If you observe food writing in this town for long enough, you begin to notice certain patterns that make for an almost predictable cycle. For instance, assume that someone opens a new concept restaurant, say a high-end French-German fusion restaurant specializing in a frogs leg schnitzel. Here's what you can expect from the beginning of the 24 hour food-news cycle:
Day 1: EaterLA does a "Plywood" posting, reporting the concept and idea for this coming restaurant, gets location wrong and misspells name of proprietor.
Day 5: First Yelp review goes up of "soft opening," which turns out to be owner handing out some samples on the street.
Day 15: Restaurant opens.
Day 16: Yelp reviews start to rave about the place.
Day 22: J. Gold does a fly-by review for the LA Weekly praising the "delivery of a peasant food with an intensity usually reserved for Weimar-era German cinema."
Days 23-25: Three hundred LA food bloggers post about the restaurant.
Day 26: Reservations are now only available at 4:00 and 11:30.
Day 45: Backlash begins, the first Yelp posts go up calling the place overrated and overhyped. Others agree that they are "so over" this place.
Day 55: Grub Street reports on planned expansion with new location in Hollywood and roving food truck.
Day 172: Irene Virbala reviews in LAT and gives one and one-half stars.
Day 225: Restaurant closes.
Day 335: Squid Ink reports on concept and idea for a coming restaurant by same proprietor for casual schnitzel-on-a-stick stand in same location as former restaurant.
Repeat ad nauseum....
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Whiskey Wednesday: Most Craft Whiskeys Suck!
I'm sorry, but someone had to say it. This particular emperor has been wearing new clothes for too long.
The Phenomenon
Like every whiskey writer/blogger in the universe, I've written a fair amount about American microdistilleries; I even put together one of the first complete lists of American whiskey microdistilleries on the web (which I continue to keep up to date). It's a fascinating and exciting phenomenon. Suddenly, after years of having only a dozen whiskey distilleries, the nation is awash in microdistilleries cropping up in every unlikely nook and cranny. The proprietors of these micros are, almost to a person, lovely folks. They are the type of creative artisans who bring a real love to their craft and have invested countless hours of sweat-equity. They pursue innovative new recipes and techniques; they epitomize the "little guy." Who could not like them? The only problem is that many of their products suck.
I'm sorry, but I am tired of hearing raves about this great new, innovative distillery in Idaho with their first whiskey on sale for $85 plus shipping, only to find out that it's been aged for 18 days and tastes like turpentine. I have had this experience multiple times. Despite their lovable heritage, craft whiskeys are mostly too young, too expensive and too crappy.
Don't believe me? Last May, the American Distilling Institute (ADI), an association for craft distillers, had a craft whiskey tasting competition. A panel of experts blind tasted 65 craft whiskeys. The winner of the best in show award (Best Craft American Whiskey) was High West's Bourye. But the whiskey in Bourye was not made by a craft distillery. It was made by a macrodistillery and purchased by High West, which blended it for Bourye. It turns out that the best craft whiskey in American isn't a craft whiskey at all. (You can read more about this controversy on Chuck Cowdery's blog).
The Press
It's time to admit that many of us in the blogging/journalistic community, out of a desire to encourage and nurture this young industry, have given these craft whiskeys a pass. If you read reviews of craft whiskeys you will continually see words like "interesting," "innovative" and "experimental." Reviewers seem afraid to come down too hard on these lovely folks, so we get a lot of euphemisms. Meanwhile, we continually see romantic puff pieces about one man's brave quest to make quinoa whiskey in a remote Nebraska town. The big exception to this trend has been the aforementioned Chuck Cowdery who has not held back about craft distilleries, particularly those that aren't really distilling.
These Ain't Microbrews
There are constant comparisons between the microdistillery movement and the microbrewery movement, but while there are certain similarities, the two are really apples and oranges. Back in the '80s, before the first big wave of microbrews, the vast majority of Americans were drinking crap beer. It was Bud, Miller, Coors, Schlitz - looks like piss, tastes like water. There was barely any alternative. The microbrewery revolution wasn't just about smaller producers, it was about bringing flavor back to beer. Suddenly, you could get beer that tasted like something. The microbreweries continue to lead the way on flavor and the big guys, for the most part, continue to put out crap.
The story with whiskey is nearly the opposite. The big macrodistilleries put out some amazing quality whiskeys. I'm talking Parker's Heritage, the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection, Four Roses Single Barrel and Wild Turkey Rare Breed. They also put out innovative new whiskeys like the Buffalo Trace Experimental Collection and the Woodford Reserve Master's Collection. Sure there is bottom shelf stuff out there, but the macrodistilleries give the whiskey lover plenty to choose from. In contrast, the micros are giving us less flavor and less age, and in the end, that means less care is going into the product. Unlike microbrews, they aren't filling an important gap because there is no gap to fill.
