Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

novamute posted:

I've done two sets of steaks in my Sansaire so far and I seem to be having some problems with the sear. After I unbag the steaks after cooking they are super moist past the point where I can just pat them dry like if I were cooking them normally. I feel like in order to get a dry surface to sear on I'd have to squeeze a lot of the moisture out of the steak which I'm loathe to do.
Don't squeeze (it won't do much anyways). A lot of people like to leave on a rack overnight.

I haven't seen a perfect solution for this, either, and it's probably the main reason I don't vizzle absolutely everything.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Huge_Midget posted:

My new Anova puddle machine just arrived! I'm so drat excited to use this thing. Any suggestions on a foolproof first recipe to impress the wife with?
Well, they're all gonna be foolproof, but I find good sea bass to be really really good (cook at 118 for 30 minutes, no searing necessary)

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

ScienceAndMusic posted:

So I noticed in the OP there is a link to a sousvide guide on the iphone. Unfortunately I have a droid and such a guide doesn't exist. My anova arrived today and I was hoping to find a good webpage guide/easy to use droid app that contains all relevant temperature and cook times for various types of foods?
I usually just use Google - <ingredient> modernist cuisine

There may be an app but there are multiple possible temperatures for each food (that, in some cases, can significantly vary in outcome) so it's good to see the context around the dish.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
Ribeye's an interesting cut of beef, as you're trying to hit a very specific temperature and you don't want to go over or under. It's more like fish than most red meat that way, as with most beef you either a.) don't care if it's raw in the middle or b.) it's tough enough that you'd rather hold it for a while.

It's a good beef for the first-time puddler, as you get a unique effect without having to hold it for very long. Other options include pork loin, lamb loin, and white fish.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Safety Dance posted:

:rolleyes: Yes, vizzling is literally on par with whipping up some fugu after watching a couple of videos on youtube.
Vizzling a frozen raw turkey is a bad idea... The idea that food heats linearly with thickness is probably bad advice as well...

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
Like, if you want to roll the dice that's fine, it's your life, but it's sort of this thread's job to make sure we aren't telling each other things that aren't true

No Wave fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Mar 15, 2014

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
For those keeping track, that's a few broken Sansaires already, no broken Anovas - has a tipping point been reached? Can the hivemind recommend the Anova over the Sansaire?

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
I am sort of curious why benedict specifically gets messed with so much. I rarely see actual eggs benedict these days - usually I see smoked salmon versions. If the salmon's any good I see it as a waste not to let the salmon sit on top of whatever you're eating so the fat brushes the top of your mouth (like sushi).

Like for crab cakes - I'd never put crab cakes on anything toasted as it would kill the texture of the crab. Crab cake sandwich on a potato roll, maybe, but not an english muffin.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Heran Bago posted:

The pork loin was a big success. The fat gelatinized and the meat was pink and juicy. The meat stayed together very well but was very easily broken up with tongs. One eater who insists on a consistently crispy outside wound up with slightly drier meat. A super hot pan can only do so much but I'm not about to invest in a kitchen torch.
A torch isn't as good as a pan (though the searzall may be, but that's not out yet). Next time, let it cool off a bit/leave wrapped in paper towels to absorb moisture before searing. Restaurants that SV have no trouble getting crust with a pan if they start the meat from cold.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Heran Bago posted:

I've read about cooling, chilling or even refrigerating the meat after SV for a good sear and moistness. How doesn't that make the meat cold on the inside though?
It can get cold - it heats back up when you sear it. If you vizzled a steak at 130 you'd sear it until it hit about 110 in the middle (a thermapen is very helpful for this). It will still have the texture of a 130 degree steak, as the physical changes that occur when it reaches that state are permanent.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

BraveUlysses posted:

Anecdotally I have seen some people claim before and after searing is a good thing. I feel like trying it with short ribs soon.
It'll depend on the temp. Cooked at 140 for 48 hours I've found them a little too tender to sear unless you're using enough oil to basically fry them (not a bad thing, just not a traditional pan sear).

