Risotto

[Ashen]

I am wary of setting as the arbiter of standards people who say 'the only good risotto I've ever eaten is my own.' Those recipes tend to be ... unique, rather than exemplars of perfection.

I am not sure if this was meant to refer to my comments or not, but maybe I should be a little more clear. I only claim to know what constitutes "good risotto" for me. The reason I know this is that I have actually experimented with it myself . The toasted vs not toasted creaminess issue is not news to me. In the past I have even tried and actually made a decent risotto with full cook brown rice. If you think stirring for 17 to 20 mins is long , try it with brown rice. LOL

My other issues with his procedure that make it not for me is the fact that I have never made risotto that took the exact same amount of liquid as the ones before. Change the variety of rice, humidity level on that day or just the added flavouring ingredients and it is a whole different ballgame as to how much liquid the rice needs to get to the nexus where you have proper creaminess, desired looseness, and firmness in the center of the rice grain.

The other issue I have with cooking it in all the liquid at once at a boil is that you can easily , ( although not all the time) burst the rice cuticle which produces a texture change I don't like. Toasting strangely enough seems to help against this happening.

So this isn't just me knowing one way home and refusing to look for something different. It is simply the way that produces the product I prefer. I won't claim to be an arbiter for what anyone else likes though. Just because I like vanilla ice cream, it doesn't mean the people who like chocolate (Or cake ) are wrong.

Edited October 15, 2011 by Ashen (log)

[Broken English]

I won't be trying it. I get wonderful results with Carnaroli, and I see no reason to mess with what seems a more complicated method. I think the biggest problem with risotto in a lot of restaurants that aren't high end is that they use Arborio, which is in every way inferior to either Carnaroli or Vialone Nano (although I prefer Carnaroli).

I've also taken to finishing my risotto's with butter and mascarpone, and generally omit the Parmesan altogether. I find it's creamier yet less rich, if that makes sense. It gives a texture and flavor profile I prefer as well.

[HowardLi]

Any accomplished chef who uses "pure win" in an article is OK by me. I'll try this.

[nickrey]

I am wary of setting as the arbiter of standards people who say 'the only good risotto I've ever eaten is my own.' Those recipes tend to be ... unique, rather than exemplars of perfection.

Let's just change that to "never had a good one in a restaurant" and be done with it. Risotto is an a la minute dish, not something you par cook and then sit for hours finishing it off in a blaze of glory. Sorry guys, it just doesn't seem to work.

[ScottyBoy]

Hmmmmmmmm...

Tried it and am not a fan, I started documenting the procedure but stopped when I realized the end result was not going to be up to snuff..

I did not add any cream and I think that addition is what makes this version creamy. 3/4 a cup of cream whipped to stiff peaks? Yeah that would make anything creamy...

This was slightly creamy chicken stock with cooked short grain rice in it. I'll be sticking with my old school method which people are already very happy with every time.

[slkinsey]

I am wary of setting as the arbiter of standards people who say 'the only good risotto I've ever eaten is my own.' Those recipes tend to be ... unique, rather than exemplars of perfection.

Let's just change that to "never had a good one in a restaurant" and be done with it. Risotto is an a la minute dish, not something you par cook and then sit for hours finishing it off in a blaze of glory. Sorry guys, it just doesn't seem to work.

The risotto I had at Per Se was pretty damn good. Although given the price point and the meal structure, I suppose it's quite possible that their risotto is made from scratch for each table.

I've also been to restaurants in Italy that made very good risotto, although these always said that it would take around 30 minutes for preparation.

[slkinsey]

Where does this idea of "toasting" the rice to brown it come from?

It's not anything I've ever seen done for risotto. Normally the process is that you melt your fat and soften your aromatic vegetable base, then you add the rice and stir it around until the rice is evenly coated with fat, and then you start adding the liquid. The idea that the rice should be browned in the fat is an entirely new concept to me, and not one that seems traditional at all. Is this some new practice that has become fashionable? I flipped through Hazan's seminal book, and although it says that the rice is "lightly toasted" in the overall description of risotto technique, I wonder if this may be a mistake of translation since all of her actual recipes merely specify that the rice is mixed with the fat and vegetable base only until it is evenly coated with fat before the first addition of liquid.

I think it's interesting how certain relatively recent innovations or tweaks to old traditional preparations have become "standard practice" in some people's minds. Browning gnocchi is one such practice that immediately comes to mind. Never heard of it until perhaps a decade ago, and now many people seem to believe that this is just part of how you make gnocchi.

[jmolinari]

I'm with scottyboy. I tried it last night without the cream and it was less creamy than my standard traditional method. If it made better risotto I'd put up with premeasuring everything ( a pain in and of itself) but it wasn't.

