|
deimos posted:Chicken meat is a fickle mistress, the rubbery parts got to ~155°F. What you can do to counteract is next time SV to 140 for the required time then immediately ice bath them for a minute while in the bag (I use cheap Vodka that I keep for that purpose on the freezer, since it's mostly reusable with some patience and a funnel*). That will make them less susceptible to overcooking when pan searing. My point here is that a surface temperature of 155 F/68 C (or whatever) might be something that a piece of chicken can hold up to via some methods (say deep frying) and you won't necessarily see all of the bad changes that negatively effect texture and mouthfeel, but in a puddle machine you're effectively moving the entire piece closer to the `brink' of that condition, so you might have problems at say 150 F/65 C. I usually do poultry in the puddle machine at around 57 C/135 F to deal with this without having to dance around with having to do the whole hydrotherapy thing to cool the meat---I just rest it for a couple minutes between puddle machine and sear, which also gives it time to dry off a bit, which also helps with the sear. It's something you can play around with by feel---as long as you're holding for long enough (and the hold times around 57 C are around 45 minutes, so if you're doing a several hour cook this isn't an issue) there's no food safety issue, so you're just loving around looking for the texture and mouthfeel you like. Duck and turkey can handle being vizzled at lower temperatures without getting squoogy, but if I think the general belief in low temperature chicken having a hosed up texture is largely overstated. In any event, it's something that you can certainly just experiment with until you find what satisfies your personal preference. deimos posted:* Bonus points: it's a lot colder than ice. You're much better off just putting a bunch of ice cubes in water and using that as a water bath if you want to cool something off quickly.
|
# ¿ Oct 11, 2013 03:27 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:41 |
|
deimos posted:The Anova is also decent enough that there won't be a huge temp dip if you add an item halfway through a lonk cook, max deviation I saw was a degree or so when I dropped some room temp chicken into my 72 hour short ribs. You kinda get the idea that +/- a fraction of a degree C makes a big difference from things like all those sous vide egg charts you see that have pictures for every degree or whatever. But those are kinda misleading, because (as anyone who's done a shitload of eggs will tell you) there are variations between individual eggs that will result in palpably different results even when done together in the same water for the same length of time (this is particularly true of the behaviour of the white, which appears to produce noticeably different results from the same treatment depending on the age of the egg). And that's sorta at one extreme---eggs are comparatively sensitive to temperature differences, and they're comparatively homogeneous. If you're looking at a steak or a duck breast or some short ribs or whatever, there's going to be way the gently caress more variation between individual servings and they're far less sensitive to minor temperature variations.
|
# ¿ Oct 16, 2013 01:11 |
|
Choadmaster posted:I've been looking at various things to try and lobster has caught my attention. Anyone done it before? There seems to be such a wide variety of temperatures (~120-140 F) in the recipes I've seen. I'll probably end up doing 135 for convenience sake if I'm going to throw it in with the short ribs. I'm also curious to try some crab using the same method as the lobster. If it was me, I'd still steep the lobster meat in solution of water and vinegar before sealing them in a bag with some unsalted butter to more or less reproduce the method Keller popularised. That being said, this is one of those things where I'd consider just doing it all in a pot because you're not gaining much by doing it in a puddle machine over the more traditional approach.
|
# ¿ Oct 16, 2013 02:59 |
|
Genewiz posted:I read somewhere that the butter poached method doesn't work as well if you do butter-in-bag and then in a sous vide because the butter doesn't get to circulate around the lobster meat. Genewiz posted:Thomas Keller used to do the bagged method but apparently switched to the bath method after some issues with New York's health inspectors. Like I said before, I'd probably just do lobster `conventionally' because I don't see much of an advantage to doing 'em in the puddle machine (as opposed to some other shellfish which are a lot easier to get just so sous vide), but I don't think there are any problems with doing it sous vide.
