nickrey

You could go in a totally different direction by deep frying them to give a crisp batter type texture. Serve a few per person (depending on size) accompanied by a sharp chutney (you just need something acidic to cut through the richness of the filling). Or perhaps a gremolata of garlic, parsley and grated lemon rind mixed with some yoghurt or creme fraiche to give a liquid medium to the sauce.

Try what would normally be a more chewy cut of beef (eg topside, I think we use similar cut names in NZ and Oz) at the same temperature for a longer time. Then use that as sliced rare roast beef. It will be the reddest, juiciest, and most tasty cold beef you will ever had have.

They give recipe yields and weights, including metric, so yes everything is scalable up or down. Edited to add: but they don't have an inbuilt calculator, you still need to do it by hand.

Agree with all your points Sam but I'm running out of space for cookbooks so the option of carrying them around on one small device is incredibly appealing, not to mention the advantages of portability or putting them on the Cloud and accessing them from anywhere. The problem you point out with apps, which contain programming features that are typically not portable, is unlikely to apply as much to e-books because as the next great thing comes along there will always be third party programs written that will port the (relatively flat and simple) e-book content across. I like the app and I suppose that the question that should be asked is whether in ten years time the content is going to be the same. We are at the ninth edition. By the time my iPad bites the dust, I'll probably be ready to buy the twelth edition anyway.

Try 'demi-sel charcuterie' as your search term. Sometimes the search engine needs a bit of context to throw up the appropriate information.

ps. Nice to see you lurking Jay, I really like your reviews and comments. Even for those who are not able to physically visit the restaurants, it gives us a good idea of what the experience is like.

He and Jill have come back to live in Sydney. He's still doing wonderful reviews, but of our restaurants here. I much prefer Simon Thomsen to Durack. Thomsen still comes across as enthusiastic and passionate, whereas Durack seems to be quite harsh on young chefs trying new things, and comes across as too cynical. His review of Becasse is a good example of what I mean. While overall positive, contained a few snarky comments about trying too hard and basically calling it derivative of Noma and Alinea, like the restaurant was claiming to be the first to use smoke or faux soil in a dish. I think a sense of child-like wonder in a critic is a good thing. Jaded and cynical, not so much. I'm afraid I can't call Justin a young chef, he is (or should be) at the top of his game. Having eaten at Becasse in the last month, I think the review was fair. At the top end in this class of cooking, basically they are all very similar anyway. To add to Terry's comments, many chefs should acknowledge the influence of Michel Bras on their plating and the food at Becasse is no exception. I loved Justin's food, and it is visually spectacular, but in our experience the wine matching was very poor. I've passed this feedback to Becasse via one of the managers and sincerely hope it picks up because it really is worth a return visit for his food. On the other hand, I take Simon Thomsen's reviews with a hefty grain of salt. To come back on to the point of this thread, it is like listening to movie critics: I really think one should read the reviews, try out some of what they talk about yourself, compare your experience to theirs, and pick a reviewer that echoes your tastes. On this basis I'll stick with Terry.

He and Jill have come back to live in Sydney. He's still doing wonderful reviews, but of our restaurants here.

The author is a forum regular called Vengroff. He is most obliging and always seeks input from eGullet members on how to improve this app.

Lior, thanks very much for giving us a wonderful glimpse into your world. I love seeing how others live and eat and once again it shows how our world is becoming so diverse through migration: fascinating.

I've posted this on the sous vide thread before but thought it deserved to go here. First sous vide slices of pork belly until well and truly cooked. Cool and store in fridge or freeze until ready to cook. If frozen, defrost. Then crumb (flour, egg, panko breadcrumbs) and deep fry.

I found some banana shallots in my local store here in Sydney. Of course, at the time I didn't know what they were but they looked interesting enough to try. Would have to say that they are much easier to chop than regular shallots. Can't see much other difference. If you can't get them,just used regular: if you can, you'll see what I mean about peeling and chopping being easier.

Reading the article, the author wanted to achieve the "perfect" prime rib without using sous vide. They didn't mention sous vide in the article apart from saying that it couldn't be used. How did you extract the information that they prefer the method used when the comparison was definitely was not done?

