Jump to content


Welcome to the eGullet Forums!

These forums are a service of the Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, a 501c3 nonprofit organization dedicated to advancement of the culinary arts. Anyone can read the forums, however if you would like to participate in active discussions please join the Society.

Photo

Cooking with Ruhlman & Polcyn's "Charcuterie"

Charcuterie Cookbook

  • Please log in to reply
616 replies to this topic

#61 Chris Hennes

Chris Hennes

    Director of Operations

  • manager
  • 7,410 posts

Posted 17 September 2008 - 10:45 AM

By the way, I'm assuming I can freeze the andouille now, right?

View Post

Absolutely -- I have a batch in my freezer right now. I personally like to reheat them in water just above 150, treating the sausage basically like Sous Vide (which in a way it is). I don't find that the Andouille benefit much from sauteeing or roasting, since they pack a powerful flavor punch on their own.

Chris Hennes
Director of Operations
chennes@egullet.org


#62 mkayahara

mkayahara
  • participating member
  • 1,709 posts

Posted 23 September 2008 - 08:40 AM

First off, you probably don't really want to mix in any dry chips: the problem with dry chips is that they actively burn, rather than gently smolder. I guess getting them a bit wet with the soaked ships probably cuts down on this, but nevertheless I'd recommend only using soaked chips, and make sure they aren't getting much oxygen (by putting them in a foil packet). Your wood chips will smolder if they hit around 600 degrees F: the propane flame on your grill is (probably well) over 1000 degrees even at its lowest setting, so if you get the chips right up near the heat source, they should smolder no problem (I'm omitting some technical complications here...). It will take 30-45 minutes before you have significant visible smoke: I generally don't put my meat in the smoker until 30 minutes in.

View Post

I had a batch of bacon ready today, so I tried out this suggestion for smoking it. I put the wet chips in a foil pouch and put them in the grill over low, right on top of the heat diffusing plate. After 45 minutes, I had some wisps of smoke, so I put the bacon on the side of the grill that was turned off. After 2 hours, the bacon was up to temp, but I never really had more than a wisp of visible smoke. It's starting to pick up now, of course.

I'm thinking a hybrid of the method I was using and the method I tried today would be good: either mixing in some dry chips and keeping the heat low, or using all wet chips and starting the heat higher, then dropping it once I get some smoke. Obviously, the ideal situation would be to have the wood in a separate compartment, so the heat driving the wood smoldering isn't also cooking the meat. I guess that's what a real smoker does.

This smoking stuff isn't easy! Clearly I need more practice...
Matthew Kayahara
Kayahara.ca
@mtkayahara

#63 Tela T

Tela T
  • participating member
  • 93 posts

Posted 24 September 2008 - 09:13 AM

First time to this thread and I've already learned so much....! Thanks for all the info and the pictures - now I'm really hungry... :rolleyes:
Live and learn. Die and get food. That's the Southern way.

#64 Chris Hennes

Chris Hennes

    Director of Operations

  • manager
  • 7,410 posts

Posted 24 September 2008 - 10:03 AM

Guanciale (1st ed., pp. 47)
Fresh off my pig head adventure (documented here, not for the squeamish), I had a whole bunch of jowls, so my first thought was to make them into Guanciale. Due to a somewhat sloppy slaughter, and a downright poor fabricator (yeah, that'd be me), they were in various states of "wholeness" and so despite having eight to work with, I only ended up with four times the weight Ruhlman mentions, so I made up a quadruple batch of his seasoning (which is very heavy on the garlic and thyme), complete with a small amount of pink salt:
Posted Image

I poured the mixture into the Ziploc bag with the jowls:
Posted Image

And attempted to massage it into submission, or at least even distribution:
Posted Image

I was trying to avoid getting my kitchen any messier than in already was from all the hog head action, but to no avail. I ended up dumping the whole lot into my last clean big bowl and mixing it up there, then dumping it back into the bag:
Posted Image

Then it was into the fridge for a week. After a week, it looked like this:
Posted Image

I rinsed it off the best I could (a lot of the thyme was resistant to being removed):
Posted Image

Here are half the jowls ready to go into the curing chamber (documented here):
Posted Image

And here they are three weeks later, ready to come out of the chamber:
Posted Image

They were quite firm, more like prosciutto than bacon (I've never had the stuff so I don't know if they are supposed to be like this -- any thoughts?):
Posted Image

I vacuum-packed most of them and froze them, but of course I had to sample some, so I shaved one up very thinly on my meat slicer:
Posted Image

Fried a bit of it up:
Posted Image

Victory!
Posted Image

The first taste is almost sweet, then you get the garlic and thyme, and then the salt kicks in. Hard. I think I let it go too long in the fridge: since the pieces were smaller than Ruhlman's, I should have taken it out after 4-5 days, rather than giving it the whole week. It will still be good in stuff (where I can just reduce the salt in the recipe), but plain it's too salty to really enjoy. I guess I'll have to get me some more pig heads!