I Said "Most"
Now bear in mind that I say "most" craft whiskeys suck, and by most I do mean the vast majority. However, Anchor's Old Potrero and Charbay's hopped whiskeys are excellent. I consider those two distilleries to be the only two I have tried that compete with the majors on quality. Everyone else is batting for the minor leagues at best.
I do love High West's Rendezvous Rye, but as with their Bourye, it is not craft distilled. It's a macrodistillery whiskey that High West has done a great job sourcing and blending. Sourcing and blending are real skills and High West deserves credit for blending and bottling a great whiskey, but it doesn't count as something made by a microdistillery.
And I have nothing against craft distilling generally. I've written multiple posts on the fabulous craft distilled brandies from Germain-Robin and also enjoyed St. George Absinthe. I'm sure there are other good craft distilled spirits out there, but the whiskey sucks.
Now, I'm perfectly aware that mine isn't the only opinion on the block, so I'd love to hear from anyone who thinks that these whiskeys really do measure up. Let me know which ones you love.
What Do You Think?
To the whiskey writing community I have to ask, are we doing any favors by coddling distillers who are putting out substandard products at inflated prices? Are we being honest with our readers about the line between "interesting" and "worth your hard earned cash"? Is our emotional investment in the innovation and enthusiasm of craft whiskeys clouding our collective judgment? Isn't it time someone said it: Most Craft Whiskeys Suck! Maybe someday it won't be the case, but today it is.
The Phenomenon
Like every whiskey writer/blogger in the universe, I've written a fair amount about American microdistilleries; I even put together one of the first complete lists of American whiskey microdistilleries on the web (which I continue to keep up to date). It's a fascinating and exciting phenomenon. Suddenly, after years of having only a dozen whiskey distilleries, the nation is awash in microdistilleries cropping up in every unlikely nook and cranny. The proprietors of these micros are, almost to a person, lovely folks. They are the type of creative artisans who bring a real love to their craft and have invested countless hours of sweat-equity. They pursue innovative new recipes and techniques; they epitomize the "little guy." Who could not like them? The only problem is that many of their products suck.
I'm sorry, but I am tired of hearing raves about this great new, innovative distillery in Idaho with their first whiskey on sale for $85 plus shipping, only to find out that it's been aged for 18 days and tastes like turpentine. I have had this experience multiple times. Despite their lovable heritage, craft whiskeys are mostly too young, too expensive and too crappy.
Don't believe me? Last May, the American Distilling Institute (ADI), an association for craft distillers, had a craft whiskey tasting competition. A panel of experts blind tasted 65 craft whiskeys. The winner of the best in show award (Best Craft American Whiskey) was High West's Bourye. But the whiskey in Bourye was not made by a craft distillery. It was made by a macrodistillery and purchased by High West, which blended it for Bourye. It turns out that the best craft whiskey in American isn't a craft whiskey at all. (You can read more about this controversy on Chuck Cowdery's blog).
The Press
It's time to admit that many of us in the blogging/journalistic community, out of a desire to encourage and nurture this young industry, have given these craft whiskeys a pass. If you read reviews of craft whiskeys you will continually see words like "interesting," "innovative" and "experimental." Reviewers seem afraid to come down too hard on these lovely folks, so we get a lot of euphemisms. Meanwhile, we continually see romantic puff pieces about one man's brave quest to make quinoa whiskey in a remote Nebraska town. The big exception to this trend has been the aforementioned Chuck Cowdery who has not held back about craft distilleries, particularly those that aren't really distilling.
These Ain't Microbrews
There are constant comparisons between the microdistillery movement and the microbrewery movement, but while there are certain similarities, the two are really apples and oranges. Back in the '80s, before the first big wave of microbrews, the vast majority of Americans were drinking crap beer. It was Bud, Miller, Coors, Schlitz - looks like piss, tastes like water. There was barely any alternative. The microbrewery revolution wasn't just about smaller producers, it was about bringing flavor back to beer. Suddenly, you could get beer that tasted like something. The microbreweries continue to lead the way on flavor and the big guys, for the most part, continue to put out crap.
