Sous Vide: Recipes, Techniques & Equipment (Part 4)

smashz · May 5, 2008

What temp and time did you use on the SV brisket?
I suspect that one doesn't even need 2 hrs in the smoker to develop a fair amount of smoke flavor when it is going to be finished SV.
←

Maybe not, but I like strong smoke flavor in brisket. I also wanted there to be enough to notice a difference. I took a WAG and figured that if I measured surface temperature and figured in carryover, that I would still be well below my target SV temperature of 146F/63C. I did the SV for 48 hours.

Most likely you overcooked the meat: I would say it was smoked a bit too long , before you SV it ( internal temp was either too high to begin with, and kept rising)

From past smoking experience, I more suspect that it was because I used a brisket with no fat cap. I've had variable results with an added fat layer, and it probably got me this time. Unfortunately, that was the last one my butcher had.

I pulled it out with a surface temperature of 124F and an internal temperature of 108F, so I don't think that carryover took it too far. But, input taken, I will try an earlier pull next time for comparison.

Also, you seem to "overcrowded" your SV vehicle - I don't know if there was any circulation in that rice cooker, but chances are different cuts were cooked at different temps - I would suggest to allow water to circulate, and to maintain temp within .25-.5C range. If you go beyond that - temp will get out of control, esp. in a limited space.

The photo shows it with the 3 pork tenderloins added, which was only in the final 2 hours. Most of the 48 hours it was rather sparse, not crowded at all. I did check the temperature at various points around the cooker several times, and it was within measurement error.

You use a blowtorch to careamelize your meat - it's a lot of fun, and it looks/feels quite theatrical, but browning meat that way yields uneven results - that heavy cast iron pan and a touch of clarified butter would probably work much better.

I had done SV twice before, on bacon-wrapped fillets, and did the hot pan/blowtorch sear, and it worked well. This time, however, I was doing too many pieces. Your point is well taken. (But the guest loved the theatrics.)

I looked at your pics - awesome!!! What internal temp were you trying to achieve for your cuts? Did you check the temps during cooking?

Thanks. I was shooting for 146F. Probably high, but I was concerned about sufficient breakdown of the tough meats, and took notes from the 60+ pages here. I did not check meat core temperature during cooking; I don't have the probe for that yet.

I hope you enjoyed the results, and please don't take these suggestions as critique - the goal for most people here is to perfect the art of SV ( there are a few, however, who make statements and arguments just for the sake of being noticed - hope you don't pay attention to them)

I (and the guests) enjoyed it, including the analysis of what to improve for next time. I absolutely welcome the critique - that's why I post. Thanks!

Edited May 8, 2008 by Pam R (log)

e_monster · May 5, 2008

Maybe not, but I like strong smoke flavor in brisket. I also wanted there to be enough to notice a difference. I took a WAG and figured that if I measured surface temperature and figured in carryover, that I would still be well below my target SV temperature of 146F/63C. I did the SV for 48 hours.

As a point of reference, I like strong smoke flavor, too.

I have now done 3 briskets at 147F for 48 hrs and 1 at 135F. I liked the one at 135 better. 48 hours was plenty of time for the collagen to break down completely (and the fat doesn't render at either temp). The one at 135F was quite a bit moister than the other (the moistness might be because it was the deckel end and the other were all flats). It was fork tender.

ossified · May 5, 2008

(1) You are quite right, if you want a `steakier' short rib then you would use a lower temperature for a longer time (say 131F/55C for 24 hours) and if you want a `braised' short rib then you would use a higher temperature for a shorter time (say 176F/80C for 8-12 hours).
(2) The air pump may not be necessary, but it certainly doesn't hurt anything. If you have a good (thermocouple) digital thermometer, you can measure the water temperature at multiple points and see if the water temperature is uniform without the air pump.
(3) Everyone probably has their favorite `blow 'em away' sous-vide recipe. I usually show off the power of sous-vide by making roast beef: chuck roast seasoned with salt and pepper and cooked for 24 hours at 131F/55C. I use chuck roast because it has great flavor, is extremely tender after the collagen has dissolved into gelatin, and is inexpensive (only about $3/lb at Costco).
Some of my friends absolutely love sous-vide salmon, while others don't care for it at all. Many of my friends like sous-vide chicken breasts, but I think that is just because conventionally prepared chicken is grossly overcooked. If you do go for chicken, I would recommend removing the skin first and preparing it separately and then brining the chicken breasts.
←