|
# ¿ Oct 16, 2013 19:49 |
|
Choadmaster posted:About steaks, what is the goon consensus on pre-searing? Should I do that? Or just post-sear? Or both? Ultimately I'll have to experiment and see what works for me, but for the first few steaks I'd like to start off with whatever people think works best The texture of the crust will be different, though, particularly if you're aggressive about searing---the crust of meat seared before going in the bag won't be as crisp as the crust on meat seared afterward. Well, maybe `crisp' isn't quite the right word---you're not making it crunchy, but you know what I mean---the crust you get from a sear has a distinctive texture, and it gets softened when you sous vide it after. It's not really a big deal either way, but I decide on whether to sear before or after based on the overall mouthfeel and texture of the meat. So something like a steak or a pork chop or whatever I'll sear after, but short ribs I'll sear beforehand. I could just be letting my prejudices about how I'd approach the meat `traditionally' affect my decision here---you have to sear before doing a braise or stew, so I tend to sear first with things that I'd braise or stew if I wasn't doing them sous vide...but that's kinda a bullshit rationalisation. Searing beforehand is basically just searing beforehand. Searing afterward you want to be sure to pat that motherfucking piece of meat dry. Like seriously, it's loving soaking wet from sitting in that bag and if you just throw it on a lava loving hot skillet you're just going to steam it. Just patting it dry works fine if you're careful, but I'll sometimes throw something just out of the puddle machine in a toaster oven on the lowest setting---the Cuisinart model I have has a convection setting, and it's pretty drat good at surface drying and keeping meat ~*danger zone warm*~ while I'm juggling something else.
|
# ¿ Oct 17, 2013 03:06 |
|
Steve Yun posted:I've had bags fill up with air, but it turned out that I didn't seal them well, like a corner was crumpled or something and probably let in some air while it sealed.
|
# ¿ Oct 22, 2013 01:50 |
|
Choadmaster posted:I hear you can if you put it fat-side-down, especially after it's softened up so much (hell, my pan had nearly a half-centimeter of fat in it after searing 8 ribs without even trying that). But I'd really rather not tear my ribs apart to do that.
|
# ¿ Oct 24, 2013 02:14 |
|
Choadmaster posted:http://sassyspoon.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/short-ribs-raw.jpg
|
# ¿ Oct 24, 2013 23:25 |
|
Womens Jeans posted:I'm moving to a country without safe drinking water. Do I need to use bottled water in my sous vide machine, or can I just use the unsafe tap water (and if so, should I boil it first?)? And that all aside, if you're cooking long enough to pasteurise the food (and you should), then you're also going to be pasteurising the water. Of course this won't help if your water contamination problems involve heavy metals or arsenic or something like that, but hopefully you're talking about moving to a place like India that uses a lot of groundwater with biological contamination rather than a superfund site, alien planet, or something like that.
|
# ¿ Nov 26, 2013 08:07 |
|
Scott Bakula posted:Using a torch to make sure its completely dry then using cast iron to sear it seems the best way And that's true, for what it's worth, in general and not just with meat that's coming out of a puddle machine.
|
# ¿ Dec 5, 2013 06:58 |
|
mod sassinator posted:How long do people think thick steaks should be cooked sous vide? These are thick prime grade ribeye steaks, about 1.5" thick and maybe 8-10oz each. I'm thinking of cooking at 130 F for about 2 hours. Any concerns?
|
# ¿ Dec 24, 2013 00:03 |
|
geetee posted:Nope, zero reason. Get the Anova. Smaller foot print yet higher capacity, circulates water, won't corrode. The fact that it circulates water is really a non-starter. Like in principle it allows for finer temperature regulation but it's not like the SVS has trouble with managing temperature---even if there's some theoretical difference in their abilities, it's something that will result in literally indistinguishable results. Just like a DIY thing with an old rice cooker---cooking in a puddle machine is just insanely forgiving. That being said, an IC---any IC, not just Anova's---has moving parts, which a SVS does not. I don't know what the expected service life is for the heating element in the SVS is, but my guess is that a pump (again, pretty much any IC pump, not just the Anova one) has a MTBF that's lower than a heating element (which is a part all puddle machines will have regardless of design). And the base plate corrosion thing, well, while it's bad design---they should've just anodised the loving things---but it's not like the fact that the finish is all hosed up actually affects operation. I mean by all means buy an Anova or any other IC if you want. But I think pretty much any of the commercial sous vide products will do anything the majority of home cooks want to do, and they'll do it just about the same. The real basis for comparison that I'd care about is service life, and the Anovas just started shipping in, what, November? So there's not exactly a lot of data out there on them yet.
