IndyRob

Once, on successive nights, I served beef filet. The first night I did a traditional preparation, and on the second I did sous vide. To me, there were plusses and minuses to each, so I asked my wife (who had not seen me cook either). She preferred the second night's steak (sous vide). Still, subsequently she made it clear that she'd rather I'd do it in the traditional manner. So there's a big perception factor. As others have said, sous vide need not be expensive, slow, or complicated. My sous vide setup centers around a $40 Presto Kitchen Kettle (which we already had), a FoodSaver (which I received as a Christmas gift), and a Thermapen (which was on my Christmas list). The only penalty is some time spent stabilizing the temperature. Sous vide can take seconds. IIRC, Keller's poached lobster is overcooked after 15 minutes. Some very thinly sliced filet (as for an Arby's style sandwich) can be cooked to perfect med rare in a minute or two - even from frozen. Can't do that in a pan. But for me, a big part of it is just adding to my arsenal and understanding, and having a proven theoretical model when I'm trying something unique.

I was just browsing the site trying to get a feel for what it was all about. I clicked on a story (read: Recipe) on a gruyere and chanterelle grilled cheese. At the bottom were comments. The first discussion involved someone saying they were adding chanterelles to their grocery list, followed by someone asking where he could find chanterelles (Not sure if he missed the hyperlink or was being funny). This was followed by someone helpfully informing him where he could source chanterelles locally. Ah well, perhaps if this doesn't work out then Ruth can write the Trader Joe's Fearless Flyer. [Edit]Removed redundant 'perhaps'

Is the traditional egg shape a must? I've long been thinking about (in a slightly different application) separating the whites and yolks and cooking them separately, then reconstructing the components. This would require a custom tray mold to SV the whites into some sort of cup form and cooking the yolks separately. Then you just unmold the molded white, fill with cooked yolk, garnish, and serve. Besides being able come up whimsical shapes (An egg cube? An egg white shot class filled with yolk?), you could individually season the components and completely sidestep the difficult issues involved with managing the temps of two different components in one package. An egg's shape may be very classical, but is it the most practical shape for plating? I'd think that a flat bottom alone could be a huge plus.

C'mon, I'm sure that even you might learn something! I've got room for plenty of learning, especially about jaw muscles being cheeks apparently. I've also got room for MC, when I feel that I can make the investment. But when someone posts a reference to a chapter of a tome I (or most of us, for that matter) don't have, I don't know what it's meant to mean. "Aha, V2, Ch3, Pg 336!" "Yeah, but V3, Ch2, Pg 202, paragraph 3. Got you there!"

Well, okay, perhaps a glance at Homer's Odyssey will help you (with what? I don't know. But I also don't know what you think MC will teach me.) I believe you're confusing googled masseteric references with actual animals. Bessie's cheeks aren't responsible for her most dangerous bite force.

With all due respect to NathanM and his contributions large and small - to eGullet and the general culinary world - I hope that discussion at eGullet will not devolve to quoting chapter and verse of MC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does the cheek - in any animal - have anything to do with moving the jaw? That's why I thought that it would be most instructive to select two similar cuts, rather than one lean cut like a filet and another fatty one like cheek. But it ignores the question that was asked. Can we make a lean cut more tender?

