Tony Conigliaro
by Tomas Estes
Talking to Tony I think of D.H. Lawrence, maybe it’s Tony’s Laurencesque beard or maybe it’s because he has a an unconventional creativity with drinks that reminds me of Laurence’s literature. As Tony starts telling me about his latest creations I know the world at large would delight in what I’m hearing.
Imagine a drink in front of you. It is a champagne flute with the bubbles ascending to the surface bringing with each one an aroma of perfume. Each of those hundreds of sublime spheres are bursting open at the surface recreating all the sensory memories and associations of the famous perfume, opening out of and with these little explosions of perfumed essence.
The source of this ethereal sensation is a sugar cube at the bottom of the flute which has been doused, with Tony’s creation, his drinkable essence of perfume. How did this idea ever get conceived?
Tony had been studying the work of Heston Blumenthal, the British chef who has become world renowned for his unconventional ways with pushing the boundaries of what food is and can be. Blumenthal has achieved top accolades for his restaurant, the Fat Duck which has earned three Michelin stars. Tony had experienced first-hand Blumenthal’s pervasive, inquisitive nature around food. Under Blumenthal’s influence the mind is so freed that there is no ‘box’ outside of which to work as described by Tony. Tony noticed this approach of experimentation and enquiry with food and thought, “No one is doing this with drink”.
Tony was also studying perfumes. After all, up to 80% of taste can come from smell. Tony says that perfumiers combine essences to create a harmony of aromas to smell compared to bartenders who combine spirits and ingredients to create a harmony of flavours to drink. Tony’s curious mind followed this perfume stimulus. He wanted to marry the idea of perfume and cocktails.
Tony took the ‘aroma notes’ of a iconic brand of perfume, found food grade equivalent elements, combined them and recreated his version of it into a consumable liquid. This is what he douses on the sugar cube.
Once the drinkable ‘perfume’ was created, Tony tried it out in a Martini. Why the Martini? Tony tells me because it’s the quintessential cocktail. [What did Lawrence drink?] The temperature of the Martini was too low, too cold and the essence of Tony’s version of the perfume did not come out the way Tony wanted. Next try was with Champagne and the sugar cube. The temperature was right and the essence rode on the elevators of the CO2 bubbles. The sensory result is an aroma of ‘that’ iconic perfume and a taste of flowers, rose, jasmine and ylang ylang which Tony says amplifies other flowers’ aromas. Tony’s choice of Champagne is Perrier Jouet Gran Brut. The name of the drink is “Mille Fleur Champagne Cocktail”.
This cocktail amongst other exotic concoctions is on the menu of Tony’s new bar in London, ‘69 Colebrooke Row’. The bar has a ‘film noir’ theme, décor and feel to it. It is down a side street and is not easy to find. It doesn’t help that there is no sign outside. At night there is a shadowy effect outside the bar. Above the bar Tony has his own lab, his own playground in which to experiment and mess around. Tony has the office of his business, the “Drink Factory,” on the same floor as the lab. This business is about “how drinks work”, how the ingredients work together or not. It is not about the history of or presenting of spirits.
For years Tony has been collecting the apparatuses he has in his lab. He has the following: a two liter vacuum still, a soxhetlet which is a continuous type of still which leaves a liquid with a high intensity of flavour, almost like a reduction in a kitchen with a sauce. Tony looks on-line, checks out chemists’ and scientists’ offerings and figures out if he can apply these to his experiments.
Some wine and some spirits are aged to see what evolves. This is an art based on science that has been toyed with for centuries. What about doing this same thing with cocktails and mixed drinks? This is what Tony’s inquisitive mind came up with. He started with a Manhattan: bourbon, sweet vermouth and bitters in the proper proportions. Giving this adventure a proper chance of succeeding, Tony made twenty Manhattans. He put them away in his cellar and at three months he tried one. He didn’t like the result. It was not palatable, nothing good had happened. Next time Tony revisited his cellar one year later he thought he would throw the samples out. He tried one as a last chance. This one gave Tony what he was looking for. This one had fused flavours; it was smoother and more velvety than the original.
Try and dare, don’t give up. This is Tony’s story. He believes in patience. Mimicking the perfume ‘took him two years to develop and the Manhattans have seen four years since inception. Tony now has a cellar of 2006, 2007 and 2008 ‘vintage’ Manhattans maturing. He really does not have any semblance of a ‘box’ around this kind of thinking. He has done some aged Martinis, it IS his favorite drink. The aging works up to six months and then the flavours, “fall off the edge.” Look for other aged cocktails from Tony, since he remains as much as ever the inquisitor.
