Member Profile
Robert Hess Age 51
about
- since August 2007
- website
- location Seattle, WA
- country USA
- job Cocktail Evangelist
- industry Mixology
- interests Cocktails, Cooking, Computers, Science Fiction
favorites
- cocktail Old Fashioned, Manhattan, Martini, Sidecar, Trident, Vieux Carre, etc.
- spirit Gin
- wine Pinot Noir
Latest
Comments
Chris, you ask a very common question, and one which we unfortunately have to work hard to correct. The "fire ritual" is one that isn't proper/appropriate to use on real absinthe. It was something that was created around 1995 for the fake absinthes (faux-sinth we call them) which were coming on the market and didn't louche properly. They needed some sort of ritual to replace the loucheing ritual so they did the flame thing instead. I often tell folks that thinking it is proper to flame absinthe is like saying it is proper to put a worm in your tequila. There are no tequilas which come with a worm. There are "some" mescals which do this, but to the best of my knowledge it is only the cheaper ones which are doing it as a marketing ploy. :->
Yes, we can blame a lot of Margarita sadness on those chain restaurants. I've had people write to tell me my Margarita recipe was wrong because it didn't use sour mix, and since (insert name of famous chain restaurant here) always used sour mix in their Margaritas THAT was the right way to make it. Agave syrup is a nice "touch" to add to a Margarita, simply because it ties back so nicely to the mother plant. Personally I love my 3-2-1 recipe, and think it is sweet enough. To add Agave to this, I'd probably have to switch to a 3-1-1-1 ratio, but that too would change the flavor.
Darren, You raise some good issues here. One of which is "nothing is written in stone". Gary Regan regularly reminds me of this when I start pontificating a tad too much on the "right' way to make a cocktail. As it just so happens, he is also the one who "enlightened" me to the 3:2:1 ratio for the Margarita once when I was trying to determine the "right" recipe. It's perfectly fine for folks to like "weak" drinks, as well as drinks with a different "balance" to them. Each of us has a slightly different flavor "pattern" which we gravitate towards. That said, I think that there is something to appreciate about having names "mean" something. The "traditional/classic" Margarita consists of tequila, lime juice, and Cointreau. Ratios of those ingredients can vary a tad, but there is always more tequila, then either of the other ingredients independently. And the key objective is to find the right "balance" of those ingredients so that it is not to sour, and not too sweet. When I order a Margarita at a quality bar, this is almost exactly what I will get every time. If I order a Margarita at a two-bit mexican joint, I'll get something that tastes nothing like it, but more like a "lemonade, with a slight kick". Which one is a Margarita? Can they both be? The cheap "commercial sour mix" version of the Margarita I liken to ordering a Caesar Salad, and getting a wedge of Iceburg lettuce with garlic mayonnaise on it. Sure, it might be a fine "salad", but can you call it a Caesar Salad? What if your first experiences with Caesar Salad were with this iceburg variation? What if that's the one you prefer? What if that's the way everybody made it in the town you grew up in (perhaps because they were the iceburg captal of the world)? And it's timely for you to raise this issue as well because we just started the "Saturated on Sazeracs" set of episodes. When I first visited New Orlenas, I made it a point to try a Sazerac at every bar I went to just so I could see how they made "real" Sazeracs down in it's birthplace. Almost to a one, the drink that came back was WAY too sweet, and far, far, sweeter than I know this cocktail would have been made. The reason is quite simple, kids coming off of Bourbon street, wander into a bar and try a Sazerac, and are slapped across the face with alcohol unrestrained by sugar or fruit juices. Bartenders soon learn that to prevent drinks from coming back, they need to "sweeten it up" to make it more approachable to this inexperienced crowd. Thus destroying the drink for those of us who liked it fine just the way it was. Who's right? The alcohol adverse who wants a drink with the alcohol safely hidden, or the alcohol experienced who appreciates the characteristics that alcohol brings to the drink? In my mind, a "cocktail" is a drink which "celebrates" the spirit, which means that it properly positions the spirit within the rest of the ingredients so that you can taste it, and appreciate it. ...at least that is the way it is written on my stones. -Robert
Sweetness in a drink I feel can do several different things. Just the added sweetness alone can make for a more pleasureable drink, since we tend to gravitate towards sweet things more than we do sour, but I also think in some cases it can help to "finish" the flavor. For example, some folks might take their absinthe drip without sugar, I tried for a while to do mine that way, but then when comparing it to an absinthe drip with sugar, I felt that the sugar was doing more than simply sweetening the drink, it was actually filling in a gap. It is as though the flavor were incomplete without the sugar (to me anyway). Syrup can also add a texture to the drink as well, especially a richer syrup which has a certain viscosity to it, or even a gum syrup to which as been added gum arabic specifically to add more "body" to the syrup.
