|By Chrysippvs on Thursday, August 24, 2000 - 11:09 am: Edit|
Midas when did Radomil tell you how they made Hills?...I guess they are going to have to go back to using Anti-freeze now that the secret is out...
|By Midas on Thursday, August 24, 2000 - 10:23 am: Edit|
Seeing many people don't have the resources of the funds to buy pre-prohibition absinthe,I still say that the best absinthe is the one that you have, except if it's Hills, then you're better off drinking your nail polish remover.
|By Luger on Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 09:42 pm: Edit|
Good to hear from you again!
I *hate* swedish vodka! It does not taste a-ny-thing!
Swedish beer on the other hand,,,mmmm Spendrups, Pripps, Åbro, Falcon. They are the Pernod of the beerworld, and the rest is Hills,, :-)
Just my opinion though. Strangely enough, when Iīm in London, I enjoy their warm beer and the great atmosphere at the pubs, and when Iīm in Kiel I enjoy their stuf too. At Kiel there is a place where one can watch the brewing going on through a glasswindow in the basement while eating sausages and drinking the local beer. ( Donīt try to order any other beer ).
Best regards: Luger
|By Bob Chong on Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 04:58 pm: Edit|
Pabst and Pilsner Urquell both suck
And that's your opinion.
Urquell, if not stale, is a quality brew--if nothing else, quality ingredients are used. It has barley, Saaz hops, yeast, and water. Pabst, OTOH, has a little barley, corn, other cheap grains, hop extracts instead of actual hops, etc.
So maybe this is a decent comparison after all, regardless of how Artemis feels about the taste.
IOW, as Ted pointed out:
What I was trying to illustrate is that the effort that goes into making these products is limited.
Both are macrobrews, but one costs a lot more to produce because it has much better ingredients.
Sorry about being so off topic. I had asked for an analogy, not someone's tirade about Pilsners.
|By tabreaux on Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 03:50 pm: Edit|
I might add that I am not sure why you feel that Deva is getting a 'bad rap'. It is about as good as the Spanish absinthes get, and is regarded as such. I see it as only a nominal step below La Fee.
|By tabreaux on Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 03:38 pm: Edit|
If you read my post, you'll see that I equated most Czech 'absinth' to Night Train, which is indeed an accurate analogy. In fact, where taste is concerned, Czech absinthe is actually further from the originals than Night Train is to good wine. Why? Because like I said, if you didn't know it was 'absinth', you wouldn't know.
As far as my equating the Spanish with Gallo, I don't think we see the wines equally. I don't see Gallo as 'bad' wine, but it is more like an economic, mediocre brand. This is how I view the Spanish absinthes (which are more reminiscent of modern pastis than old absinthe). Gallo looks like wine, it tastes like wine, and it serves a purpose. It doesn't have the character and refinement of Lafitte Rothschilde, but it suffices. Maybe I should have said regular Mondavi table wine instead. What I was trying to illustrate is that the effort that goes into making these products is limited. This isn't at all saying that they are 'bad'. In fact, there are a couple of Spanish brands which I think are ok, despite their oddities. But then again, I don't have any problems in drinking a glass of Gallo either.
|By Artemis on Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 03:23 pm: Edit|
To carry on further, Bob Chong also wrote:
"as Pabst beer is to Pilsner Urquell."
Pabst and Pilsner Urquell both suck, they just suck differently and for different reasons. Now, that's my opinion. Some people like Pabst. Some labor under the delusion that Urquell is good because it comes from the Czech Republic. Some simply like it, ignoring or not knowing how to recognize major flaws that inevitably develop due to poor handling on the way to the U.S. Even at its best, it's not my idea of good beer. That's why it's absurd to refer to Deva, etc. as "lesser" or whatever. Lesser is in the eye of the beholder. I see Deva getting an increasingly bad rap, and I'm sorry, but that's bullshit.
Luger, my friend, you must be chagrined to learn you will not be making absinthe for another seven years!!! Better go back to that cheap Swedish bootleg vodka, I guess!!
|By Artemis on Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 03:12 pm: Edit|
Bob Chong wrote:
"Ted, you slay me! I can't stop laughing at the "Night Train" reference."