Thanks, Doug! I finished up the short ribs yesterday and I have to say: Best. Short ribs. Ever. My girlfriend is now a believer. Tender, pink meat all the way through. I used a very hot cast iron skillet to finish them. I meant to take pictures, but got caught up in the excitement of the first 'unveiling', and only have pictures of the PID/pump/rice cooker set-up. Next up will likely be your chuck roast, but also on the near-term agenda are oxtails, a reprise of short ribs at higher temp/shorter cook time for contrast, and veal or lamb shanks.

Edited May 5, 2008 by ossified (log)

sygyzy · May 6, 2008

I had a strange experience recently with SV Ribeye. Here's what I did.

1. Heavily salted a ribeye and stick slices of garlic in the natural fiber seperation already present (Pay attention to this for later). I let it sit so it would warm up to room temperature.

2. I set the SV PID connected to my 24 cup Black and Decker rice cooker to 132F.

3. I washed off the salt and patted the steak really dry. I put it into a bag along with a blob of butter and vacumm sealed it with a Foodsaver.

4. I placed it into the rice cooker and it started floating. I didn't think about this until after but this obviously suggested there was air. So I put in the steamer basket and it kept the whole thing down.

5. I let this cook for about 2:45 hrs.

6. When I took it out, I knew something was wrong. As I picked the bag up from the corner, I could feel my other hand get all greasy. I soon realized there was 1/3" hole in the seal and I was pouring juices out.

During cooking, the steak sort of split into multiple steaks. I realized after that ribeyes are probably not the best steaks to SV with. They are naturally "split" at various points. Cooking only made these splits more pronounced. I thought for a few minutes about whether or not I wanted to eat this. I was concerned about potential bacteria problems but I figured this was the same as putting steak in hot water. It's not as bad as having a bag expand while SV cooking, which would indicate bacterial growth. Right?

Anyway, I'll try again but this time I'll triple check the seal and I'll look into using a different cut.

Any feedback would be appreciated.

e_monster · May 6, 2008

During cooking, the steak sort of split into multiple steaks. I realized after that ribeyes are probably not the best steaks to SV with.

Here are a couple of thoughts

In my opinion, ribeyes are a great steak to SV with (btw, that is the cut that Grant Achatz uses at Alinea -- at Alinea the ribeye is wagyu beef flown in from Japan). With ribeye, I would alway go with a really thick steak 1.5 inch minimum (in my opinion). I find that thinner steaks are really no better SV than cooked by conventional means. Also, there is no advantage to keeping it in the bag longer than necessary to bring it up to temp.

When cooking a steak sous vide, I wouldn't leave it out beforehand to get to room temperature. There is no advantage and there is probably an increased risk of contamination. Also, there isn't any real reason to pat it dry. Moisture from inside the steak will come out when you sous vide--even when the bag is properly sealed. You will want to dry it off when it comes out of the bag before searing it (either in a super hot pan or with a blow torch).

I wouldn't recommend putting raw garlic in the bag. Most people find the flavor not quite right (even people like me that love raw garlic). The flavor doesn't develop as it does at a higher temp. When I want garlic in the bag, I usually use some cloves that I have already roasted, or garlic confit (I make it by cooking it in olive oil for a few hours at 170 or 180).

Anyway, those are my thoughts.

sygyzy · May 6, 2008

Hi e_monster

Thanks for the reply. Maybe it was unique in the particular piece of ribeye I got but it definitely has these major seperations. I am not sure how I could explain it. Maybe I can post a picture for you to see. Do you understand what I am talking about?

I was at Alinea last month so I am aware of the steak and yes, it tasted great. But the piece that was served was not as seperated as mine was, plus it was a very small piece so even if it had the problem, you couldn't tell.

I did not put the garlic into the bag. At least I don't think so.

It seems odd not to let the steak come to room temperature. It just means it has to go from ~30F up to 132F rather than going from 70-132. I'd have to adjust for time then.

Thanks for your advice.

e_monster · May 6, 2008

I haven't had the problem with the steak breaking apart. But I do understand what you mean.

