pbear

It's interesting see how MC@H has created renewed interest in pressure cooking. FWIW, I first got into pressure cooking and canning about fifteen years ago. I started with Kuhn-Rikons, because that's what all the "cool" sources recommended. I soon discovered, though, that these cookers have a dark side, which is that we are, in effect, the thermostat. To maintain proper pressure, the cookers have to be closely monitored, tinkering with the heat to keep the band at the right setting. With short cook times, say less than twenty minutes, not a big deal. For longer times, though, especially for canning, rather a big deal. Perhaps surprisingly, the solution to this problem is simple. Instead of the cool, new technology, try the old one of weight-regulated cookers (also known as rockers). Unlike spring-regulated cookers, weight-regulated ones can't go over pressure. Any excess heat is dissipated as steam. Yes, they're noisy, but I can deal with that. (For long processing times, I can easily move to another room.) Yes, you have to strike a balance between too much heat and too little, but the error band is wider. Bottom line, I haven't used my K-Rs in ten years. For regular pressure cooking, I use stainless steel Prestos. For canning, I use an 8 qt aluminum Mirro (which has the advantage of a variable weight, supporting 10 lb as well as 15 lb pressure). Oh, and the old technology is cheap. To my mind, win-win. YMMW. As for the engineering issue, rockers don't have the Dalton's Law problem for the simple reason that they vent continously. And, for that matter, they are easily vented before placing the weight. I will say, though, that I'm not convinced this is an important issue. AFAICT, the boiling point of the water bath is a function of total pressure, not vapor pressure, so that issue is tempest in a teapot, so so speak.

Mjx, I'll admit to being surprised to learn that bone is 30% collagen (by weight, I assume). I knew there was some, as I understand bone is a calcified protein matrix. Rocks was a metaphor and I did say basically. But I didn't realize the collagen content is so high. OTOH, how easily that collagen is extracted is another matter. In that regard, my experience (and that's what the OP asked about) is that bones as such don't add much to a stock. I've done this at least three times that I can recall. One was the stock mentioned in Post #11. Another was assisting a coworker make a similar stock with similarly bare veal bones. It was thoroughly disappointing. A third was making scrapple with a Smithfield ham bone, not well trimmed but ham is also low in collagen. The scrapple didn't set up as I'm used to using smoked neck bones, which are high in connective tissue. I'm curious whether you've ever tried making a bare bone stock and what your experience was. As my experience is that it's the stuff attached to the bones, not the bones themselves, which furnishes the overwhelming majority of the gelatin. And, of course, as everyone seems to agree, pretty much all the flavor. The point being that it's one thing to use bones to make stock because we have them. That's economical and, if we do it right (not using bare bones), we'll get a good stock. The question is whether it makes sense to buy bones to make stock. IMHO, we're usually better off (and it'll cost less) if we use a little meat for flavor and something else for the collagen, e.g., skin, tendon or foot. The bones are mostly dead weight. "Everybody knows" one uses bones to make stock. But everyone has been wrong before. The OP is asking whether this is another one of those times.

With respect, I don't think bones contribute gelatin. How could they? They're basically rocks. I'm pretty sure It's the meat and connective tissues attached to the bones which produce gelatin. Years ago, a butcher sold me veal bones for stock. It was a special order and designated as such by the supplier. Unfortunately, the bones were almost completely devoid of meat or connective tissue. Like the OP, I ended up with a very weak stock which even aggressive reduction couldn't save.

