slkinsey

For me it's always been: using a spoon when twirling long strand pasta. We have a family story from when my mother was living in Rome after the war: she was starting on a place of pasta in a trattoria, using a spoon in what was then the normal practice in America. An elderly gentleman jumped up from the next table exclaiming, "no, signorina!" in mock horror and proceeded to explain/demonstrate that one simply twirls the fork on the plate.

Dave: would fine-as-snow ice really mangle mint? Also, as for the frosting, I use metal-on-metal Boston shakers, and find that I always end up with frost on both parts of the shaker before I even finish shaking.

Steven is right, the tacos at the 96th Street taco truck are okay, but can in no way compete with standouts like Tehuitzingo, never mind neighborhood spots like Noche Mexicana or Taqueria y Fonda La Mexicana.

As far as I know, no one eats the whole scallop, guts and all. It's just the adductor muscle, and maybe the roe. Have a look of scallop shucking. Also, have a look at these pictures and I think you'll agree that you wouldn't want to eat that part.

alanamoana: afaik Lyle's is made from sucrose. Some of it is inverted, and that is blended back with the rest, which is not inverted. It is extremely concentrated such that, even at room temperature it is possible to hold a spoonfull of it upside-down, and it must be scraped off the spoon with a finger (it has even been used as a reference standard for viscosity).

Awesome. Thanks for the interesting quote, Dave (and you for yours, George). I wonder why it is that no one seems to churn, roll or shake Juleps anymore, and this practice seems to have largely gone away? Now that I think about it, it makes sense considering that we swizzle Swizzles. Also, I gather that recycling the mint was relatively commonplace?

http://www.lylesgoldensyrup.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_syrup

The two-tin pouring sounds like fun, yea. I'm still not convinced about the vigorous mixing. Even churning with a spoon, while not "disallowed," hardly seems "standard." Most recipes I've seen (and this goes back to at least Jerry Thomas's instructions) don't mention anything beyond perhaps a slight stir. Many/most of them don't seem to say anything about mixing at all (interestingly, JT's instructions for the Georgia Mint Julep "stir with a spoon" whereas his instructions for all the other Juleps as well as those for the Smash do not mention mixing of any kind.

Erik, I'm not positive about #4 above. I think a Julep can be mixed vigorously (cf. Dave's shaking method) but doesn't necessarily have to be. Actually, most recipes don't seem to include vigorous mixing. I also wonder whether #6 really applies to anyone other than JT. Certainly there are a lot of drinks today called a "Smash" of one kind or another that couldn't in any way be described as "Julep-like."

How do they manage it for something like Lyle's Golden Syrup, then? I mean, that stuff is incredibly thick at room temperature -- way too thick to be useful in cocktails -- and has to be supersaturated. And yet, I've never had any crystallization in a jar or can or Lyle's. Not once. Honey is also a lot thicker than even a highly concentrated simple syrup, and while crystallization does sometimes happen with honey, it's not all that often. Re supersaturation: I assume that any sugar syrup that has to be heated in order to dissolve the sugar into the water is technically supersaturated at room temperature, yes? I'm getting ready to start a simple syrup experiment making old-style gomme syrup, which is a highly concentrated sugar syrup that has the additional component of gum arabic. I plan to include around 10% glucose, but I also wonder how the gum arabic will affect the tendency to crystallize.

Yep. There's even a thread on it here. The Per Se Cocktail 2 oz : Ciroc vodka 1 oz : Pineau des Charentes Rinse : Grand Marnier Dash a little Grand Marnier into a chilled cocktail glass. Rotate to evenly coat and shake out the excess. Stir vodka and Pineau des Charentes with cracked ice and strain into prepared cocktail glass. Garnish with a gooseberry and lime twist (the actual garnish changes, but this is the one from the article).

For cocktail use, the modern standard is 1:1 by volume. This is what is specified in almost every modern professional cocktail recipe you will see. It does not need to be heated, as equal volumes of sugar and water will form a solution without heating. Clearly, of course, it is possible to get a highly concentrated sugar syrup without crystalization. A good example would be Lyle's Golden Syrup. Pastry-types will likely know better than I, but doesn't around 10% glucose help to prevent crystalization even in highly concentrated syrups?

The ratio is crucial. Sounds like it's over-saturated. Also, presumably you are using the corn syrup with the idea that glucose helps to prevent crystalization? Keep in mind that corn syrup, Karo for example, can be as little as 15% to 20% glucose.