It isn't that odd to not bring it to room temperature first. With conventional methods, the cooking time is so quick that when it is added to the time for the meat to come to room temperature, the total time in the 'danger zone' is small. When you are cooking at LOW temperature, however, the situation is very different because the meat will be in the danger zone for a fair bit of time. All of Nathan's tables are based on the meat going from the refrigerator into the water, btw.

Best,

E

slkinsey · May 6, 2008

sygyzy, the reason you put the steak into the water bath at refrigerator temperature is because you want the steak to spend the minimum amount of time in the "danger zone" range of temperatures. What is the fastest way to warm up the steak? Put it in the water bath. It only makes sense to pre-warm-up the steak when you're using a cooking method in which the heat source is higher than the desired target temperature.

sygyzy · May 7, 2008

Thanks to both of you for your clarifications. I was unaware of the information you presented so my second attempt will surely be an improvement.

What *is* the danger zone temperature range, btw?

rmillman · May 7, 2008

When I do steaks now: I always do a sous vide first step.

I do it different than when I am doing a peice of meat when the goal is to render out collagen (where I use close to or my finish temp for 36+ hours).

For steaks, I use a bath at 65C and bring to an internal or 53-57 depending on degree on internal doneness i want (8-15min depending on steak and starting temp). I remove it from my bath, rinse the bag in cold water, rest it in the bag for 5 min and then chill on ice in bag. When I want to finish, I remove it from the bag, pat it dry, salt it and either sear on a HOT pan or prefered on a HOT charcoal grill (www.korin.com). Comes out perfect every time.

DouglasBaldwin · May 7, 2008

What *is* the danger zone temperature range, BTW?
←

The danger zone is between 29.3°F and 127.5°F (-1.6°C and 53°C). Different microorganisms grow at different temperatures; for instance Salmonella can grows between 41.5°F--114°F (5.5°C--45.5°C) while Listeria monocytogenes can grow at temperatures down to 29.3°F (-1.6°C) and Clostridium perfringens can grow at temperatures up to 127.5°F (53°C).

The pathogens can be inactivated with cooking (that is, we can pasteurize the food). This is typically achieved by heating the food to above 130°F (54.4°C) and holding it there for some length of time (please see my web page for more information). The problem, is that some pathogens produce toxins and/or spores which are not destroyed when cooking. For instance, C. perfringens produces both a toxin and spores (which is very resistant to heat).

smashz · May 8, 2008

I have now done 3 briskets at 147F for 48 hrs and 1 at 135F. I liked the one at 135 better. 48 hours was plenty of time for the collagen to break down completely (and the fat doesn't render at either temp). The one at 135F was quite a bit moister than the other (the moistness might be because it was the deckel end and the other were all flats). It was fork tender.
←

The piece which I ran the split experiment on was the flat.

Interesting comment about the result at lower temperature; that's what I'll try next.

You mention that neither temperature is sufficient to render fat. As you can see in the photos, I did include two small pieces of the fat which I'd used during smoking into the bag. These were visibly smaller (maybe 35% of the initial size) when it was finished.

cookingkid · May 8, 2008

I had a few questions about the brisket experiment...

I currently smoke a brisket for a beef duo on the menu, but I haven't thought about the sous vide idea for it. In other words, I just smoke until it's done. Anyway, what would the optimal cooking temperature be for the sv of a brisket? It is not a collagen rich cut, as far as I'm concerned, so would you do like e_monster recommends and go for a lower temperature, but not as long of a time, like maybe for 18 to 20 hours? In other words, why such extended water time? What is the benefit of 48 hours, or another way of putting it, what is the gastronomic difference between the brisket at 24 hours and 48 hours? Is is just to be on the safe side? By the way, I'm thinking of a brisket flat or some call it brisket nose off.

I use a ribeye for the other part of the duo, so here's why your ribeye fell apart. You got a part that had more deckle than ribEYE. The deckle is the flap of meat that covers the eye part of a ribeye primal. At one point, there is a third muscle that is not exactly deckle and not exactly ribeye (it happens to be one of the best pieces of meat on a cow, and I'd appreciate if anyone could tell me the exact name of that torpedo shaped muscle). So, your cut could have incorporated all three muscles with extraneous fat inbetween all of the cuts.

If you decide to cook the ribeye sv again, you may want to try and get a piece that would isolate just the eye. It's tough to explain that to a butcher or anyone who just cuts steaks from the primal. You would have more pure meat without the sinew and without any large pockets of fat.

