Jump to content
  • 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 a free account.

Cookbooks That Use Weight-Based Measurements


Recommended Posts

Over in the Kitchen Scale Manifesto topic, much sorrow was expressed at the lack of weight-based measurements in cookbooks. Off the top of my head, I realized I had a few books on the cookbook shelf that fit the mold:

James Peterson's Sauces, the rare rigorous non-baking book. His Glorious French Food has a lot of weight-based measurements, but it's not as complete as Sauces.

Grant Achatz's Alinea -- no surprise there.

Michael Ruhlman's Charcuterie and the sections on charcuterie in Paul Bertolli's Cooking By Hand.

The CIA books: Professional Chef and Garde Manger. Again, not a shocker.

From the baking section, quite a few, including Peter Reinhart's Bread Baker's Apprentice, Maggie Glazer's Artisanal Baking Across America, Jeffrey Hamelman's Bread, Pierre Herme's Chocolate Desserts (though NOT his Desserts book, strangely), and the King Arthur Flour's Baking Companion.

What are the other books that use weight, and not volume, in their recipes?

Chris Amirault

eG Ethics Signatory

Sir Luscious got gator belts and patty melts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rose Levy Beranbaum's The Cake Bible and The Pie & Pastry Bible do. I don't own her others, but they might too.

Lots of the bread books I own, like Dan Lepard's The Art of Handmade Bread and Nancy Silveton's Breads from the La Brea Bakery.

Edited by fooey (log)

Fooey's Flickr Food Fotography

Brünnhilde, so help me, if you don't get out of the oven and empty the dishwasher, you won't be allowed anywhere near the table when we're flambeéing the Cherries Jubilee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CIA uses weight in its professional books but volume in its books for home cooks. I'm not sure if there was much of a to-do about it, but I was certainly disappointed by this decision. It was a missed opportunity for leadership. When Rachel Perlow and I spent a day baking at the CIA in connection with the release of "Baking at Home with The Culinary Institute of America," she asked about this in the Q&A session. The editors, chef-instructors and audience members (other than us) were uniformly and totally closed-minded on the subject. They were not under any circumstances even going to consider giving weights in a book for home cooks. Posting about it, Rachel wrote:

During the question and answer segment I inquired if the book has weight measures or volume? The answer was volume, that weight measures are used in the professional book & textbooks (i.e. Baking and Pastry : Mastering the Art and Craft ), but were not for the home cook. So I followed up with "since weight measures are so much more accurate don't you think it's the duty of the CIA to educate the public on this issue and encourage its use?" The response was pretty much the same, saying that home cooks don't want that type of measurement, that they couldn't assume everyone has a scale. One of the other attendees said "well it certainly wouldn't sell as well if they did!" I'm sure that's the reason, in a nutshell. I just figure that if Jamie Oliver can be on TVFN using weight measurements, the CIA should be able to put them in their book. Maybe someday.

And I wrote:

To me, it seems almost a moral obligation for an institution like the CIA to be pushing home cooks towards weight measures for baking and pastry. While I understand the marketing downside of not including volume measures, what possible objection could there be to including both? Any competent typesetter can put the metric weights in small type in the margins so they don't bother anybody.

Steven A. Shaw aka "Fat Guy"
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the UK, the ONLY books using wretched volume measures these days are imports from the US.

That is except for small quantities - teaspoon and below - where the assumption presumably is that quantities of less than 5g are below the accuracy and precision of most home scales.

However today you can buy a 1g precision scale in supermarkets for under £10 (roughly $15 US).

The insidious problem is those books US books 'republished with weight measures' where the conversion has been conscientiously done by a drone looking up figures in some table or database.

The problem there is that neither the drone nor the publisher have the wit to realise that the whole reason for using weight measurements is the same reason that every such table and database is inaccurate -- how much a volume measure contains depends on how hard you pack the stuff in.

Its not the measure that is inaccurate, its the variability of fitting stuff into it.

Volume measures in books should be outlawed for the same reason that they are outlawed for sales.

They are not accurate measures for particulate solids.

That is why you buy flour by weight, and not in "20 cup" bags.

Edited by dougal (log)

"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch ... you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a couple of those mentioned above, and I'd add The Sweeter Side of Amy's Bread: Cakes, Cookies, Bars, Pastries and More from New York City's Favorite Bakery, which is really a good book, and I can confirm that the results are true to the products they serve in the bakery--usually better, because they're even fresher homemade. They give all measurements in grams, ounces, and by volume.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, it seems almost a moral obligation for an institution like the CIA to be pushing home cooks towards weight measures for baking and pastry.

