Jump to content

RedRum

participating member
  • Posts

    117
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RedRum

  1. Thank you Matt, these clips are great. Is is me or were the 80s programs better than today's cooking shows??? I learned more watching these than most stuff I have seen the last few years.

    Especially in the case of Marco, where he cooks in front of you his signature restaurant dishes. I don't think there is anyone who does this today. I would love to see today's chefs cook in their kitchen their dishes.

    On another note, Marco has probably the best technique I have seen in a chef. His knives skills, the way he moves in the kitchen, he is great to watch, and shows how far ahead he was. I have seen ramsay in the kitchen, I don't think he has Marco's skill and elegance.

  2. For that money, you should be able to get a reconditioned clip-on laboratory recirculating water bath heater that you could use with any vessel you wanted.  I don't understand paying $483 US on a non-recirculating PID heater with size limitations.

    I bought it when the sterling to the dollar ratio was 2 to 1 (I live in the UK), so it was not that expensive. I could not get anything better for that money, and although I am in science myself could not really find a lab water bath... I just wanted something that worked straight out of the box. The recirculation makes sense in a restaurant environment, but for home use I find that the system is sufficient. I just move the pot around a few times, no big deal. One could go for Combo 1, which is $250, should not make much difference.

  3. Apparently the manager and assistant managers have been sacked... A friend of mine ate there 2 days ago and had the mussels and lamb shank. both were great, he was very happy with the meal. We have a LC here at Cambridge, I hope this menu rolls out for the whole franchise, I would be very happy to try it.

    I think that is the main problem with food in the UK. Some of the world's best chefs and restaurants are here, but the quality of everyday simple food you will get in a little casual is very very poor and overpriced. In France, Italy, Greece, even in the US you can eat simple well cooked food cheaply.

  4. My roast chicken is not a good as the rotisserie chicken from even the lowliest supermarket.

    Next?

    It could not be better, since they are different methods of cooking. In a rotisserie the intense heat applied for a short time in a confounded in a small surface of the chicken allows for even cooking, but with crispy skin and juicy meat. Roasting is intense heat for prolonged time in a large surface (the whole chicken actually).

    My stir fry is not as good at the 2.5 pounds (4 dollars) stir fry across the road...

  5. The problem with using pressure cookers for stock is if you rapidly release the pressure after cooking, the mixture will boil violently until the 250degF is reduced to under 212degF - this will surely homogenize any impurities/fat into the stock...

    I actually use a pc to make stocks and broths all the time...  and it is possible to make a remarkably clear stock/broth with it... with consomme clarity...

    My steps take a little bit longer, but I think, in the end, the result is worth it - I have never tasted any "vegetal" flavor or other off note that has been described above...  also, i don't blanch or wash the bones prior because I think it leaches out flavor...

    What I do is put the bones/meat in the pc with the lid off (white stock uses raw bones/meat, brown stock uses roasted bones/meat)... cover with the total amount of water being used.... I bring to a simmer (lid off) skimming all the way... once it comes to a point where no more impurities (or very little) come off, I add the vegetables/bouquet garni, then the lid and increase the heat so that I get full pressure - once at full pressure, I decrease the heat to maintain a bare simmer inside the pot - you can tell the simmer level by listening to the pot - you can hear how fast it boils... also you can tell sometimes depending on how much steam comes out of the release valve - you want it barely steaming at all, while maintaining full pressure.

    Chicken stock I let go this way for 1/2 hour, beef/veal stock I let go for 1 hour.

    Then, I turn off the heat and allow the stock to "steep" until cooled enough so that there is no more pressure in the pc...  this takes a few hours - once sufficiently cooled, I remove the lid and strain through a strainer lined with cheesecloth, trying to disturb the bones/meat as little as possible.  I have no bacterial concerns since 1)everything has been killed while at 250degF for 1/2 - 1 hour and nothing has been re-introducted usually around 180degF).