Thanks for any answers.

e_monster · May 8, 2008

Brisket has a lot of collagen -- that is why it is so tough if you don't braise it -- and why it takes long time to cook even by traditional methods (it takes about 18 to 20 hrs for my smoker to get a brisket up to temp). At low temperatures like 135 and 147F, the collagen takes a lot longer to gelatinize than at higher temps (collagen breaks down a lot faster above about 170F -- I think that is about where it speeds up a lot). I have done 26, 36, and 48 hr SV brisket. At 48 hrs, the brisket at 135F was fork tender but also nice and meaty and held together -- not stringy at all. The meat was a nice bright pink, too - at 147F the meat was pinkish gray. At 26 hrs, the brisket was tasty but not as tender as I wanted. 36 hours wasn't as tender either but edible.

I suppose results will vary with the quality and marbling of the brisket. The French Laundry does theirs at 147F for 48 hrs. But I found 147F to yield a result dryer than I hoped for.

I will have to do some more at 135F to confirm that the moistness was the result of the cooking temp and not just because that particular brisket was naturally juicier.

I want to try on some Wagyu brisket next as the marbling of the flat should be better than the briskets I have worked with so far.

joesan · May 8, 2008

Maybe it was unique in the particular piece of ribeye I got but it definitely has these major seperations. I am not sure how I could explain it. Maybe I can post a picture for you to see. Do you understand what I am talking about?
←

Sygyzy - Perhaps these separations that you experienced were do to some over-zealous mechanical meat tenderizing. Some suppliers will mechanically puncture the tougher cuts of meat with blades (similar to the hand jaccards that many of us use) to make them more tender. If this is done over-zealously then the meat can break down into these "major separations". When done properly you wouldn't notice it at all.

Qwerty · May 8, 2008

I doubt anyone would attempt to mech. tenderize a ribeye steak. More than likely you just got a cut from the chuck end of the rib primal, which has many many individual muscles that are held together with layers of fat and connective tissue. The number of muscles diminishes near the loin end, so you probably just got one of the first steaks from the chuck end. Next time, specify a center cut ribeye steak and that might help.

I hope I made sense.

Digijam · May 8, 2008

Brisket has a lot of collagen -- that is why it is so tough if you don't braise it -- and why it takes long time to cook even by traditional methods (it takes about 18 to 20 hrs for my smoker to get a brisket up to temp). At low temperatures like 135 and 147F, the collagen takes a lot longer to gelatinize than at higher temps (collagen breaks down a lot faster above about 170F -- I think that is about where it speeds up a lot). I have done 26, 36, and 48 hr SV brisket. At 48 hrs, the brisket at 135F was fork tender but also nice and meaty and held together -- not stringy at all. The meat was a nice bright pink, too - at 147F the meat was pinkish gray. At 26 hrs, the brisket was tasty but not as tender as I wanted. 36 hours wasn't as tender either but edible.
I suppose results will vary with the quality and marbling of the brisket. The French Laundry does theirs at 147F for 48 hrs. But I found 147F to yield a result dryer than I hoped for.
←

Low and slow is definitely the way to go, although I've also had good success with salt beef brisket for 48 hours at around 152F. This was with particularly well marbled and capped brisket, though, so I wanted a good compromise between protein preservation and fat rendering. And several days of brining probably helped with the juicyness.

MikeTMD · May 8, 2008

I had a few questions about the brisket experiment...
At one point, there is a third muscle that is not exactly deckle and not exactly ribeye (it happens to be one of the best pieces of meat on a cow, and I'd appreciate if anyone could tell me the exact name of that torpedo shaped muscle). So, your cut could have incorporated all three muscles with extraneous fat inbetween all of the cuts.
Thanks for any answers.
←

cookingkid,

You may find this interesting( and save $70 on NAMP Meat Byers Guide - LOL):

http://bovine.unl.edu/bovine3D/eng/ShowCro...74527&crossec=H

I think you are talking about Delmonico Steak - but see for yourself, please.

JIC, here is the picture:

There are few other good references (with pictures):

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/l.../beeboe1e.shtml

http://www.beeffoodservice.com/Cuts/info.aspx?Code=7

Hope this helps.