Have you been shaking your head at Tony’s weirdness or, should I say, ‘unconventional creativity’? How about this for a novel approach: Tony has been working on the quality of ‘dryness’ in drinks especially the - here it is again - Martini. To do this Tony has studied saliva and how it works in the mouth and has come up with an ingredient to put into vermouth to make it and its Martini extra dry. It has to do with how this element affects the tongue.
Here’s another head shaker. Tony worked with a chocolatier to see how tastes develop in the mouth and, as in a journey, how some taste sensations arrive earlier than others. This is pure Tony, looking at the ‘’how” beyond the “what”. He says that the size of the taste molecules in things we eat or drink affects the rate of when they release in the mouth, tongue and palate. Does this sound like the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari? Tony reminds me how sensitive the mouth is to taste and also about the mouth being erogenous [Lawrence revisits]. I can see Alan Bates in Ken Russell’s film, “Women in Love” opening and slowly eating a fresh fig.
I asked Tony specifically to speak about tequila, not being a fan of martinis myself. In 2000 he created a drink for the Isola Bar. It is made with griddled lemons. The cooking removes some acidity and gives a carmelized quality to the lemon flavour. Present day this process has evolved to include cold smoking the lemons and then griddling them. Tony uses the juice of these lemons to make a margarita. He does all this to accentuate the flavour elements inherent in the tequila.
For Tony tequila is an enormously fun spirit to play with because it has such a huge spectrum of flavours. The “Armundo Torres Gonzales” is one of Tony’s creations which is tequila with caramel flavouring. His friend, when served this drink, told Tony that it reminded her of an earlier lover’s smell. What was the name of Lady Chatterley’s gardener?
HEAD II HEAD
For Mixto Tequila: Thomas Estes
Industry leaders ask those who will listen to use the following terms when naming the two categories of tequila: 'Tequila', that spirit which must have a minimum of 51% agave sugars and allows the maximum of 49% other sugars to be added at the point of fermentation. 'Tequila 100% agave', is self explanatory.
There are both well made [mixto] tequilas and well made 100% agave tequilas. I have drunk many examples of both categories over a long period of time and have come to the conclusion that the quality of the tequila of either category is more important than which category it is.
I have been at numerous blind tastings where the participants cannot tell examples of one category from the other. Apart from the preceding, I would add that many prefer [mixto] tequilas over 100% agave tequilas.
The taste of the two categories can differ. Some argue that the mildness of the sugar added [to mixto] makes a more palatable drink for them. This may give value to the whole category as being a ‘starter tequila’?
One of my favourite bars in the world, and that of others I know is La Capilla bar in the town of Tequila in Mexico. One of the reasons I like it so much is that there is zero snobbery or pretence in this legendary tequila mecca. The owner, Don Javier Delgado has been bartending for 62 years. Don Javier’s house pour tequila is 'Tequileña' made about 2-3 hundred meters from his bar entrance. It is a [mixto] ‘tequila', not 100% agave. It is robust, full of agave flavour and does not hurt the drinker the next day because it is well made. The fact that the most revered tequila bar in the world for tequila 'insiders' serves this particular [mixto] tequila makes one hell of a convincing endorsement in my book.
One of the outstanding strong points of tequila is its versatility. It can be drunk in wide and far ranging manners. This distinguishes it from all or most other spirits. By having two categories increases the variety of tequilas to drink and mix and results in a grander field of versatility for the consumer, therefore expanding its appeal.
Footnote: I added [Mixto] to the above text to make clearer. SD
Against Mixto Tequila: Simon Difford
While I hate the fact that tequila’s distillation process itself is not more tightly regulated (i.e. no maximum distillation strength or still specifications), by far my biggest gripe with tequila’s lax rules is the continued existence of mixto.
During the fermentation of mixto tequila, sugar (cane or corn) is added to the aguamiel (agave juice) prior to fermentation. Such mixto tequilas can be, and usually are, made from as much as 49% of added sugar. In my book that makes them almost half rum. Thankfully, ‘real tequila’, a.k.a. 100% agave tequila is only fermented from aguamiel. To label a mixto tequila without reference to the fact that practically half of it was distilled from sugar seems a contravention of the trade descriptions act.
All 100% agave tequilas are labelled as such but presently it is only the lack of a mention of 100% agave that identifies a mixto tequila as being such. Perhaps the producers are rightly ashamed to draw attention to all that added sugar? Surely it is only right that each mixto is labelled with the proportion of added sugar used in its production? Most of the people buying mixto tequila are ignorant to how much sugar is being added and I feel they are being cheated.
