slkinsey

Darcie B: As chance would have it, all of the stainless/copper bimetal is manufactured by Falk Culinair, which developed the process and owns the patent. Even more interesting is the fact that Bourgeat copper cookware is manufactured by Mauviel using Falk Culinair's bimetal. takadi: As others have mentioned, copper pans have a higher thermal capacity than aluminum pans of the same size/shape/configuration. That said, if what you really want is a saute pan, and you intend to use it for sauteing and other high-heat applications, you can do even better with a disk-bottom pan that has a heavy stainless bottom and an extra-thick aluminum base. Several manufacturers offer aluminum bases between 5 mm and 7 mm thick.

It's never been clear to me that there is a good definition of "ratafia." Some sources seem to indicate that ratafia is a liqueur made by infusing alcohol with fruit kernels/pits and/or bitter almongs, and possibly also including fruit and/or herbs -- in which case it is defined by the kernel/pit/bitter almond infusion. Other sources suggest that ratafia is a fruit based infused liqueur produced either at home or in small farms -- in which case it is defined by the place/way it is produced. Both are apparently wine-based and quite low in alcohol, which would not give them much similarity with crèmes de noyaux such as Noyau de Poissy or the Duplais recipe. On the other hand, the 1913 Webster's says it is "A spirituous liquor flavored with the kernels of cherries, apricots, peaches, or other fruit, spiced, and sweetened with sugar; -- a term applied to the liqueurs called noyau, curaçao, etc." So that is needless to say inconsistent as well.

This fork of the discussion came about because LPShanet said that "the defining characteristic of NY pizza is its crust" and, by implication, that NYC pizza is distinguished by having a great crust. I pointed out that most NYC steel deck pizza oven crusts suck. LPShanet agreed that the "best crusts come from a really hot coal (or wood, or similar) oven" but suggested that "you can achieve a pretty good result in a standard Bari deck oven" by baking the pizza twice. I replied that I thought a good and even great slice can come from a stainless deck oven, but not a truly great crust -- primarily because steel deck ovens can't achieve a high enough temperature to create a "crisp and charred yet light and pliable" crust that is the pinnacle of pizza crustery. This led to the current digression on oven temperatures. I would say that it is not possible to make a truly great pizza crust using a standard stainless deck pizza oven, even with considerable tweaking. The primary limitation is temperature, but there may be other limitations. It's impossible to make any absolute pronouncements as to temperature, because styles differ. I would suggest that somewhere around 800F (could be as low as 750 for a certain style, and could go as high as 900 for others). Regardless, I think it's pretty clear that stainless deck ovens are at least a hundred degrees F away from being able to compete with what retained heat ovens are capable of producing in terms of crust quality. If someone invents a stainless deck oven capable of putting a crisp char on the bottom, fully cooking the crust and melting the top of a pizza in 120 seconds, that may change. But for sure that's not what most NYC pizzerie are using right now, and I have some doubts as to how many of these ovens are even capable of 650 (never mind the fact that practically none of them are set that high). Hey, if someone has an example of a steel deck pizza oven crust that competes with Patsy's, Grimaldi's, Franny's, etc. on those criteria I'd like to try it. But generally one has to choose between soft, spongey and insipid on one hand or crisp, dry and tough on the other .