Chris Hennes
Director of Operations
chennes@egullet.org


#65 Chris Amirault

Chris Amirault
  • manager
  • 19,489 posts

Posted 24 September 2008 - 11:03 AM

Great pix as always, Chris.

Most of the guanciale I've seen and had is firmer than bacon but not as firm as prosciutto, so I think you're in the right range.

As for the saline OD, you could certainly make some fantastic bucatini all'Amatriciana and adjust the salt levels.
Chris Amirault
Manager, eG Forums.
camirault@eGstaff.org
eG Ethics Signatory
I took my potatoes down to be mashed
Then I made it over to that million dollar bash

#66 JaneMC

JaneMC
  • general member
  • 66 posts

Posted 25 September 2008 - 03:42 PM

Chris,

Great pictures and I'm glad the here the wine cooler has worked out great. I should be getting mine tomorrow....I'm getting it from Lowes and I can't wait! I like the 's' hook idea.

Jane

#67 MikeHartnett

MikeHartnett
  • participating member
  • 632 posts

Posted 01 October 2008 - 08:19 AM

Recipe in the NYT Dining section for "Pork Belly Guanciale." Why would they call it that? Why not bacon?

http://www.nytimes.c...html?ref=dining

#68 Mallet

Mallet
  • participating member
  • 874 posts

Posted 01 October 2008 - 10:06 AM

From Wikipedia

Guanciale is a kind of unsmoked Italian bacon prepared with pig's jowl or cheeks. Its name is derived from guancia, Italian for cheek.


Martin Mallet
<i>Poor but not starving student</i>

www.malletoyster.com

#69 MikeHartnett

MikeHartnett
  • participating member
  • 632 posts

Posted 01 October 2008 - 10:33 AM

From Wikipedia

Guanciale is a kind of unsmoked Italian bacon prepared with pig's jowl or cheeks. Its name is derived from guancia, Italian for cheek.

View Post



Exactly. It isn't guanciale if it's made with belly. Just unsmoked bacon, correct?

#70 jmolinari

jmolinari
  • participating member
  • 1,305 posts

Posted 01 October 2008 - 10:50 AM

Because naming it "pork belly guanciale" makes it sound fancy pantsy and high falootin':)

It's totally incorrect, and basically meaningless. Guanciale is made only and exclusively from the cheeks. The name derives from that as stated above.

#71 MikeHartnett

MikeHartnett
  • participating member
  • 632 posts

Posted 01 October 2008 - 10:52 AM

Because naming it "pork belly guanciale" makes it sound fancy pantsy and high falootin':)

It's totally incorrect, and basically meaningless. Guanciale is made only and exclusively from the cheeks. The name derives from that as stated above.

View Post



Thanks. That's what I thought.

#72 qrn

qrn
  • participating member
  • 748 posts

Posted 01 October 2008 - 10:54 AM

From Wikipedia

Guanciale is a kind of unsmoked Italian bacon prepared with pig's jowl or cheeks. Its name is derived from guancia, Italian for cheek.

View Post



Exactly. It isn't guanciale if it's made with belly. Just unsmoked bacon, correct?

View Post


the spices are the same as guanciale ,just the base flesh is diffferent, Probably otta be "pork belly in the style of guanciale"
Bud

#73 MikeHartnett

MikeHartnett
  • participating member
  • 632 posts

Posted 01 October 2008 - 10:56 AM

From Wikipedia

Guanciale is a kind of unsmoked Italian bacon prepared with pig's jowl or cheeks. Its name is derived from guancia, Italian for cheek.

View Post



Exactly. It isn't guanciale if it's made with belly. Just unsmoked bacon, correct?

View Post


the spices are the same as guanciale ,just the base flesh is diffferent, Probably otta be "pork belly in the style of guanciale"
Bud

View Post


As I understand it, though, it's not the spices so much as the part of the pig. It's like saying "chicken wing in the style of chicken leg."

