Pre-Soaking Dried Pasta

[Chris Amirault]

In "The Invisible Ingredient in Every Kitchen," an essay on heat that's one his regular food science pieces for the NY Times, Harold McGee writes,

In fact it’s easy to save loads of time and energy and potential discomfort with grains, dry beans and lentils, and even pasta. But it requires a little thinking ahead. It turns out that the most time-consuming part of the process is not the movement of boiling heat to the center of each small bean or noodle, which takes only a few minutes, but the movement of moisture, which can take hours. Grains and dry legumes therefore cook much faster if they have been soaked. However heretical it may sound to soak dried pasta, doing so can cut its cooking time by two-thirds — and eliminates the problem of dry noodles getting stuck to each other as they slide into the pot.

I've never heard of this pre-soak method before, and McGee doesn't say anything more about it. Does anyone do this? Results?

[Tri2Cook]

Never tried it... but I'm going to now. Might make a few messes figuring it out but dry pasta is cheap.

[jsmeeker]

In "The Invisible Ingredient in Every Kitchen," an essay on heat that's one his regular food science pieces for the NY Times, Harold McGee writes,

In fact it’s easy to save loads of time and energy and potential discomfort with grains, dry beans and lentils, and even pasta. But it requires a little thinking ahead. It turns out that the most time-consuming part of the process is not the movement of boiling heat to the center of each small bean or noodle, which takes only a few minutes, but the movement of moisture, which can take hours. Grains and dry legumes therefore cook much faster if they have been soaked. However heretical it may sound to soak dried pasta, doing so can cut its cooking time by two-thirds — and eliminates the problem of dry noodles getting stuck to each other as they slide into the pot.

I've never heard of this pre-soak method before, and McGee doesn't say anything more about it. Does anyone do this? Results?

←

Interesting..

I assume that when it comes to actually cooking the soaked pasta, it would be done in a lot of boiling water, just like normal past cooking? For varieties that are allready fairly quick quicking, it seems you are only shaving off a 2 or 3 minutes.

How long do you soak it for? hours? over night? But easy to test, as dried pasta is pretty inexpensive.

Edited January 2, 2008 by jsmeeker (log)

[slkinsey]

A fair amount of the article had to do with ways that one can conserve energy (both thermal energy and the ConEd bill) -- not necessarily the better way to do things.

For example, McGee correctly points out that electric burners are much more energy-efficient than gas burners. But gas burners have a whole range of advantages over electric burners (not to mention that natural gas is cheap) that makes them preferable over electric. I don't think I know too many people who would prefer electric burners over gas.

Anyway, as to how this has bearing on pre-oaking dry pasta... why would anyone want to do this? Let's say it reduces cooking time by 75%. So what? So, it takes me 3 minutes to boil penne instead of 12? But the real time savings isn't anywhere neat 75%. Considering that it takes me 30 minutes to heat up enough water to properly cook a pound of pasta, the 9 minute time savings is only around 20%. I can't believe the energy savings is all that much either. More to the point, I think it would considerably complicate timing, etc. I've experimented with par-cooking pasta a time or two when I needed to have as short a time as possible between firing up the burners and having food in front of 30+ people. It's never been as good as starting with fully "raw" pasta. I have to assume he mentioned it only to make a point.

[jumanggy]

I have one of those electric kettles where the heating element is inside the kettle itself, so I have no problem with time (boil water, pour in pasta pot, put lid on, boil another kettle, bring everything back to a rolling boil over the hob all in 8 minutes). I'm curious to see what everyone else's experimentation has resulted in

How about... Placing the dry pasta in the pot while you bring the water to a boil? How much time could be saved then?