The two main reasons to age beef, of course, are tenderness and texture. The former by permitting enzymatic action, the latter by removing excess moisture.. In my experience, though, this only applies to dry roasts and steaks. I've tried aging pot roast a couple times and didn't see any advantage. Even when cooking LTLT, tenderness there comes mainly from collagen conversion. From this, it follows that pork shoulder, which is normally cooked like a pot roast, won't benefit either. But I have aged pork loin, which mainly has the advantage of tightening the texture (it's already tender). Likewise, sausages and ham are aged to evaporate excess moisture (not for tenderness). For that matter, I've aged lamb which I planned to dry roast, but not that which I planned to braise or barbecue.

jrshaul: I'm confused. In Post #8, you accepted my idea of using a temp of about 185ºF. In Post #14, you talk about using 145ºF. Those are very different. I've been assuming we're talking about a mixed meat and veggie sauce, both from the thread title and where you said in Post #8 that you "like the idea of making a meat and vegetarian sauce simultaneously." If so, Shalmanese is right that 145ºF is far too low for the veggies. For that matter, at that temp, four hours would be too little for reducing the collagen in the meat. For that, you'd need at least twelve, preferably eighteen to twenty-four. And the veggies still would be effectively uncooked. So, let's go back to 185ºF, a temp comparable to what you did with a conventional stove-top simmer. Be aware that, if you do this in ziploc (which wasn't my recommendation, but I understand why you want to go that way), you need to vent the bag (e.g., with a stent). Otherwise, steam will build up and vent it anyway. Better a planned venting than an accidental one. Shalmanese: Frankly, I don't understand why you object to using a PID to control a crock-pot. Once one has selected the parameters (I use P = 40 and I & D = 0, which I find reliably settles at one degree below the set point), it takes less than a minute to set up the cooker. Nothing like 53 chinoises. Not so important if the OP were making an all-veggie sauce, but I'm pretty certain he's doing a mixed meat-and-veggie one. For that, I assume you agree not boiling the meat is a valid objective. And, in my experience, a crock-pot, even on low, eventually boils the meat unless interdicted by a PID. slkinsey: I agree that a traditional ragu (mostly meat with little tomato) doesn't have a significant evaporation issue. The OP, though, seems to be doing something different.

Notice I only said to put the probe in a ziploc. The crock-pot still will get dirty. To avoid that, you'd have to use a liner (I don't bother) or move to a sous vide solution. The point about lack of evaporation is a good one and something I overlooked because I'm used to doing that adjustment as a matter of course when cooking in a crock-pot. Here, the best solution probably would be to substitute paste for some of the tomato, but it's hard to be sure whether that will fit without seeing the recipe. I'll be interested to hear how slkinsey handles that issue.

How well "putting the temperature sensor in the middle of [the cooker]" works depends on how precise one needs it to be. Will it hold the temp of the whole pot within a degree of the set point? No. Will it keep the crock-pot from boiling? Yes (at a set point of, say, 185ºF). I don't do this much anymore, as some sort of bain marie set-up in a Sous Vide Supreme (e.g., canning jars) is easier, but before I got that I used to do this fairly often.

Yes, a crock-pot will work for this dish, but the PID will give you better results. The problem with a crock-pot is that it will boil eventually. With the PID, you can top out at whatever temp you like. For stuff like this, I put the probe in a ziploc, so it's not sitting directly in the sauce.

Seems to me it's a stodge or soft-with-soft-with-soft problem. In other words, the traditional accompaniments are too much like the main dish, especially in texture. So, what I'd do is mix that up. Say, brussels sprouts and roasted potatoes (rather than mashed).

Have you considered doing this in canning jars? Seems like the simplest solution to me.

Living in SF, it's easy to find most Mexican, Latin American and Asian ingredients. But, there are a number of items easily found on the East Coast (where I grew up) which I can't find here. light cream daisy roll (smoked picnic) premium sliced bread (like Peppridge Farm or Arnold’s) kluski noodles radiatori pasta spaetzle (Maggi, boxed) originario (Italian soup rice) hominy grits (slow, not quick) pasteurized eggs (occasionally but very rare) escarole and rapini (occasionally but very rare) Florida avocados (larger and lighter than Hass) cappicola (ham from the shoulder) lebanon bologna bruder basil (a smoked cheese) fontinella (Italian table cheese) sassafras tea extract (Pappy’s) hoagies worth having chickarina soup (Progresso, canned) chicken and dumplings (Sweet Sue, canned) Tastykake pies, etc. (nothing comparable here)

Oops. Make that 85% lean ground beef. Sadly, yes, English is my first language. ETA: Now fixed.

