paulraphael

Well, in most cases we're talking about canned, frozen, or dehydrated products, so shelf life doesn't come from the salt. And I don't think it's weight. Even the saltiest of foods are only a few percent salt by weight. The weight comes from water. Luckily no ... that's 38% your recommended daily allowance. Still it's a lot! Salt, and mystery protein, but mostly water. Lots of lower end deli meats are pumped full of some variety of brine ... it raises the weight for cheap, and gives a vague illusion of juiciness. If you ever see something labelled "ham and water product," it means they've exceded the legal added water limits of plain ham.

Yup. And I suspect that what you're calling "interesting ingredients" companies like Campbells and Swanson call "expensive ingredients."

Maybe in some homes, but I think a lot of these commercial foods are just oversalted, plain and simple. Part of it is that people who eat a lot of fast food and packaged food get desensitized and think it tastes normal. But the root cause, I suspect, is that salt is cheap, and an abundance of it helps distract from the lack of other flavors. Case in point is commercially packaged stock. Even the "low sodium" varieties have a ton of salt (consider that the optimum amount of salt in stock is none). Before i made my own stock I tried several brands to see if any could be used to make reduction sauces. The answer was no; all resulted in brine. I would use the better low sodium stocks as a partial foundation for soups; the regular stocks I find inedible. And for what it's worth, I feel that I use a lot of salt in my cooking. I don't even think I make any desserts without salt.

We've talked more about materials than shapes. Seems like there are two basic styles: tall and narrow, low and wide. I generally like the tall/narrow ones, which resemble electric mixer bowls. You can whisk more vigorously without food ending up on the walls, and they take up less counter space. But I've seen more of the low/wide ones in commercial kitchens. Thoughts?

I have a bunch of commercial sheet pans bought used from resto stores ... they've been practically demolished by dishwasher detergent, but the damage is esthetic. I use them all the time. I've cleaned them with barkeeper's friend and have no problem with residue coming off on food or anything else. The oxalic acid probably reverses the oxidation just like cream of tartar.

Especially since (to co-opt scientific jargon) several people here have been unable to duplicate their results. Not that anyone here has tried to replicate the exact conditions of their experiment--but considering that their intent was to simulate real world burger-making conditions, and their conclusion was presented as universally true--then we can trust there's something seriously wrong with their methods.

A couple of years ago I saved myself from the insane assylum by doing this. I now use three sizes of those glad or ziplock containers (cheap, decent, and easy to replace) and two sizes of takeout containers (cheaper, equally decent, easier to replace). In addition to storage, these \ all work as prep containers. For bigger quantities i use stainless mixing bowls, but the plastic containers do most of the work. Looking into kitchens at some of the best restaurants, a common denominator is the ubiquitous pint and quart takeout containers used for mise en place. Footnote: I tried to give my old tupperware to the salvation army, and the volunteer out on the sidewalk said, "they won't accept this garbage."

If you don't work for the person and don't happen to respect them, you're free to leave it off. I think it was Oscar Wilde who said, "a gentleman is someone who never insults anybody ... by mistake."

That explains it. I generally roast waxier potatoes. And I get the soft/crisp thing just by using a very hot oven.

Well, they're not even acknowledging the myriad variables they haven't controlled. People throw around words like "scientific" without understanding what the word means. It's more than observation. At the very least, a scientific approach to this experiment would require them, in their analysis, to discuss all the limitations of their approach, and all the variables they were unable to consider. By failing to do that, and by coming to an absolute and simplistic conclusion ("salting before grinding makes sausage!") they've done junk science.

It might be signifcant that they used 2% of the meat's weight in salt. That's a lot. I don't know if it's more than what mcdonalds and bk use, but it's more than I can stomach by a factor of 2. I use about .75% salt by weight. I want the salt to make the burger taste more like beef, not to make it taste like a salk lick. There are other variables the article doesn't mention: how long before grinding did they salt? What size grinding disk? I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that if the meat is salted right before chilling (up to an hour before grinding) and ground with a course disk (1/8") you will observe none of the transformation they're describing. I've done this countless times, and I've done it while experimenting with many different cuts of meat.

Interesting. I always salt before grinding, just because it mixes the salt thoroughly without forcing you to overwork the ground meat ... it's generally best to work the meat as little as possible. I've never experience a bouncy, sausage-like texture. I find them extremely tender.