That's not the full context of what I said. What I said was: "Even with a seriously tweaked oven maxed out at 650F, they're still a few hundred degrees F below what you can get in a wood- or coal-fired oven." It's quite clear that wood- and coal-fired ovens can, and regularly do achieve temperatures in the range of 850F to 900F. Maybe I need to check my basic mathematics, but I think I'm correct in saying that these temperatures are "a few hundred agrees" higher than 650F. I would argue that the places making the best crusts, the outstanding crusts that are capable of attracting attention in and of themselves, are by and large baking at significantly higher temperatures than the 650F maximum obtainable with a maxed-out, top of the line, brand new stainless deck pizza oven. So, yea. I would argue that it's more or less impossible to get a superior crust at 650 degrees in a stainless deck oven. I've certainly never experienced one. You should do more reading on pizza baking temperatures, then. I think you'll find a remarkable amount of agreement among those with knowledge that the best pizza crusts are produced at high temperatures. Indeed, most of the various societies and certifying bodies tend to suggest around 800F, and sometimes more. Again, I haven't argued that all wood- and coal-fired retained heat ovens are fired at those temperatures. I believe I said in my last post that plenty of "brick oven" places fire to lower temperatures and produce correspondingly less-exciting crusts. That said, even something like 750 degrees is significantly different from 650 degrees when it comes to making pizza. You seem to be proceeding on the premise that "in the 700s" means 700 degrees, whereas I'd suggest that we're talking about at least a hundred degree average difference. But let's assume that plenty of places with wood-fired ovens are baking at 700 degrees. Considering that plenty of places with wood-fired ovens are producing less-than-exciting crusts, I'm not sure what this tells us. Certainly the quality of crusts baked in stainless deck pizza ovens could be better, and there are a lot of things that could be done to make them better. All I am suggesting is that, due to temperature limitations, there is a finite limit as to how good these crusts can be and there are certain effects that are not possible using a stainless deck pizza oven. These issues are further compounded by certain stylistic choices that go along with this kind of pizza (most prominently, the volume of toppings). Considering that 90% of American consumers of pizza are primarily focused on the toppings, it's not clear to me that there is a great deal to be gained for the operator of a stainless deck pizza oven in tweaking for a better crust. I think that Dom Demarco at Di Fara is achieving just about the peak of what is possible in terms of crust quality out of a stainless deck pizza oven while working within the topping-centric aesthetic, and it's clear that his method involves some significant tweaking. Could most of the stainless deck oven pizza crusts be a lot better than they are, even within the topping-centric aesthetic? For sure. Turn up the temperature and bake the pizza on the oven floor. Stainless deck oven pizza crusts could be even better if the pizzaioli made the dough thinner and used half the amount of toppings -- not that I think this will ever happen. But, regardless, none of these crusts will be able to compete with the crust coming out of an 800F - 900F retained heat pizza oven by someone who knows what he's doing. I think that's simply impossible as a matter of physics. So, my contention is that it's possible to make a terriffic pizza crust and a superior pizza crust at temperatures that are only available in retained heat ovens. Stainless deck ovens can aspire to very, very good.

There are plenty of "brick oven" type pizzerie turning out mediocre pizza baked at lower temperatures. Just because it is a retained heat wood-fired oven doesn't mean it's going to be fired high enough or turn out great pizza. The NYC wood- and coal-fired pizzerie are baking at least as high as 750, and optimally in the very high 800s or even low 900s. The lower temperatures would coincide with pizzerie that are lacking in overall oven management (e.g., Lombardi's) and times when otherwise extellent pizzerie may lenot keep the oven fully fired during the non-rush hours (e.g., Grimaldi's at around four o'clock in the afternooon). Both conditions result in a notable drop in quality. What Forno Bravo (which is trying to sell pizza ovens) says is: I note that the Italians recommend "900ºF on the cooking floor and 825ºF in the cooking dome" and also that the text says there are "many VPN-certified pizzerias baking in the 700ºs." The rest of their text would indicate that they're talking about at least 750F when they say "in the 700ºs." That's a far cry from 650 degrees. As for the News-Tribune article, I'm not entirely sure how much I believe all those temperatures and baking times. Did they measure the temperatures, or did they ask the owners? And if they did measure, how was the temperature in the ovens measured? Was it with an infrared thermometer or did the ovens have a temperature indicator? If it was an oven indicator, that's problematic because different ovens can show radically different temperatures depending on the way the oven is constructed, where the temperature is measured, and the nature of the temperature probe. Depending on construction/location/method, it 's certainly possible for a temperature readout to show 675F and for the floor of the oven to actually be 750F. I also have some questions as to those baking times, but will note that the pizzeria with the shortest baking time and the most rhapsodic description of its crust was the place with the highest reported oven temperature. It's also interesting to note that, in the article, good crust quality was highly associated with the higher oven temperatures (and secondarily with austere use of toppings). The best thing in the Forno Bravo site is that they point out the importance of fully cooking the pizza in 90 seconds for an optimal crust that is both crisp and pliable as opposed to tough and chewy. It could be theoretically possible to do this at 650F, but the pizza would have to be paper thin with minimal toppings.

