slkinsey

Since the NY Times review just came out, I'd like to remind everyone of my Brief Note on New York Restaurant Threads, and the following in particular: Let's do what we can to keep this already very long thread focused on Per Se, and do any reviewing of the review/reviewer in other threads. In particular, there is an ongoing thread I created following the Babbo review entitled "Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing" that is more appropriate for much of this discussion. As always, new threads can also always be created for tangential discussions of this nature provided they are non-repetitive. If you're wondering what happened to a recent post of yours in this thread, the above referenced thread is a good place to check. Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.

Below is a relevant quote from the review:

Never!

The non end-grain ones may be significantly less expensive, but they're a waste of money at any price.

It sounds like you have a bottle of "regular" Bombay Gin. This is, IMO, much better than Bombay Sapphire. Bombay Sapphire is of much more recent provenance, and is far less interestingly flavored (indeed, one hears from reputable sources that Bombay Sapphire was developed to be marketed to vodka drinkers). This alludes to Bombay's chosen method for infusing the spirit. At some point during the distillation/rectification process, the vapors travel up the column of the still and through baskets of various aromatics which flavor the distillate. Both Bombay "regular" and Bombay Sapphire are infused via this process. Better than Bombay Sapphire and cheaper too. That's why Bombay will occasionally be found in my pantry, but rarely Bombay Sapphire. In NYC we can get it for around 20 bucks a liter, compared to around $28/liter for Sapphire.

Harder is not necessarily better when it comes to a cutting board. Quite the opposite, in fact. A hard cutting surface will quickly dull the edge of a knife that is used on it. This is one reason you always want end grain and never cross-grain cutting boards. Given what they're charging for bamboo cutting boards (50 bucks minimum for a 12-inch square), I don't see why anyone would want one. You can get a nice end grain cutting board from Ikea for around $20.

You want a liquid mint flavoring? Other than putting it into a sugar base or an alcohol base, I don't know how you would do it.

They have it at Citarella sometimes. I don't get what you're after when you say you want "some good retail sources in the NYC / Long Island area." What's wrong with Lobel's? Lobel's falls pretty squarely into "NYC / Long Island." Or is it the case that what you're really looking for is waygu beef in metro-NYC for a lower price than Lobel's?

First, we should understand that the referenced press release is from a company that sells vodka. So they clearly have a point to make. Next there is the question about the flavor of vodka. First, we should have an understanding of what flavor is. Flavor and taste are not quite the same thing. Taste is the sensation produced by the activation of taste buds in the mouth and throat area by certain chemicals. Smell is the sensation produced by the activation of olfactory receptors by certain chemicals. There is another chemosensory mechanism called the "common chemical sense" through which various nerve endings (especially prevalent in the naturally moist areas of the body) react to certain chemicals to create sensations such as the burn of capsaicin, the sting of ammonia, etc. These senses combine with other sensed elements such as texture and temperature to produce the impression that we call "flavor." As many people understand, smell is perhaps the most important contributor to the perception of flavor. Understanding the foregoing, it is impossible for anything to have zero flavor. Anything you put in your mouth will have some kind of flavor. One could even argue that having nothing in your mouth has a flavor too! So, on that score you are absolutely correct that one cannot say that vodka has no flavor. Whether or not one can say that it has little flavor becomes a bit more complicated. It strikes me as an inescapable fact that a major part of the vodka-making process is to reduce to a great extent the presence of substances that would produce a strong or distinctive neurological response in the sense areas of taste and smell (and, to the extent that vodka is refined to remove congeners, common chemical sense as well). This makes the vodka-making process and aesthetic fundamentally different from any other alcohol-producing method, where the idea is to create an impression by increasing and/or shaping these sensory components rather than by reducing them and basing the character of the libation on what's left behind. One could argue that there is an upper level of flavor, above which a vodka is not judged a quality libation. Smaller concentrations of strong sensation-producing chemicals equals less intensity of flavor. I don't think there can be any argument that vodka isn't the least flavored liquor from a purely chemical standpoint, and I have yet to hear an example of any alcoholic beverage with less flavor. The end result, of course, is that vodka indeed has very little flavor. This doesn't mean that it doesn't have any flavor, though, and more doesn't necessarily equal better. The makers of vodka, in choosing their fermentable materials, their distillation/rectification process, theit filtration methods and materials, and especially the water they use to dillute the spirit for bottling, are controlling what small contributors to flavor do remain in the beverage. As both the article and press release suggest, some of the main distinguishing characeristics are texture (touch) and "finish" (common chemical sense) which, not coincidentally, are the two least significant contributors to flavor. Of course, there are other characeristics of flavor that allow one to distinguish between vodkas, but they are not nearly as present. It is almost as though the goal of vodka is to remove the smell and taste to a large extent so that the flavor is comprised mostly of texture and common chemical sense perceptions. That said, it doesn't make sense to claim that the qualities that allow one to make distinctions among vodkas exist in vodka to the extent that they exist in other liquors, nor that the differences that do exist between vodkas exist to the extent that they exist within other liquor families. This is one of the reasons one continually hears the word "subtle" in any discussion of high end vodka. All this is not to say, however, that it can't be fun and enjoyable to perceive and enjoy a barely-flavored beverage like Vodka. Under a certain aesthetic, less can become more. This is one of the things that makes Audrey's smoking martini so interesting. By dilluting the smokey single malt way down with vodka, certain elements of flavor come to the 'fore that are largely obscurred among the many strong flavor sensations present when the scotch is at full strength.

