or Connect
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › Just because it's in Gourmet Magazine...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Just because it's in Gourmet Magazine...

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 
...doesn't mean it's going to taste good.

However, I should have known as the title was "New Coq Au Vin" and said it took 25 minutes, But figured eh, it will be quick meal, and the ingredients don't look too bad. Should have went with my intuition and at least dutch ovened it on low for an hour or so. Here is the recipe...but don't make it.

Looks good, I guess...but tasted "eh"


O well, the leftovers will be sacrificed to the chicken stock pile.
post #2 of 15
I haven't taken a look at the recipe yet, but I'm curious to know what exactly was wrong with it. Was it just bland-tasting, thus, the "eh"? Clearly 25 minutes for Coq au Vin is . . . um . . . different, to say the least :crazy:
Emily

______________________

"If you are not killing plants, you are not really stretching yourself as a gardener." -- J. C. Raulston, American Horticulturist
Reply
Emily

______________________

"If you are not killing plants, you are not really stretching yourself as a gardener." -- J. C. Raulston, American Horticulturist
Reply
post #3 of 15
That recipe sucks! It pushes one of my pet peeve buttons, the total and complete bastardization of classic dishes. Reminds me of a "time saving" variation on the classic chicken with 40 cloves of garlic which used garlic powder and a rotisserie chicken :lol:
post #4 of 15
Next time Luke, trust the Schwartz.
post #5 of 15
Time-saving recipes, hmm. In my experience only a few are as good as the original, such as when a newer cooking method is available that does fit the bill. An example that comes to mind is pressure-cooking beans, but then how new is the pressure cooker method?

If you don't know what the original tasted like, or if you aren't very discerning or if your sense of taste just doesn't work, hey there are a lot of possibilities :rolleyes:

I'm no expert on food in general, but some I know very well, such as many Indian foods. I wish I could enjoy the "corruptions" as much as some others do.

Powdered garlic--I wonder if that even has a good use. I would say NEVER when garlic is a main flavor of the dish, and probably also never even when it isn't.
post #6 of 15
I've been a subscriber to Gourmet since 1983 and I have to say that the recipes were once turn key. As the years have passed and the advertising content increased the recipes became more of the "in need of tune-up" variety. The last few years tho, they have taken on an "in need of major repairs" thought process.

For me it was always a "creative booster". I don't think I have used a recipe out of the magazine without some form of revision in 17 years. There was a Grappa cake in 1991 that was outstanding made verbatim.

Look at it like this.....seems most of the folks that subscribe to it nowadays would most likely be found in a Pizza Hut Pasta commercial. They're more about the show and not the go. What is it called? Obsessive Branding Disorder :rolleyes:

By the way... I still like getting the magazine but most often it goes from the mailbox to the bookcase. :look:
post #7 of 15
Hey RpMc--are you sure it was just "eh"?? Someone gave it a 5 star rating:crazy:
post #8 of 15
There really are people who have no sense of taste. I'm serious. They are very easy to cook for, I have heard.

I am a fan of celery, and I often include the leaves. Some of my soups just wouldn't be the same without celery leaves.
post #9 of 15
Aren't they the ones that have a "Taste-bud orgasm" before they even get the fork out of their mouth? :rolleyes:
post #10 of 15
Yeah like in the commercials. After all, every second counts in a TV commercial. "So what" if they didn't even taste it.
post #11 of 15
The thread has made me want to make a coq au vin. I'm not sure where I could find a grandpa rooster, but I'd like to try it with a chicken. Anyone have a GOOD recipe?

"You are what you eat, so don't be fast, cheap, easy, or fake."

Reply

"You are what you eat, so don't be fast, cheap, easy, or fake."

Reply
post #12 of 15
I have about a dozen - I'll see what looks best and send it to you or post it. You can use an older, larger chicken - a "roaster" instead of a young fryer- and get good results. A number of the better poultry farms are selling their birds at about 4 1/2 pounds here, and they're mighty tasty. Roasters tend to be a little bigger and heavier.

You can also look for a stewing hen ... frankly, were I looking to remain as close to the original intent as possible, I'd go with a roasting hen or one of the heavyweight fryers mainly because I've no experience with an old rooster and its toughness.
post #13 of 15
This reminds me of our post yesterday re/. Alton Brown. This will be my quote "IF YOU ARE GOING TO CALL IT A CLASSIC DISH, THEN MAKE IT IN THE CLASSIC WAY'' < And like we both agree dont take what any of them say as gospel.
CHEFED
Reply
CHEFED
Reply
post #14 of 15
Both Gourmet and Bon Appetit have been on long, downward slides for a some time, culminating in the last remake a year or so back. I haven't seen their subscription retention numbers, but based on discussions at various cooking sites, I'd say the numbers are rather low.

It appears as though Conde Nast looked at the success of Rachael Ray and Sandra Lee and said, "we can capture that market." That's certainly what both books seem to be aiming for.

Frankly, I haven't seen anything even inspiring in Gourmet in a number of years, and don't even take it anymore. I certainly wouldn't cook anything from it that had a clock next to the recipe title.

Meanwhile, both Food & Wine's and Saveur's readership numbers have been steadily increasing. Anyone wanna offer odds where that readership is coming from?
They have taken the oath of the brother in blood, in leavened bread and salt. Rudyard Kipling
Reply
They have taken the oath of the brother in blood, in leavened bread and salt. Rudyard Kipling
Reply
post #15 of 15
Thread Starter 
yeah, my expectations were CERTAINLY not coq au vin....regardless of name. just something that LOOKed good and recipe lent itself towards a good weeknight meal. gotta learn to trust my judgement a little more.

problems? lack of flavor....skin went soggy.....little things that just added up.....for every problem i could have "fixed" in the recipe based on my little cooking experience...but then it would be a REAL coq au vin recipe haha.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Food & Cooking
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › Just because it's in Gourmet Magazine...