Sous vide cheap cut steaks coming out consistently dry and pale (Baldwin time/temps)

[Derek Tran]

I've had luck with sous viding steaks only to bring them up to temperature. But any steaks that require holding for more than a couple hours always dry out and lose a ton of their pinkness. I use Douglas Baldwins tables and have tried sirloin, ribeye, eye of round, etc at 130/131F. I've tried them at 6 hours, 8 hours, and sometimes the much longer 24 hours or more cooks.

 

Ribeyes - of course I only tried at 6 hours once as I was looking for a way to render the fat down a bit more besides applying a lot of high heat. I was trying to get the best of both worlds with this one. The delicious rendered fat of Ribeyes with the perfect medium rare temperature with less chance of human error.

 

The other meats, I was experimenting to see if I can turn leaner, cheaper cuts of meat into something much greater, like many sous vide advocates talk about. I've tried many times, and have never been successful. Like I said, the longer cooks make them lose a ton of their juices, and the meat comes out pale and hardly pink at all, despite being cooked at medium rare. I recently did a side by side comparison of a 8 hour vs 1.5 hour sirloin and the 8 hour was not enjoyable at all. Dried out. The 1.5 was good, but about the tenderness I expect form a traditional cooked sirloin of course.

 

I figured it might be an issue with the microcontroller (Dorkfood DSV) not being calibrated. So I bought a thermapen and pretty much the 3 thermometers including the thermapen I use pretty much agree that the microcontroller is doing a great job (and yes, the bath is circulated). My heating element is one of those Marshalltown immersion bucket heaters.

 

Have any of you had this problem? My only suspicion is that it might be a factor of thickness at this point, but even then, I've tried top sirloin over 1 inch thick and it still comes out dry and pale after 6 hours at 131. I'm not getting this legendary turning cheap cuts into filets with more flavor that I keep hearing about. The only thing I haven't tried is doing a roll/roast.

 

Any advice would be appreciated!

[paulraphael]

I don't think you can hold lean / tender cuts of meat for a couple of hours without drying them out too much. Long cooking times work for tough cuts, especially if they're reasonably well marbled. Anything like a rib-eye is going to start going downhill shortly after it's cooked through.

 

The silk purse / sow's ear approach works with true tough cuts of meat. These tend to be decently marbled even when cheap, and more importantly, they have plenty of collagen that can be broken down into gelatin over time. Tender cuts don't have this. After they're cooked, their only transformation is to get drier.

[weedy]

I'm not getting why it should be "pale", at least by my understanding of that word

 

even after 'too many' hours, I should think that 131F steak should still look pink.

 

have you tried thermapen checking the finished internal temp? is it really coming out of the bath cooked to 131?

 

I posted a rib eye I did a week or so ago on another thread.

One thing I've found with meat in general (and this was something I think Kenji at the seriouseats.com food lab says as well is that despite people's belief that they 'prefer' rare meat, when they actually compare blindfolded almost everyone actually picks med-rare becauuse the fat renders and it ends up therefore both 'juicier' and 'beefier'

 

so I tend to do it at 134 which yields both that rendered fat you said you want, and still a nice pink overall colour and no tastes of 'overcooked' beef.

this way I guess I feel I don't need more than 2-3 hours in the bath; and so, no texture or dryness issues that would go with that.

 

 

but one more thing:

are you finishing these steaks somehow?

searing or torching?

obviously, the thinner they are, the more crucial it is that those finishing touches be done super hot and super quick.

that would be the first place I'd look for a reason anything would look grey.

 

sorry if that's obvious to you already... just trying to figure it out!

[dcarch]

Also, check the accuracy of you system's temperature.

 

dcarch

[Derek Tran]

Paulraphael:

what cuts do you recommend for the longer cooks (silk purse effect)? I've done ChefStep's short ribs at 129F for 72 hours. That turned out great. But nowadays short ribs are becoming very expensive as people are realizing that it's delicious if cooked right. Are there other's that you recommend playing around with?

 

 

Weedy:

I think it's coming out pale cause it's losing a lot of its juices. I too was under the impression that no matter what, the meat should maintain it's color as long as it never cooked above the temperature where it would lose it. Interesting note on the medium. I'll try upping the temp the next time I do a ribeye.