The story with whiskey is nearly the opposite. The big macrodistilleries put out some amazing quality whiskeys. I'm talking Parker's Heritage, the Buffalo Trace Antique Collection, Four Roses Single Barrel and Wild Turkey Rare Breed. They also put out innovative new whiskeys like the Buffalo Trace Experimental Collection and the Woodford Reserve Master's Collection. Sure there is bottom shelf stuff out there, but the macrodistilleries give the whiskey lover plenty to choose from. In contrast, the micros are giving us less flavor and less age, and in the end, that means less care is going into the product. Unlike microbrews, they aren't filling an important gap because there is no gap to fill.
I Said "Most"
Now bear in mind that I say "most" craft whiskeys suck, and by most I do mean the vast majority. However, Anchor's Old Potrero and Charbay's hopped whiskeys are excellent. I consider those two distilleries to be the only two I have tried that compete with the majors on quality. Everyone else is batting for the minor leagues at best.
I do love High West's Rendezvous Rye, but as with their Bourye, it is not craft distilled. It's a macrodistillery whiskey that High West has done a great job sourcing and blending. Sourcing and blending are real skills and High West deserves credit for blending and bottling a great whiskey, but it doesn't count as something made by a microdistillery.
And I have nothing against craft distilling generally. I've written multiple posts on the fabulous craft distilled brandies from Germain-Robin and also enjoyed St. George Absinthe. I'm sure there are other good craft distilled spirits out there, but the whiskey sucks.
Now, I'm perfectly aware that mine isn't the only opinion on the block, so I'd love to hear from anyone who thinks that these whiskeys really do measure up. Let me know which ones you love.
What Do You Think?
To the whiskey writing community I have to ask, are we doing any favors by coddling distillers who are putting out substandard products at inflated prices? Are we being honest with our readers about the line between "interesting" and "worth your hard earned cash"? Is our emotional investment in the innovation and enthusiasm of craft whiskeys clouding our collective judgment? Isn't it time someone said it: Most Craft Whiskeys Suck! Maybe someday it won't be the case, but today it is.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Foodie Query: How Big a Tip Should You Leave When Your Kid Pees on the Floor?
I'm thinking pretty big, yeah?
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Counter Intelligence: Meat vs. Toppings
Burger and hot dog lovers generally divide into two camps: the meat lovers and the topping lovers. Meat lovers are purists who judge their burger or dog on the standard of the meat. Is the burger juicy, rare and made from high quality chuck? Is the dog well spiced and does it snap when you bite into it? You'll find these folks at Cassell's, Skooby's and Carney's. The topping lovers, while they appreciate good meat, are most interested in innovative and high quality toppings. They want garden fresh veggies, a wide choice of cheeses, house made sauces and all kinds of add-ons. They hang out at 25 Degrees and Slaw Dog. I tend to be a meat lover, but I'm not averse to occasionally jumping into the toppings fray. The Counter is definitely a place for the toppings lovers.
Since its founding a mere seven years ago in Santa Monica, The Counter has enjoyed massive, bacteria-scale growth such that it now boasts 25 locations across 9 states and three countries. I had never been to any of The Counter's locations when I recently stopped by the Studio City branch on Ventura Boulevard.
The Counter's concept is the customized burger. You choose the burger meat (beef, veggie, chicken or turkey), cheese, toppings, sauce and bun. There is a vast array of toppings to choose from though none of them are what I would describe as out of the ordinary such as, say, the artisanal cheeses offered by 25 Degrees.
I went with a beef burger with bacon, blue cheese, roasted peppers, pickles, grilled onions and Caesar dressing. It was good and the whole thing came together well. The burger itself is good but not the kind of meat lover's delight that the meat camp would flock too. As I said, this is a toppings place, and they do the toppings well.
The Counter's fried sides were also very good. The thin french fries and sweet potato fries were both good, though I preferred them plain to the aioli that was served with them. Deep fried pickle slices were also good, though again, I could have done without the sauce, a sweet, gloppy concoction.
I would definitely go back to The Counter for their solid, have-it-your-way style burgers. Who knows, maybe next time I'm in Dundrum, Ireland, I'll stop by.
The Counter
Various Locations
Since its founding a mere seven years ago in Santa Monica, The Counter has enjoyed massive, bacteria-scale growth such that it now boasts 25 locations across 9 states and three countries. I had never been to any of The Counter's locations when I recently stopped by the Studio City branch on Ventura Boulevard.
The Counter's concept is the customized burger. You choose the burger meat (beef, veggie, chicken or turkey), cheese, toppings, sauce and bun. There is a vast array of toppings to choose from though none of them are what I would describe as out of the ordinary such as, say, the artisanal cheeses offered by 25 Degrees.