Recently, an older friend here in SF, who went to high school and college in Joplin, was jonesing for some Spaghetti Red. As a surprise, I did some research to see how close I could come. In the course of that research, I noticed this thread, plus an article in Wikipedia (Fred & Red's apparently has now closed), what purports to be the authentic recipe (close variations of which appear on several sites, but I never did find the original source), a few interviews with Red and several reviews. Taking the linked recipe as my starting point, I reconstructed the dish using real ingredients rather than a seasoning mix. This probably means it no longer counts as authentic, but my friend was very pleased with the results, so I thought I'd share. It's an interesting chili precisely because it's so simple. Saute 2 med chopped onions in 2 tbsp vegetable oil until golden, about 20 minutes; add 4 cl minced garlic and saute another minute. Add 3 lb ground beef (preferably chuck), 85% lean; saute until lightly browned. Add 4 c water, 4 oz crushed saltine crackers, 6 tbsp mild (and/or spicy) pulverized new mexico chile (and/or ancho, paprika, etc.), 2 tbsp cumin and 1 tsp each salt, black pepper and oregano. Simmer partially covered 1‑1/2 to 2 hours. Cook 1 lb spaghetti al dente in salted boiling water; drain; divide among plates or shallow bowls and spoon chili over. Traditionally served with dill pickle slices, chopped onion and saltine crackers, but I think bread-and-butter pickles work better (and don’t think the onion or crackers add much). Note: The source recipe, as reported on other sites, makes much of using regular fatty ground beef. I've reduced it to 85% mainly because I don't like the mouthfeel of overly unctuous dishes. You can make your own decision. The real key to the recipe, imho, is the long simmer, which reduces collagen in the beef to gelatin. With that, you don't need the fat. Those same version, btw, insists you shouldn't use chuck, though it doesn't explain why. I'm quite certain chuck is right (because of its collagen content), so that's what I used and recommend.

There's definitely a mellowing process with some dishes, especially spicy ones, but I think the environmental factor mentioned here is generally the larger factor. In fact, someting along these lines is what I came into the thread to post.

Bill Christopher, in an article written a few years ago, confessed to using Chinese garlic in those products using prepared garlic. He said that he could buy Chinese garlic cheaper than he could grow it himself. Here's the link. What the article says is that "his company uses imports in some prepared products, such as sauces." I was talking about their peeled garlic, which the packaging states is grown in California. For that matter, what I care about is the quality, not the provenance. I only mentioned the latter because it had been raised by others.

ISTM that David Whitehouse, though not an ogre, is arguing for an overly aggressive interpretation of copyright. Doubtless he is right that copyright protects an author from cutting-and-pasting an entire recipe. He acknowledges, though, as he must, that American copyright law doesn't cover formulas, i.e., the ingredients list. Where Whitehouse goes sideways, IMHO, is in asserting that a rewrite of a recipe infringes copyright unless it uses a different method. No, that would be a patent issue. No one reasonably claims recipes can be patented. Copyright protects the expression, i.e., the words, not the idea. A recipe rewritten in new words does not infringe copyright, though one can quibble over whether the new words are "new" enough. Further, even if Whitehouse's standard were correct, andiesenji says the Thermomix recipes have been converted to a different process. If so, Whitehouse is asserting in this case a protection in copyright that neither he nor Lepard can possibly possess.

Another vote for peeled garlic. What I buy is Christopher Ranch, grown in the US fwiw. Consistently good quality and very easy to use (all one needs to do is trim the ends). I like to freeze it, both because it holds indefinitely that way and is easier to mince with a chef's knife when thawed.

I've been pretty happy using a sturdy butter curler for the job. You crack open the nut and scrape out the meat until you reach the brown skin. You can make it a little easier by alternatingly scoring the coconut and scraping, but I generally just rely on the scraping. OTOH, I'm not generally doing three coconuts at one sitting.

