Which is better: Technique X or technique Y?

[nickrey]

There are many consumer reports on the effectiveness of appliances such as coffee makers as well as many eGullet threads comparing particular techniques (ways of making stock, cooking eggs, etc).

One common feature in these is that techniques are applied, outputs are compared, and a statement is made that “technique X is better than technique Y” or “coffee maker X is better than coffee maker Y.”

Being someone who often uses technique Y or coffee maker Y, I am somewhat bemused as I have deliberately chosen these techniques or this equipment because it produces better output than the other techniques.

For example, I use the whirlpool method of poaching eggs and get (close to) perfect poached eggs every time and have a semi-automatic Rancilio Miss Silvia coffee machine from which I get a (close to) perfect espresso every time.

In both cases, it took me months of experimentation and many failures to get to the stage were I could call the results (close to) perfect. I say close to, because I’m sure I’m still learning even now.

When techniques are assessed on eGullet, often people have a favourite technique that they have used for years. They then compare it with one of the alternative techniques that they are trying for the first time and proclaim that their favourite technique is better. This approach would be fine if you were comparing two out of the box products in which the skill of the operator plays no role (eg. comparing the picture on two TVs from the same source). Where skill is involved, as it most certainly is in cooking, this is an unfair comparison.

If one were to test techniques fairly, you would get two people with equal skill in the different techniques and then provide the output to an independent tasting panel to get their opinion. Great in theory, but this is rarely possible in the real world.

Perhaps the best way of looking at different techniques – and this is one that it provided by eGullet extremely well – is to get input from people who use the different techniques and have them talk about their successes and failures using the technique. They might even conclude the posts with a statement that it took them many months of trial and error to finally get it right.

Recently I started making Tortillas. I followed the recipe from the book and had some moderate success. But I had no measure of what was good, particularly in Australia where Mexican food is not especially common. By posting a query to eGullet, I received some invaluable tips from people who are experts that accelerated my learning dramatically.

How many perfectionists out there have persisted with a technique or piece of equipment and find that they can create things that were not possible with the “out of the box” techniques that always rate highly in initial comparisons?

[paulraphael]

The phenomenon you're describing applies to anything technique-intensive, not just cooking. When I first started taking music lessons my teacher was elated that I wasn't self taught (I was un-taught). He knew how hard it was to get someone to un-learn bad techniques. Much easier to mold a completely fresh piece of clay.

Same thing in anything athletic. I struggle weekly to improve as a rock climber. Half of what I do is force myself to use less comfortable, less familiar techniques, knowing that the new ones will be better when I eventually learn them.

In cooking I'm always discarding things I've learned and practiced. It's really annoying, but much of the time it's the only way to improve. I labored to learn all the traditional Cordon Bleu standard knife techniques, and then threw half of them out when I saw that there were better ones to be learned.

[gfron1]

Its rare that I get to use my doctorate in Sport Psychology in these forums, but what you are describing is that point where practice, achievement and confidence merge (efficacy). Performance is very individualistic, but can be molded/inspired by others. When all of these components hit their pinnacle, you achieve, what we call in sports, flow. I'm sure most of you have achieved flow in making that perfect souffle, 10-course meal, etc. This is also why sport practice involves so much repetition - if we create the patterns in our minds on how to climb that route, run the marathon, hit the tennis serve (have you ever been chopping carrots and realized you were done but don't remember doing it?), then we can move beyond that and work on confidence - confidence that is built over the course of the repetition, and ultimately we have achievement which continues the cycle. Thanks for letting me put my student loan to work...now cook on!

Edited January 31, 2009 by gfron1 (log)

[isomer]

How many perfectionists out there have persisted with a technique or piece of equipment and find that they can create things that were not possible with the “out of the box” techniques that always rate highly in initial comparisons?

←

Scrambled eggs. I learned Jean-George's technique from his book Simple to Spectacular, co-authored by Mark Bittman. I don't know if he invented it, but I am attributing it to him because that's how I learned it. It is absolutely a revelation, because it is purely a difference in technique (same eggs, same butter), but the results are dramatically different, and I think better.

Here is how to scramble eggs, as described by JG and MB:

Start with a cold non-stick pan, and crack 3 eggs into it. Add about 1/2 Tbsp of butter, and turn the heat to medium-high.

Using a wisk, begin slowly stirring the eggs. Don't incorporate air, but do keep the eggs moving.

As the pan heats up, the butter will melt. Keep stirring. Next the whites will start to coagulate in tiny clumps and strands. Keep stirring.

Soon the yolk will start to cook as well. If at any time the egg start sticking to the pan, lift the pan off the element for a few seconds, and keep stirring until the eggs stop sticking, then return the pan to the heat.

The eggs are done when they have the texture of loose oatmeal. Don't overcook them.

Add salt and pepper, and serve with a spoon.

The eggs are unbelievably creamy! I've even made them with no butter, and they are still creamy. I think the reason this happens is that the constant stirring prevents the eggs from clumping and separating into overcooked parts and undercooked parts, but that's just a guess.

[Shalmanese]

It's relatively rare for a method to be technique heavy enough that significant practice is required, poaching eggs being a notable counter example. Most of the time, the actual technique is easy enough to be mastered in 2 or 3 goes and the real difficulty lies in being able to taste effectively which is universal across techniques.

[Edward J]

Techniques are a tool. If something better comes along, I'll try it (like microwaving fresh fruit to make jams and jellies, technique was OK, but the stuff had to be refrigerated--no shelf life) I'll give it a try and see if I can use it.

As a cook, I was shown a technique of how to clean a griddle (flat top) with a grill brick and water. The technique made sense, water did a perfect job, the brick wouldn't clog up as fast, never skated, far fewer hot oil burns and splashes, and water is a lot cheaper then oil. I still use this technique, but in some kitchens I was ridiculed or out-right dis-obeyed when instructing to my staff.

Whatever works, works.

When shown by a crusty ancient Frenchman of microwaving couveture in a METAL bowl I was very hesitant--for 30 years I had never nuked anything in a metal container and reprimanded countless employees of doing so. Yet it does work and quite safely--PROVIDED the edges of the bowl don't touch the walls. The same man showed me how he uses a stick immersion blender in a 12 kg tub of couveture--no air bubbles whatso ever and very smooth couveture. This has alos become part of my daily routine.

Whatever works, works.