[Sourdough Starter - Hows, Whys, Whats]

Many strong sourdough cultures are decades old, having co-evolved through literally billions of generations.

[Esquire's Best Bars In America]

Whoa. That's a lot of questions, dude. I think it might be interesting if those who fill out the forms for Esquire also post their choices here.

I won't fill it out myself, because any bar I might choose would be one of which Dave is already aware. But for top places in NYC, one could do worse than Flatiron Lounge, Milk & Honey and Pegu Club.

[Titanium cookware]

I basically want a non-stick cookware that will last and will not emit any harmful chemicals.

Just get a decent quality PTFE-coated frypan. Whatever is being sold at a deep discount.

No nonstick surface will last forever, and I am not aware of any nonstick coating that emits "harmful chemicals."

[Sourdough Starter - Hows, Whys, Whats]

Shalmanese: For various reasons having to do with growth-limiting conditions for sourdough microorganisms, it would be much better if you reduce the amount of "old" starter you hold behind. You are holding back 33% of the old starter. The starter culture would have much better growth characteristics if you held back only around 10% of the old starter. I often refresh by dumping out all the old starter and only holding back whatever sticks to the inside of the jar. Reducing the percentage of held back old starter is the single most important thing you can do to increase the activity and health of your sourdough culture.

I would also recommend feeding your starter at 1:1 flour and water by weight rather than by volume. This also helps to reduce growth limiting conditions and makes it easy to know how much flour and water you have in a given weight of starter.

Finally, you should try to feed your starter when it is at peak activity. If you wait until the starter is starving before you feed it, you are starting off on the wrong foot already.

Rickster: It sounds like your starter culture is awfully young to be put in the refrigerator for three weeks. This is the kind of treatment that is often only handled well by cultures that are very robust and well-established (which is one reason I think it's better to acquire an established culture rather than making your own).

[The Sazerac Cocktail]

FWIW, I prefer Absente over Pernod for an absinthe-substitute.

[All About Prions and Food]

Because the study was supposed to show the opposite: it was supposed to quantify the benefit of low-fat diets once and for all. Nobody thought it was going to quantify the benefit at zero; the results were a complete surprise to everyone except for a minuscule minority of skeptics who were never taken seriously.

I don't think it's entirely accurate to say that there existed only a "minuscule minority ... who were never taken seriously" in the scientific/medical community who were were skeptical of the premise that dietary fat was the end-all, be-all with respect to heart disease, cancer, etc. -- although this may be true of the popular media.

[Bicerin]

Cafe Edgar on the Upper West Side in NYC has something very similar they call a "Viennese."

[Bicerin]

For those who may not be familiar with bicerin, it is essentially a drink with a shot of espresso, a couple of ounces of Italian-style hot chocolate (considerably thicker than the American version) and a couple of ounces of unsweetened softly whipped cream on top.

[All About Prions and Food]

Doc, I don't think viruses can be cultured in a nutrient media. Think about it: viruses don't have a metabolism and replicate by using the machinery of a living host cell. If there is no living host cell, the viruses cannot replicate. Since a nutrient medium is not a living host, no replication. Right?

[The Sazerac Cocktail]

I don't see why you couldn't use regular sugar. You'd just have to make sure you stirred everything together long enough to dissolve the sugar before adding ice.

Simple syrup is often preferred simply because it's easier. It's easy to measure and you don't have to worry aboud dissolving.

[The Sazerac Cocktail]

By coating the inside of the glass with pastis and allowing it to dry, you can add an interesting aroma component to the drink, providing that you leave a healthy rim on the glass.

Wow mbanu the swirling of the pastis and letting it dry sounds so cool and makes a whole lot of sense. Thanks. That's a neat trick probably best sampled at home since I can't imagine that many bartenders would want to coat the glass and then keep checking it to see if it's dry before they finish making the drink.

FWIW, letting the absinthe or absinthe-substitute dry to the inside of the glass is not the standard technique. Actually, I'm not aware of any cocktail where the glass is rinsed and allowed to dry (although of course there may be some of which I am unaware).

