boilsover

I think you misunderstood me. She wants a corer/slicer, not a peeler. I already have one of the mechanical peelers. Thanks.

OK, so I'm usually the one in my house requesting and choosing cookware and utensils, but this year my wife has requested one of the ubiquitous push-down combination apple corers/slicers. I've attached a photo of a Winco model just so y'all can see the genus. Considering our ages and the plethora of unitaskers we already have, I'm loathe to get one at all. But DW has been extremely indulgent with my cookware buys, so she can have whatever she wants. The problem is: she doesn't know which one she wants. I'd rather buy the best-in-class. Who has what, and what do you consider best? Thanks!

There you go. Invent the self-cleaning Chinoise and retire to the Riviera!

All +1. May I add: --Flush/brush from the outside first. Clearing the crap by forcing it back out is easier than pushing it though. --Bang it hard several times on a protected edge over the sink. --If the mesh allows, push the ends of a fine bristled brush through the mesh (again, outside-in) --If it's all-SS or SS-Exoglass, hit it with oven cleaner or Carbon Off. --If you have access to a garage-type air compressor and blow tip...

Gosh, I'd just tell him he's free to use his steel on his own knives, not yours. Why is it more complicated than that? BTW, I recently bought one of the Big Stick style (1" diameter) ceramic rods. I was initially disappointed to find that it is coarser than my other ceramic. But after using it awhile, I really like it. When an edge starts to go, it gets a swipe or two on this, and then a pass on the finer one to polish. Have you tried a Big Stick?

Or dialectic unions...

I hope you've shot some time-lapse footage of this, so you can see how worthwhile the project, how trivial the travail...

There are surprising ## of sellers who are both unapologetic and unabashed over charging exorbitant sums to "handle" and ship small, light things. In fact, it's a pricing strategy on TV infomercials and many eBay listings. In both cases, I think the seller's hoping the shopper is lazy and/or drunk. Not a great marketing strategy for a celeb chef, I think.

I dunno. No one has rigidly enforced any of this shape/ratio business. Still, we try to retain some precision in what we call things in today's world of "sauciers", "Weekday" and "chef's" pans. And in general, the form and terminology ought to follow the function. I encourage you to dig deeper if you are interested. A good seminal source is Renard's "Les Cuivres du Cuisine". Or the vintage catalogs of the French makers of the Golden Age. Have you seen any of the (mostly American) larger splayed pans whose walls are cut on a bias? That is, the rim at the handle sits appreciably lower than it does at the opposite (far) side. I have some confidence this was intended as a kind of "ski jump" as an aid to tossing. I find these quite beautiful, but I have never cooked in one. Cheers.

Thanksgiving 2017 Update Searzall actually made a big, positive contribution to my Tday feast. I'd call it The Equalizer for my overcrowded oven and my brined turkey's dermis. It excelled in evening up the skin browning all over the bird. And it was very helpful in imparting some needed top browning on the pan stuffing and casserole dishes. Overall, it was a big help in bringing things together at the right time to plate and serve.