Edited May 8, 2008 by MikeTMD (log)

MikeTMD · May 8, 2008

I had a strange experience recently with SV Ribeye....
During cooking, the steak sort of split into multiple steaks. I realized after that ribeyes are probably not the best steaks to SV with. They are naturally "split" at various points. Cooking only made these splits more pronounced. I thought for a few minutes about whether or not I wanted to eat this. I was concerned about potential bacteria problems but I figured this was the same as putting steak in hot water. It's not as bad as having a bag expand while SV cooking, which would indicate bacterial growth. Right?
Any feedback would be appreciated.
←

sygyzy,

The results you got are not unusual, and in fact could be quite desirable, although the broken seal doesn't make for the best SV experience ( we all have seen it happened , though).

First, you could always double-bag whatever it is you are SV'ing ( in fact Heston Blumenthal recommends it for pork bellies: https://www.nespresso.com/precom/nmag/4/pdf...046_0051_en.pdf ).

Also, generally we are trying to DISSOLVE connective tissue WITHIN a muscle ( which is what makes it tender, vs. conventional cooking methods - where high cooking temps make collagen fibers SHRINK. Needless to say, all connective tissue elements, including the outer fibers that connect different muscles get the same treatment and dissolve equally. With addition of proteolytic substances ( the ones that break down proteins) , such as garlic, vinegar or alcohol, connective tissue breaks down quicker and easier - which is why we all love to marinate meat cuts before cooking.

I agree with you on the choice of cuts for SV: single muscle cuts , like eye of ribeye, flat iron steak, tenderloin, strip, brisket, hanging tender are ideal, whereas T-bone Steak, Porterhouse and Ribeye would not have the same appeal, as they would on the grill - they would simply fall apart.

Again and again, I would point out that temp control and full vacuum are essential: former to assure uniform cooking, the latter would allow low temp to do its job ( remember: a liquid in a vacuum environment has a lower boiling point than when the liquid is at atmospheric pressure, a liquid in a high pressure environment has a higher boiling point than when the liquid is at atmospheric pressure.)

Hope this helps.

Edited May 8, 2008 by MikeTMD (log)

e_monster · May 8, 2008

I agree with you on the choice of cuts for SV: single muscle cuts , like eye of ribeye, flat iron steak, tenderloin, strip, brisket, hanging tender are ideal, whereas T-bone Steak, Porterhouse and Ribeye would not have the same appeal, as they would on the grill - they would simply fall apart.
Again and again, I would point out that temp control and full vacuum are essential: former to assure uniform cooking, the latter would allow low temp to do its job ( remember: low pressure raises boiling point of water among other things)

I disagree with Mike about the Ribeye. Ribeye can be absolutely amazing cooked sous vide and quite different from grilling if using a good cut of meat and remembering that you are only cooking to bring it up to temp--there is no reason to subject the ribeye to long cooking times -- you aren't trying to tenderize it -- you are trying to get a uniform texture -- medium rare, for instance, all the way throughy. A ribeye cooked at 130F for an hour and then seared for 20 seconds a side in a VERY hot pan is a wonderful treat. I have never had one fall apart.

Contrary to Mike's statement low pressure does not raise the boiling point. Also (as noted below) the influence of pressure on temperature isn't relevant -- because everything is at atmospheric pressure when cooking in bags:

1) Low pressure REDUCES the boiling point a liquid. It DOES NOT raise the boiling point of water. (This is also irrelevant to sous vide cooking as noted in #2). Boiling point increases with pressure which is why a pressure cooker reduces cooking times when compared to steaming at atmospheric pressure.

2) when you are cooking things that have been vacuum sealed in a bag they are not under low-pressure. They are at atmospheric pressure. They are at the same pressure they would be at if they weren't in a bag because the walls of the bag collapse as air is pumped out. (To have low pressure inside of a container, you need to have a rigid container that does not collapse when the air is pumped out.)

MikeTMD · May 8, 2008

A ribeye cooked at 130F for an hour and then seared for 20 seconds a side in a VERY hot pan is a wonderful treat. I have never had one fall apart.

e-monster,

I completely agree with your approach to Ribeye SV: that is exactly how I would do it. My comment was in reference to longer SV times, which is what makes it fall apart.