[hummingbirdkiss]

I tried this many years ago a friend of mine swore by presoaking ..but I found it to be a pain and since it takes no time really to make pasta I saw no benefit to it myself ..but hey if it takes less time and you need to cut corners the final result was as good as cooking it the regular way

[Tri2Cook]

Anyway, as to how this has bearing on pre-oaking dry pasta... why would anyone want to do this?  Let's say it reduces cooking time by 75%.  So what?  So, it takes me 3 minutes to boil penne instead of 12? But the real time savings isn't anywhere neat 75%.  Considering that it takes me 30 minutes to heat up enough water to properly cook a pound of pasta, the 9 minute time savings is only around 20%. 

←

30 minutes to boil 4 litres or so of water? Really? Anyway, I'm just curious at this point. I'm not worried about practical applications (yet) or energy conservation. I'd just like to find out if pasta could be pre-soaked, bagged and finished off in a short amount of time later that day without compromising quality. Basically, could it be rehydrated to the point of fresh-made pasta then cooked from there later. I'm not thinking par-cooking, I was thinking more along the lines of a cold soak. Spending a few extra minutes is nothing when feeding the family or serving one large group but a few minutes per order on a busy night adds up to a lot of time saved. You can't do much about how fast people eat their food but you can to some degree manage how fast they get it... just not at the expense of quality which is why this will be an interesting experiment to me.

[slkinsey]

Anyway, as to how this has bearing on pre-oaking dry pasta... why would anyone want to do this?  Let's say it reduces cooking time by 75%.  So what?  So, it takes me 3 minutes to boil penne instead of 12? But the real time savings isn't anywhere neat 75%.  Considering that it takes me 30 minutes to heat up enough water to properly cook a pound of pasta, the 9 minute time savings is only around 20%.

30 minutes to boil 4 litres or so of water? Really?

Um, I'm cooking a pound of dry pasta in something more like ten liters of water. Four liters for a pound I would consider entirely too little -- more the volume of a saucepan than a stock/pasta pot. Actually, I'm pretty sure I have a four-liter "tall saucepan," and I wouldn't consider cooking pasta in it.

[Darcie B]

I have one of those electric kettles where the heating element is inside the kettle itself, so I have no problem with time (boil water, pour in pasta pot, put lid on, boil another kettle, bring everything back to a rolling boil over the hob all in 8 minutes). I'm curious to see what everyone else's experimentation has resulted in

How about... Placing the dry pasta in the pot while you bring the water to a boil? How much time could be saved then?

←

I think you would end up with mushy pasta that stuck together if you did this. I could be wrong, though!

[qrn]

The time savings at sea level probably is not a big deal. But, at altitude where boiling point can be much less than 212º it could be very helpful...I posted a story of a pal from NY that couldn't understand why spagetti at 9500 ft took over half an hour...

The pasta would be the one for me to try , as I usually do beans in the pressure cooker...

Bud

[paulraphael]

I cooked pasta at 11,600 feet once. It wasn't pretty.

[Peter the eater]

I heard of this technique when I lived in Vancouver years ago. As I recall, the lady said it was a way of reconstituting the dry pasta back to an almost fresh state. I've never tried it, but know I think I will.

I cooked pasta at 11,600 feet once. It wasn't pretty.

Can't let a comment like that go by . . . please elaborate!

Was base camp in Nepal? Some kind of two mile high pasta club in the galley of an airplane?

[Meanderer]

I hope the process works well for a somewhat different reason. We don't have air-conditioning so anything that will keep a little heat and humidity out of the kitchen in July and August is welcome. On the other hand, our house is old and hard to heat, so cooking pasta in the usual manner has to help in the winter, if only psychologically.

[Tri2Cook]

Um, I'm cooking a pound of dry pasta in something more like ten liters of water.  Four liters for a pound I would consider entirely too little -- more the volume of a saucepan than a stock/pasta pot.  Actually, I'm pretty sure I have a four-liter "tall saucepan," and I wouldn't consider cooking pasta in it.

←

Fair enough, my mistake. I use the large pots of water at work because they're going to be staying on the boil and ready to use for an extended period of time but I don't use nearly that amount of water just to cook one batch of pasta.