Well, to my in-laws' hosted Thanksgiving, I contributed some glazed carrots. Kenji's SV glazed baby carrots to be precise. http://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2010/06/sous-vide-glazed-carrots-recipe.html I wanted to stick to the prep (183F for "about" an hour). But I especially wanted to try carrots because Kenji has written: "... there are some vegetables for which sous-vide cooking can't be beat. For me, carrots top that list. When cooked in a sealed bag with a little bit of butter, sugar, and salt, the natural flavor of the carrot intensifies into a sweeter, stronger, and downright tastier version of itself. It's one of the few cooking methods where the end result is a vegetable that tastes more like itself than when you started." (emphasis in original) And considering my poor experience with cooking SV soft-boiled eggs, I wanted to minimize any "outside in" texture issues by using carrots no larger in diameter than 5/8". I tasted the carrots at the hour mark, and Kenji is right about the flavor. But there was a definite texture difference twixt the root and top ends. Since the roots were done fairly far up, and I knew I would later saute them, off to the in-laws I went. What I found was that there was little carryover to the carrots' top ends, and not quite enough heat added by the saute to get those ends past a crunchy state (our dinner knives were breaking, not cutting, at the cores). But the saute was enough to make the root ends slightly too soft for my liking. Carrots were eaten, but there were many cleared plates that held the top 1/4s uneaten. So, what have we learned, Palmer? I think I've learned that the outside-in phenomenon happens with everything, and that it's a potential problem that needs to be solved with something other than SV. My giant mistake so far with SV is expecting that if only the ideal temp/time direction is followed, the food will be uniformly cooked. For example, I believed, perhaps foolishly, that 183F for an hour on these skinniest of carrots would break down the pectins throughout each carrot. It did not--IMO it would have taken longer, by which time those pointy root ends would have been so soft as to risk breaking off in the finish and plating. I'm also getting the sense that reheating is just reaheating--the same outside-in issue happens again. So... Forget binary things like eggs in shells. In you experts' opinions, is there anything that can be SVd at X degrees for Y minutes (or held at that same X degrees indefinitely) that will be of desirable, consistent texture? I thought these skinny carrots might be that... Thanks.

Hi, SLB: No offense taken. I'm having issues finding the distinction you mention in Sam's article. Sam writes: " Sauteuse Evasée (Slant-Sided Saucepan, Windsor Saucepan, Sauteuse Conique, Conical Sauteuse, Fait Tout, Chef’s Pan, Reduction Pan): This is a saucepan that has been optimized for reductions. The sides are angled out from the base to provide 25% more surface area for evaporation. In addition, the sides are even lower than those on a Low Saucepan -- usually one-third as tall as the diameter of the pan. Due to its geometry, which is neither particularly high nor particularly low, the Sauteuse Evasée may be used for sautéing in the larger sizes, and the smaller sizes can be very useful in place of a Low Saucepan. Such versatility has conferred upon this pan the name “Fait Tout,” which means “does everything.” (Note: Le Creuset makes a non-traditional “Windsor” that has slanted sides, but is relatively tall and narrow. This pan does not have the same performance characteristics as the traditional designs.)" and "Curved Sauteuse Evasée (Curved Sauteuse, Saucière, Sauteuse Bombée, Saucier, Chef’s Pan): As the name suggests, this pan is otherwise similar to the Sauteuse Evasée, only with curved rather than straight sides. In smaller sizes, the curved sides provide easy access to every corner of the pan with a whisk or spoon for sauce making. In larger sizes, the curved sides facilitate one-handed tossing of the food when sautéing." (emphasis mine) I see no contradiction or distinction in what Sam wrote. He clearly equates 'sauteuse evassee' with 'Windsor', etc. Were I Sam's editor, I would have moved the bold sentence quoted to the end of the first paragraph, because it applies best to all these splayed geometries, not just the curved-wall variants. I'd also like to offer that any difference is one of degree masquerading as one of kind. Unless we literally are on a desert island, we would want a large floorspace on which to saute. But that expansive floorspace may defeat the purpose of keeping a relatively constant surface:volume ratio for reductions. So we might reasonably agree that a 'sauteuse evassee' is a Windsor with enough floorspace to saute. These nomenclature issues can sometimes be frustrating (E.g., Try proving what a "Dutch oven" is!). To some French chefs a 'Russe' is just a saucepan; to others, it's a taller specific pan akin to a milk pan.

My great granny's is smaller than a serving spoon, yet larger than a large table spoon. It is marked "New Haven Silverplate Co" and is probably c1890. Obviously cut for a rightie. This shape is nice. Oxo, what's 1 more among 10,000 products? Joseph Joseph?

Hai, Nama no Shichimencho. Good eye.

Great. I wish you consistent, fine results.

I would suggest roasting it whole, and low, after a pan sear on the back and thighs, a la Tom Keller's roast chicken prep. The breasts are chisel-y, and you don't want them dry. I hate to say this, but both times I've tried roasting "heritage", free-range, fresh turkeys, I've been very disappointed with the results. The last time (literally the last time), the bird ran just north of $100, and was no better that the plain 'ol frozen birds that are discounted for Thanksgiving. Oh, and there are not really any leftovers for the week after. Sorry to be a buzzkill...