The notion of a "cocktail" being required to include bitters has sort of fallen by the wayside. I don't think that there is anybody today who is actively promoting that standard is re-established. Heck, if that was the case, then the only common drinks which would be considered cocktails would be the Old Fashioned, Manhattan, and Champagne Cocktail. Few other drinks (outside of dedicated "craft" bars) include bitters at all. I'm happy if folks consider cocktails to be a drink made with with attention to their culinary properties.
Greg, it's a math issue... If you treat "2 oz" as "3 parts", that means a single part is 2/3 of an ounce. and 2 parts is 1 1/3 ounce. Which gives the recipe as presented, even if 1/3 ounce measures are fairly rare in cocktails.
Yes, that's the same way I find it as well. It's not that Grand Marnier isn't as good of a product, nor is it that Cointreau is better in cocktails than Grand Marnier. It's just that for this particular cocktail, to get the right flavor profile, Cointreau provides a better character than Grand Marnier.
I tend to favor stirred cocktails, even when the ingredients would "allow" them to be shaken, and the small amount of lemon juice in this makes it a drink that actually does benefit visually from being stirred. And as Vince says, a drink can always be stirred, but not always shaken (the Ramos Gin Fizz and such being the exception to that) :->
I seem to recall a while back running across an original of the article which reported the Scofflaw cocktail and included a recipe, but I can't find it now. I think my recipe originally came from Paul Harrington's website/book "Cocktail: The drinks bible for the 21st century". I have a copy of Harry McElhone's "ABC of Mixing Cocktails", who owned "Harry's New York Bar" in Paris at the time (and added "Harry's" to the name when he did), so I would suspect this would have something pretty close to the original? There, it lists the recipe as: Scoff-law Cocktail One dash of Orange Bitters, 1/2 Canadian Club, 1/2 French Vermouth, 1/6 Lemon Juice, 1/6 Grenadine. And then follows this with: Chicago Tribune, January 17th 1924 : Hardly has Boston added to the Gaiety of the Nations by adding to Webster's Dictionary the opprobrious term of "scoff-law" to indicate the chap who indicts the bootlegger, when Paris comes back with a "wet answer" - Jock, the genial Bartender of Harry's New York Bar, yesterday invented the Scoff-law Cocktail, and it has already become exceedingly popular among American prohibition dodgers. So my recipe is out of whack mostly because it isn't using the same amount of Grenadine as it is Lemon Juice. Ted's recipe however is leaving out the orange bitters (but basically correct otherwise), and he also is claiming this would have been made with rye instead of Canadian Whiskey... I think he is wrong there, we are already many years into Prohibition and I would think American Rye whiskey would have been almost impossible to access over in France, but Canadian Whiskey would have been easy. We were seeing many recipe volumes from those days listing Canadian Whiskey for drinks which would have otherwise used American, even the Manhattan, but the Scoff-law was invented during those times, so I feel they would have reached for the Canadian.
blair, by "re-architecting", I meant that they weren't using a previous recipe, but instead worked out something of there own.
Eddie, yes, switching around on what bitters you use can sometimes add an interesting touch to drinks. As for Maraschino... I've tried to get into the habit of refering to real Maraschino (liqueur or cherries) as maraskeeno, and those artificial neon red things as marasheeno just to keep them separated :->
I think that Shawn did a great job in this video. Lots of good information and details as he was producing the drink. Yeah, I would have used a mixing glass as well, but that's just a nit. If you compare this video to the vast majority of cocktail videos on youtube and such, it beats them hands down! Federico, you are right. In "Casino Royale" Mr. Bond specifically instructed the bartender to shake this drink (although to the best of my knowledge the phrase "Shaken, not stirred" is never used in the books, only the movies?). However I take the approach that Mr. Bond knows nothing about proper mixology, and so just because he wants his drinks shaken, doesn't mean that is the right way to do it. If a customer asks for their drink shaken, of course that is how they should get it, just as if a customer asks for their fillet mignon "well done", they should have it that was as well. But at the same time, the bartender should be aware that this isn't the best way to make it. -Robert
Turroflair... Not sure what your issues are with this, but as demonstrated I think this would not only be a very fine Old Fashioned, but aside from a mangled carcass of a cherry in the bottom of the glass, it is essentially like you would find in many cocktail books. The carefully prepared orange twist would add the orange flavors to the drink, without the ugly pulp that muddling an orange slice would present, and the slow addition of whiskey and ice would provide "just enough" water to the drink to take the bite off of the alcohol. Granted, I prefer to use simple syrup only in my Old Fashioneds, but I'm fine with a sugar cube as well.