    I then cool the strained stock in a sink full of cold water to cool as rapidly as possible, then leave uncovered in the refrigerator overnight... the next day, you can remove the congealed layer of fat from the now "stock jello"...  I'll then reheat and either concentrate for storage, or store in the freezer as is...

    I think the key to the clarity is the skimming prior to pressurization, gentle simmering during pressurization, and slow cooling....

    I see this is very similar to the method I use, I do cook it full pressure though. I am using stocks mainly for sauces, not broths so I do not mind the fat rendering in the stock, I actually want it for more flavour. I do agree that this is the best way to make a stock, as it yields better results than long cooking and also improves on heston's method.

  6. Ok, from a purveyors point of view. 

    The way that works best is to take a damp CLOTH and cover your shellfish, if you have some seaweed great, put that under your critters. 

    DO NOT place ice or ice packs directly onto or above newspaper, as it can put unnecessary stress on your lobsters and some shellfish... So Damp cloth in a proliferated pan. 

    If you have a market as you say, alot of times they will have boxes that the prefillet fish comes in, eg tilapia boxes, catfish boxes.  Ask for the Styrofoam boxes, poke a few holes up top,

    It should go Seaweed, critters, damp cloth (remoisten) and lid with holes.

    I meant this way...

  7. My uncle is a fishmonger with his own fishing boat and confirms that this is the best way to keep shellfish alive. Put them in a container, preferably with the bottom being seaweed. Cover them with damp (not wet) cloth and put them in the fridge. re-damp the cloth every 12-24 hours. Should keep oysters, clams, mussles alive for 2-3 days. Keep the lobster in a different container.

  8. There is one issues with stock that I do not seem to have been addressed.

    cold vs hot water:

    Science tells us that you need to start with cold water in order to get the best extraction from the bone marrow. This is because bones have small pores that allow the marrow to be extracted. But they close due to protein coagulation if heated. This is why brown (i.e. roasted bone) stocks are less gelatinous than white ones.

    Over the last two years I use a modification of Heston's for stock. I use a pressure cooker pot to brown 1 onion with star anise. I then let the onions cool, then add another onion cut in quarters, and roughly chopped celery, carrot, leek spices, herbs. I add COLD water and the bones, and then bring it to simmer slowly. This gives time for the bones marrow and gelatin to be broken down and extracted. after it reached simmer, I pop the pressure lid and cook it full pressure for 30-40 mins. The best way to tell when the stock is done is when you can snap the bones with your fingers.

    This produces a fresher and more vibrant stock than the long simmering one, but with equally good gelification and mouthfeel. It only takes 15 mins more than Heston's stock, but the results are much better.

  9. Meh, foodies.......you'll never get it. And the pros out there who go along should be ashamed. But then again I'm guessing you don't know any better.

    erm... so who do you cook for?? I assume you cook for people who like discussing your food and food in general, who appreciate your effort. I read your blog, you seem like quite a modern chef, with elaborate techniques and hi-end cuisine. Who are you targeting with your cooking? like it or not my friend is the "foodies" you are striving to satisfy, not the Mikky-D and TG Fridays consumer. So you should be a bit more modest on your criticism about the people who actually support your profession.

  10. Carlucios it ok... just ok... foot is pretty greasy, and anything too complicated is a disaster. Even for Cambridge it is pretty average... I hear that Jamie's chain will open here is Cam, I have heard good things about it.

    Cambridge food scene is pretty bad, apart from a couple decent curries, and of course Alimentum and Midsummer house and Loch Fyne (sometimes...), everything else is pretty average. I hear good things about Restaurant 22 but not yet tried it, and I was pleasantly surprised with Graffity at Hotel Felix.

  11. I don't think we disagree, it is more of a semantic determination issue I would say. As I said, I retain and will keep retaining the word genius for very few people (Einstein, Davinci, mozart, Dali, Gaudi, Darwin, Newton etc...), but always being appreciative of exceptional people in their respective field.