#74 Stuckey

Stuckey
  • participating member
  • 68 posts

Posted 03 October 2008 - 03:53 AM

I am currently dry curing a belly in the fridge for bacon. The belly is just under 2.5lbs, and I used 25g of dry cure. It's been curing for 5 days now in a ziplock bag, and while there were a few tablespoons of liquid for the first few days, it appears today that there is no liquid at all in the bag. It seems like the belly leached out some liquid early on, but has for some reason re-absorbed it all again. The bag is resting on a tray, which is dry, so I know that the liquid hasn't leaked out of any holes in the bag. I understand that it is important in some recipes for the meat to always be in contact with the brine, but when there is no brine to speak of, what does this mean? I've dry cured half a dozen bellies in the past, and while none of them really gave off heaps of liquid, this is the first that has had no liquid in the bag at the end of curing (typically 5 days). Any thoughts on this? Cheers.

#75 prasantrin

prasantrin
  • participating member
  • 5,411 posts

Posted 03 October 2008 - 04:00 AM

Victory!
Posted Image

The first taste is almost sweet, then you get the garlic and thyme, and then the salt kicks in. Hard. I think I let it go too long in the fridge: since the pieces were smaller than Ruhlman's, I should have taken it out after 4-5 days, rather than giving it the whole week. It will still be good in stuff (where I can just reduce the salt in the recipe), but plain it's too salty to really enjoy. I guess I'll have to get me some more pig heads!

View Post


That looks sooooooo good!

I bet if you could crumble it up into smaller pieces, it would be really good straight on top of some freshly cooked rice. Freshly cooked rice is a good foil for crispy salty things in small doses (like salted fish).
Rona Y.

#76 muichoi

muichoi
  • legacy participant
  • 599 posts

Posted 03 October 2008 - 04:48 AM

Does anyone know why the recipe for pancetta in this book contains garlic? I've never come across such a thing in the Italian article.

#77 dougal

dougal
  • participating member
  • 1,279 posts

Posted 03 October 2008 - 04:56 AM

Does anyone know why the recipe for pancetta in this book contains garlic? I've never come across such a thing in the Italian article.

View Post

When questions of a similar type have come up before, the answer has been: -- because the authors liked the taste that way! I think the book is much stronger on technique than 'authenticity'. The recipes nevertheless are, I gather, authentic to their Michigan roots.

Edited by dougal, 03 October 2008 - 04:57 AM.

"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch ... you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan

#78 qrn

qrn
  • participating member
  • 748 posts

Posted 03 October 2008 - 07:15 AM

I am currently dry curing a belly in the fridge for bacon. The belly is just under 2.5lbs, and I used 25g of dry cure. It's been curing for 5 days now in a ziplock bag, and while there were a few tablespoons of liquid for the first few days, it appears today that there is no liquid at all in the bag. It seems like the belly leached out some liquid early on, but has for some reason re-absorbed it all again. The bag is resting on a tray, which is dry, so I know that the liquid hasn't leaked out of any holes in the bag. I understand that it is important in some recipes for the meat to always be in contact with the brine, but when there is no brine to speak of, what does this mean? I've dry cured half a dozen bellies in the past, and while none of them really gave off heaps of liquid, this is the first that has had no liquid in the bag at the end of curing (typically 5 days). Any thoughts on this? Cheers.

View Post

You are essentially using the method I use for bacon. That is, I add the %ofsalt in the cure I want in the finished product. Then let it sit in a bag, till all is absorbed. It works very well and gives no over/under salted suprises. I try for 3.5% salt in the final, which works well for my tastes. Your % assuming 2.4 lb (1088g) is at 2.3%(again assuming the 25g is all salt, if not, even less%) which would be a bit light for me. I dont think you have any problem
Bud

#79 Stuckey

Stuckey
  • participating member
  • 68 posts

Posted 05 October 2008 - 05:35 AM

Thanks for the info, Bud! :)

Next time I make bacon, I'll try adding the dry cure using the salt box method, just to see if there's any/much difference to the measured method that I've always used. Cheers, mate.

#80 jmolinari

jmolinari
  • participating member
  • 1,305 posts

Posted 05 October 2008 - 05:50 AM

I am currently dry curing a belly in the fridge for bacon. The belly is just under 2.5lbs, and I used 25g of dry cure. It's been curing for 5 days now in a ziplock bag, and while there were a few tablespoons of liquid for the first few days, it appears today that there is no liquid at all in the bag. It seems like the belly leached out some liquid early on, but has for some reason re-absorbed it all again. The bag is resting on a tray, which is dry, so I know that the liquid hasn't leaked out of any holes in the bag. I understand that it is important in some recipes for the meat to always be in contact with the brine, but when there is no brine to speak of, what does this mean? I've dry cured half a dozen bellies in the past, and while none of them really gave off heaps of liquid, this is the first that has had no liquid in the bag at the end of curing (typically 5 days). Any thoughts on this? Cheers.

