slkinsey

That's a good point, bacchant036, and a good thing to hear. We're seeing a lot of that here in NYC as well. In recognition of the fact that I tend to go to a certain kind of bar or restaurant, I'm not sure if I can say "most new bars" all across the City -- but it's certainly something I've noticed as well. My impression is that this tends to be especially true for restaurant bars.

Well, I think one has to define "booming." The cocktail culture is "booming" in NYC as well, and famously so. But the fact is that while plenty of bars in both NYC and Edinburgh may make cocktails, most aren't "cocktail bars" and the cocktails made in the average bar aren't very good. If a higher percentage of the cocktail-making bars in Edinburgh (or wherever in Europe) are making quality cocktails, it is probably mostly reflective of the fact that "cocktails" are part of the culture of most every bar in the US whereas it is not for many (most) in Europe. It is quite easy to spend time in NYC primarily in bars like Bemelman's, Schiller's Liquor Bar, Milk & Honey, Flatiron Lounge, etc. That's what I try to do, in fact. But one does have the tendency to form the idea that the state of the craft is a lot better than it really is. I think when one says "cocktail bar" and speaks of bartenders like yourself, there is already the expectation that higher quality ingredients and a more culinary approach will be employed. It is significantly less likely, in my view, that a "cocktail bar" will use sour mix and flavored syrups in place of citrus juice and fresh fruit -- just as it is less likely that these bars will serve an overly sweet, unbalanced drink. All this is to say that I have a hard time believing that the average bar in Edinburgh or London is using fresh ingredients, etc. That said, it's been a few years so maybe I'm not current. But I don't get the impression you're an "average bartender" working in an "average bar." I'm not sure I get it. Where do you get the jackass part, and from who? It doesn't sound like they're being anything but good to their customer base, despite the fact that some of them had not-so-nice things to say about the state of the craft. I can say from personal experience that the NYC venues mentioned couldn't be more welcoming. Just for the record, the phone number thing at Milk & Honey is hardly exclusionary. This is even pointed out in the article: It's a small place and they also want to make sure they are able to give everyone the appropriate attention. In a way, it is taking a bar in the direction of a restaurant model, by taking reservations. It's hardly difficult to get the phone number for M&H, though.

It's a completely ridiculous statement on a variety of levels. First of all, it's a little simplistic to say that "rice has no natural sugars." Rice is mostly made out of starch. Starch is a "complex" polysaccharide carbohydrate. Polysaccharides can be broken down into monosaccharides by hydrolysis. Sugar, generally speaking, is a "simple" carbohydrate composed of one or two monosaccharides. So even if one can say that "rice has no natural sugars" it is a meaningless statement in this context, since there is ample starch that is reducible to sugar. It's like saying that scotch has almost no calories, due to the absence of natural sugars in barley. Second, if there's no sugar there's no alcohol. Alcohol is made out of sugar, in the sense that it is a byproduct of the fermentation of sugar by yeast. When sake is made, rice is inocculated with a mold called koji (Aspergillum oryzae). The koji mold converts the starch of the rice into... wait for it... sugar. This sugar is fermented by yeast and the result is sake. Third, hello? Alcohol has calories. Seven calories per gram, in fact (fat has 9 calories per gram).

There was a very interesting article in this week's food section, entitled So a Purist Goes in a Bar and Starts to Pour Art. In the article, Florence Fabricant discussed the growing trend among bartenders to take a more "culinary approach" towards mixology. The article, by the way, features an eGullet favorite and leading light in the cocktail revival, Audrey "Libation Goddess" Saunders. Here are a few excerpts I found interesting: Some interesting stuff there, and some provocative stuff too. I highly recommend this article and am interested to hear what we think of it.

