slkinsey
-
Posts
11,151 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by slkinsey
-
-
Exactly. A jigger is a metal measuring device shaped like two cones stuck together at the pointy end. Usually the big side is twice the size of the small side. Thus you get a 2 ounce/1 ounce jigger, a 1.5 ounce/0.75 ounce jigger and a 1 ounce/0.5 ounce jigger. Presumably, if you want to do a quarter ounce, you fill the 0.5 ounce jigger half way or you use 1.5 teaspoons.
Jiggers are very useful when you are mixing drinks in a situation where speed is a major consideration (e.g., a busy cocktail bar). When you want two ounces, for example, you just pick up the 2/1 ounce jigger, fill the big side all the way to the top and dump it into the mixing glass. "Free pouring," in which the bartender measures the liquid by sight or by counting while pouring, is an even faster method of measurement, but in my opinion not accurate enough for fruly exacting formulae (I note that the bars I visit that prepare drinks with any real complexity of formula do not free pour and use jiggers as a matter of course).
Personally, at home I am very rarely in a situation where speed is a major consideration, and I find that I like the Oxo cups better. That way I can use one liquid measure for the whole drink.
-
That's the great thing about the Oxo cups. The angled measure makes it very easy to read.
-
Interesting question. I'm glad you brought this back up.
I think it depends greatly on the size of the cocktail (and they are way too big these days). A properly sized cocktail contains no more than 3 ounces of strong spirits which, as it turns out, contains right around the same amount of alcohol as the average pour of wine.
So, fundamentally, from the "senses befuddled by alcohol" perspective, there is little difference between preceding dinner with a martini or a glass of wine. A proper cocktail should be short, cold, bracing and stimulating of the appetite. Unfortunately, when you take that formula and blow up a three ounce drink into a 9 ounce drink, intoxication starts to become an issue. I think people would be best off ordering a cocktail split between two people and served in two glasses.
-
Very nice, Doc. My main difference is that I don't use jiggers. I find it much more convenient for home use to use the Oxo 2 ounce angled measuring cups. That way I can make the whole drink using one liquid measuring device. I can see the utility of a jigger for professional volume mixing, but personally not for home use.
-
[...]When I go to the greenmarket I can always tell which farmer doesn't use any pesticides, because the leaves of his lettuce are always full of tiny holes where they have been eaten by insects.[...]
Do you buy those? I remember hearing a story about an upland Thai village, where there was according to the report a misguided aid program that promoted strong pesticides that ended up making people sick, so the villagers bought only the insect-eaten vegetables at the market and refused to touch the ones that looked perfect. Now, I don't think we're dealing with anything that drastic in these parts, but still, I'm interested to know what you do with that information.
I buy on gustatory criteria, not dogmatic or health-related criteria. If the greens look good and taste good, I buy them. If not, I don't. These, to my eye, don't look very good. Given all the other things I am doing to my body (breathing NYC air, drinking too much alcohol, eating too much fat and too many calories, etc.) I am not overly concerned about whatever minute trace amounts of synthesized pesticides I may be getting from greenmarket produce (especially since, as I point out upthread, some of the common naturally-occurring and derrived-from-naturally-occurring-sources pest control substances organic farmers may use are far more toxic).
-
I'm not suggesting all chemicals are "bad," but I find it outrageous that corporations get a free pass on dumping whatever they want.
I completely agree. I just don't think two wrongs make a right.
-
I should qualify my post upthread -- in case it is not clear -- to point out that I am not necessarily "pro-pesticides." What I am is "pro-good science" and "anti-sensationalistic fearmongering." This is to say that the EWG may have some points to make, but I think the dishonest way in which they do it obscures the message to an unacceptable point.
JohnL also makes some interesting and valid points. It's never been clear to me that there is a reasonable alternative to some form of chemical pest control (be that with naturally-occurring chemicals or manufactured chemicals). When I go to the greenmarket I can always tell which farmer doesn't use any pesticides, because the leaves of his lettuce are always full of tiny holes where they have been eaten by insects.
