Sous Vide: Recipes, Techniques & Equipment (Part 9)

[Kerry Beal]

I've re sous vided lamb at higher temperatures when it wasn't tender enough.

[rotuts]

interesting point. but Ive learned that you might consider more time at the initial tempt.

from now on, an it will be quite some time, after all, 11 lbs of Beouf will last me for quite some time

from now on for me, Tips will be at 130 for 10 - 12.

learn something every day ....

[PedroG]

WikiGullet

 

WikiGullet has been aroused from hibernation.

In the Sous Vide Page the section "Cooking Eggs" has been expanded and a section "The structure and denaturation of Proteins" has been added.

The sections "Water baths and PID tuning" and "Cooking vegetables and fruits" need more content -> please help! If you are not very familiar with editing source code, you can play in the "Sous Vide Sandbox".

 

Thanks to all contributors!

Pedro

[JoNorvelleWalker]

A Tale of Two Steaks

 

Last week I brought home a small boneless rib steak of organic Australian beef, of a brand with which I am familiar.  What we in this part of the world might call a club steak.  I cut the raw steak into two portions, being careful to have some of each muscle group in each half.

 

I seasoned with salt and garlic powder, vacuum sealed each half, and cooked both together in the same bath for the same time and temperature.

 

One bag I threw into an ice bath and then stored in the bottom of the refrigerator.  The other I opened and threw into a hot pan with smoking butter to brown.  This steak was dry, powdery, quite possibly the worst steak I have ever had.  I can't even say it was tough -- that might have been an improvement.

 

Tonight I had the half that had been sitting in the refrigerator, finished the same way:  thrown into a hot pan of smoking butter.  Was this the best steak I have ever had?  No, perhaps not, but it was very good.  Way better than my average.

[EnriqueB]

A Tale of Two Steaks

 

Last week I brought home a small boneless rib steak of organic Australian beef, of a brand with which I am familiar.  What we in this part of the world might call a club steak.  I cut the raw steak into two portions, being careful to have some of each muscle group in each half.

 

I seasoned with salt and garlic powder, vacuum sealed each half, and cooked both together in the same bath for the same time and temperature.

 

One bag I threw into an ice bath and then stored in the bottom of the refrigerator.  The other I opened and threw into a hot pan with smoking butter to brown.  This steak was dry, powdery, quite possibly the worst steak I have ever had.  I can't even say it was tough -- that might have been an improvement.

 

Tonight I had the half that had been sitting in the refrigerator, finished the same way:  thrown into a hot pan of smoking butter.  Was this the best steak I have ever had?  No, perhaps not, but it was very good.  Way better than my average.

 

Did you reheat the second steak before searing? If not, and the pan times were similar, the different initial steak temperature in the pan may explain it.

 

On the other hand, what was the sous-vide profile (time & temperature)?

Edited April 4, 2014 by EnriqueB (log)

[JoNorvelleWalker]

The good steak was at refrigerator temperature before searing.  And, yes, I think the first steak got over cooked by searing but the effect was far worse than a traditional over cooked piece of beef.  I should note both steaks were rather thin, particularly after being squished in the vacuum sealer.

 

The bath was 57 deg C.  Time was 3.5 hours.

[rotuts]

this ref. was posted by Weedy in the chanber vac thread

 

give it a look re very high vac's and the effect that might have.

 

http://www.cookingis...e-of-your-meat/

[KennethT]

I'm not familiar with the Club cut, but I assume it's supposed to be a tender cut if it comes from a rib steak. If that is the case, I think 3.5 hours is way too long. The longer it sits at temp, more and more juices get squeezed out. Especially with beef, which is typically eaten rare or med. rare, really, I find the best results using a time that would just bring it to temp, which is dependent on thickness - but depending on what you're calling "rather thin" - that could be 30 min? Do you have eGullet member Vengroff's Sous Vide Dash app? It's very useful for figuring timing for thin cuts - but, unfortunately you need an Apple device - I don't think they ever came out with an Android version.

In any case, I think Enrique's explanation of why the two came out differently makes sense. I find searing in a hot pan tends to raise the temp of thin cuts too much to do just after removing from the bath. If I do this, I usually set my bath temp a few degrees lower, or I'll do a 5 min. dunk in ice water to chill the surface a bit before searing. I find the torch the easiest way to do a thin piece - it doesn't require pre-chilling or other playing around.