View Post


I don't think this is a problem. I've found that sometimes the meat in the cure gives off liquid, and sometimes it doesn't...it probably depends on the meat, where it came from, how it was processes, frozen, unfrozen etc. I haven't found this to affect the quality at all though.

#81 Chris Amirault

Chris Amirault
  • manager
  • 19,489 posts

Posted 05 October 2008 - 07:16 PM

I'd like to revisit the issue of Bactoferm ratios as discussed in the first topic. Here's the relevant exchange:

I made the peperone Monday and it's hanging in the wine cellar, looking happy. I followed the recipe, adding 20g Bactoferm disoved in water. Yesterday I found the paper that came with the Bactoferm F-RM-52 packet, and it claims that 25 grams will do 200 pounds of meat! I only used 5# of meat and 20g.  Seems like quite a difference - what's up?

View Post


  the amount of acidification is controlled by the amount of sugars in the sausage, which the bacteria feed on, and not the amount of bacteria added. Having said that, using 20g of bactoferm for each batch of sausage is most likely a waste.

View Post


this is exactly right.  we've added an explanation to the next editions of the book.  the reason for adding so much bactoferm is to make sure enough of the live culture makes it into the sausage.  too much won't hurt.  Butcher-packer recommends using at least a quarter of the package.  the rest can be frozen for serveral months.

View Post


So I'm assuming that Ruhlman suggests 5g/5 lb meat, yes? Does anyone have a second (or third, or...) edition of the book in which the Bactoferm ratio question is explained?

ETA the relevant passage from Butcher-Packer's website:

Each 25-gram packet of Bactoferm™ F-RM-52 will do 220 pounds (100 kilo) of meat. You can use the whole packet in 100 pounds of meat or use half of the packet and refreeze remaining culture.


I don't understand the relation of the two sentences: in the first, it says 220 and the second it says 100.

Edited by chrisamirault, 05 October 2008 - 07:20 PM.

Chris Amirault
Manager, eG Forums.
camirault@eGstaff.org
eG Ethics Signatory
I took my potatoes down to be mashed
Then I made it over to that million dollar bash

#82 jmolinari

jmolinari
  • participating member
  • 1,305 posts

Posted 05 October 2008 - 07:22 PM

I just use the ratio to calculate how much bacteria i need.
eg: if the 25g pack of bacteria is for 200lbs of sausace , 5lbs will get 0.625g...i would just round up to 1g. ( 5/200 * 25).

#83 Chris Amirault

Chris Amirault
  • manager
  • 19,489 posts

Posted 05 October 2008 - 07:23 PM

So, Jason, that suggests that using that significantly smaller amount works just fine for your (excellent) product, yes?
Chris Amirault
Manager, eG Forums.
camirault@eGstaff.org
eG Ethics Signatory
I took my potatoes down to be mashed
Then I made it over to that million dollar bash

#84 jmolinari

jmolinari
  • participating member
  • 1,305 posts

Posted 05 October 2008 - 07:27 PM

Chris, the smaller amount works for my products...whether they are excellent isn't for me to say:)

I normally just round up to make sure i get enough bacteria (in case it's slowly dieing in my freezer or whatever).

I've also found that fermenting at a lower temperature for longer yields a better flavor (for me). I use F-LC culture, ferment at 72 deg. for about 48 hrs.

#85 Chris Hennes

Chris Hennes

    Director of Operations

  • manager
  • 7,410 posts

Posted 06 October 2008 - 08:00 AM

ETA the relevant passage from Butcher-Packer's website:

Each 25-gram packet of Bactoferm™ F-RM-52 will do 220 pounds (100 kilo) of meat. You can use the whole packet in 100 pounds of meat or use half of the packet and refreeze remaining culture.


I don't understand the relation of the two sentences: in the first, it says 220 and the second it says 100.

View Post

My reading of this is that they have designed the package size for 100 kg of meat, but you can use the whole package in less meat, or you can use less of the package and freeze the rest. My understanding is that as long as you have enough live bacteria to get you going, it is actually the amount of sugar (lactose, sucrose, etc.) you add that controls the flavor: the bacteria will simply consume it all, converting it into the flavor compounds we are looking for, regardless of how many of the little buggers there are.

Chris Hennes
Director of Operations
chennes@egullet.org


#86 HKDave

HKDave
  • participating member
  • 733 posts

Posted 15 October 2008 - 02:14 AM

Has anyone noticed that there are 2 different versions of the hot dog recipe (page 164) in 'Charcuterie'?

