slkinsey

Right. So it seems like you're pretty set in terms of that kind of pan. If you don't use the sauté pan, then maybe get rid of it (I love sauté pans and find them very useful, but different people have different cooking habits). Ah. Well, if you're cooking for one, then the 8 quart pot is probably just fine for pasta. So, let's see what you have and what you want. You have: 3.5 quart vessel 5.5 quart vessel You say: "the 3 1/2 qt cast iron dutch oven is way too big for some of the quantities that I make" which means that you want something smaller You also say: "The rationale behind the saucepan or saucier in the 3 - 4 quart range, was to have an alternative size for making large quantities of say risotto, polenta etc." So... you want something smaller than 3.5 quarts for rice, porridge, reheating soup, etc. What are the considerations: 1. None of these things inherently requires a fancy expensive straight gauge construction; 2. Anything that is "too small" to be done in the 3.5 quart pan is likely in the area of 1 quart; 3. Depending on the size of your burners, a small standard disk bottom saucepan might catch some heat around the base and cause scorching. I'd suggest you buy the least expensive 1.5 quart pan you can find that either has straight gauge construction (i.e., All-Clad MC2 from Cookware and More or Calphalon Try-Ply or something like that) or that has an extended encapsulated base, like ScanPan Steel. Any one of these pans would be overkill for the kinds of things you want to do, so I would try to find something on super-sale (for example, I have a couple of 1 quart All-Clad stainless saucepans I bought for 15 bucks on sale from Amazon). So... after you buy this 1.5 quart pan, you will have: 1.5 quarts 3.5 quarts 5.5 quarts I just don't see that you need another pan. For things like "large quantities of say risotto, polenta etc." I don't think you're going to do substantially better than the pans you already have. I still don't understand your desire for a "saucepan or saucier in the 3 - 4 quart range" when you already have a 3.5 quart pan made by one of the best manufacturers in the business. For what it's worth, when I am making large quantities of risotto, polenta, etc. I use my 6.8 Liter Le Creuset.

Actually, it's not clear to me at all that today's Rose's isn't a reasonably close approximation of the old stuff (with better production techniques). At the least, I'd guess it's as close to the old Rose's as today's CocaCola is to the pre-corn syrup CocaCola -- and while there is definitely a difference, I don't think anyone would suggest that it is a radical one. In any event, while I am sure it makes some difference, I'm not sure that the simple use of high fructose corn syrup is enough to make a radical change in the flavor profile. By and large, it's the "funky" flavor to which Rose's detractors object (and which Rose's fans enjoy). From what I can tell, that's always been there. Think about it: this stuff was carried around belowdecks in a barrel for months on end. If anything, this would make it taste more funky, not less. Reading Dave's cool historical information again, I noticed that he offered one interesting observation that many of us seem to have missed: Again, this suggests to me that the funky taste is something that was always a part of the Rose's flavor profile. In terms of something that is reasonable true to the original, I think Rose's is it to the greatest extent possible. And remember, we have no reason to suppose that, e.g., the Plymouth Gin of today tastes all that much like 18th century Plymouth gin. What I think is quite clear is that the "lime zest infused simple syrup with a squeeze of fresh lime juice" is nothing like the original stuff.

I've done a little reordering of your list. What I see is that you have four pans that are around ten inches in diameter -- two straight sided pans (the All-Clad sauté and the cast iron pan) and two slope-sided frypans. I think you're pretty set in this regard. Then you have three pans for liquids. As I will explain below, I think you should keep them both. It depends. Melting butter doesn't really need a great pan. Are you really making delicate sauces and intense reductions? If so, this argues for the 1.4 quart "try me" curved sauteuse evasée from Falk if price is not a concern. But it would be a waste to buy an expensive pan if you'll be using it to melt butter. Why would you want a straight gauge pan for these things? Total waste of money. Also, if you're going to have a 1 - 1.5 quart saucepan, it's not clear to me what use it is to have a 2 quart saucepan as well. If you have a 1.5 quart saucepan, your next pan should be at least 3 quarts or larger. Here's my question: What's wrong with sticking with the 3.5 quart Le Creuset pan you already have? All the things you seem to want to do here, the 3.5 quart Le Creuset will do just fine. Why do you want a straight gauge saucepan at 4 - 4.5 quarts? What is it that you want to do with these pans that would make you want straight gauge construction? Huge portions of Hollandaise? Massive reductions of stock? At the 4+ quart size, I think you're talking about a tall saucepan, which argues for disk-bottom construction. But again, what is it that you want to do with a 4 quart saucepan that you can't do with the 3.5 quart Le Creuset pan you already have? Given the cookware you already have, this would be #1 on my list. What are you using to boil water for pasta? Get a good 14 quart stock pot with a past strainer insert. Again, why do you want one of these? What is it that you want to do that you can't do with the pans you already own? If you want to shallow fry, I think you'd do just fine with your cast iron skillet, your sauté pan or your larger Le Creuset French oven... much better off than you would be with the 2.25 quart Le Creuset buffet casserole (which, at 8 inches in diameter and 2.5 inches tall is more or less useless for shallow frying).Cala, here's the thing... The question you need to ask yourself is: What do I want to do that I can't do well with the pans I already have? Once you identify those things, you can then start thinking about the best pans to do those things in a way that fits with your style of cooking, strengths and limitations. The wrong way to go about it, and what you seem to have done, is to ask yourself: What kinds of pans are there that I don't have? When you do this, you end up with a bunch of pans you paid too much for and don't use. Having a straight gauge copper pan you use only rarely to boil water or make rice is like having a Ferrari in the garage you only use to drive to the mailbox every couple of months.

