• Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create an account.

  • product-image-quickten.png.a40203b506711f7664fc62024e54a584.pngDid you know that these all-volunteer forums are operated by the 501(c)3 not-for-profit Society for Culinary Arts & Letters? This holiday season, consider a tax-deductible Quick Ten Bucks to support the eG Forums and help us remain completely advertising-free. Thanks to all those who have donated so far!

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
robert brown

Molecular Gastronomy

2 posts in this topic

Heston, I’m getting a bit nervous about Molecular Gastronomy. I’m concerned that it may be overshadowing the tried and true, if not proven, field of Solid State Gastronomy. I may be alone in mourning its demise, but I still like a solid piece of meat; tearing into a solid whole chicken for two, perhaps with truffles under its skin; a solid, entire fish like a sea bass “en croute”. I have nothing against foams, capsules, and jellies, but my mom told me that in order to be a happy lad, I should have at least two solid meals a day. Any chance that Solid State Gastronomy will ever make a comeback?

Since satire is what closes on Saturday night, let me be serious and ask you this legitimate question: I have not seen the expression in many years, but I remember food writers of 20 years ago speaking of the cuisine of certain Nouvelle Cuisine chefs as having a taste that “explodes in the mouth”. Perhaps currently less-sensitive taste buds are a bit of a factor, but I remember enjoying food at the great restaurants of France tasting better than it does in all but a handful of restaurants today. As I have stated or implied many times (maybe now too many times) on e-Gullet, I find that besides less generosity, more “control-freaking” (not only are more chefs telling you what you have to eat, but also how to eat it), I also find less succulence or naturalness in my dishes, often so with the unexpected Adria-inspired dish that I encounter. In fact, so far (and this does not include The Fat Duck which, believe me, is visit number one the next time I go to the UK) I would have to say that Adria-inspired food works best in the context of a meal “Chez Adria”. In the interest of brevity, then, how do you view cuisine that is offered in new delivery systems (or altered states) vis a vis cuisine made by complete, masterly chefs using impeccable produce stunningly prepared and made with tried and true technique, and do you think that the collaboration of chef and food scientist is slated for a meaningful long term future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert,

Thanks for your question, a very good one at that.

Firstly I think that the term "molecular gastronomy" does not do this approach any favours at all.

Although this term was coined a few years ago in this country ( the origin of the science of cooking) and it describes perfectly the adaptation of science in the kitchen, it makes it sound like you need a nuclear physics degree to understand it!

At its roots, molecular gastronomy does not mean white chocolate and caviar, it is simply deals with what happens to ur food when we cook it.

So, whether it is roasting a chcken, boiling an egg or making a cup of tea,

an understanding of the science of cooking makes these tasks easier and, in the case of things going wrong in the kitchen it puts you in a far better position to rectify them.

I do agree with you that a menu dotted with foams for example is not the way forward and that food of the future should in no way loose sight of its classical roots.

I just think that there is a whole new world of cooking and eating out there that is hithertoo undiscovered.

After all,sweetcorn and chocolate, tobacco in cooking and parmesan ice cream have been made for nearly two hundred years so what is "classical cooking?

I think that the basic premise of using impeccable produce with true technique could never be questioned.

One of the best examples that I can think of how the knowledge of the science of cooking can improve classical kitchen technique is in the roasting of a chicken.

The probelm is how to cook a chicken so that the breast and leg are cooked perfectly. Either the breast is spot on the legs are not cooked or the legs are cooked and the breasts are like cardboard.

Th classical solution is to cook the chicken first on one leg, then on the other asnd finally on its back, so that the heat from the roasting tray would speed up the cooking of each of the legs while resting on it.

I then begen to think, if the oven is on fixed temperature, why should the roasting tray be hotter than the air in the oven?

It is because the heat retaining capacityof the breasts are different to that of the legs. The breasts heat up much faster a given temperature.

Imagine then, placing a chicken in an oven set at 180C with the intention of cooking the chicken to an internal temperature of 65C to 70C.

The breasts reach the desired internal temperature before the legs as the oven is set at 180C. The breasts, waiting for the legs just get hotter and hotter and, by the time that the legs have reached the desired temperature, the breasts have probably hit 100C and are as dry as anything.

If however, the oven is set at say 70C, then although the breasts reach the desired temperature first, they do not get any hotter while waiting for the legs.

This way a perfectly roast chicken is obtained.

The only downside to this is that there are no browning flavours on the skin. THis can be countered by giving the chicken a very quick blast in the hottest oven possible for five to ten minutes.