 

And yeah, I do finish the steak. Usually with cast iron with some oil plus a torch to make it super super quick. The method works well on the short cooked beefs. The crust develops well really quickly without any additional cooking underneath.

 

I haven't tried directly testing the temp of the meat with the thermapen  after a long cook yet. I just assumed after a long cook like that, it would most definitely be at the water temp.

Edited August 11, 2014 by Derek Tran (log)

[Anna N]

" I'm not getting this legendary turning cheap cuts into filets with more flavor that I keep hearing about."

I have only ever understood that you can take cheap meat and use S-V to improve it when working with meat that is coventionally slow cooked. I do not ever remember a claim that you can take a "choice" ribeye and turn it into a "prime" ribeye if that is what you mean.

[btbyrd]

Are you salting the meat before you bag it? If so, don't. I also don't think that prolonged cook times are necessary or useful for tender cuts like ribeyes. The temperature at which you're cooking isn't hot enough to render fat so you're not getting any real benefit. As for cuts that lend themselves well to the "silk purse" effect, apart from short ribs, cheeks are quite nice. If you're not scared, tongue also takes long cooks quite well. Same for pork belly and cheek.

[paulraphael]

what cuts do you recommend for the longer cooks (silk purse effect)? I've done ChefStep's short ribs at 129F for 72 hours. That turned out great. But nowadays short ribs are becoming very expensive as people are realizing that it's delicious if cooked right. Are there other's that you recommend playing around with?

 

If you like rib-eye, try chuck. Here's a post where I described a successful long cook.

 

(I'm working on a blog post on this, with all the information compiled in one place)

Edited August 11, 2014 by paulraphael (log)

[Unpopular Poet]

This reminds me of a very conversation myself, paulraphael and some others were having a few months ago.  I had not had good luck with sous vide steak -- until I took his and others advise -- bought a prime NY Strip and (as pointed out above by btbyrd) absolutely not salting it.  The results were amazing.  I have a 24 hour chuck roast in right now (at 160) so I can make some beef tacos tonight...should just come right apart I am thinking.  

 

Prime meat + no salting = absolutely amazing steak.

[FeChef]

I never salt or use any sort of marinade pre sous vide. All seasoning is dont post. With the exception of searing. I pre sear while frozen. This gives me a nice crust with literally no grey, period...period. Ive tested this method on all types of cuts from ribeye to ny strip and filet. The only cut i truely have trouble with is short rib. 4 out of 6 times it was dry and still medium rare. Chaulky texture in my mouth. It seems all the blood had expelled out of the meat and into the bag it was cooked in. This was 48 hours at 136.5F. I had tried 133F for 24 hours and that time it was juicy but still tough to chew. Im in the same boat as the OP. Short rib is so expensive its not worth testing anymore. I would love to experience this short rib bliss everyone speaks of but its just not worth the cost.

[btbyrd]

That's really strange. I've done low-temp short ribs four or five times, mostly using pastured beef or bison (which have a comparably low fat content when compared to grain fed choice beef) and they've been plenty juicy. 72hr @ 130F with a bit of clarified butter in the bag. I'm sorry you haven't gotten good results. Maybe try some cheek! It's very beefy and comes out with a super silky steak-like texture that I much prefer to braised versions. And unlike short ribs, it's still pretty cheap -- when you can find it.

[FeChef]

That's really strange. I've done low-temp short ribs four or five times, mostly using pastured beef or bison (which have a comparably low fat content when compared to grain fed choice beef) and they've been plenty juicy. 72hr @ 130F with a bit of clarified butter in the bag. I'm sorry you haven't gotten good results. Maybe try some cheek! It's very beefy and comes out with a super silky steak-like texture that I much prefer to braised versions. And unlike short ribs, it's still pretty cheap -- when you can find it.

I have never seen cheek anywhere. Even local family owned farms/butchers dont sell cheeks. If they do it sell quick. Its hard to even get tounge. Its sad that i have to go to walmart to buy beef tounge. They sell some vac packed  rumba brand. Its actually really good, but its walmart...lol.

[weedy]

 

Weedy:

 

 

And yeah, I do finish the steak. Usually with cast iron with some oil plus a torch to make it super super quick. The method works well on the short cooked beefs. The crust develops well really quickly without any additional cooking underneath.

