source
stringlengths 620
29.3k
| target
stringlengths 12
1.24k
|
|---|---|
How do I get seasoning to stick to home-popped popcorn? I've been popping my own corn and I want to season it with salt, but when I sprinkle it over the popcorn it just ends up at the bottom of the bowl without taking to the popcorn. How could I get the seasoning to stick to the popcorn? <Q> If you want dry seasonings to stick to popcorn, you will probably need to add a liquid to adhere them with. <S> If you're avoiding extra fat, a few spritzes of a non-stick spray (like Pam) might do the trick without adding significant fat. <A> I air pop my popcorn <S> and then I spray it with Dr. Bragg Liquid Aminos . <S> It has a salty flavor <S> and if you spray it lightly it doesn't make the popcorn soggy. <S> If all you want is the salty flavor then this will do it <S> but it also has the added advantage of allowing other spices to stick as well. <A> In addition, as Sourd'oh says, to using some fat as glue. <S> Water will also work if you don't want calories, but will soften the popcorn somewhat. <S> Use popcorn salt. <S> This is salt that is very, very fine, so that it sticks more easily to popcorn. <S> Additionally, applying the salt immediately after popping when the popcorn is very hot will help. <A> Put the salt in a spice grinder (such as this one )! <S> My grinder has several options for granule size. <S> Unfortunately, it has no markings or logos on it <S> so I can't tell you what the exact type it is else <S> I'd highly recommend it. <A> The problem is not liquid. <S> The problem is the size of the salt. <S> You have to grind the salt. <S> If you don't have a spice grinder, (I use a mortal & pestle) <S> you can put a cup of salt in a blender :) and use it in the future. <A> Why not add the salt to the oil while it is heating up - or otherwise mix with the kernels before throwing them into the oil? <S> I have done this both with sugar and salt and it works well for me (and the salt does not appear to burn or damage the saucepan... <S> If you shake everything up (as you should do) while cooking, then the popcorn gets evenly coated. <S> However, no-one else seems to suggest this, so there may be something I am not considering...
|
You could try adding butter or oil to your popcorn while it is hot, then adding the salt and tossing it together.
|
travelling with cooked chickens I want to cook some chickens in the morning, and then travel about 2 hours in a car later in the day. Should I cool the chickens in the fridge after cooking them, or just wrap the hot chickens in tin foil and travel with them that way? <Q> This scenario is on the borderline, if the travel time were the only factor. <S> Generally, you don't want to hold foods in the danger zone (40 - 140 F / 8 = 4 - 60 C) more than about 2 hours. <S> However, you have indicated you want to cook the chickens earlier, so that adds on to the time they would not be at a proper temperature if you tried to keep them hot. <S> The safest method, then, is to chill them properly, and transport them in a cooler packed with ice. <S> Putting the chickens into zip-type bags will keep them from getting water logged. <S> See also: How do I know if food left at room temperature is still safe to eat? <A> Tin foil is not going to keep them above 140 F but a good cooler should. <S> Use a cooler not much bigger than the chickens and pre-warm the cooler with boiling water. <S> 2 hours below 140 F is the limit so even an hour should be safe. <S> Check the temperature when you arrive and like 1/2 way in transport. <A> Many of those ice-packs can actually be heated as well, <S> if you have those type, you can heat them to add more heat to the cooler. <S> I have also used foil wrapped bricks, heated in the oven, and put into the bottom of the cooler (on a trivet or something to prevent the plastic cooler from melting). <S> I also put terry cloth towels on the top to absorb any steam that is given off to keep the mess at a minimum. <S> If you are going to do this very often, it might be a good idea to invest in a catering front loading food carrier (Cambro makes the one I use). <S> These thermal containers cool down very slowly.
|
Using a pre-warmed cooler is a great idea.
