boilsover

This is a useful article, very well thought out. The concept makes complete sense that smaller molecules may penetrate the meat further than larger ones. Marinades aren't really atomically monolithic, after all. And of course it makes sense that salt may penetrate the furthest, by virtue of the different processes by which it penetrates. But it obviously does not all remain on the surface. Incidentally, the article also points up a flaw in using dye penetration as "proof" that meat is impermeable--the molecule size factor applies to the dyes as well. I was not under the impression that marinade--vacuum or not--drove flavor components all the way through meat. This would be a red...herring. I'm content with the penetration depths this article appears to confirm: 1/16" to 1/8", depending on the molecules involved. If I can increase that depth even by a small increment, that's something I probably want to do. My tests so far would indicate that there is indeed slightly more uptake with a vacuum. The article also raises implications for the utility of scoring or abrading meat prior to marinading. More surface area exposed to the marinade, more and/or deeper uptake.

So, after 6 hours, the tray-marinated tritip weighed 1/4 oz more. The vacuum one added just shy of 1/2 oz. This is consistent with the Young & Smith 2004 chicken study. I couldn't taste a difference, and I did not weigh after cooking. I'm duplicating the test today with Jaccarded identical 7 1/4 oz triptips, one in the tray and one under vacuum. Eating prime beef for science... I hope you all appreciate my sacrifice...

"Neither of the second set of sources that I linked to mention beef." Mentions beef. Feel better?

By this logic, there should be almost no uptake at all. Clearly, cut, exposed meat exchanges moisture with its environment. While it is wrong to think of it as a sponge, it's also wrong to consider it not to absorb marinade.

I've read these linked sources. None addresses beef. The first is almost completely devoid of data, and the illustrations appear completely fictional, apparently designed to support the conclusion. The second, about chicken, actually acknowledges that vacuum *does* increase uptake in beef: "The vacuum tumbling process has been shown to increase marinade uptake in the meat (Young and Lyon, 1997; Young and Smith, 2004) and improve cook yield (Young and Lyon, 1997; Young et al., 2004)." Here, the time period was only 1 hour. The third linked study, also about chicken, had a marination time period of only 30 minutes. The fourth addressed halibut. Unfortunately, all I could access was the abstract, which indicates that testing vacuum uptake wasn't the focus of the article. My curiosity has inspired me to cut 3 identical tritips (7 1/4oz) each. One sits just in a shallow tray at ambient pressure, the second is under vacuum in a Vac-u-Vin cannister (shaken a few times to make sure marinade coats the cut) and the third one Jaccarded and in the same vacuum environment. Equal volume of marinade in each. Any bets on weight differences after 6 hours? I'm not adding green dye to prime beef sorry. You'll have to trust/excuse me reporting any taste differences.

Hmmm, do you have any data supporting this? I certainly get that needled tissue will take up marinade faster than non-, but I question whether meat is so dense that it will not absorb marinade faster under vacuum. It would seen to me that, while not significantly porous, there is clearly enough "room" for water and salt (and blood, serum and lymph) to pass through and between muscle cells, and vacuum would aid with that, even without needling. I guess I have to run a little test. In this connection, I've heard it's the practice of markets like Costco and Walmart to needle pretty much everything.

And if you've ever been around real copper, you know it's a completely different color...

Hella marketing is what's going on. Carry on.

Actually I do have up to 180K Btu available, and I'm with you about butter. Because of the high temps I'm using with searing the SV'd steaks, if I want butter/diacetyl flavor, it gets ghee and oil for the sear, and then a little whole or compound butter at the finish. The Ducasse/Fat Guy method was also my mom's (wife of the butcher) --the crust is incredible. Personally, I prioritize that crust ahead of the (relative) lack of gradient with SV. Now I'm thinking of a la Mom/Ducasse, except starting with the raw steak chilled... Next "Steak SV" question: I have had good luck with "marinating" steaks overnight in a vacuum cannister with olive oil, garlic and herbs. I think the acids in the oil improve the texture, and the aromats infuse the meat. I have not noticed this texture improvement with my SV cooks, but the flavor infusion has been OK. Do you SV experts think you get equal or greater benefits from doing that in a non-vacuum SV bag in a 1-2 hour SV cook? In other words, do you get much, besides heat, that you wouldn't get from a vacuum marinade?

Ooh, that looks good. I knew of the dextrose/soda thing from wok preps like Mongolian Beef, but I didn't think of it for steaks. Homebrew here I come.

I have to think about that. Deep frying conducts the heat from the oil over the entire surface area all at once, whereas a pan/griddle/grate is generally just hitting it front and back. I deep fry Czech meat skewers fairly often, and unless the chunks are cut really large, they get cooked through. I'll try it though. Thanks!

Gosh, it may have been longer. Like I said, I'll have to time it next time. Thanks for your input.

I get the coverage aspect of this, but aren't you limited to about 375F for temperature?

Gosh, I never time that. I go by the color and crust. I'll try to remember to time it. When I sear non-SV steaks, I sear the same way, but I either leave them in the pan to finish and rest (off the heat, covered), or put them in a low oven. So do you sear right out of the bag, warm? Before I got the circulator, I fooled with a variant of Kenji's charcoal chimney prep, where you bake the steaks in about a 140F oven for 40 minutes or so, and then perch them, skewered, over a half-full burning charcoal chimney. There, the sear is about 45-60 seconds/side. This is similar in concept to SV, IMO.