Interesting Fig Newton trivia: The Fig Newton is named after the place where I grew up: Newton, Massachusetts. It was originally called just a "Newton" and the "Fig" part was added after the fact because people liked the fig jam filling. The machine that makes Newtons was invented by James Henry Mitchell in 1891, and the Kennedy Biscuit Works started making and selling them around that time. The fig ones do seem to be the best by far. Figs are an interesting fruit because the dried version still retains a lot of softness. Other fruits (say, blueberries) really aren't all that great when dried to this extent, and need to be treated with too many preservatives. Most of the other Newton variations seem too artificial tasting to me.

Exactly! I like to do bracciole in the sauce and serve those as the second course.

What's your definition of a "high end steakhouse?" Are we talking Peter Luger, Wolfgang's, Sparks, Berns, et al. or Ruth's Chris, Zentner's, Shula's, Gibson et al.? I would be shocked to learn that the former are using a Jacarder.

And I've given up on figuring out what a Perfect Martini or Manhattan is. Yep, "perfect" usually means using half sweet red vermouth and half dry white vermouth for the vermouth portion of the drink. An example of a Perfect Manhattan would be 2 oz of rye or bourbon with 1/4 oz of sweet red vermouth and 1/4 oz of dry white vermouth.

On a day that has now become somewhat legendary in the Kinsey family, my parents awoke one morning around 15 years ago to find the front yard awash in morels. They picked them all -- an obscene amount -- and freeze dried most of them in my mother's lab. They still have a bag of them in the freezer. We have occasionally found incredible amounts of Craterellus cantharellus near our place in the Western North Carolina mountains, but not this year for some reason.

Richard, what you are describing is what I would call a "low casserole." This is essentially a saute pan body with two small loop handles instead of one long handle. My gut feeling is that a low casserole isn't really all that useful. I have one, and it's the least-used pan in my battery. More to the point, however, I can't think of any reason why enameled cast iron is an advantageous material to use in this kind of pan.

Since spaghetti and meatballs is a totally American-Italian thing, I figure it makes sense to go the American-Italian direction. This means a long cooked Am-It style sauce (see here), plenty of meatballs (beef, pork, veal, bread crumbs, parsley, garlic, onion, egg -- lightly browned and briefly simmered in the sauce, served on the side), maybe a braciole or two. Spaghetti, never fresh pasta.

I'm curious: what's your basis for saying this? I have a hard time believing that a "high end steakhouse" is poking its dry aged prime beef full of tiny holes to tenderize it. My own personal experience in cooking dry aged prime beef, and even lesser grades/treatments, has also demonstrated that such treatment is not necessary for a strip, sirloin or similar "steak cut" of beef. I've certainly never cooked a strip steak from Lobel, Citarella or Fairway and found myself thinking it wasn't tender enough.

If I asked for a martini with a twist, I would absolutely expect there to be no olives. And I think it would be totally fine to ask the bartender to mix another one if it came with olives in it. This is fairly dependent on the type of bar you're in, though. In bars of a certain kind it is not reasonable to expect a high level of mixological skill, so you order a martini at your own risk and take what they give you.

Hmmm... some of these urban areas strike me as pretty far out. Washington-Baltimore? Maybe. Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City? Eh, probably not. Boston-Worcester-Lawrence? Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint? Miami-Ft. Lauderdale? I don't think there is any meaningful way, in terms of culture as it might relate to resaurants, that these places hang together as single units.