[JoNorvelleWalker]

this ref. was posted by Weedy in the chanber vac thread

 

give it a look re very high vac's and the effect that might have.

 

http://www.cookingis...e-of-your-meat/

 

Thanks for that link.  Very interesting!  I'll try lower pressure next time.

[JoNorvelleWalker]

I'm not familiar with the Club cut, but I assume it's supposed to be a tender cut if it comes from a rib steak. If that is the case, I think 3.5 hours is way too long. The longer it sits at temp, more and more juices get squeezed out. Especially with beef, which is typically eaten rare or med. rare, really, I find the best results using a time that would just bring it to temp, which is dependent on thickness - but depending on what you're calling "rather thin" - that could be 30 min? Do you have eGullet member Vengroff's Sous Vide Dash app? It's very useful for figuring timing for thin cuts - but, unfortunately you need an Apple device - I don't think they ever came out with an Android version.

In any case, I think Enrique's explanation of why the two came out differently makes sense. I find searing in a hot pan tends to raise the temp of thin cuts too much to do just after removing from the bath. If I do this, I usually set my bath temp a few degrees lower, or I'll do a 5 min. dunk in ice water to chill the surface a bit before searing. I find the torch the easiest way to do a thin piece - it doesn't require pre-chilling or other playing around.

 

I had intended to cook two hours, not three and a half, and I should have chosen a lower bath temperature to account for searing.  My intuition tells me 5 minutes in an ice bath would not help much.  I could be wrong.

 

From the link that rotuts posted I see Dave Arnold does ribeye at 55.5 deg C with oil.

 

My phone was made by Western Electric in the 1970's and I don't know if they have come out with apps for it.

[rotuts]

I do beef  130.  time then is determined by 'toughness'

 

also a thicker cut works better;  > 1 " i find.

 

credit on the link goes to "weedy"

[KennethT]

I find that 5 min. in the bath helps drop the surface temp while leaving the inside still warm. I find it helpful when searing in a really hot pan for 10 seconds - which is definitely not enough time to get a good crust. If you need to sear longer, depending on thickness, it's best to cook in advance and completely chill, and sear straight from the refrigerator.... as you have seen.

I can relate to using an old phone... so, you can always go old-school and use the tables either in Douglas Baldwin's website, or in the relative beginning of the original sous vide thread provided by nathanm. I actually have these printed and I keep them in a file just in case. They were used with great success pre-app.

[rotuts]

look through the coleman coolers ;

 

http://www.coleman.com/Products/8500/coolers

 

i have 4

 

the top is not insulated, but that's easy to fix.

 

sometimes they are cheaper at Target, esp if you have their store charge card, as you get an additional 5 % off and free shipping

 

with no minimum.  i got my largest cooler that way and i was cheaper than amazon and < 25 $$  etc etc

 

this is my workhorse :

 

http://www.coleman.com/product/36-quart-cooler/6281A718G?contextCategory=8540

 

but i like to do 'bulk' SV.

 

Edited April 4, 2014 by rotuts (log)

[JoNorvelleWalker]

My most successful sous vide experiment so far has been a thick loin pork chop.  I have read that people also cook pork roasts sous vide, and today I came home with a nice 2.5 pound pork loin roast that was on sale.  The thing is the roast is bone-in.  Would this still be a good candidate for sous vide (assuming I can fit the piece of meat in a bag)?  Or would I be better off trying to remove the bones?

 

Or should I just throw it in the oven?

[nickrey]

Bone is fine. I'd assume that as it's pork you will be cooking it to between 60 and 62C. In this case it is over 55C the four hour rule is not going to come into play. There only issue with bone is that jagged edges can rip bags You can get special bone guards from butcher supplies but I'd look at them to see that they are made of an appropriate plastic. Because the time to cook is not linear (it increases more exponentially than linearly) cooking a piece of meat that is twice as thick means cooking it for a lot longer than twice the time. Also the bone has different properties to the meat in terms of thermal conductivity so the cooking times may also be altered because of this but I'd just go with the timings as if it were all meat.

[weedy]

I"ve come to the conclusion that the whole "on the bone" thing is severely overrated, and especially so in sous vide cooking

 

 

 

http://www.seriouseats.com/2013/03/ask-the-food-lab-do-bones-add-flavor-to-meat-beef.html?ref=search

[JoNorvelleWalker]

I got a bone-in roast because it was what was on sale!