My copy at home calls the recipe "Chicago-Style All-Beef Hot Dogs", and it calls for a mix of lean beef and suet, and cold-smoking at 90F/32C (sic) then poaching to 140F/60C internal, then chilling.

But the copy at work just calls the recipe "Hot Dogs" and calls for beef short ribs, and hot-smoking to 140F/60C internal, then chilling.

They appear to be the same (First) edition, but not same printing (mine's earlier)... anyone know what's up with this? Are there any other recipes that got changed? I did some Googling to see if this had come up anywhere before but couldn't find anything.

For the record, I've done hot-dogs both ways, but lately it's hot-smoked.
Hong Kong Dave

O que nao mata engorda.

#87 Chris Hennes

Chris Hennes

    Director of Operations

  • manager
  • 7,410 posts

Posted 15 October 2008 - 05:47 AM

Has anyone noticed that there are 2 different versions of the hot dog recipe (page 164) in 'Charcuterie'?

View Post

Yes - According to Ruhlman (original post here):

i was never happy with the hot dog recipe and so worked on an alternative method. [...]

It's impossible to make a hot dog at home identical to the big good producers (such as vienna beef, which makes the best commercial hot dog there is) due to the power of their choppers, so the main goal for the hot dog was to devise a method that could give a home sausage maker a good dog with a firm texture and a good bite.

The main innovations of this recipe, if you will, is to use the meat from beef shortribs, which are very fatty, rather than using suet or pork fat and leaner beef. the flavor of beef fat is very important to the hot dog. this soft fat emulsifies well. second, and this i learned at the vienna beef factory, the salt and pink salt and water are added to the ground shortrib meat at least a day before regrinding and mixing. myosin is salt soluable and this brining stage helps ready the protein that will give the sausage a solid texture.

the main flavors of the hot dog are beef fat and beef, paprika, garlic and smoke. the smoke is more critical in a hot dog than i'd imagined. abra tried adding some liquid smoke to what she felt was an insipid batch and she thought, "There's the hot dog flavor."

they don't need a lot of smoke, just a little. I smoked a batch for twenty minute and finished them in a warm oven and they were extraordinary.

View Post


Chris Hennes
Director of Operations
chennes@egullet.org


#88 HKDave

HKDave
  • participating member
  • 733 posts

Posted 16 October 2008 - 12:33 AM

Has anyone noticed that there are 2 different versions of the hot dog recipe (page 164) in 'Charcuterie'?

View Post

Yes - According to Ruhlman (original post here):

i was never happy with the hot dog recipe and so worked on an alternative method. [...]

View Post

View Post

Thanks, Chris. Now that I think about it, if I had looked up 'Hot Dog' in your index to the old thread instead of Google, it probably would have taken me to the answer... (I just checked, and indeed it does).

I'm going to have to set aside a few days and read that entire 98-page thread.

Are there any other recipe changes in later printings?
Hong Kong Dave

O que nao mata engorda.

#89 Chris Amirault

Chris Amirault
  • manager
  • 19,489 posts

Posted 15 November 2008 - 04:46 PM

Has anyone tried to make the pancetta that isn't rolled (stresa)? R&P say to wrap it in cheesecloth and hang it for a week; CIA's Garde Manger doesn't mention cheesecloth and suggests 2-3 weeks. I'd very much appreciate feedback on this one, as I've had to toss 30% or more of my previous pancetta attempts due to internal molding from inadequate rolling of the arrotola.
Chris Amirault
Manager, eG Forums.
camirault@eGstaff.org
eG Ethics Signatory
I took my potatoes down to be mashed
Then I made it over to that million dollar bash

#90 MikeHartnett

MikeHartnett
  • participating member
  • 632 posts

Posted 15 November 2008 - 04:56 PM

Has anyone tried to make the pancetta that isn't rolled (stresa)? R&P say to wrap it in cheesecloth and hang it for a week; CIA's Garde Manger doesn't mention cheesecloth and suggests 2-3 weeks. I'd very much appreciate feedback on this one, as I've had to toss 30% or more of my previous pancetta attempts due to internal molding from inadequate rolling of the arrotola.

View Post


Chris,

I made stresa quite successfully on a rack in the fridge without cheesecloth. In the old thread, someone said there's no noticeable difference between this and stresa air-dried. Tasted delicious. No mold. Good luck.

Edited by MikeHartnett, 15 November 2008 - 04:58 PM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Charcuterie, Cookbook