slkinsey

Their burgers are: New York Burger: 6 oz. natural beef burger New York Cheeseburger: 6 oz. natural beef burger with American, bleu, Vermont cheddar, Swiss or Monterey jack Skyscraper Burger: double natural beef burger (12 oz.) Cheese Skyscraper: double natural beef burger with cheese Chicago Burger: 6 oz. natural beef burger with appleqwood smoked bacon, cheddar and 1000 Island Dallas Burger: 6 oz. natural beef burger with with fire-griled onions, Monterey jack and BBQ sauced Seattle Burger: 6 oz. natural beef burger with portobello mushrooms, fire-grilled onions and NY Burger Co.'s burger sauce Edited to add: one of is clearly a faster typist

It's definitely not a generic "hamburger roll." It may be brioche or something like that. Perhaps they get them from Sullivan Street Bakery, which is where I'd guess they get their (excellent) bread. The issue, more or less, is that the bread is around an inch larger in diameter than the burger. It's very good bread, but it's too big -- which is not to say that the burger is too small. Really, these rolls would be too big for any hamburger of reasonable size. Anyway, I was at lunch with Dean. Had the gazpacho as well, plus a croque madame (ham, melted gruyere & grilled country bread topped with a fried egg). Both were excellent. We also got to try some of the porchetta (boneless roasted pig) special, which was also very tasty, nicely moist and came with some pieces of crispy skin. No sooner did Dean say, "they definitely brined this pork" than Valerie Serrao, the FOH manager, came by and told us about going into the walk-in and being startled by a whole pig soaking in brine. The man knows his pork.

I'm not saying categorically that this is isn't true, because everyone has differing abilities to taste. But, I can tell you this: my parents are both chemists and whenever soneone suggested that they could tell the difference between, for example, Gordon's and Bombay Sapphire in an Aviation or G&T, their usual response was "why don't you put on a blindfold and let's find out." Rarely, if ever, was someone actually able to do better than chance. Of course, with certain strong-flavored gins (Junìpero and the now demised Malacca come to mind) it would be relatively easy to taste the difference. More to the point, however, are the questions as to whether a complex cocktail is made better by using the more expensive gin and whether one is able to appreciate the subtleties of the more expensive gin in the complex cocktail. In other words, whether or not you're getting your money's worth. This is, to be sure, an easier point to make with respect to vodka, where I think it's stupid to spend money on anything more expensive than a reasonably good brand like Skyy.

I often use Vya, albeit in much smaller amounts than Noilly Pratt due to its much stronger flavor. Noilly Pratt is the other dry vermouth I tend to use, and is definitely the one I'll use in trying the 1:1 martini Gary mentioned. Interesting. Lillet Blonde tastes sonewhat sweeter and less herbaceous than Vya to my palate, but it is an interesting one to use with gin. I've always been meaning to try a Vesper Martini (gin, vodka and Lillet Blonde).

Presumably, however, the other bartenders would have to have some way of knowing what it is anyway, right? I mean, if you made a drink called, say, a "blossomtini" or a "s'mortini" I can't imagine that they'd have any useful idea how to make one without some kind of recipe from you. It strikes me that, for example, Audrey Saunders isn't having this issue at Bemelmans. Well, of course there is always going to be a certain take that will figure more from a sales-minded commercial/professional standpoint than it will from a connaisseur/enthusiast standpoint. And clearly there is no well-defined right or wrong in either of these positions. Personally, I think it makes plenty of sense to name a drink a "_____-tini" or a "_____ martini" if it is recognizable as a riff on the martini (others have mentioned a vodka-and-sake "saketini," for example). However, I have great regret over the number of cool cocktail names we have missed out on due to either user-friendly commercialism or lack of interesting ideas. After all, it's quite likely that, if it had been invented today, an up Margarita would be known as a "Mexican Martini" or "Tequillatini."

It strikes me that there are both good new cocktail trends and bad new cocktail trends. What's good in my book -- and I have a feeling that most of the cocktailphiles on these boards would agree with me -- is evolving the craft, but doing so with a firm understanding of the roots a base in the "classics." This philosophy produces carefully balanced and crafted libations using ingredients such as fresh citrus juices, bitters, etc. If I had to come up with snappy description of this philosophy, I'd call it "moving forward by looking back." What's bad in my book is exactly what Lan4Dawg describes: "chilled spirits in a pretty glass." Or, in other words, simple and not particularly elegant or complex drinks based on not much more than the newest flavored vodka, usually with something to sweeten it up. The devolution of the martini from a gin-and-vermouth cocktail to a glass of cold vodka is emblematic of this trend, as is the scarsity of bitters -- and, it must be said, the widespread use of the ending "-tini" for drinks which bear no relationship with a martini instead of a more interesting and unique name. People should, of course, try to be aware of both trends in the cocktail craft before making blanket condemnations of all that is new. On the other hand, most people are afforded much wider exposure to the latter trends than the former, and not everyone is able to live in a city like NYC, London (and, no doubt, the right places in Cleveland ) among the leading proponents of the good new school, and we should have some understanding of that too.

