DaRiv18

I am a huge Pepin fan and have seen both his classic and rustic techniques on The Complete Pepin video. It is in that sequence where he claims that he would judge a chef by how she makes an omelette, above all other dishes. I have come close to his style of omelette making (Julia's looks like a good one, but completely different). But I can't always close the omelette at the end, and forget about stuffing it -- a complete mess. Mine is generally smooth, but always has several pleats. I will say that Williams-Sonoma generally has deals on 8 inch non-stick omelette pans right about now: they are bundled with a 10 inch pan and the cost savings are tremendous. I like to use a small rubber spatula instead of a fork so that I don't scratch up the pan. Still, I'd like to try a professionally done omelette. For awhile, I made the Aviation cocktail at home and thought I was doing ok. Then Justin Guthrie made it for me and it was clear that my recipe was just way off. There's no substitution for the live professional experience.

I will definitely check out your suggestions. Thanks for the tips, I really want to find a good one! One ulterior motive: I've understood omelettes to be the classic "throwdown" subject matter. Eggs and butter are relatively cheap and easily sourced. So it really just comes down to the chef's technical skill and aptitude for sucessful riffs. I was taught that even sushi chefs are ultimately judged by their tamago skills. I want to better my own home game on this. But it seems burgers are the new exhibitions upon which chefs stake their reputations, and I have not seen a French omelette on a menu before. I am truly perplexed, as it seems that many people would pay at least $5 or $6 for a classic 3 egg omelette?

David Wondrich has an Apple Toddy recipe in Imbibe! that I want to check out.

You are correct; I saw them using an ice cream scoop to get it out of a plastic tub for my Greenwich Village. But they certainly go thru more of that chopped liver than, say, Heidi's Deli.

If this thread continues, I'd like to change the focus away from professional QCing to home mixology QCing. Obviously, I don't have a spill sheet at home, so I am very interested in "salvaging" a cocktail before I serve it to a guest. It was poor judgment on my part to frame this issue as that of an industry standard, when I am really just interested in an issue Ueno-san brings up. Which is: he claims that at some point you "just know" that you have a viable cocktail. If you watch the video, once Ueno-san tastes the un-iced cocktail and confirms it's the right mix, he's confident that all his subsequent steps will be the right ones. He has confidence in his own craft. He "just knows", he says. While I now have been convinced that Ueno-san probably could not successfully apply this standard behind the stick Saturday nights at Bourbon, Dino, or The Gibson, it is interesting that he has this QC standard at all. What is equally interesting is that this same standard is being dismissed out-of-hand here, as if it couldn't work in a relaxed home environment. My friend tells me the same thing. Whenever we go out for dinner, and he's QCing the bottle of wine ordered, he always makes a big production of checking the dregs, exploring the nose, and savoring the finish. All while the server hovers over, waiting for confirmation of the wine's identity and integrity. Presently I'll remind my friend that the captive audience is thirsty, and he proceeds to inform us exactly what a GREAT wine we'll soon taste. Clearly, I am scarred (not unlike my liver) from these continuing events.

Last year, I made a Bijou cocktail in the pousse cafe style. Equal parts sweet vermouth, Plymouth gin, and Green Chartreuse. I researched their specific gravities, I bought special tall, thin pousse cafe glasses that maximize a liquid's surface tension, and I layered using the back of my bar spoon. I just now made the Bijou again, but didn't layer it as carefully. Rather, I just dumped it in from a jigger. I did pour in order of decreasing specific gravities, and you can see that the sweet vermouth didn't mix completely. Finally, I did what I suspect the vast vast majority of bartenders do: pour with no regard to the recipe's relative specific gravities. I poured in the gin first, then the green chartreuse, and then the sweet vermouth. Here's that hot mess: Now, let's imagine a regular mixing glass: pouring these liquids into a wide vessel that lessen a liquid's surface tension? From a greater drop than a 2 oz pousse cafe glass? To imply that the forces needed to break the surface tension of these liquids are not present (even giving you the benefit of the doubt that the liquids were poured in the correct order relative to their specific gravities) is just an amazing assertion.