I went with a beef burger with bacon, blue cheese, roasted peppers, pickles, grilled onions and Caesar dressing. It was good and the whole thing came together well. The burger itself is good but not the kind of meat lover's delight that the meat camp would flock too. As I said, this is a toppings place, and they do the toppings well.
The Counter's fried sides were also very good. The thin french fries and sweet potato fries were both good, though I preferred them plain to the aioli that was served with them. Deep fried pickle slices were also good, though again, I could have done without the sauce, a sweet, gloppy concoction.
I would definitely go back to The Counter for their solid, have-it-your-way style burgers. Who knows, maybe next time I'm in Dundrum, Ireland, I'll stop by.
The Counter
Various Locations
Friday, July 23, 2010
Foodie Film Review: Salt
It was with great excitement that I learned Hollywood had signed on to make a silver screen version of Mark Kulansky's moving history of the world's most common seasoning: Salt, and with Angelina Jolie in the starring role no less.
Kurlansky is one of the nation's foremost food historians, and Salt was his masterpiece. The work traces the history of salt from ancient times to the present and touches on not only its culinary importance but also its central role in economics, commerce, politics and culture.
I was interested to see how Hollywood would interpret a masterwork of such breadth, and I have to say, while the film is creative, it may leave those of us who are familiar with the original work a bit disappointed as it is not exactly faithful to the book. Since salt was the lead character of Kurlansky's work, it is only fitting that mega-starlet Jolie should play the role in the film. (She is certainly saltier than Tom Cruise!). The metaphor gets stretched at times, but the point director Phillip Noyce and writers Kurt Wimmer and Brian Helgeland seem to be making is that salt was not only crucial to commerce and culture, as so thoroughly documented by Kurlansky, but also played an important role in international intrigue.
I have to admit that beyond that, this interpretation of Kurlansky is a bit confounding. While I would expect Hollywood to take some license with any original work, I was surprised at the complete lack of concentration on the culinary aspects of salt. Certainly, the widely loved mineral has a political influence, but it's mostly a food, and I'm not sure where all those fighting scenes came from. I guess as a fan of the book, I was a bit disappointed, but one positive is that even people who haven't read Kurlansky's work will be able to enjoy the film.
This film just hollers for a sequel, which I assume will be based on Kurlansky's other masterwork, Cod: A Biography of the Fish That Changed the World. I just hope the writers can make that film a bit more faithful to the original.
Kurlansky is one of the nation's foremost food historians, and Salt was his masterpiece. The work traces the history of salt from ancient times to the present and touches on not only its culinary importance but also its central role in economics, commerce, politics and culture.
I was interested to see how Hollywood would interpret a masterwork of such breadth, and I have to say, while the film is creative, it may leave those of us who are familiar with the original work a bit disappointed as it is not exactly faithful to the book. Since salt was the lead character of Kurlansky's work, it is only fitting that mega-starlet Jolie should play the role in the film. (She is certainly saltier than Tom Cruise!). The metaphor gets stretched at times, but the point director Phillip Noyce and writers Kurt Wimmer and Brian Helgeland seem to be making is that salt was not only crucial to commerce and culture, as so thoroughly documented by Kurlansky, but also played an important role in international intrigue.
I have to admit that beyond that, this interpretation of Kurlansky is a bit confounding. While I would expect Hollywood to take some license with any original work, I was surprised at the complete lack of concentration on the culinary aspects of salt. Certainly, the widely loved mineral has a political influence, but it's mostly a food, and I'm not sure where all those fighting scenes came from. I guess as a fan of the book, I was a bit disappointed, but one positive is that even people who haven't read Kurlansky's work will be able to enjoy the film.
This film just hollers for a sequel, which I assume will be based on Kurlansky's other masterwork, Cod: A Biography of the Fish That Changed the World. I just hope the writers can make that film a bit more faithful to the original.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
DIY: Chocolate Peanut Butter Pie
If you want something easy to make with incredible results, this is a can't-miss dessert. It tastes like a giant Reese's Peanut Butter Cup. At our place, it's a staple for my daughter's birthday. I adapted the recipe from the Silver Palate Cookbook by Julee Rosso and Sheila Lukins (where it's known as Candace's Chocolate Peanut Butter Pie), meaning it pretty much comes from them but I make the crust chewier, the filling creamier and the topping chocolatier.