I have known for a long time that mixing continuously is unnecessary, so my normal

Method isn't that much harder.

[ScottyBoy]

I never have really browned the rice to start it. When I do my "toasting" step it's more of a quick light fry in the fat and then the stock goes in. And any vegetable base I plan to use (onions, garlic, etc) are cooked before the rice goes in.

[slkinsey]

I never have really browned the rice to start it. When I do my "toasting" step it's more of a quick light fry in the fat and then the stock goes in. And any vegetable base I plan to use (onions, garlic, etc) are cooked before the rice goes in.

Right. But if you are softening the vegetables separately and reserving them, then frying the rice in hot oil (albeit briefly), then adding the reserved vegetable base back in, then starting your liquid additions... this is already a deviation from the traditional technique. (Or are you saying that the rice goes into the pot together with the vegetables and fat?) To the extent that anyone notices a reduction in creaminess when the rice is "toasted" compared to "not-toasted" this may reflect a misunderstanding of the traditional technique, because the rice isn't supposed to be fried. All you really want to do when you add the rice is stir it around enough to coat it with fat. Even lightly frying the rice in the fat by itself would, I think, lead to some reduction in creaminess. Also, if one is not interested in browning the rice slightly, there is no reason to go to the special trouble of frying the rice separately.

I might as well point out that tostare in Italian doesn't exactly mean "toasted" like we think. It is often used to mean something like "cooked a while in the fat." If you have a look at this YouTube video you will hear the chef say variations of tostare a number of times, and yet it's quite clear that nothing is being browned or fried (also note that the rice is added to the pot together with the butter and onions).

Edited October 15, 2011 by slkinsey (log)

[ScottyBoy]

Veggies sweat down, rice added to that, cooked for a second then stock goes in a cap at a time. Seems to render correct results from what I've been taught and have eaten.

[djyee100]

Where does this idea of "toasting" the rice to brown it come from?

It's not anything I've ever seen done for risotto. Normally the process is that you melt your fat and soften your aromatic vegetable base, then you add the rice and stir it around until the rice is evenly coated with fat, and then you start adding the liquid. The idea that the rice should be browned in the fat is an entirely new concept to me...

I think it's an ambiguity of translation. I've encountered a couple chef-teachers who instructed their students to "toast" the rice for risotto. It only meant heating the rice in oil for a minute or so until the rice is hot and covered with oil. (One teacher said, "almost popping.") The rice is not supposed to be browned. This frying step was supposed to help prevent the rice from turning mushy during cooking.

ETA: The "toasting" step is done after cooking the aromatic base, in the same pan. Not so different from the traditional method.

Edited October 15, 2011 by djyee100 (log)

[Ashen]

Yep same with my mention of toasted vs non toasted.

I used that reference since it was the nomenclature of the article to distinguish between this step and just adding a good amount of liquid and rice at the same time.

To me it just meant putting the rice in with the softened veg and fat and stirring about for 30 -40 secs approx to coat then starting to add stock.

[ScottyBoy]

Just as I do it. Though I'm forgetting that I add the splash of white wine before the stock goes in. A old chef I worked with told me it "activates" the starch. Donno if that's true but just something I do because I always have.

[nickrey]

I also learnt my initial Risotto making technique from Marcella Hazan and agree with your interpretation Sam.

Giorgio Locatelli, who has a Michelin-starred restaurant in London that serves traditional Italian food, describes the tostatura in his book 'Made in Italy" as serving the purpose of making sure every grain of rice is coated and warmed up and will cook uniformly. Nothing about toasting.

It appears that he also cooks every risotto from scratch in his restaurant so that's another to add to your list Sam.

Someone above stated that arborio is not a good rice to make risotto from, which is a broad statement that I would challenge. Both arborio and carnaroli are superfino rices, which are the largest. Vialone nano is a semifino, or dwarf rice. They are used for different types of dishes. In my experience vialone nano and carnaroli are more forgiving than arborio when cooking. I typically use arborio for risotto and, again to quote Locatelli, arborio is "still the rice most people use to cook risotto at home."

Edited October 15, 2011 by nickrey (log)

[ScottyBoy]

I've never used anything but arborio, maybe I should check out some other grains.

[ChrisTaylor]

Aborio isn't bad. In Australia, at least, it's easier (and significantly cheaper) to get your hands on. The other grains are just different. The way it was explained to me by one of the ladies at my local Italian deli is that the different varieties suit different purposes--it depends on what you're putting in your risotto and what you want the end result to be like in terms of texture.

Aborio also makes a decent sub. for calaspara ...

[slkinsey]

I've never used anything but arborio, maybe I should check out some other grains.

Vialone nano is a rice variety from the Veneto, and it's more suited to keeping a bit of bite in the Venetian-style soupy risotto (sull'onda) than the creamy-style of risotto that is more well-known in the US.

