ZOMG, Candy!

Dove Promises’s newest product, milk chocolate with peanut butter, is heading into bold territory by trying to hone in on Reese’s audience. Challenging Reese’s is no small feat - they’ve really perfected the chocolate/peanut butter balance, both flavor and texture-wise, and they’re a brand behemoth. It may not be entirely fair to judge Dove against Reese’s, but the comparison is unavoidable.

So how’d they do? The Promises are covered in classic smooth and creamy Dove milk chocolate and filled with a similarly silky peanut butter filling. The milk chocolate was soft rather than snappy, making the whole Promise rather pliable.

The peanut butter filling was nutty, but not roasty, and could have been saltier. Reese’s has done so well precisely because its peanut butter is salty enough to really stand up against the chocolate. Dove’s could have been stronger. Still, Dove did at least manage a decently balanced chocolate to peanut butter ratio.

All in all, not a bad effort. They look slightly nicer than Reese’s miniatures, and they’d fit in nicely with a mix of Promises for a living room candy bowl. But if I have a peanut butter/milk chocolate craving while I’m in the candy aisle, I’d go with a Reese’s instead. An O.

A continuation of Monday’s review, the next five chocolates in my Schocolat box.

First up at the top, a salted caramel that wasn’t in their chocolate guide, I guess because they’re usually sold in boxes of all caramels. As with the bunny chew from Monday, it’s a stiff caramel that really gets in your teeth. The salt offsets the brown butter flavor nicely, though I wish the flavor developed a bit more as you chew it. Still, a lovely treat and OM-worthy.

Moving clockwise is what I think is a Gianduja, “layers of hazelnut flavored milk and dark chocolate dipped in milk chocolate finished with a candied hazelnut.” I say think because it tasted more like peanut butter than Nutella to me and my friends. Sadly, the nut topping was so candied that I couldn’t tell what kind of nut it was.

The dark and milk layers were visible in the super stiff ganache, and the whole thing had a roasty nuttiness with a creamy chocolate finish. An OM, regardless of my nut uncertainty.

Next is the round rolled-then-enrobed truffle, the only one in the box that wasn’t molded and another one that was off the guide. My friend Rita bit into it first and made a blech face. Surprise! It’s banana, which Rita is allergic to.

Specifically, it’s a white chocolate ganache. It has a strong banana flavor with a sweet, white chocolate finish. The dark chocolate coating was studded with bits of candied almonds. Nice, but not for me (or Rita), so an O.

The skinny gold ingot shaped chocolate is the Golden Cinnamon, “milk chocolate ganache flavored with gold-schlager cinnamon liquor surrounded in dark chocolate and gold flecks.”

The creamy ganache had a light, barely noticeable cinnamon spice and heat to it, with more cinnamon in the finish. A lovely, perfectly balanced blend that gets an OMG.

And last for today, the dark and milk domed truffle that’s also off guide. It’s definitely peanut butter with a super roasty finish. An O, not because it’s bad, but because I’m not that big on peanut butter.

It also makes me more sure that we correctly identified the Gianduja. I think the Gianduja didn’t taste hazelnutty enough because it was made with actual hazelnut butter, thus the more-subtle-than-Nutella flavor.

So - back on Friday for the rest of the box. It gets even better!

I was in Rochester, NY last week and came across a delightful little chocolate shop called Hedonist Artisan Chocolates. While there I struck up a nice conversation with one their chocolate makers (perhaps the proprietor?) and partook of their generous free samples of just-made rolled champagne truffles and some bits of chocolate bark. The great samples convinced me to buy two of their ever-changing selection of handmade truffles: molasses ginger and peanut butter cayenne.

The molasses ginger (left) was a square of molasses ginger flavored ganache covered in dark Valhrona and topped with a tiny piece of candied ginger. It was fresh and tasted amazing. The ganache was creamy but not greasy and had a distinct fresh ginger flavor without the less pleasant bite that real ginger has. I didn’t get any direct molasses notes, but there’s a mellow sweetness that permeates throughout. The little dab of candied ginger was a wonderful touch that again, brought ginger flavor with any bitter notes. All this was nicely juxtaposed against the snappy shell of good quality dark couverture.