[The Sazerac Cocktail]

Any reasonably priced brands of rye whiskey out there?

Have a look at the thread All About Rye Whiskey and ask around. There are plenty of excellent, reasonably priced rye whiskeys on the market. Indeed, rye whiskey is probably the best bargain for the money in liquor today.

[The Sazerac Cocktail]

1) Why the swirling of the Herbesaint/Pastis and then dumping, instead of just adding the appropriate amount (whatever that may be) in the first place?  Is is some sort of Sazerac mystique or does it really make a difference?

For a few reasons. First, there is the tradition and showmanship element. Second, swirling absinthe around to coat the inside of the glass and discarding the excess is a useful way to get just the right amount of absinthe. Third, when you coat the inside of a glass with a liqueur and pour the drink in over that coating, the rinse infuses into the drink somewhat differently than it would if you simply added a few dashes to the mixing glass.

2) I've seen recipes that call for both Peychaud and Angostura bitters to be added since they're supposed to have different qualities/tastes.  Anyone ever do that or should only one be added?

As far as I know, Peychaud's only is traditional. And for sure you need Peychaud's bitters to make a Sazerac. Can't make one without Peychaud's bitters. But there's no harm in adding a dash of another bitters in addition, and a lot of people prefer it that way, myself included.

[A Distaste for Coffee]

I feel your pain, Craig. Friends in the know tell me that there are a few places on the West coast that blow away the best places in Italy, but there's nowhere near the ubiquitous baseline quality one can expect on every street corner in Italy (this is discussed a bit in this thread). That's one reason among many I take almost all my coffee at home with my own roasted beans and from my own Rancilio.

[When is a Collins not a Collins?]

And to that end, I'll bet that y'all can suss out the recipe for the "Rathbone Sour".  I'll send the first person who does a copy of Irwin S Cobb's Own Recipe Book.  Barring that, the closest entry by Friday noon (EST) gets the book.

A (gin, whiskey or perhaps scotch?) sour with basil?

[When is a Collins not a Collins?]

That's all I'm going to say on the subject of drink names in this thread.  I think we've worn it out!  Can we agree to disagree? 

Absolutely. I think it's clearly a topic on which there is more than one defensible viewpoint. I've only tried to explain mine.

Don't you know some servers at neighborhood diners who do this sort of thing?  You get canned corned beef hash and greasy eggs, but you go back time and time again because of the sassy server.

There's room for lots of different types behind the stick, and much as I love Pegu, and I truly LOVE Pegu, I wouldn't enjoy it as much if I didn't have a good Blarney Stone to go to, too.

This would be a boring world if all the bars were fancy cocktail bars . . .

I actually kind of like canned corned beef hash and greasy eggs. But I do get your point. Unfortunately for me, there are a lot of fun bars I can't visit any more because of my profession. I can't be damaging my hearing with loud music, straining my voice shouting over same. Them's the breaks when your hearing and voice are the tools of your trade. That's one reason I have been so happy about the NYS and NYC smoking bans -- I can finally go back into bars without screwing up my voice from the cigarete smoke.

[Tanqueray No. Ten]

That's interesting. I hadn't thought of M&R being necessarily "lighter" than NP, but now that you say that it makes some sense. We have a thread here on vermouth, and it might be interesting at some point to order the various bottlings of vermouth as to different qualities -- fullness of flavor, sweetness, etc.

Anyway, back to No. Ten. . . Someone like Gary is in a better position than I to speak on this point, but No. Ten has always struck me as being one of those lightly flavored "martini gins" designed to appeal to the vodka crowd. This makes it a good substitute for vodka -- subbing No. Ten for citrus vodka in a Cosmo formula, for example, although I think Plymouth works just as well this way and has more character (I like aquavit in a "Cosmo" too) -- but a little underwhelming in actual gin cocktails with flavorful modifiers.

[When is a Collins not a Collins?]

I LOVE your music analagy, Sam, and I think that if I went to a concert that promised me a concerto in G minor, and it was played in another key, I might feel as though I'd been duped (although I have a tin ear and probably wouldn't notice!).