"Organic," it should be pointed out, does not necessarily equal "no pesticides." For example, organic farmers may use things like oil, Bacillus thuringiensis, copper sulfate, pyrethrum, rotenone, etc. for pest control. Many of these natural substances have far greater toxicity and environmental impact than the manufactured pesticides (copper sulfate, for example, has been banned in Europe because it is a permanent soil contaminant that has high toxicity for both humans and fish). I can tell you right now, I would much rather eat a vegetable with a high score on the EWG's list than an organic tomato from the field of a farmer who uses copper sulfate.
I'd be interested to hear what some people in a position to know think are reasonable and realistic alternatives to (naturally occurring or manufactured) chemical pest control.
(As an aside on the discussion fork re mushroom washing: I believe both Frank McGee and Alton Brown have conclusively shown that mushrooms do not absorb a significant amount of water from a brief rinsing -- or even a lengthy soaking.)
-
In a strict dollar model, I think it probably goes something like this:
But there are many reasons why this is so.
On the cheap end of the curve, you're dealing with ingredients that fundamentally don't taste very good to begin with. This speaks to Dave's rule to "never mix a drink with anything you can't choke down straight (although I suppose this doesn't account for bitters).
In the middle part of the curve, you're getting a lot of ingredients that not only taste good and have a refined flavor profile, but also often have good intensity of flavor. I don't think anyone would argue, for example, that Booker's doesn't have a more intense flavor than Jim Beam White Label, or that Cointreau doesn't have a more refined flavor than Hiram Walker triple sec. In the middle point of the curve, you're going to find more liquors bottled at higher proof, and you're going to find liquors with some age on them, but not so much that they begin to become less assertive or overly mellow in character.
In the expensive part of the curve, you're going to find two categories of ingredient. The most obvious example is an ingredient that is simply too expensive to be consumed in anything other than its pure, unadulterated form. This is where you find your $300 bottles of XO cognac, etc. As Dave pointed out, it's unclear that his "Paradis Sidecar," which would retail for around $120, actually tastes all that much better than a still very expensive "XO Sidecar" that would retail at around 35 or 40 bucks. All the stuff you pay for in a $300 bottle of cognac would be obscured by the other ingredients in the cocktail.
The less obvious example is an expensive ingredient that actually doesn't work as well in a cocktail compared to the less expensive one. Many liquors come to be dominated by wood flavors after a certain amount of aging and to lose some interesting characteristics that are present at a younger (aka, less expensive) age. A perfect example is apple brandy. A younger calvados still tastes strongly of apples, whereas one with more age often tastes more of "aged spirit." Other expensive spirits are too subtly flavored to be employed to good use in a cocktail. If you're going to obscure all the subtle floral character of a boutique grappa di moscato by mixing with it, you might as well be using vodka.
So, looking at the curve we can think about something like the Jack Rose, a simple cocktail composed of applejack, lemon juice and grenadine. At the lowest end of the scale is regular 80 proof blended applejack, 30% apple brandy blended with 70% neutral spirits. This is actually pretty good. More expensive is Laird's bonded applejack, 100% apple brandy at 100 proof. This has a stronger apple flavor due to the increased percentage of apple brandy, and has more intensity of flavor due to the higher proof and is even better at making its presence felt through the lemon and grenadine. The Jack Rose is better made with the bonded applejack. More expensive still is Laird's 12 year old apple brandy. A Jack Rose made with this wouldn't be very good, because it doesn't taste all that much like apples. Lemon and grenadine would also obscure much of the delicate character.
-
I, of course, agree with Charles about going to a farmer's market to buy produce. There are many reasons to do this, and pesticides may be one of them. Of course, people in many areas of the US don't have access to a wide variety of fruits and vegetables from farmer's markets, but that is another subject.
