Jump to content


participating member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
    Brooklyn, NY USA

Recent Profile Visitors

5,625 profile views
  1. paulraphael

    Restoring this Knife ? Help

    If you want it to look like new (which I wouldn't ... I like the age showing) I'd check with Dave Martell at Japanese Knife Sharpening and see if he'd like to take it on. If you want to keep the battle scars but make it useful, it probably won't be too much work. I'm guessing it's carbon steel, and not terribly hard, so it should be pretty easy to sharpen and work on. If you already have a full set of water stones you're pretty much ready to go. The first step would be removing the active rust (anything red or brown) with Barkeeper's Friend and a scouring pad. This will take off all the patina, too, but it will come back. And don't forget to take care of the wood with some conditioner, like the beeswax / mineral oil blends used for cutting boards. After that it's just going to be about repairing edge damage with your coarsest stone, putting on a new edge with a medium stone, and then polishing with finer stones, if you like. None of us can tell you how fine a grit to sharpen to. That's going to depend on what you like, and on what the steel will take. If it's a soft or coarse-grained steel, going much beyond 2000 grit will be pointless. Depending on how you use the knife, and how you like to cut, you may not want to go past a toothy 1000 grit. FWIW I go to 1000 with my German chef's knife and anything I use for butchering, boning, or ripping open packages. My gyuto and slicing knife I take to 6000–10000. This gives a polished edge similar to a straight razor, but doesn't really make sense for a butchering knife like this. I believe one traditional use of scimitars is butchering meat that's hanging from the ceiling. The curved blade makes it useful when cutting overhead. Another use is slaying your enemies when they're on foot and you're on a horse.
  2. paulraphael

    Hot chocolate--hot cocoa what's the best?

    I've experimented a bunch with hot chocolate over the years. There's a spectrum from intense chocolate flavor to high richness, and you need to find the sweet spot. So to speak. Tastes will vary. The most intense hot chocolates I've had are dairy-free, and are closer to the way cocoa was originally drunk. It sounds like a ripoff ... just chocolate and water. But the chocolate intensity is bonkers. I find it a bit too much, for anything more than a demitasse-sized chocolate dessert. But it's worth trying. I use it as a starting point, and add a bit of whole milk to mellow it out. But I generally like the water / milk blend more than pure milk. If you prefer richness to chocolate intensity, you can go all the way in the other direction and use ganache. This is a handy formula for restaurants, because the ganache is basically an instant hot cocoa mix. Just stir it into hot milk or hot water. Overall I prefer bittersweet chocolate to cocoa powder. Not because it's inherently better, but because in practice it's better. Very few companies make cocoa powder that's as good or as interesting as their chocolates. With a handful of exceptions, it's a byproduct. There are some signs that this is changing. For the time being I use a blend of both. Chocolate for the interesting flavors, cocoa for added intensity with less added fat. Here's a version I've enjoyed: 360g / 1-1/2 cups water 60g / 1/3 cup sugar 120g / 4-1/4 oz Bittersweet chocolate 24g /1/4 cup dutch cocoa 1g / 1/8 tsp salt 240g / 1 cup whole milk -Heat sugar in a heavy saucepan. -boil the water separately -when sugar starts to caramelize, stir vigorously until amber -pour water on sugar, and keep stirring and heating until clumps liquefy -whisk in cocoa -stir in chocolate, continuing to stir until melted -stir in milk -keep on heat until the first bubble pops on the surface -remove from heat and whip (with a whisk or a stick blender) until slightly frothy notes: -you can make it with all milk, if you want less chocolate intensity. -you can make it without the cocoa, if you want to mellow the chocolate flavor. if so, reduce sugar to 1/4 cup. -you can dispense with the caramelization (if you don't caramelize, it will be a bit sweeter).
  3. The moisture content of roasted coffee is so low that I doubt frozen beans are especially tough. They're also not immune to changing. Freezing and vacuum packing slow down the changes but don't stop them. There's a new trend at the super high-end ... freezing green coffee beans in sealed bags, for storage and shipping to the roaster. Some are arguing that this will preserve more flavor. I have no doubt they're going to charge us for it!
  4. paulraphael