In the immortal words of Buckaroo Banzai: yes on one and no on two. Yea, they're making Neapolitan-style pizza at Mozza. At it's broadest definition, "Neapolitan-style" means individual-sized, thin crusted pizza with sparse (and largely traditional) toppings baked at high temperature in an Italian-style wood-fired oven. "new Neapolitan-style" takes the toppings concept in the direction of a Chez Panisse-inspired asthetic, with nontraditional but still impeccably fresh (local, seasonal) toppings -- a good example might be something like "spicy cauliflower." The pizza meny at Pizzeria Mozza seems fairly traditional, with a sprinkling of new Neapolitan-style offerings. I can only assume that Bruni has plentyenough experience in this area without going to Patsy's. Which brings me to... No, Patsy's East Harlem is not making Neapolitan-style pizza. They are making coal-fired NYC-style pizza. This is larger, has a crust that is made with hard flour instead of soft flour, has toppings that are not within either the old or new Neapolitan-styles (pepperoni and low-moisture mozzarella?), is baked in a coal-fired oven which imparts a more aggressive char, etc. Patsy's is not an appropriate frame of reference for someplace like Pizzeria Mozza, for the same reason that lots of people in NYC don't "get" pizzerie like Franny's and Fornino. I don't get that the Mozza article is connected to NY at all -- and I don't see any reason why it should be. If Bruni happened to take a jaunt out to Moldavia and wrote an article about a restaurant in Suceava in which Joe Bastianich was a partner, would he have to include a survey of all the Moldavian restaurants in Queens? The Mozza article is about something interesting that's happening in Los Angeles, and Bruni's expertise and understanding of this kind of pizza certainly seems to be miles ahead of many NYC critics (not to mention eG Forums participants) who kvetched about the prices, absence of Hormel pepperoni and lack of slices at Franny's.

Meh. Once upon a time, maybe. Not now. If I were going to show an Italan some old-school NYC pizza that I thought was both outstanding in its class, distinctly American but still understandable to an Italian I can't think of anywhere better than Patsy's East Harlem (places like Fornino, Franny's, Una Pizza Napoletana, etc. don't count). Maybe Grimaldi's at the noon hour, but even they have a pretty heavy hand with the toppings even at their best.

Well, perhaps if he were going to opine about the state of pizza in NYC, or about NYC pizza places. Not sure it disqualifies him from writing about a "Chez Panisse-influenced new-Neapolitan style" pizzeria in California, though. I mean, presumably the guy ate plenty of pizza in Italy and Mozza is clearly not on the American model.

Do we really think that delis like Katz's and pizzerie like Patsy's East Harlem are relevant to Bruni's supposed field (i.e., much higher end restaurants)?

Falk does not do tin-lined to the best of my knowledge. But, honestly I have to say: I think you're making a big mistake in getting tin-lined over stainless lined. One retinning and you'll wish you had ponyed up for the stainless stuff. And it's not a matter of "if" with retinning, it's a matter of "when."

The freezing and storing differences also account for the reason it's impossible to have decent gelato at home or from the supermarket. The lower temperature in home and supermarket freezers causes a change in the ice crystals that cannot be remedied by thawing (I forget exactly what the change is... I think they get fewer and bigger?). Companies like Ciao Bella that make packaged gelato are forced to include stabilizers, etc. to make their products seem more "gelato-like" despite being subjected to longer-term storage and lower temperatures. This is why the ingredient list for their chocolate gelato looks like this: "Milk, Cream, Sugar, Cocoa (Processed with Alkali), Corn Syrup, Buttermilk, Corn Syrup Solids, Whey, Peanut Oil, Guar Gum [emulsifier, stabilizer, thickener], Locust Bean Gum [thickener, gelling agent, retards ice crystal growth], and Carrageenan [thickener, stabilizer]."

A few things: In my opinion, you do not want tin-lined copper. It looks like a bargain, but re-tinning is very expensive and tin linings are not durable. For one, tin melts at around 550F, which means that high heat cooking is more or less out of the question. The main producers of stainless lined heavy copper available in the US are Bourgeat, Falk Culinair and Mauviel. They are all available in 2.5 mm thickness. Mauviel has several different thicknesses available with a stainless lining: 2.5 mm "Cuprinox"; 2.0 mm "Cuprinox Gourmet" and "Style" (the latter with stainless steel handles; and "Pour la Table" aka "Table Service." The latter is for table serice only, and is not intended for stovetop cooking. So it is possible that you have handled some of the "Gourmet" or "Table Service" Mauviel, which is indeed lighter gauge. That said, the heavy gauge "Cuprinox" is just as thick as Falk Culinair and Bourgeat. I own pieces of stainless lined heavy copper from all the manufacturers, and lean towards Falk Culinair. I like the fact that they have a brushed finish on the exterior, which makes it easy to keep them bright with Bar Keeper's Friend and a Scotch Brite pad (although, of course, tarnished copper cooks just as well). I like the smaller rivets. I like the flared lips. Most of all, I like the fact that Falk was responsible for rationalizing the US prices for stainless lined heavy copper cookware (Bourgeat's list price on an 11 inch "flared saute pan" was something like $580 back in 1999) and I like doing business their North American distributor.

And more fat.