I certainly don’t expect the Consejo Regulador del Tequila (CRT) to agree with me and legislate to immediately end mixto. Such a move would obviously be damaging to the category. However, I would like to see a period set for its phasing out, say ten years. Along the way, perhaps five years, mixto tequilas could be required to be labelled as such.
Most of the developed world recognises and respects tequila as being an Appellation of Origin (AOC). Now tequila has the opportunity to leave the frat boy shooter image behind and join the hallowed ranks of AOC categories such as Scotch whisky, cognac and champagne. To attain such premier status I believe a tightening of NOM rules, to include the outlawing of mixto, is necessary.
www.classbar.com
Talking to Tony I think of D.H. Lawrence, maybe it’s Tony’s Laurencesque beard or maybe it’s because he has a an unconventional creativity with drinks that reminds me of Laurence’s literature. As Tony starts telling me about his latest creations I know the world at large would delight in what I’m hearing.
Imagine a drink in front of you. It is a champagne flute with the bubbles ascending to the surface bringing with each one an aroma of perfume. Each of those hundreds of sublime spheres are bursting open at the surface recreating all the sensory memories and associations of the famous perfume, opening out of and with these little explosions of perfumed essence.
The source of this ethereal sensation is a sugar cube at the bottom of the flute which has been doused, with Tony’s creation, his drinkable essence of perfume. How did this idea ever get conceived?
Tony was also studying perfumes. After all, up to 80% of taste can come from smell. Tony says that perfumiers combine essences to create a harmony of aromas to smell compared to bartenders who combine spirits and ingredients to create a harmony of flavours to drink. Tony’s curious mind followed this perfume stimulus. He wanted to marry the idea of perfume and cocktails.
Tony took the ‘aroma notes’ of a iconic brand of perfume, found food grade equivalent elements, combined them and recreated his version of it into a consumable liquid. This is what he douses on the sugar cube.
Once the drinkable ‘perfume’ was created, Tony tried it out in a Martini. Why the Martini? Tony tells me because it’s the quintessential cocktail. [What did Lawrence drink?] The temperature of the Martini was too low, too cold and the essence of Tony’s version of the perfume did not come out the way Tony wanted. Next try was with Champagne and the sugar cube. The temperature was right and the essence rode on the elevators of the CO2 bubbles. The sensory result is an aroma of ‘that’ iconic perfume and a taste of flowers, rose, jasmine and ylang ylang which Tony says amplifies other flowers’ aromas. Tony’s choice of Champagne is Perrier Jouet Gran Brut. The name of the drink is “Mille Fleur Champagne Cocktail”.
This cocktail amongst other exotic concoctions is on the menu of Tony’s new bar in London, ‘69 Colebrooke Row’. The bar has a ‘film noir’ theme, décor and feel to it. It is down a side street and is not easy to find. It doesn’t help that there is no sign outside. At night there is a shadowy effect outside the bar. Above the bar Tony has his own lab, his own playground in which to experiment and mess around. Tony has the office of his business, the “Drink Factory,” on the same floor as the lab. This business is about “how drinks work”, how the ingredients work together or not. It is not about the history of or presenting of spirits.
For years Tony has been collecting the apparatuses he has in his lab. He has the following: a two liter vacuum still, a soxhetlet which is a continuous type of still which leaves a liquid with a high intensity of flavour, almost like a reduction in a kitchen with a sauce. Tony looks on-line, checks out chemists’ and scientists’ offerings and figures out if he can apply these to his experiments.
Some wine and some spirits are aged to see what evolves. This is an art based on science that has been toyed with for centuries. What about doing this same thing with cocktails and mixed drinks? This is what Tony’s inquisitive mind came up with. He started with a Manhattan: bourbon, sweet vermouth and bitters in the proper proportions. Giving this adventure a proper chance of succeeding, Tony made twenty Manhattans. He put them away in his cellar and at three months he tried one. He didn’t like the result. It was not palatable, nothing good had happened. Next time Tony revisited his cellar one year later he thought he would throw the samples out. He tried one as a last chance. This one gave Tony what he was looking for. This one had fused flavours; it was smoother and more velvety than the original.
Have you been shaking your head at Tony’s weirdness or, should I say, ‘unconventional creativity’? How about this for a novel approach: Tony has been working on the quality of ‘dryness’ in drinks especially the - here it is again - Martini. To do this Tony has studied saliva and how it works in the mouth and has come up with an ingredient to put into vermouth to make it and its Martini extra dry. It has to do with how this element affects the tongue.
