slkinsey

Suggestions from above: Heart muscles is TOUGH because it is constantly in use. I would try 180F/82C for 8 hours. This ought to be enough, but you may need to take it longer. This will create a texture similar to a traditional braise, which is probably what you are familiar with. I would cut it into serving portion and bag each separately. You could cook it down to 140F/60C but then it would require days and that may not be what you are looking for. Some experimentation will be necessary to get the results you want. Just wanted to report that the ox heart cooked sous vide (per NathanM's 180F/82C for 8 hours suggestion) came out fabulous. The heart was sliced into about 1/2" thick slices. I kept it real simple, just s/p and some frozen cubes of stock. I cooked it the day before, then chilled and reheated just before serving with an orange-cognac gastrique and a mizuna salad with mandarins and crispy pig's ear (see below for more info on that). Beautiful rose-pink color, fork tender. Although one of my dinner guests who is a big heart lover said it was maybe too tender--that he missed the chewiness. However another guest said you could have served it to anyone without telling them it was heart and they would have had no idea!

There's a scant 1/4 ounce of 1:1 simple in there as well, I think.

I think the point e-monster was making is that, with <1.5-inch steaks, once you finish browning the steak, the difference is not tremendously different from regular pan cooking. Personally, I'm not sure I agree with that. It depends on how you brown the steak, for one (blowtorch being recomomended if you want good external browning with minimum penetration). I'd also say that 1.5 inches as a reference point is a bit too thick. I've seen a marked difference using this technique for strip steaks as thin as one inch. Below maybe 0.75 inches you're really starting to get so thin that by the time you brown the steak (unless using a blowtorch) you have undone a lot of the careful temperature work you did with the sous vide process. This is all assuming you would like to brown the exterior of the steak in a hot pan. If you're using a blowtorch or if you do not want to brown the exterior of the steak at all, you could get good results at most any thickness. Where sous vide is really handy is when you have an extra-thick steak. Then you can get an even medium rare with a nice crust but otherwise very little penetration of "doneness" beyond medium rare that would be extremely-challenging-to-impossible using any other method.

Some threads that may be of interest: If you like this, you'll probably like this. . . Cocktail suggestions Bartending guide for the perplexed

I have done this with a 6 inch thick porterhouse steak and some other steaks of lesser size. Sous vide it up to temperature, then blast in a hot pan to finish. You can see some pictures of the dinosaur steak here.

Don't know what street you are on in Brooklyn, but there is a cocktailian bar set to open in Brooklyn by a leading light in the NYC cocktail scene. I can't say (and largely don't know) more than that, but don't be too quick to discount this rumor.

What's so "very Italian" about Marco Canora and Paul Grieco? One's from upstate NY and the other is Canadian. Regardless, the three dishes you ask about, which come from a tasting menu at Insieme restaurant in NYC, are all listed as "contemporary" dishes in contrast to such traditional (or anyway less outreaching) dishes such as fritto misto and sardines "in saor". I don't think that Insieme gets a pass and everything being declared "Italian," by the way. In particular, I have my doubts as to whether the "crudo" trend (started by Pasternack at Esca, by the way) has any real traditional grounding -- rather, Batali's places have tended to view their cuisine as being "in the Italian tradition, as though NYC culture and ingredients were another region of Italy." Not quite the same thing as being "Italian" though. I don't take any particular position on the three dishes you ask about, except to observe that they don't strike me as all that Italian -- or all that anything, really. On the other hand, there are plenty of things on the "contemporary" side of that menu which strike me as plenty Italian, such as short rib ravioli with fiore di sardo, kohlrabi and thyme; branzino "saltimbocca" with cippolini onion, savoy cabbage, prosciutto and sage; guinea hen "finochietti" consisting of an organic breast, liver, thigh and wing of guinea hen with smoked fennel, tagiasca olives and lemon; and others.

I think the whole reaction saying "oh my god! what are those idiots at Father's Office going to do when someone orders a Ramos Fizz?!" is a bit misplaced. Like many articles on cocktail developments, and especially those by the LA Times, this one simply asks the wrong person. I don't know if there are any serious cocktailian bars in LA along the lines of what exists in NYC and a few cities around the country, but regardless... Father's Office in LA does not seem to be one. From what I can tell (web site here) it's a medium-upscale pub well known for burgers that is focused mostly on beer, of which there are 30 on tap (cocktails aren't even mentioned on the web site). One is not surprised to learn that "Trivial Pursuit" is a popular passtime there. What this means is that the guy from Father's Office was happy to get the press mention, but the fact is that they are not a serious cocktail spot and they don't seem to be set up to make any cocktails that one would be unhappy to have stirred. I imagine they do 99% of their (presumably relatively meager) cocktail business in highballs, rocks drinks and the occasional Martini or Manhattan -- none of which requires a shaker -- and I'm quite sure there isn't an egg white to be found behind the bar. ETA: Considering that Father's Office doesn't seem to be much of a serious cocktailian bar, or even cocktail-focused establishment, it's interesting to me that this is the second LA Times article on the subject of cocktails that quotes Sang Yoon of Father's Office to appear within a month (the other being this article on cocktail "rules"). I'm wondering if Mr. Yoon has some in with the LAT staff.