The collaboration of chef and scientist is certainly not responsible for so called "whacky" combinations but can lead to a greater understanding of what happens to our food when we cook it.

It is my night off, on a Sunday night and although I call it a half day, I have been at work until nearly 6pm and could not wait till I got home to eat my ost eagerly anticipated meal of the week; my wifes roast chicken with roast potatoes, cauliflower cheeses and braised carrots..........FANTASTIC!

Oh, of course the time with my family makes it more special!


Heston Blumenthal

The Fat Duck

The Fat Duck website

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Similar Content

    • By eG Forums Host
      Introduction

      Welcome to the index for the Sous Vide: Recipes, Techniques, & Equipment topic, one of the largest and most influential topics on eG Forums. (The topic has been closed to keep the index stable and reliable; you can find another general SV discussion topic here.) This index is intended to help you navigate the thousands of posts and discussions to make this rich resource more useful and accessible.

      In order to understand sous vide cooking, it's best to clear up some misconceptions and explain some basics. Sous vide cooking involves vacuum-sealing food in a plastic bag and cooking it in a water bath at precise temperatures. Though it translates literally as "under vacuum," "Sous vide" is often taken to mean "under pressure," which is a misnomer; not all SV cooking involves food cooked in conditions that exceed atmospheric pressure. (See below.) In addition, calculations for SV cooking involve not only time and temperature but also thickness. Finally, due to the anaerobic conditions inside the bag and the low temperatures used, food safety issues are paramount.

      You can read the basics of SV cooking and equipment here. In the summer of 2005, Nathan Myhrvold (Society member nathanm) posted this informative, "I'm now going to answer my own initial questions" post, which addresses just about everything up to that point. For what came next, read on -- and be sure to order Nathan Myhrvold's highly anticipated Modernist Cuisine book, due in spring 2011.

      As with all indexes of on-going discussions, this one has limitations. We've done our best to create a user-friendly taxonomy emphasizing the categories that have come up repeatedly. In addition, the science, technology, and recipes changed over time, and opinions varied greatly, so be sure to read updated information whenever possible.

      Therefore, we strongly encourage you to keep these issues in mind when reading the topic, and particularly when considering controversial topics related to food safety, doneness, delta T cooking, and so on. Don't read a first post's definitive claim without reading down the topic, where you'll likely find discussion, if not heated debate or refutation, of that claim. Links go to the first post in a series that may be discontinuous, so be sure to scan a bit more to get the full discussion.

      Recipes were chosen based solely on having a clear set of information, not on merit. Indeed, we've included several stated failures for reference. Where possible, recipes include temperature and time in the link label -- but remember that thickness is also a crucial variable in many SV preparations. (See below for more information on thickness.)

      History, Philosophy & Value of SV/LTLT Cooking

      Over the years, we've talked quite a bit about SV as a concept, starting with this discussion about how SV cooking got started. There have also been several people who asked, Why bother with SV in the first place? (See also this discussion.) What with all the electronics and plastic bags, we asked: Does SV food lack passion? Finally, there have been several discussions about the value of SV cooking in other eG Forums topics, such as the future of SV cooking, No More Sous Vide -- PLEASE!, is SV "real cooking," and what's the appeal of SV?

      Those who embrace SV initially seek ideas about the best applications for their new equipment. Discussions have focused on what a first SV meal should be -- see also this discussion -- and on the items for which SV/LTLT cooking is best suited. There's much more along those lines here, here, and here.

      Vacuums and Pressure in Sous Vide Cooking

      As mentioned above, there has been great confusion about vacuums, pressure, and their role SV cooking. Here is a selection of discussion points on the subject, arranged chronologically; please note that later posts in a given discussion may refute earlier ones:

      Do you need a vacuum for SV cooking, and, if so, why? What exactly is a "vacuum"? Click here, here, and ff. Are items in vacuum-sealed bags "under pressure"? Does a vacuum sealer create a vacuum inside the bag? Do you really need a vacuum, or can you use ZipLoc bags? Also see here, here, and here. If "sous vide" means "under pressure," aren't the items in the bag under pressure? There is more along these lines to be found in this discussion.  

      The Charts

      We've collected the most important of many charts in the SV topic here. Standing above the rest are Nathan Myhrvold's charts for cooking time versus thickness and desired core temperature. We worked with him to create these three reformatted protein tables, for beef, fish, and chicken & pork.

      Nathan provides additional information on his charts here. Information on how to read these charts can be found in this post. For an explanation of "rest time" in Nathan's tables, click here.