Dang. The recipe I am "making" here comes straight from the book "New Classic Cocktails". You'll note that I clearly say/measure "1 oz" of bourbon. For the triple sec, while I accidently "say" 1/4 ounce, I actually pour out "1/2 oz" which, thanks to the transparency of the OXO jigger, you can see (but only if you are familiar with the jigger, since the measures aren't pointing so you can see them). So the "2 oz" listed in the printed recipe is a typo, and the "1/4 oz" said/printed, is just a flub. But the drink itself as made, is as it was intended :->
Vygantas, As a self-described "Cocktail Evangelist" I feel the need to help folks see the culinary value of all types of cocktails, and so I try to provide as varied of a mix as possible of drinks that help to illustrate this. I think it would be safe to say that a good percentage, if not a majority, of the drinks I make are gin based (which is clearly not a dark alcohol). A spirit which I feel is the most exciting one for making really great cocktails with. It has a wonderful ability to snuggle in with a wide variety of flavors and turn into something special. I also have done many cocktails with juices, we even did a short run of "Tiki" episodes, which featured a variety of different juices in a great array of fun drinks. If something like the Seelbach doesn't quite suite your palate, I suspect there should be something in the large array of drinks I've featured here that will. -Robert
Nick, Glad you've been enjoying the shows, and glad you'll be getting a chance to come over to the States to check out our offerings. You'll find a wide variety of bars depending on what cities you plan to visit. The big cocktail cities are New York, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, with Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington DC coming on strong, and New Orleans providing a very exciting glimpse of the wide evolutionary path of the cocktail.
And now that we have "real" sloe gin available again, it might just be the right time to dust the Charlie Chaplin off and let it strut its stuff.
Brian, DeLaurenties down in the Pike Place Market is carrying Angostura Orange Bitters, although the last time I was down there, about a week ago, they were out. They do however carry a very (very) broad selection of bitters from Fee's (including Orange Bitters), and "The Bitter Truth" (A german company making excellent bitters, including a very good Orange Bitters).
Stefanos, are you wanting to buy bar tools, glassware, or liquor? At a certain level it doesn't really matter, since even with the internet opening up a broad world for everybody, it can still be hard to find these products equally available to all. Here in the US, many of the fine barware we see being used in Europe and Japan is outside of our reach (although www.CocktailKingdom.com is working hard to bring some of these products to our shores). Our glassware is often limited to the ordinary offerings of "Libbey" and other run-of-the-mill providers, and the patchwork of liquor laws can make it difficult, if not impossible, to access some of the wonderful, but obscure, ingredients needed for some of the cocktails of old. I might recommend that you check out my discussion forum at ChanticleerSociety.org where we have a world-wide membership of cocktail enthusiasts who might be able to provide some specific details for getting better access to product in your area. -Robert
Michael, Amaro Nonino is a wonderful product, I love to use it in many cocktails that might otherwise use sweet vermouth. It makes a wonderful Manhattan.