 

I haven't tried directly testing the temp of the meat with the thermapen  after a long cook yet. I just assumed after a long cook like that, it would most definitely be at the water temp.

 

I had one other thought, which is:

have you cut open and had a look at a cooked steak straight out of the bath, but BEFORE searing?

just to see if it's already "pale"

[lordratner]

I never salt or use any sort of marinade pre sous vide. All seasoning is dont post. With the exception of searing. I pre sear while frozen. This gives me a nice crust with literally no grey, period...period. Ive tested this method on all types of cuts from ribeye to ny strip and filet. The only cut i truely have trouble with is short rib. 4 out of 6 times it was dry and still medium rare. Chaulky texture in my mouth. It seems all the blood had expelled out of the meat and into the bag it was cooked in. This was 48 hours at 136.5F. I had tried 133F for 24 hours and that time it was juicy but still tough to chew. Im in the same boat as the OP. Short rib is so expensive its not worth testing anymore. I would love to experience this short rib bliss everyone speaks of but its just not worth the cost.

Were your short ribs on the bone?

[ElsieD]

That's really strange. I've done low-temp short ribs four or five times, mostly using pastured beef or bison (which have a comparably low fat content when compared to grain fed choice beef) and they've been plenty juicy. 72hr @ 130F with a bit of clarified butter in the bag. I'm sorry you haven't gotten good results. Maybe try some cheek! It's very beefy and comes out with a super silky steak-like texture that I much prefer to braised versions. And unlike short ribs, it's still pretty cheap -- when you can find it.

It have some cheeks in the freezer. Can you tell me at what temperature you cook them at and for how long? And how big are they?

Thanks!

[Smithy]

I'm going to put a plug in here for the sous vide index at the top of the Cooking forum page. Specifically, there are several topics listed in the index regarding beef and sous vide, in this post: http://forums.egullet.org/topic/136274-sous-vide-index/?p=1777783. They may provide useful information.

Mind you, there seems to be a great deal of room (from where I sit, having no experience with the technique) for variation and disagreement! I'm hoping that the sous vide index provides an additional resource that stimulates further conversation. :-)

[Derek Tran]

I used to salt pre vacuum but not anymore after reading a few different threads on this forum.

 

As for the reasoning behind why I tried long cooking ribeye: I used to only sous vide ribeye to bring it to medium rare temp before finishing it (45 min-1.5 hours). Of course I had the issue with the fat not rendering so was trying to get the best of both worlds so I searched around for any tips. Someone had mentioned that they cooked ribeye long enough (6-8 hours) (can't remember where/find the source) that they literally rendered a hole where the fat used to be. It seemed to contradict what I've read about the low temp not being high enough to render but I figured I'd give it a try anyway. Turned out too good to be true.

 

I've seen blog posts of people doing eye of round roasts. That's where I got the idea that one could take a low cost (because of it's low fat content) meat and turn it into something better.

 

I have tried cutting into the meat before searing as well, it still came out pale. Again this was using Douglas Baldwin's time/temp tables in "Sous Vide for the Home Cook" and sometimes using far less time than he suggested. The blood just leaks out into the bag by the end of a long cook, which is what I attribute to the loss of color in the meat. Even doing the sirloin for 8 hours (he mentions that collagen with temp between 130-140 breaks down in the first 6 or so hours) I was expecting something like this: http://meandmytorch.com/recipes/8-hour-sous-vide-sirloin-steak but ended up getting pretty much greyish pink throughout and a very dry meat.

 

I've done lots of very successful braise and pulled recipes at higher temps. I just can't get lower temp (medium rare) "steaks" to be any good past 2 hours. I think, based on what I'm reading above, unless doing higher temp cooks for the purpose of braised or pulled textures, I shouldn't bother trying to tenderize it and just stick with bringing it up to temperature and then searing and enjoying.

[btbyrd]

It have some cheeks in the freezer. Can you tell me at what temperature you cook them at and for how long? And how big are they?

Thanks!

 

I've found that the time/temp guidelines for short ribs yield roughly similar textures on cheek. Higher temps (e.g. 85C for 16-24 hours) will shred like a traditional braised short rib. The same is true if you go down 15 degrees to 70C for 48 hours. If you drop the time at that 70C to 12-16 hours, it's a bit more like a steak and isn't falling apart like a braise. But when I cook them, I almost always go for 72 hours at 54C. This slices like a steak and is velvety delicious. If you want it a bit more toothsome, you can do it for 48 hours. I love to put slices of it on top of a bowl of Pho.

