slkinsey

Okay guys... as interesting as this discussion may be, we are a foood site and out mission is to discuss food ande substantially food-related topics. Since this thread does not show the promise of moving on-topic, I'm going to lock it now.

Right here. Apparently we were thinking WAY too far outside the box.

Interesting. I know that butter helps anything to brown, but I hadn't given it a lot of thought. I bet it has something to do with the fact that the butter solids brown and undergo Maillard reactions. One interesting thing about Maillard reactions is that, if there are other already "Maillardized" molecules around, it makes the Maillardization of whatever you're cooking go that much faster. This is why, when you're browning off a bunch of steaks (etc.), the subsequent steaks take color much more quickly than the first steak.

Although some people apparently don't believe this is true, it is a fact that the seasoning on a cast iron pan can start to burn if the pan gets too hot. This is what is happening when an otherwise clean seasoned cast iron skillet starts to smoke. The solution to this is to use seasoned cast iron no higher than medium-high heat. Anything hotter will damage the seasoning after a while anyway. For extra-high heat cooking, use unseasoned cast iron. This is to say, take extra care to clean the iron thoroughly so no seasoning has a chance to build up. The fact is, though, that extra-high heat cooking produces a fair amount of smoke no matter what you do as the fat and juices burn.

Hmmm... Looks like NY Magazine did a Best Offal category in their "Best of New York" ratings back in 2001. The winner was Guastavino's.

So, at long last, JJ, Herbacidal and I are preparing to embark upon the first leg of our epic journey through New York's variety meats. Thus far it looks like we're going to start with a vestedda (spleen, ricotta and caciocavallo on a roll) at La Focacceria, then somewhere (GSIM?) for some Asian guts, then we'd like to finish the day with a big mixed grill. Any suggestions? Can't-miss guts places in the City? For the time being, we're looking for cheap eats guts. The "fine guts dining" trip will be later on.

This is getting into subject matter that is only tangential to Landmarc, but I think if a restaurant has a wide enough range of selections to please most customers in their target demographic, there should be no need to offer substitutions. If you don't want to have the ratatouille that comes with the "lamb t-bone" then either don't eat it or order something else... like the grilled pork chop with sauteed spinach. If you want to have the pork chop but just can't live without ratatouille... then it is available as a side. So, really, this is a nonissue for a place like Landmarc. Take a look at their dinner menu. There's plenty for everyone there, and if someone can't find a dish they're willing to eat as-is, then Landmarc probably isn't the restaurant for them. Given their "mix and match" steak and mussel choices, they seem plenty flexible to me. Plenty of restaurants, especially in larger cities where there are many other opportunities for customers who don't see anything they like on the menu, don't allow or encourage substitutions.

I'm pretty sure I said something about this early in the thread, but it bears restating more clearly. . . We decided as a group early on that it made sense to visit the most famous/legendary NYC pizzzerie first, to get the lay of the land and a firm grip on the NYC style. It also made sense to start with the most traditional (and suposedly the best) pizzerie before branching out. From this idea emerged the Big 5: Di Fara's, Grimaldi's, Patsy's (East Harlem), Lombardi's and Totonno's (Coney Island). We determined that we would try to visit these as early as possible in our survey (I also like the idea of a return trip later on for a re-evaluation, but that's neither here nor there). So, since we knew where we wanted to go first, JosephB and I have done most of the organizing thus far. Now that our visit to the last of the Big 5 is within sight, it's a good time to look to the future. Joe and I have no interest in being the "bosses" of the Pizza Survey, picking out where we're going to go next and all that stuff. There are plenty of pizzerie around here worth visiting, and hopefully plenty of eGulleters who would like to share their favorite pizzeria with all of us. If there's one thing that the Survey has revealed thus far, it's that insider information can be crucial in terms of getting the most out of a pizza trip. So, what I think makes sense going forward is that any time someone has a pizzeria they think we should visit, they should "sponsor" it in this thread, which means several things: A) giving a brief description of the pizzeria, and letting everyone know what makes it so cool that they should check it out; B) detailing any important specialties (e.g., "spicy crawfish tail pizza") or quirks (e.g., "they close at 5:42 on Saturdays"); and C) taking the lead on organizing a trip out there. Forum Hosts such as myself, Pan, JosephB, etc. are always available to help with organization, of course. So, having said that... I do totally want to check out L&B Spumoni Gardens. Hopefully we have among our membership some regulars who would be willing to give us the inside scoop.

According to the NY Times, Citarella The Restaurant has been renamed Joseph's.