Unfortunately, it wasn't as accurate as it was funny.
"Thanks for the explanation. I suppose even Night Train or Gallo might clue someone in to what wine is, altho' bad wine at that."
Exactly why it wasn't accurate. Night Train and Gallo are bad wine. Ted's remark may lead someone to conclude that all Spanish absinthe is bad absinthe. It's not even all the same, much less is it all "bad". I know it's become fashionable to bash any absinthe but impossible to obtain absinthe. Now, Ted has his own frame of reference, which is broader than most other peoples', and he may not prefer Deva, and he may not even like Deva. But to imply that Deva is anywhere near to absinthe as Night Train or Gallo are to wine is simply not accurate.
|By Luger on Tuesday, August 22, 2000 - 11:57 am: Edit|
Ted & Don!
I agree with what you said, but I obviously expressed myself badly! I really ( this time ) meant: It would be great to see even these useless recipes, for the same reason that is great to know that Van Goghs special edition included Turpentine! This (obviously) doesnīt mean that I have to try it out, but since Absinthe is alot historyrelated, these things is interesting to know!
As an example, I am planning to visit the Pontarliermuseum, and look at their exhibition ( Any recipes on the wall? :-), and although noone is likely to try to build such a large still that they is supposed to have there, it will still be nice to have a look at it. Just for the fun of it!
That the recipes says "a handful of herbs, while in the moonlight, during christmas night collected at a graveyard", doesnīt mean it is uninteresting!
Best regards and good luck with your project: Luger
|By Bob Chong on Tuesday, August 22, 2000 - 11:49 am: Edit|
Ted, you slay me! I can't stop laughing at the "Night Train" reference.
Thanks for the explanation. I suppose even Night Train or Gallo might clue someone in to what wine is, altho' bad wine at that.
|By tabreaux on Tuesday, August 22, 2000 - 11:38 am: Edit|
Since the consumer basically relies on taste to differentiate absinthes, I'll leave the academic differences alone and comment on that. So far, I have had the opportunity to drink two different brands of old absinthe, with two more coming in the near future. These two brands, while different, have distinct similarities which are lacking in modern products.
We can't make comparisons to Czech products (save for Sebor maybe), as if these didn't say "absinth" on the bottle, who'd guess they were supposed to be that? I wouldn't.
In comparison to modern staple products (e.g. Spanish), the old absinthes are far less sweet, have a more complex and interesting overall flavor, have good balance of those flavors, and have flavors which seem to be absent from modern products. In other words, when you taste it, it doesn't have an obtrusive singular pastis flavor, but rather has a very nice, silky composite of flavors. It is difficult to make something like this, and of course, the 100 years of aging has a nice affect on any 'sharp edges'.
Being that the Spanish and Czech products all cost well under $5 per liter to make, it is obvious that they are comparatively very 'economically' made, and this undoubtedly explains some of the differences.
If I equated the differences to wine, I'd make the following broad analogies:
Czech - Night Train
Spanish - Gallo
Antique - Chateau Margeaux
|By Bob Chong on Tuesday, August 22, 2000 - 09:01 am: Edit|
There has been lots of talk about how currently available absinthe is nothing like "real" absinthe, yada yada.
Could someone (e.g., Ted) provide an *analogy* as to what the difference is? Like, "genuine absinthe is to Deva as Ruth's Chris beef is to McDonalds beef..." or, "...as Pabst beer is to Pilsner Urquell."
Or if I am to understand past threads on this forum, the analogies may be more like "as brick is to jet engine," or "as gorilla is to tablecloth"? Meaning, there is no comparison?
|By tabreaux on Tuesday, August 22, 2000 - 08:23 am: Edit|
Luger, the museum recipes aren't very usable. The way they processed herbs back then was different, some of the herb names may refer to something other than what seeems obvious, and the methods of measure (where legible) are very difficult to translate into modern units. I've attempted pretty much all of them, with equally unpalatable, medicinal results. I think those recipes were written down so someone could remember how much of what. Not much else (if even that) can be determined from these.
|By Don Walsh on Tuesday, August 22, 2000 - 07:04 am: Edit|
There are two representative recipes hyperlinked to the FAQ page. Many more have been discussed in detail on this Forum and can be found in the archives. And even more can be found on the Net, and off. I take it you are suggesting to Kallisti that she post all the available recipes? I can't respond on her behalf as to whether that's likely to happen.