Yes Oliver, the Chaplin as shown here is a Zig Zag original, one that Ben Dougherty (one of the owners) came up with a few years back. And as for the substitution issue... I totally agree, this is a drink that needs Ramazotti. The substitution issue discussed above was about Amaro Nonino, and I commented that it is great for cocktails which normally call for sweet vermouth... which the Chaplin is not one of :->
Glad you enjoyed the interview and have gotten the chance to learn a little more about Makers Mark! I find that understanding a little bit about the people behind the product helps you gain some valuable insights into what makes the product, and the company tick. It was a lot of fun to meet with Bill and share these moments with you. -Robert
Great little discussion going on about the Crusta... let's first cover the most imporant point being raised as in what exactly "makes" this a crusta, to get to that, here is one of the earliest descriptions of the crusta,from Jerry Thomas's 1862 Bartenders Guide: "Crusta is made the same as a fancy cocktail, with a little lemon juice and a small lump of ice added. First, mix the ingredients in a small tumbler, then take a fancy red wine glass [Robert: illustration shows what is known as a "Hock" wine glass], rub a sliced lemon around the rim of the same, and dip it in pulverized white sugar, so that the sugar will adhere to the edge of the glass. Pare half a lemon the same as you would an apple (all in one piece) so that the paring will fit in the wine-glass, as shown in the cut, and strain the crusta from the tumbler into it. Then smile." ...thus the crusta is a cocktail, with the addition of a little lemon juice, and a sugared rim, and a broad piece of lemon peel wrapped inside as a garnish. So the next obvious question is... what the heck happened to the sugared rim? (see next post :->)
...as for the sugared rim... It appears that a part of this episode got left on the cutting room floor, and that bit was where I talked precisely about this exact aspect of the drink, and how makes this drink similar to what we today know as the "Sidecar" with it's typical sugared rim. Personally, I don't like the sugared rim on a sidecar because it quickly leaves a sticky film on the outside of the glass, which results in sticky fingers. And so I was illustrating here how the recipe for the Crusta is is the same with or without the sugared rim, and I'll leave it up to each of you to decide how you might want to do this. For the lemon peel trick to work properly, I think it really needs a glass of the correct shape. I've been looking for a hock-style wine glass, and plan on showing the "Brandy Crusta" the full Jerry Thomas way, once I do. -Robert
I agree that the sugared rim AND the rather robustly appointed lemon peel garnish is part of the fun and glamor of the Crusta, but at the same time I think it is worthwhile to not let that get in the way of getting aquainted with the drink. I promise to do a full-bore brandy crusta in a future episode.
Glad that everybody has enjoyed this episode so much! Since we filmed this episode, I did go back and work on the "Tequila" Old Fashioned. Lemon Bitters along with the Agave syrup works really well for that. Haven't tired it yet with Grapefruit bitters... guess I know one of the drinks I'll be mixing up tonight! :->
I suppose in the end, it really doesn't matter which approach you use, ice-whiskey-stir, ice-whiskey-stir, ice-whiskey stir, or just ice-whiskey-stir.... as long as the end result is a drink of "this" temperature with "this" amount of whiskey and "this' amount of added water. Thermal dynamics as they are, it's more about the "time" taken to make the drink, than the stir once, or stir multiple times approach (for the most part).
Yes, Chris makes a terrific Old Fashioned. He started doing the "muddled peel" because of one of my rants about the whole muddled pulp business, and that got me to realize that I could simply use the orange peel in the drink, and started doing an orange twist, or squeezing the oils over the drink instead. So I inspired Chris, and then Chris in turn inspired me.
Will, I (and others here) are on a quest to try to re-establish the Old Fashioned Whiskey Cocktai in all of it's formal glory. The more people that we can get to understand this drink, and it's optimum preparation, the better! As for kumquats, I've frankly never used them in cocktails, but they would make a lovely, and delectable garnish in the right drink. I'd go for something light and refreshing, and perhaps served tall, with ice, and soda (or sparkling wine). Since their flavor is somewhat subtle, if I were to use them as a muddled ingredient, I'd try using spirits which are themselves more subtle. I seem to recall their being a variation of the Caipirinha which some folks make in which they muddle kumquats in.
Trevor, the Old Fashioned is just one of my touchstones. I don't use it as a pass/fail, but more as just a one way to measure things up. I almost always get a badly made Old Fashioned, so I never dismiss a bartender or an establishment out of hand if they serve me a glass of swamp water. I simply try to understand from "how" they improperly made it what their actual approach and understanding of cocktails are. Recently I was served an Old Fashioned at a very high end steak joint, where they proudly listed it as one of their house specialties. Even carefully pointing out that they were just using "branch water" (which is sometimes seen as the "water" component in some of the older recipes), but "sparkling branch water"... It could work, if used only in a very small amount, so I was curious how they would proceed. The bartender, made a perfect Old Fashioned (using Woodford Reserve)... then proceeded to add around three ounces of "sparkling branch water" while he proudly pointed out that this is what he was doing. Needless to say it was a bad drink. And cost $15 to boot. What I learned here, was that this was a place that was "trying" to serve a grand classic, using methodology that they had done "some" research to discover the right way to do it, but really knew nothing about the drink at all, and so ended up with a mess... this hopefully means that they will gradually be heading in the right direction, and perhaps with some properly presented advise to the right person, their program will head that way quicker. It is also important to note that the OF isn't my only touchstone, There are a set of three such drinks I order which I've learned work pretty well to help me get a good feeling for a bar and the bartender.