paulraphael

Rental equipment tends to get abused, so I'm thinking that the consumer circulators will have pretty short lifespans. The library should probably budget for replacing the things every few months. The alternative of lending professional circulators probably isn't too appealing, since they tend to be so much bigger and heavier. And they're equally vulnerable to death by drowning. I think it's a great idea, at least as an experiment. I would have loved this. I made my first forays into s.v. with borrowed equipment, but was lucky enough to know people who owned the stuff.

Interesting. I haven't had that kind of luck with sheet pans that have been assaulted by the dishwasher. No sense of the the oxalic acid magic happening with aluminum oxide. Maybe it's a slower reaction than with stainless steel.

Yeah, if you want to nit-pick everything.

FWIW, I've used ziplocs exclusively for the five or six years I've been cooking sous-vide. I noticed that Dave and Nils at cookingissues.com say they use either ziplocs or plastic wrap for most s.v. cooking, relegating their vacuum sealer to other duties (storage, infusions, instant pickling, etc.). I've had one bag leak ever. Now as a precaution, I double-bag for any long cook above 85°C. I think the biggest drawback of ziplocs is that they lose strength as they approach the boiling point. Some other caveats: they're not reliable if you reuse them, they're almost guaranteed to leak if you freeze the contents and then thaw, and you have to get the one's labelled "freezer bag," and that don't have the plastic slider to close them.

Interesting. I've never pulled off this particular kind of alchemy, even with BKF. Maybe you're actually abrading off the oxidized aluminum on the surface?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's the case. Last month I visited Michael Laiskonis's chocolate lab at ICE, and just about the only piece of equipment missing from this extremely shiny playground was a mill for grinding cocoa powder. They have a 100-ton hydraulic press to separate the cocoa solids, but nothing to refine them. So if you're wondering what to get them for christmas ...

I'm betting that Askinosie just isn't able to mill the cocoa as finely as the bigger industrial manufacturers. This is likely to be a problem for anyone trying to make chocolate ice cream with single-origin cocoa powders. There just aren't many of them, and they mostly seem to be available from small artisanal chocolate makers, who would likely have lower-powered milling equipment. I wrote to the people at Match Chocolate about this. They advertise SO cocoa powders, and warn in the descriptions that they're milled coarser than industrial cocoas. I asked if they were coarse enough to affect the texture of ice cream, and they said absolutely. They're hoping to upbgrade their equipment at some point, but it doesn't sound like any time soon. This is an issue for me, since I like to feature distinctive main ingredients in my ice creams. I'm much less interested in generic tasting-blends than in pure ingredients with interesting origin flavors. For chocolate, this mostly means using couverture, but this choice comes with a litany of texture challenges from the cocoa butter. I'm planning to start a new round of chocolate ice cream experiments soon. The approach I've been using, which needs a lot of work, is to mix an SO couverture (like Cluizel Villa Gracinda) with a good quality non-SO cocoa (Cluizel or Valrhona). The idea is to get some of the distinctiveness from the couverture, but to not use so much that texture problems are too noticeable. I'd like to switch to 100% SO cocoa powders, but don't know of any right now that are suitable. Callebaut advertises some on their commercial site; I haven't yet figured out how good they are or how to get my hands on them. Also I believe that non-Dutched cocoa would be ideal in ice cream. Unfortunately these aren't so popular with the great better chocolate makers. It would be nice to see some variety here.

I have a mix of Lincoln, Chicago, and some unbranded ones from the restaurant store. The Lincolns and the heavier no-name ones are my favorite. The Chicago Metallic has a slight advantage in cases where you don't want things to brown as aggressively ... the steel is a bit less conductive than aluminum. But it's a minor difference and mostly I use whichever pan is on top. The disadvantage of the Chicago pans is temporary warping. When subject to rapid temperature change they often go "ping!" and twist themselves a bit longitudinally. They've always returned to normal, but this is disconcerting, and at least once has sent a cookie into the air. Overall I think heavier gauge bare aluminum is a better material than steel for sheet pans .