I'm watching a program called Hooked on The National Geographic Channel (a current show with a 2011 date). This particular episode is about the invasion of Asian Carp in the Mississippi basin, their impact on (or the complete destruction of) the traditional fishing industry in the area and their threat to the Great Lakes. In searching, I found that these fish have been mentioned many times on eGullet but apparently haven't yet warranted their own topic. This is a very fascinating story. A guy with an algae problem in his catfish pond finds success by importing Asian Carp. Within a couple of months, his algae problem is just a memory. But then come the floods and the Asian Carp, with no natural predators here, get into the main waterways and begin taking over. I had been aware of this as a news story. Later I learned an important mitigating factor. Asian Carp are apparently very tasty. Upon review, they're most often compared to cod, but Wikipedia notes that many say that they taste like something between scallop and crab. Sweet! And they're targeted for complete elimination. A veritable genocide of tasty fish is in the offing - all in the name of the environment and sustainability. The only fly in the ointment seems to be that they are rather boney fish. And, well, okay, Americans don't find carp to be an appealing dining option. Most of the current catch is shipped back to China (apparently, 80% of farmed fish there is of this variety). But these are not your bottom feeding variety of carp. They only eat algae, so they don't accumulate mercury. What bad stuff they pick up in the rivers, they store in their fat which is easily cut away. But in dining on algae, they do cut the bottom out of the food chain. Bizarrely, the Silver Carp have a tendency to get spooked right out of the water (leaping as high as 10 feet), making them a hazzard for boaters and an aerial target for bow fisherman. It's all a very complicated environmental balance issue. But listening to the biologists, it appears that the best environmental option is to kill them all. Might as well eat 'em. But somehow, I suspect that this wouldn't be the first time in history that we've made this choice. This seems a very tricky situation.

I've developed some weird preferences with respect to potatoes and butter/cream. For mashed potatoes, it has to be butter and cream. For baked potatoes, I prefer putting equal parts I Can't Believe It's Not Butter (formerly Parkay until they changed their formula) and sour cream into a ziplock bag with some salt and chives. I'll mix that and leave it in the fridge for the flavors to marry. Then I cut off a corner of the bag and insert a pastry tip and pipe it into the opened baked spuds. I don't have a good explanation for the difference other than texture. If you're going for creamy, anything short of cream is going to be, well, less creamy. So perhaps there's a kernel of wisdom in there somewhere. Play to the ingredlents you want to use rather than trying to replicate the results of the ones you're trying to avoid.

I think I'm feeling the intent of the original question and it's a good one. Although I propose that we narrow in on a specific cut (or a specific comparison). Beef Round seems like a good choice. I've done a round roast sous vide and sliced it thinly across the grain and it was good. But not filet good. Still, someone with good knife skills and a good eye could probably cut up a round roast and a tenderloin and present us with two pieces that most of us could not tell apart visually. But they'd have totally different properties. Could we use brine/acid/braising/sous vide/jaccarding/injection/transglutaminase/molten lava/philospher's stones/Ginsu knives to transmute an eye of round into a filet?

I agree, but I think they'll get there. Hubert K had to cook in a dormroom bathtub on his way to that challenge. Top Chef has done a great job to create something that will attract these chefs, but with Masters they have to walk a tightrope. Most of Masters is like a company picnic with three legged races, maybe the egg on the spoon race. Like Top Chef: Regular, it's a game, but even moreso when they're dealing with established reputations. It's not about world domination. It about us getting to get to know these chefs in a slightly charged, but comparativey relaxed environment. I'm sure they'll let the final two or three show off.

I agree completely. I have followed the same roads and arrived at the same destination. Not too concerned about smoke myself. Or what I can call it (other than words like succulent). I had what Bon Appetit called the best ribs in America and they were very good. close to the bone. However, I found the much vaunted 'bark' akin to shoe leather.

Appalling? Really? 'Unethical' I could get on board with. Entitlement-minded? Yeah, I might jump on that tram. But Appallingly unethical?, Um no, I'm not riding on that train.

I followed up my waffle bread experiment with some gut level modifications. Much to my own surprise, I nailed my goals for color and texture - A nicely thin crispy golden brown exterior with a very light, airy, tender, slightly eggy crumb. The flavors could be more complex, but I'll feel very comfortable further developing that aspect. Still, with a pre-planned external application of butter and syrup, these were exactly what I was going for. For two 7" diameter, 1.5" thick waffles.... 75g White Lilly Flour (for lightness...) 75g All Purpose Flour (...but hedging my bet) 10g Cornstarch (for crispyness) 4g Sugar (for browning) 3g Salt 3g Active Dry Yeast 225g Water 1 Large Egg (50g) Whisk together dry and wet ingredients separately. Then mix together. Let proof for an hour or two until risen about 50% over original level. This basic recipe could use a bit more salt, but is okay as is. And as waffles go, these should be pretty healthy. I'm almost ashamed of that. But as my original goal was to drizzle butter over the top, I'm okay with it. Future flavor enhancement plans: A touch more salt Cold ferment in the refrigerator overnight Vanilla Malt Replace some water with cream