|
# ¿ Feb 7, 2014 03:59 |
|
Chemmy posted:In terms of the corrosion it's eating the bath away. It's only a matter of time until it springs a leak, so I'd say the function is compromised.
|
# ¿ Feb 7, 2014 04:21 |
|
Chemmy posted:The coating on the inside of the bath is also eaten away by the corrosion. The inside of the bath, as well as the heat spreader plate, is corroded.
|
# ¿ Feb 7, 2014 05:01 |
|
nwin posted:Here's what happened. I bought one of those pork tenderloins that are in a vacuum sealed baggies in the store with a marinade on em (this one was just cracked black pepper). It stayed in the fridge a few days and it was never frozen. I took it out, set the sous vide to 138F and let it go for 5 hours. It was about 18 oz of pork tenderloin, thickest part being maybe 2". MrEnigma posted:Edit2: 3.5" is 7:14. Basically these numbers are all to core, meaning temp at center hits your bath temp.
|
# ¿ Feb 8, 2014 03:34 |
|
ShadowCatboy posted:Enjoying a sous vide ribeye done at 132.5* for 3 hours. I know most people don't think it should go that long, but I like mine done a bit more so all the collagen has gotten all nice and melty. I mean I'm not criticising your 3 hours@132F cook. You just seem to be suggesting that that's a long time to sous vide a ribeye, and it really isn't.
|
# ¿ Feb 28, 2014 11:26 |
|
ShadowCatboy posted:Actually for the given time and temp I've specified I generally get very good results on softening up the connective tissues. Instead of tough fibrous bands of muscular fascia I've got muscular fascia that's edible, just a little bit chewy. I mean it can still be a good steak. Not like a ribeye's exactly a tough cut of beef to start out with. Anyway. As far as pasteurising goes, yeah. I'm not saying you have to pasteurise your steaks. What I'm saying that is that if you throw a steak in for 45 minutes at 131 or whatever you're not even pasteurising it, because that isn't happening until around the 3-4 hour mark, and just hitting pasteurisation isn't exactly lol overcooked as far as s-v goes.
|
# ¿ Mar 1, 2014 08:52 |
|
ShadowCatboy posted:I'd urge you to try it sometime then, SubG. It's true that very little of the fat renders out, but the connective tissue is definitely softer. I've done this a dozen times or so and I've always found that the 3-hour mark is when the CT becomes edible. As I said, it really doesn't have a lot of connective tissue that needs to be broken down by the heat, and if it did that length of time at that temperature wouldn't do it. At low temperatures like that you'll get some denaturing of collagen, but below 60C/140F the thing that contributes most to tenderisation (as in 24-48 hour short ribs) is the activity of the enzyme collagenase rather than thermal breakdown, and the generally-accepted (and empirically derived) low end time for collagenase to do its poo poo is about 6 hours. Like, sure you'll get some effect in 3 hours, but it's rounding error. If you've really got it into your head that something magical is going on, go get yourself some tough-rear end chuck or shank or something and put it in the puddle for 3 hours@131 and try it.
|
# ¿ Mar 3, 2014 22:10 |
|
ShadowCatboy posted:No, I realize that ribeye has very little collagen in the meat itself. I'm referring to the fascia layer that separates the inner eye from the outer skirt. THAT gets significantly and noticeably softer after 3 hours in the puddle machine.
|
# ¿ Mar 4, 2014 06:51 |
|
geetee posted:Regarding pan searing, here's some good advice than can make or break your experience. Use plenty of oil. I skimped for far too long, and you just don't get enough contact that way.