Here’s another head shaker. Tony worked with a chocolatier to see how tastes develop in the mouth and, as in a journey, how some taste sensations arrive earlier than others. This is pure Tony, looking at the ‘’how” beyond the “what”. He says that the size of the taste molecules in things we eat or drink affects the rate of when they release in the mouth, tongue and palate. Does this sound like the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari? Tony reminds me how sensitive the mouth is to taste and also about the mouth being erogenous [Lawrence revisits]. I can see Alan Bates in Ken Russell’s film, “Women in Love” opening and slowly eating a fresh fig.
I asked Tony specifically to speak about tequila, not being a fan of martinis myself. In 2000 he created a drink for the Isola Bar. It is made with griddled lemons. The cooking removes some acidity and gives a carmelized quality to the lemon flavour. Present day this process has evolved to include cold smoking the lemons and then griddling them. Tony uses the juice of these lemons to make a margarita. He does all this to accentuate the flavour elements inherent in the tequila.
HEAD II HEAD
For Mixto Tequila: Thomas Estes
Industry leaders ask those who will listen to use the following terms when naming the two categories of tequila: 'Tequila', that spirit which must have a minimum of 51% agave sugars and allows the maximum of 49% other sugars to be added at the point of fermentation. 'Tequila 100% agave', is self explanatory.
There are both well made [mixto] tequilas and well made 100% agave tequilas. I have drunk many examples of both categories over a long period of time and have come to the conclusion that the quality of the tequila of either category is more important than which category it is.
I have been at numerous blind tastings where the participants cannot tell examples of one category from the other. Apart from the preceding, I would add that many prefer [mixto] tequilas over 100% agave tequilas.
The taste of the two categories can differ. Some argue that the mildness of the sugar added [to mixto] makes a more palatable drink for them. This may give value to the whole category as being a ‘starter tequila’?
One of my favourite bars in the world, and that of others I know is La Capilla bar in the town of Tequila in Mexico. One of the reasons I like it so much is that there is zero snobbery or pretence in this legendary tequila mecca. The owner, Don Javier Delgado has been bartending for 62 years. Don Javier’s house pour tequila is 'Tequileña' made about 2-3 hundred meters from his bar entrance. It is a [mixto] ‘tequila', not 100% agave. It is robust, full of agave flavour and does not hurt the drinker the next day because it is well made. The fact that the most revered tequila bar in the world for tequila 'insiders' serves this particular [mixto] tequila makes one hell of a convincing endorsement in my book.
One of the outstanding strong points of tequila is its versatility. It can be drunk in wide and far ranging manners. This distinguishes it from all or most other spirits. By having two categories increases the variety of tequilas to drink and mix and results in a grander field of versatility for the consumer, therefore expanding its appeal.
Footnote: I added [Mixto] to the above text to make clearer. SD
Against Mixto Tequila: Simon Difford
While I hate the fact that tequila’s distillation process itself is not more tightly regulated (i.e. no maximum distillation strength or still specifications), by far my biggest gripe with tequila’s lax rules is the continued existence of mixto.
During the fermentation of mixto tequila, sugar (cane or corn) is added to the aguamiel (agave juice) prior to fermentation. Such mixto tequilas can be, and usually are, made from as much as 49% of added sugar. In my book that makes them almost half rum. Thankfully, ‘real tequila’, a.k.a. 100% agave tequila is only fermented from aguamiel. To label a mixto tequila without reference to the fact that practically half of it was distilled from sugar seems a contravention of the trade descriptions act.
All 100% agave tequilas are labelled as such but presently it is only the lack of a mention of 100% agave that identifies a mixto tequila as being such. Perhaps the producers are rightly ashamed to draw attention to all that added sugar? Surely it is only right that each mixto is labelled with the proportion of added sugar used in its production? Most of the people buying mixto tequila are ignorant to how much sugar is being added and I feel they are being cheated.
I certainly don’t expect the Consejo Regulador del Tequila (CRT) to agree with me and legislate to immediately end mixto. Such a move would obviously be damaging to the category. However, I would like to see a period set for its phasing out, say ten years. Along the way, perhaps five years, mixto tequilas could be required to be labelled as such.
Most of the developed world recognises and respects tequila as being an Appellation of Origin (AOC). Now tequila has the opportunity to leave the frat boy shooter image behind and join the hallowed ranks of AOC categories such as Scotch whisky, cognac and champagne. To attain such premier status I believe a tightening of NOM rules, to include the outlawing of mixto, is necessary.
www.classbar.com
posted by The team at
10:40 PM
<< Home