Here's the thing that I immediately noted upon reading the report: It doesn't really give us any useful information as to the nature and amount of the pesticides found on these various fruits and vegetables. Somehow they arrive at a composite score that supposedly accounts for these factors, but given that the EWG is rabidly anti-pesticide, I think their presentation is somewhat suspect. This isn't the first time the EWG and similar groups have come out with alarmist public releases about pesticides. Here is an interesting article addressing a similar release by the Consumers Union several years ago:
Dr. Bruce Ames, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a biochemist who directs the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Center at the University of California at Berkeley, told the Associated Press that the findings of the report are "nonsense" and that focusing on "minuscule" levels of pesticide residues "is a distraction from something far more important — feeding kids fruits and vegetables that prevent cancer and other diseases."This is not to say that we shouldn't strive for ways to use lower levels of pesticides and to develop more targeted and friendly pesticides as well as aggressively exploring non-pesticide methods of pest control in agriculture.
-
I can't endorse the utility of a small food processor bowl (either a 3-4 cup "mini processor" or the minibowl of a KA processor) strongly enough. This is by far the best machine for making mayonnaise I've found.
That little "food processor" is part of the Braun Turbo stick blender combo. That particular immersion blender is 400 watt.
Very cool. Are you able to add oil while the blade is in motion?
My method is (more or less) just to get the yolk going with some acid and salt (and garlic, etc. where appropriate) in the minibowl of my KA and slowly drizzle in the oil.
-
Nice class!
As chance would have it, I'll be making mayonnaise this evening to use on the panini I'm taking to The Metropolitan Opera in Central Park picnic tomorrow.
I was happy to see the food processor used in your pictures. From my own experience, I can't endorse the utility of a small food processor bowl (either a 3-4 cup "mini processor" or the minibowl of a KA processor) strongly enough. This is by far the best machine for making mayonnaise I've found.
-
There must be a huge variance in the way Salt Lick and Elgin cooks brisket, because they were using brisket from the same supplier at the event, Smithfield. So the fat content, moisture, etc of the briskets were identical from the start.
As far as I could tell, the major difference was that Salt lick was cooking and serving the whole brisket, including the deckel, and Elgin seemed to be only serving (and perhaps only cooking) the first cut.
-
Brisket and sausage: I found that everybody I spoke to liked both the sausage and brisket from Salt Lick better than the sausage and brisket from Elgin. I felt exactly the opposite. So I don't know what's going on there. I must be losing it.
Dude, are you sure you're not remembering this the wrong way around? I distinctly remember sharing some Elgin brisket and sausage with you and the Psaltises, and my memory is that we found the Elgin brisket unpalatably dry.
What I really liked about Salt Lick's brisket is that it was juicy, most likely because they used not only the first cut but also the second cut (aka deckel) of the brisket. Ellen and I got some good video with one of the Salt Lick pitmasters demonstrating the difference between slices from the first and second cuts of the brisket. IMO, the deckel is absolute necessary in a brisket sandwich or plate for the juicy moisture it provides.
-
Unfortunately, the word is that they are sold out of the Bubba Fast Pass for this year.
Much more later when I awaken from my meat-induced coma.
One perplexing question: if this is supposed to feature some of the best Q from around the country, why no McRib?
-
It isn't a calvados per se, since it isn't from France, but Clear Creek Distillery makes a spectacular "Eau de Vie de Pomme" using the traditional methods of Normandy's calvados makers. It's distilled from good old Granny Smith apples from Oregon and aged 8 years in old Limousin oak Cognac barrels. It's often been called "American calvados," and is rated higher than many examples of actual calvados. A 750 ml bottle will only set you back around 35 bucks.
-
Here is some calvados talk from the thread on the Sidecar cocktail (edited to include only discussion relevant to calvados.
Try a Calvados sidecar sometime. Those are really yummy!
If you have a Calvados recommendation I'd appreciate that too.
For Calvados, we use the Couer de Lion at Rouge for our Calvados Sidecars. It's about $25 in PA for a 750ml. Undoubtedly less wherever you live.