I do think it's interesting that one of the major steps in developing a new brand of vodka is the design of the bottle. Bottle design has become important for many alcoholic beverages (viz. Bombay Sapphire's blue bottle), but it's much more important for vodka because there is so much less to differentiate beween brands. It's widely accepted that Absolut's bottle design had more to do with the success of that brand than anything else. This seems to be the major step towards becoming a trend leader like Katie suggests, so people will order fifteen dollar vodka tonics.

afaik, a "Frenched" chicken breast simply means a skin-on breast with the breastbone and first two joints of the wing removed -- sometimes with the meat scraped off of the remaining joint of the wing. When I am cooking drumsticks I always either cut off the knuckle (end joint) or, if I want it to look pretty, I run a sharp knife around the knuckle end of the bone to detatch the meat and tendons from that end. This results in a much more palatable and "thigh-like" texture. According to your description the latter process is "Frenching" the leg.

"If I am going to spend that kind of dough on pasta"!! Pun intended, I hope! Seriously, though, I think this outlook reflects a little bit of what Marcella Hazan weighs in against in her books: the idea that fresh pasta is better than dry pasta. Why does $2.50 a pound for good quality fresh pasta seem like a reasonable price, and not $2.50 a pound for the very best quality dry pasta? Taking the opposite view, I spend more money on the dry stuff because there is no way a store can make fresh pasta that's better than what I make myself at home for 1/10th the price, whereas I can't make dry pasta at home at all. But, I also think that the value one gets out of pasta, either fresh or dry, is also largely shaped by one's culinary practices and priorities. I tend to prefer my pasta dishes in the Italian style, which is to say fairly lightly sauced. This allows the pasta to play the starring role, and the sauce is just a condiment. Most Americans, on the other hand, tend to prefer their pasta dishes much more heavily sauced, such that the sauce is really the main event. This isn't necessarily an issue of one approach being inherrently better than the other (and I have no idea which style you prefer), but it is the case that the quality of the pasta will be much more apparent in the Italian style preparations. All this is to say that Barilla and De Cecco (etc.) are definitely quality products, but I have no trouble whatsoever immediately telling the difference between the better industrial dry pastas and artisanal dry pastas -- and I think this is true of most people who eat at my house. In fact, I remember the first time Fat Guy was over for dinner after I had started moving away from Barilla and De Cecco to brands like Setaro and Latini. He took one bite and said, "this is really good quality pasta."

Dude, that's only $2.27 a pound. What's so expensive about that? It may seem expensive compared to 59 cent a pound Ronzoni, but the fact is that $2.27 a pound is still very inexpensive. I mean, you can feed 3-4 people on one pound of pasta. That's around 55 to 75 cents a person! If there is another primo ingredient that can be had this inexpensively, I don't know about it. Compared to, say, $2 a pound for red peppers, it's a bargain. And don't even get me started on what they're charging for fresh fava beans, etc. Well, I can't read the book as yet, because it won't be published until early October. But I am, naturally, intimately familiar with the rest of her work to-date. In the books I have read, she has often referred to dry pasta as "factory made" and has often made the case for valuing dry/factory-made pasta equally with fresh/homemade pasta. When I read, "this might shock you, but . . . Santa Marcella says that for some dishes, factory-made pasta is the only way to go" in a thread about dry pasta, I gathered you were interpreting Hazan as occasionally advocating industrial dry/factory-made pasta over artisanal dry/factory-made pasta. Otherwise, why would I be shocked, right? That I started a thread on favorite dry pasta brands strikes me as strong evidence of my fondness for dry pasta and the fact that I value it equally with fresh. But perhaps I misconstrued your post. I'll be surprised if she changes from her historical practice in this new book, but you're certainly in a better position to know than I. I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting. It's not rocket science to find out this information, and I have found that it's not that hard to visit a pastificio if you're in the neighborhood. For the record, when I wrote as to "what makes Latini factory-made pasta different from Ronzoni factory-made pasta" was never intended as an implied commentary on your knowledge in this area, which I'm sure is quite advanced. What are the other elements you take into consideration? The only one I am not considering for the purposes of this thread is cost. Perhaps our difference of opinion is because for me there is no such thing as "just maccheroni." I don't think $5/kilo in NYC is an unreasonably high cost, and I don't find that it depletes the funds I have available for other quality foodstuffs such as produce, meat, fish, wine, etc. But, on the other hand... my cooking, culinary philosophy and everyday diet were largely formed in Italy. So I eat a lot of pasta, and it's important to me.