That's the stuff, Dave! Thanks for the history. I'm off to try a 4:1:1 Pegu Club right now. . .

Just a quick moderator's note: Let's keep this thread about "Philly-style Steak" places in NYC and not diverge into a discussion about the archetypal places in the city of origin.

In a companion piece to his newsday article on pizza, which kindly mentions the NY Pizza Survey and myself, Josh "Mr. Cutlets" Ozersky provides a list of "Where to get a great pizza" including the following pizzerie: Manhattan: Patsy's East Harlem Una Pizza Napoletana Gnocco Caffe DeMarco's Pizzeria Sal & Carmine's Pizza Queens: Sac's Place Rizzo's Pizza Nick's Pizza Gino's Singa's Famous Pizza Brooklyn: Di Fara Pizza Totonno's Coney Island Peperoncino Grimaldi's Lento's Long Island: Original Umberto's of New Hyde Park 34 New Street (Huntington Village) Massa's Coal Brick Oven Pizzeria (Huntington Station) Timothy's Pizza (Centerport) Eddie's Pizza (New Hyde Park) Thoughts? I have to say that I'm a bit taken aback that pizzerie like Franny's and Fornino -- places I consider among the very best in NYC -- aren't on the list. It also seems a bit odd that Arturo's isn't there either. It may not be as good as Patsy's East Harlem, but it's better than Sal & Carmine's for sure, and better than the two times I've been to DeMarco's as well. Then again, it's not a "best of" list but rather a "some good places" list. As such, it's reflective of Josh's likes and dislikes (which, as a major Di Fara partisan, includes a healthy enthisiasm for DeMarco's even though they admittedly have some kinks to iron out). Overall, though, I think it's a good list. I've been meaning to try Singa's.

That's the big downfall of Grimaldi's: they're maddeningly inconsistent. JosephB has been there many more times than I, and he says that it's important to arrive soon after they've fired the oven (they only substantially fire the oven twice a day: once for lunch and once for dinner). The time the NY Pizza survey went there, we were the first ones in the door after they opened for lunch and the pizza was etherial. Other times it has been quite pedestrian.

One thing I don't understand is why more bars don't simply maintain some kind of computerized recipe database (either customized by the establishment or with off-the-shelf recipes). If I were designing a bar where I expected to serve a wide variety of drinks, I'd put some kind of touch-screen searchable cocktail dabase screen under the bar (out of the customer's line of sight. Because it's not rocket science to make a basically good cocktail from a basically good recipe -- even if you've never heard of the drink and never mixed one before.

spiritchild posted an interesting Pegu Club-inspired variation over in another thread: Kind of like a Pegu/Pisco Sour thing going on there.

The beauty of the Calphalon Commercial Nonstick pans (and, one assumes the same will be true of the Calphalon One Nonstick pans when they go on super-sale) is that they cost the same as the kind of nonstick pans that last only a year, but they're triple (or quadruple, I forget which) coated with PTFE and the extremely durable coating lasts a long time. The trick for nonstick, I think is: 1. only fry pans (I don't think it's useful for any other kind of pan); 2. don't use it as a general-puropse pan -- use it only for cooking tasks (eggs, delicate fish, etc) that really need nonstick; 3. only moderate heat; and 4. no metal utensils.

Flor de Mayo does one better than that: they deliver. A chicken, a huge container of rice (try the cilantro rice!) and a big container of flavorful black beans -- more than enough for two, can be delivered to your door for a ridiculously small price. This is one of the best deals in town.

I think he does that right up front when he says, "I never have more then one drink before dinner." Uh, is "interesting" the right word? <sigh> Why even call it a Martini? Super Freedom 75 Deluxe, perhaps? They don't call it a Martini. It's the press that calls it a Martini (presumably on the premise that every cocktail served up in a V-shaped glass is a "martini"). The drink is the World Cocktail, formerly named The World's Most Expensive Cocktail. The price is silly, of course, but fundamentally it's a publicity thing (and it's worked).

I just spoke with the good people at Quaker (1-800-MY-GRITS) and they confirmed that Quaker Grits are indeed no longer made with hominy. They are made with regular old dry corn.