Now I sure wish I could edit the byline, namely, "Legit QC technique, or abusive pretext?" I do agree that straw tasting is a legit QC technique. Also, no one has questioned that it can be used as an abusive pretext. So my byline was a poor description (I'd change "legit" to "most effective"). At this pint point though, I still wonder if it is the most effective QC technique. It is certainly the safest. I'm tired of defending Ueno-san's position without backup though, so I'd rather think up a better thread (or respond to one).

The map I link above says its starts on L and heads north. It actually dips down below Mass Ave to include that triangle park bounded by L, Mass, and 11th.

Agree. Interestingly (for lack of a better transitional adverb), Shaw may be as close to 10th and NY as Mt. Vernon.

There's one on 6th Street, near H. The name escapes me, but it's between Chinatown Express and some adult movie rental shop on the corner. Tangysweet used to be Juan Valdez Coffee.

For another perspective the DC Office of Planning has a very strict view of what Downtown is, in terms of defining it as a historic district (it's basically Chinatown and most of Penn Quarter) For how far south Dupont Circle reaches, the map is here

Would you ever taste a cocktail before icing though? To be clear, I am all for quality control, it just seems that there's a fair amount of waste (both of booze and of a bartender's time of completely starting over) if you taste afterwards. But you bring up a fair point about volume. I know you guys get 4 deep at your bar. Maybe Ueno's technique is more feasible in a small 20 seat establishment. I'm sure he is more worried about his spill sheet than you guys are, as he probably only rings 100 drinks most nights. Manhattans and Phil Ward drinks . . . we'll have to get you switched over to Gin Rickeys and Adam Bernbach drinks.

I just revisited the video (which actually is found here). Forgot that it is over 65 minutes long! So: at 28:00, Mr. Ueno does his spoon tasting. From 44:00 to 47:00, he fields a question about whether to taste before or after icing. Mr. Ueno is a proponent of the "hard shake" school, which is very influential in the past couple years. I have seen several DC bartenders change their shaking styles actually. So this guy is legit. To see Mr. Ueno's hard shake, go to the 30:00 mark.

I haven't thought about viscosity, I am just familiar with specific gravities for pousse cafes. Perhaps viscosity plays a role. In my experience, at home, jiggering different liqueurs and spirits into a mixing glass (which involves a fair amount of splashing), I have never seen any sort of separation. I imagine sticking a straw into such a mixture to taste would further agitate. I guess this is an empirical question and it would be interesting to research. As for the differences for swizzling, shaking, and stirring, my understanding is that the differences between those techniques are largely cosmetic. Stir non-citrus or non-dairy drinks to ensure clarity, shake for all others. Of course you could shake everything, the myth of easily bruised gin has been dispelled. Even drinks with egg whites (which I imagine is the liquid most likely to separate in an unmixed cocktail) conventionally first use a "dry shake" without ice, so you could taste-test before icing down. If you are asking whether I am singling out a certain establishment or bartender for this practice, I don't intend to. This is a GENERALLY ACCEPTED practice throughout the industry, and from what I can tell, not just in DC. My intent to to question the practice. I've linked above to a Japanese bartender who supports a different technique, and I just think it's interesting. I don't think I'm out of line questioning a process in a highly idiosyncratic industry that oftentimes prides itself on pomp and circumstance. Now, for bartenders who taste my drink beforehand and tell me how great it's going to be, yes I guess ending that practice is part of my agenda. No one in the DC Bartender's Guild has done that to me though. And yes, the waste of extra plastic straws and of perfectly good booze does bother me on a philosophical level.

I should try tasting something before shaking it to see. I hear what you're saying here, but in my experience pousse cafes are a PITA to make. Layering is a circumspect process and you can't just literally dump the spirits in to make one. I am not sure to what extent the liquid mix when a bartender measures into a mixing glass, but I am sure they do mix to a large extent. Maybe not enough to evaluate a cocktail's viability thru a straw-test (or spoon test, as Ueno does it).