Interesting that you say that, Russ. I have to say that my experience is a little different. I can't say that I can immediately put my finger on a distinctive flavor, but artisinal dry pasta does taste different from the industrial stuff to me. Here is the example I had in mind when I started the referenced thread: I didn't have much in the pantry or much time, so I cooked up around a pound of Setaro ditali and dressed them with a half cup of chicken stock, some butter and some whole parsley leaves. Now, this is an "emergency" dish I have made before with other brands of dry pasta. It has never been much more than filling -- certainly never interesting. This time, however, I couldn't stop eating it. It was delicious! I'm sure it had more flavor than it would had I eaten the pasta completely unadorned, but I wouldn't say that it tasted of either butter or chicken stock and I'm not sure I would describe the pasta's function in this dish as primarily one of conveying flavor. So it tasted of something, and definitely something different (and better!) than the De Cecco I had normally used. Would I have discerned as large a difference in flavor between Setaro and Latini as I tasted between Setaro and De Cecco? That's harder to say.

I do a tasting menu every year for Thanksgiving dinner. It is a lot of work, but the key is planning ahead (especially concerning dinnertime logistics) and also making as many things ahead of time as you can. Making sure the portions are small enough is also important This is my Thanksgiving dinner from last year. Assorted Crudités Prosecco di Valdobbiadene Rustico, Viticoltori Nino Franco, NV – – – Kumamoto Oyster On The Half-Shell With Cucumber Granita Muscadet de Sevre et Maine sur Lies, Cuvee Vielles Vignes, Domaine Clos des Briords, 2002 – – – Cauliflower Soup With Seared Diver Scallop And Curry Oil Saumur Blanc “La Papareille,” Domaine Saint-Vincent, 2002 – – – Mixed Herb Salad With Shrimp Ceviche Saumur Blanc “La Papareille,” Domaine Saint-Vincent, 2002 – – – Toasted Corn And Stilton Soufflé Sautéed Brussels Sprouts With Guanciale and Chive/Oregano Vinaigrette Bourgogne Rouge, Domaine Alain Hudelot-Noellat, 2000 – – – Lemon-Thyme Sorbet Moscato d'Asti “Vigneto Biancospino,” Azienda Agricola Dante Rivetti, Piemonte, 2002 – – – Turkey Two Ways With Cornbread Dressing, Foie Gras And Black Truffle Carpaccio Coteaux du Languedoc Pic Saint-Loup “Le Rollier,” Domaine Mas Foulaquier, 2001 Sonoma Valley Red Wine “Albarello,” H. Coturri & Sons, 2001 – – – Bourbon Bread Pudding Cranberry Cheesecake Pecan Tart Coffee – – – Palmiers and Chocolate Truffles Grappa, Scotch, Bourbon, Etc.

All dry pasta is factory-made. What I think she's saying is that fresh pasta is not necessarily better than dry pasta, and on that point I agree. In "Essentials" she says, "the boxed, dry pasta one refers to as factory-made. . ." and also ". . .for many dishes, factory-made pasta is the better choice. . ." What makes Latini factory-made pasta different from Ronzoni factory-made pasta is that the Ronzoni factory, process and ingredients are different from the Latini factory, process and ingredients. De Cecco is, IMO, the best mass-production ("industrial") dry pasta -- so I totally agree with your tastes there. But also IMO, there is such a world of difference between De Cecco and e.g. Setaro that I'll never go back to De Cecco... not while I can get Setaro for five bucks a kilo. Seriously, go the Italian store at Chelsea Market some time and pick up a kilo of Setaro vermicelli. Serve it with some good butter and nothing else. I bet you'll never want to go back. Yea, but compared to what? And who is doing the testing? I bet if it was you and me doing the testing, it might not rate so high.

I'm not wondering what brand you tend to use the most because it's reasonably priced and available in your neighborhood, etc. I'm talking about the brand of dry pasta you like more than any other. Everyone I know, even those who aren't all that wild about pasta, can immediately taste the difference between industrial dry pasta and artisinal dry pasta. I also find it's true that many pasta dishes that would be uninteresting with industrial dry pasta (e.g., penne in bianco) are wonderful with artisinal dry pasta. So... my favorites are Setaro and Rustichella d'Abruzzo. I also like Latini, and I always have a soft spot for something from Le Marche. But I have to admit that I have some trouble with their strand pasta. Latini short/tubular pasta always cooks just right for me. But Latini long/strand pasta seems to take forever to become tender, and often ends up gummy and overly al dente at the same time. What are your favorites, and why? Are there any I'm missing that I should be sure to check out?