Convert-Me.com is a very convenient web site for converting all kinds of measures. 1 gill = 4 ounces = 11.8 centiliters (118.3 milliliters) 1/6 gill = 2/3 ounce = 1.97 centiliters (19.72 milliliters) 25 milliliters (2.5 centiliters) = 0.85 ounces = 0.21 gills For all intents and purposes, the old bar measure of 1/6 gill was 2 cl and the new bar measure of 2.5 cl is 1/5 gill. So the bar measure became effectively 25% larger with the switch to metric measures. What this means about Bond's drink is a bit more complicated. Casino royale was published in 1953. As far as I know, the UK begain to adopt metric measures sometime around 1965. This means that the original Vesper was probably measured in gills and not in centiliters. Something like this: 3/6 gill Gordon's gin 1/6 gill vodka 1/12 gill Lillet Blanc Or, converted to ounces: 2 ounces Gordon's gin 2/3 ounce vodka 1/3 ounce Lillet Blanc Certainly not a large drink by modern standards. Probably 4 ounces or a little more after dilution with water from melting ice.

Question: Who cares whether it is coated with diamond dust? What is supposed to be the benefit? Personally, although extra thick aluminum (which I take to mean >5 cm) is a great thing to have, I can't see spending a hundred bucks on a nonstick pan.

Let's continue any such discussion on that thread.

The drink comes from Ian Fleming's "Casino Royale" thus: He names it the "Vesper" (not the "Vesper Martini") after the hot female double agent in the book named Vesper Lynd. This is the only book, afaik, in which Bond drinks a Vesper. There's a ton of press clippings about the Algonquin's publicity mechanism drink on their web site.

Anyone tried this method with Corona beans? They are gigantic (around the size of a small thumb before they're cooked) and I am a little concerned that they'll take forever to cook and get all torn up on the outside if I don't soak them. The thing is that Corona beans are quite expensive, so I'm a little hesitant to do the trial and error thing.

All these pots will work just fine on the stove. Personally, I think Staub is the best. Heavier construction. I think the matte black enamel is better for browning. And I think the "basting spikes" are cool. But they'll all do well, I think. It's a matter of preference.

Sweet! Will have to procure some (although I am swiftly running out of room to hide bottles around the house). For pineau cocktails, of course, there's always the Per Se house cocktail. Haven't tried it yet for lack of any Belle de Brillet. But it intrigues me. Lemon does seem more like a natural to me, but I'd like to try it with lime first. I have to assume they've not making it that way for no reason.

I would love to know where to find some of this in Manhattan. Liz: Check out a copy of Cocktails in New York by Anthony Giglio. There is a recipe in there for the "Pear Martini" they serve at Blue Ribbon made with Belle de Brillet, Absolut Citron and lime juice. According to this SF Chron article by Gary Regan, it's made with 2 ounces Belle de Brillet, 1 ounce citrus vodka and 1 ounce fresh lime juice (shake with ice and strain).

Make sure you include some oil, as this will tenderize the crust. You could also maybe bump up the hydration to 65%. Very important, I think, is to do a lengthy fermentation and to retard the dough in the refrigerator. As for the toppings, Patsy's uses a very light hand with the toppings. This is important when the crust is so thin. They have two kinds of cheese, you cen have either fresh mozzarella or low moisture mozzarella. The sauce strikes me as a cooked puree of tomato without much in the way of herbs, garlic or onion (perhaps a bit but not much). The sauce is fairly dark in color, so I think it is likely cooked a fairly long time. You can find some good pictures of Patsy's pizza making set up here in the NY Pizza Survey thread.

What I suspect leads to part of the Patsy's crust texture is that they are using higher hydration than most of the regular slice shops. This makes the dough more extensible and the extra moistyre contributes to oven spring and that special interior layer of soft, flexible crust.

I am almost positive that Patsy's East Harlem (the only Patsy's worth copying) uses a strong flour, most likely with some oil to tenderize it. This is common in the neo-Neapolitan style, and just about every pizzeria that is not a Neapolitan-style specialty place uses strong flour (even some of the "new Neapolitan places like Franny's use strong flour). Any time you see someone stretching a pizza dough in the air, flipping it around and pulling it aggressively, it's a strong flour. Pizzaioli working with soft flour doughs tend to do their stretching of the dough on the bench.

I'll be interested to hear what she says. As far as I understand it (and especially given that the EU is a member of the IOOC), the IOOC sets the standards. This is supported by reading through the "What's the IOOC" pages on the IOOC site. They are desribed therein as the "intergovernmental organisation in charge of administering the International Olive Oil Agreement." The EU is a party to this agreement. Here's a quote I found that sounds relevant: All the laws, as far as I know, that have to do with the legal classification of grades of olive oil have to do with the percentage of oleic acid present in the oil, with "extra virgin" meaning not more than 0.8% by weight.