slkinsey

Cutting fish for sushi is a slicing rather than push cutting task. You place the heel on the object you're cutting and mostly let the weight of the knife do the work as you draw the knive towards you, most preferably in one pass. That's why those yanagi-ba are so long. Well, I learn something new every day. Still, though, you'd want a highly polished edge to do minimal tissue damage.

Generally speaking, I would say this is true. However, there are certain circumstances where a straight gauge design is preferable (reduction pans, fry pans, sauce pans for making temperature-sensitive sauces, any pan that is smaller in diameter than the burner on your stove). Not familiar with them, unfortunately. The main reason this is happening is because a fourteen inch saute pan is way too big if you have a regular residential stove. Even an expensive heavy copper pan would have trouble performing consistently across the base of the pan when heated by such a (relatively) tiny flame in the center. Eleven inches is generally the maxium practicable size for a regular residential burner. It is possible to mitigate this limitation somewhat by using an oversize pan with an extremely thick base (e.g., Sitram Profiserie's 7 mm aluminum) and lengthy preheating. However, this will only really work in situations where you want to do extra high heat cooking (in other words, probably not sauteing shallots, etc.) Ultimately, you're better off frying in batches of using two pans. A 7.25 quart coquette! That's a lot of flirting, my friend! Okay, bad joke. Seriously... I think Staub is the best, and the 7.25 qt cocotte would be a wonderful choice for braising. The prices among the top brands of enameled cast iron are similar enough that I don't think there is a significant bargain to be had one way or the other (except for the Le Creuset "seconds" sales, if you happen to live near an outlet). Some people don't like a dark interior because they think it's hard to see levels of browning, etc. I don't find that to be a problem, and I do think Staub's dark interior is better at browning. But this will be a matter of personal preference. Ultimately, if you're making a reduction you're probably better off using a pan that is designed for reductions. I wouldn't want to reduce something down to a thick, syrupy consistency in a big enameled cast iron casserole, if for no other reason than the fact that the diameter will be too large (and thus the layer of liquid too thin) for the final stages of the reduction.

Be wary of seemingly great deals for Mauviel. Some web sites advertise 2.5 mm but, then you look at the shape they are selling and it's a shape Mauviel only manufacturers in 2.0 mm. This acitydiscount.com offering is a perfect example. It appears to be a curved sauteuse evasée with a rolled lip. They describe it as "extra thick," saying, "features include: 2.5MM thickness. . ." However, if we look around (e.g., here, we can see that Mauviel doesn't make a curved sauteuse evasée pan in 2.5 mm, and furthermore that none of their 2.5 mm pans have a rolled lip. But when we look here, at Mauviel's 2.0 mm pans, we see rolled lips on most of the pans, and among them we see a 2.0 mm curved sauteuse evasée with a rolled lip that looks suspiciously like the pan acitydiscount is saying is 2.5 mm. You may draw your own conclusions. I will only say that my own personal experiences with acitydiscount's people (which is a matter of record on Usenet for any who care to look) has not inclined me to give them any of my business.

Both Falk and Mauviel have the traditional flat lip on the sauteuse evasée. Mauviel, afaik, uses a traditional flat lip on all their 2.5 mm copper cookware (which probably works better with the traditional long-handled flat cover).

Just a reminder: Let's keep the discussion in this thread on the subject of ADNY, and the review as it directly touches on ADNY. For discussion of the Bruni's reviewing chops and general criticism of the review itself, please take discussion to the "Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2005)" thread.

Performance-wise it's a wash, as they literally use the same exact metal (make sure you get the 2.5 mm Mauviel). The rest is looks and personal preference as to looks and minor design variations. I prefer Falk because I like the brushed finish and because I like their American distributor (who happens to be an eGS member, by the way). So, for me, it's worth a little more money for Falk if it comes to that (often it does not). For the 11 inch size, I think the curved sauteuse evasée can't be beat. It's the single most versatile and single most used pan in my kitchen. For a smaller reduction pan, I actually like the regular sauteuse evasée, because the sides slant all the way up whereas the sides of the curved version go vertical about half way up. Mauviel is by far the oldest and most respected of the traditional French cookware manufacturers. It says "depuis 1830" right on Mauviel's web site. You will likely find more Mauviel copper in top kitchens than any other brand. de Buyer also dates to 1830, but started off making sheet metal rather than cookware. Bourgeat is a relative newcomer at 1913, and Falk Culinair is not old at all. Bourgeat, I am given to understand, no longer manufacturers its own copper cookware. This is incorrect, unless there was some other process that was in use before the current one. Falk Culinair and the University of Louvain developed the current process by which a thin layer of stainless steel is permanently bonded to a thick layer of copper, and afaik Mauviel and Bourgeat buy their stainless steel/copper bimetal from Falk.