Just a note: Please keep in mind that this thread is for discussion of Wolfgang's Steakhouse. Any discussion of the recent Times review in this thread should be within the context of what it tells us about Wolfgang's, whether we agree with what it tells us about Wolfgang's and other things directly relating to... wait for it... Wolfgang's. If you would like to talk about the review as a piece of writing, whether or not you think it has anything valuable to say, what you think about Bruni's style and overall views... there is a thread for that in Food Media and News.

Here is an interesting quote from Gary Regan in another thread: Sasha Petraski is known as one of the top bar guys in the City, and some in these forums have called the martini at Milk & Honey "definitive." My personal opinion and experience is that most people say they want little if any vermouth but, if you make a proper martini with around 4:1 or 6:1 (maybe 8:1 if it is a delicate gin and a strong vermouth), they will say it's the best they've had. I would assert that, if the vermouth isn't present in sufficient quantity to be tasted, it is not a martini and it is not a cocktail -- it's just a glass of cold vodka or gin served in a funny glass. I'm very interested to try the 1:1 martini Gary describes -- although it sounds like extreme coldness is a crucial element, and I'm not sure how I'd get that other than pre-chilling the ingredients, which presents other problems (chief among them, insufficient dillution).

Wood sugar is xylose, which Merriam-Webster says is a "crystalline aldose sugar (C5H10O5) that is not fermentable with ordinary yeasts and occurs especially as a constituent of xylans from which it is obtained by hydrolysisxylose." It is extracted from wood or straw and sometimes used in foods for diabetics.

A few things: As I imagine many know, "gelato" and "ice cream" mean the same thing in two different languages. Gelato is merely a specific style of ice cream that happens to be prevalent in Italy. We use "gelato" as short hand for "Italian-style ice cream" but it is just as much variation between different styles we call "ice cream: as there is between what we call "gelato" and what we call "ice cream." I think it is a mistake to suppose that the use of eggs (i.e., a custard base) is a defining characteristic of Italian-style ice cream. First, it is not the case that Italian-style ice creams are always made with a custard base. Second, it is the case that plenty of American-style ice creams are made with a custard base. In fact, custard bases are so common that there is a special name for American-style ice cream made without a custard base: Philadelphia style. The significant differences between the American and Italian styles are two 1. American style uses cream and has a much higher butterfat content. As the ice cream is frozen, air is actually "whipped" into the ice cream, making it lighter. Think about the texture of a fresh scoop of American-style ice cream -- all those little holes. This is possible because of the use of cream. Italian style uses milk and is not fatty enough to whip up. 2. Italian style is frozen and maintained at a much higher temperature. This temperature difference also contributes to a denser texture. One big problem with purchasing Italian-style ice cream in American grocery stores is that it is held at too low a temperature, which negatively affects the texture. The end result of these two differences is that Italian-style ice cream is much more dense than its American counterparts. This provides a rich mouthfeel while at the same time being light due to the lower fat content. American-style ice cream works the opposite side of the equation. The air pockets provide lightness while the fat content provides richness.

Mario Batali's fennel dusted sweetbreads with sweet and sour onions, duck bacon and membrillo vinegar at Babbo is one of their signature dishes and also one of the best sweetbread dishes I have had anywhere.

Exactly. I, too, use Gordon's for cocktails where the gin won't shine through and various other high-end gins where the gin will really shine through. I mean, what's the point of making a Twentieth Century with Hendrick's or Plymouth? The whole point of most high-end gins is the subtle and delicate flavors. On the rare occasions I use a high-end gin in a non-martini cocktail, it tends to be because the high-end gin is a particularly strongly flavored one like Junìpero that can cut through the other ingredients. Gordon's is, by the way, a perfectly good gin, and one I am proud to use in cocktails. Seems like you feel the same way.

Yes, I believe it was a whole chicken. Emeril claimed it was a swordfish, legend says it was a chicken, videotape shows it was a potato pancake. But the quote was right. The quote is not quite right. According to the good folk at Snopes.com: Child has admitted time and again to the potato pancake incident but has always firmly maintained she never dropped a chicken, duck, or whatever else the rumor has ascribed to her. Thanks to the power of manufactured memory, fans of the show remain convinced they saw something she has directly and repeatedly denied.

Hey, come on now! Why, you have a chance of winning the lottery that is only 4 or 5 times less than being struck by lightning.

