Topic: The Price of a Curry

[DalPuri]

i was just talkin to a mate up in Greenock. she's just ordered a take away and sent me the menu. As i was reading through it, i started thinking,
From what we all know about making curries, is the extra 2 or 3 quid you pay for a Chef's special justified?
How different are they to the standards, i.e. Madras, Jalfrezi etc...
Any thoughts?
cheers, frank.

[Razor]

Hi DP,

Most of the Chef Specials around here are nothing more than one of the classics with a little something extra.  Whether it's worth the extra couple of quid is a good question.  I'd rather pay 8 quid for a great curry, than pay 6 quid for a crap one.  Trouble is, I've payed 8 quid for a reputed great curry, only for it to have turned out crap

Ray ;D

[Peripatetic Phil]

From what we all know about making curries, is the extra 2 or 3 quid you pay for a Chef's special justified?
How different are they to the standards, i.e. Madras, Jalfrezi etc...

I normally avoid them like the plague, (a) because they are invariably over-priced, and (b) because it is almost impossible these days to find one that uses fresh chicken rather than chicken tikka.
** Phil.

[Razor]

Hi Phil,

I normally avoid them like the plague, (a) because they are invariably over-priced, and (b) because it is almost impossible these days to find one that uses fresh chicken rather than chicken tikka.
** Phil.

Interesting Phil.  I've got to admit, I've started to view chicken tikka in my curries as standard these days, finding just 'chicken' a tad too bland.

But you mention 'fresh' chicken!  By that, I assume that you mean not 'precooked'?

Ray

[PaulP]

From what we all know about making curries, is the extra 2 or 3 quid you pay for a Chef's special justified?
How different are they to the standards, i.e. Madras, Jalfrezi etc...

I normally avoid them like the plague, (a) because they are invariably over-priced, and (b) because it is almost impossible these days to find one that uses fresh chicken rather than chicken tikka.
** Phil.

I must admit like Phil I don't normally go for dishes like chicken tikka madras, bhuna etc as I prefer the chicken plainer.
I do love chicken tikka as a starter with onions, salad, lemon juice etc.

Cheers,

Paul

[Peripatetic Phil]

Interesting Phil.  I've got to admit, I've started to view chicken tikka in my curries as standard these days, finding just 'chicken' a tad too bland.  But you mention 'fresh' chicken!  By that, I assume that you mean not 'precooked'?

Only "not pre-cooked in the tandoor" : I don't think my BIR receptors are sufficiently well attuned to determine whether fresh chicken is /really/ fresh or has been lightly pre-cooked ('though I used to eat in a Chinese restaurant in the Euston Road where the chicken was /clearly/ pre-cooked, and not just lightly, but Khanh tells me this is normal practice for Chinese restaurants : it stops the chicken going off).  Oh, and like Paul, yes, I love Chicken Tikka for a starter -- I just prefer my curries to be made with "real" chicken.

** Phil.

[PaulP]

Just remembered I'm off to this place...

http://www.eastzeast.com/Liverpool-home.html

...next Thursday with some work buddies.

It has a good reputation apparently and is part of a chain. Seating for 750 (!) so it will probably be a bit impersonal.
Their menu is almost all "specials" with a little menu section dedicated to the "old-time" madras, bhuna etc.

I'll report back after I've been there in the reviews section.

Regarding the price of curry, for takeaway I don't care if a dish costs 5 or 9 quid because we only have about 3 a month, so long as it tastes great. For posher restaurants it's easy to spend a lot as everything (like drinks) is more expensive.

Cheers,

Paul

[Razor]

Hi Paul,

I must admit like Phil I don't normally go for dishes like chicken tikka madras, bhuna etc as I prefer the chicken plainer.

It's a very fair comment, and I know many of my friends won't pay the extra to have tikka in their curries, as they don't see the point because the curry masks the flavour of the tikka, a view which I also shared up until recently.

However, I have noticed, certainly from my regular TA and BIR, that the tikka that you get as a starter, is a little more subtle than that that you get when you order it in your curry.  This was confirmed to me a long time back when I ordered a Chicken tikka Jal frezi from my local.  They have a massive grille/hotplate in the front and usually cook your tikka, seekh kebabs and so on in front of you.  On this particular night, they never placed any skewers of chicken tikka on the grille but, from nowhere (out the back really) they waltzed in with my Chicken Tikka Jal frezi.

I asked how he'd done the tikka (as he'd not done it in front of me as per the norm) and he replied "special Tikka for curries" I can only assume from this, that they either marinate it for longer to get a deeper flavour, or they add a greater amount of spices so the curry doesn't mask the tikka flavour?

I think a good, strong flavoured tikka, can stand out in a curry whereas a more subtle tikka will get lost in the sauce.

Dipuraja's was a perfect tikka for curries, whereas my tikka, is great for a starter

Ray

[ELW]

The descriptions on some of the menus in Glasgow are always embellished somewhat, suggesting the methods of cooking are more labour intensive than they actually are("finished with Chef Ali's "special sauce", "meats simmered in their own juices","special" tangy /creamy sauce (chefs spoon of mango chutney/cream anyone?) All for only