Ingredients
Crust
1 1/2 cups graham cracker crumbs
1/3 cup sugar
1 stick unsalted butter, melted
Filling
12 oz cream cheese
1 1/2 cups peanut butter
1 1/2 cups sugar
2 cups heavy cream
Topping
4 oz good dark chocolate
1/2-1 cup of heavy cream
Make It:
Crust
Combine the graham cracker crumbs, melted butter and sugar. Spread the mixture out on the bottom of a 9 inch pie plate. Bake for 8 to 10 minutes at 350. Set aside to cool.
Filling
Combine the cream cheese, peanut butter, sugar and one cup of heavy cream in a large bowl until well blended (it works better if the cream cheese has been allowed to come to room temperature). Whip one cup of heavy cream until stiff and fold it into the cream cheese-peanut butter mixture. Pour this mixture into the cool pie crust.
Topping
Melt the chocolate in a double boiler. Slowly add the heavy cream to form a ganache, adding only a little at a time and stirring to make sure the cream is completely mixed and forms a ganache. Do this until the mixture has the consistency of chocolate syrup, you don't want it to get watery. Take the mixture out of the boiler and let it cool but not harden. When it is room temperature but still liquid, pour the chocolate over the pie.
Refrigerate the pie overnight and enjoy!
Ingredients
Crust
1 1/2 cups graham cracker crumbs
1/3 cup sugar
1 stick unsalted butter, melted
Filling
12 oz cream cheese
1 1/2 cups peanut butter
1 1/2 cups sugar
2 cups heavy cream
Topping
4 oz good dark chocolate
1/2-1 cup of heavy cream
Make It:
Crust
Combine the graham cracker crumbs, melted butter and sugar. Spread the mixture out on the bottom of a 9 inch pie plate. Bake for 8 to 10 minutes at 350. Set aside to cool.
Filling
Combine the cream cheese, peanut butter, sugar and one cup of heavy cream in a large bowl until well blended (it works better if the cream cheese has been allowed to come to room temperature). Whip one cup of heavy cream until stiff and fold it into the cream cheese-peanut butter mixture. Pour this mixture into the cool pie crust.
Topping
Melt the chocolate in a double boiler. Slowly add the heavy cream to form a ganache, adding only a little at a time and stirring to make sure the cream is completely mixed and forms a ganache. Do this until the mixture has the consistency of chocolate syrup, you don't want it to get watery. Take the mixture out of the boiler and let it cool but not harden. When it is room temperature but still liquid, pour the chocolate over the pie.
Refrigerate the pie overnight and enjoy!
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Whiskey Wednesday: Two New Whiskey Sites
There are two new whiskey blogs out there that fill gaps in our whiskey blogosphere, hard as it is to believe that there are any gaps in the whiskey blogosphere. Both of them are thorough and full of interesting information, and they both have very nice graphics and design (unlike some blogs).
CanadianWhisky.org is a new blog focusing on that most neglected of whiskies. It's run by Canadian Malt Maniac Davin de Kergommeaux. He's already got a number of reviews and news items up on the site, including a piece about the newly released WhistlePig Rye. I'm glad to see a site fully dedicated to Canadian Whisky, now if only they would ship more of the good stuff south of the border.
AmericanCraftSpirits.com is the first non-industry blog that I know of to focus exclusively on the new American microdistillery movement. I've written a number of pieces on micros (and will have a new, purposefully inflammatory one out next week) so I'm interested in the movement and am glad to see a blog specializing in it. Run by Matthew Colglazier of Bloomington, Indiana, the site includes reviews, videos, distillery profiles and interviews.
In a time when it seems that practically everyone who has access to a computer and a bottle of Glenfiddich has a whiskey blog, it's great to see two whiskey lovers put so much effort into blogs that serve a real purpose for the whiskey community. These are both going on my favorites list. Check 'em out!
CanadianWhisky.org is a new blog focusing on that most neglected of whiskies. It's run by Canadian Malt Maniac Davin de Kergommeaux. He's already got a number of reviews and news items up on the site, including a piece about the newly released WhistlePig Rye. I'm glad to see a site fully dedicated to Canadian Whisky, now if only they would ship more of the good stuff south of the border.
AmericanCraftSpirits.com is the first non-industry blog that I know of to focus exclusively on the new American microdistillery movement. I've written a number of pieces on micros (and will have a new, purposefully inflammatory one out next week) so I'm interested in the movement and am glad to see a blog specializing in it. Run by Matthew Colglazier of Bloomington, Indiana, the site includes reviews, videos, distillery profiles and interviews.
In a time when it seems that practically everyone who has access to a computer and a bottle of Glenfiddich has a whiskey blog, it's great to see two whiskey lovers put so much effort into blogs that serve a real purpose for the whiskey community. These are both going on my favorites list. Check 'em out!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)