Especially since it presumably would not add to their editorial cost. They're almost certainly starting with recipes they know the weight measures for; they wouldn't have to worry about conversions.

I wonder if some of it has to do with not just "Americans don't use scales" but also "Americans hate and don't understand metric." I don't think it's stretch to think that most of us who DO use scales in the kitchen prefer metric, especially for baking--it's just easier. But an American knows about how much chocolate there is in 4 ounces of chocolate, 100 grams, they don't quite get.

"I think it's a matter of principle that one should always try to avoid eating one's friends."--Doctor Dolittle

blog: The Institute for Impure Science

Link to post
Share on other sites

There may be some generalizations to be made here. Does this sound right?

- Non-North-American cookbooks generally use weight.

- In North America, professional cookbooks of all kinds, as well as advanced-amateur baking books and advanced-amateur books on unusual aspects of cookery (charcuterie, home brewing, whatever) often use weight.

Steven A. Shaw aka "Fat Guy"
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds about right to me.

About when do European cookbooks start using weight? It doesn't seem like it has always been the case. Elizabeth David's cookbooks never got very far in the U.S., as I understand it, because she refused to convert from British units of measure like gills and wine glasses for American editions (not that it matters much, since most of her measurements are approximate anyway, which isn't necessarily a bad thing).

Link to post
Share on other sites

".....but also "Americans hate and don't understand metric."

Ahhhh, but they do, every single American does every day, they just don't know it.

Consider this, waaaay back in the day when the Americans adopted the "dollar" for their currency, they gave up on the British system of 12's, 16's, and whatevers, to the pound,florin, crowns, shilling, penny, ha'penny and whatever. Well, any intellignent person would do the same, wouldn't they?

As a result, you have 100 pennies to the dollar, or 10 dimes to the dollar, 10 $10 to every $100, 100 $100's to every $1,000,and, well, I've never actually had a million dollar bill before.

The metric system and the electonic scale go together like tomatoes and basil, like strawberries and cream.

The average "American" uses scales in their lines of work or professions every day. What's so different about using scales at home?

It's a conspiracy, I tell you.....

Do we cry out to the Media for some intelligence?

Write them letters that never get answered?

Have some kind of a spokesperson, a Ralph Nader, to hold the media responsible for what goes on in the cooking magazines and the TV cooking shows?

Well, we should, but first there are other fish to fry.....

The whole hosptiality industry has other worries. There are no standards for what constitutes a "Cook", or for that matter, a "Chef", let alone a "pastry Chef". As a result there are no standards for the education of such trades, and as an even further result, because there are no standards, there is no pay scale that is "pegged" to such standards. Face it, teh Hosptiality industry pays some of the lowest and worst wages. Add on to that, it is normally accepted to tip the waitron a percentage of the entire bill. Think of that, by tipping one person a percentage of the entire bill, you are acknowledgeing that that person was responsible for the entire dining experience.

Me? I just laugh when I see the volumes, and pull out my "cheat sheet" of aproximate weights and work from there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

".....but also "Americans hate and don't understand metric."

Ahhhh, but they do, every single American does every day, they just don't know it.

Actually, they do know it: they buy stuff packaged in metric all the time in grocery stores; beverages are probably the most common. But they still don't really have an intuitive sense of what a kilo is.

Consider this, waaaay back in the day when the Americans adopted the "dollar" for their currency, they gave up on the British system of 12's, 16's, and whatevers, to the pound,florin, crowns, shilling, penny, ha'penny and whatever. Well, any intellignent person would do the same, wouldn't they?

As a result, you have 100 pennies to the dollar, or 10 dimes to the dollar, 10 $10 to every $100, 100 $100's to every $1,000,and, well, I've never actually had a million dollar bill before.

That's not metric. It's decimal. Anything can be represented decimally, metric is a system of weights and measures with particular defined values.

There are times when weights are used in American cookbooks--when it's an ingredient that comes packaged in certain standard sizes, like a 15-oz can of beans. Or items that get weighed at the store, like meats. So I think the idea of knowing the weight of the ingredient is not completely alien. Just the idea of using the scale. And metric.

One thing that strikes me as odd is that the resistance to the scale runs somewhat counter to the impulse to sell every kind of gadget for the kitchen. You'd think the fact that most American kitchens don't have one would be a marketing opportunity for someone. It has to be sold as labor- and thought-saving, though.