[Dianabanana]

Ha. Getting real here for a minute, 90% of my pasta gets made specifically because I had no time to plan or prep a meal.

[OliverN]

One part of this article that surprised me was McGee's assertion that meat should be as cold as possible before searing, so that the outside cooks rapidly before the middle gets a chance to cook.

I had always thought that letting the meat come up to room temperature was the thing to do....

Any opinions?

[qrn]

One part of this article that surprised me was McGee's assertion that meat should be as cold as possible before searing, so that the outside cooks rapidly before the middle gets a chance to cook.

I had always thought that letting the meat come up to room temperature was the thing to do....

Any opinions?

←

depends what kind of "meat" steak. roasts, ???

I heat steaks up in the m/w on ultra ultra low(5 minutes or so) till they are an even 100º thru, and then sear/finish on a 750º grill for a couple mins, so they are a pretty even med rare.(Ala prime rib), and still get the flavor of the grill sear.

big, long cooked stuff is right outta the reefer for the sear.

Might look on the sous viede(sp) thread for some interesting stuff in that area..

Bud

[Mikeb19]

One part of this article that surprised me was McGee's assertion that meat should be as cold as possible before searing, so that the outside cooks rapidly before the middle gets a chance to cook.

I had always thought that letting the meat come up to room temperature was the thing to do....

Any opinions?

←

The only time you should sear very cold meat is if you're doing a tataki-style dish (ie. raw meat seared on the outside, then sliced thin and served like sashimi or carpaccio). Otherwise if you want even cooking the meat should be as warm as possible before you sear/cook it.

It's funny - he advocated soaking pulses and other dried items before cooking (to speed up the cooking process), but advocates using cold meat (slowing down the cooking process) - and every single chef who has ever been a grill cook knows that for best results you want to use meat that's been warming up next to the grill for at least half an hour... Anyone who's ever tried cooking a piece of meat from frozen knows that cold meats don't cook right.

He did get the sous-vide part right - you cook the meat sous-vide first, and then sear it, precisely because you want your meat as warm as possible before it gets seared - putting it in a water bath is the same principle as letting it come to room temperature, just taken further along...

I have Harold McGee's book, and while it's somewhat interesting, I never really read it. If you really want to improve your cooking, Hervé This' books are much more useful and interesting - his books that he co-authored with Pierre Gagnaire are also very good reads. Just my professional (chef) opinion...

[docsconz]

One part of this article that surprised me was McGee's assertion that meat should be as cold as possible before searing, so that the outside cooks rapidly before the middle gets a chance to cook.

I had always thought that letting the meat come up to room temperature was the thing to do....

Any opinions?

←

The only time you should sear very cold meat is if you're doing a tataki-style dish (ie. raw meat seared on the outside, then sliced thin and served like sashimi or carpaccio). Otherwise if you want even cooking the meat should be as warm as possible before you sear/cook it.

It's funny - he advocated soaking pulses and other dried items before cooking (to speed up the cooking process), but advocates using cold meat (slowing down the cooking process) - and every single chef who has ever been a grill cook knows that for best results you want to use meat that's been warming up next to the grill for at least half an hour... Anyone who's ever tried cooking a piece of meat from frozen knows that cold meats don't cook right.

He did get the sous-vide part right - you cook the meat sous-vide first, and then sear it, precisely because you want your meat as warm as possible before it gets seared - putting it in a water bath is the same principle as letting it come to room temperature, just taken further along...

I have Harold McGee's book, and while it's somewhat interesting, I never really read it. If you really want to improve your cooking, Hervé This' books are much more useful and interesting - his books that he co-authored with Pierre Gagnaire are also very good reads. Just my professional (chef) opinion...

←

This has taken what McGee wrote out of context and did not finish the instruction:

The trickiest foods to heat just right are meats and fish. The problem is that we want to heat the center of the piece to 130 or 140 degrees, but we often want a browned, tasty crust on the surface, and that requires 400 degrees.