    I would not go against claiming that Blumentha, Adria, Keller (to name a few current uber-chefs) have redefined modern cooking. But the field of haute-cuisine has very little relevance in the life of everyday life, and even less people can appreciate their craft.

    And how about Hevre This, Kurti, McGee? Aren't they the ones that laid the methods and principles chefs that are considered as geniuses use? Are they geniuses as well?

    I like the chef/orchestra conductor parallel. One can be an exceptional chef/conductor. But the genius comes from the methods-ingredient/composer-orchestra.

    Anyway, this is a thoroughly enjoyable discussion, was very glad to see the views of others.

  12. Very interesting post, with very valid points. Regarding the definition of genius, you correctly identified the first part of the definition (task complexity) but you did not see the second part (impact in human life)

    The extend that a field impacts our everyday life and humanity as a whole is a necessary clause to define whether one who excels in that field is a genius

    Einstein (in my mind one of the very few people in history that should be considered as geniuses) figured out and gave to humanity some fundamental laws of how the nature and the universe work. He achieved something that no other person has ever achieved and has been the basis for scientific research for 100 years now. Sure, Adria did something no one else did with his pea ravioli and mango caviar, and blumethal with nitrogen egg and bacon ice creams. But I would not go as far say that these had much of an impact in the way we perceive the world...

    .

    Adria, Blumenthal, Keller et al are great chefs, but I don't think a pea ravioli is changing humanity.

    Even on the issue of complexity, of course there is no direct quantification of how complex is a field, but I guess it would be really hard to find someone who considers how to make a savoury ice cream more complex than mathematically formulating the relation of speed and time.

    I do find your reductionism regarding creativity a bit out of place though... I guess following the same reductionism in cooking would be like saying that it is not that Adria invented beef...

    I liken a chef to an orchestra conductor. There are a dozen of orchestra conductors that are considered the best in their field, bringing astonishing interpretations to the public. But their success is confided by the ability of the orchestra (like the brigade one great chef has in the kitchen) and the quality of the composition he conducts (quality of ingredients). Now the conductor has the immensely difficult task to combine those two, while creating an interpretation of the chosen music that is unique and moving (similarly how a chef combines his brigade and ingredients and uses his creativity to create outstanding food). A great conductor will take the best out of great orchestras and make less good orchestras better (the same way that a great chef will create amazing dishes with great brigades and ingredients, while make the best of modest ingredients)

    I have been following orchestra music for quite a while and have been close to conductors (none of the top ones...), never heard of any conductor being described a genius.

    In the end, as I said in my previous post it might all be down to semantics. Although I love food (quite frankly more than neuroscience and some arts) I personally cannot call any of the known chefs a genius (partly because having not tasted their food...). Here is another problem with haute- cuisince (availability to the public) but will not get into that...

  13. I am a psychologist and neuroscientist as well.

    We need to understand something. That to be considered a genius, you need to achieve something immensely original, creative and inspiring in a field. BUT (and there is a big but...). The degree of complexity and difficulty of the chosen field plays a role.

    Like it or not, there are professions and fields that are more difficult and complex than others. Sure, psychology and neuroscience are complex. my field is working in neuromaging, scanning brains in MRI and EEG machines to see differences in brain activation when processing faces.

    I might find something very interesting. But there are very few people or anyone in the field cognitive neuroscience that will be considered as a genius. sure, neuroscience is complex and difficult. But not complex ENOUGH for one to be considered a genius.

    I have met some of the most prominent people in the field, and I am lucky enough to be working with one. They are very smart, perceptive, their work is influential, but not INGENIOUS.

    Same with chefs. There are very smart and influential chefs, but none can be called ingenious, in the sense that the field has limited complexity. Cooking is a difficult and complex field, requires multi-tasking, artistic perception. But in my opinion, it is far less complex than some fields of science or arts.

