or Connect
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › Sous Vide Question Etc
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sous Vide Question Etc

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 

Just wondering, has anyone compared two similar pieces of meat one cooked traditional and the other sous vide? just wondering if the result is worth the extra effort or if this is all exaggerated? is the new modernist methods centrifuge, foams etc really the way of the future? 

post #2 of 7

All of the extra effort is really just money. You buy a vacuum sealer, immersion circulator and something to let it hang out in. 

 

The difference is real, you may not notice it on every piece of meat and it doesn't replace good ol' fashioned cooking. 

 

We cook almost all of our meats traditionally. We roast, grill and braise things but when it comes to shortribs we cook them in the circulator. It is a major difference. 

 

I enjoy it for somethings, like white meat chicken. For a steak, traditional cooking is just the best for me. We have messed around with some of our pork dishes in the circulator and well executed roasted pork is hard to beat.

post #3 of 7

Have used both and I also favor the old fashioned way. But then I am old

CHEFED
Reply
CHEFED
Reply
post #4 of 7

Meat only knows temperature/heat, it can't tell where the heat is coming from, grill, pan, pot, microwave, sous vide --------.

 

If you cook tenderloin at 212F you know what you will be getting.

 

 Sous vide can't give you delicious tenderloin if you don't know how to season, but it can guarantee you to within one degree how you want your meat to be cooked, say 131F, and never over or undercooked. It is very difficult (impossible?) to cook meat uniformly with most cooking methods. A digital smoker can do a relatively competent “Slow & Low” cooking. After all a smoker is like sous vide with low temperature hot air.

 

In addition to the above, the following are special sous vide features:

 

  1. The meat goes directly from freezer to the cooker, no thawing needed.
  2. Significant less shrinkage, which is important if you are using expensive cuts of meat.
  3. No resting of the meat needed after cooking.
  4. Reheating of leftover meat to the same temperature without overcooking.
  5. No poking around with thermometer.
  6. Does not matter what size the cut of meat is.

 

Dcarch

 

Leftover frozen Beef Tenderloin sous vide and grilled.

post #5 of 7

This might be able to give you a little more insight :

 

http://www.cookingissues.com/2010/02/12/sous-vide-and-low-temp-primer-part-i/#sectionI1

post #6 of 7

Sous vide (under vacuum) is incorrect terminalogy.

 

It really should be airless cooking in a water oven.

 

The purpose of the vaccum machine to to remove air, not to draw a vacuum.

 

Under vacuum, water will boil and freeze, and the food will be subject to 14 lbs of pressure per sq. inch.

 

dcarch

post #7 of 7

I have done it a few times just to see.  I have done some flank steaks both sous vide then seared on a grill and with my traditional method on the grill.  Also compared grilling boneless, skinless chicken breasts with sous vide.  It is a fun thing to do.

 

Is it worth it?  Depends on you.  For myself, I do not like my chicken rare, so to grill it for the middle to be cooked properly the rest is by definition overcooked.  With sous vide, the whole breast can be cooked to the proper temperature without overcooking.  For me that is worth it.  It really isn't much extra effort for some things.  For the chicken, I put them in the sous vide for about an hour and do other things.  Same with veggies.  It helps me often bringing everything together at the same time in a home kitchen without a giant commercial cooktop.  Also, good to walk the dogs while things are cooking.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Food & Cooking
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › Sous Vide Question Etc