Well, it's an outcome problem, that's as far as I'll go. The steak that was SV'd to 125F and then chilled to 38F before the flop turned out fine, if less than ideal. I like to pan sear with a little high-smoke-point fat in the pan. All these were done in a CI pan near to smoking. I don't care for blackened steak. I have the Searz-All, but it's pretty slow going with more than 1 steak. I mostly just hit the sides a little bit with it. Not easy to do without lighting the pan on fire. Have you seen the SV Everything guys' searing competition on YouTube? Apparently the consensus winning method was the sear imparted by one of those huge weed burner jets.

This is actually the same issue I'm having.

Hi, Chris: I think I started at 131F, then 129F, and it's now ratcheted down to 125F. I think that--strictly as a matter of physics--there's necessarily going to be some gradation whenever you sear. The heat is obviously coming from the outside, and it's heating deeper than just the topmost cells. The reason I'm speculating I need a faster sear is that the carryover heat from the way I'm doing it now is differentially cooking the interior. I think an analogous thing is happening with the carrots, which were skinny to start with, except it's probably more a function of time-at-temp than adding a second outside-in heat application. I think exactly the same thing would happen if the carrots were sauteed after SV. Then I'm thinking that carryover heat (and only that) is exactly what cooks the interior of a steak done non-SV. And that this is what I'm returning to when I chill the bag before searing. Maybe I should just be happy with a slight marginal improvement over simply pan-frying my steak?

As a relatively new circulator owner, I've been on a cook's tour of uses. First stop was an utter fail and a giant waste of time: soft-boiled eggs. Second stop was a success, but also a waste of time: vegetables (green were OK, carrots were unevenly cooked). Somewhat dismayed, I've moved on to what everyone seems to rave about: steak. I've probably done 8 batches of prime graded ribeye (all about 1.25" thick and post-seared) so far, with mixed results. All but one turned out overdone given the temperature and time recommendations. All had decidedly less homogenous centers (i.e., more heat gradation depth) than all the photos in cookbooks and on the web seem to show. Honestly, only the last batch (see below) was as good as just pan-frying. So I've been bumping down the bath temperature. The overall "rareness" progressively improved. Still, the gradation issue wasn't getting much better. The last batch I did, I decided to chill the SV'd (120F) steaks and let the bags stabilize in the fridge overnight. After searing, these were a major improvement with the gradation issue (still not perfect), and I noticed very little difference in internal temps between these and the ones seared right outta-da-bag. I'm concluding that maybe I need to sear faster. Or lower my expectations. Advice? Does anyone else find it advantageous to chill the SV'd steaks before searing? Thanks!

Prompted by the recent "What Could You Not Do Without" thread, I was thinking about the non-family-heirloom category of cooking tools, especially those acquired under special or notable circumstances, resulting in their elevation to personal treasures. What are yours, and what are their stories? Mine include a copper skillet from the hands of Caesare Mazzetti in Montepulciano, a bread knife from Poilane, a custom knife from my friend Bob Kramer, and my egg clacker from A. Simon (which I later saw in use at Astrance, a Parisian M3*). The thing need not be noble, since I also treasure my Proline skillet from the Solingen factory store, my Buffalo Iron, and the cheap shellfish forks from E. Dehillerin. Give it up...

It looks like a T.G. Green Gripstand bowl to me, indeed English. I have collected four different sizes so far. Never found a better mixing bowl. Mason Cash makes a knockoff, but it's just not the same...

Sentimental: Great grandmother's cut stirring spoon, turning fork, wooden salad bowl and soap kettle. Dad's knife scabbard. Granddad's F.Dick beavertail steel. My self-made knives. Utilitarian: 3.5mm hammered tinned copper saute, egg clacker, a tapered wall Windsor, a round gratin/roaster.

I still have a couple of those detachable-handle Fire Kings I inherited. They make great dog bowls.

I don't like glass around my cooking, and I don't trust it, especially Pyrex. However, I have carved out a small exception for borosilicate measuring beakers, fat separators, and French presses. Glass storage containers are fine.

Thanks, andie. I bought an all-metal 8-segment Amco model today. It also has a blade guard. Oddly, the coring aspect is octagonal, rather than round. Surprisingly heavy. Re: flat slices, I saw a lighter-weight one of this type that cuts flat slices, i.e., the blades aren't radial. If you're interested, I'll try to get you brand and model info. [Edit] Here's the flat one I saw. I may get her that one, too. https://www.google.com/search?q=apple+slicer&client=tablet-android-hms-tmobile-us-noonebox&prmd=sivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjcy5CmsvnXAhUL8WMKHWasBfMQ_AUIEigC&biw=600&bih=1024#imgrc=uaKKmtk0moJxjM:

Wow, I had no idea. How does your machine core and slice? I thought all these types were peelers or spiralizers. Does it slice radially like the exemplar I showed? [Edit] Nevermind, I watched the video. My wife wants the wedge-type slices. But this is a versatile machine you have! Thanks.