paulraphael

If you like rib-eye, try chuck. Here's a post where I described a successful long cook. (I'm working on a blog post on this, with all the information compiled in one place)

I don't think you can hold lean / tender cuts of meat for a couple of hours without drying them out too much. Long cooking times work for tough cuts, especially if they're reasonably well marbled. Anything like a rib-eye is going to start going downhill shortly after it's cooked through. The silk purse / sow's ear approach works with true tough cuts of meat. These tend to be decently marbled even when cheap, and more importantly, they have plenty of collagen that can be broken down into gelatin over time. Tender cuts don't have this. After they're cooked, their only transformation is to get drier.

That temperature is too low for 48 hours. And 48 hours is too short even at 140°F. You're wildly overgeneralizing from your bad results. All you can conclude is that 48 hours at 136.5 gives lousy results. Which most of us could have told you to expect. If you try it at the times / temps people are suggesting here, you will not get the lousy results you describe. Not unless you're doing something wrong that's completely unrelated. Prime grade short ribs are not required (I've never used these). Supermarket short ribs have a ton of marbling and work fine. You may decide prefer a more conventional braised texture (from cooking higher / shorter) but there's nothing dry, chalky, or unchewable about well executed 72-hour short ribs.

72 hour short ribs are the most amazing I've ever had. 48 hour chuck can be amazing. Not a hint of mush or "saw dust" with either, if the temps are right. The MC books suggest 100 hours at 60°C for oxtail. But for a traditional braised texture, they suggest 70°C for 24 hours, which is practically the same as your time/temp.

I'm curious if anyone's had it cooked like a steak. Never heard of that ... could be interesting. I think my first attempt would be as at braising temps.

We can assume by looking at it that if it's indeed a pressure oven, it won't achieve anything like the pressures of a pressure cooker. A door the size of a microwave's would have to hold back more than a ton of force if you pressurized it to 1 bar. That door isn't burly enough. But even at some fraction of 1 bar, you would see a couple of advantages. First, the oven would be venting much less of the moisture released from the food. This, combined with the small volume of the oven, would lead to a very humid cooking environment. Second, the increase in boiling point of water would reduce the evaporative cooling at the surface of the food, at least somewhat. Both of these factors would lead to a wet-bulb temperature that's much closer to the dry-bulb temperature, when compared with a conventional oven. This would make most things cook faster and more predictably. I don't know about a 1-hour turkey. My closest frame of reference is poaching turkeys (I poach in court bouillon, then roast at high temperature). In 90 minutes a 16 pound turkey is about 90% cooked. That size bird would probably not fit in this oven. Poaching happens at a lower temperature but at 100% humidity, so it may be somewhat analogous to what goes on in a pressure oven.

How many bottles of water can you carbonate with one cartridge? And how would this thing work for non-standard bottles (we used a regular wine bottle to make fake champagne in the soda stream)?

rotuts, on 06 Aug 2014 - 12:37 PM, said: 'grain-fed' or 'grain finished' add a high proportion of fat to the ( end ) diet which is the point of grain feeding it gets deposited in the meat and the 'fat' pure pasture fed beef is much leaner This is true most of the time, but it's not necessarily so. Cattle can be fattened on grass. It just takes a long time and is expensive, so very few people do it. There are some people raising USDA prime beef in the northeast and finishing on grass. I haven't tried it.

Could it be a mis-named steam oven (like a cheap-o combi)?

I haven't done a lot of tasting of milk from grass-finished cows, but I'm guessing you'd find it similar to grass-finished beef. The grassy flavor notes come from the green part. Cows with a lot of dried forage in their diet seem like the worst of all worlds. They have the leanness of grass-finished cows without the flavor. I'm not sure how stored grass like silage effects things. I've seen some grass finished meat that's actually got a lot of marbling. But not often. My understanding is that it's a time-consuming and expensive trick to pull off. The best beef likely comes from cows that are pasture-finished but that have free access to grain. Typically from places like central california where they have green grass year-round (or close to it). I don't know if any dairies are doing this. If so, it's probably not Organic Valley.

Grain refers either to cereals or legumes. We think of legumes as beans, but some grass-like plants (like alfalfa) also qualify. Cereal grains are seeds from grasses. So the huge kerfuffle of "grass vs. grain" just means leaf vs. seed from the same freakin' plant. The seeds just have higher energy density, while sacrificing chlorophyl and some other nutrients. Animals dining on fields of oat grass, wheat grass, barley grass, or alfalfa eat plenty of grain without any human intervention.