|
How to mix ingredients in bread machine? Following the catalog instruction I simply put ingredients into bread machine. However, when I got the dough, it contained particles of yeast. Then, I decided to dissolve the yeast into water (as an ingredient) before adding to the mixture in bread machine. In this method, I found that the dough rises less. What is the best way to mix ingredients for bread machine recipe? Is it helpful or harmful if briefly mixing the ingredient to be sure about dough consistency or it is better to leave everything for the bread machine? <Q> Some (many) bread machines don't mix well <S> , so you might not get a good mixture whatever you do. <S> But it's worth trying. <S> If you are making the bread immediately after adding the ingredients, it probably doesn't matter much how you add the ingredients; just put the yeast and the sugar and such in the centre. <S> If you use the timer, it is important that the yeast stay dry up until the moment the machine starts mixing. <S> What gave me the best result is this: add water, sugar, salt, egg, fat; mix this by moving the pan around until the ingredients are mostly dissolved (or stir with a wooden implement); then put all the flour in a heap in the middle of the pan; make a hollow in the centre of this heap, put the yeast in this hollow; then set the timer. <S> Another tip: <S> if you put the pan on a kitchen scale while adding ingredients, and you press "tare" on the scale after each ingredient, it's much easier to weigh everything. <S> This only applies if you use ingredients by weight, of course. <S> Lastly, experimenting with amounts that differ from the recipe may greatly improve your bread. <S> It depends on the machine. <S> I also found that the "French" setting on the machine (= longer baking) gave the best crust. <A> the bread machine doesn't mix for very long. <S> For the yeast, however, use bread machine yeast which has much finer granules and dissolve faster in the water. <S> If you are planning to set the timer on the bread machine, keep the yeast away from the water as cerberus explains. <A> Firstly, make sure you're using yeast that has not passed the expiration date. <S> If you're finding chunks of yeast, you may want to check the dough during the knead cycle and hand knead a bit to make sure it is well combined. <S> How to add your yeast depends on two things, 1) what type of yeast (instant or active dry) and 2) when you plan to start your kneading cycle. <S> If you're kneading straight away and using Instant yeast, it doesn't matter what order you put the yeast in. <S> Instant yeast has smaller particles, so it may mix in more easily as well. <S> The water should be at about 110 degrees F and the yeast-water mixture allowed to proof for about 10 minutes. <S> If it gets all bubbly and foamy, you know your yeast is good <S> and it's ready to go. <S> If you plan to use a delay timer, add liquids first, then flour, then yeast on top to keep it dry. <S> If you're still not getting good results, you may want to increase the amount of yeast or decrease the amount of salt. <S> Salt (or too much sugar, like in sweet rolls) will inhibit yeast growth. <S> The general rule is 1/2 tsp salt per cup of flour. <S> You can also add 1Tbs of an acid like vinegar or lemon juice to give the yeast a jumpstart. <S> Hope these tips help you out!
|
If you're using active dry yeast, it may be better to add the yeast and sugar to the water first to dissolve and activate before you add all of your other ingredients.
|
what is the correct consistency for cream cheese frosting I'm having an issue making decent cream cheese frosting. I have a recipe that says to use: 1 pound (450g) cream cheese, at room temperature 4 oz (110g) unsalted butter, at room temperature 2-3 cups (240-360g) powdered sugar, sifted a few drops of vanilla extract and then to To make the frosting, beat the cream cheese and butter together until smooth. Slowly add the powdered sugar (do this on low speed to avoid a dust cloud) and mix until light and silky. Add the vanilla.