Sure. When braised for any appreciable length of time, the white meat will be dry and tough whereas the dark meat will be moist and tender.

Dark meat has so much more flavor, I can't imagine any context in which I wouldn't prefer it. I think it's especially true in the contect of most curry dishes, if you want to have any chicken flavor at all come out among the many other flavors. Also, since one may cook dark meat substantially longer than white meat chicken, this offers more of an opportunity for the flavors to marry. For me, I only tend to use white meat chicken when I am going for a quick cooking and want to play up its inherrent tenderness.

Good point, my friend. If I were you, I'd probably pick one of the decent-looking sets on overstock. It'll undoubtedly be an improvement over what you describe as the current state of affairs. Or, you could put together your own set of knives from Ikea.

How many pieces does she want? Also, when you say you want a "set" for <$75, does this have to include a knife block? If you're talking, say, chef's knife, paring knife, bread knife and 6-8 steak knives for under 75 bucks, I think it will be diofficult to find anything that doesn't suck. Your best bet is probably to go on to overstock.com and buy one of their <$75 sets. The only "brand" I see there right now is Chicago Cutlery, which makes some okay stuff -- but anything they offer for a cock bottom price on overstock won't really be reflective of their overall quality.

Sounds very tasty, Elie. I hope you post pictures soon.

Some interesting new data has come up with respect to restaurant and bar smoking bans. This article, which was recently published in the Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine (46(9):887-905, September 2004. Repace, James MSc) and covered in many newspapers (Newsday, for example) had the following to report: This would seem to put several of the key health-related anti-ban arguments to rest. It was especially interesting to read that air filtration systems can't exchange air fast enough to effectively reduce smoke levels. I also found this emphatically debunked the argument that smoky bar/restaurant air can't be all that bad compared to normal levels of air pollution in cities like NYC:

Some interesting points have been made all around. I think most of us would agree that cocktail mixing skills and general knowledge are at a very low level among working bartenders, to the extent that they are practically nonexistent in the average bartender. Taking this one step further, I would argue that there is far more mixological expertise and knowledge in the amateur cocktail enthusiast community than there is among working bartenders, by and large. This is largely a reflection of the fact that the vast majority of bar customers do not drink cocktails and thus do not require or value mixological skills. The average bar is not a cocktail bar. People like Dale DeGroff and Gary Regan and Audrey Saunders are so important precisely because they are the exceptions, and cocktail evangelists in the professional community. The cocktail craft is making a comeback compared to where it was 10 or 15 years ago for sure, but the reality remains that a wide variety of well crafted cocktails is not in demand at the average bar. The average bar does the vast majority of its business in beer, shots and no-brainer mixed drinks like G&Ts, 7&7s, frozen premixed Margaritas from the slush machine, Screwdrivers, Bloody Marys, etc. In some cities the cocktail scene has developed to the extent that "regular" bars and restaurant bars are increasingly offering a limited selection of classic and new classic real cocktails. But few other cities are in the same category as NYC, SF and NO in this respect -- and even in these leading cities, the average bar is still a "beer and shots" place. So, what does the owner of the average bar want? He wants to make money. And, in order to make money he is going to hire people with the kind of skills that help him make money. Since mixological skills are not important, he considers other factors... things like speed, upselling, customer rapport, appeal to the target demographic, etc. And, as we all know, "skills" like gender, hair color, breast size and bicep development can make a difference too. None of these factors have anything whatsoever to do with knowing how to make a cocktail. Heck, the average bar probably doesn't even have cocktail glasses. Understanding the foregoing, I wouldn't expect the average bartender to know how to make any real cocktails at all. He/she might know that a martini consists of gin or vodka shaken on ice with vermouth, but just about everyone in America knows that. Depending on an individual bar's style, there are probably a few other cocktails that the bartenders are expected to know (Margaritas at a Mexican place, premix Hurricanes at Pat O'Brien's, etc.). I think the comparison to a chef is an interesting one. Beans is correct when she points out that the average cook coming into a his first restaurant kitchen at the rock-bottom level probably doesn't know how the difference between a coarse dice and a fine mince. However, he will be taught these things if he expects to move to the line, and I'm quite sure that everyone working the line at e.g., Babbo, knows difference between a coarse dice and a fine mince along with all the other things Janet outlined. But, let's take the analogy a little further. A bartender isn't like a line cook anyway. A bartender making a cocktail is like a chef who makes the whole meal all by himself. Now, I would expect that any chef I hired to staff a kitchen all by himself was well-versed in just about everything there was to know about the kind of food he would be cooking. If my kitchen was going to be turning out French food, I would absolutely expect my cook to know what goes in a bechamel. On the other hand, if my kitchen was going to be turning out hotdogs and preformed hamburgers, I wouldn't have that expectation. Taking the analogy to its conclusion, it would seem that the average bar patron wants to eat hot dogs and that the average bartender as a result is more like a fry cook than a one-man bistro chef. That's too bad, I think, but it's the reality I think.

