[kathryn]

The two wine pairings that I remember are the Iporos Rioja (with the fried shortribs) and the Masumi Okuden Kantsukuri "Mirror of Truth" Junmai Sake (can't remember what course this was with, but it was the second sake of the evening).

[spaetzle_maker]

kathryn, on Mar 5 2008, 05:05 PM, said:

The two wine pairings that I remember are the Iporos Rioja (with the fried shortribs) and the Masumi Okuden Kantsukuri "Mirror of Truth" Junmai Sake (can't remember what course this was with, but it was the second sake of the evening).

Was it with the shaved fois? I remember the shaved fois being paired with a sake.

[kathryn]

Possibly. I was so busy with the food I ignored most of the wine unless prodded.

Iporos Rioja Crianza Vendimia 2004, says the fiance, although that spelling may not be exact (messy handwriting transcription).

[oakapple]

Dave H, on Mar 5 2008, 02:05 PM, said:

And you thought Ko reservations are going to be difficult!

I'm envisioning thousands of folks in their pajamas hitting the refresh button at exactly 12:01 a.m. each day.

[BryanZ]

I'm aimlessly speculating that momofukuko.com will be the website. When it drops, no one knows. Or at least not me.

The thought crossed my mind to buy the domains koreservations.com and momofukuko.net and post all kinds of fake stuff just for pure entertainment value. Though that wouldn't be very nice.

[Fat Guy]

Occam's razor says that, since there's already a Momofuku.com website, they'll just add a page there.

[BryanZ]

They may link from there but with this new system, it may be hosted on a different domain. Again, more completely aimless speculation.

[Fat Guy]

Nathan, on Mar 4 2008, 01:10 PM, said:

well, Reichl's take is now up at Gourmet (linked too by Eater)...she certainly seems to think so.

at least two more egullet members are dining there tomorrow night (alas, I am not among them).  and at least 4 already have.

A couple of quibbles with Reichl's writeup, which is here

First, I love all these protestations about egalitarianism while at the same time Ruth Reichl, Ed Levine, etc., are being taken through the restaurant for previews. It will be amusing to watch for further cracks in that system.

Second, Reichl refers to "An egg (cooked sous vide)." So was the egg placed in a vacuum pouch ("sous vide" = "under gas") or was it really just slow-cooked in a water bath? The "sous-vide egg" misnomer probably shouldn't be perpetuated by a source at the level of Gourmet.

[Nathan]

BryanZ, on Mar 5 2008, 02:39 PM, said:

I'm aimlessly speculating that momofukuko.com will be the website.  When it drops, no one knows.  Or at least not me.

The thought crossed my mind to buy the domains koreservations.com and momofukuko.net and post all kinds of fake stuff just for pure entertainment value.  Though that wouldn't be very nice.

some of those were purchased today.

[Dave H]

BryanZ, on Mar 5 2008, 04:39 PM, said:

I'm aimlessly speculating that momofukuko.com will be the website.  When it drops, no one knows.  Or at least not me.

The thought crossed my mind to buy the domains koreservations.com and momofukuko.net and post all kinds of fake stuff just for pure entertainment value.  Though that wouldn't be very nice.

Someone seems to have had the same thought as you. momofukuko.com was registered today by some dude on the UWS. I'm almost positive this is not where the reservation system is going. koreservations.com, on the other hand, is still not registered.

I'm with Fat Guy--they'll put in another option on momofuku.com.

This post has been edited by Dave H: 05 March 2008 - 03:08 PM

[johnder]

Dave H, on Mar 5 2008, 05:08 PM, said:

BryanZ, on Mar 5 2008, 04:39 PM, said:

I'm aimlessly speculating that momofukuko.com will be the website.  When it drops, no one knows.  Or at least not me.

The thought crossed my mind to buy the domains koreservations.com and momofukuko.net and post all kinds of fake stuff just for pure entertainment value.  Though that wouldn't be very nice.