I've been known to do something similar when dining out and the thin utensils come already bent out of useful shape. It is possible to bend a dinner fork almost perfectly flat. That usually gets the message across...

This sounds interesting--the good stuff being on the outside and close to the heat source. How would you describe the difference in result from boiling/simmering for 10 min? What time and temp do you recommend? And do you butter/season a bag or are the cobs swimming free? Thanks

I have my great grandmother's stirring spoon that is cut this way.

I was being tongue-in-cheek. It's still good work.

Wow. Good work. Did you make a special jig or press to bend it over/with? Wouldn't want to use a hammer or cheap dowel or a vise or anything! Sheesh, this is technical, sort of like Jacques Pepin's new knobs for Staub. Does Ruhlman offer a spoon cut across on a bias so that it can scrape AND scoop? Nobel Prize material for anyone without a file or angle grinder, dont'cha think? We're doomed.

Well, if DOE and the folks who've measured the actual efficiency change their minds, I'm all ears. Not in my experience. Luddites come in critical and unthinking flavors. But considering the huge ## of circulators going into the aspirational market/wired set right now, I wouldn't bet on a high % of them being "well-schooled". $600 in bookshelf candy (and a tub of meat glue) does not make a cook "Modernist". Thing is, if it's subjected to any external heat at all after it towels off from the bath (assuming it was bathed to equilibrium in the first place), it's got a gradient and isn't completely "consistent". We can quibble over how to best minimize that gradient, but it's there, guaranteed. Whether it's finished under the SV Everything guys' flamethrower or in a Bessemer oven. Oh, please. 'Luddite' is what, a laudatory term? In all honesty, there are plenty of fanboys (and -girls and -fluid) who buy these sub-$100 things simply because it's fashionable or believed to be a shortcut to becoming an accomplished cook. To pretend otherwise is indeed foolish. I really don't have a dog in this fight. If SV--or Sue Veed--improves my cooking, I'm all for it. But it better make sense, and be a qualitative improvement. Otherwise it's just fashion, gear worship and funiculation. What I'm finding is that the avenue of improvement is a lot narrower than the hype. If this is unsurprising to some, shame on me, the slow learner. Where do you (or anyone else) consider that SV gives you the most bang for the buck/hour spent? Please don't say green vegetables... Thanks.

Well, I'll offer that one well-schooled culinary Luddite is preferable to 10 newb culinary fashionistas/fanboys. A problem here is that SV circulators are at their apogee in terms of mass market sales. There's very little pushback or even balanced discussion about what SV can't do, the intrinsic complications that puncture the "precision" and "perfection" ideas, and the efficiencies/duplicative steps involved. Technophillia being what it is, it's pretty easy to dismiss cynics, doubters, and even the judicious as Luddites--while avoiding debate. I see a parallel with induction appliances. It took, what, 20+ years to debunk the claim that induction is more efficient than coil electric? Or for people to "scorchprint" to show how uneven many of the induction coils are? There was (and still is) a certain irrationality afoot about what is gained and what is given up (God Rest Sitram Catering!) in the name and hedonic feedback loop of Modernity. To even question the induction mode made one, at best, a reprobate. Besides, be careful of what you think you know about the Luddites' cause. They actually liked machines. See, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-really-fought-against-264412/

Thank you. I was fearful there was some secret priesthood or decoder ring that I was unwitting to. Thing is, I've run into many people lately (e.g., poring over the Prime beef or $$ fish offerings) who--with no bidding at all--volunteer that "I'm doing this sous vide!" with some supercillious intonation that suggests superiority. I just now thinking: How difficult, really, is it to cook $24/lb black cod without a CV circulator? Just checking emperors for clothes. One of my many character flaws. Sorry.

These are close to what I like. Still, 90C for 8 minutes versus 95 C for 4-5 minutes (aka simmering water, non SV)? Can someone please explain the practical advantage of doing these SV? The temps are high enough that timing seems just as critical. What am I missing?