 

I'll add that the last batch I did was cooked at 62C for 72hr and they came out awesome. I cooked them along with some pork cheeks (for ramen) using the recipe at ChefSteps. Incidentally, 72hr @ 62C is the MC@H preferred time for short ribs. Whenever I cook for 72 hours, I always try to make a big batch and then freeze it so I have lots of the goodness on hand. It's a nice easy way to stock your freezer.

 

So overall, it's pretty similar to the textures of short rib. It can be a bit more fibrous though (sort of like flank steak) because the muscle grains are longer than they are on short ribs. Size wise, the one's i've gotten are roughly the size of my hand but a little bit thicker.

Edited August 13, 2014 by btbyrd (log)

[paulraphael]

As for the reasoning behind why I tried long cooking ribeye: I used to only sous vide ribeye to bring it to medium rare temp before finishing it (45 min-1.5 hours). Of course I had the issue with the fat not rendering so was trying to get the best of both worlds so I searched around for any tips. Someone had mentioned that they cooked ribeye long enough (6-8 hours) (can't remember where/find the source) that they literally rendered a hole where the fat used to be. It seemed to contradict what I've read about the low temp not being high enough to render but I figured I'd give it a try anyway. Turned out too good to be true.

I just addressed this topic  in some depth here, in a post titled "high steaks for cheapskates." 

[FeChef]

I just addressed this topic  in some depth here, in a post titled "high steaks for cheapskates." 

I read your blog and while i understand $7-$10/lb is cheaper then $25-$70 for better cuts of the same grade. I can not see how a $7-$10 chuck is going to turn out better then a $7-$10 choice grade ribeye cooked the same way. Most likely needing less cooking time aswell.

[ChrisTaylor]

Are you consistent in where you purchase the meat?

[paulraphael]

I read your blog and while i understand $7-$10/lb is cheaper then $25-$70 for better cuts of the same grade. I can not see how a $7-$10 chuck is going to turn out better then a $7-$10 choice grade ribeye cooked the same way. Most likely needing less cooking time aswell.

In my part of the country there's no such thing as $7-$10/lb choice grade rib-eye. 

 

The choice rib-eyes that I've had cost more like $15/lb and were fine but not memorable. They would have been improved greatly by dry aging, but the only butchers I know who dry age sell prime meat exclusively. So there ends up being nothing to talk about ...

[FeChef]

In my part of the country there's no such thing as $7-$10/lb choice grade rib-eye. 

 

The choice rib-eyes that I've had cost more like $15/lb and were fine but not memorable. They would have been improved greatly by dry aging, but the only butchers I know who dry age sell prime meat exclusively. So there ends up being nothing to talk about ...

You should consider drybagsteak bags. I was skeptic when i first read about the bags but they really do work. If you keep your fridge below 37F your in business. Ive even turned cheap "select" grade NY strip, ribeye, and filet mignon into so really good tender, beefy steaks. Seriously try it.

[paulraphael]

I'll leave that experiment to someone else. For one thing, I'm interested in the responsible raising of livestock, so even though I don't have a lot of disposable income, I avoid cheaply-raised meat. I would rather eat steak less often and eat the good stuff. And I would much rather eat a cheap cut from well-raised steer than a rib-eye from one that's been tortured by mass-production. I'm not a zealot about it, but I do what I can, when I can. And when buying food that I consider special occasion food (like steak ... especially in this quantity) it's always going to be a time when I can. 

[FeChef]

I'll leave that experiment to someone else. For one thing, I'm interested in the responsible raising of livestock, so even though I don't have a lot of disposable income, I avoid cheaply-raised meat. I would rather eat steak less often and eat the good stuff. And I would much rather eat a cheap cut from well-raised steer than a rib-eye from one that's been tortured by mass-production. I'm not a zealot about it, but I do what I can, when I can. And when buying food that I consider special occasion food (like steak ... especially in this quantity) it's always going to be a time when I can. 

Not me Mang. I go by the "you only live once philosophy" I will eat my high in whatever you wanna call it, and will continue to run my 7 miles a day to stay in shape and healthy.