I CAN tell you that none of these recipes, without a load of additional knowledge and skill, will get you anywhere near a decent absinthe much less a great one. Not any more than you can build a car on the basis of an encyclopedia entry on one.
The first thing Ted did when he showed me how to make great absinthe was to have me spend a week or two of sweat and tears trying to make the Arnold recipe produce anything other than undrinkable veggy muck.
Forget it! Can't get here from there. The published recipes, and the ones on the museum walls, are defined by what they DON'T say, rather than by what they do say. Once one learns to make absinthe properly, one can look back and read the published recipes and recognize where the 'holes' are.
That isn't to say this is a matter of the illuminated vs the unilluminated. It is just that this is a process of hard work, study, labor, and more study. Ted is trying to illustrate how many variables and pitfalls are involved. I can attest to that!! It isn't simple and it isn't easy. Ted spent seven YEARS accumulating the knowledge base he has shared with me, and therefore he isn't inclined to give away what he knows, and he has obliged me to respect his wishes in this regard. Anyone with the proper skills and training, or maybe even without, can accumulate the same knowledge base IF they care to make the investment of time and effort and study. Roughly the time it takes to earn a doctorate (from the time you graduate from high school) or the time you'd need to get out of medical school, internship and residency -- after pre-med.
Ted's point is that even if he DID hand it out on a plate, distilled down into a few paragraphs, the 'recipe' would still probably fail to produce the same results unless he is willing to go hold someone's hand and guide them through the entire FULLY DETAILED process and vet every herb, every setup. Well's he's not willing to do either. Why should he be?
|By Luger on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 09:25 pm: Edit|
If then, all the recipes hanging on a museumwall are so useless, then why not publish them? Here on Fee verte? They might be historically interesting.
Even if I get to taste "the real thing", and recognizes the Wormwood, Anise e.t.c. it is always nice with a bit historical "anecdotes".
Donīt you think so?
Best regards: Luger
|By Don Walsh on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 09:08 pm: Edit|
Ted is quite right...which is exactly why the published absinthe recipes are varying degrees of useless, from pretty useless to totally useless. Hanging on the wall of a museum doesn't mean a given 'recipe' is correct, in fact in this context, 'correct' is meaningless. One must be able to figure out obsolete units of measure, some of which are mere approximations anyway like 'handful'.
By the way, I like your coined word, "thaught" -- is that prounced 'thaft' as in 'draught = draft'? Cool!
|By tabreaux on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 08:19 am: Edit|
I am not aware of any written descriptions to the old Pernod family secrets, nor would I expect there to be.
There is so much more to a 'recipe' than a few paragraphs of information, that if it were written down, it would comprise quite a few pages of detailed information. Furthermore, even if a detailed protocol were available, there are so many variables which have a pronouced influence on the final product (with respect to herbs, equipment, temperatures, etc., etc.) that the chances of a person following those instructions and coming up with a virtually identical product are small.
Let's be hypothetical and say that I wanted you to be able to accurately duplicate a product that I made. Even if I deliberately attempted to describe everything I knew in detail, you probably wouldn't be able to duplicate my work satisfactorily unless I was physically there to tune your equipment and show you exactly how to do it. When you have nothing to go by save for a bottle of 100 year old liqueur (with finite contents), the same task is indeed daunting.
|By Chrysippvs on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 08:13 am: Edit|
Just be patient. In a few months you will be able to just buy what you are wanting...
|By Artemis on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 07:31 am: Edit|
This has been discussed here before, and discussed in even greater detail offline. To make a long story short, those who know aren't telling. For sure you won't see it discussed out in the open here.
|By TimK on Monday, August 21, 2000 - 07:21 am: Edit|
Has anyone ever tried to locate a copy of the recipies / processes used by the pernod factories in their production of absinthe, i mean there might still be information around even after 100 years, im not sure of the company history but if theres still a large pernod family presence then its a possibillity someone knows the processes? just a thaught
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|
Administer Page |Delete Conversation |Close Conversation |Move Conversation