"I think it's a matter of principle that one should always try to avoid eating one's friends."--Doctor Dolittle

blog: The Institute for Impure Science

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah-butt.....

Metric is a system of weights and measurements based on units of 10, NOT based on some long-dead King's uh,...appendage length or a series of units of 12 or 16. The foot is divided into 12, then into fractions, the pound is divided into 16 then into fractions, give me a fraction in decimal form, and I'll walk off, far, far away, I'm a cook, not a machinest or mill-wright.

Temperature in metric is based on 10's as well. The first celcius thermometer was a blank one, immersed in boiling water (at a sea level), a mark made on the themomter, then immersed in ice-water, and another mark made. The space between the two marks was divided by 100, or, if you like, in 10 units of 10. Thus, water boils at 100 and freezes at "0". Folks, it don't get much simpler than that.

What really burns me up is the cooking mags. On the better ones, the content, thoughtfulness, and pure intelligence is fantastic--except for the quantitites given of ingredients. The magazines make statements identifiying that weighing out flour is far more accurate, or weighing out chocolate chips/ coins, but then give amounts for sugar or butter in volume.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There may be some generalizations to be made here. Does this sound right?

- Non-North-American cookbooks generally use weight.

- In North America, professional cookbooks of all kinds, as well as advanced-amateur baking books and advanced-amateur books on unusual aspects of cookery (charcuterie, home brewing, whatever) often use weight.

That's definitely what I've found.

All of my modern cookbooks use weight measures bar the North American books.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that metric and weight must go hand-in-hand certainly doesn't hold true in the UK and Ireland. Perhaps this is changing for my generation and younger (I'm 33) but even still I don't have good intuition for grams or kilos, it's much better for pounds and ounces. Most cookbooks I've seen have weights in ounces and in grams, and you can take your pick. My mother, for example, would never have measured in grams, always in ounces.

The "Americans don't use scales" argument probably holds more water, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to point out the obvious here: there's a bunch of Yanks around these parts who believe that the UK is filled with cookbooks using a superior measurement system. The moment is ripe for the return of the Empire (at least on our cookbook shelves)!

Pray, what exact books can be had on your bonny shores that we 'Mercans can try to hunt down? Same goes for y'all in the other, better colonies. :wink:

Edited by Chris Amirault
adding reference to our Aussie & Kiwi friends (log)

Chris Amirault

eG Ethics Signatory

Sir Luscious got gator belts and patty melts

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah-butt.....

Metric is a system of weights and measurements based on units of 10,

Yes, metric is decimal, but there's more to it than that. The decimal part isn't what confuses people. The units still have meaning, and the meaning is what Americans don't really understand. If you say to the average American, It's 22 degress Centigrade outside, they don't have any idea if that means it's hot or cold. If you say a pound of butter, they know what that is, but a kilo of butter is unknown.

"I think it's a matter of principle that one should always try to avoid eating one's friends."--Doctor Dolittle

blog: The Institute for Impure Science

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, any intuition I have about centigrade temperatures comes from darkroom work, so as long as it's around 20C, I know it's about 68F, and I know that 0C is freezing, and 100C is boiling, but move away from those reference points, and I have to start thinking about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As was mentioned here on the Kitchen Scale Manifesto topic, Michael Ruhlman's Ratio would seem at first glance to be a great example of a book that uses weights: he starts out with a section on the importance of the scale. Immediately, though, he starts talking about circumstances in which it's more convenient to use volume measurements (he says, for instance, that "it's easier to measure out a cup of corn than 5 ounces"). And I'm sure this was undoubtedly at the insistence of the publisher, but in the very next section he says that a scale isn't necessary to use the book. The recipes themselves are a mishmash of volume and weight -- for example, you get a lime peanut vinaigrette recipe that calls for 1/4 lime juice, 1/4 cup peanut butter and, yet, 4 ounces of oil.

It's unfortunate that he couldn't follow through on his insistence on how important a scale is. My guess is that as much as an author might want to use weights, American publishers are convinced that American home cooks won't buy a book that uses them exclusively.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem that, for a publisher looking to move the ball forward on this issue, the most painless thing to do in a cookbook (or any written recipe) context would be offer alternate measurements in parentheses. Once such a system is set up it represents little additional work. Indeed, a recipe tester (in this case, somebody who writes cookbooks for chefs) I spoke to recently told me she works in metric weights and then does a bulk conversion to volume using a standardized table, 1 cup of flour = x grams, etc. At the very least, a publisher could offer its assumptions in an editorial note: "for the purposes of all our recipes, 1 cup of flour = x grams." That way at least those of us willing to use scales could do the conversions ourselves. But as it stands, with a few notable exceptions, we're mostly kept in the dark about what a cup means in any given recipe.