Someone seems to have had the same thought as you. momofukuko.com was registered today by some dude on the UWS. I'm almost positive this is not where the reservation system is going. koreservations.com, on the other hand, is still not registered.

I'm with Fat Guy--they'll put in another option on momofuku.com.

But if you look at the ip's where momofuku and momofukuko.com are registered, it is within the same "class b" address space.

momofukuko.com is 74.208.88.51
momofuku.com is 74.208.86.109

It also is throwing very similar 404 pages

example:
momofuku 404 page
momofukuko.com 404 page

The odds of someone registering a domain and hosting it at the same hosting provider as momofuku.com is pretty slim. I think it is probably legit.

[spaetzle_maker]

Dave H, on Mar 5 2008, 06:08 PM, said:

Someone seems to have had the same thought as you. momofukuko.com was registered today by some dude on the UWS.

And now we can arrange to have a pizza delivered to him.

[BryanZ]

johnder, on Mar 5 2008, 06:20 PM, said:

Dave H, on Mar 5 2008, 05:08 PM, said:

BryanZ, on Mar 5 2008, 04:39 PM, said:

I'm aimlessly speculating that momofukuko.com will be the website.  When it drops, no one knows.  Or at least not me.

The thought crossed my mind to buy the domains koreservations.com and momofukuko.net and post all kinds of fake stuff just for pure entertainment value.  Though that wouldn't be very nice.

Someone seems to have had the same thought as you. momofukuko.com was registered today by some dude on the UWS. I'm almost positive this is not where the reservation system is going. koreservations.com, on the other hand, is still not registered.

I'm with Fat Guy--they'll put in another option on momofuku.com.

But if you look at the ip's where momofuku and momofukuko.com are registered, it is within the same "class b" address space.

momofukuko.com is 74.208.88.51
momofuku.com is 74.208.86.109

It also is throwing very similar 404 pages

example:
momofuku 404 page
momofukuko.com 404 page

The odds of someone registering a domain and hosting it at the same hosting provider as momofuku.com is pretty slim. I think it is probably legit.

My programmer friend said the exact same thing.

[Nathan]

I thought everyone just used godaddy?

[Dave H]

johnder, on Mar 5 2008, 05:20 PM, said:

Dave H, on Mar 5 2008, 05:08 PM, said:

BryanZ, on Mar 5 2008, 04:39 PM, said:

I'm aimlessly speculating that momofukuko.com will be the website.  When it drops, no one knows.  Or at least not me.

The thought crossed my mind to buy the domains koreservations.com and momofukuko.net and post all kinds of fake stuff just for pure entertainment value.  Though that wouldn't be very nice.

Someone seems to have had the same thought as you. momofukuko.com was registered today by some dude on the UWS. I'm almost positive this is not where the reservation system is going. koreservations.com, on the other hand, is still not registered.

I'm with Fat Guy--they'll put in another option on momofuku.com.

But if you look at the ip's where momofuku and momofukuko.com are registered, it is within the same "class b" address space.

momofukuko.com is 74.208.88.51
momofuku.com is 74.208.86.109

It also is throwing very similar 404 pages

example:
momofuku 404 page
momofukuko.com 404 page

The odds of someone registering a domain and hosting it at the same hosting provider as momofuku.com is pretty slim. I think it is probably legit.

Oh, that's interesting...

[Mayur]

Fat Guy, on Mar 5 2008, 05:49 PM, said:

Second, Reichl refers to "An egg (cooked sous vide)." So was the egg placed in a vacuum pouch ("sous vide" = "under gas") or was it really just slow-cooked in a water bath? The "sous-vide egg" misnomer probably shouldn't be perpetuated by a source at the level of Gourmet.

I can't imagine that they wouldn't have used a vacuum sealer if they're actually calling the thing "sous vide." Chang is pretty big on honoring traditional culinary terminology; his entire operation is practically a siren song to the line guys.