I've done pork shoulder many times and have settled on 150ºF as my preferred temp. IMHO, it's done in about 18 hours, but that's still with some bite. Another six hours is pretty-much-but-not-quite falling apart tender. Can't imagine wanting to cook more than 48 hours total.

The other thing for which a grill pan is handy is baking (oven roasting) things like sausage and bell peppers that you want elevated above the pan surface. Now, that would be a single-burner than two-burner grill pan, but the cleaning question remains. Not that hard, really. Let soak a few minutes, then clean with a nylon brush, running it back-and-forth with the grooves. Non-stick is easiest, but wears out and has maximum heat issues as you mention. After that, I find naturally-cured cast iron easier to clean than enameled, assuming of course the former is properly seasoned.

Clarification. When I say I always cook the meat and sauce separately, I don't mean that I never SV in the sauce. On the contrary, I often do that, in whole or in part. But, when I do, I always have fully cooked the sauce separately first.

valeree, a few thoughts. 1. If you heat the dish above your SV temp, you pretty much negate any advantage of using the technique. You'd have gotten the same thing if you had braised conventionally at the higher temp. FWIW, I generally do meat braises at 150ºF, as I find the texture cooked at 131ºF to be too flabby. 2. Depending on the cut, braising ground beef serves a purpose. Although the fibers have been cut very short, there's still collagen in there (especially with chuck) which will convert to gelatin with braising. Ground beef doesn't take anything like two hours, though. Half an hour to one hour at a conventional braising temp is plenty. Don't know what the SV time would be. At a guess, eight to twelve hours at 150ºF (won't even hazard a guess as to a lower temp). BTW, I find that browning the meat before grinding is easier and more effective than browning afterwards, and pretty much essential if you're cooking SV (see point one). Also, if you do much of this I'd strongly recommend getting a proper grinder. Can be used, of course, for making sausage as well. 3. When doing SV, I always cook the sauce and and meat separately. Partly this is because I'm used to doing things that way (pressure canning simmer sauces for the pantry is one of my hobbies). Also, I've seen almost nothing on how to cook sauces at low temp. Your chili could be adapted as a stand alone sauce pretty easily, simmered about an hour conventionally. There's a learning curve, obviously but, once you learn the trick, you can apply it to almost any braise. If that seems too much like work, maybe you'd be better off cooking this one conventionally.

My approach to stuff like this is to dispense with the bags and, instead, pack the product in 1 liter canning jars. Of course, strictly speaking, this is no longer sous vide, but you get the same advantage of long cook times at low temp. Takes about two hours for the jars to heat through, but this isn't important with long cook times. And you could easily remove the jars from the bath as necessary to stir in spices, then return them for further cooking. I will mention that it seems to me the recipe you describe is poorly crafted. It's the slow boil which is making the meat tough. Even cooking conventionally, you should be using no more than a simmer. Folks sometimes ignore this rule when cooking ground beef, but it's just as true for that as any meat.

Given this, I will respectfully disagree with the other posters. They're giving you good advice on how to coordinate two different objectives as to texture (MR vs. M), when what your wife cares about is color. Frankly, I don't think she would like a steak SVed to 140 degrees then browned. It'll be pinker in the middle than she likes. That's the nature of SV. To see this, look at the pictures for Keller & Co.'s sirloin recipe in Under Pressure. They SV to 139.1 degrees, then sear. I'm guessing that's too pink for her. Instead, I would go with your original alternate idea of SVing both steaks to 131 degrees, then browning hers a little longer. Won't take 5 to 7 minutes - more like 3 to 4 - though it'll take a few batches to get the timing right. Nor will this lose all, or even most, of the advantage of SV. Instead of cooking the steak from chilled, you'll have a big head start on target temp. So, a little more of a gradient, but not much. And the color, I think, will be rather more to her liking. Just my $0.02's worth.

For moderating heat to the pan, I prefer the two-layer type, often sold under the trade name “Flame Master.” Much better than disk-type diffusers for this purpose. Often can found in the housewares department of hardware stores (not so much in cookware stores). Also available from Fantes (scroll down) and Amazon. Have been using for years and recommend highly.