Technological Cooking

[boudin noir]

I’m new to egullet. I find it to be a useful and novel source of cooking and food related information. I love the input from home cooks ( of which I am one) and from people who cook in a more professional capacity. I have been cooking about 40 years. I have traveled a great deal and have eaten wonderful food around the world. I am an accomplished cook.

I don’t understand the trend to making cooking complicated, expensive and time consuming. I’m referring to sous vide technique and other so called technological advances. I am not a luddite. I embrace technological advances. However, for me the most important issue is what ends up on the plate. I have eaten sous vide cooked meats at highly regarded restaurants. It was OK. I can do as well or better with traditional methods. What am I missing?

[dcarch]

"---What am I missing? "

An open mind? (just kidding )

A sous vide cooker is an appliance, just like an oven, a grill, a toaster, a microwave----. It does not guarantee the food will taste good.

It cooks meat with a different texture. Whether you like it or not is a personal preference.

Sous vide cooked brisket has nothing to do with stewed or braised brisket. Which one tastes better, apples or oranges?

Besides, "high tech" cooking provides a lot of visual drama, theatrics, in addition to unique flavors.

dcarch

[gdenby]

At the core, for me, it is not so much a matter of using a particular piece of technology, but understanding the whys and hows of cooking. If I had spent a lifetime in the kitchen, as my mother did, and had the acquaintance of older and more accomplished cooks as a guide, as she did, I suppose my cooking would be a lot better than it is.

However, being mostly a casual cook until the last 10 years, many recipes left me bewildered. As an example, my early attempts at baking bread were complete failures. Even with practice, my improvements were very small. Once I came across recipes that described how to use a scale to precisely measure the amounts of flour and water for a particular kind of dough, the end results of my efforts were pleasantly better. A quick read thermometer to tell when the bread was done worked so much better than thumping on the top of the loaf. Having an IR thermometer to tell when the stone was well heated likewise improved the results.

The list goes on. I can make decent braised meat with a roaster and oven. I've tried cooking in paper, and with salt crusts. But for me, sous vide makes a good result much easier. I'm willing to make the trade of cost for effect.

The only thing I've done for many years was work at BBQ. It is one of the few things I think I do O.K. Spending 6 - 12 -24 hours tending a fire makes dropping something into a waterbath for a few days seem like a snap.

[nickrey]

I don’t understand the trend to making cooking complicated, expensive and time consuming. I’m referring to sous vide technique and other so called technological advances. I am not a luddite. I embrace technological advances. However, for me the most important issue is what ends up on the plate. I have eaten sous vide cooked meats at highly regarded restaurants. It was OK. I can do as well or better with traditional methods. What am I missing?

Welcome to eGullet. This should lead to some spirited debate.

I'm not sure what's complicated and time consuming about vacuum packing twenty steaks, cooking them at 55C for 3 hours then searing them off for service in a restaurant.

My suspicion is that you have eaten much more in the way of sous vide cooked elements of meals in restaurants than you have realized. Many use it as a matter of course without putting it on the menu.

Sous vide is a cooking method. Slow cooking is a cooking method. Grilling is a cooking method. The best chefs use these to their advantage to transform raw ingredients into a finished product. In a restaurant context sous vide makes everything replicable so no matter who cooks your meal it will come out the same. This is the aim of better restaurants: who can blame them for using something to help the process along.

My own experience is that not all things need to or indeed should be cooked sous vide. Other ingredients transform into something that cannot easily be achieved in any other way. What happens is dependent on the skill of the chef who sets up the way ingredients are treated and how long and at what temperature they are cooked.

Sous vide uses constant temperature to cook things using water as a medium. It is not complicated. Equipment specifically designed for the home cook is getting cheaper. My suspicion is that we are starting to move beyond the early adopter stage with the technology.

Many people enjoy the product of the cooking. If you don't, don't order it. Although given what I said above you may be destined to eating in grill restaurants if you want to avoid it.

Edited October 6, 2011 by nickrey (log)

[Peter the eater]

I have eaten sous vide cooked meats at highly regarded restaurants. It was OK. I can do as well or better with traditional methods. What am I missing?

I'm mostly a home cook and I love the concept of sous vide (which really needs a different name). I use a big stock pot on an electric stove with a decent thermometer which allows me to cook stuff +/- a degree or two Celcius. I use vacbags, ziplocks and old milk bags. The best part is no more "well done" anything.

And I don't need a panini press because all you really need is a pan and a weight.

[EatNopales]

If anything the whole concept behind Sous Vide is making cooking brainless not more complicated... I wouldn't be surprised if tidy consumer versions of Sous Vide machines become the next Microwave or Crock Pot.