It appears to be made by All-Clad Metalcrafters, but even a casual glance at the Emerilware website is enough to demonstrate that it's not the same thing as regular All-Clad. That doesn't necessarily mean worse, but it's pretty clear it's different. Again, I would encourage you to look for less expensive and better cookware. Especially if you have been paying full retail for All-Clad. That's just highway robbery.

Beans brings up good points, I think. There are, unfortunately, precious few "cocktailphile" bars around. So, what I think we have here are perhaps two different lines of inquiry here. There is "what should be in the ideal cocktailian bartender's repertoire" and there is "what is valuable to have in the average working bartender's repercoire." These are completely different questions, and will result in completely different answers. For the averge working bartender working at a typical bar, I'm thinking: Margarita, Cosmo and Martini -- in that order -- plus whatever happens to be the trendy drink du jour and a few house specialties are the only "must have" cocktails that require any real mixing skills. Everything else will be of the G&T/Bloody Mary/LIT variety. I'm guessing that the above, plus beer and shots/shooters, comprises around 99% of the average American bar's business. Now, for a bartender at a "really good cocktail place" the list is entirely different.

To spatchcock: fendre pour griller Spatchcocked: fendu pour griller Maybe?

Hmmm... I wonder. The three big ones that come immediately to mind are: Martini, Cosmopolitan, Margarita. Second tier would be Manhattan, Gimlet, LIT. Third tier would be things like Mojitos and Caipirinhas that are becoming popular in some cities/demographics. Other than those, and no doubt more popular than any from the second of third tier, are things like Gin & Tonic, Bloody Mary, Rum & Coke, 7 & 7, etc. -- mixed drinks that don't demand a whole lot of skill and are easily understood simply from the name. My gut feeling is that, in 90% of American bars, a bartender can get by only knowing the first tier cocktails and the easy mixed drinks.

Sorry for the long delay. Sometimes these posts don't show up on my radar. So... The short answer is that no, there's not really any reason to have a cast iron skillet if you have a good stainless lined heavy copper saute pan. There are a few things that cast iron might do a little better (making cornbread, fitting close under the broiler, etc.), but if clutter is a consideration I don't think there's much point in getting some cast iron. I have an unreasonable amount of cookware in my kitchen, including lots of copper and also lots of ancestral cast iron. I'd say I use the copper pieces maybe 50 times for each 1 use of the cast iron pans. I like having them around, but I probably wouldn't miss my cast iron pieces if I got rid of them (well, I'd miss them for sentimental reasons, but not for cooking reasons). If, on the other hand, you do have some room to spare, you might think of trying a cast iron piece. The great advantage of cast iron is that it's very inexpensive.

In terms of a professional bartender, I imagine the list of requisite cocktails will have a lot to do with the venue. There's little point, for example, in learning how to make an Aviation in a bar that is frequented by the frozen margarita and Jaeger shooter set.