I don't think, though, that anyone was trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes re the Dylan Collins.  I doubt very much that Mr. Mautone was thinking, "I know, I'll call it a Collins so everyone will expect a tall fizzy drink, then I'll really disappoint my customers by serving them a cocktail instead."

As always, interesting and thought provoking stuff... To a certain extent, some of these reactions depend on one's store of knowledge, which I think we would agree is regretably low when it comes to cocktails, not only in the customer base but even among professionals. To return back to my original musical example... one reason I wouldn't like to see a freeform atonal piece for banjo and flute called "Piano Sonata in G Major" is that the word "sonata" has certain connotations as to musical structure (see here), which would not be satisfied by the freeform atonal piece. Now, that's something you might not know about, and therefore you might not care. Similarly, if I were in a bar and ordered a drink called a "collins," I would absolutely expect a tall drink on ice with citrus and fizz, and would probably be disappointed to be served an up drink in a V-glass. For most people, though, this wouldn't be the case because "collins" doesn't particularly mean anything to them.

This all goes to my later point, and yours, about writing for a certain audience. . .

<<I'm sure there are things you would have to say to a hardcore cocktail audience that you wouldn't put in an article such as this.>>

You know, Sam, this comment really made me think hard.  (And my brain isn't used to that . . . )  I don't think I would have treated this drink much differently no matter who I was writing to.  I might have thought differently 10 years ago, but now, after seeing what has happened in the cocktail world in the past decade, I've decided (at this point) to live and let live as long as intentions are pure.

I wonder if that's entirely true. My guess is that, if you were writing an article for Mixologist, or perhaps even something for an audience such as we have here in the eG Forums, you might have gone a little bit into talking about what a collins has been historically, how or whether this new drink is derrived from or related to that concept, etc. Certainly this is the kind of explaining you do in The Joy of Mixology. But, again, that book has a different goal and a different audience from the magazine article. Actually, I'd still be interested in hearing your thoughts on how, if at all, the Dylan Collins is related to or updated from the Collins category.

Perhaps it's time for a statement:  I believe that it's of great importance that bartenders know and understand the formulas used to make all classic drinks.  Without that knowledge as a base, nobody gets anywhere.  But after that, as I tell my students at Cocktails in the Country, "There are no rules."

Make great drinks.  Be creative.  Call 'em whatever you like as long as your intentions are honorable.  But make great drinks.

To a large extent, and on all the important parts, I couldn't agree more. But -- and this is reflective of my personal biases -- I think there are an awful lot of potential cocktail names out there, and I think if someone is going to give a drink a name associated with an established category of cocktail (collins, julep, daisy, etc.) then it should respect those traditions. Otherwise, why not just pick another name?

The core job of a bartender, in my 'umble opinion, is this:

A good bartender, no matter what his or her cocktailian skills are, makes sure that each and every customer leaves the bar feeling better than they did when they walked in.

Absolutely. Audrey has made this point to me a number of times. If someone comes into the bar and wants a Ketel One tonic or whatever, you want to make them feel good and give them a great Ketel One tonic. That's job #1.

[Babies and Barrooms]

Christopher, your point is well made with respect to not ascribing the general condition to every individual. If all parents were as considerate and thoughtful as you, no one would give this sort of thing a second thought.

[When is a Collins not a Collins?]

First off I should say that I believe it's the right of the creator to name a drink whatever he or she want to name a drink.

Thanks for stopping in, Gary!

I'm at an interesting crossroads on this point. As a classical musician, I guess I tend to stand against the idea of calling an atonal theme and variations composition for banjo and flute "Piano Sonata in G Major." Nevertheless, I do respect the composer's right to give the composition that name, and believe it could have meaning in a certain context depending on the composer's concept. That said, at the same time I recognize that the concepts "piano," "sonata" and "G major" will begin to lose meaning or take on new meanings if they come to be commonly used in this way. As you point out, this has happened in different ways with the words "cocktail" (which in my opinion has had a fairly useful evolution of meaning) and "martini" (perhaps not so much).

But... again, I'm someone who specializes in the interpretation of music that was written around 150 to 125 years ago, so I have my biases.