My knives are made with a very hard steel (as are many/most custom knives), so perhaps that is why I didn't consider this. However, along with extra hardness comes extra brittleness. A more brittle steel along with a more acute sharpening angle = recipe for chipping the edge if you're not careful.

Perhaps it would have been more clear if I had used the correct terminology, which is really push-cut and slice (not "saw"). I used "saw" because I thought there would be some confusion of terms, since what is typically called "slicing" in a kitchen is actually a combination cut (more on this below). Maybe this helps: With a pure push cut, the edge addresses the material 100% perpendicularly. There is no sideways motion of the blade. A good example of this is shaving. Tests show that a fine grained steel and a highly polished edge are best for push cutting. With a pure slice cut, there is minimal perpendicular pressure in the cut. The length of the edge is drawn across the material in a sideways movement. Tests show that a fine grained steel and a highly polished edge are not optimal for slice cutting -- a relatively coarse edge is optimal. Most cuts, of course, are a combination of these two elemental cuts, and a combination cut has much more cutting power. This is one reason most kitchen knives have a curve. "Flat" blades, like the currently popular santoku shape, more or less force the cook into using a mostly push cut action (which, I think, is one reason these knives don't perform up to expectations so often). How a knife is best sharpened will largely be determined by the kind of work the knife does. I can see how someone who cuts sushi, for example, would want a highly polished edge. This is a largely push cutting task, and a major concern is doing minimal tissue damage to the flesh. For an "all around" kitchen edge, however, it strikes me that a highly polished edge will not usually be optimal. Many tasks in the kitchen depend on a fair amount of slice cutting in the action of the knife. While it is true that the advantage of a coarser edge can be mitigated somewhat by a super sharp polished edge and a greater reliance on push cutting in the cutting motion, it is also the case that edge retention at this level of sharpness is not good (this is one reason a straight razor is honed so frequently) compared to a coarser edge and does not respond to steeling the way a coarser edge will. This is why highly polished edges need to go back to the fine grit stone with such frequency, whereas a coarse edge needs only a swipe across a steel. I don't think it's worth getting into specific brands, because that inevitably brings up counterarguments along the lines of, "well you have to try this brand, not that brand." Suffice it to say that I've tried a number of Japanese knives at a variety of price points. I think they're great, and they have their uses. I just happen to prefer a heavy, Western style knife. That's what works with my style of use and in my kitchen. FWIW, my main knives are custom made out of cast dendritic steel, which means, among other things, that they have extra large carbide crystals and an extra-aggressive "toothy" edge by the very nature of the steel. I wouldn't want to shave with them, but they fly through just about anything the second there is even the slightest hint of sideways motion. Eventually, I'll pick up a skinny fine grained knife for mostly-push-cutting tasks. I wonder what would happen if you were to have your Western knives sharpened to 15 degrees. I'm not suggesting, by the way, that Japanese knives are no good. They're clearly very good. I'm just suggesting that there is no clear way to say that one is definitively better than the other. Anyone in the market for a new knife should indeed check into the Japanese-style knives, because many people like them and there are many advantages to the Japanese style. But there are also many advantages to the Western style. For me, I like having a heavy knife that does a lot of the work for me. I like having my 10 inch chef's knife thin at the tip for fine work and thick at the back for power work. I like having a knife I can bang around on the board and hack through chicken bones without worrying about chipping a thin fragile edge. I like the fact that I only have to sharpen my knives a few times a year and swipe them across a steel when I use them to keep them in optimal condition, instead of polishing them on an 8 zillion grit stone once a week. I like the fact that a thick blade feels better in a pinch grip than a thin one. But, of course, I understand that there are plenty of reasons on the other side of the coin to prefer a Japanese style... or a Chinese cleaver. I'm just not willing to say that one is definitively better than the other. It's definitely a fact that Japanese style knives are here to stay. But it is also a fact that they are very trendy right now, and I have little doubt that another trend will come along in ten years that will leave us all saying "remember when everyone thought Japanese knives were the end all/be all of kitchen cutlery?" Of course, by that time the success of Japanese knives may have influenced the traditional Western makers (as Western knives influenced the most used Japanese styles) into, e.g., sharpening to a more acute angle at the factory.