The bartender measures, ices, then strains the cocktail. Drop off at the service bar. But a final step before the server picks up: the bartender grabs a black plastic straw, dips the straw into the glass, covers the unsubmerged straw end with her index finger to create suction, lifts the straw to her lips, releases her index finger, and "tastes" the cocktail. The bartender puts on her best thoughtful face, stares off into the distance, and finally nods. The straw is discarded, just like all the others. The server picks up the glass and delivers. Job done. I've always wondered about this quality control measure. While the process itself isn't invasive (although it does nothing good for our landfills), the timing may be wrong -- why taste-test the cocktail at a stage when there's no real way to properly adjust it? Japanese bartender Hidetugu Ueno talks about tasting his cocktails BEFORE they have been stirred or shaken, so he can make last second adjustments. Otherwise, to stir or shake a second time would cause too much water dilution. The bartender must throw away this cocktail as it cannot be salvaged. So, this quality control measure, as practiced by most American bartenders, may need to be re-thought, or at least defended better than what I've heard so far. But I've noticed bartenders also straw-taste outside of the quality control context. Now we are in Sillyville. It happens when a staff tries a new menu recipe (make one drink, and pass it around). Or it happens when I order a specific recipe off-menu, an item they haven't experienced before. In both cases, using a straw makes it impossible to "taste" and fully evaluate a cocktail, as a straw-taster does not experience the aromatics as she drinks. I understand that smell is some large percentage of taste, so there it is. Characterize these scenarios as innocently ineffectual. But the MAIN reason I dislike straw-tasting is that some bartenders use it as a pre-text for quality control, but then disrespect the guest's autonomy. To illustrate: I order a particular drink, the bartender constructs it, pours it, and it's ready to serve. Here comes the straw! The bartender tastes, ponders, nods his head and says some variation of these fatal words: "Now THAT'S a good drink!" No matter what cocktail you've ordered, the bartender instead has served you the Jedi Mind Trick. There is a difference in wanting a guest to be happy at your bar, and telling the guest what he should like. The Jedi Mind Trick often betrays a lesser bartender, and in any event, puts the guest on the defensive. A breach of duty. So, to summarize, I can see it being part of a legit cocktail program for quality control, but I wonder if it could be more effectively implemented. But this technique is definitely not effective for educating a staff, and its practice can facilitate abusive relations (although I readily concede that most abuse overwhelmingly comes from the intoxicated guest side -- but still).

Well, I tried to "riff" on a classic cocktail topic so that we wouldn't go down the same path that so many other internet boards have traveled, but I guess I should leave the improv to professional bartenders. I truly don't think jiggering is an issue here in DC any more than it is in NYC. Maybe I'll start a thread on other generally accepted bartending practices that I question, just to mix it up.

I'm a bit hesitant to answer because I'm not sure I "enjoy" cooking any more than I enjoy talking or writing. Sure, I cook for reasons more than pure sustenance, but enjoyment is a minor role. If anything, I'm super critical of my work and I hate to hear any feedback (NPI) on my dishes. Cooking is the basest form of humanity. On this planet, you can't understand everyone's language, but you can understand everyone's cooking. I cook to understand, and to prepare myself for, others. Eating without knowing how to cook is like speaking a language without being literate. PS it's less about control for me than it is about being more independent. But that may be a minor distinction from what you are saying.

The hours are actually 11:30 am to 2:00 pm. I got the tacos, and they are good. There is alot of variety here, including roasted onions. Maybe too much variety - it takes awhile for the line to move. But I'll be back.

A tequila stinger with two barspoons of white creme de cacao.

I believe Chantal did not work this past Sunday, and I haven't tried a cocktail with another bartender there, so can't speak to your experience. I have my own schedule for certain days of the week to see my favorite bartenders. I'd like to think I could now pick out a Chantal-made cocktail out of a lineup, she's one of the real auteurs in the city. Sure, she can make you a textbook Manhattan if you're in the mood for comfort food, but we can all do that at home. Bartender's Choice is the value here. Inevitably you'll end up at PX, Todd Thrasher's nationally renowned speakeasy. They shake their Manhattans there, last time I checked. Just so you are prepared. I accept his departure, and his commitment to his core values are clearly expressed by the delivered drinks. I agree jiggers are the way to go, especially when working with more volatile ingredients such as lime juice or distinctive liqueurs. But using jiggers is not enough, if consistency is your commitment. I believe jiggering bartenders should also keep their recipes in view, so they don't err in the quantity of the ingredient needed. If one says that relying on muscle memory to time a pour leads to inconsistency, then it's hard to argue that a bartender should rely on a mental database of recipes. Especially with today's emphasis on subtle riffs, or obscure-yet-somehow-canonical cocktails (such as this Journalist misunderstanding, a drink that appears in MOTAC's "every bartender should know" pocket guide to cocktails).