That said... i am not entirely sold on Sous Vide... despite what the business people tell you the plastic is gonna leach (I've tasted it on restaurant food)... for many foods you can obtain reasonably similar results by wrapping the foods in a natural / organic things (like Banana leaves) and cooking in a convection oven etc.,

I think in the end it will become a widespread convenience item... and the real cooks & the cool kids will shun them... c'est la vie

[Mjx]

Is it everything it's supposed to be?

Well, yes, if you accept the concept of 'supposed to', here, since that hinges exclusively on subjective, personal reactions to the technology and its results.

. . . . What am I missing?

Nothing. It's just not your thing. What's great about food and its preparation is that it offers something to everyone. There doesn't seem to be any basis here for contention, or debate, even.

[JadeShing]

Its true, that what may seem distasteful or "ok" to you may seem great to others. Example: I had dinner at a semi famous portugese restaurant with one of my girlfriends the other day, neither of us having experienced much of this type of cuisine. While I found it quite pleasant but a bit pricey, she found it boring and didn't know "what" she was eating that was so amazing. Now they said it was slow cooked in its meats for so many hours to bring the taste out etc etc as was the description on the menu but in the end its really personal preference.

And it seems for me the restaurants with the more open kitchens will try to sell their hi tech ultra clean kitchens as a showpiece as well as a cooking equipment

[PedroG]

. . . .

I have eaten sous vide cooked meats at highly regarded restaurants. It was OK. I can do as well or better with traditional methods. What am I missing?

Welcome to the eGullet forums, boudin noir!

You could do the community a great favor by explaining how one can do better with traditional methods:

• Cooking tough meat fork-tender yet medium-rare
  
• Cooking eggs with a set white (neither runny nor rubbery) and a creamy yolk
  

We are eagerly awaiting your explanations.

[rotuts]

PG put his finger on two important points for SV.

"tender" meat often lacks flavor. NB Filet Mignon. Chuck "eye" SV for a 'roast' with proper treatments of the exterior just cant be made rare anyother way. is it for you? maybe maybe not.

SV is also economical in terms of energy use and most important for people who are busy, allows a big quantity step up adding very little prep time for food than can be safely kept in a cold refirgerator for quite some time or frozen.

and those SV eggs:

[boudin noir]

I think what this discussion can be boiled down to (or sous vided in 12 hours ) is the whether what is technically possible makes a significant and positive difference in the food experience. I can soft boil and egg with set whites. The yolk will be creamy with perhaps some of the edge of the yolk more firmly set. I can do this in a short period of time. Is this a less satisfactory culinary result? It may not be a technical tour de force, but it is fine eating.

I have not eaten sous vide brisket, beef chuck, or ox tails so I can't comment on how they would taste cooked rare. I have had sous vide medium rare pork shoulder. I would not trade it for my 24 hour slow roasted pork shoulder. Just because something can be cooked and eaten rare doesn't mean that it should be. I do love a good rare or medium rare steak that can be done quite nicely in a cast iron pan.

I see sous vide being useful in restaurants. I'm waiting to be convinced for home use.

[EatNopales]

I think what this discussion can be boiled down to (or sous vided in 12 hours ) is the whether what is technically possible makes a significant and positive difference in the food experience. I can soft boil and egg with set whites. The yolk will be creamy with perhaps some of the edge of the yolk more firmly set. I can do this in a short period of time. Is this a less satisfactory culinary result? It may not be a technical tour de force, but it is fine eating.

I have not eaten sous vide brisket, beef chuck, or ox tails so I can't comment on how they would taste cooked rare. I have had sous vide medium rare pork shoulder. I would not trade it for my 24 hour slow roasted pork shoulder. Just because something can be cooked and eaten rare doesn't mean that it should be. I do love a good rare or medium rare steak that can be done quite nicely in a cast iron pan.

I see sous vide being useful in restaurants. I'm waiting to be convinced for home use.

That is a very important question.... Smoking causes Lung Cancer... eating Rare red meat causes Colon Cancer.

Now don't get me wrong I love myself a venison steak barely scared on the griddle... with that opulent purpleish hue that looks more like Sashimi than steak... but there is a reason no sustainable, densely populated culture (of Homo Sapiens) ever existed on rare meats.

Yes, just about every pre-industrial culture had its celebratory raw / rare flesh once in a blue moon... but you just can't build a viable society on eating raw / rare meats.... wait a minute.. this might solve the Social Security "crisis" as long as we are willing to allow health insurance exclusions for colon cancers... okay never mind... I am all for this... for the next stimulus I vote that every American household get a Sous Vide machine.