The only other Calvados I have any extensive experience with is the Pere Magliore which is about $5 more. We used to serve that by itself and used the Couer de Lion for mixing. Boulard also makes an under-$30 Calvados that I'm certain would be fine for sidecars.My second and third favorite liquor stores have websites and here's what turned up:
Coeur de Lion Pommeau Calvados, France 750ml $17.99/Bottle
Coeur Lion Selection Calvados 750ML $24.99/btl
Coeur de Lion Reserve Calvados, France 750ml $29.99/Bottle
Coeur Lion Calvados Fine 750ML $34.99/btl
Coeur de Lion "VSOP" Calvados 750ml $49.99/Bottle
Do you know if one of these is the "at Rouge" under a different name? The Coeur de Lion homepage wasn't helpful. The photos aren't too clear but it appears the labels of the "Fine", the "Reserve" and the "VSOP" also say "Calvados du Pays d'Auge". My high school French is well beyond it's expiration date. Is "d'Auge" French for "at rouge"?
One of the shops has the Pere Magliore Fine (750ml) at $27.99/Bottle. They also have a Boulard calvados but at $102 something tells me that's not the one you were referring to.
I'm thinking the P.Magliore might be the best deal of the bunch. Apparently Chicago prices aren't significantly different from PA prices.Kurt, the "d'Auge" part means "from Auge." It's part of the regulation for calvados d'appellation contrôlée. A Calvados so named must be distilled form apples grown in the orchards of the Pays d'Auge.
An interesting article in today's New York Times about Calvados:Very cool article, though. I agree with the authors that some of the younger, less expensive calvados bottlings can actually be better and taste more strongly of apples.
-
I've only recently begun exploring tequila. By and large I prefer the silver versions. With more wood and age, I just feel that it becomes less and less "tequila like" and more and more like just another aged spirit.
-
Here's the deal with bread knives: There is no point in spending a lot of money on a bread knife because 1) an expensive forged bread knife won't necessarily outperfom a cheap stamped bread knife, and 2) once the knife does go dull, it's next to impossible to sharpen it back to original condition -- then you have a sixty dollar knife that cuts worse than a ten dollar Ginsu.
If I were you, I'd get something like this. It's an 8 inch serrated bread knife with an offset handle. It's made by F. Dick (one of the most respected manufacturers). It will cut bread as well as any knife on the market. It costs twelve bucks.
-
As a former owner of a Cuisinart and a current owner of a KitchenAid, I lean heavily towards the KA. It's easy to use and clean, the base is heavy, the motor is powerful and the utility of the minibowl cannot be underestimated.
Of course, one will always be able to find one or the other manufacturer on a big sale. That's the nature of the beast. Comparing full retail prices, KA seems a clear winner to me.
The standard 12 cup KA with 4 cup minibowl has a full retail price of $250
Cuisinart's most comparable model is the 11 cup "Prep 11 Plus" with a full retail price of $320. And, in order to match the KA's functionality, it's another $110 for the 3 cup "Handy Prep."
Now, as Steven points out, you can buy an 11 cup "Custom Prep" (which I assume is either an earlier version or the "Prep 11 Plus" or a similar-looking model manufactured for Costco) at Costco for 170 bucks. That gives you another 80 bucks to find a 4 cup food processor for a full match with the KA's functionality at the KA's full retail price. A 5 minute search of the internet turned up a number of sites selling the KitchenAid 12 cup model for around 200 bucks, which narrows the gap considerably. It wouldn't be so easy to find a high quality 4 cup food processor for 30 bucks -- never mind all the extra room it would occupy on your countertop.
Given the small ($30) difference in discounted retail price and the fact that KA has the 4 cup minibowl, I think it's crazy not to buy the KA.
-
In a great bit of irony, only weeks after we've been lamenting that genever is all but impossible to find in NYC, the NY Times does an article on genever. And not only genever, but the even more impossible to find Belgian artisinal genever. Way to do an article on something none of your readers can buy, guys!