I've always assumed that the unique flavors of a traditional confit (the slight rancidity, and possibly other aged flavors) are the product of storing, not cooking. Confit was traditionally a preservation method; you'd eat your duck legs weeks after cooking. So it would make sense that you wouldn't taste differences in these methods right after cooking.

It was foodpairing.be! Thanks so much. The other links are also cool, and I've never seen any of them, so thanks both of you for the great info.

There was a site a year or two ago that looked like a research project ... it attempted to match foods based on shared flavor molecules. I forgot to bookmark it and now can't find it. Anyone know what I'm talking about?

There are a lot of reasons to keep cutlery out of the dishwasher. In truth, a knife like one of the big German brands, with it's very stainless stainless steel and plastic handles, put in one of those knife protectors, will probably be ok. But knives made out of better steel tend to have much less chromium in the alloy, and tend to be much less corrosion resistant. The highly alkaline detergents used in a dishwasher are corrosive to those steels, and will ruin your edges quickly. The possibility of detergent water seeping between the blade and the handle is also bad news. And of course, if a knife has a wood handle, you're just committing vandalism by putting it in there.

I'm baffled by the benefit of parboiling roasted potatoes. I jump through all kinds of molecular hoops when mashing them, but the best roasted spuds I've ever had came out of a 500 degree oven, with practically no fuss. Enlighten me. If anyone says anything convincing I'll do a side by side trial.

So, the Cooking Issues blog demonstrates that there are significant differences in the quality of results from different pressure cookers. Of the three different types they tested, Kuhn Rikon was the clear winner. The distinction was the type of pressure regulating mechanism. Does anyone know of other (prefferably cheaper) brands that use the same type of mechanism?

Something awesome and consumeable is often a safe bet. A pile of porcini mushrooms, great wine/booze, etc. etc.

Never. Nor would I put them in a drawer (unless it has a knife storage thing to protect the edges) or on a ceramic dish, or leave them unatended on a counter. They're in my hand, on a cutting board, or in their block. Knife edges are the most fragile thing in the kitchen and need to be treated as such.

Never. Nor would I put them in a drawer (unless it has a knife storage thing to protect the edges) or on a ceramic dish, or leave them unatended on a counter. They're in my hand, on a cutting board, or in their block. Knife edges are the most fragile thing in the kitchen and need to be treated as such.

Marlene, good point about not turning too soon. This principle that applies just about everything, including proteins. Let the browning reactions progress enough, and food will release from the pan on its own. You'll never need a teflon pan for protein ... even with the most delicate fish.

Chris, I do it basically your way, but find no need to preheat the pan. Hot oven, definitely: i always preheat to 500. Any new potato, fingerling, or other tasty spud with a tender skin is ideal. I cut them into halves, quarters, or smaller, depending on original size. small and even is good, but doesn't make a huge difference. Toss with plenty of olive oil, salt, pepper, then spread into a sheet pan and into the oven. If I'm doing two sheets, the bottom one goes in several minutes earlier to compensate for radiant heat lost to the top pan. ideally, toss spuds around with tongs after they start browning. A great twist: while they're roasting, mince a bunch of whatever herbs you have around, and make a slurry with more olive oil. After the spuds have cooked 20 minutes or so and are mostly browned, pull them out and slather the herb oil all over. Turn oven low (300 or so). put the spuds back in; if the oven is still blazing hot, leave the door partly open for a few minutes. After 10 minutes or so, the spuds will be fork tender, well browned, and infused with herb flavor. And you won't have incinerated the herbs or added any bitterness. I can't imagine having to jump through hoops like parboiling ... these are so good.

Technically, my nonstick pan has lasted over five years. But I rarely use it, since I hardly ever do egg cookery. I used to use it for flaky fish; then I learned correct sauté technique for fragile proteins and just do all that on stainless now. Things better on non-teflon surfaces. And you can make pan sauces. I don't believe there's a nonstick surface that can be used daily (even with perfect care) and maintain its performance. People often think they do, but side-by-side comparisons with a new pan are usually night and day. Maybe some innovations have snuck under my radar, but to my knowledge everything is either some flavor of PTFE (with different kinds of technologies and marketing buzzwords bonding it to the pan), or something that's less nonstick that PTFE in the first place.

That's a respectable philosophy, too, but it means not buying nonstick pans. Or at least, using them only for things that require nonstick (eggs ... and even here, "require" is an exaggeration ... people cooked eggs pretty well for centuries without teflon). The point is that even the megabucks nonstick pans are disposable. The expensive ones often have coatings that won't flake off, but they all lose their magic powers. None of them lasts through much use, even when cared for.