If we don't have a consensus and we don't have to agree, then the jury is indeed still out. What I am attempting to do is inject a bit of balance into some absolutist comments. I am quite confident that we will never be able to say that one style of knife is definitively "better" than another. You know that your Japanese style knives are far superior to your Western style knives for you. This could have to do with your preferences, or it could have to do with the fact that you're spending around 500% more for your Japanese knives than you are for the Western knives. Either way, others may just as certainly know that their antique French carbon steel knives are better than their Japanese knives, or that their custom extra-heavy Western-style knives are better. Where I think you will agree is that everyone has to find the style of knife that works with their hand, with their habits of use and with their preferences in a cutting tool. I have been given to understand that a finer grained, more polished edge makes it more likely that the carbide at the edge will "pop out" of the matrix, thus dulling the edge. I occasionally use a ceramic steel because the main action of the steel is to straighten the edge. To the extent that any polishing occurs, it is to portions of the edge that in some microscopic way are less likely to respond to steeling. Any time you deviate from a pure push cut -- which is to say, any time there is any sideways motion of the blade at all relative to the direction of the cut -- you are making a sawing motion. It is one of the two fundamental kinds of cutting motion: push cut and saw. I find it extremely hard to believe that you employ push cutting exclusively (in fact, I think this is imposible in most kitchen situations other than a few highly specific tasks).

Definitely Irish oatmeal with butter swirled in at the last minute. Changes the entire dish. Also, what about compound butters? A nice steak or pork chop with a knob of anchovy butter melting over the top...

I'd say the jury is still out on this one. After all, everyone was saying the same thing about Chinese cleavers when they were in vogue a while back, and they are hardly ever seen these days. I don't dispute the fact that Japanese knives are very good, and even the best solution for certain tasks. But I also believe that the Western style hasn't been such a success for no reason. Right. To expand on this a bit, and restate it: If you have an edge on your knife, you do not need to sharpen it. All you need is to steel the knife and bring the edge back in line. I'd also add that the occasional use of a very fine ceramic steel (along with the regular use of a smooth metal steel) with a light touch can extend the time required between sharpenings by "micro sharpening" as it straightens the edge. In re to polished edges: I am not sure it's the best edge for all applications. A highly polished, very fine grained, acute angled edge is important when you want to do the minimum amount of tissue damage... like when you're shaving or performing surgery. If one is push-cutting very delicate fish for sushi or something like that, I can see how this could make a big difference. However, minimal tissue damage is not necessarily a priority when you're cutting up a chicken or dicing vegetables -- especially if you're using a sawing action in addition to the push-cut action. In these cases, my experience is that a coarser edge has a much more aggressive "bite" and actually does the job a little better. This kind of edge also seems more durable and responds better to steeling. That's my experience, anyway. ymmv.

The most obvious difference was the absence of white pies in the Brooklyn places we visited. Our local visits include basic red and white pies to taste the crust. cheeses, seasonings and red sauce without any influence from the extras. That's odd. I'm not sure whether Di Fara offers a white pizza, but Totonno certainly does:

I think Di Fara's square pizza is significantly thicker than a regular pizza crust, but since we in NYC trend towards a thinner crust than the national standard, maybe it wouldn't be considered all that thick. But I think you're probably right about the "doughiness." Some people, myself included, just can't get past the underbaked crust. To illustrate what I'm talking about, here is a (not very well focused) side view of an L&B slice: That darker area just under the sauce is a big soggy stripe of not-quite-baked-through dough. For something more in line with the real Sicilian model (sfincione, they would insist, not pizza), I like these from the Sullivan Street Bakery. Anyway... getting away from that, did you guys notice any characteristic differences between NYC pizza and Philly pizza? You guys seemed to go much more towards ordering multiple (and therefore heavier) toppings than we usually do here.