Well, in that case, the unethical act was quietly stuffing them into your pockets. You should have tucked the tops of the bags into your shirt collar and wore them like bibs for all to see. Then the question turns on how long you would have to keep them there until Mediacy owes you money. I just checked a couple of produce bags in my kitchen (while wondering if I should start a "Silly stuff eGullet posts have caused you to do" topic ). No advertising. Well, unless "Fruits & Veggies - More Matters" is some sort of industry association ad.

I think Alton is getting a bad rap for this home brew episode. I read the comments on the episode's page on the website. I thought, "Cool, let's see how bad Alton is being ripped." Then I watched the episode and was amused to see that the very first thing he points out is that he was wrong in a previous episode. This is immediately followed by the title 'Brewing 101'. Let's be honest. We could rip any Good Eats episode if we attacked it with the fervor that the home brew community has mustered. But Good Eats is not about the best possible result. Its about putting the basic knowledge into the hands of Food Network viewers. In a pizza episode, AB stepped in some doo doo with his insistance on kosher salt. It turns out that most people don't the same brand of kosher salt he does and, because they used a volume measure, they had to put a disclaimer on the episode's web page. They do make mistakes. 20 minutes of TV will not make you a master brewer. But as many experienced home brewers have chimed in, this technique will likely make an acceptable beer. Most of us have chlorine bleach and table sugar already. He points out many tools that would be good to have, but that they wouldn't be using. Any given episode of Good Eats is like a gateway drug. It's never meant to produce the ultimate result, but to get you past the first hurdles.

Having been on an inexplicable frozen waffle kick for a few weeks, I decided to breakdown and buy a Belgian Waffle maker. I found this thread and read through it first. The recipes provided with the machine were very similar to the ones here so I decided start with those. First I tried a yeasted version and opted to just let it rise at room temp instead of leaving in the refigerator overnight (impatience). The results were okay. A little dense maybe. A few days later I tried the whipped egg white version. The results seemed pretty much the same. In fact, I was impressed by how similar they were. I was pretty sure of my technique, except for the heat setting and the amount of batter I was using. I suspect I'm using a bit too much batter and that's not leaving enough room for expansion. One thing that struck me was that although there ws a lot of butter in the batter, I didn't feel that the results were all that buttery. I thought the same amount of melted butter poured on top of a baked waffle might be better. Having never had a proper Belgian Waffle, I had no preconception about what it was I was after. So I decided to throw convention to the wind and just start playing. Thinking of similar baked things, the first thing that came to mind was pate a choux. Could I get a crispy exterior and a very light interior? I tried it, adding an extra egg to loosen the paste. I still had to pipe the dough onto the machine. Perhaps because of the extra egg, I didn't get a crispy result. But it was eggy and buttery in a good way. Actually, it was a crepe in waffle form (a creffle?). I like crepes, so I may explore that path further. Later I thought "Hey, what about funnel cake batter?" Looking it up, I discovered the potentially useful bit trivia that funnel cake batter pretty much is waffle batter. Being generally fascinated by yeast leavened things, I then decided to go minimalist. What if I just poured a poolish in the thing? (a poofle?) Well, I had to find out. I took 150g flour (hi gluten), 200g water, 3g salt, and about a gram of yeast, and mixed it in a measuring cup. I let it bubble up and poured it into the hot waffle maker. It became waffle bread. I'm still trying to decide what I think about it. It's bread - nice and freshly baked - but in a weird form. Visually, it would fool pretty much anyone (okay, maybe a little light in color). As I chew it, I think "Why isn't this a waffle?" Maybe a bit too chewy, not crisp enough on the outside, needs something in the flavor department.... Hmmm, What if I threw some blueberries in there? An egg? I could let the poolish sour. What if I used pastry flour? Cornstarch would likely help with crispiness. Or, what if I poured brownie batter into the thing...?

