HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >

Discussion

Cuisine at Home--Who Are They?

Got a free issue advertising 2 years for $28 and NO ADS. How is this possible; they all cost about this much stuffed with ads. Anybody heard of the publisher or anything about this outfit? Articles/recipes seem up to par, so far.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. This is the only cooking magazine to which I still subscribe. The recipes are solid. I actually look forward to the day it arrives and planning out what I want to try. I was a long time subscriber to Gourmet (more than 40 years) and Sauver (from inception up to 2009) as well as Fine Cooking, Food and Wine, and a number of other specialty mags. All gone except for Cuisine at Home. The only other food magazine I still get is the quarterly trade putblication Plate.

    We have not be disappointed in Cuisine at Home. And they truly do have no ads, and it is not as deadly dry as Cook's Illustrated

    9 Replies
    1. re: DiningDiva

      Thanks, I guess I'll give it a whirl based on that.

      1. re: kleine mocha

        Hey, $28 for 2 years isn't a bad deal. They don't publish monthly, so you won't be inundated wth magazines. Photos are in color

      2. re: DiningDiva

        Saveur is still publishing, I have a subscription. Have they dumbed themselves down recently, like Gourmet had been doing?

        1. re: EWSflash

          Can't answer that, I haven't picked up a Saveur magazine in quite a while. I do subscribe to their FB page and that's not too bad. I did renew Food & Wine last year and have actually been happy with that decision. I always try at least 1 recipe from each issue of F&W and often more.

          1. re: DiningDiva

            I am very fond of Saveur. The writing is excellent and the recipes (the few I've tried) have worked out well.

            1. re: buttertart

              I agree about Saveur recipes working. Maybe it was just a phase they were going through, but there as a period where I thought their approach was just a bit to "precious" and elitist for me

              1. re: DiningDiva

                I hated it when it first came out. Less Colman Andrews has helped enormously.

                1. re: buttertart

                  Good to know. He *was* still editor-in-chief when I let my subscription lapse.

      3. I received a one-year gift subscription a few years ago. It covered a lot of the same ground as Cooks' Illustrated. The only thing I DIDN'T like was the way the recipes were laid out. I can't even recall now exactly how they did it, but seem to recall that it was somewhat narrative, without an entire ingredient list preceding the directions, so the reader could not easily give it a once-over to determine whether s/he had all the ingredients on hand.

        3 Replies
        1. re: greygarious

          I've always wondered if they were the same people as Cuisine magazine (mid-late 1970's) - that was a goodie. I don't care for this one, I don't find the recipes very appealing.

          1. re: greygarious

            The recipes have complete ingredient lists at the top of each recipe, followed by the method

            1. re: greygarious

              i agree and i did miss the ingredients list. but i really liked the way the recipes were presented in bullet form, rather than the long narratives in paragraphs.

            2. I like the magazine a lot. I just renewed my scrip, and will probably continue to do so.