Being an author is a little bit like being a screenwriter, in that there's a whole hierarchy in which you're on the bottom. If the editor, director, whatever wants things a certain way, that's how they're likely to happen. You have a little bit of political capital to spend and need to pick your battles. Having never written a cookbook, I have no idea how hard I'd fight for weight. But I certainly wouldn't want to do anything to damage sales, and the fact of the matter is that a weight-only cookbook will sell fewer copies. Still, I think I'd at least try to get both weight and volume measures included. There's so little cost to doing this, and everybody in the industry knows the superiority of weight, so I have no idea why this doesn't just get made standard operating procedure.

Steven A. Shaw aka "Fat Guy"
Co-founder, Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, sshaw@egstaff.org
Proud signatory to the eG Ethics code
Director, New Media Studies, International Culinary Center (take my food-blogging course)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's how Rose Levy Beranbaum's books are written. They actually give the weight by ounces and grams, and give volume measurements as well, so there are three choices for readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I visited a used bookstore yesterday, one with a large cookbook selection, and noted that a lot of American cookbook titles promise to impart secrets of professional and/or famous chefs. Ironically, none of them used weight-based measurement, which I consider to be the biggest professional 'secret' -at least where baking & pastry are concerned.

So, I think that Americans would accept scales quite readily -if they were told that the scale was the real secret of great cooking.

Two weeks ago, I saw one in use on America's Test Kitchen as they made Almost No-Knead bread. I guess I should send a fan letter (for the scale) recommending that the scale make more appearances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's how Rose Levy Beranbaum's books are written.

Yes, RLB's books are very good that way--all of the information you could ask for presented in neat little tables. And it would seem not have hurt the sales of those books one bit. It is more work for the typesetter to do that--you can't just plunk lots of tables down randomly on a page. So it costs more. But relative to the rest of the costs of a cookbook, it's probably not that much. You're already paying for complicated layout, anyway. Somebody has to compile that information in some way, and check that it's correct (ok, I know they'll skip that step). The big remaining problem is that publishers still perceive it as a negative from a sales perspective, or at least not a positive (it won't sell additional copies, so why have additional cost?). How to change their minds? I don't know. I know from first-hand experience that that sort of inertia can be hard to overcome. They would have to see a book sell big numbers because it had weight measures.

"I think it's a matter of principle that one should always try to avoid eating one's friends."--Doctor Dolittle

blog: The Institute for Impure Science

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to point out the obvious here: there's a bunch of Yanks around these parts who believe that the UK is filled with cookbooks using a superior measurement system. The moment is ripe for the return of the Empire (at least on our cookbook shelves)!

Pray, what exact books can be had on your bonny shores that we 'Mercans can try to hunt down? Same goes for y'all in the other, better colonies. :wink:

As I've said, pretty much ALL our books are now metric (and of course weight) based. (Except for small quantities being in teaspoons and sometimes tablespoons - "Nobody's perfect!")

So, here are a handful of interesting books you might not have seen (yet) -

And all of these use metric measures ONLY - no pounds, and no cups.

Sarah Raven's Garden Cookbook http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sarah-Ravens-Garden-Cookbook-Raven/dp/0747588708/

Ottolenghi http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ottolenghi-Cookbook-Yotam/dp/0091922348/

Classic Bull http://www.amazon.co.uk/Classic-Bull-Accidental-Restaurateurs-Cookbook/dp/0333766504/

Red Velvet & Chocolate Heartache http://www.amazon.co.uk/Red-Velvet-Chocolate-Heartache-feel-good/dp/0593062361/ (totally, wonderfully, off the wall, BTW)

River Cottage Handbook No 2 : Preserves http://www.amazon.co.uk/Preserves-River-Cottage-Handbook-No-2/dp/0747595321/

No Place Like Home (Leigh) http://www.amazon.co.uk/Place-Like-Home-Rowley-Leigh/dp/0007232411/

Family Food (Blumenthal) http://www.amazon.co.uk/Family-Food-Approach-Cooking-Penguin/dp/0140295399/ Heston's pretty relaxed about quantities generally

Tagine (Basan) http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tagine-Ghillie-Basan/dp/1845974786/

Those are probably considered slightly 'foodie' but no way 'pro'.