[Fat Guy]

I'm not necessarily pinning it on Chang. It could just be what Reichl wrote. I mean, look at the fourth photo in post #19 above. That to me looks like an egg coddled in its shell at 63 degrees Celsius for 45 minutes (or whatever) in a low-temperature water bath, not an egg cooked in a vacuum pouch. I will, however, say that at least one cook at Noodle Bar has called the eggs there, which are coddled in their shells and not cooked in sealed pouches, "sous-vide eggs."

[Jesikka]

Mayur, on Mar 5 2008, 07:48 PM, said:

Fat Guy, on Mar 5 2008, 05:49 PM, said:

Second, Reichl refers to "An egg (cooked sous vide)." So was the egg placed in a vacuum pouch ("sous vide" = "under gas") or was it really just slow-cooked in a water bath? The "sous-vide egg" misnomer probably shouldn't be perpetuated by a source at the level of Gourmet.

I can't imagine that they wouldn't have used a vacuum sealer if they're actually calling the thing "sous vide." Chang is pretty big on honoring traditional culinary terminology; his entire operation is practically a siren song to the line guys.

I think she just misheard egg and onion soubise.

[tupac17616]

donbert, on Mar 5 2008, 10:40 AM, said:

the day I start going restaurants looking for new paradigms someone needs to put me out of my misery.

amen

[Fat Guy]

Nobody is going to restaurants looking for new paradigms. How would one do that? With one of those metal detectors people use to look for coins on the beach? We're talking about the fact that Momofuku Ssam Bar shattered the old restaurant paradigm. It simply happened, but some folks are slow to realize it. I'd be happy to explain, again, why the doubters are wrong. On the new-paradigm topic. Not here.

[weinoo]

Fat Guy, on Mar 5 2008, 07:55 PM, said:

I'm not necessarily pinning it on Chang. It could just be what Reichl wrote. I mean, look at the fourth photo in post #19 above. That to me looks like an egg coddled in its shell at 63 degrees Celsius for 45 minutes (or whatever) in a low-temperature water bath, not an egg cooked in a vacuum pouch. I will, however, say that at least one cook at Noodle Bar has called the eggs there, which are coddled in their shells and not cooked in sealed pouches, "sous-vide eggs."

Isn't the shell a "sealed pouch?"

[Fat Guy]

Not on my home planet.

[weinoo]

Well, maybe we're talking semantics and technicalities here, but a chef calling the egg sous-vide isn't that far off base...

Quote

Eggs are one of the easiest places to start with sous-vide cooking. Since they already come in a convenient cooking shell you don’t need to worry about vacuum sealing them (so technically this isn’t exactly ’sous-vide’).

and from the NY Times

Quote

Goussault instructed the chef in the kitchen to drop an egg into a thermal circulator, sous vide's ''oven'' -- a circulating water bath whose temperature can be adjusted to within a tenth of a degree. It was set at 64.5 degrees Celsius (about 148 degrees Fahrenheit), which he calculated as the perfect egg-cooking temperature.
Chefs, Goussault said, ''need people like me to regulate and to push the creativity to the next place.'' He quantifies what chefs aim to do intuitively. Some need less help than others. ''I was in Joël's kitchen,'' Goussault said, referring to Joël Robuchon, one of France's most revered chefs, ''and he was cooking eggs, so I tested the temperature; I put in my probe, and it was 64.5. I asked him how he knew this, and he just said that was how he liked it best.''

After 45 minutes, the chef removed the egg from the water and Goussault cracked it over his plate. I had never seen an egg like this: the whites and yolk, cooked to precisely the same consistency, spilled out like a wobbly custard, and Goussault, using a spoon, began pulling the whites from the yolk. The yolk was bright and creamy and stood up like a marshmallow. ''You see, you see!'' Goussault said. ''It's all about the temperature.''