|
# ¿ Mar 12, 2014 01:33 |
|
nwin posted:This is something I don't think I ever get right. Although if your hob is putting out enough heat that you're smoking whatever oil you're using, you could just try searing them dry. Like seriously make sure your steaks are dry on the surface, don't use any oil on your cast iron, throw it down, it'll release when it's ready, done. If your seasoning isn't righteous, if the cooking surface isn't lava loving hot, or if your steaks are still damp on the outside this'll be a bloody goddamn mess, but if you've got your ducks in line it'll work fine.
|
# ¿ Mar 12, 2014 02:00 |
|
geetee posted:I think we're just going need to disagree, or my definition of plenty of oil is similar to your definition of as little oil as possible. I tried minimizing for a while and always ended up with an uneven sear. Depending on the pan, 2 or 3 tablespoons gives me just enough depth to ensure even heat transfer. I'm getting beautiful crusts, so I'll just keep sticking with what works for me.
|
# ¿ Mar 14, 2014 01:37 |
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:Filet is a silly meat to use for your first time, because it is super lean and all you need to do is get it up to temp. It does not provide a significant benefit sous vide over a grill or pan. I would do shortrib or ribeye. Lamb shoulder or Turkey would both be better demonstrations of sous-vide.
|
# ¿ Mar 14, 2014 21:55 |
|
Safety Dance posted:Yes, vizzling is literally on par with whipping up some fugu after watching a couple of videos on youtube.
|
# ¿ Mar 15, 2014 01:48 |
|
ShadowCatboy posted:I'll be honest, eggs benedict isn't as tasty as I'd hoped but it was still quite nice. Used salmon instead of cured pork product. That being said, if you're serving poached eggs over smoked salmon the traditional addition to the Hollandaise is dill. It adds some zing that you'll be missing otherwise---the other flavour components (egg, butter, toasted bread, fish) are pretty muted.
|
# ¿ Mar 22, 2014 04:52 |
|
ScienceAndMusic posted:-Take chicken breasts and thoroughly coat them in Tony's creole seasoning. I generally prefer using an animal fat, just because a comparatively mild poultry like chicken can use it, but I dunno if you're eating chicken breasts because of some diet thing or what.
|
# ¿ Mar 26, 2014 11:37 |
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:like i get that you mention cooking them in a pan but like I mean you might not care about this if you're really confident about your ground beef, if you're doing your own grinding, or something like that. Food safety aside, if you like a thicker burger you get all the traditional sous vide benefits out of doing burgers in a puddle machine. You do absolutely need to give them a sear afterward, so yeah it's not really a labour-saving thing. It's a pretty good approach to the classic diner-style burger at home though; the whole smash burger is really more of an upscale fast food burger approach---if that's what you're going for, doing it s-v isn't going to get you much because it's a different final product.
|
# ¿ Apr 11, 2014 00:44 |
|
WhiteHowler posted:The meat was pretty solidly Medium - I may try 135F next time. Also, I think I'll season it a bit more. The inside was juicy and full of flavor, but I like a salty/peppery taste on the outside. For those who do steaks often, do you typically season before puddling, before searing, or right before serving? Or all three?
|
# ¿ May 2, 2014 02:37 |
|
mls posted:I only tried it because another goon raved about it on this thread. Have you tried a brisket at a lower temperature like 135? I was very impressed with how the corned beef turned up at the lower temperature. I might have to buy a brisket and try it both at 135 and at 177. So something like 140F for like 48-72 hours, like you see in sous vide, works. And traditional braising at around 160F for a few hours works. But you wouldn't want to vizzle a brisket or short ribs or whatever for 48 hours at 160, and you wouldn't want to braise them at 140F for a couple hours either.
|
# ¿ May 20, 2014 22:51 |
|
dotster posted:Chicken is the most different for me between sous vide and traditional cooking, super tender and juicy. I have started just buying a few whole chickens at a time and deboneing and making a white and dark meat bag seasoned and ready to go and freezing them for easy meals. I have had good luck with nomnompaleo.com's chicken thighs. I mean I'm not making GBS threads on the recipe, which looks fine. I just find it adorable that a paleo diet website has a section on sous vide cooking.