It would let you cook thicker fluids, or larger quantities of fluids while covered. Like for custards, or pasteurizing ice cream, or maybe even tempering chocolate. You need more precise temperature control (and for longer times) with these kinds of things than with most things that cook in a skillet. I've always wanted a lab hot plate with magnetic stirrer, but they're likewise overpriced, and usually are poorly designed for cooking.

You got it for the right price! I'd love to see something like this, but 1) much cheaper, and 2) with a lab-style magnetic stirring rod. It may not be possible to do both induction and a magnetic stirring rod ... anyone know about this? But for many things I'd rather have the stirrer and a hot burner than induction without.

To be fair, that guy at BBQ Bible was all about results. No idea what other BBQ people think of him, though ...

That's charitable in this case. Nevertheless, people make exceptional BBQ by sous-viding the meat, partially drying the surface, and then smoking it. Or in some cases changing the order of operations. You can have semantic and taxonomic arguments all day long (as BBQ fanatics love to do). But when it's done well the results kick ass by any conventional BBQ standards—besides lack of a visible smoke ring, which doesn't mean anything. Nathan Myhrvold advocates for this technique, and he's been a member of a champion BBQ team.

One thing with the cuisinarts (and probably every brand) is that the metal blade is going to get dull eventually, and make it seem like the machine has lost its oomph. It may not be immediately obvious that the blade is the problem. These blades have tiny serrations and so are probably impractical to sharpen, but replacements are pretty reasonably priced.

Not exactly the same thing, but it's pretty damn good. I've just decided I'm not going to spend 25 to 30 times as much per milliliter for something that just has a slightly different flavor profile. If I had 25 times as much money (many people do!) I'd collect them all.

I don't know about their pans. The big danger to one's bank account is their hams.

I have a perfume-bottle-sized aceto tradizionale reggio emilio, which is delicious, but when it's gone I won't even consider replacing it. It probably goes for over $100 now, while I can get a 375ml bottle of Pedro Ximinez sherry vinegar for around $17. The sherry vinegar is a little dryer, and not quite as viscous, and has a different flavor profile. But it's every bit as good, and at least as complex, and I don't feel like I'm dispensing some irreplaceable elixir every time I throw together a vinaigrette. What's more, for 1/3 the price of that precious balsamico, I've put together a whole stable of sherry vinegars from Despaña in NYC, that includes moscatel, fino palomino, and cheaper grade palomino vinegar in a big bottle. In my vinegar cabinet, Spain has ignominiously kicked Italy's ass. Edited to add: I don't like the supermarket grade balsamic vinegars. I don't know what they actually are, or why they get so much shelf space.

I've got an 11-cup Cuisinart from the early 90s that's endured much use and abuse. It hums along like it's a piece of commercial gear. Not sure if the quality's changed since then.

I wouldn't feel so bad that they don't pay attention to you, because clearly they haven't paid attention to anyone else who knows anything. As gfweb said, it sounds like the results would be just awful, so it's hard to imagine there would be too many customers in danger of getting sick. But for the unfortunate few, the meat is being held way too long at dangerous temperatures, where toxin-producing bacteria can thrive. After its bagged theres even a danger of spore-producing bacteria becoming activated. The toxins produced by these bacteria aren't going to be deactivated by the 90C sous-vide bath ... that will only serve to turn the meat gray and tough and bad tasting. Where does this "cool to 16C in 6 hours" come from? That's bizarre. Health codes just about everywhere say that if food spends more than 4 hours between 4°C and 40°C you have to throw it out. This is a bit too conservative ... the danger zone should be rewritten as 4°C to 55°C, with longer safe-holding times at the low end of the range. But no matter what, your coworkers' numbers are whackadoodle. edited to add: How are they passing inspections with that 9°C fridge?