Anyway, there are some interesting bits worth reading:
The two main types, jonge (young) and oude (old), refer not to age but to style. Often resembling English gin, jonge has less alcohol (a maximum of 35 percent), is generally drunk cold, and has little grain flavor because its alcohol comes mostly from potatoes or other non-grain products. Oude is stronger - 54 percent alcohol in some cases - and tastes more of grain because it uses a greater percentage of malt wine, which itself is often aged in oak to add color, smoothness and complexity of flavor. A few oude genevers, labeled graanjenever, are made with 100 percent grain. -
Smithy, instead of making what will inevitably be a somewhat dry chicken breast tagine (that's just the nature of the beast), if your friend won't eat chicken thighs or skin why not make the beef and cauliflower tagine? Everyone I've made it for loves it.
-
I've come up with a pretty good one. It's based on the Improved Holland Gin Cock-Tail as given in Dave Wondrich's new book, only substituting linie aquavit for genever gin.
Improved Aquavit Cock-Tail
2 oz : linie aquavit
1 tsp : 2:1 demerara simple syrup
1 tsp : maraschino liqueur
2 dashes : Peychaud's bitters
Mix in a glass with ice. Garnish with lemon twist.
-
1
-
-
By the way I went to Openheimer this evening.. I wanted to check it out.. The place looks pretty good.. The fish department was lacking however...
Yea, I don't recommend them for fish unless you live in the 'hood and don't want to go to Citarella (of course, if you're really serious about fish, you'll go to Sea Breeze on 9th Avenue). Their fish is from Wild Edibles, and good quality. But it's more or less an add-on. Meat is the reason to go to Oppenheimer.
Honestly, I'm not sure I approve of the whole "butcher/fishmonger combination" thing. I'd rather have a good butcher and a good fishmonger separately. The considerations, skills, suppliers and connections for these two different types of purveyor are very different.
-
Adam Platt of New York magazine reviews Alto.
The customary brief excerpt for posterity:
Alto is named for Alto Adige, the northern Italian region that abuts the border with Austria. The area is known for hearty Aryan food like pork dishes and lots of dumplings, although I doubt you’d encounter anything there quite as rarified as Conant’s porcini-and-Swiss-chard ravioli, which are encased in a light, crispy skin, like pot stickers, and served with a deliciously sweet form of sauerkraut. Other dumplings appear on the excellent pasta section of the menu, like delicious little pouches of agnolotti (they’re stuffed with veal, pork, chicken, and fontina cheese, and decorated with Parmesan foam) and green ricotta-spinach gnocchi, which are mingled in an awkward way with dry medallions of rabbit. My nice bowl of ramp risotto didn’t quite go with its topping of glazed eel either, although everyone at the table admired the perfectly cooked farfalle, which is decked with morels and nickels of crispy sweetbread, and the perfectly cooked tangle of trenette (a flat pastalike linguine, but thinner) tossed with fresh mussels and spot prawns, and poured with a lightly frothy uni broth.
Cheap for Mixing/Expensive for Sipping?
in Spirits & Cocktails
Posted
Nothing odd about that. Different brands/bottlings of a spirit work better in different kinds of cocktail. I almost never use an expensive "boutique" gin when making a drink with a lot of ingredients, because the delicate notes tend to get lost and they often don't have a strong enough juniper note to sing through. It's not clear to me, for example, that there would be much point to making a Pegu Club with Hendrick's gin.
Hey, Gordon's is a really good quality gin. I love Tanqueray and consider it probably the best "all around" gin, but in terms of a good quality traditional gin with an emphatic juniper note it's hard to beat Gordon's. Since it's around half the price of Tanqueray, I use it often in drinks with a lot of flavors going on. Gordon's juniper really cuts through.
This is an important point, and ties in with what I wrote above in response to jbewley. You won't often hurt the drink by defaulting to your top shelf mixer, but it's wise to consider whether the drink you're mixing might be more suitable to a less expensive bottling. Sometimes (e.g., a Pegu Club made with Gordon's versus Hendrick's) you're probably going to get a better drink with the less expensive brand. Most of the time I don't see much point in using an expensive spirit in a highball.