Interesting idea. Here is a list of the top 50 cities in the US by population in 1990. I'll give the top 20. --------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | Density | | | Land| (average | | | area| popula- | | | (sq.| tion per Rank | Place |Population| miles)|sq. mile) --------------------------------------------------------------- 1 New York city, NY *...... 7,322,564 308.9 23,705 2 Los Angeles city, CA..... 3,485,398 469.3 7,427 3 Chicago city, IL......... 2,783,726 227.2 12,252 4 Houston city, TX......... 1,630,553 539.9 3,020 5 Philadelphia city, PA.... 1,585,577 135.1 11,736 6 San Diego city, CA *..... 1,110,549 324.0 3,428 7 Detroit city, MI......... 1,027,974 138.7 7,411 8 Dallas city, TX.......... 1,006,877 342.4 2,941 9 Phoenix city, AZ *....... 983,403 419.9 2,342 10 San Antonio city, TX..... 935,933 333.0 2,811 11 San Jose city, CA........ 782,248 171.3 4,567 12 Baltimore city, MD....... 736,014 80.8 9,109 13 Indianapolis city, IN *.. 731,327 361.7 2,022 14 San Francisco city, CA... 723,959 46.7 15,502 15 Jacksonville city, FL *.. 635,230 758.7 837 16 Columbus city, OH........ 632,910 190.9 3,315 17 Milwaukee city, WI....... 628,088 96.1 6,536 18 Memphis city, TN *....... 610,337 256.0 2,384 19 Washington city, DC...... 606,900 61.4 9,884 20 Boston city, MA.......... 574,283 48.4 11,865 It's interesting to me in that I would never put the likes of San Diego, Phoenix and San Antonio above Washington, DC in terms of food. Would be interesting to look at the list by population density. The only cities that come even close to NYC are San Francisco and Jersey City, all at ~9,000 less per square mile.

My Florentine friends would insist it's not the same unless grilled over vine cuttings. :whatever:

Yes, povero Alino. You'll have to suffer with plain old dry aged American prime.

I'd say the best way to go would be to get the thickest porterhouse or t-bone you can get (2 - 3 inches). Then grill the steak (duh!). Let it rest (duh again!). Cut it into pieces and drizzle with very best, peppery Tuscan extra virgin olive oil. Sauteed greens would be a wonderful side, keeping in mind that Italians don't tend to have a lot of side-dishes with the main event -- especially starchy ones. FWIW, I've had probably several dozen Fiorentine in my day, and none of them had the slightest hint of rosemary. That's probably about as close as you can get in America. When you're cooking something as elemental as steak, differences in the source ingredients can make a huge difference. As others have pointed out, bistecca alla fiorentina is made with beef from chianina cows. These cows are slaughtered at a younger age than American cows. The beef is not as fatty and marbled as good American beef. They are fed a special diet. I'm not sure the steaks are extensively dry aged like the best American beef. The result is a flavor and texture that is completely unlike American beef. Unless you can source someone who is raising Chianina beef in America and trying to mimic the whole process top-to-bottom, it's highly likely that the best you can do is approximate the experience to about the same degree as one might approximate Japanese style kobe beef with dry aged American Black Angus. Which is to say, something that's totally delicious but fundamentally only reminiscent of the real thing. I've done this at home a few times, and have always enjoyed it -- as I'm sure you will too. pmathus: what makes it "Florentine" is the whole thing I described above. One cannot really obtain Chianina beef raised, fed, slaughtered and butchered as it is around Florence anywhere else.

Re the dry manhattan, I can see where confusion might have happened. The "dry" in "dry martini" has completely changed meaning over the life of that drink. Whereas "dry martini" used to mean making the drink with dry white vermouth instead of sweet red vermouth, now it means using a very small amount of vermouth. The idea of making a martini with sweet red vermouth doesn't even exist any more. I imagine most bartenders would follow the modern day martini convention and simply use a smaller amount of sweet vermouth when asked for a "dry manhattan." The tendency to make this assumption would be reinforced by the fact that most customers asking for a "dry manhattan" would likely do so with exactly that meaning in mind. That the staff at this restaurant did not automatically make this assumption and mix the manhattan with a smaller proportion of sweet red vermouth, and instead took the time to make sure they knew what you wanted, speaks to me of mixologist competence rather than incompetence.

If some of my past trips to New Orleans are any indication, some of what happens in New Orleans must stay there because no one remembers exactly what happened anyway.