` The problem I have is that it comes out way too runny to frost anything with. I've tried adding a bit more powdered sugar and it still maintained it's runny state. I'm using the K paddle for my Kenwood mixer to mix the frosting. I've put the icing in the fridge for the moment to see if it will harden up a little. Is this standard or am I doing something wrong? EDIT: So after putting the cream cheese in the fridge for a few hours, it still didn't harden up, just turned a cold runny goo. One thing I have noticed is that the supermarkets in the UK sell "Soft Cheese" as opposed to "Cream Cheese" which makes me think there is a difference between cream cheese and soft cheese. Philadelphia in the UK is sold as Soft Cheese, and many UK based recipes that include a cream cheese frosting often include lemon juice. <Q> My current favorite cream cheese frosting recipe comes from Thomas Keller's book Under Pressure - page 218. <S> The proportions of the major ingredients include: cream cheese: 100%, butter: 68%, sugar: 132% <S> Your recipe uses: cream cheese: 100%, butter: 24%, sugar: 80% (using the maximum recommended amount). <A> Sometimes this happens to me too but not always, and I always use the same recipe! <S> I just came across this post on Nigella's site. <S> This seems to be an adequate explanation as to why it happens and how to avoid it. <S> http://www.nigella.com/kitchen-queries/view/Cream-Cheese-Icing-Turned-Runny/2531 <S> Unfortunately occasionally cream cheese frosting does liquefy and this mainly comes from the liquid in the cream cheese mixing with the icing <S> (confectioners') sugar and dissolving it, leading to a runny icing. <S> ... <S> We would suggest reducing/omitting the lemon juice as this adds extra liquid - you could use finely grated lemon zest instead if you want to add a lemon flavour ... <S> There is a chance that the cream cheese was over beaten before the sugar was added [...] <S> You could try making the frosting in a food processor, putting the sugar and cheese in together and whizzing for about 1 minute, until the ingredients are just combined. <S> We would also suggest using a recipe which contains part butter and part cream cheese. <S> This is usually a bit more stable since the butter adds slightly more fat and is less likely to dissolve the sugar. <A> A fabulous cream cheese frosting recipe that stays firm enough to pipe. <S> 125g butter at room temp, 150g cream cheese straight from the fridge <S> (Must be full fat, not a reduced fat variety, my favourite being Philadelphia) <S> 500g icing sugar. <S> Beat the butter till soft, add the cream cheese and beat briefly. <S> Add the icing sugar and beat slowly until incorporated, then give a very quick blast with the beaters. <S> Do not overbeat. <S> The more you beat the softer it will become. <S> Beat until you get it soft enough to pipe. <S> I use this recipe all the time to fill large cakes and also to pipe on to cupcakes. <S> You can add flavour to it for example, vanilla seeds, orange or lemon zest, cinnamon etc <A> The way to do cream cheese frosting is to separately cream the butter and the cream cheese. <S> Cream cheese tends to get runny if overmixed, while butter keeps on adding volume. <S> So beat them separately and then combine. <S> That way, you can arrange yourself on how "cheesy" you want your frosting to taste. <A> THE ONE FAILSAFE AND SIMPLE <S> SOLUTION USING SAME RECIPE <S> I know this is an old thread but <S> seems like no one has found the solution. <S> I had the same problem for over 6 years, living in France and was very frustrated. <S> Found this solution <S> and I have no issues whatsoever now. <S> Beat butter and icing sugar together FIRST. <S> You can add as much or as little sugar as you want to taste - <S> this will not affect the result. <S> Beat the cream cheese in LAST. <S> You cream cheese frosting will be delicious, not too sweet and totally pipe-able. <S> You're welcome. <A> On the episode of Good Eats about Devil Food's cake, Alton Brown mentions that for cream cheese icing, the cream cheese must never have been frozen, which may result in the runny texture.
|
It may be that you just need a lot more sugar (or more sugar and butter), or it may be that the cheese being sold in your part of the world is not the "cream cheese" we know of here in the USA.