Did you try any of their Grand Cru single origins? I haven't had these, but suspect that if Valrhona's making anything it amazing, you'd find it there. Valrhona made its name with blends like manjari and guanaja, which are less amazing than solid and balanced. They make these with complete consistency and predictable functional qualities, so pastry chefs can buy them year after year and know exactly how they'll behave. Artisanal chocolates are getting more like wine from a particular vintage that won't ever be exactly replicated.

SV Dash will tend to give unreasonably long cooking times. It's not wrong; it's just being maddeningly accurate, and reporting the actual time it will take the very center to reach the precise temperature you've entered. The last couple of degrees may take well over an hour. You can have a much easier time if you compensate slightly. Whatever my theoretical target temperature is, I set the core temperature in SV dash 0.5°C lower than this. And I set the bath temperature 1°C higher. Results are exactly what I'd get if working it out by trial and error, and times can be as little as half. I suspect most recipes and most of the consumer apps build this kind of tweak into their tables. I wrote a post about this method here.

I'm also suggesting that even among enthusiasts, if you're doing a tasting of a bunch of SO chocolates, your favorite might be low on another chef's list, and vice versa. It's just the nature of the beast when you're dealing with distinctive flavors.

I bet you'd find that once you get to the level Cluizel / Felchin / Amadei, etc, you'll find much more difference between the particular varieties than between the brands. Especially when you deal with the fickleness of personal taste ... all of these makers' single-origin chocolates are so distinctive that they're likely to be divisive.

What's Cocchi Rosa? How does it taste compared with Cocchi di Torino vermouth (which is my fave)?

We're talking past each other Scott. I think I understand what you're saying. When I mentioned ambient temperature of the oven, I was talking about the temperature of the surfaces, and contrasting them with the radiant heat thrown off by a broiler. The former can be measured by temperature and emissivity of the surface; the latter can't. I don't know what's a "1 in 1000" broiler." I'm just talking about a powerful one. Nathan Mhyrvold has had success with some electric broilers; I've seen success with the kinds of gas infra-red broilers you see on BlueStar, Wolf, and DCS consumer ranges. I wouldn't worry too much about someone spending too much money on these ranges just to start a pizza hobby. Anyone who's that single-minded will just get a pizza oven. Or hack their self-cleaning ovens like Jeff Varasano, or do it outside on a steel in a kamado. I've read your thoughts on dough hydration. My short reply is that I disagree. My more nuanced reply is that I hate working with high-hydration pizza dough, so it's not a point I care too much about. I'll just suggest you'll have no trouble finding examples of extremely puffy focaccia and other hearth breads made with 80%+ hydration, and made this way for sound reasons. Go ahead and use the Brooklyn Neapolitan term. I'm pretty sure I didn't coin it. But know what I'm referring to. I'm thinking of places like Roberta's and Motorino and Wheated, which may even be following VPN rules (I don't know because they don't talk about it; Naples isn't part of their identity). But they go for a slightly different crust texture. The main difference is that it isn't quite as thin and soggy and self-destructing in the center. The slices have some substance, and won't completely flop into a puddle of soup when you pick them up (with this pizza knife and fork are optional). All these shops use wood or wood-hybrid ovens, because they're cool, not because they're mandatory. My favorites use natural leavening. They all use 00 flour because of the high heat, and they're all pulling 60 - 90 second pies. Roberta's at least in its incarnation from 5 years ago, was making the best pizza I've ever had. Edited to add: upthread I mentioned substituting bromated flour, but I meant partially malted flour. It's the lack of malting that keeps Caputo pizza flour from browning at lower temperatures. Another compensation is to ferment longer, which creates more sugars. Some people just throw some honey in the dough. I don't work with Caputo flour so I don't know how longer than normal fermentation affects texture and flavor.

Sure! I assume obsession is why most people would do it. Or maybe just falling for the process. It's like when people who live in major cosmopolitan cities get into making bread ... they'll have to jump through many hoops just to equal what the best local bakeries are doing for $6 a loaf. But the process becomes an end in itself. If it doesn't, they've made a math mistake.