measuring spoons around, and I'm not sure any one of them has a "half tablespoon" measure. You can either use something like the OXO graduated measure (which I find perfectly fine for home use, especially when I can't use a speed-pourer) or all you need is two jiggers: a 2 : 1 jigger and a 1 : 1/2 jigger. If you like, you can precisely measure 1/4 and 3/4 ounces into the two sides of the 1: 1/2 jigger and make a scratch mark on the inside. Another good thing to have for <1/2 ounce amounts is this adjustable tablespoon measure from KitchenArt.