How was it?

I'd get one if we had room. Forget the flavor packets. It would be all about the Big Questions, like, "what can I carbonate that I'm not supposed to?" Top of the list: French chardonnay. Dave Arnold and Nils Noren reported making some shockingly good, shockingly cheap fake champagne.

Generalizing about plastic is like generalizing about metal. They are both such large families of materials that there is practically nothing you can say that's true for everything under those headings. We cook in stainless steel with impunity; we do not cook in lead. Tin, no problem. Mercury, big problem. Plastic? Anyone who generalizes about it won't even be able to tell you what it is. The short version is that there are many specific plastics that we know leach potentially harmful chemicals into food. And there are many specific plastics that show no evidence of doing so. Just like with metals. There is nothing special about plastic as a category. If you're scared of polypropylene (takeout containers, tupperware) HDPE (soda bottles) or LDPE (ziploc bags, plastic wrap), your fear is not based on anything known to science. The only known issues with these plastics is they're not fantastically heat tolerant. I've never seen a ziploc bag melt from boiling water or steam, but I've seen them soften to the point that the seal can fail easily. I've seen steam generated in the microwave warp the lid of takeout containers. And plastic wrap is pretty wimpy when it comes to heat. Nevertheless, I heat polypropylene containers in the microwave all the time, and sous-vide in ziploc bags at temps up to 95°C. There's just no known reason to fear chemicals leaching from these materials at cooking temperatures. A skeptic could say "you don't know for certain that they're safe." This is, of course, correct. But it's also correct for everything else in your kitchen. You don't know for sure that the stainless lining of your pans doesn't leach chromium; you don't know what's leaching from the particular borosilicate glass of your mixing bowl, or from the ceramic glaze of your dinnerware. It's probably nothing, but you don't know. The only difference here is the negative emotions attached to the world "plastic."

I made a variation as a birthday cake and it came out great. Mine was just the exploding crust, raspberry filling, and chocolate ganache on top. Techincally it was a truffle tart (someone suggested I call it a pop tart). To keep the pop rocks from pre-exploding, I modified the recipe to use brown butter (cooks off the water, and tastes amazing). I dispensed with browning the shortbread cookies, because the ones I got were nicely browned already, and I'd be getting plenty of toasted flavor from the butter. I also put a barrier layer of chocolate over the crust. This was dark chocolate, melted, and with a little butter swirled in for pliability. The raspberries where cooked on low heat until soft. Then I strained out the juices, reduced them, and thickened with a bit of xanthan and arrowroot starch (pectin would probably work also, but I was on vacation and these were the thickeners I'd brought along). The ganache on top was just 50/50 dark chocolate and cream. I considered putting the raspberries on top, but the chocolate top let me make a stencil and dust with cocoa powder. Despite the thickening, some raspberry juice oozed out of the springform pan while setting up in the fridge. But it didn't soak the base. There was plenty of popping. Even two days later the last of the leftovers had some pop left. In the future I might up the proportion of popping candy (I got the stuff from Molecular Recipes). This was more of a crackling cake than an exploding one.

I am aware of the claim, and also aware that it's misleading. There are issues with giviing digestive problems (acidosis) to cattle by switching them too quickly to a grain-rich diet, or by giving them a poor mix of grains and forage. But cattle can do fine on a diet that's rich in grain. Here's one explanation. Antibiotic use is unrelated to any of this. Feed lots that use antibiotics generatlly do so to compensate for crowded and unsanitary conditions. People associate these conditions with grain-finished catle. But the better farmers don't do it this way. Some of the best ones finsih on grain in large corals, or even in the pasture.

Yeah, and I'd also check the time/temp curves to see how long the center would take to get up to a safe zone at the cooking temperature. Some people have had issues with spoilage bacteria when the rise time is too long, if they've done stuff to compromise the sterility of the center. Interesting idea, though. It might just require slicing the meat a bit thinner.