|
# ¿ May 31, 2014 01:32 |
|
No Wave posted:Both frameworks make sense to me, which I guess is why it's always sort of odd to me how GWS often points out how "ridiculous" the diet is when it works out quite well for most people who do it - meaning that we're apparently using some metric other than "results in the real world" to evaluate the goodness or badness of an approach. It's pseudoscientific crap. The fact that there are some people who believe in the pseudoscientific crap somewhat less ardently or less stridently than others doesn't mean that it's not pseudoscientific crap. Like I said the recipe actually looks fine. I mean if you didn't already know about it you wouldn't even know it was a paleo recipe. Almost as if paleo itself is completely irrelevant to good cooking.
|
# ¿ May 31, 2014 03:09 |
|
No Wave posted:Paleo itself is just a heuristic, and eating it generally makes you feel really great almost all the time. You don't need science to verify the fact that[...]. Eating is a very personal experience, and pure aesthetics is a large part of that experience. That's cool. That's one of the things that makes food and cooking interesting. So if anyone wants to claim that they personally prefer to eat the way they speculate cavemen used to eat, fine. I mean I happen to think that's pretty loving goofy, but whatever. Lots of people have eating habits I think are pretty loving goofy. But moving from `I happen to like to eat this way' to `real food blah blah grains destroy your immune system blah blah dietary science is totally made up man' moves it from no-accounting-for-taste territory and deep into completely-loving-barmy land. This probably isn't the thread to arbitrate this however. There's a pseudoscience thread in SAL that's just full of people who would no doubt love to hear all about it though.
|
# ¿ May 31, 2014 12:25 |
|
MeKeV posted:Wrong time or wrong temp? Or just not a meat cut where sous vide gets the best out of it? It's actually a great approach, you can get super loving tender nicely rare stir-fry, which is not at all traditional but is nevertheless awesome. There's no reason it has to come out overcooked any more than any other goddamn thing done in the puddle machine and then seared is, which is to say not at all unless you need to work on your technique.
|
# ¿ Jun 2, 2014 11:13 |
|
Kalista posted:The short version - sous vide the baby backs for 4 hours at 167, then dust with rub and smoke/grill for 3-4 hours at 176 (if you have an electric smoker) or as low as you can get if it's charcoal.
|
# ¿ Jul 15, 2014 21:26 |
|
Most of the studies I've seen suggest that the major C. botulinum risk associated with sous vide cooking is not during the cooking itself but rather in vacuum sealed foods refrigerated improperly after cooking (e.g. stored at temperatures over 4 C) for prolonged periods. I'd be interested in seeing data demonstrating germination and growth at sous vide temperatures over typical sous vide timescales (e.g. a couple hours to 72 hours or so at the outside).
|
# ¿ Jul 23, 2014 00:10 |
|
Chemmy posted:Under Pressure is a cool book but I agree that ultimately it's not terribly useful as a first SV book.
|
# ¿ Aug 12, 2014 00:16 |
|
Samizdata posted:Sorry, copyrighted. I'mma calling !
|
# ¿ Aug 13, 2014 23:56 |
|
.Z. posted:I have a Demi and I'll eventually get an Anova or a similar circulator. It's not that the Demi is bad, it's just that the circulators are almost always better. Only reason I have a Demi is because at the time the cheapest comparable circulator was like $250 more. More reasons for circulator over Demi: The main advantage that I can see to the SVS design is that it has no moving parts. I don't know where the different IC manufacturers are sourcing their pumps, but in a commercial application a fluid pump is one of those things that you expect to go tits up before any other part of the device (mod gaskets and so on). And I don't think any of the new low end ICs have been out there long enough to know what their service life is going to look like.
|
# ¿ Aug 27, 2014 23:56 |
|
Chemmy posted:Do you mean Atlantic oysters? There's tons of oysters here.
|
# ¿ Sep 6, 2014 05:02 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:41 |
|
Choadmaster posted:Anyone have a favorite pork chop temp/recipe?
|
# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 00:25 |