    Help with Xanthan Gum

    A few thoughts ... -Probably the chef pre-hydrates the xanthan not because it's hard to hydrate the stuff, but because it takes a while for it to fully hydrate. A blender or homogenizer will disperse it in a hurry, but it can still take a couple of hours to fully hydrate. This means that you can easily overshoot with the concentration. Pre-hydrating would take the guess work and the timing out of the picture. -I'm not convinced he told you the full story. Anything thickened to that consistency with pure xanthan gum would be disgusting. It would basically have the consistency and mouth feel of snot. My guess is that that stuff (whatever it is) was naturally thick, based on whatever was pureed, or else it had some other ingredient that acted as a hydrocolloid. The xanthan could then be used to add a bit of viscosity, cling, and stability. -If you have to get a thin liquid to that viscosity, a couple of suggestions: -a 3:1ratio of lambda carrageenan and xanthan. Use at a concentration 0.4% to 0.6%. Doesn't have to be cooked, but should be dispersed with a blender to prevent clumping. -a 10:1 ratio of arrowroot starch and xanthan. Use at a concentration of 0.5% to 1%. Needs to be cooked to hydrate. But pretty easy to disperse just by making a slurry and whisking. -Maybe the green is chlorophyl. Or maybe it's a Shamrock Shake™®©
  5. Yup. Freshly roasted beans are so full of CO2 they make terrible coffee. Some of it goes into solution, forming carbonic acid, which adds metallic bitter and sour notes. The rapid off-gassing when the hot water strikes also interferes with espresso extraction. Exactly how long the beans should rest (and the maximum time they should be allowed to rest) is quite variable. Generally speaking, if you're making espresso you should rest longer than if you're making brewed coffee. And with lighter roasts you should rest longer than with darker roasts. My favorite coffee shop generally aims for 7 - 14 days off roast, in keeping with what Mitch says. They specialize in espresso, and roast on the light side.
  6. paulraphael

    Stir Frying in Stainless Steel

    Likewise ... having a roast. A stew. A braise.
  7. paulraphael

    The Greatest Fork in the World

    Someone wake me up when the designer of this thing and Gray Kunz collaborate on a spork.
  8. paulraphael

    Stir Frying in Stainless Steel

    Food sticks to stainless because the food is too wet or the pan isn't hot enough. Sticking is always a technique issue. You should be able to cook fish with the skin on in a stainless pan, with no sticking. I still don't think stainless is a great material for traditional wok (one you'll use for real stir frying). It's less conductive than spun steel, and more expensive. And while you could probably get some seasoning to build up on it, it will be fragile, so you'll probably end up cleaning off any polymerized oils. Which means you'll need more perfect technique to keep things from sticking, so it won't be as casual to use. We have a vaguely wok-like pan ... a flat-bottomed, curved sided thing with a conductive disk bottom. I kind of like it. Is this the sort of thing people are talking about? I see these as a hybrid between a wok and a sauté pan. They're nice for sautéing vegetables, because they hold a lot of them, and make tossing them nearly effortless. But this isn't real stir-frying. You're not using the kind of heat that could set the ceiling on fire.
  9. paulraphael

    Home Made Ice Cream (2015– )