    The extend that a field impacts our everyday life and humanity as a whole is a necessary clause to define whether one who excels in that field is a genius. window fitting is complex, sure enough. But would one go as far to compare the best window fitter in history (don't know who that might be...) with Antoni Gaudi?

    Einstein (in my mind one of the very few people in history that should be considered as geniuses) figured out and gave to humanity some fundamental laws of how the nature and the universe work. He achieved something that no other person has ever achieved and has been the basis for scientific research for 100 years now. Sure, Adria did something no one else did with his pea ravioli and mango caviar, and blumethal with nitrogen egg and bacon ice creams. But I would not go as far say that these had much of an impact in the way we perceive the world...

    I understand that in the end, it is all down to semantics... as nickrey says, there is preconception of which field a genius come from. But I personally believe that this preconception is to a large extent justified. We tend to attribute the term genius to people coming from fields of high difficulty and complexity. I love food, I love cooking, I love the culinary world, but I would have to say that it does not suffice for someone to excel in the culinary field to be considered as a genius.

  14. yes, you are right, there was no rationale... I believe this:

    there is no such thing as molecular gastronomy, as a style of cooking. Heck, I will go as far to say that there is no such thing as molecular gastronomy, as it is a invalid term.

    Chefs tend (less nowadays) describe their style of cooking as "Molecular gastronomy", as one is saying "I cook italian", or "I cook French" etc. This is just silly... just because someone uses lecithin to make a foam (instead of a reduction), or alginate to make a sphere (instead of pea juice), this does not define a new style in cooking.

    Although Adrian, Blumenthal , Garnier and Keller now despise the term Molecular Gastronomy, they are the ones that have established it and and used it in the beginning to describe their cooking style. Heck... Blumenthal uses it to describe his style in the intro of his Perfection series... They dropped it after it became more fashionable and more people were using it.

    I have eaten the Fat Duck and at Sketch, some things I liked, some things I did not. I have not visited El Bulli, but people who have, advised me to eat something solid before hand, because they were very dissatisfied with everything being in a jelly state.

    I have been following the blog Ideas In Food (http://ideasinfood.typepad.com/) and I am very impressed with their use of modern techniques, I would really like to eat in thei restaurant.

  15. my 2p, will try to keep it as concise as possible. My background in neuroscience, not cooking, but I am very interested in both. The problem with MG is the term itself... it really does not say anything. I don't know who came up with it ( I believe it was Kurti) , but it is a term that really says nothing.

    In my opinion we have two branches: Food science (which includes, chemists, physicists, doctors, neuroscientists etc) and cooking (chefs). Food science tries to explain physical and chemical properties of food.

    Chefs cook. Sometimes chefs cook borrowing methods discovered from food scientists, or other scientists in the industry. Adria did not discover spherification, he borrowed it.

    All the hydrocolloid are being used in food industry for decades. How many years has light mayo been around. 20-30 years? well, this was because they have been using xanthan gum to stabilize the emulsion with less fat. that's it. Check almost any produce

    Chefs are borrowing ingredients and techniques that have been around for decades. Yes, some have been pioneers (like Adria et al) and have been using them creatively in their restaurants, mainly to create new methods of presentation (a pea ravioli will always taste as pea puree; olive oil sand made with oil and maltodextrin always tastes like olive oil... ). Molecular gastronomists did not discover alginate, xanthan, guar, methol, activa, malto, lecithin etc. Scientists did. Food industry used them extensively the last 50 years. Chefs use them the last 10. what do you think the "E" numbers and "stabilizers" at the back of products is...

    What we call molecular gastronomy, is as much of a progress in cooking as nouvelle cuisine to traditional french cuisine. The use of xanthan in a sauce is as much of progress as a the use of cornstarch, or the use of reduction to create rich sauces without the use of roux (which was one of the big contributions of nouvelle cuisine).

    Hope this made some sense, sorry if it was too long...

  16. About the keller method:

    he says that in the end you baste the chicken before serving it. But that beats the purpose of keeping the skin crispy, no?