Peanut butter cayenne was topped with a little half peanut. The filling in this was stiffer and slightly gritty. It initially starts with a roasty fresh nuttiness before giving way to a lingering cayenne burn. The heat is more intense than other chili chocolates, so it may not be for the faint of heart, but I loved it.

Both truffles were great, if not exactly cheap at $2 a bite. Still, they get a ZOMG! for their high quality and wonderful flavors. There were other interesting sounding flavors that I didn’t try (like raspberry wasabi and lapsang souchong), so I’m sure that I’ll revisit Hedonist Chocolates again and again once I move to Rochester.

That’s right - I’m moving to Rochester! I get my BA in psychology/neuroscience at the end of May, and sometime during the summer, I’m starting a two-year stint as a research assistant/lab manager at the University of Rochester. The decision to move there wasn’t an easy one to make, especially since my other option was a fully funded, generously stipended year in a Master’s program at Cambridge University (back in England, with British accents and Cadbury and Haribo…), but Rochester made me a great offer full of great opportunity. Besides, it’s close to Canada, so I’ll still get to explore an international candy scene while there!

Last Friday, I reviewed and greatly enjoyed Q.bel’s wafer rolls. Today, I tackle the wafer bars, the wafer roll’s squatter, squarer cousin. Like the wafer rolls, the wafer bars come in three versions: milk chocolate crispy rice, dark chocolate crispy rice, and milk chocolate peanut butter.

The two crispy rice wafer bars were wafer cookies sandwiching chocolate cream, topped with rice crisps, and enrobed in milk or dark (pictured below) chocolate. The wafer cookies were mostly bland and provided more texture than taste, while the crispy rice provided both, adding an airy crunch and a heavy, toasted flavor. The milk and dark chocolate were the same as that of the wafer rolls. If you need a flavor profile review, the milk was dusky and creamy while the dark chocolate was earthy with a fruity sweet finish. Overall, I found these to be a bit overly dry from their starchy components but still quite yummy. An OM.

The peanut butter wafer bars lacked the crispy rice that topped the other two, so it had a less bumpy appearance and instead was all gorgeous, sumptuous ripples. The peanut butter was between the layers of wafer cookie and had a salty, creamy finish. It was not as nutty or as roasty as the peanut butter of the wafer rolls, which was a bit disappointing. On the plus side, it did nicely mitigate the dryness of the wafers, so much so that the bar feels overly rich. I give it an O, but I think peanut butter lovers would enjoy this more than I did.

The Q.bel line-up, as a whole, did great, with the wafer rolls coming out on top in my book. On the one hand, I’m glad that Q.bel mailed me so many samples, as I’ve definitely been enjoying them and enjoying giving them away and hearing about how much others like them. On the other hand, I’ve been eating at least two packs a day, which is wreaking havoc on my waistline. I recommend trying them, but trust me, you don’t want to have a case of each lying around. The temptation is terrible.

When reviews of Q.bel chocolates started hitting the candy blogosphere, I was intrigued. It’s not often that Cybele bestows a candy with a 10 out of 10 rating, and Q.bel managed to nab the honor.So when Q.bel asked me if I wanted free samples to review, I eagerly said yes. I’m so glad that I did.

Q.bel (the Q is for quality; the bel is for Isabel, the wife of the creator. When will I get a delicious candy named after me?) chocolates come in two types, wafer rolls and wafer bars, with three iterations of each: milk, dark, and peanut butter. Today, I’ll cover the wafer rolls. The wafer bars will be reviewed on Monday.

The wafer rolls were crispy, crunchy, fresh, and flaky wafer cookie rolls filled with chocolate or peanut butter and enrobed in more chocolate. The milk chocolate of the milk chocolate wafer roll (center) is wonderful - rich and creamy, but not too sweet, and with a dusky finish, earning it an OMG.

