

> I agree with many of your arguments but I am also not against things
> like, competitions, molecular approaches, home-made stuff,
> experiments, etc. I am only against doing it at a large scale (the
> answer to why one should not do it). Surely I recognize potential but
> my arguments are for doing these things in a moderate way.
Who's doing it at a large scale?!? Most of the bars that are doing this are
specialist, much like the restaurants that are doing it with the food side of
things, they're also specialist.
> I agree that there is a good influence from those competitions.
> However the show performed behind the bar must not become too much
> like the show in those competitions.
Which bars are selling competition drinks behind the bar?
> Molecular mixology can be given many different definitions. Indeed it
> can be appointed to the way of creating drinks which already existed
> since people started layering different ingredients. I intentionally
> did not explicitly say that it is molecular mixology itself which is
> not leading to anything good in bartending (because I think it is a
> stupid name which is badly defined).
It's not badly defined. Quoting Wayne Collins; "The basis of molecular
mixology is to understand how the molecules in the four different food groups
- water, protein, fats and sugar - interact with each other depending on what
you do with them."
What's hard to understand about that?
> I am talking about the current molecular cuisine trend and the
> things which people currently call molecular mixology (the stuff with
> thickening agents and other sorts of chemicals). At the present time
> nobody would say he is doing molecular mixology if he makes a layered
> shot. That's not how the name is used in practice. I am talking about
> the trend. The trend is objectionable for its excessiveness.
Of course some people would say that layering a shot is molecular mixology,
becuase it IS.
> No. I see the trends as a good thing. Highly-skilled bartenders
> should make those drinks. However what is wrong are the people
> wearing inappropriate (e.g. to tight) clothes only because they are
> the latest trend. Of course it is not the clothes which are wrong but
> instead those people who make to decision to wear the wrong ones. I
> am against trying to fit every bar in too tight trends.
Too tight clothes? I'm lost here.
> The point is that the most valuable drinks do not require work done
> behind the bar but instead are made by the industry who have much
> better machinery and knowledge in order to create quality products.
> More people should recognize that. The creative work behind the bar
> is and will always be limited to a humble final touch.
I already explained this in my last post. Why you're talking about the most
valuable drinks with regard to cocktails I'll never know?!?
> I personally make a distinction between fresh products and products
> with a high stability. Adding fresh notes is necessarily done behind
> the bar but for stable products there is less motivation.
Why should there be less motivation if you can make a better product in house?
People like Papa Jules (Julien Gualdoni) of Trailer Happiness should be
applauded for the work they put in 'back of house'.
> The reason not to do things by your own is because others can do it
> just as well giving you opportunities to spend time on other things
> which you are good in (a bar is not just about the drinks).
I disagree. For example, there are many good syrups out there, but I've made
my own orgeat and grenadine before and I can quite comfortably say that the
bottlings I made were a lot better, on their own and in mixed drinks. There's
no reason why some cocktail bars couldn't make a batch once a week for use in
their bars.
> Your arguments could also be used to argue that bars should be making their >
> own beer, wine, glassware, etc. Because... why wouldn't they?
You seem to be talking about bars as if they're all categorised in the same
group.
Some bars do have their own homebrew, do select grapes for their own wine
bottling, do age their own whisky, do make their own house bitters, and so on
so forth. On the whole though, it wouldn't make financial sense for bars to
make everything they sell.
> I don't think it is safe but instead we can't make good predictions.
> That's why I say I believe. Also distillers don't need to make them
> it could be done by small reseller companies.
Okay, IMO, I don't think that you'll see bacon whisky/whiskey at any time in
the near future. Bacon vodka on the other hand, probably, as it's about the
only flavour that's not been done yet. :)
--
Bar Consultancy, Training and Events
http://www.evo-lution.org
"When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading."
Henry Youngman
Current thread (25 messages):
|
Home · Drink Recipes · Bookstore · Barstore · Handbook · Web Index · Feedback
Copyright © The Webtender.
About | Disclaimer | Privacy policy