 

Tonight I pre-seared the meat for 20 minutes on a rack in a 450 deg F oven.  I figured why not, since I had just been baking bread.  I'm still not sure the roast wil fit in my largest sous vide bag.  If it does not, I guess I'll cut the meat off the bone.

[jmasur]

Shrimp time and temp suggestions, anyone?

I thought that 136F for 30 minutes would be too much, so I tried 130F for 40 minutes. Still came out a little rubbery.

On the plus side, the flavors of this recipe, with chipotle substituted for esplette, were terrific. http://blog.sousvidesupreme.com/2012/06/sous-vide-vanilla-butter-shrimp/

Edited April 7, 2014 by jmasur (log)

[paulraphael]

I"ve come to the conclusion that the whole "on the bone" thing is severely overrated, and especially so in sous vide cooking

 

 

 

http://www.seriouseats.com/2013/03/ask-the-food-lab-do-bones-add-flavor-to-meat-beef.html?ref=search

I think Serious Eats is right when it comes to relative short, dry cooking methods. But bones do seem to contribute if you’re doing a braise / stew / soup … long-cooked wet processes that can liberate marrow and gelatin into the broth.

 

An interesting test would be split some short ribs into on- and off-bone sections, and sous-vide them simultaneously for a long time. If there’s a difference at the end (my money says there will be) you’d probably notice it in the cooking liquids more than the meat itself.

 

Sous-vide would make this test easy, because the conditions could be otherwise identical for both batches. After geeking out with the blind test just mix them all together and call it dinner.

[weedy]

Shrimp time and temp suggestions, anyone?

I thought that 136F for 30 minutes would be too much, so I tried 130F for 40 minutes. Still came out a little rubbery.

On the plus side, the flavors of this recipe, with chipotle substituted for esplette, were terrific. http://blog.sousvidesupreme.com/2012/06/sous-vide-vanilla-butter-shrimp/

 

 

if I sous vide shrimp, I do it in butter (like butter poaching) 145F for 15

[weedy]

 

I think Serious Eats is right when it comes to relative short, dry cooking methods. But bones do seem to contribute if you’re doing a braise / stew / soup … long-cooked wet processes that can liberate marrow and gelatin into the broth.

 

An interesting test would be split some short ribs into on- and off-bone sections, and sous-vide them simultaneously for a long time. If there’s a difference at the end (my money says there will be) you’d probably notice it in the cooking liquids more than the meat itself.

 

Sous-vide would make this test easy, because the conditions could be otherwise identical for both batches. After geeking out with the blind test just mix them all together and call it dinner.

 

Yes, I agree that if it's in there long enough, and hot enough, in a braise to break down the collagen there is certainly a difference (especially in texture)

 

but that's not the same as the  "bones = flavour" that gets so repeated.

 

I have not found it to make a diff in sous vide cooking.

Short ribs at 135F for 48 or more hours come out more or less 'the same' to me with or without the bone.

but without the bone is infinitely easier to deal with.

 

and in relatively short cooking times, such as 2 hour NY strip steak or chicken breasts for examples, I find the bone adds nothing but complication.

I know they are oft maligned, but sous vided boneless chicken breast is every bit as good as bone-in breasts, and in fact always BETTER than conventionally cooked on-the-bone chicken breasts.

Edited April 7, 2014 by weedy (log)

[paulraphael]

I have not found it to make a diff in sous vide cooking.

Short ribs at 135F for 48 or more hours come out more or less 'the same' to me with or without the bone.

but without the bone is infinitely easier to deal with.

 

For your short ribs are you treating them like a braise and cooking in liquid that becomes a sauce?

[weedy]

Usually.

But i've done them both in and not in liquid, in the bag

[lesliec]

Shrimp time and temp suggestions, anyone?

I thought that 136F for 30 minutes would be too much, so I tried 130F for 40 minutes. Still came out a little rubbery.

On the plus side, the flavors of this recipe, with chipotle substituted for esplette, were terrific. http://blog.sousvidesupreme.com/2012/06/sous-vide-vanilla-butter-shrimp/

 

I have a good prawn recipe which only cooks them for 12 minutes at 58°C/138°F, followed by a sear.  Works very well - they still have a good texture.

[jmasur]

Thanks for the feedback, all.  Does anyone have suggestions for how long to cook prawns at 130F/55C?  That way, I can use a single bath for steak and prawns (my wife doesn't eat red meat).

 

Worst case, I suppose I'll have to experiment and report back.