The main deal is temperature. Even with a seriously tweaked oven maxed out at 650F, they're still a few hundred degrees F below what you can get in a wood- or coal-fired oven. It's possible to reach these temperatures with gas, but it takes a very specialized setup (I've seen one at Fornino in Williamsburg -- the gas jet is the size of my torso). Even though it's a few hundred degrees below the retained heat ovens, when a gas deck oven is cranked up to 650F, it's not going to be a very comfortable working around it. Those big doors let out a lot of heat. Dom Demarco has the ovens at Di Fara cranked up to the maximum, and it can be quite uncomfortable standing near the oven. Retained heat ovens, on the other hand, are purpose-built and designed in such a way that the pizzaiolo's exposure to the intense heat is minimized. I also have to assume that it can be quite expensive to maintain a stainless deck oven at high temperature. The result, as Steven points out, is that the vast majority of stainless pizza ovens are maintained more like around 500F (I also wonder how many NYC pizzerie have ovens that are capable of safely sustaining 650F). Consider this: How long does it take to bake a pizza in a typical stainless deck pizza oven? 10 minutes for the places that have the oven cranked up, and more like 20 minutes at most places. I've stood in front of the oven at Patsy's East Harlem and timed their pizza baking time, which averages between 90 and 120 seconds to bake a pizza. That gives some idea as to the difference in temperature.

It's not clear to me that crème de noyaux is supposed to be almond liqueur. First, the French word for "almond" is amande not noyau, which means "pit" or "core" (interestingly, another meaning of amande is "kernel"). If you look at the history page for Noyau de Poissy, it says: "Quand et à qui vint l’idée d’utiliser l’amande si parfumée de l’abricot?" Taken together, it would seem that crème de noyaux is apricot kernel liqueur.

How about as cast iron frypan, with low sloped sides instead of the medium-height straight "skillet" sides. And, for that matter, I'd love to see cast iron cookware at around double the thickness currently offered.

Steel cut oats. Toast in a heavy copper saucepan until lightly browned. Add water at around 4:1 by volume. Bring to boil. Heavy pinch of salt! Simmer half-covered at lowest possible setting until thick, stirring occasionally. When ready, turn off heat and stir in medium knob of butter. Eat with a touch of brown sugar.

I'll certainly agree that, to me, pizza has always been about the crust. But, leaving out the old school coal-fired places, I'm not sure NYC deck-oven by-the-slice pizza has been defined by a superior crust in a long, long time. There's only so good the crust can be with this style of pizza. Sure, there are some places like Di Fara and Sal & Carmine's that manage to turn out a better crust than usual (ableit radically different in the case of these two examples), but I wouldn't say even the best places have been head-and-shoulders above the norm. I'd say that's both true and false. While the best crusts come from a really hot coal (or wood, or similar) oven, you can achieve a pretty good result in a standard Bari deck oven by using the principle discovered by the best french fry makers: cook it twice. I think some places (e.g., Di Fara as I mention above) have come pretty close to the best of what is possible within the limitations imposed by a stainless deck pizza oven, and they seem to be able to do it without baking the crust twice. I don't dispute that a "pretty good slice" can be produced in a deck oven... even a superior one. I do dispute that New York stainless deck oven pizza was ever particularly defined by having a superior crust or distinguished from other species and styles of pizza on this basis. The limitations imposed by stainless deck ovens mean that, in order to get a crisp crust -- never mind any "char" -- you need to bake the pizza for a longer period of time, which dries out the crust and makes it tougher (as opposed to the "crisp and charred yet light and pliable" effect higher temperature retained-heat ovens can create). This is especially true when the pizza is made with high gluten flour and even more true when the crust is laden with an overabundance of toppings, both of which are almost always the case with this style of pizza. Double-baking and other compensatory techniques magnify this drying/toughening effect. This is not to say, however, that a superior pizza can't be made in this style and using these techniques. Most anyone would agree that Di Fara makes a superior pizza working in this style, and weinoo and others point out that other examples exist around the city. But superior pizza and superior crust aren't the same thing. I would argue that "acceptably crisp and functionally capable of supporting the toppings" just about represents the pinnacle of stainless deck-oven pizza baking. It's unclear to me that they're capable of making a crust so good you'd eat it on its own. That said, I suppose I'd agree that NYC stainless deck oven pizza may have been distinguished from other regional stainless deck oven pizza by having a less common incidence of crappy sponge crust. One thing I note is that it's fairly common even in "slice shop level" pizzerie in NYC to bake the pizza directly on the floor of the oven rather than using a pizza pan, which does provide for a crisper crust. This does not seem to be the case in many other regional traditions. Edited to add: I think it's interesting that, in order to get a great pizza at Joe's, weinoo had to specify "thin, light on the cheese, and well cooked on the bottom" -- in effect, mandating that they deviate significantly from their usual practices. I've employed similar ordering techniques at Lombardi's.