|
Does pizza need yeast? I have been looking into some recipe without yeast. Jamie Oliver has a recipe in his 30 minute book that does not need yeast. Will pizza have less crunch or flavour without yeast? <Q> Many kinds of pizza base are made from a yeast-raised bread dough. <S> As with other breads (and beer, and wine, and cider etc.) <S> the yeast, while it feeds and gives off the gas that causes the dough to rise, produces other substances which contribute to the flavour. <S> So, a dough used as a pizza base which was not leavened with yeast isn't going to taste the same because it's not going to have these yeasty byproducts in it. <S> Texturally, it's also likely to be different. <S> One of the other things that happens while the yeast is working at making the dough rise, and during any kneading that is part of the process, is the formation of gluten, which is essential to the structure of many risen breads. <S> Anything else is unlikely to have the same behaviour. <S> Take for example soda bread, which, despite being made from wheat flour, is made in such a way as to minimise gluten development and thus has a very, very different texture to a yeasted loaf made from the exact same flour. <S> So, your non-yeast pizza recipe is likely to be quite different to yeast-risen pizza. <S> That doesn't necessarily mean it won't be nice, but you'll have to make it in order to find out. <S> I once made a pizza with a base made from scone dough, which has the advantage of being fast, as would a pizza based on a soda bread base. <S> Yeast takes a while to work, so there's no way you're going to get a good yeasty base inside 30 minutes. <S> It'd be hard to do it inside an hour. <S> My usual strategy involves a no-knead dough recipe set up the night before, so actual preparation of the pizza takes perhaps three quarters of an hour, with the yeast doing most of the work while I'm at work or asleep. <S> But I'm just airily speculating. <S> The only way to know for sure what this recipe is like is to make it and find out. <A> Yes, it is possible to make a pizza without yeast <S> but there is no guarantee how good it will be. <S> here i give you a recipe to make a pizza without yeast. <S> Ingredients : 2 c. flour1 tsp. <S> salt2 tsp. <S> baking powder2/3 c. water1/4 <S> c. vegetable oil Mix flour, salt, baking powder and water. <S> Knead on floured counter just until workable and spreadable, about 2 minutes. <S> Put on pizza pan, with fingers spread vegetable oil on crust (helps so tomato sauce won't soak in crust) then put pizza sauce on, next put on toppings. <S> Bake at 425 degrees for 20 minutes. <S> Try above recipe to make a yeast free pizza. <A> I just tried it, and I found it is somewhere between a buttery biscuit and a cracker... <S> and it can work. <S> It does not have a developed yeasty taste, nor is there any chewy pull, but it can be a basic base for good toppings. <S> It will be like a pliable biscuit if barely browned, or a nice crunchy thick cracker if darkened well on the bottom. <S> Use good toppings and some salt <S> and I would not be too embarrassed to feed it to some friends. <S> You won't bee selling it on the street, but when you are out of time or yeast, this can work. <S> So expect and accept a basic blander tasting pizza crust and <S> you might not be too disappointed. <S> I used about:1/2 cup all purpose1/2 tsp baking <S> powder1/2 <S> tsp salt (or more to pull out what little flavor is in flour)1/2 tbs melted buttersplash olive oil1/8 milk (plus however much more needed to make dough consistency.) <S> Mixed all these, kneaded for about 5 min, <S> let rest for 5 min or more, roll out with rolling pin, par bake around 450 on bottom rack on cookie sheet till it starts to develop brown on top, then add your sauce and toppings as desired. <S> This made a small single serving. <A> is to utilize a Sourdough Starter which uses the wild yeast in the air to leaven the dough. <A> I have made many pizzas without yeast because it was not available?plain <S> flour, 2 table-spoons of margarine, pinch of salt, 1 cup of milk. <S> 1-preheat <S> the oven first, in bowl put 2 cups of plain flour, add butter. <S> use your hand to mix. <S> 2-add salt and cup of milk and mix with hands. <S> the mixture is sticky now. <S> (If you want you