[slkinsey]

Every technological advance in cooking has been met with some doubters. Let's rephrase some of the OP, and you get the idea:

"I don’t understand the trend to making cooking complicated, expensive and time consuming. I’m referring to sous vide technique stoves, pots and pans, and other so called technological advances. I am not a luddite. I embrace technological advances. However, for me the most important issue is what ends up on the plate. I have eaten sous vide cooked meats cooked on a stove at highly regarded restaurants. It was OK. I can do as well or better with traditional methods using a sharp stick, some hot rocks and an open campfire. What am I missing?"

[rotuts]

and thats laughing with you as they say.

fine work!

[EatNopales]

Every technological advance in cooking has been met with some doubters. Let's rephrase some of the OP, and you get the idea:

"I don’t understand the trend to making cooking complicated, expensive and time consuming. I’m referring to sous vide technique stoves, pots and pans, and other so called technological advances. I am not a luddite. I embrace technological advances. However, for me the most important issue is what ends up on the plate. I have eaten sous vide cooked meats cooked on a stove at highly regarded restaurants. It was OK. I can do as well or better with traditional methods using a sharp stick, some hot rocks and an open campfire. What am I missing?"

Or you could also consider that for every 1,000 seeming technological advances in cooking only 1 pans out & becomes part of tradition.

The microwave is one of the most adopted technological advances in cooking whoopee do... lets all blindly absorb every new idea as the next fire.

Finally... sharp stick, hot rocks & open campfire still produce some the best gastronomic results available. The fact that people would prefer to use a Microwave is more a blemish on our preferences than some great triumph.

[Kouign Aman]

I think the closed minds are those who attack the op instead of those who address reasonable questions.

For example, on this board we've seen people bemoan 'mass produced' or 'fake' food, yet fall in love wtih a single item produced with the same technology (fake lemonade, vs some Modernist lemon event containing No Lemon!).

I think for the home cook, the sous vide result probably is convenience, and the ability to budget. For the restaurant cook, ditto, the same plus some extra ability to fine tune and play games.

And for some folks, its just the fun of it.

Cooking is full of contradictions, even among those who post most authoritatively.

For stew, we sear before stewing, and are told its critical for full flavor, yet for sous vide, we sear after 'stewing', because we want that texture and appearance. Clearly, long cooking in the presence of the seared surface isnt critical to good flavor, just to a specific flavor.

I love my microwave. It thaws, steams, boils water, par-cooks, melts butter and otherwise saves me hours during the week.

[gdenby]

I have not eaten sous vide brisket, beef chuck, or ox tails so I can't comment on how they would taste cooked rare. I have had sous vide medium rare pork shoulder. I would not trade it for my 24 hour slow roasted pork shoulder. Just because something can be cooked and eaten rare doesn't mean that it should be. I do love a good rare or medium rare steak that can be done quite nicely in a cast iron pan.

I have made portions of pork shoulder sous vide a few times. I have tried searing both before and after. Searing before worked better. I would not have considered serving the meat without a browning. what I have made is not quite as good as a long cook over charcoal. But it is close, and I can use fairly small pieces of shoulder that would dry out over a fire.

I have done pork loin and beef top round, and served them pink. They were good, but the portions of beef that I tossed in a pan afterwards were improved.

I haven't had really good results yet with beef chuck. I am not yet familiar enough with the differences between beef short ribs from near the clod section, and those nearer the back. As a result, my "traditional" short ribs vary in quality. On the other hand, every attempt made through sous vide has had eyes popping. From what I have read, the long low temperature cooking allows enzyme activity to break down the collagen even better than braising. The texture of the meat is surprising and delightful.

Spice flavors become quite intense.

To get back to the original question, my sous vide set-up is not very expensive. I just bought the cheapest controller I could hook up to my slow cookers. Because I don't have a circulator, cooks take longer. Hopefully the controller will last long enough that some of its cost will be off set by the very low cost of cooking this way.

[IndyRob]

I think what this discussion can be boiled down to (or sous vided in 12 hours ) is the whether what is technically possible makes a significant and positive difference in the food experience.

Once, on successive nights, I served beef filet. The first night I did a traditional preparation, and on the second I did sous vide. To me, there were plusses and minuses to each, so I asked my wife (who had not seen me cook either). She preferred the second night's steak (sous vide). Still, subsequently she made it clear that she'd rather I'd do it in the traditional manner. So there's a big perception factor.