The peanut butter wafer roll (right) is covered with the same milk chocolate, but it’s filled with salty, thick peanut butter that tastes fresh roasted. The overarching finish of the peanut butter lingers a bit, and I found it a bit overpowering for the chocolate. An OM from me, but peanut butter lovers would absolutely adore this.

My favorite of the wafer rolls was the dark chocolate wafer roll (left). The dark chocolate and wafer were an amazing match. The dark chocolate had an earthiness to it, but its finish was sweet and fruity, which needed the cookie wafer to cut it. It gets a bit cloying in the finish, but if you have enough self control to stop after one roll (I don’t), it’s perfect. A ZOMG!

I highly recommend you check these all-natural chocolates out. Q.bel is doing a huge rollout in Whole Foods, so look for them there. They’re probably a bit pricier than your average candy bar, but these are not your average candy bar. And check back on Monday for my review of their wafer bars!

I tried. I really, really tried to give the Necco Sky Bar a fair shake of a review. It’s a retro bar and is deliberately marketed as such, with it’s matte-looking wrapper, photos, and font. Nostalgia is about all this guy’s got going for it.

The bar is billed as “4 flavors in milk chocolate.” It comes in four segments, each imprinted with the word “Necco.” One segment is filled with caramel, another with vanilla, another with peanut, and the final one with fudge. Wait - I take that back. Let’s try that again. One segment is filled with “caramel,” another with “vanilla,” another with “peanut,” and the final one with “fudge.”

Why the quotation marks? Because the fillings vaguely tasted like rude approximations of what they were labeled as, but to call them a real caramel or vanilla or fudge or peanut butter would be a travesty. They were nasty goops, all of them. And nasty goop inside poor quality milk chocolate just makes for more nastiness.

I took a small bite out of each of these for the sake of candy blogging science, but I couldn’t bring myself to eat those bites slowly or thoughtfully. I just wanted the nasty swallowed and as far away from my taste buds as possible. So, readers, that is why I have no descriptions for you. All that’s in my tasting notebook is “nasty goo” and a giant scribble.

Usually I give my tasting leftovers to friends. The Sky Bar I tossed, as I thought it too horrible to inflict upon others. A definite O that caused me to hover my mouse over the box that would’ve categorized this as “not candy”. If you don’t believe me, check out fellow Sugar Savvy writer Sylvie’s take. She didn’t hate it as much as I did, but she also found it disappointing.

On Monday, I reviewed the Butterfinger. Today’s review is of the 5th Avenue, a highly similar but less well known peanut butter bar made by Hershey’s.

The 5th Avenue is “crunchy peanut butter in a rich, chocolatey coating”. If you’re new to the candy blogging world, you should know that “chocolatey” is candy marketing speak for “not made of real chocolate”. Yum… Still, it fared better than most mockolate bars did.

The peanut butter layers of the 5th Avenue were nice, crisp, and peanut buttery. As a bonus, they didn’t get lost in the nooks and crannies of my teeth like the Butterfinger’s did. And the chocolately coating was super sweet but actually wasn’t that bad, especially compared to that of the Butterfinger. At least the 5th Avenue’s coating had some cocoa flavors to it.

All and all, the 5th Avenue turned out to be a nice combination of salty and sweet, though I personally would’ve tempered the sweet just a bit. I give it an OM, though it may have the advantage of framing effects, as I tasted it alongside the Butterfinger.

And if you want a second opinion, here’s Cybele’s take on a head-to-head match-up of the two.

Nestle had quite the coup when they enlisted Bart Simpson (and the rest of the Simpsons) to shill their Butterfingers. Everyone knows that nobody better lay a finger on Bart’s Butterfinger. I find that to be a shame, as that’s helped Butterfinger overshadow the similar, but better, 5th Avenue bar (review of that to come on Wednesday).

The Butterfinger’s tagline promises that it is crispety, crunchety, peanut-buttery! I actually don’t think the filling tastes much of peanut butter. It’s more of a butterscotch, with a buttery sweetness to it. And while it is crunchy when you bite into it, it’s also quite crumbly. The layers don’t hold up too well, and they get stuck in the nooks of your teeth, where they then harden and become a social faux pas in the making.