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
Out of curiosity - what's the point of putting butter in the bag? Seems like it would make the sear awkward.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Steve Yun posted:

Mainly for seafood, but people sear plenty of steaks in butter, no?
No... clarified maybe, but you're going to towel the meat so it won't be used to sear

(I was asking 'cause you were talking about 3 hour cooks that don't apply to seafood)

You're right that plopping a pat of butter in with the meat is one of those things people do with SV, but it makes sense more often than not for red meat to avoid it unless you're going for something so tender that it's unsearable

No Wave fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Mar 26, 2014

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

SubG posted:

Not a big loving deal, but you're probably better off either with a neutral oil (like canola) or using chicken or duck fat. The cool volatile compounds that give olive oil its unique flavour break down at fairly low temperatures, and you'll end up with either a bland oil (in which case you're better off using a cheaper neutral oil to start out with) or, worse, a bitter mess (this is something that's more likely to happen with a high quality extra virgin olive oil, but can happen even with refined olive oils, if they're real olive oil and not a flavoured generic vegetable oil).

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.
I think one of the total oddities of food as long as I can remember is that I can walk into a grocery store and find fifty varieties of vegetable, milk, and fakey fats and zero animal fats. So bizarre. When did it not become immediately obvious to cook beef in beef fat and chicken in chicken fat?

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Ola posted:

I'm cooking for my friends next weekend. The idea is to debone/butterfly a leg of lamb, wrap it up with garlic and spices, drop it in a 60C/140F puddle Friday morning before work and serve dinner in the evening (with ratatouille and potato/celeriac mash).

Does anyone have experience with roast style lamb? I might try to make it into a square shape instead of a round one to make it easier to sear afterwards. There can be a bit of connective tissue in the leg, but 10-12 hours should sort it out right? Or do I need 24 hours? Higher temp?

And should I sautée the garlic first? I seem to recall reading that raw garlic at sous vide temps just overpowers everything.
Honestly just rubbing with oil, seasoning, and cooking low in the oven at 215 (or lower, preferably convection) or so for 2-4 hours (pulling at 140, then searing in-oven or in-pan) will probably give you an equal or better outcome. I don't know if it's technically FDA approved but I've done it a lot... And you can just buy it boneless, I only prefer getting bone-in if I'm doing lamb at higher temps (in which case, you would want to hold it - you'll get lamb that can be shredded). This is my go-to low-effort food. In this case, you can use raw garlic - poke holes in the meat and tuck them in.

You'll want to confit your garlic and smear it on as a paste if you want to puddle it.

Leg of lamb is tender enough that you don't have to hold it for an extended duration - just getting it up to temp will be good.

No Wave fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Mar 27, 2014

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Plinkey posted:

Ugh, I had a bag somehow get a hole in it in my puddle this morning. I think the vac seal failed.

Goodbye Corned Beef Brisket, you had so much potential.
Double-bagging for long cook times should be in the OP - I double bag for all extended cooks. I've always puddled for either less than two hours or more than 12 hours so the distinction is usually pretty clear. I am truly sorry for your lots.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Zorak of Michigan posted:

If I pasteurize avocado, can I refrigerate them after and use them the next day? I have a vague fear that heating them will accelerate the ripening/rotting process and I'll have a mess on my hands.
I thought the point of heating them was to stop that process from happening. If that is not the case - why are you pasteurizing your avocados?

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Random Hero posted:

I am going to start some short ribs tonight and either take them all out at 48hrs or leave one bag in for 72hrs. I have looked through several recipes and have some ideas but I was hoping you guys could throw out some recommendations on preparation: pre-sear, seasoning, sauce to cook it in, etc.
Pre-sear optional, responses are mixed

Season with salt, pepper optional (I don't use it)

Beef jus for sauce, or something creamy with some lemon in it.

It's got a lot of flavor so you don't have to do much with it. A little lemon makes the fat taste better but lemon's best added at the end.