... when you are cooking things that have been vacuum sealed in a bag they are not under low-pressure. They are at atmospheric pressure. They are at the same pressure they would be at if they weren't in a bag because the walls of the bag collapse as air is pumped out. (To have low pressure inside of a container, you need to have a rigid container that does not collapse when the air is pumped out.)

This is where I can't agree with you: vacuum sealed bags are BELOW atmospheric pressure, which is why they collapse when vacuum is applied.

Vacuum/low-pressure decrease boiling point - just like you said, which is exactly what we are looking for in SV applications.

Edited May 8, 2008 by MikeTMD (log)

dougal · May 8, 2008

...
Again and again, I would point out that temp control and full vacuum are essential ...
←

And again and again, I've wondered just what you might be meaning by "full vacuum"... :smile:

e_monster may have misread your post regarding pressure and boiling point, BUT

- he's quite right that the pressure in a non-rigid s-v bag is going to be at atmospheric pressure (or actually just slightly above atmospheric pressure because of being submerged below the waterbath surface).

The flexible bag collapses until pressure is equalised inside and out. Being flexible, and stretchy too, the bag cannot resist the external pressure of the atmosphere. It would be different with a rigid box or bottle. But its a flexy, slightly stetchy bag. And atmospheric pressure is pretty strong about 14.5 pound pressing on every single square inch. The bag doesn't stand a chance!

- and boiling point is irrelevant to s-v cooking. (Because pressure - and so boiling point - isn't changed, as above.)

However, it does seem to be important that the bag doesn't float to the surface, and that the bag should be well collapsed around the food, so that the waterbath is in good thermal contact with the food - as far as possible on all sides.

So "well evacuated" makes sense, but "full vacuum" or even "low pressure" really don't.

"Vacuum" sealing and "sous vide" aren't scientifically correct descriptions. Just as "convection" is a pretty inaccurate description for an oven with a fan ... :smile:

Edited May 8, 2008 by dougal (log)

slkinsey · May 8, 2008

Mike, I'm afraid you are incorrect about the items inside a vacuum sealed bag being below atmospheric presure.

Think about it: What is atmospheric pressure?

Atmospheric pressure can be simply described as approximately the hydrostatic pressure caused by the weight of the atmosphere. A more simple way of putting it is that atmospheric pressure is the combined weight of the air above us "pressing down."

If you reduce gravity, weight is reduced and atmospheric pressure goes down. When elevation increases the mass of air molecules above is reduced, and atmospheric pressure goes down. If climactic conditions create a "low pressure condition" the mass of air molecules above is reduced, and pressure goes down (the opposite is true for a "high pressure condition").

So, what happens with respect to pressure when we put a piece of beef in a bag and suck all the extra air out of the bag? Nothing, really. The mass of air molecules "pressing down" on the steak through the bag is exactly the same as the mass of air molecules "pressing down" on the steak before it was in the bag. In both conditions, the steak is under regular atmospheric pressure.

If we would like for the steak to be under reduced pressure, we must put the steak into a rigid container and evacuate the air from the rigid container. At this point, the mass of air molecules "pressing down" on the steak is very small, and the steak is under less-than-atmospheric pressure.

Another way to think about it is this: Suppose you took the steak in the vacuum-sealed bag and put it at the bottom of the ocean. Would the steak be at low pressure or high pressure? Now, suppose you took the steak in the vacuum-evacuated rigid container and put it at the bottom of the ocean. Would that steak be at low pressure or high pressure? (Answer: steak #1 = high pressure; steak #2 = low pressure.)

MikeTMD · May 8, 2008

And again and again, I've wondered just what you might be meaning by "full vacuum"...
The flexible bag collapses until pressure is equalised inside and out. Being flexible, and stretchy too, the bag cannot resist the external pressure of the atmosphere. It would be different with a rigid box or bottle. But its a flexy, slightly stetchy bag. And atmospheric pressure is pretty strong about 14.5 pound pressing on every single square inch. The bag doesn't stand a chance!

My dearest dougal,

Full vacuum, just like absolute zero temps are impossible, although we try to approach them as much as we could - and I completely agree with you about that.

When the pressure outside the bag and inside the bag are equal - the bag wouldn't collapse ( just like when gravity and lift are equal an object would be in flight), when the pressure inside the bag is approaching zero - the bag inevitable collapses (it's not cooking - it's physics, really). Would you agree with me on that?