Since you're baking the pizza in an oven, you don't really need the long handle of a traditional peel. One option that offers you more versatility for your Looney is a large rimless cookie sheet, like this one. Used for pizza, it functions more or less like a metal peel with no handle. As for the dough sticking to the peel, there are a few tricks. As others have pointed out, a sprinkling of cornmeal can help. But in my experience (I use a very wet dough) the most important thing is to have your mise all set up so you can get the pizza built and off the peel as quickly as possible. If you watch a professional pizzaiolo at someplace like the East Harlem Patsy's, the pizza is built in around 60 seconds once the dough hits the peel. If you're really stuck, try dragging a string between the dough and the peel just before you go to the oven.

I think Spumoni Gardens gets the short end on PIZZA surveys because (despite the 24 ovens) it's more of an Italian restaurant that happens to serve pizza. The Sicilian (or square) pie there was an excellent example of it's type, and again, I thought the sauce was really good. Interesting. Our overall reaction was that L&B didn't make a particularly good example of "Sicilian" (e.g., thicker, square pizza) -- especially compared to Di Fara's square pizza, which I think is the best of that style in the City. And we weren't all that fond of the sauce (which, like their canned mushrooms, comes out of big #10 cans of "pizza sauce"). But, of course, part of this is a matter of preference. I can understand that some people are fond of L&B's undercooked doughiness (they do huge business, after all), it's just far removed from the things I personally value in a pizza. Anyway... sounds like you guys had a great trip!

Sounds like an awesome time was had by all. Just to clarify on the above: The cheese in slices is low moisture mozzarella (not fontina); next comes a few dabs of the fresh stuff; then comes some parmigiano (not pecorino). Di Fara is a special place for sure, and Dom is a real artisan. For those who are interested in comparing, there is a clickable index at the top of the NY Pizza Survey thread that will take you to the various places we've visited as a group. I'll be interested especially to read reactions to L&B, which seriously underwhelmed the NY group.

Here's the thread. I'm still not totally convinced about mixing the soup into the pork -- although it makes a bit more sense to mix cubes of gelatinized stock into the pork as opposed to liquid soup (the recipe you found says "use before it gelatinizes"). We should get someone to ask Cecil at China 46 what he does to make his.

The problem with granton edges on non-slicer knives, in my opinion, is that they shorten the usable life of the knife. Once you sharpen to the point where you're getting up into those divots, you've got a screwey edge.

This is an odd recipe, Todd, because the soup is actually mixed in to the filling. I don't see how this would produce what we commonly understand to be xaiolongbao filling (i.e., a meatball surrounded by soup). Not sure why people think otherwise, but pork skin is chock full of gelatin. As these guys at the NC State School of Engineering say: "The best raw material for the derivation of gelatin is pork skin."

You can still post links, yes! That said, it's not considered good form to post a "deep link" (i.e., one that goes directly to just one image on a page rather than to the whole page in the context intended by the creator/owner).

A harder steel can keep an edge longer, but it also takes a lot longer to get it sharp again once it does go dull. Hard steel is also usually more brittle and prone to chipping. This is not to say that harder steel isn't as good as softer steel... but it's also to say that it isn't definitely better either. It's always a tradeoff of sorts wrt hardness. Full carbon knives go in the opposite direction. They're soft and lose their edge fairly rapidly... but at the same time they return to a razor's edge with a swipe along a steel or a brush across a stone Is one better than the other? Not really. Just depends on what you want.

Again, for posterity, a short quote from Expatica:

Mmmmmmm... splenocytes! If you're able to read the article, I'd love it if you could post your thoughts and maybe a short quote from the abstract.

For posterity, it is always halpful to include a short excerpt: Some related BSE talk on eG here.

As you can see, I have edited some posts upthread. I'd like to take a moment in my moderator's hat to remind everyone of our Copyright & Fair Use Policy. Two things in particular: You can't post a picture without permission if it is owned by someone else. It's a copyright violation. This includes pictures from other web sites. You can't post pictures that reside on another web site, unless you have permission or unless that web site belongs to you. This is called "bandwidth theft" because every time that image displays on our site, it uses some of the originating site's bandwidth... bandwidth that they pay for. Thanks for understanding and cooperating!