If I was really desperate to impress I'd serve it with parmesan gnocchi and leeks.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

ShadowCatboy posted:

No, but upon poaching I turned off the heat, then used a digital thermometer and lowered the pot's water to about 144*F. I let the egg sit in there for 10 minutes or so while I prepped all the other ingredients. By that stage the yolk's heated through sufficiently without cooking any further.
I'd probably experiment with the reverse - put the egg in the pot cold and leave it in until it's near-boiling (assuming a small pot and a strong flame/induction).

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

ShadowCatboy posted:

Why? By the time it gets to boiling the egg yolk would've likely cooked through quite a bit.
Depends on how long it takes. If it's like a four minute boil probably not.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

G-III posted:

I'm trying to find the right cooking temp and time for rabbit. I've seen variations from 125 degress (hell no) to 140 degrees. Is there any official word of trusted word on for temp and time for rabbit meat?
Modernist cuisine likes 138 to core for the loin, 151 for an hour for the leg. I haven't done rabbit SV, but MC's default recommendations have always been good starting points for me.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Recursive posted:

Can't wait to try a real cut of fresh meat. Short Ribs? Hanger steak? NY Strip?
My favorites are beef cheek for long cook time (72 hours at 142) and ribeye for short cook time (133 to core). The nice part is that everything comes out pretty well.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Random Hero posted:

How did you season and serve the beef cheek? I think I might do that next.
Just salt beforehand, serve with a puree (celery root with lemon is my favorite), carrots, maybe leeks. It'll taste like really rich beef stew meat. Don't have to do anything too fancy with something that flavorful.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Random Hero posted:

Thanks. How would you describe the consistency after cooking it at that temp and duration?
Just cuttable with the side of a fork with a little effort

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Kalista posted:

I started a beef cheek tonight, with roasted garlic, celery and red onion. The bath is 167 degrees, I'm not sure if I'm going to make this a 24 or 48 hour session. Thoughts, advice? The cheek weights in at 1.8 pounds.

Here's the lil' guy


That's pretty warm. I'd pull it at 24. Modernist Cuisine recommends 36 hours at 154 for "tender, flaky" and 12 hours at 176 for "very flaky", so 24 will put you right in the middle, sorta.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

Veritek83 posted:

So I've done steak and salmon and eggs and short ribs and chicken breasts. I'm trying to eat a bit less meat these days though, so I'm curious as to what seafood, other than salmon, works well in the puddle machine. Anybody have suggestions?
Sea bass is my favorite.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
Nothing will put you off steak, but the beef cheeks will come close.... short ribs have enough fat that a normal braise is better IMO.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

SubG posted:

Cooking sous vide, just like our paleolithic ancestors.

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.
I've found that paleo broadly refers to two things:

1.) The understanding that our knowledge of nutrition has historically sucked and is most likely in a position of sucking now in ways we don't know so the least risky thing to do is to eat poo poo that sorta resembles what might have been eaten in the past to reduce unknown unknowns where easily possible
2.) Eating mostly meat and vegetables because the macros are good and avoiding sugar and gluten because it makes you feel bad

This website is most likely under 2.). I don't know if either is the "correct" definition of paleo, but I certainly find 1.) more interesting.

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.

As with all activities, some people take it to excess, but even the people who take it to excess are in pretty good shape, and it's nothing compared to the excesses of disgusting poo poo that most of the populace engages in.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

SubG posted:

The owner of the blog conveniently provides a comic (complete with serenely informative self-insert and dumb and so goddamn crazy strawman) explaining their viewpoint, which is that people should eat `real' foods. Instead of things that `wreck our metabolic, digestive, and immune systems'. Like rice.

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.
If there's a specific contradiction on her blog, sure, fine - but that doesn't make SV on a paleo blog that ridiculous.

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 you're not sleepy at all during the day, and an approach that recognizes our fundamental inability to be certain of how nutrition works is totally valid when long-term nutritional studies are as flawed and useless as they are.

Anyways, I let Nietzsche determine my diet:

quote:

A diet that consists predominantly of rice leads to the use of opium and narcotics, just as a diet that consists predominantly of potatoes leads to the use of liquor. But it also has subtler effects that include ways of thinking that have narcotic effects. This agrees with the fact that those who promote narcotic ways of thinking and feelings, like some Indian gurus, praise a diet that is entirely vegetarian and would like to impose that as a law upon the masses. In this way they want to create and increase the need that they are in a position to satisfy.
...maybe.