The worst part of the Butterfinger was the fake chocolate coating. It was way too sweet, had no cocoa flavor whatsoever, and completely ruined what was already a mediocre bar. An O. And yet, the Butterfinger seems to be doing well enough to have inspired many spin-offs.

PS: Happy birthday, Dad!

Reese’s is awesome at churning out limited edition stuff. The newest iteration is their Limited Edition Crunchy Peanut Butter Cups, which I picked up as an impulse buy at the counter of my local Walgreen’s. Hooray marketing!

My friend Steve just asked what makes it crunchy. Just like peanut butter, the peanut butter cups are crunchified by the presence of peanuts. The peanut butter cup doesn’t look any different on the outside, but the peanut bits are visible in the pb cup cross section.

The peanut bits add a nice textural component to the cup and contributes a strong peanut scent, though I don’t have a regular pb cup to compare it to. Even without a regular pb cup handy, I can tell that the peanut butter filling in the crunchy cup is sweeter and less salty than its non-limited edition counterpart.

I think the crunchy is an improvement on peanut butter cups. The peanuts aren’t too intrusive and don’t get stuck in your teeth, and the peanut butter cup texture is more exciting. I do wish the nuts were roastier but still give this limited edition a solid OMG.

The saga of my sweet-toothing my way through Chicago continues with Fannie May chocolates, who I would liken to Chicago’s version of See’s, except See’s is better.

At a Fannie May store, I picked out a selection of their chocolates and a few of their individually wrapped candies (review on those to come next week). Top down in columns, from left to right they are, as best as I can tell/remember: bittermint, some nougat thing, vanilla buttercream dark, no clue, buttercrisp, peanut butter, raspberry cream?, lemon buttercream, and a Trinidad. The salesguy assured me that there would be a comprehensive key online. There isn’t.

bittermint - this was a mint in the York Peppermint Pattie vein. The dark chocolate shell was quite thick, and the gooey mint innards had a strong mintiness tempered by a slight bitterness. The lightly bitter finish went nicely with the dark chocolate.

rectangular nougat thing - I have no idea what this is and couldn’t match it up to anything on their website. It was dark chocolate coating a chewy, nutty nougat log that tasted of maple, I thin.

vanilla buttercream dark - I’m not a big fan of buttercreams but let myself be talked into buying this one by Katie, who loves them. This was sweet and cloying but otherwise had a great vanilla flavor. If you have a higher sugar tolerance than I do, you’d probably like it.

buttercrisp - an almond buttercrisp in milk chocolate. I found it too be too hard to bite into and with a weird, not quite toffee-like texture (it didn’t cleave like toffee does).

peanut butter - a creamy peanut butter filling where the peanut butter was not nearly nutty or salty enough. The milk chocolate shell was slightly too thick for balance.

raspberry cream - I think that’s what this was. The chocolate shell was thicker than I expected, and the filling tasted strongly artificial with a slight cherry cordial winey-ness to it.

lemon buttercream - the center of this tasted like a lemon meringue pie. The lemon-ness was super bright.

Trinidad - I’ve managed to save the best for last: it’s a chocolate cream center with “pastel coating” and toasted coconut. The chocolate filling was smooth and creamy, and the coconut flavor was just right.  The only one I really enjoyed from the ones I picked.

I had wanted to buy some Mint Meltaways in my boxed assortment but the salesguy told me not to because their mintiness would overpower everything else. I managed to buy a little tray of 3 larger meltaways at a Walgreen’s instead. I tasted them after the Frangos that I so loved, and they paled in comparison.

The Mint Meltaways had a pastel green white chocolate coating that tasted too sweet and sugary. It gave the confection an unpleasantly greasy creaminess and a thick finish. The mint flavor was weaker than that of Frangos, and it was more artificial tasting.

Overall, I didn’t really enjoy Fannie May that much. I liked the bittermint and Trinidad, but I wouldn’t go out of my way to seek those out. An O for the chocolates described here. The individually wrapped chocolates I bought fared much better, and my review of those will publish on Monday.