I'm not going to defend myself on anything else that's been written in this thread, except to mention that, when I'm writing for a specific magazine I try to take into consideration my audience, and in the instance cited, I was writing for people who are far more interested in wine than cocktails.  Wine Enthusiast is not an ideal platform to get into the intracasies of classic drink families, etc.

I hope you don't think anything I wrote needs defending against. I have my own viewpoints, but believe there is room for more than one. And, as you point out and I was trying to say, you're writing for a certain audience. I'm sure there are things you would have to say to a hardcore cocktail audience that you wouldn't put in an article such as this.

And although I have great respect for the classics, as anyone who know me will tell you, I do not consider myself to be a classicist.  I'd prefer to be known as a progressive, but that might not be entirely true, either.

Interesting thought, and maybe one that can be explored in a different thread. I've posted the following in an interesting thread Dave started on "The March of Booze Through Time":

<blockquote>

I see cocktail culture in the new century taking two divergent paths right now:  One path is what I call the "new old school."  This would be the school to which you & I and most of the people we like belong, grounded in the idea of continuing the great tradition that was interrupted by Prohibition and largely ignoring the "three different kinds of spiced rum blended with ice and 5 different kinds of fruit juice" mixing that happened in the 80s and 90s.  These tend to be dry, strong drinks based on traditional spirits.  But I think there is also the "new new school" path, where the idea seems to be to continue in the direction set in the 80s and 90s, but presumably with better quality.  These tend to be sweeter, fruit-flavored drinks based on flavored vodkas and flavored/spiced light rums, etc.  A good example of a "new old school" drink might be the Little Italy from Pegu Club (Rittenhouse bonded rye, Cynar, M&R Sweet) and a good example of a "new new school" drink might be the Wet Water Martini from Cherry (Beefeater Wet, Chambord, Power-C Vitamin Water).

</blockquote>

In reading your work, you have always struck me as someone with one foot in each school of thought -- very much of an "old school" outlook, but also eager to embrace new ingredients and trends and step outside the box.

[The Sazerac Cocktail]

I would like to try the cocktail made with rye; thanks for the commentary.  Any rye whiskeys you or others would recommend for this drink?

Have a look at the thread: All About Rye Whiskey. The Sazerac is a cocktail that really allows the qualities of the base spirit to come to the fore, so it's a good one to mix with just about any rye of quality.

[The Sazerac Cocktail]

Truth is, 99.9% of the Sazeracs served in New Orleans are made with rye whiskey. . .

I suppose I might as well also mention, unfortunate as it is, that most people who care and can tell the difference tell me that 99.9% of the Sazeracs they've had in New Orleans bars weren't very good -- and these are people who were out looking for a good one. I haven't been out on a New Orleans Sazerac quest, but this does in general align with my experiences of NO mixology. Perhaps when this great city gets its feet under itself again, we may see the Museum of the American Cocktail and other influences spark a resurgance of classic mixology there.

This doesn't have any particular bearing on the question of base spirit, but does have something to say about where one should look for authority in matters such as this.

[When is a Collins not a Collins?]

Heh. As much as I'd like to take credit, it's right there in the lead-in to the article.

[All About Rye Whiskey (Part 1)]

Interesting, Eric! I wish we had good data on the grain bills for the various rye whiskeys.

I know, for example, that the Van Winkle ryes have only 51% rye in the mash -- the lowest percentage allowed by law. This strikes me as hardly a rye whiskey, although I don't know what percentage is more usual for a rye.

[Babies and Barrooms]

I tend to agree with Dave on this one, although I would point out that his provisions ("child is quiet and well-behaved and the parents are attentive") are absolutely key. There are some bars where I can see this working fairly well (e.g., a relatively quiet and uncrowded bar), but many more where I can't see it working very well. And, of course, there does come a point where enough is enough, and there is something to be said for an adult atmosphere.

All this is to say that I wouldn't mind a quiet kid or two at a local taphouse on Saturday afternoon, but I don't want to find a crying baby next to me or 5 strollers taking up space at Flatiron Lounge on Thursday night.