can add teaspoon of herbs or Italian herbs in the dough.) <S> 3-dust <S> the kitchen bench with flour and put the sticky mixture in the centre. <S> knell the dough slowly until the mixture is not sticky and ready for the rolling pin. <S> roll the dough out to the size you want on pizza tray. <S> 4-place <S> the dough on the pizza tray and place in the oven at high heat for 5 mins. <S> While the pizza base is being treated, you can cut up the ingredients for the pizza. <S> 5-Use gloves, get the hot pizza tray and squeeze BBQ sauce as the base sauce add 5 different types of meat: <S> I preferred cold cooked chicken, hot dogs, salami, sausages, ham. <S> sprinkle some cheese over the pizza then back in the oven. <S> 6-second pizza I often make is garlic pizza, mix 1/3 cup of garlic with 1/2 cup of margarine, very lightly with cheese. <S> strong but popular
|
While not a direct answer to your question, you can make a good pizza dough without commercial A good alternative
|
How can I reduce the sliminiess of okra? I don't particularly mind the slime in okra, but my wife hates it. Is there a proven technique for reducing the sliminess? I do wish to make an Indian simmered curry (Bhindi) with it, so frying is out. <Q> The okra itself won't be slimy. <S> This is one of the traditional ways to thicken gumbo! <S> Even just stewed okra, with a decent amount of tomatoey goop, usually isn't very slimy. <A> My tips: Do not wash the okra. <S> Just brush off any dirt and wipe with a paper towel. <S> Wait to cut until it's almost time to cook it. <S> Letting it sit around makes it slimier. <S> Make sure you have some acid in your recipe (tomatoes, lemon/lime juice, vinegar, etc.). <S> This will cut down on the sliminess. <A> I love okra in gumbos, soups, curries, etc. <S> But I also dislike the sliminess. <S> And even though it will cook into most broths so that the okra itself is not slimy the actual texture or feel of the broth will be different. <S> What I have found that works very well is to dry fry the okra before adding to a recipe. <S> Done properly, dry frying should in no way compromise or change the okra other than to remove the slimy liquid. <S> You can then add your okra to your recipe. <S> (Doesn't take much time.) <S> The okra will be intact but with no slime or change in the texture or feel of the broth. <S> Plus, you wont't have to adjust any other thickening agents or change your recipe in any other way. <S> Hope this helps! <A> I agree with @Paul, Adding a bit of vinegar/lemon, and heating the cut okra in dry non-stick pan/skillet, takes out the sliminess. <S> PS: while doing above, if the slime sticks to the spatula/spoon, then use the tissue to wipe it from time to time to take take out the stickiness. <S> Another way is to cut the okra length wise instead of cutting it in in small. <S> This doesnt cut the seeds, which is the main culprit oozing the mucilage...
|
Simply slice the okra and heat over medium heat in a dry (no oil or water) non-stick skillet and cook tossing or turning until the liquid has been eliminated. If you're simmering it in a decent amount of liquid for a while, like curry, the slimy stuff (mucilage) will all go out into the curry and end up just thickening it.
|
How to store hard boiled eggs that are peeled so to avoid moisture build up? On the weekend I usually make 10 hard boiled eggs and peel them so I can eat 2 every morning during the work week. It's a big time saver in the morning, but when I store them in a plastic container in the refrigerator, a ton of moisture accumulates. I've tried putting a napkin in the container to soak up any water that appears but it doesn't help much. Does anyone know how you should store hard boiled eggs that are peeled? Is peeling them going to reduce how long they stay good? And does anyone know how long peeled and unpeeled eggs should stay good for? In case anyone is wondering. I make the eggs by putting them in a pot with water, then bring it to a rolling boil, remove from heat, cover the pot and let it sit for 12 minutes. I then crack the eggs and dip them in water to remove any small pieces of shells, and then finally dry them. Thanks!! <Q> This is probably not what you want to hear on any front, but it is best to store your eggs in their shell. <S> Their original