I think Swizzle Stick would qualify in this respect, but it might be too embedded in a tourist friendly zone to be a regular hang out for locals. It's hard to say, because I haven't been there (yet! - I'm going to be in New Orleans in November). But the menu isn't terribly encouraging: Contrast that with this menu from The Zig Zag Cafe in Seattle, which is more what I had in mind: This menu is reflective of a level of sophistication, a knowledge of cocktail history and a familiarity with the revival tradition of developing new cocktails in the classic tradition that is not apparent in the Swizzle Stick menu.

I think the decline of cocktails in NO was part of the general trend in America. You can't have a standard sink that low for such a length of time and not have it affect New Orleans as much as it does anywhere else. In terms of locals, I imagine that NO presents many of the same hurdles to the cocktail revival as other cities, things such as building interest, familiarity and critical mass. Even in a city like NYC, a leader in the cocktails movement, the vast majority of bars are turning out mediocrity. On top of that, New Orleans has perhaps some additional hurdles. For example, it seems as though beer and straight whiskey are much more a part of what is perceived in the popular imagination as "mainsteam NO culture" compared to cocktails (and I am constantly amazed the way a perceived reality can be bought into to the extent that it becomes actual reality within a generation). In terms of tourists, I wonder what percentage of NO non-restaurant alcohol-consuming tourists aren't going to the French Quarter to get sloshed on cheap sugary crap. This is another hurdle. In the final analysis, however, I'm not so sure that the cocktails situation is all that dire in New Orleans -- the cocktails revival is still in quite an early stage. There are plenty of cities at around the same urban size as New Orleans about which we wouldn't even be having this conversation, because the going-in assumption would be that they didn't have a single great cocktail spot (e.g., Jacksonville, Kansas City, Cleveland, Oklahoma City, etc.). If we wonder why New Orleans doesn't have better cocktails, it's probably because of the historical association (awareness of which has been boosted by the Museum of the American Cocktail and Tales of the Cocktail) and also because it's known as having such great food culture. Ultimately, however, all it takes is for one dedicated bunch to open a place in New Orleans that religiously maintains quality, tradition and innovation within the context of tradition.

All of these things, I would thing, presuppose that it isn't three-deep at the bar. No bartender who is busting ass to serve 4 customers every minute is going to be able to have a conversation with you about how you'd like your Martini other than to glean the basics (brand, stirred versus shaken, garnish, proportion of vermouth if you're lucky).

I've had Martinis made with equal parts gin and (fresh) Noilly Prat probably at least 50 times. I don't know how much vermouth would overwhelm a Martini to the extent that differences between gin bottlings were largely obscured, but experience tells me that the drink would have to be at least 50% vermouth. There's no way something like a 3:1 Martini, which would be considered extremely wet by many people, subjugates the gin to the vermouth. There's also the question, of course, as to whether the Martini is supposed to be a cocktail in which the gin dominates, or rather one in which the gin and vermouth play with one another to create an impression that is neither gin nor vermouth, but something more. Assuming a non-crowded bar (in which event you always take your chances with a highly individualized cocktail like the Martini), these are the discussions that would give me confidence in a bartender's cocktailian chops.

If you can get something qualified as "non potable" it doesn't matter how much booze it has in it. Bitters are, by and large, "non potable." Gary talks about this upthread back in 2005. Amazing it's already been around for around 2.5 years, and also amazing the huge explosion in bitters that's happened during that short period of time.

I like Flor de Caña as well. Brugal white is not bad for this purpose either.

Yea, that's more or less my point as well, with respect to evaluating a bartender on cocktilian chops. Cointreau should be the defeult, unless there is some specific reason to use another (quality) brand. The bartender uses Hiram Walker, and I'm sticking with "something on the rocks."

We are splitting hairs. To be technical so is Grand Marnier, but I was really referring to well brand triple secs (Bols, DeKuyper, etc)Actually, Grand Marnier isn't a triple sec, it's an orange liqueur with a cognac base. Cointreau is a high-quality triple sec. I think what kills a margarita most of the time is the use of Rose's Lime and Sweet & Sour mix. If you use 100% agave tequila and fresh lime juice, Bols triple sec may be just fine. It's not quite that simple, Marco (see this thread), although I think we all agree that GM isn't a great product to use in a Margarita. IMO, Cointreau or another triple sec of similarly high quality (by which I mean better than Brizard and definitely better than Bols) is necessary for a good Margarita.