Yea, a lot of people find copper frypans too heavy for the "flipping" technique. I don't find this too much of an issue, but then again I have Popeye forearms and, as I posted above, I don't often use the "flipping" technique anyway since I like to sauté in a sauté pan. Now that I think about it, I wonder what the real weight difference is between identical pieces of All-Clad Stainless and MasterChef. Some quick math indicates that the difference is likely to be less than 100 grams (3.5 ounces) for an 20 cm frypan. Of course, this difference would go up for larger sizes. Not that this is definitive, but Amazon.com's listed weights are the same for the same sizes of All-Clad Stainless and MasterChef fry pans. I'm not sure I agree with this. It might be reasonable to assume that the pan is "all thermal material" when it is a stainless lined heavy copper pan, but definitely not for the All-Clad Stainless pan. Consider that 48% of the thermal capacity is attributed to stainless steel. That's a lot! Especially compared to 18% for MasterChef. Or, to think about it another way, if you were to take a sideways slice of an All-Clad stainless pan, 36% the thickness would be stainless steel compared to only 12% for MasterChef and 8% for stainless lined heavy copper. Again, that's not nothing. It's not just that the Stainless pan has a thinner piece of aluminum, it has a thinner piece of aluminum plus twice as much stainless steel.

Phil, from a technical performance standpoint, it's all a wash. Bourgeat and Mauviel purchase their copper/stainless bimetal from Falk Culinair. In addition, Bourgeat's copper/stainless pans are actually manufactured by Mauviel. (All the stainless lined heavy copper brands -- Falk, Bourgeat, Mauviel -- are better than All-Clad Copper Core and Cop-R-Chef, of course.) This is not to say that one can't prefer a certain stainless lined heavy copper design better than another. Differences include flared lip versus straight lip, different handle anchor points, different handle shapes, different finishes and different pan geometries (although they are all very similar in terms of geometry). The question you have to ask yourself is whether these differences in design are worth the differences in price. Sometimes it may me, sometimes it may not be -- keeping in mind that cooking performance will be more or less identical. If you've got your heart set on Bourgeat and are already familiar with these pans, my experience is that you are likely to get the best deals over the internet. Just make sure you don't shell out for super-expensive copper/stainless bimetal lids (they're a pain in the butt, and don't contribute to performance at all), and make sure you're getting 2.5 mm thickness (I think Bourgeat is only available in 2.5 mm, but I've seen some internet sellers offering low prices on "2.5 mm" Mauviel designs that are only produced in 2.0 mm).

I agree with Paul's main premise, which is that the pans will perform differently depending on what you are looking for. The main difference, however, I believe is one of maintenance: All-Clad Stainless is dishwasher-safe, and you trade off some performance in order to have this feature. "Somewhere between copper and iron" is an awfully large range. In use most people will find aluminum cookware to be "responsive" and cast iron cookware to be "not responsive." (More on this below.) It's debatable in my mind as to whether an All-Clad Stainless pan will come up to temperature and respond more rapidly compared to MasterChef. This is primarily due to the fact that the Stainless line contains twice as much stainless steel, which material has very poor thermal conductivity. I did some calculations assuming a 20 cm (8 inch) frypan, and found that the thermal capacity of the two pans was fairly close, with the MasterChef pan at 4,888 and the Stainless pan at 4,109. This would tend to favor the Stainless pan in responsiveness. However, 48% of the Stainless pan's thermal capacity is contributed by stainless steel compared to only 18% for the MasterChef pan. Stainless steel has extremely poor thermal conductivity compared to aluminum (0.16 W/cm/K versus 2.27 for aluminum) and I have to believe this will have a significant effect on performance. I'm also not sure I'd say the responsiveness would be at all "like copper." A 20 cm copper frypan would have a thermal capacity similar to that of the MasterChef pan (4,814) but only 9% of this capacity is attributable to stainless steel. Considering copper's much higher thermal conductivity (4.01 W/cm/K), it's going to have much better responsiveness than either the Stainless or MasterChef pan, while also benefitting from the higher thermal capacity of the MasterChef pan. In comparison, the same 20 cm frypan in cast iron would have a thermal capacity of 4,977, and with low thermal conductivity to move all that thermal energy around (0.8 W/cm/K) it would respond quite slowly. (I assumed a 3 mm thickness for the cast iron pan. For a thicker cast iron pan, the responsiveness would be even slower.) For true sautéing, where the ingredients are frequently tossed around in the pan, a lighter weight can be handy and you're not as concerned about hot spots. If I used the "pan flipping" technique frequently, I'd probably be inclined towards a large heavy gauge carbon steel frypan rather than an All-Clad frypan. However, I like to use an actual sauté pan with low straight sides, which allows me to move the ingredients around simply by shaking the pan back and forth on the burner grate (this is why sauté pans have straight sides). The advantage of using a sauté pan that you're not going to be "flipping" for this technique is that you can get something with a gigantic thermal pad on the bottom (e.g., 7 mm of aluminum) to really blast heat into the sautéed ingredients. This is likely hot spots due to the high percentage of stainless steel.

The thing about Otto is that you can walk in the the front room and have only gelato (which accounts for something like 90% of the times I've been to Otto). This doesn't seem meaningfully different from going into a gelateria. In fact, it's not too much of a stretch to describe the front room of Otto as a gelateria. If you're going to exclude restaurants -- and I can understand your logic for doing so -- then I would argue that it makes sense only to exclude ones where gelato is only or primarily available at a table after dinner. If you can walk up to a counter and order a gelato, I'd say they should be able to compete. Similarly, if Per Se had a separate window (like Balthazar does) where you could buy their bread, I't say they could compete against Sullivan Street and Amy's, et al. for "best bread bakery."