carton provides an ideal container. <S> If you do want to store them peeled, the standard way to do it is refrigerated in a bowl of water (changed daily). <S> Of course, you will then have to dry the egg before eating it the wetness bothers you. <S> This method is also used with poached eggs. <S> The eggs should be good for about one week, unpeeled. <S> The Egg Board recommends they be eaten the same day they are peeled, but other sources indicate up to about 5 days. <S> See also: Still Tasty <S> Eat By Date <A> I work at a restaurant and we keep peeled eggs (for salads) in a covered container and cover them with fresh water. <S> Ours don't usually last longer than 2 days or so (before we run out and have to make more), but we are able to keep them for up to a week, and they taste just as fresh on day 7 as on day 1, so long as you remember to change the water out daily. <S> They may stay fresh for longer, but we don't keep any prepared foods for longer than 7 days, and if I wouldn't feed it to my customers after 7 days I certainly wouldn't feed it to myself. <A> Ok, I am very interested in trying the baking soda method <S> and I will this weekend. <S> I do the same thing as David to save time during my busy week by cooking them up on the weekend and peeling them ready to eat. <S> As for storage I let them cool down fully, dry them and place them in a container and put them in the fridge. <S> The next day I drain out any liquid then put a splash of white vinegar in and lightly shake them around. <S> They are good like that for 4 or 5 days. <S> If you haven't gone through them by then give them a rinse with water and put a fresh splash of vinegar. <S> I think the vinegar works as a preservative killing off the nasties that may form in that liquid that appears. <S> Works for me as long as you don't mind the slight taste a vinegar. <A> You can reduce the shelling to a second and literally blow the eggs out of the shells if you add a couple of spoons of baking soda to the water. <S> They should make it through the week. <S> Some say boiled eggs last for a very long time in their shell. <S> Though not sure about the modern washed eggs and would recommend staying within the 5-day thing. <S> Checkout <S> this video by Tim Ferris and a party trick. <A> Peeling them IS THE TIME SAVER .. <S> So keeping them in water is the best way and having to dry them ( with a paper towel or how ever) is what I have to do is not that te consuming .. <S> It is peeling them ... <S> I do this weekly .... <S> Hard boil them keep them in water and every morning grab 2 rinse for 3 seconds <S> then dry them off for 3 seconds .. <S> Sprinkle salt and pepper on them and eat .. <S> This whole prices only takes me under 1 minute usually 30 second ... <S> So I can in fact say keeping in water is a quick way to eat eggs and keeps them tasting the freshest and in water <S> I know they are protected from everything .. <S> Drying out germs ... <S> Whatever .. <S> Hope this helps .... <S> Sometimes I bring to work .. <S> I invested in a lock tight container that cost under a few dollars <S> and I can keep them in water and put the container in a bag with all my important papers and not worry about the container opening and water COMMING out ... <S> Of if you don't have one use tape or rubber bands then wrapp up with plastic wrap or tin foil or zip lock bag ... <S> I do Love the lock lids ... <S> They have to have the removable rubber seal to ensure a tight leakproof seal ... <S> Hope this helps ... <S> I have also been a chef for 30 plus years and have been to many food management training schools .. <S> And also family owned restaurants plus managed a few . <S> So any questions u can find me on FB or <A> Wrap the eggs individually after you peel them. <S> I use Glad Press-N-Seal. <S> Lay a sheet of it over an ice cube tray, set the eggs in the hollows, then layer on a second, longer sheet of wrap, making the top wrap contact the bottom one between each egg. <S> Remove from ice cube tray and press out the air from around each egg as you tighten the wrap. <S> You can leave them all together, or cut them apart into individuak airtight little packages.
|
Lastly, you can do what you are already doing, and store them with some towels, but they will probably express some water.