Some ('home recipe' books principally, I'd opine) are still published with imperial measures in brackets (pounds for solids, UK pints {not US pints!} for liquids) after the principal metric quantities.

Two I can lay my hands on now are

Recipes to know by heart http://www.amazon.co.uk/Recipes-Know-Heart-Xanthe-Clay/dp/1845333586/

The Ultimate Recipe Book http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ultimate-Recipe-Book-Good-Food/dp/0563522976/

These are actually pretty good books, despite the titles.

My 1984 paperback of Jane Grigson's Vegetable Book uses metric with imperial in brackets. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Jane-Grigsons-Vegetable-Penguin-Handbooks/dp/0140463526/

However the 1990 Feast Days by the iconoclastic Jennifer Patterson is of course exclusively Imperial! http://www.amazon.co.uk/Feast-Days-Spectator-Jennifer-Paterson/dp/0719548489/

I'll leave it to a publishing pro to discuss how and when the changeover happened!

Incidentally, all the above have my recommendation!

"If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch ... you must first invent the universe." - Carl Sagan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, a recipe tester (in this case, somebody who writes cookbooks for chefs) I spoke to recently told me she works in metric weights and then does a bulk conversion to volume using a standardized table, 1 cup of flour = x grams, etc.

Marcel Desaulniers might work this way. I've noticed that a lot of his recipes have, for lack of a better word, metric-osity to them. When it comes time to portion cake batter into two pans, it always seems that the batter weight is exactly 2000 grams (1000 in each pan), three pans, 3000 grams (again, 1000 in each pan), etc. I really like that about his books, but then he's nothing if not extremely precise. That said, his recipes never fail if you follow them as written.

Edited by fooey (log)

Fooey's Flickr Food Fotography

Brünnhilde, so help me, if you don't get out of the oven and empty the dishwasher, you won't be allowed anywhere near the table when we're flambeéing the Cherries Jubilee.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Similar Content

    • By Mutleyracers
      Hi all. I hope you are well. I am just into baking bread due to lockdown and need help. Ideally I would like modernist bread but the wife is not quite agreeing to that yet. So I would like some where to start for now until she comes around to the idea. After she has tasted all my amazing breads I make. 
       
      I would like this to be in metric rather than imperial.
       
      Thank you 
    • By Burmese Days
      Hello everyone,
       
      This is my first post, so please tell me if I've made any mistakes. I'd like to learn the ropes as soon as possible. 
       
      I first learned of this cookbook from The Mala Market, easily the best online source of high-quality Chinese ingredients in the west. In the About Us page, Taylor Holiday (the founder of Mala Market) talks about the cookbooks that inspired her.
      This piqued my interest and sent me down a long rabbit hole. I'm attempting to categorically share everything I've found about this book so far.
       
      Reading it online
      Early in my search, I found an online preview (Adobe Flash required). It shows you the first 29 pages. I've found people reference an online version you can pay for on the Chinese side of the internet. But to my skills, it's been unattainable.
       
      The Title
      Because this book was never sold in the west, the cover, and thus title, were never translated to English. Because of this, when you search for this book, it'll have several different names. These are just some versions I've found online - typos included.
      Sichuan (China) Cuisine in Both Chinese and English Si Chuan(China) Cuisinein (In English & Chinese) China Sichuan Cuisine (in Chinese and English) Chengdu China: Si Chuan Ke Xue Ji Shu Chu Ban She Si Chuan(China) Cuisinein (Chinese and English bilingual) 中国川菜:中英文标准对照版 For the sake of convenience, I'll be referring to the cookbook as Sichuan Cuisine from now on.

       
      Versions
      There are two versions of Sichuan Cuisine. The first came out in 2010 and the second in 2014. In an interview from Flavor & Fortune, a (now defunct) Chinese cooking
      magazine, the author clarifies the differences.
      That is all of the information I could find on the differences. Nothing besides that offhanded remark. The 2014 edition seems to be harder to source and, when available, more expensive.
       