Any cocktail or mixed drink (martini excepted) using an expensive super-premium vodka is a waste of money and booze. I can't think of a single cocktail other than a martini where one could taste the difference between drinks mixed with, say, Ultimat at $70/L, Precis at $50/L, Belvedere, Ciroc, Chopin and Van Gogh at $38/L, Absolut and Ketel One at $27/L, Skyy at $19/L or Luksusowa at $17/L. This suggests to me that it doesn't make sense to use anything but Luksusowa.

There are various synthetic clarifying and chillproofing agents one may use that are not animal-based, such as Divergan. If any winery claimed its wines were "vegan" then I would asssume that no animal products were used.

You have these things: A thin disk of (relatively moist) dough. A slab of thermal material (e.g., baking stone, hearth of traditional oven, whatever). A hot oven. You then slap said disk of dough onto said slab of thermal material, causing heat to shoot into the dough. This heat has two effects: 1. the leavening microorganisms go into a brief overdrive before expiring from the heat, thus producing lots of gas; 2. some of the water contained in the dough also turns into gaseous form. At the same time, the heat of the oven "sets" the top part of the dough sufficiently to trap gas. So, at this point, we have a whole lot of gas being produced in a very short period of time. We also have a well "set" bottom crust and a somewhat "set" top crust on the dough, and a very thin interior. Under these conditions, there aren't a lot of places the gas can go. The expanding gas therefore tends to "blow out" all the little cells in the interior of the thin dough and form one large gas bubble sandwiched between the bottom and top crusts. The result is that the whole thing blows up like a baloon, forming a "pocket" in the interior of the thin bread. Voila: pita. The same thing will happen with any leavened dough that is sufficiently thin, unless the dough is treated to mitigate this effect. This is why cracker dough is docked, why ciabatta dough is poked with the fingers, etc.

Ah, Trillium, once again you beat me to the punch. I was just trading through the thread thinking, "why is everyone saying smaller capers are better? some of the best capers are the big ones. I'll just scroll down and make sure no one else has poste-- d'oh!!" Seriously, though, size has nothing to do with the quality of capers. The best capers money can buy, salt-preserved caperi di Pantelleria, are quite large.

Gianduja is chocolate blended with hazelnut into a smooth paste. Nutella is probably the most widely-known brand and form of gianduja. Whether or not one considers Nutella to be gianduja, the Nutella sold in the states has more peanut oil and sugar than chocolate or hazelnuts and is laced with transfats from partially hydrogenated peanut oil. Its ingredients are, in order or quantity, as required on the label: sugar, peanut oil, hazelnuts, cocoa, skim mild, reduced minerals, whey, partially hydrogenated peanut oil, soy lecithin and vanillan. Nutritional information here. I'm not sure what your point is here. Ingreduents like sugar, peanut oil, cocoa, skim milk, reduced minerals, whey and vanillan strike me as relatively unexceptional ingredients for making chocolate. The peanut oil and partially hydrogenated peanut oil make the mixture spreadable and they hydrogenated stuff also acts against rancidity. The soy lecithin is an emulsifier. And, of course, there are hazelnuts. No one, least of all me, is suggesting that Nutella is the highest quality gianduja on the planet. But it certainly is gianduja. Indeed, the original brand name for Nutella was Supercrema Gianduja.

Gianduja is chocolate blended with hazelnut into a smooth paste. Nutella is probably the most widely-known brand and form of gianduja.

Sounds nice. I had a drink at Landmarc the other day they called a "French Gimlet." It was gin (although they usually make it with vodka), fresh lime juice, Rose's lime juice and the glass was rinsed with Ricard. Although lime with licorice sounds odd, it turned out to be really tasty.

That's what I said when I walked by there with Herb and JJ on our "NY Offal Tour." I was like, "who knew that Cheap Trick recorded their first US hit album in such a small place." They looked at me like I was from Mars. I said, "you remember... Cheap Trick Live at Budokan?... 'I want you to want me' and all that? Came out in the late... 70s... when... neither of you guys had been born. <Grumble> Forget I said anything."

Just to play Devil's advocate for a moment... isn't this somewhat inevitable? I mean, Bruni was saying that Babbo was designed for three stars and is achieving very near the pinnacle of what it is to be a three-star restaurant. Bouley, on the other hand, was designed for four stars and is substantially underachieving in some key areas (not too many people seem to be disputing that Bouley has fallen off the four star mark). This equals mostly praise of Babbo and mostly criticism of Bouley.

Guys... Understanding that Stephen Starr's star looms large in the Philadelphia restaurant scene, I can understand that there is some temptation to discuss his Philly restaurants in this thread. However, please resist that temptation and keep in mind that this thread is about a New York restaurant. Discussion here should be directly relevant to the New York restaurant Buddakan and the New York restaurant scene. If members would like to engage in discussion about Mr. Starr's Philadelphia restaurants, we have a great forum for just such discussions.

With the advent of a fresh review in the New York Times by Frank Bruni, we are going to close this chapter of discussion and start a new thread for discussion of Bouley.