|
What's the technique for frying plantain? After enjoying a recent BBC Food Programme podcast about bananas I bought some green plantain. I fried them, for breakfast, and ate them with an egg. They were hard and dry and not very nice. My method: I sliced them 8mm thick along the diagonal and fried them in a little oil until golden, being careful to avoid burning them. I seasoned, patted them dry with kitchen paper, and squeezed over a little lemon. Is there a problem with the method? Perhaps the plantains were poor quality? I live in Bath, UK, not a very multi-cultural area. <Q> In the Caribbean green plantains are treated much like potatoes. <S> One technique that is common is twice-frying, usually with a soak in water either before the first fry, in between, or both. <S> One example of this technique is Tostones . <S> The Puerto Rican classic cookbook "Cocina Criolla" by Carmen Valldejuli calls for soaking the plantain pieces in room temperature water with salt and crushed garlic for 15 minutes as well as dipping them in water immediately before the second fry. <S> Like many potatoes, green plantains will often turn brown if left out in the air for too long after being peeled, soaking in water also helps prevent this from occurring as well as reducing the amount of free starch on the outside which can cause over-browning. <S> Elsewhere, both in the Americas and Africa, green plantains are cut very thinly and fried into plantain chips (UK: crisps). <S> These are usually 1-2mm thick and also benefit from presoaking. <S> If you decide not to fry them you could also boil them in salted water like a potato or boil them in vinegar with onions, garlic, and spices to make an escabeche. <S> You could also partially cook them in salted water or stock then bake them in the oven. <A> It sounds like you just undercooked them. <S> They're fairly similar to potatoes; if you just chop them up and fry with reasonably high heat on the stove, you're going to brown the outside before the inside is cooked. <S> If you want to cook them purely by frying, you want to use lower heat, and possibly more oil, so that you're efficiently transferring heat to the whole thing, not just the bottom. <S> I might suggest, though, partially cooking them first, whether it be by baking or steaming or microwaving. <S> That way, when you fry them you're mostly browning and finishing them, not relying on it to cook them the whole way through. <S> If you do bake them, be sure to leave the skin on - they'll sort of steam internally, and it'll come off easily when you're done, at which point you can quickly slice and fry. <S> I know the traditional technique is double-frying, but baking and microwaving require a lot less active work, and scale better if your pans aren't too big. <A> Let the plantains over-ripen; the peels should have lots of black over top of deep yellow. <S> Then slice them roughly 2cm thick, on an angle. <S> Cook in a pan of oil (enough to submerge half a plantain at a time) on medium heat until they turn golden brown. <S> Flip and repeat, then remove from the oil & dab away the excess. <A> You need to soak them in salted water first to flavor them as well as extract some of the "free starch" as another another person mentioned. <S> You also cut the plantains too thick. <S> When frying like this, they will come out crispy if thinly sliced but will be hard if the plantain is too thick. <S> If you want softer plantains, you need to cook them slowly and for a longer period of time. <S> Just like a potato.
|
Soaking plantains allows them to absorb a little water to help steam the inside as it fries, much like one would do for American-style french fries (UK: chips). Another method is to make them into "maduros", a sweet and very tasty treat.
|
Sponge cake with only three ingredients - will this work at all? I have a recipe for a sponge cake only consisting of sugar, eggs and flour. To be honest, I am a bit afraid to to try it. How can this create a fluffy cake - where does the air come from? Won't it be really dry because there is no fat in it? Also, when doing a cake like this, do I need to pay special attention to something? I am really skeptical that this will work. How long can I store the undecorated cake? Where and how to store it? Edit: Ingredients 6 large organic eggs 180g caster sugar 180g plain organic flour (sieved) Method Preheat the oven to 170°C.Break 6 eggs into a very clean bowl of a stand mixer fitted with a whisk attachment. Whisk the eggs gently to break them up, then add the caster sugar and whisk on medium high speed until the ‘thick ribbon’ stage is reached. This means the mixture will be light, have increased substantially in volume and be of a moussy consistency. When you lift the whisk the mixture should fall slowly in thick ribbons. While the eggs are whisking, grease three (22cm diameter) cake tins and line the bottom with a disk of parchment paper. When the thick ribbon stage is reached, add the sieved flour and fold in very gently to fully incorporate without knocking the air out of the mixture. Very carefully apportion the mixture between the three cake tins and pop in the oven for 15-20 minutes, turning two thirds of the way through the cooking time. You will know when they are ready as they should be golden brown and coming away slightly from the edges of the tins. Remove from the oven and cool in their tins for 10 minutes before carefully turning out and leaving to cool completely on a wire rack. source <Q> The key to this cake is the whisking of the eggs and sugar to the ribbon stage. <S> This incorporates a significant amount of air into the batter. <S> You didn't mention it, but I imagine the flour is then folded in. <S> The cake will work mechanically. <S> However, I cannot imagine it will taste very good: there is no salt to enhance flavor, no fat (other than from the eggs), and no flavoring such as vanilla. <S> So the only significant flavor will be from the eggs themselves. <S> As to how long it will keep, I imagine it would freeze well; it will probably keep at room temperature for 2-3 days. <S> Update: I see from the link added to the question that these layers are intended to be used in layer cake with other flavors and components, where its neutrality is actually a virtue. <S> I still think it needs about 1/2 tsp of salt, and maybe a touch of vanilla or even pistachio extract if you can get it, but the neutral flavor makes sense in context. <A> This is a cake that my mom made all the time. <S> The key is to use a light hand when mixing the flour and to really make sure to beat the eggs well. <S> The result is almost like an angel food cake, but with more depth. <S> it won't be moist like the butter laden cakes, but closer to a sponge cake. <S> The absence of salt and vanilla is not noticeable. <S> It lends itself well to frosting, but works even better when the layers are sliced thin and made into a multi-layered cakes frosted with a wetter filling such as a pudding filling. <A> The cake is actually very tasty. <S> The recipe is wrong though. <S> You have to separate egg yolks and whites and beat them separately. <S> Combine egg yolk and sugar and beat until it turns a light color and the sugar has melted. <S> Then fold in flour (use a spatula or spoon) and finally the egg whites that have been beaten until white and stiff.