    I go for a variation of the heston method (6 hours in 60C). My gas oven cannot go as low as 60C, so I use gas mark 1, which is about 110C. I usually brine the chicken in a 8% solution (80grams of salt for a litre of water, usually use 3 litres) with 4% sugar. I rub oil and salt pepper. I take good care to season the inside of the chicken very well.

    Then cook until the thigh is 65C.

    For a 4 pound chicken this takes about 1.30 hours. At this point the skin is very pale and not crispy at all. I take the chicken out, and put the oven at full whack, close to 250C and also turn on the broiler at full temperature as well. I oil and salt the chicken again, then pop it in for about 15 mins until the skin is crisp.

    This method creates amazingly succulent flesh, and very crisp skin.

    alternatively, when I am in a hurry, I turn the oven in full wack, 250C and pop the chicken in for 40, plus 10 mins under the broiler for extra crispy skin. The flesh will not be as succulent, but still pretty damn good chickin!

  17. I don't get the chopstick thing...

    Heh, well as someone who would prefer eating salad with chopsticks if given her druthers, and who eats many Western foods at home with chopsticks, I'd just have to say that you summed it up when you said it all comes down to what may have grown up using.

    Yes, that was exactly my point. If I don't eat western foods with chopstics, why should I eat Asian food with them?

    As I said, in my book anyone should used whatever is comfortable for them. And I don't have a problem with westerners using chopstics to eat asian foods. I have a problem with those woh frawn uppon those who don't use them. Don't know.. maybe I am socialising with the wrong crowds, but I have gotten strange looks from strangers in asian restaurant for eating with a fork and knive..

  18. Of course I would. As I said, I eat sushi with my fingers, it is more comfortable. All I am saying is that I don't think eating asian food with a knife and fork should be frawned uppon.

    There have been situations where I have been out with a company of both asian and non-asian friends in chinese restaurants, and the non-asian people were kinda telling me off for not eating with chopsticks.

    Needless to say, it was myself and the asian people that were laughing when their expensive dresses, shirts and trousers were covered with delicious rice and other food...

  19. I don't get the chopstick thing...

    I can use them very well, but I prefer to eat with knives and forks and spoons... I eat sushi with my hands. I will eat sashimi with chopsticks, but only because I cannot bother asking for a fork.

    When I eat chinese, I don't feel very comfortable eating noodles and rice dishes with 2 pieces of stick... I know you are supposed to bring the bawl to your mouth and scoop it in, but this is not something that I have been brought up to do. I want to eajoy the food and flavours, and for me it is all about comfort.

    I have quite a few asian friends and I have actually gained their respect for sticking to what I know of how to eat. I was talking with a waiter the other day, kinda apologising for asking a fork, and he told me that they actually prefer when people eat with forks as there is less mess to clean up...

    I live in the UK by the way, where asian people are not that many (quite a few though here in Cambridge)

    Is there are a real reason why it is imperative to eat asian food with chopsticks?

  20. To quote Charles Barrier

    "Among chefs there have only been 2 geniuses - Carême and Escoffier. Point was a purveyor of happiness."

    I think it is a bit unfair to compare a single dish to mozarts 40th though. I do see some similarities that are very similar to a conductor, to watch a professional kitchen in full flow, with leads taking there own solos, the head chef keeping the timing flowing.

    I do understand your point though, many are visionaries rather than true geniuses. Though I also would disagree with Barrier that Point wasn't.

    we have to remember that Adria did NOT invent spherification. It is a known process for almost decades now, he was the first one to use it in cooking. Almost any technique and ingredient used in what is proclaimed as molecular gastronomy has been in use in the food industry for decades (xanthan, guar, metho, gellan, pectin, etc etc...).

    Yes, admittedly these chefs are very perceptive, tedious, probably with amazingly good palates, but geniuses? nope, sorry...

    if I would take Dali over Adria any day

×
×
  • Create New...