Many people seem to have used similar set ups. I know size of the sous vide thread can be discouraging but try looking at the index for the original topic that will contain the bulk of the information to answer your questions. As to specifics: the water needs to circulate to give consistent temperature across all items that are being cooked. PedroG for example has created a rack the goes over the top of his cooker from which he hangs his packages vertically via hooks. This maintains space between the items that will encourage water flow. If you want to get something a bit more direct that agitates the water to give better thermal distribution, try an aquarium bubbler (the one that has a hose going into the cooker, not that sits in the hot water). I use an Eheim air pump 100, which you can get from an aquarium supplier for around US$50. In summary, don't crowd the cooker and make sure that water can circulate to give a consistent temperature across the cooker. Have fun.

This comment has been made before about SMWS bottlings. If we draw a comparison with wines, those in the know still talk about the 1998 Châteauneuf du Pape. Getting a perfect vintage is such a random event that it is noteworthy. I see the same thing with SMWS bottlings: their rarity is a positive. After all, if the supply was unlimited, what would the cognoscenti have to talk about?

What fat do you use with it in the sausage roll?

First the Eleven Madison Park Cookbook and now the French Laundry? These are excellent renditions of the dishes from cookbooks many seem to stay away from. Well done! Are you blogging your cooking adventures somewhere?

What temperature did you deep fry them at Keith? They look delicious.

I have this Benriner, which does the job well.

There is a relatively simple meat dish that tastes very nice in Antonio Carluccio's "An Invitation to Italian Cooking" called Chicken Saltimbocca. It is a variant on traditional Saltimbocca alla Romana that uses chicken instead of veal. Basically, you get some good tasting chicken breast. Slice diagonally down into the breast to give serving size pieces (normally you'd use a full small chicken breast sliced or half a large chicken breast, which should give three to four pieces of saltimbocca per person). Put each piece between two pieces of plastic wrap and beat flat (think minute steak). Then lay sequentially on each piece a sage leaf, a slice of fontina cheese, and a piece of prosciutto to cover. Attach to the chicken by way of a toothpick. Cook in hot pan (I use butter and olive oil mix), prosciutto side down first, turn briefly to cook other side. Keep meat warm. Add small amount of white wine (around a small glass) to deglaze the pan and reduce. To enrich the sauce it a bit more, add a small amount of chicken stock. Cook down to pour-over sauce consistency. Serve chicken with sauce spooned over. To accompany this, I normally make up a tomato-based pasta sauce and cook green beans in the sauce. Serve beans with tomato sauce (only a small amount so as not to overwhelm then). My other accompaniment is typically fried potatoes with garlic, rosemary and sea salt. The beauty of this dish is that finishing cooking can be done in less than ten minutes. It's a really tasty meal. I'll leave someone else to suggest a pasta course to go with it but given the main, I'd stick with a tomato- rather than cream- based sauce.

I bought this recently as an ebook. It is great. Totally recommend it for learning how to do this form of cooking.

I'd just like to point out that sous vide cooking is not only for tenderising tough cuts of meat. No one can say chicken breast, fish, turkey breast, or even pork loin are not tender. The prime use of sous vide for these meats is to produce a much more succulent cooked piece of meat that cannot easily be reproduced using conventional cooking techniques.

If this is true, why do they always have cold hands and feet? Just asking...

Did anyone look at the abstract? The numbers used in the study were very large (a good thing) but the actual incidence of the disorder was .26%. It is normally more persuasive to present the numbers rather than a percentage so I'll do so: 160 women in total from a sample of 61,433 who participated in the study contracted stomach cancer over the 15.7 year timeframe of the study. The 22% increase in risk for coffee drinkers was calculated across these 160 women. I can see why the authors would want to publish something after almost 17 years. But let's face it, while the result may have been statistically significant, it's really trivial. Moreover, statistical significance means that they have set a probability that there own conclusion is wrong: commonly used levels are a 5% chance or a 1% chance that their findings are caused through chance. This is why science demands that findings be replicated by other authors. In summary: their research "evidence" is really weak and the numbers involved who actually contracted the disease is very small over the time period. My advice is to take any finding you read with a very large grain of salt, particularly in this epidemiological space. After all, even if the result was a true finding, who is to say that there was not a third influence that varied between the groups of coffee drinkers and non-coffee drinkers? Perhaps the coffee drinkers prefer strong tastes and imbibe more of the Swedish delicacy of highly fermented fish. After reading the abstract, I'm just off to have my morning coffee without a care in the world.

Beer in a mock Chanpagne type bottle does not make it Champagne Beer, a qualifying factor for which would be that it was made in the Champagne region of France. Can't wait to see what happens when the French read about this one.