My night there starts with an apertif: Campari-soaked sugar cubes, vermouth (blanco or dry?), and prosecco of some sort. Lemon twist. I look at the flute and imagine a maraschino cherry talking underwater. I like the drink, but later regard it as a highly effective palate cleanser, setting up the show that would follow. The Root Cocktail (blanco tequila, white port, green chartreuse) paired with the abalone ceviche follows. My expectations for the cocktail are for something relatively sweet and sturdy. I push my menus forward and glance toward the cuvenee. The bar crowd transports me to their office water-coolers. My mind drifts to an overdue library book. Adam stands in front of me, holding the mixing glass with his right fingertips, and dexterously stirs disinterestedly, as if twiddling his thumbs. I recall a yawn, but perhaps we just nodded to each other, acknowledging the present. Strain and serve with orange swath. Surprise occupies a rung only below Taste in my hierarchy of culinary values. Surprise, especially when exploring an avenue you thought familiar, Surprise reminds you afterwards that you have lived yet again, and teases you with future tastes. So delicate is this drink, like a lean martini with exotic bitters. Adam mentions something about the tequila's herbaceousness. But it is the Green Chartreuse (it's there, despite no tint), or one of its hundred and thirty ingredients, or several, or all of them in staggered appearances, that propels the finish. Rhizomes reaching out, fighting to expand -- that is the action that I taste. I don't fully understand what is going on. I don't understand the role of the white port. Surprise still has me off-balance. I'll have to explore this one again, to better define where it is taking me, but Beauty grows impatient and I focus to enjoy her only. I close with the Wagyu carpaccio and another sparkling cocktail, unnamed. This part I don't share with you. But know that this pairing leaves me very grateful, my tongue still glowing with red onions and balsamic. Special night.

I thought it was very much like Breadline's style. Except with less menu options and more outdoor seating. The menu is the worst part of the restaurant, it is very confusing. The menu is divided into food categories: Salad, Soup, Terrine, Cold Sandwiches, Grilled Sandwiches, Pancake, Pizza, and something else. For each food category, there seems to be a further sub-category of the day of the week; i.e. some items are only offered once a week. For soups, there is a Monday and Wednesday soup, and a Tuesday and Thursday soup. The bottom line: even though there are probably 30 things on the menu, only perhaps 15 of them are available on any given day. That's a lot to filter out, and maybe G Street Food should consider just having a daily menu. To make matters worse, my first choice, a cheddar, bacon, tomato sandwich was not available since they were out of bacon. 2 other items had bacon in them or were no longer available, so that added to the confusion. I contemplated walking out at that point, and am not surprised to hear ruslev's account. Two days ago, I learned about Food Phobias. My newfound sensitivity for this issue dictates kindness and understanding. The me of two days ago would have facetiously offered to sponsor your colleague for a Terrine of Day excursion -- but now I just want to encourage them to take attainable baby steps: a bite of a baguette, or maybe a toasted Montreal bagel. Really! Despite the confusing menu, and the lunchtime cibophobiacs in the area, I am hopeful that the World Bank and IMF workforce will have some employees who are more open to trying these "street foods" of the world. G Street Foods isn't revelational, but it is high quality and deserving of a brisk business. I predict they shall overcome.

I'm eating my Traditional Chicago Style hot dog as we speak. My bread isn't wrapped around, it's just two pieces cut from the same loaf, kinda like a bun. I don't know if that is traditional or not, but it's nice. The fries are good as well. It was a third full by the time I got there at 2. I thought about sitting down at the table next to Michel Richard, but he seemed to be enjoying his pizza too much and I know I would have started a conversation.

Well, if that was the case then I feel very badly. She had a tremendous group of close friends, so hopefully they will intervene if it is severe. FWIW, she was a very self-confident person, very productive, and passionate enough about her diet to convince her boyfriend to become a vegan. Just curious, do the people you reference ever return dishes at restaurants for self-validation of their phobias/disorders? I would intervene if I saw a pattern of such behavior from a close friend.