Let's start a list: Totonno Pizzeria Napolitano -- Coney Island May 14, 2004 1524 Neptune Ave. Between 15th and 16th Sts. 718-372-8606 JosephB and Donna slkinsey and bergerka docsconz Blondie Alacarte Pan jogoode kurl phaelon56 (+1?) Eric_Malson Anyone else think it's odd that their web site seems to completely ignore the original location? I had to google the site to fine this page. Readers may also be interested in this blurb written by some schmo who probably doesn't know what he's talking about anyway.

Hey, man... there's not much point in having all those fat dictionaries if I don't use 'em.

Sounds great. Can anyonie share some thoughts comparing Spicy & Tasty to GSIM?

Allora. From the Harper Collins Sansoni Unabridged Italian-English Dictionary (IMO, the best Italian-English dictionary): Note: nothing above about pressing anything out. Lo Zingarelli says: This is more interesting and informative. Here we see that esprimere word does, in fact, come from the Latin exprimere. We also I think we get the real deal in espresso (2) A, which pretty much tells us that caffè espresso means either "coffee made quickly," or "coffee made at the moment for someone" -- or, most likely, both.

Hey... if you Philly folk think Staten Island, a borough of New York City, is a "meet halfway in the middle" situation, that's okay by me! Joe, I'm always up for hookey if it means good pizza... especially if it means Coney Island afterwards and then dinner with Russian gangsters!

Sorry... but that's just not what it seems to be in Italian, at least in terms of how the word is used in modern times, and the usage to describe coffee making is a modern one. I checked a good Italian-English dictionary at Barnes & Noble over lunch, and nothing there led me to think that it has the modern connotation you describe. When I get home, I'll post the entry from Lo Zingarelli, which is like the OED for Italian. Until then, we have this definition from wordreference.com: I'm also not sure that their derivation follows quite the way we might think it does. Esprimere certainly seems like it is grew from the Latin exprimere meaning "out (ex-) to press (premere)." This seems reasonable to me. It also seems inevitable that spremere shares the same origin. Now, however, these two verbs do not have the same meaning despite their shared ancestor. So, while "espresso" might ultimately be traced back to a Latin word meaning "to press out" that doesn't indicate to me that caffè espresso in modern Italian means "pressed out coffee." Who knows, though? We'll see what the Zingarelli guys say.

Several things here... regardless of what Merriam-Webster says, "espresso" does not mean that the coffee is "expressed" as in "forced out (as the juice of a fruit) by pressure." I'll take a look in my Zingarelli when I get back home, but I don't recall hearing the word used in this sense. Used as a verb, espresso is the past participle of the verb esprimere, which means "to express, as in to voice an opinion" and also "to express, as in to convey a true impression of e.g., the flavor of the coffee beans, one's internal torment, whatever." AFAIK, one does not "esprima" the juice out of a lemon, the oil out of an olive, or the coffee out of coffee beans. The verb for that is spremere, which means "to squeeze e.g., the juice out of a lemon or the answer out of one's mind" or "to press e.g., the oil out of an olive." This is the verb that would tend to go with the meaning "pressed out coffee," in which case we would all be asking for spremuto (the past participle of spremere). This would make things very confusing, since "spremuta" (literally "squeezed") is generally taken to mean "fresh fruit juice." malachi has the right idea and the history seems correct. Used as a adjective, espresso either indicates specificity (as in, "expressly for you" or "my express desire") or speed (as in, "express train"). I have understood in the past that "caffè espresso" or "caffè all'espresso" means "coffee made quickly." I have a hard time thinking that the "espresso" used to describe coffee is used in the part participle sense. If it were, then I think most Italians would be calling the product "espresso" just like they do "spremuta." But they don't, they call it "caffè."

Some good info on Barbuto from New York Magazine can be found here and here. The Daily News doesn't seem to like it. Eric Asimov, on the other hand, does.

I asked. That's an interesting question. I don't know. Permanently bonding a thin layer of stainless to a thick layer of copper is not an easy thing to do, nor is forming cookware out of it. The Villedieu people have to be getting their raw materials from somewhere, because they're sure as hell not making the bimetal themselves. I don't know, of course, but I would imagine that most of the nonfactory artisinal copper cookware is tin lined, as that is something one can handle in a one-person operation.

Great. We look forward to hearing from you upon your return. And, hey... it's not too late for your sister to register with eGullet in time to come on and report about it too.