    I'm just looking quickly at your formula and don't see anything obviously wrong. Just a couple of quick observations ... - You're down below 8% milk fat. This isn't crazy; it's within the range of a lot of Italian gelato. But it's low, and it's the fat that makes the foam structure. - There's a whole lot of complication going on with your blends of sweetening ingredients, including things like polydextrose and glycerin, which I don't know anything about. There's a possibility that something in there is interfering with foam structure, either by preventing the the emulsifiers from de-emulsifying the fat globules, or by interfering with the partial coalescence, or by who-knows-what. -I didn't do the math, but total solids looks low. The recipe would benefit from a bunch of nonfat milk powder. This would let you reduce or get rid of the protein powder, because milk powder is full of whey and casein. I really doubt the problem is with the stabilizers or emulsifiers. That part of the formula looks completely standard and should work fine. My suggestion would be to make a batch of really basic ice cream. 50/50 cream and whole milk, around 4% egg yolk, enough milk powder to bring total solids to 40%, and ordinary sugars ... try something like 8% sucrose, 3% dextrose. Cook it 75–80°C for 30 to 60 minutes. Flavor it with something that won't mess with the structure. Vanilla, or matcha powder, or herbs. If this won't whip up, then the problem's with your machine. If it whips up fine, then you'll need to figure out which of those variables is causing the problem. I'd start by testing the fats and solids levels. And if those aren't the problem, then start trying out the other ingredients.
  10. That method looks like it's intended to hydrate and swell the cocoa to make it easier to disperse. I'd be surprised if it made any difference in the end result, especially if you've got a blender and a cooking stage in your process.
  11. Whole foods often has bulk selections of Valrhona and Callebaut. The Italian grocery shop at Chelsea Market has bulk Domori and Callebaut. I haven't seen any brick and mortar shops that can compete with Chocosphere in variety or higher-end chocolates.
  12. It should be great for deep frying. If aluminum were bad for you, we'd have a problem, because the biggest dietary source of it is leafy green vegetables.
  13. paulraphael

    Sous Vide Turkey

    There's interesting information on cookingissues.com. Do a search for Dave Arnold's experiments in sous-vide turkey. His best browning/crisping results came from "pour-over frying," which basically means ladling hot oil over the skin of the cooked bird. All attempts at using very high dry heat (torches etc.) failed. I think the oven got rejected on grounds that it would overcook the meat.
  14. To the OP, it doesn't sound like you're really talking about espresso, so these are general guidelines for any coffee process. Coffee beans: darker roast = more bitter (and up to a certain point, also more sweet) lighter roast = less bitter, more acidic, more coffee origin flavors and aromas Extraction: Hotter water = more bitter (and up to a certain point, also more sweet) Cooler water = less bitter, more acidic The acceptable range is 90°C to 96°C. For brewed coffee, I like 93°F for the lighter roasted beans I favor. With some natural process beans (often my very favorite) I get the best balance as low as 90°C. Finer grind (drip) or longer extraction (press pot) = more bitter Coarser grind (drip) or shorter extraction (press pot) = more sour, weaker development of flavors Larger dose = heavier body, stronger flavor (if you go too far, subtler flavors will be masked, and it will be hard to know what you're tasting. It might not be obviously too strong). Lower dose = lighter body, weaker flavor The acceptable range is around 5% to 7.5% coffee relative to water (consider water to be 100%, so 7% means 7g coffee to 100g water) I use 6.4% with a press pot. My advice would be to leave the water temperature and dose (brew ratio) alone in the beginning, and play with grind size. 93°C will be reasonable for any good coffee. As will a 6% brew ratio). If you're using a press pot, grind size will be coarser, but really doesn't have to be as coarse as some suggest. Somewhere between the coarsest setting people recommend and drip-size works well. 4 minutes total brew time will give good results. But first make sure the coffee is good. If it's overroasted, it's going to be bitter, and it's going to suck no matter what you do. There will be no way to balance bitterness and sourness or insipidness with it. This describes 90% of the coffee available at stores and everyday coffee shops in the US, so don't assume your coffee's ok just because it cost a lot or is convincingly branded. Coffee roasters should be presumed guilty unless proven otherwise.
  15. This will vary tremendously with different roast levels, and to a lesser degree with different coffees. A rule of thumb is that the lighter the roast level, the longer it's going to take to offgass, so the longer it will be before it's ready (and before it's no good anymore). My favorite roaster roasts on the light side; his beans are ready for brewed coffee after about 7 days, and for espresso after about 10. They stay fresh-tasting for a good 10 or 14 days after this, although the flavor profile changes. Darker roasting makes the hull of the bean more porous, so gasses leave faster, accelerating all these processes. Natural process vs. wet process coffees differ here as well. The natural process beans may do better with a slightly longer rest than the more common wet processed beans.