It takes time for heat to move inward from the surface to the center, so the default method is to fry or grill or broil and hope that the browning time equals the heat-through time. Even if that math works out, the area between the center and surface will then range in temperature between 130 and 400 degrees. The meat will be overcooked everywhere but right at the center.

The solution is to cook with more than one level of heat. Start with very cold meat and very high heat to get the surface browned as quickly as possible with minimal cooking inside; then switch to very low heat to cook the interior gently and evenly, leaving it moist and tender.

In regards to pasta, I was curious and wrote him to see if he had any more specific recommendations. This is what he replied:

About pasta soaking: it depends so much on the pasta itself, which can be thick or thin, long or short. No general rules, I think--you try it and see. Fettucine profit from 3-4 hours, and I bet farfalle or penne could use even more.

[TheSwede]

The only time you should sear very cold meat is if you're doing a tataki-style dish (ie. raw meat seared on the outside, then sliced thin and served like sashimi or carpaccio).  Otherwise if you want even cooking the meat should be as warm as possible before you sear/cook it.  ... Anyone who's ever tried cooking a piece of meat from frozen knows that cold meats don't cook right.

Frozen and cold are two very different things, so lets disregard that.

Having the meat warm will definitely get the best result when you want to finish the dish quickly (like in a resturant) and want to do it in a single process (ie pan with perhaps lower temperature for the finish).

But if you first want to sear and then finish in a low temperature oven? Then cold might be better. That should enable you to get a very thin seared crust and then almost uniform inside with minimal drying out.

My worry would be that the cold meat wouldn't sear as good a warm, since the cold meat would cool the pan. Thoughts?

Edited January 4, 2008 by TheSwede (log)

[adey73]

Just tried pre-soaking dried udon noodles.

It wasn't pretty, ended up looking like a bowl of porridge.

[slkinsey]

My worry would be that the cold meat wouldn't sear as good a warm, since the cold meat would cool the pan. Thoughts?

Given the area of contact for thermal transfer, and presuming a very hot pan with a decent heat capacity and a reasonably powerful burner, this is not a concern. I've had no troubles browning off completely frozen lamb shanks that I was later going to braise overnight.

Just tried pre-soaking dried udon noodles.

It wasn't pretty, ended up looking like a bowl of porridge.

Considering that udon noodles are quite soft, this isn't a surprise. I'd think that chewy strong pasta made with high gluten flour would be necessary for this technique.

In regards to pasta, I was curious and wrote him to see if he had any more specific recommendations. This is what he replied:

About pasta soaking: it depends so much on the pasta itself, which can be thick or thin, long or short. No general rules, I think--you try it and see. Fettucine profit from 3-4 hours, and I bet farfalle or penne could use even more.

Nicely done, Doc. It's still not clear, howwever, whether he's talking about reducing cooking time or actually gaining some kind of culinary benefit. I suspect the former and have my doubts as to the latter.

[Aileen]

I cooked pasta at 11,600 feet once. It wasn't pretty.

Can't let a comment like that go by . . . please elaborate!

Was base camp in Nepal? Some kind of two mile high pasta club in the galley of an airplane?

←

I've never tried to cook pasta at that elevation, but I camp every summer outside of Leadville, Colorado (our campsite is about 11,200 feet), and it takes a LOOOOONNG time to cook rice there. I assume the same is true for pasta.

[Adam Balic]

I saw Hervé This give a lecture/demonstration a year or so ago. He is a great showman and the presentation was very interesting, but one thing that he did say was that he was a scientist not a chef, it was his role to demonstrate what is possible and it was the role of a chef to make things taste good.

I'm not fussed about the pre-soaking of pasta, I have 12 minutes to spare to cook from scratch. If I was interested in efficient pasta I would cook it in huge batches, freeze it and microwave it when I needed it.

Legumes are different issue, they don't take 12 minutes to cook and a reduction in cooking time would be welcome, but I pre-saoked anyway.