      Other Society members helped out as well. Douglas Baldwin references his heating time table for different geometric factors (slab/cylinder/sphere) here; the pdf itself can be found here. pounce created a post with all three tables as neatly formatted images. derekslager created two monospace font charts of Nathan's meat table and his fish table.

      Camano Chef created a cumulative chart with information gathered from other sources including Thomas Keller's Ad Hoc. Douglas Baldwin shared this chart devoted to pasteurizing poultry. PedroG detailed heat loss and steady state energy consumption of sous vide cookers in these charts.

      Finally, there is also an eG Forums topic on cooling rates that may be of interest.

      Acknowledgment & Comments

      This index was built by Chris Amirault, Director, eG Forums. It was reviewed by the eGullet Society volunteer team as well as many Society members. Please send questions or comments to Chris via messenger or email.
       
       
    • By TdeV
      Wikipedia defines pork wings as: a pork product made from the fibula of a pig's shank - a single bone surrounded by lean, tender meat.
      Images from the internet look like a finger-size bit of meat around a bone.
      Mine, however, look more like the meat (lots) which surrounds a bone. My butcher called this cut pork wings.
      You can see on the right that there's a small amount of bone.
         
       
      My butcher said he regularly ate SEVERAL of these. But this one measures 15 oz (425g).
      He also said it had to be cooked slowly.
       
      So, if I cook these sous vide, what temp and for how long?
    • By jedovaty
      Good morning!
       
      Long story short: I am doing a spin off the coconut/chocolate/almond candy (almond joy), and trying to create a specific shape out of the almond.  My hands are cramped after a couple dozen failed attempts whittling roasted almonds, so now I'd like to try a different approach, and instead, create some kind of sub-candy or cookie with roasted almonds that I can put into a mold or use a mini cookie cutter.  I'm fairly new to sweets, my knowledge in this area is pretty slim.  Some ideas so far, I don't like any, but it might help turn some gears:
      1. dusting almond over a stencil, but that's not enough almond nor crunchy enough
      2. almond brittle, but that's too hard and sweet, I'd like it more of a soft crunch, and bringing the almond flavor forward
      3. meringue with almonds (sort of macaron-ish), however, weather has been humid and raining here, and I'm ending up with a gooey mess instead of that soft crunch
       
      In addition to having almond-forward taste and soft crunch texture, it'd be fun to explore something modernish - I have a accumulated a few tools and ingredients not customarily found in homes.
       
      There are dietary considerations I will have to account for, however, no need to worry about that now, I am just looking for ideas and a place to take it from there
       
      Thank you for your time in reading!
    • By Franzisaurus_Rex
      FOOD BRETHREN!
      I need some advice. I have one last piece of pork belly confit in the fridge. I brined these bitches for about 5 days (brine included pink curing salt), vacuum sealed the squares of pork belly with lard and sous vide them at 158 F for 16 hours. I cooked this on 11/10/16 and its been in my refrigerator since. 
      Here is the general recipe I followed, with some modifications based on my taste: https://www.chefsteps.com/activities/...
      The last piece is still vacuum sealed and submerged (mostly) in lard. Any visible pork only has contact with the bag. 
      It's staring at me. And calling my name.
      I want to deep fry this sucker and have a little date night with the handsome devil I see in the mirror every morning, but the last thing I want is spoiled food. I can't find any conclusive information about how long pork confit lasts for. I've only seen references that duck confit or in general that the confit technique will last for months in the fridge. I have found no sources which directly addresses pork confit.
      Questions/Factors I'm Considering:
      - Does pork confit keep for as long as duck confit?
      - Does vacuum sealing have any effect on the length of preservation?
      - Does sous-vide cooking method affect the length of preservation?
      I know I am probably being a bit paranoid, but I thought I would do my due diligence before taking the plunge, so to speak. Any advice on these questions would be extremely helpful and appreciated!
      The Franzisaurus-Rex
      PS - you should totally make this if you are into sous vide, confit, food, or have any respect for the enjoyment of life. Flash-searing these things after cooking was OUT OF THIS WORLD.
    • By JoNorvelleWalker
      The NY Times has a current article in the science section "A Universe of Bubbles in Every Champagne Bottle".
       
      The article asserts that it is better to serve Champagne at warmer than refrigerator temperatures so that the bubbles are larger and convey more flavor.  Also to serve in a narrow glass.
       
      However Gerard Liger-Belair (who is referenced as an authority in the Times article) points out in his book Uncorked (forward by Herve This) that the colder the wine the more viscous and the more dissolved CO2.  Liger-Belair also prefers a goblet to a flute.  I bought Uncorked after reading about it in Liquid Intelligence from Dave Arnold.
       
      Discuss.
       
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.