I'm all for more regulation of food names. Usually deviations are just about deception. One of my big gripes is the deli section at Whole Foods, where they say all their charcuterie is uncured. Huh? They're selling things that are by definition cured: hams, prosciuttos, etc... Apparently the industry lobbied to have the official definition of "uncured" altered to mean free of certain kinds of nitrates or nitrites. Which is just b.s.. -- marketing departments influencing the laws in order to pander to the public's misconceptions. Makes me want to kill people. Then there are food names that have been eroded to near meaninglessness, like balsamic vinegar. And food names where international fraud is prevalent that it's almost impossible to know what you're getting, like extra virgin olive oil. I also get annoyed by food label claims, which, while technically accurate, are stupid, and only serve to further misconceptions. Like vegetable oils that trumpet "no cholesterol!" Well, no vegetable oil ever has or ever will contain cholesterol. And the idea that dietary cholesterol has any health effects was debunked decades ago. They're just making people stupider for their own gain. p.s. I work in advertising and am not proud.

I do but mostly for zesting citrus. I like my crappy dimestore grater more for things like aged cheese and nutmeg.

That's interesting, too, thanks for posting. It contradicts what I posted above about there being no legally recognized designation for Kobe in the U.S.. But! It only covers beef labelled "Certifed Kobe Beef®" ... which I've never encountered. You can still throw around the world "Kobe" in other phrases with impunity, as it seems everyone does. Reminds me quite a bit of balsamic vinegar, which practically doesn't mean anything anymore. Anyone can call anything they want Balsamic. But there's an official designation for Aceto Balsamico Tradizionale ... which means it actually has to be the stuff that was once just called balsamic vinegar.

What I've read from Japanese chefs says unequivocally that the tender cuts are cooked beyond rare. There is an insane amount of marbling, and if the fat doesn't melt, it's unpleasant. It's possible that the way the beef is raised, the fat is higher in unsaturated fats than typical beef, and so would melt at a lower temperature. I'd still assume they cook it somewhere north of 54°C / 129F. I haven't been to Japan, so have only had fake Kobe.

This is interesting ... it says that before 2001 there was a small quantity of Kobe beef imported into the U.S., just as there is after 2012. Which still means that in the ensuing 11 years, everyone selling Kobe beef here was lying, while before and after, it was only most people. The passage distinguishing Kobe from Kobe-style does not sound like a U.S. legal designation. It just looks like a clarification of language for the purpose of this document.

Yeah, I think I'd rather do my taxes. From what I've heard, the biggest nuisance in NYC is actually filing the plan and dealing with getting it reviewed and approved.

I want to share a strategy I've worked out for determining cooking times. This is all about short-cooking (without added time for tenderization). When I first got the Sous-Vide Dash app, I was confused that the suggested times were all much longer than times given in the tables in Modernist Cuisine. In some cases the differences were close to 50%. I exchanged some emails with Darren Vengroff, the app's developer, who explained that the app strictly follows the best models for heat propagation. The issue is the long tail of the curves: you might get within 1/2 degree after 30 minutes, but that last final bit can take a long time. This is why Myhrvold recommends setting the circulator to 1°C higher than the target temperature. But I find that this still leads to surprisingly long cooking times. It occurred to me that we habitually use the core temperature as the target temperature. This makes sense in cases where you need to pasteurize food all the way to the core, but in practice it means either 1) if you set the water bath temperature higher than the target, you will have a gradient, and every part of food besides the center will be cooked higher than the core, or 2) if you set the water bath exactly to the core temperature, cooking times will be extremely long. After a bit of experimenting, I've started following the Mhyrvold recommendation of setting the bath 1°C higher than the target temperature, but then in the SV dash app, setting the core temperature 1/2°C LOWER than the target temperature. This achieves two things. It significantly shortens cooking times, actually bringing them into a range that's roughly similar to the MC tables. And the gradient, if it's perceptible at all, puts a larger portion of the food close to the target temperature. Of course I'm not talking about huge gradients like you see in conventional cooking. I don't notice this kind of gradient at all when cooking beef. But with salmon, it's perceptible, and can actually be pleasant. You get a very subtle range of textures, from less cooked than the target at the center to slightly more cooked at the edge.

Evenness of heating over the whole bottom of the pan is important. Evenness of heating over time isn't an issue for any pans on the stove. That's something you look for in a dutch oven or other braising vessel, so it can even out the huge temperature swings of an oven. There aren't any advantages to a saucepan that responds slowly to temperature change. Generally the more responsive the better. But the importance of this depends on the kinds of sauces you make. If you make hollandaise family sauces, reduced cream sauces, chocolate sauces, or anything like a creme anglaise, responsiveness is important. If you make tomato sauces that just sit there and simmer, it makes very little difference. The best materials for a sauce pan (at least the conductive part on the bottom) are thick copper or aluminum.