So, while indeed the dictionary definition of sous-vide may be "under vacuum," many chefs, including Robuchon, would consider the cooking of eggs, in a thermal circulator, sous-vide for their purposes.

[Fat Guy]

The first quote specifically says it's not sous vide, and the second one doesn't say it is. Because it isn't.

[slkinsey]

Yes, technically "sous vide" requires cooking vacuum. But a cursory glance at the sous vide thread on this site, as well as the things that have been written about it elsewhere, will reveal that this has come to be a catch-all phrase describing the range of techniques available with sous vide technology. This includes mostly precise temperature control of ingredients vacuum-sealed in a pouch, but also is informally used to describe cooking techniques such as precise temperature control via a precision water bath heater but without a vacuum pouch (e.g., cooking vegetables at a specific temperature in an open container) and also various effects possible with vacuum equipment (e.g., "pressure cooking," compressed fruit, cucumbers vacuum-infused with gin, etc.).

Getting back to the example of an egg. . . no, the shell of an egg is not 100% airtight. But it is certainly airtight enough that it's not entirely inappropriate to describe an egg long-cooked to precise temperature inside the shell as "sous vide." As a matter of practical chemistry, the eggs are likely exposed to less oxygen using this method than they would be if they were cracked into a plastic bag which was then vacuumed and sealed. Also as a matter of practical chemistry, quite a bit of sous vide cooking isn't really done under vacuum.

I understand that "sous vide" means more or less "under vacuum." But one has to understand that there are plenty of terms that come to have a somewhat different meaning when they are imported into another language or become part of the technical jargon of a certain field. A good example might be the musical term "rubato," which is an Italian past participle adjective meaning "robbed." The full phrase would be "tempo rubato" meaning "robbed time." Employed in music this implies a certain accelleration and relaxation of the tempo within a musical phrase such that time is "robbed" from one part of the phrase and "paid back" in another part of the phrase. In English usage, however, we use this adjective as a noun. For example, "I am going to do a rubato here." Strictly speaking, this sentence doesn't make any sense -- but any classical musician in America would know what you meant if you said that. This is because the strict meaning of the word changed when it was imported into English and became part of the classical musician's technical jargon. I would suggest that some of the same things are at work with "sous vide."

[donbert]

$100 or a dinner at Ko says Chang doesn't care what the technique is called and thinks we're all ridiculous for still arguing about it.

[weinoo]

I have to go along with Sam here...I think cooking is jazzy enough that anyone who has actually cooked is more concerned with the final product then whether one is strictly adhering to the literal translation of a foreign cooking term.

Can we get Chang to weigh in on this, donbert?

[Jesikka]

weinoo, on Mar 6 2008, 03:00 PM, said:

I have to go along with Sam here...I think cooking is jazzy enough that anyone who has actually cooked is more concerned with the final product then whether one is strictly adhering to the literal translation of a foreign cooking term.

Can we get Chang to weigh in on this, donbert?

Doesn't anyone care that what they actually said was soubise??

[spaetzle_maker]

I think a bunch of us misheard the word soubise as sous-vide.

[Fat Guy]

Mayur, on Mar 5 2008, 06:48 PM, said:

I can't imagine that they wouldn't have used a vacuum sealer if they're actually calling the thing "sous vide."

Still having trouble imagining it, Mayur?

The "misheard as sous vide" theory seems valid, however even if that's what happened we still have people saying that egg was cooked sous vide even though it wasn't!

Look, low-temperature cooking does not necessarily equal sous vide. It's as simple as that. There are hundreds of articles, books, classes and papers out there that make the distinction clear, and also plenty that get it wrong. But just because a lot of people get it wrong doesn't make it right, and Ruth Reichl's job is to be in the group that gets it right. Sam, I'm surprised you'd argue it the other way around given what a stickler you are for accuracy. It's hard to reconcile that approach with, for example, all your posts correcting people's use of the term "saute," your oeuvre of posts on cookware design and materials, etc.