As others have said, sous vide need not be expensive, slow, or complicated. My sous vide setup centers around a $40 Presto Kitchen Kettle (which we already had), a FoodSaver (which I received as a Christmas gift), and a Thermapen (which was on my Christmas list). The only penalty is some time spent stabilizing the temperature.

Sous vide can take seconds. IIRC, Keller's poached lobster is overcooked after 15 minutes. Some very thinly sliced filet (as for an Arby's style sandwich) can be cooked to perfect med rare in a minute or two - even from frozen. Can't do that in a pan.

But for me, a big part of it is just adding to my arsenal and understanding, and having a proven theoretical model when I'm trying something unique.

[nickrey]

I think what this discussion can be boiled down to (or sous vided in 12 hours ) is the whether what is technically possible makes a significant and positive difference in the food experience. I can soft boil and egg with set whites. The yolk will be creamy with perhaps some of the edge of the yolk more firmly set. I can do this in a short period of time. Is this a less satisfactory culinary result? It may not be a technical tour de force, but it is fine eating.

I have not eaten sous vide brisket, beef chuck, or ox tails so I can't comment on how they would taste cooked rare. I have had sous vide medium rare pork shoulder. I would not trade it for my 24 hour slow roasted pork shoulder. Just because something can be cooked and eaten rare doesn't mean that it should be. I do love a good rare or medium rare steak that can be done quite nicely in a cast iron pan.

I see sous vide being useful in restaurants. I'm waiting to be convinced for home use.

I cook, chill, and freeze meat portions. I defrost the package in the sink keeping the temp above 57C while preparing accompaniments.. Then I sear and serve with my heated up prepared sauce that is pre-made using sous vide meat juices. Fabulous beef that is as tender as the most expensive cuts but has the flavour of the hard working cuts and final preparation within ten minutes.. This can be done at home using sous vide but not anywhere near as effecitvely using any other cooking technique.

I also pre-prepare food for an infirm relative. For example, make a cacciatore sauce, seal some in a pouch with some chicken breast and cook sous vide, chill, and freeze. Teach them to reheat without overcooking. Perfect home-cooked meals in no time.

All it takes for any technique to be useful is knowledge of how it works, a willingness to experiment, and imagination.

[PedroG]

Sorry, boudin noir, I hanged you - yesterday at 07:30 AM - in the water bath, together with liverwurst, green bacon and sauerkraut, set the temperature to 80^oC and let you simmer until lunch time. Then I just pulled you out of the water, served the contents of the bag on warmed plates, making up a nice little metzgete, and ate you up with relish, leaving only the skin. Even the bacon's rind was completely converted to tasty gelatin.

[boudin noir]

PedroG, Your lunch looks to be very seductive. You could win me over with that one. Unfortunately life expectancy following that meal can't be more that 48-72 hour as the result od massive coronary occlusion.

[rotuts]

I think PG put an aspirin in there somewhere. those sausages are also probably loaded with statins.

Edited October 8, 2011 by rotuts (log)

[dcarch]

I enjoy taking a completely frozen solid block of meat and go directly into the sous vide cooker without hours or days of thawing.

I enjoy reheating in the sous vide cooker leftover meat without overcooking.

I am not aware of other cooking methods that can do that.

dcarch

[JAZ]

I think what this discussion can be boiled down to (or sous vided in 12 hours ) is the whether what is technically possible makes a significant and positive difference in the food experience.

Or you could also consider that for every 1,000 seeming technological advances in cooking only 1 pans out & becomes part of tradition.

The microwave is one of the most adopted technological advances in cooking whoopee do... lets all blindly absorb every new idea as the next fire.

Two things come to mind:

First, it seems to me that the technological advances that make it into most home kitchens do so because they either improve consistency and reliability (ovens and stove tops or scales) or they make the cooking process faster and more efficient (stand mixers, food processors); sometimes they probably do a little of each. While it might be true that some cooks can achieve great results without these advances, for the average cook, they improve the final dishes and make them easier to reproduce reliably.

Second, any kitchen appliance or tool can only be as good as the person using it. Can bad food come out of a sous vide set-up? Of course, just as bad food can come out of a regular oven or a food processor. Anyone who tells you a piece of equipment can, by itself, magically transform a bad or mediocre cook into a good one is trying to sell you something.

[boudin noir]

My final statement in this string. I have enjoyed and have been enlightened by the discourse. I am a technophile and was looking for justification to add another device to my crowded kitchen space. I think I have found a limited place for sous vide in my cooking arsenal. I will probably wait until the cost of good immersion circulaters comes down since I don't believe I would be using this more than several times a month. PedroG's lunch was the coup de gras!