I suppose it's possible that that an entirely different Argentine place offering a very similar menu opened in the old Pampa space. It does make sense that a new Argentine restaurant might want to take advantage of whatever cuisine-specific equipment was already in place. But the similarities of the menu and presentation, combined with what looks like the reappearance of Pampa's grill man, makes it look like an awfully big coincidence. I believe Caminito is cheffed (and possibly also owned) by Fabian Manca, who was the original chef from Pampa's early "glory days." It looks like Cafe Frida, Cafe Rhonda and La Rural are owned by a management group headed up by Cristina Castañeda and Raul Bonetto. Considering that the WHOIS information for pamparestaurant.com lists Raul Bonetto as the administrative contact, I think it's safe to assume that La Rural's management is the same group that ran Pampa, if not the original chef.

Thanks for the write-up, D! Interesting that this place seems to be, more or less, an updating and renaming of Pampa. Do you have any idea whether it is under the same management? I look forward to checking it out. Over the life of Pampa, I felt like the overall quality there suffered a decline -- slow in the beginning and rather precipitous towards the end. In the early days, Pampa featured actual Argentinian beed, but various factors put a stop fo that. Then the selection began to narrow, especially with respect to offal selections (the original menu featured not only sweetbreads but also grilled kidneys, intestines and tripe). Soon thereafter the prices began creeping and then bounding upwards from what had originally been quite a bargain to something that seemed on the expensive side for a cramped, loud restaurant on Amsterdam Avenue above 96th Street. I stopped going a year or two before it closed, and wasn't surprised when they shut their doors. . . . All of which is to say that I miss the original Pampa, and am very pleased to see that another similar restaurant has opened in its place offering, if not quite the same pricing of Pampa's early days, at least what seems like a much better-executed version of what Pampa was trying to be in the final years of its decline, together with a more varied and more interesting menu.

Interesting. Do you know who sells the 24oz Chivalry glass? I wasn't able to turn it up with Google. I don't know about the Chivalry glass, but if you google something like "buy libbey glass" you'll find plenty of places selling it. In general, since many of these glasses are intended for business, you'll have to buy a case. The size of a case will vary depending on the glass (12 to a case seems the usual for large tumblers -- cases of small cocktail glasses are much larger). Here is a case of twelve 24 ounce Libbey glasses for 40 bucks. Here is a case of 23 ounce Chivalry beer glasses for 28 bucks. Here is a case of 24 ounce paneled jumbo coolers for 36 bucks. In general, this seems like a pretty good site for Libbey glasses. Poke around in the various categories of glass down towards the bottom of the page.

This is a drink (usually, and it would seem, incorrectly called a "Sea Fizz") that a number of NYC bartenders are known to make from time to time. I'm not aware of it being on any menus.

Absinthe is a high-proof solution containing a lot of alcohol-soluble dissolved substances. When water is added and the proof is lowered, certain alcohol-soluble substances that do not have good solubility in water come out of solution and, being now opaque, create the characteristic milky white "louche."

Dude, you have clearly never had a job in Italy. That is efficient, if you're an Italian!

From what I have been able to glean, it actually is an infusion of the cookies -- believe it or not. According to the Lazzaroni web site:

Nathan, that might be true in terms of savory dishes and cocktails. But, in general I think America has a sweet palate compared to other cultures. And those 100+ year old cocktails might seem sweet to you and me, but not so much to the people drinking "Apple Pie Martinis" in the Dubuque TGI Friday's. Taken as a percentage of the average diet, it's hard to say off the cuff whether sugar consumption has radically increased -- because, of course, the average daily calorie count in general has radically increased over the last 150 years. Even if the percentage has remained the same (and I think it's likely it has increased simply as a function of the fact that people eat far more processed foods today) it could still be a lot more sugar. However, one chance I've noticed over the last 3.5 decades is the huge increase in soda, juice and other high-calorie drinks among American children. When I was a kid, we had Coca-Cola around the house maybe 3-4 times a year, total. Nowadays, it's not uncommon for a family to consume more than 2 liters of full sugar soda per person per week. When I was a "tween" there was maybe one overweight kid in my entire elementary school class. Now the average is probably at least 35% (if not 50% or more). The one fundamental difference in diet I can see between 4th graders now and 4th graders in the 1970s is the extra calories from beverages. As adults, there is (sometimes) less drinking of full-sugar cold drinks, but this is compensated with increased consumption of things like a "grande gingerbread pumpkin latte" at Starbuck's.