[slkinsey]

Here is something I wrote back in 2005:

Arborio is a softer rice more appropriate for the creamy Lombardia/Emilia-Romagna/Piemonte style of risotto while Vialone Nano is a toothier rice best suited for the soupy Veneto/Fruili style. They are completely different, and neither one is entirely satisfactory when used in the other's style. It is worth noting that the creamy style is by far the most common in the US, with the "sull' onda" style being virtually unknown over here (it's actually the style I prefer for seafood risotto). It people have the perception that Arborio is "better" than Vialone Nano, that may be part of the reason: they're not using the Vialone Nano correctly.

Carnaroli is a hybrid of Vialone Nano and Japanese sushi rice. It was designed to be in the middle between Arborio and Vialone Nano: both creamy and al-dente at the same time. It's okay and easier to work with than Arborio. But if I am making a creamy risotto, I'd rather just use Arborio and pay attention.

I should point out that these three rices are not the only kids on the block. There are other varieties suitable for risotto, like Superfino Baldo.

[nickrey]

And from the stirring/non stirring debate:

I bought some Vialone Nano rice last week and made risotto with it for the first time this evening.

That means I've now made risotto with Arborio, Carnaroli, and Vialone Nano.

I'd have to say that while they all make excellent risottos, they tend to absorb different amounts of stock. You really need to taste and know when to stop cooking rather than just use the amount of liquid recommended in a cookbook. Moreover, all come up with a different texture in terms of: 1. creaminess from absorbing the stock, and 2. the al dente nature of the finished product.

If you have only ever had one type of rice in risotto, you might be tempted to think that risotto made with a different one was somehow wrong.

My thought is that each would best be matched with different types of core ingredients to ensure a pleasant texture profile to the finished dish.

Does anyone have experience in using different risotto rices for different dishes?

Nickrey, here in Italy Arborio and Carnaroli are generally used when preparing meat risottos or plain milanese and piedmontese white risotto with truffles. Vialone Nano is preferred for vegetable and seafood risottos. It does absorb more liquid and has a slightly different bite. In my opinion it's also a little tastier than the other two. Of course, all three can be used for any risotto with good results.

[Ashen]

I really like carnaroli. It certainly is more forgiving on the cooking side for texture and the end product is usually creamier than made with Arborio. That being said, Arborio or even what they simply call, "italian style rice" here can make very good risotto.

I have told my wife in the past , that if we go to italy, I will need an empty suitcase to bring back different kinds of rice. lol

Since most on this thread like risotto and seem a bit adventurous I hvae a fun experiment you can try.. Switch out the rice for millet but use risotto cooking technique. The results are deliciously suprising. I just had a why not moment one day when I neeed to use up some millet, I thought was getting a bit too old.

[Broken English]

Someone above stated that arborio is not a good rice to make risotto from, which is a broad statement that I would challenge. Both arborio and carnaroli are superfino rices, which are the largest. Vialone nano is a semifino, or dwarf rice. They are used for different types of dishes. In my experience vialone nano and carnaroli are more forgiving than arborio when cooking. I typically use arborio for risotto and, again to quote Locatelli, arborio is "still the rice most people use to cook risotto at home."

That was me. By that I meant that in a restaurant setting, it's a much harder rice to get right, as it's far less forgiving than the other two, which requires far more care than is usually possible when you're busy and have 6 other things on the go. I also find it far less creamy and starchy.

Arborio plants produce more grains per plant than the other varieties, so I imagine that's why it's still the most widely available, and therefore widely used rice for risotto. Carnaroli it is for me.

[ScottyBoy]

This is an eye-opening topic, why I'm on this forum.

[Icanmakeit]

As someone else mentioned, I have only tasted my own risotto I don't have much to compare to other than my own trials and errors. I find the old school way, toasting the rice a bit in some butter and a bit of olive oil and continuing to add stock, a bit of white wine as the rice will soak it up.

No added cream, although in the end - after much stirring and a sore wrist - people who eat my risotto will argue with me that there must somehow be cream involved.

I think really good stock whether you make it yourself or a decent store brand can make the difference.

I last made some nice risotto with some home made pesto added at the end and it was really good.

[ScoopKW]

Just as I do it. Though I'm forgetting that I add the splash of white wine before the stock goes in. A old chef I worked with told me it "activates" the starch. Donno if that's true but just something I do because I always have.

I would guess it has more to do with evaporating the alcohol out of the wine prior to adding other liquids, than "starch activation." And for some reason, I prefer to deglaze a pan with something acidic. Just seems easier than using stock or water to deglaze -- which I do, but I prefer wine.

And there's plenty of fond in a risotto pot to liberate.