I own two of his books (still, after a major purge of cook books), and was a Good Eats early watcher. But, I'm actually a little surprised to hear that Good Eats is only now ending. I had completely lost track of it. I thought it was over. I thought Alton had moved on to Iron Chef, Feasting on Whatever, and The Next Food Network Star. Good Eats did seem to start to run out of ideas, but oddly, he never latched on to things like sous vide, or other modernist things that seemed right up his alley. He could have even brought some healthy skepticism to the whole discussion. Instead, he was entirely absent. If he has a new project in the works, I must say that that I'm hopeful, but not expecting much. I fear that 'TV Alton' (enabled as it is by his clique of Current Food Network Stars) has taken over his wonderfully curious cooking side.

As a side note, as this book is over 100 years old, it's out of copyright and the whole thing can be downloade or viewed in electronic form here... http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924000610117

Are you sure about that? Yes. No. The blue is unburned, therefore cold. The hottest part is just ABOVE THE TIP of the cone. In the UK this is taught in schools before mid-teenage. http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/ocr_gateway/carbon_chem/7_using_carbon_fuels2.shtml The problem isn't entirely the gas itself. Most (all?) fuel gases have tiny traces of 'very smelly stuff' added to them so that you can "smell gas" if there should be a leakage. You want that stuff to be burned before it hits the food. This sounds like one of those perennial arguments that will need to be settled by an authoritative source. Long before I ever thought of applying a torch to food, I was in metal shop and was told in no uncertain terms that the tip of the blue flame was the hottest part of the flame. So I have a problem reconciling the 'hottest part of the flame' with 'unburned fuel'.

Butter. You need a churn, right? And spend hours churning for all you're worth? Nah, pour some cream in the KitchenAid and put the spurs to it.

When it comes to Top Chef: Masters, I think the first commandment is "Thou shalt do no harm to a Master's reputation." Therefore, the sillyness is required. Nobody is going to lose their reputation for not being able to cook pasta in a dorm room bathtub. But, as in the last episode, you could acheive fame among your follow-on peers for having pulled it off (Hubert K). Although it may seem counterintuitive, TC: Masters cannot be viewed as some sort of Superbowl event. It's more like the events surrounding the Pro Bowl where the top quarterbacks are trying to drop a football into a moving basketball net. The real game (not the Pro Bowl) is deadly serious. This is for fun. Top Chef: Regular is where they can make people cry and make or break careers for our entertainment. As such, it's more compelling. Still, some of the concessions they make in Masters are interesting. Such as letting the chefs view the quickfire judging on a TV in another room and letting them say what they want. I really like that twist.

Same here. I've tried the double boiler, but think I can do it as well over direct heat if I'm in the mood to be careful. My discovery for the year is using a silicone spatula. Clean up is much easier if I don't get to it right away. Oh, and sriracha, but that was posted here years ago.

So has anybody been able to go? I've looked for reviews but haven't found any. The only new news I've found is that Jumawn will be able to see 'his' concept realized, will receive a manager's salary (MOD?, store manager?, regional manager?...), and will receive a percentage of profits (I imagine somewhere between 0.00000001% and 1%).

And we ask why men tend to rise to the top of the trade. Because we revel in being idiots! Fire, smoke, lasers...Hell, Navy Seals (and other Special Forces) cook over a small bit of C4 plastic explosives. DISCLAIMER: Please wear rated eyewear when using lasers of any sort. And never cook with C4.

Cool, then you can do this. Or, How 'bout lasers? Actually, there is a lot on the web regarding laser cutter hacking. I've never dealt with such things, but it looks like with the very basics - laser diode, power supply, a slow rotating gear motor - and a clever mechanical setup, you could pretty easily build a laser eggshell topper. Add a cam mechanism to move the egg up and down during rotation, and the top edge could be scalloped. [ETA]Oh, and I bet any non vibrating power sander could be used with a fine grade sandpaper and some care (and a good rinsing afterwards).