Welcome, bronihk! I would hardly call one member's experience definitive, and Landmarc has received some positive early mentions in the media. Have you been there? Let us know your thoughts.

No difference, in my opinion. The main thing you want to do is have a hot pan, add some cold oil and give it a shake while the protein is setting. There's no getting around the fact that stainless steel is one of the stickiest cooking surfaces around, but all cookware involves a compromise of some kind and it beats nonstick by a mile IMO.

pennbrew, isn't that statement a little hard to reconcile with the fact that Miller Lite contains things like propylene glycol alginate (beer foam stabiliser), chemically modified hop extracts (modified so they can use a clear bottle without the sun turning the beer skunky), amyloglucosidase (reduces the level of unfermentable polysaccharides ), papain enzyme (used to reduce chill haze), potassium metabisulfite (antibacterial agent), and Emka-malt?

I prefer Falk Culinair for several reasons: 1. I think their American distributors are great people. I have always enjoyed doing business with them, and would like to give them more of my business. Having relationships with people who believe in their product and stand behind it is important. 2. I like the fact that they have a brushed finish rather than a mirror finish. This means I can easily keep my copper looking great using nothing more than Bark Keeper's Friend and a Scotch Brite pad. 3. The price of stainless lined heavy copper has come down significantly over the past five years. An eleven inch Bourgeat sauteuse evasée that used to list for 580 dollars and sell for 410 at deep discount (if you were lucky) now sells for around 270. This is largely due (I think) to Falk's rationalization of the copper cookware market with their reasonable prices. Falk's eleven inch sauteuse evasée sells for around $235. From a pure performance standpoint, however, it's a wash. They're all exactly the same. This is bullshit, and these people clearly don't know what the hell they're talking about. First of all, Falk Culinair makes all the stainless/copper bimetal used by Bourgeat and Mauviel (they invented/patented the process). The thick gauge is 2.5 mm thick. Second, you are correct that no one would want 1/8 inch of stainless bonded to copper, as it would ruin any of the thermal properties of the copper. Third, I doubt very much that it is technically possible to bond 1/8 inch of steel to 1/8 inch of copper and form it into a piece of straight gauge cookware. Finally, 1/8 inch of copper bonded to 1/8 inch of stainless would give an overall thickness of 6.36 millimeters. No way. As detailed above, that site's thickness claim is completely bogus. Bourgeat's stainless lined copper is no thicker than Falk's or Mauviel's. As for the sauté pan, Bourgeat's eleven inch sauté pan has sides that are a little higher than the standard height of ~2.8 inches. It's up to you to decide if that's something you would like to have. Bourgeat certainly makes a good sauté pan.

Hmmm... that's pretty rough treatment for a pan. You probably changed the texture of the metal on the inside of the pan and made rougher, which would tend to lead to more sticking. As for the food reacting more, that's impossible unless you scraped away part of the stainless steel all the way down to the aluminum base (very unlikely). Stainless steel is nonreactive. It doesn't need to be, nor does it benefit from seasoning. Wish I could be more encouraging, but I think you screwed up the pan using that drill.

The main thing is that the sauteuse evasée has taller sides and a curved transition from the base up to the sides. This, in my opinion, gives it an advantage for cooking applications involving liquids, such as the curries and braises you mention (especially the lamb shanks), and also for things like finishing pasta together with the sauce. I just think it's easier to work with a pan that has slightly higher sides in these cases, and the rounded edges make it a better performer in terms of sauces because it's easier to get a spoon into every corner of the pan. The sauté pan, of course, has certain advantages when it comes to sautéing (i.e., direct heat transfer from the cooking surface to the food through a thin layer of fat) due to the larger surface area. Fundamentally, though, they're pretty close. It's a matter of which pan you're most comfortable with and which design fits the dishes you would like to prepare. There's no right and wrong here, especially for someone with experience. For the things you say you would like to do, I would personally go with the sauteuse evasée. But, if you're used to using a sauté pan and prefer that, then you should go with a sauté pan. Yea. A lot of kitchens use an all purpose deep frypan, usually in aluminum. In a frying pan, I find that one often has to "flip" the ingredients, or they will simply slide out the back side when you shake the pan. They both work. One is simply more difficult to do from a technical standpoint (the flipping with a frypan technique). You're much more likely to flip your mushrooms out of the pan using a frypan than you are a sauté pan. Sometimes, if the ingredients are wet and/or tend to stick together, or if the pan is carrying more food than it really should (a frequent error) the only thing you can use is the flip technique. I still think it's easier to do in a sauté pan, though.