No Wave fucked around with this message at 10:54 on May 31, 2014

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
I'm a little confused about how I'm supposed to feel about smoking oil. Everywhere I read says it's extremely bad for you, but it seems like the only way to sear steak super hard - and even if you use a dry pan the meat itself smokes.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

The Midniter posted:

Meh. Ever eaten anything from a grill? If so, you've signed your own death warrant.

Everything kills you and everyone is going to die. I'd rather go out with a belly full of steak when my time comes.
Yeah I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything - I'm just looking for the rule of thumb otherwise responsible people tend to use.

If you're searing hard - it's okay to smoke, but discard the oil afterwards? (as opposed to searing in clarified butter then cooking spinach in that, for example)

Obviously I've eaten stuff that smoked before, but I always sort of wonder if I'm being more or less reckless than common practice.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

CrazyLittle posted:

Use oil with a higher smoke point, and then you won't have to keep the oil smoking as long. The goal is to sear the steak, and using a low-smoke-point oil only means you have to cook it in the pan longer.

You can also deep-fry the meat to achieve the same effect without having to bring the oil to its smoke point.
Clarified butter's smoke point is 485F, which is on the high end for oil already.

Also not looking to deep fry. I've used extra clarified butter and kept the oil below smoking on thicker ribeyes sometimes, but I'd rather have a single process instead of having to choose between the two each time.

No Wave fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Jun 2, 2014

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

granpa yum posted:

What was your reasoning for cooking it this way?
I can't speak for him, but I have been curious about two-stage vizzling projects. Some people speculate that cooking for a long time at low temperatures kills the enzymes that cause the proteins to contract at higher temperatures, meaning that if you had short ribs and went from 133 for 24 hours to a braise you'd end up with short ribs that retain more of their moisture. I think McGee pointed out that the slow heat-up time in a braise is why slow-roasted/braised from cool short ribs often are pink in the middle while pressure-cooked ones will almost never be.

So I've wondered for a while if it would be ideal to vizzle your meat at a minimally safe low temperature regardless of what temperature you want to end up at.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

The Midniter posted:

Everyone who backed the Anova Kickstarter, please immediately go here and vote for the Brushed finish. The Chrome one looks tacky as all hell.
Didn't back it and I still voted. I have strong feelings about brushed metal finishes. (good feelings)

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

WhiteHowler posted:

Sous-vide can turn out some tasty food for sure, but it's no substitute for learning basic cooking skills.

You'll still want to sear most meats after cooking, and it's nice to be able to whip up some nice sauces or side items. You'll get a lot more value out of your puddle machine once you can do this.
Etrips seemed to have trouble with meats coming out correctly, and the easiest solution for that is a Thermapen! Puddler's ok though.

No Wave fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Aug 19, 2014

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
I don't really understand the clamp. What's a use case?

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

CrazyLittle posted:

It's for when you're done burning stuff and need to put down the very very hot torch cone on a table without it falling over.
Got it. Seems sort of overengineered but I can't think of a much better solution.

The ideal probably would have been to angle the top differently so that it would be balanced while standing straight-up, but I don't know what sort of considerations had to be made so it might not have been possible.

No Wave fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Aug 21, 2014

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
I can't find them on Amazon - I think they're just going through fulfillment there.

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!
Catboy's right in that even the good bags leak. The water gets gross pretty fast for the multi-day cooks.

Choadmaster posted:

The fat isn't really going to render at those temps (at 144 it gets pretty soft but not quite rendered out). A good searing helps. I haven't really done short ribs since my first couple attempts for the same reason though, but I've been meaning to try again.
Do beef cheeks instead!!!!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

No Wave
Sep 18, 2005

HA! HA! NICE! WHAT A TOOL!

BraveUlysses posted:

I've never had a bag leak but it's pretty normal for the smell of the beef to permeate through the bag into the water and my kitchen.
I think that's what he meant by leak. Maybe a better word is leech?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply