Jump to content

TheBacchus

participating member
  • Posts

    95
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TheBacchus

  1. Zoticus has a point - everyone has their preferences. We are talking about the difference between someone ordering their steak rare and someone ordering it medium to well because they 'dont like blood'. Perhaps the reason people talk about perfection is not because it it the perfect way to cook something. In my opinion it is because it is the method that is as true to the original form as possible without simply serving it raw. You retain all the nutrients, moisture and content of your protein - cook it in a controlled and gentle environment to achieve a safe level at which to consume it whilst adding all the benefit to the protein by way of seasoning or marinates Put like that is incredibly sterile and un-romantic but i think it helps explain the difference between the meaning of the superlatives that are often linked to discussions about sous-vide Strip everything away and i think most people would agree that sous-vide has its place in any kitchen as a means of cooking and that in the right context new technologies can be used to produce innovative and exciting ways to cook food. Furthermore i think the proof is in the (sous-vide) pudding when you look at the proponents of my theory Juan Roca, Feran Adrian, Heston Blumenthal, Anthony Flinn, Willie Dufresne, Thomas Keller and so on and so on
  2. Good point Benjamin For me it is because of these new machines that sous-vide has had a 'renaissance' of late after suffering from bad press in the 80's. That bad press related to facts that are diminished now due to the introduction of advanced technologies such as the superb machines produced by Roner that have 0.1 degree control and water circulation I think the massive distinction is also between which side of the fence you fall on with regard to uses: I disagree (from a food/restaurant perspective) with the use of these technologies (immersion circulators and vacpacs) and techniques (sous-vide) as methods of mass production or storage I whole heartedly agree with the use of the above as a means of cooking to achieve superior results with food - marinating, seasoning or whatever, a piece of meat, fish or veg and IMMEDIATELY cooking this to achieve the desired effects that you can achieve with controlled low-temperature cooking. For me this is the application that professional and amateur chefs are raving about and should not be confused with the former application
  3. I can understand your viewpoint but unless your basing 'hardly pleasant' on an actual experience i would urge you to try it first. Far from being unpleasant the results are in fact extremely good and pleasant indeed I agree that it is nothing new to cook what are often seen as cheap or tough cuts of meat such as shanks for long periods of time but surely that highlights my point of the interesting and positive results you can achieve cooking lean cuts of meat like steaks in this way. And what is the difference between searing a steak and finishing it in the oven and cooking steak sous-vide and finishing with searing? Also agree with the veg - endless possibilities there. I shall be trying your tip soon!
  4. I think that most top chefs have been using sous-vide to cook meat and fish for some time now. What is really exciting is seeing chefs cooking veg and even stocks using sous-vide methodology although some time restrictions start to make it a bit absurd (72 hour stocks anyone?) I went to Tragabuches in Spain a few weeks ago and was pretty intrigued to see entire dishes cooked using sous-vide - a quick look in the kitchen revealed 3 circulator baths - one each for meat, fish and veg. A bit extreme? Well in my opinion it comes down to one thing - taste. That is what customers are paying for wherever or whatever they eat - the best meat, the best fish, the best carrot or whatever. If one restaurant or chef believes that the best way is sous-vide then why not. One of the best arguments on sous-vide is one where the ingredient is so synonymous with a particular type of cooking that it is deemed impossible to question. Try this. A steak - good old fashioned sirloin or rump, 100% synonymous with a grill save for the recent trend of finishing them in an oven. My friends argued that the entire beauty of a steak on the grill could never be equalled or bettered by sous-vide, something we put to the test. 61.5 degrees cooked for 20 mins followed by a quick searing in a hot pan (Maillard Reaction). Bearing in mind there is no resting time as with a steak cooked at high temperatures the time to cook this classic dish is pretty much the same. And the results? Well there were 6 hungry men who ate the 'sous-vide steak' and a pretty impressive 5 preffered it cooked this way (the six doesnt even count cause he's weird). They thought the meat was perfectly cooked (a given because of the controlled temperature), but also the taste of the meat was better, it was more succulent, it had a softer texture and left a much cleaner palatte. Whatever the outcome of these ongoing debates there are 6 converts right there. Other things i've personally cooked sous-vide?: Chickens (whole) as per MPW (which he was doing in the early 90's!) Steaks Any fish Scallops (gives a very gelatinous texture almost like a gelee) Carrots Parsnips Lamb (racks) Lamb (legs - 36 hours!) Pork Potatoes Foie Onions And i have so far resisted the temptation to come home from the pub and cook yesterdays leftover shepherds pie sous-vide as well as my saturday morning bacon buttie sous-vide. Some things you just dont mess with......
  5. Your right - some of the results sous-vide can have on both taste and texture is absolutely phenomenal. Salmon - as mentioned above - yields completely unique results to salmon cooked using 'traditional methods'. Cooked sous-vide it appears uncooked and has a texture more like smoked salmon but a taste that is very true to the cut and is full of flavour. Obviously this is because the fish retains 100% of its nutrients and natural flavour by being cooked in this way. Also, i disagree with the statement that some chefs consider this cooking method 'cheating' or that it requires less skill. On the contrary there is an art to it just like other cooking means such as braising, grilling, roasting and poaching. For example, try cooking a piece of salmon sous-vide for 13 minutes at 50 degrees and then try cooking it at 60 degrees for 10 minutes - completely different results. I think that Chefs are starting to realise that sous-vide DOES have a place in the kitchen and that many are starting to utilise advances in technology to apply these to the dishes they produce. Here's an interesting thought - over the years there have been many professional kitchen appliances that have made their way through to the domestic kitchen. I, for one, can certainly remember the day that i got my first slow-cooker, first juicer, first espresso machine etc If professional kitchens continue to innovate and use technology to find new ways of cooking, such as sous-vide, it cant be long before a sous-vide/slow cooked recipe appears in one of the many cookbooks we see coming out? As soon as this happens surely there will be a demand created by people wanting to impress friends at dinner parties and home with their new party piece recipe? And as quick as you can say 'out with your oven' immersion circulator baths for the domestic kitchen will be at a department store near you!
  6. well well well... is that what is known as a shock upset? Tsk, never believe gossip!!
  7. Living just off Kinglsand Road I couldnt agree more!! Not tried the Clerkenwell Road branch yet but tend to go to Au Lac or Miso if I'm in the mood for such offerings... Phil
×
×
  • Create New...