Last I checked, Crisco was not banned. And, for what it's worth, I think it's pretty silly to ban trans-fats in all applications. There's no reason pie crusts shouldn't be made with Crisco. On the other hand, I'd prefer that the pie crusts be made with butter and lard, which is not only natural but more healthful than using Crisco.

slkinsey, what do you mean by "respecting the power of the stove"? Do you simply mean not overheating the pan? What I meant is that, if you have a Crapmaster 9000 NYC apartment stove like I have, you are not putting out nearly as many BTUs as you are if you have a Wolf stove. As a result, you have to adjust your technique. In a commercial stove, you can put more food in the pan without losing temperature, because the burner is cranking out tons of thermal energy and the pan can recover quickly. On the Crapmaster 9000, you have to rely more upon the thermal energy stored in the pan, since the stove isn't strong enough for a fast recovery. I find that overcrowding the pan, which has consequences beyond simply lowering the temperature, is one of the most common mistakes made by home cooks. This way they're covered liability- and warranty-wise if you crank up the heat and something bad happens.

Hmmm. I feel the need for some side-by-side expermientation after the turn of the New Year.

That's not the way it works. Trans-fats are not naturally-occurring in any meaningful quantity, and there is strong and generally accepted scientific evidence that (a) consumption in reasonable amounts has certain negative health consequences and (b) there are viable alternatives to its use. Sucrose and other sugars, on the other hand, are naturally occurring in abundance. Furthermore, there is no strong or generally accepted scientific evidence that the consumption of sucrose or any refined sugars in reasonable amounts has any particular negative health consequences. What does have negative health consequences is the overconsumption of calories, and the pervasive use of refined sugars in refined foods (also an area where trans fats were overused) has certainly contributed to that. But, the standard is not for the non-alarmists to "prove that white sugar is not harmful for your pancreas and skin and cardiovascular system." Rather, the standard is for those who make the positive claims to prove them. Recitations of what Grandma says do not constitute meaningful support of your positions. I don't think anyone is suggesting that it's healthy or won't have any health consequences if someone were to take in 100% of his calories in sucrose and pop a multivitamin each day. (Then again, one could say the same thing about a diet that relies too much upon meat, fish, citrus, leafy green raw vegetables, etc. as the main source of calories.) But there is no credible evidence saying that a teaspoon of sugar in one's morning tea and a slice of pie for dessert represents a major health risk.

I wouldn't be too worried about that. Try soaking a piece of meat in pineapple juice or papaya juice for a day and see what happens. Surely you're not suggesting that pineapple juice is bad? You believe them when they say that "cardiovascular disease and cancer were virtually unknown" in the beginning of the 20th Century? How can we possibly believe anything else these people write when they make such a ridiculous and clearly wrong assertion? Cancer, for example, has been documented and remarked upon as early as 1600 BC, so I think it's safe to say that it was not "virtually unknown" in 1900. Some cancers that were quite common 100 years ago (e.g., stomach cancer) actually are relatively rare today. I could say similar things about cardiovascular disease. So, no... sugar is not causing an increasing spike in cancer and cardiovascular disease rates -- mostly because there is no spike in cancer and cardiovascular disease rates. We are, however, a lot better at detecting and classifying (and treating) cancer and cardiovascular disease than we were 100 years ago. And, on top of that, people are living a lot longer these days, so there is quite a lot of increased opportunity to develop cancer and cardiovascular disease, and for such cancer and cardiovascular disease to be detected (and treated) before the person dies. Even if there were an overall rise in cancer and cardiovascular disease compared to 100 years ago, there is no credible evidence that such a rise could be attributed to increased consumption of refined sugar. Increased diagnoses of cancer and cardiovascular disease happen to correlate highly with things like telephone poles per capita and other markers of a modern First World society. No, it isn't. Our ability to detect and classify cancer is growing more advanced. And actually, even with modern-day detection capabilities, according to the American Cancer Society: ". . . age-adjusted incidence rates for all cancer sites combined continue to decrease."

I think most SV applications don't attain a high enough temperature to "cook" the garlic in a way that provides the garlic flavor most of us are looking for. In general, meat SV temperatures are not sufficient to cook vegetables. With something highly aromatic like garlic, it's possible that meat SV temperatures might cause unexpected/undesired flavoring results by facilitating certain reactions but not others. In general, I think most people do not like using fresh garlic for SV. Yes, but the flavor is quite mild. If you want a more traditional garlic flavor, you might try cooking minced fresh garlic in oil or butter to the appropriate stage, quickly chilling/freezing the oil-and-garlic mixture to stop any further cooking and adding that to your bag.

Interesting setup. That is a very small volume water bath. What do you propose to cook in there?

I bet that's what it was. Pectin precipitates in alcohol. Prune juice (and presumably also prune syrup) is high in both pectin and water-soluble fiber.

Having had the Staggerac a few times, I can say that it is a mighty beast and not to be missed. J: How are you guys making your orgeat?