      Author(s)

      In the last section, I mentioned an interview with the author. That was somewhat incorrect. There are two authors!
      Lu Yi (卢一) President of Sichuan Tourism College, Vice Chairman of Sichuan Nutrition Society, Chairman of Sichuan Food Fermentation Society, Chairman of Sichuan Leisure Sports Management Society Du Li (杜莉) Master of Arts, Professor of Sichuan Institute of Tourism, Director of Sichuan Cultural Development Research Center, Sichuan Humanities and Social Sciences Key Research Base, Sichuan Provincial Department of Education, and member of the International Food Culture Research Association of the World Chinese Culinary Federation Along with the principal authors, two famous chefs checked the English translations.
      Fuchsia Dunlop - of Land of Plenty fame Professor Shirley Cheng - of Hyde Park New York's Culinary Institute of America Fuchsia Dunlop was actually the first (and to my knowledge, only) Western graduate from the school that produced the book.
       

      Recipes
      Here are screenshots of the table of contents.  It has some recipes I'm a big fan of.
       
      ISBN
      ISBN 10: 7536469640   ISBN 13: 9787536469648 As far as I can tell, the first and second edition have the same ISBN #'s. I'm no librarian, so if anyone knows more about how ISBN #'s relate to re-releases and editions, feel free to chime in.
       
      Publisher
      Sichuan Science and Technology Press 四川科学技术出版社  
      Cover
      Okay... so this book has a lot of covers.
      The common cover A red cover A white cover A white version of the common cover An ornate and shiny cover  There may or may not be a "Box set." At first, I thought this was a difference in book editions, but that doesn't seem to be the case. As far as covers go, I'm at a loss. If anybody has more info, I'm all ears.
       
      Buying the book
      Alright, so I've hunted down many sites that used to sell it and a few who still have it in stock. Most of them are priced exorbitantly.
       
      AbeBooks.com ($160 + $15 shipping) Ebay.com - used ($140 + $4 shipping) PurpleCulture.net ($50 + $22 shipping) Amazon.com ($300 + $5 shipping + $19 tax) A few other sites in Chinese  
      I bought a copy off of PurpleCuture.net on April 14th. When I purchased Sichuan Cuisine, it said there was only one copy left. That seems to be a lie to create false urgency for the buyer. My order never updated past processing, but after emailing them, I was given a tracking code. It has since landed in America and is in customs. I'll try to update this thread when (if) it is delivered.
       
      Closing thoughts
      This book is probably not worth all the effort that I've put into finding it. But what is worth effort, is preserving knowledge. It turns my gut to think that this book will never be accessible to chefs that have a passion for learning real Sichuan food. As we get inundated with awful recipes from Simple and quick blogs, it becomes vital to keep these authentic sources available. As the internet chugs along, more and more recipes like these will be lost. 
       
      You'd expect the internet to keep information alive, but in many ways, it does the opposite. In societies search for quick and easy recipes, a type of evolutionary pressure is forming. It's a pressure that mutates recipes to simpler and simpler versions of themselves. They warp and change under consumer pressure till they're a bastardized copy of the original that anyone can cook in 15 minutes. The worse part is that these new, worse recipes wear the same name as the original recipe. Before long, it becomes harder to find the original recipe than the new one. 
       
      In this sense, the internet hides information. 
       
    • By TexasMBA02
      After batting about .500 with my previous approach to macarons, I came across Pierre Herme's base recipe online.  After two flawless batches of macarons, I've been re-energized to continue to work at mastering them.  Specifically, I want to try more of his recipes.  My conundrum is that he has, as far as I can tell, two macaron cookbooks and I don't know which one I should get.  I can't tell if one is just an updated version of the other or a reissue or what the differences really are.  I was hoping somebody had some insight.  I have searched online and haven't seen both books referenced in the same context or contrasted at all.
       
      This one appears to be older.

       
      And this one appears to be the newer of the two.

       
      Any insight would be helpful.
       
      Thanks,
       
    • By K8CanCook
      Update!! --- the sale is still going on at Amazon as of Sunday (11/24) at 11:15am EST
      ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
       
      Did anyone note the sale price on Modernist Cuisine today (maybe yesterday)? Amazon and Target dropped the set of tomes to $379!!!
       
      This price looks like it will change after today...so get it ASAP!!!

      https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/0982761007?pf_rd_p=183f5289-9dc0-416f-942e-e8f213ef368b&pf_rd_r=SRFCHFB5EFTGAA8AZHJX
      -or-
      https://www.target.com/p/modernist-cuisine-by-nathan-myhrvold-chris-young-maxime-bilet-hardcover/-/A-77279948
    • By Bollo
      I need a book on the application of rotavapor machine. I've searched something on web but i can't find something strictly professional for the kitchen please help me. To improve the research. 
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...