Interesting article. But, really, why must people persist in calling a drink consisting of whiskey, Cynar and pomegranate molasses, or whiskey with sweetened Shiraz a "Manhattan"? Can't we agree that a Manhattan is made with whiskey, Italian vermouth and bitters? And when you add other stuff you either have a different kind of Manhattan (e.g., "dry" or "perfect") or you have a different drink (e.g., the Little Italy at Pegu Club)?

I do totally agree with this. Knowing your regulars, working the crowd, this all goes into being a good bartender. I think the OP was fairly clear in that the "test" is to evaluate a presumptively cocktailian bartender's skill at making cocktails. Obviously, there are different bartender skills that are appropriate to different settings. For example, whereas looking great in a halter top and miniskirt while dancing on the bar are necessary skills for certain bars where the ability to make a great Martinez are not, the opposite is also usually true. The problem with a margarita, is that unless you are specific in your order, most bars are going to give you crappy tequila, triple sec (maybe) and sour mix with the requisite squeeze of lime. It is what the general public expects. If you order a margarita up, you might get lucky and get lime juice but you will still need to specify the liquor. These are all reasons why the Margarita is a good test of a presumptively cocktailian bartender's bona fides. A good cocktailian bartender in a cocktail bar is not going to give any customer "crappy tequila, triple sec (maybe) and sour mix with the requisite squeeze of lime" without at least having a discussion with the customer. Because they don't know, can't tell, don't care, hardly ever use any, or some combination of the three. Considering that the standard Martini you'll get most often these days contains barely a molecule of white vermouth (and many bartenders make, and customers expect, Manhattans on the same principle) it hardly makes any difference if the vermouth bottle was first opened 9 months ago.

I don't know, Andy. Plenty of bars have a few token bottles of vermouth gathering dust on the back bar. And if the bottle's been sitting out there post-opening (or, worse yet, with a speed pourer in the neck) for six months, there's pretty much no way you're getting a good Manhattan.

Other decent tests of baseline mixology would be Cointreau-based sours. The Margarita is a good test, because everyone knows it. Do you get a glass of frozen slush or a proper up drink? Is it overly sweet? Does the bartender reach for Cointreau or crappy triple sec? What kind of tequila is used? Is it made with (in decreasing order of preference) fresh lime juice, bottled lime juice, sour mix or Rose's? An interesting test would also be the Sidecar. A lot of the questions as to brand of base spirit, Cointreau-versus-crap, fresh citrus, balance, etc. are the same as they are with the Margarita. The first question is whether the bartender even knows how to make one.

Am I being unrealistic to expect a cocktail bar to mix a decent cocktail? I don't expect a dive or neighborhood bar to do this, sure. But I would expect a swanky lounge with high prices to mix a basic drink. (And no, I don't normally hang in swanky lounges, but this is for work.) There are lots of places that sell cocktails, but aren't really "cocktail bars." Practically every restaurant in NYC sells cocktails, but few of them are real cocktail spots. A lot of swanky places charging high prices are doing tons of business on superpremium vodka sodas, booze on the rocks and fruit bomb-style mixed drinks.

You need to circumscribe your expectations by first evaluating whether you are in a cocktail bar and whether it is a cocktailian bartender. There are plenty of bars that have lots of bottles on the back bar and the occasional V-glass, but aren't interested in being the place you go for that really great Manhattan. A Manhattan is a relatively foolproof drink to order if you're at a place that meets minimum requirements (e.g., no dust on the vermouth bottle), but I find that I still need to look at the back bar to choose my whiskey and then say something like "three to one [call brand] Manhattan, stirred, up with a twist and a short dash of bitters if you have any" at most bars around the country. Unfortunately, you're in a bit of a bind down in New Orleans, which is somewhat notorious among the cocktailian set for mediocre mixology (for example, I recently told a bartender friend here I was going to NO for my upcoming honeymoon and he said, "you know you have to 'bring your own' when you go down there, right?") The impression I get is that there are two or three pretty good places, but the drop off is quite steep. Hopefully I'll discover otherwise in November.

Steven, are you talking about everyday utility-level dishes, or something nicer? For the everyday stuff, I have always had good luck going to a place like Fishs Eddy and buying lowbrow-restaurant-grade white dishes. They're not as pretty as something from Williams Sonoma, but they're indestructible and oven safe.