|
The egg whites have to be beaten well; that will give the fluffyness and lightness to the cake.
|
Do coffee and tea need to be agitated while brewing? Do they need to be agitated in order to let the solution come into contact with every little particle of coffee/tea, or does it work the same without agitation? If not, can you explain why with physics? <Q> Tea and Coffee contain a spectrum of flavour compounds and most certainly, not all are pleasant. <S> If you've ever had an over steeped tea or over brewed coffee you'll know that the optimum extraction point is long before maximum extraction. <S> Where you are no longer extracting just pleasant compounds and picking up higher concentrations of things like caffeine, bitters, etc. <S> Agitating tea or coffee runs the risk of (or facilitate) reducing the time it takes to extract the unpleasant part. <S> On that front, experiment with not yo-yo dunking tea bags and squeezing the tea-bag with the back of the spoon (mild forms of agitation) to see the taste difference. <A> There are many different methods of brewing tea and coffee, so lets consider three just as examples. <S> Before looking at them, however, it is worth noting that water is composed of tiny molecules that are polar. <S> This makes it an exceptional solvent for almost all polar molecules, which is the reason why it has the reputation in chemistry as the "universal solvent" which is nearly true. <S> The flavor and aroma molecules in tea and coffee tend to be larger molecules that are dissolved into the water. <S> Tea Bags <S> Obviously the tea cannot be agitated. <S> However, the volume of water is large, and it is cooling so there is going to be some convection. <S> The tea bags are also designed to have a large surface area exposed to the water. <S> That is why they are thin, instead of compact and spherical. <S> The extraction is good enough . <S> Drip coffee <S> The water drips past the grounds. <S> Even if a given volume of water, as it passes through the grounds were to become saturated, the next volume of water that passes it may not yet be saturated. <S> The time, temperature, and drip rate are calibrated (via empirical experience) to optimize the extraction. <S> The motion of the water under gravity, dripping down, ensures that no single volume of water remains exclusively in the vicinity of a particular section of grounds for a long time. <S> French Press Coffee <S> This is the only common coffee method where there is little natural convection, nor any movement of the water due to pressure, gravity, or other means. <S> It is also the only method where stirring the water and grounds once or twice is recommended. <S> However, even so it is not essential, as all of the grounds will be surrounded by some volume of water which extract the flavorants locally. <S> When the plunger is used, the various regions will be mixed. <S> Conclusion <S> In general, the extraction power of the water, especially at brewing temperatures, is sufficient to the task, even with little additional agitation. <A> In fact, you need to stop the extraction before the unpleasant components get too strong. <S> Since you asked for a physical answer, I think it's the Brownian motion from the boiling water that takes care of everything not done by the fluid dynamics of convection. <S> I'm somewhat of an expert in tea, though not in physics, mind you, so you can take the answer with a grain of salt.
|
With tea, there is no need to agitate the pot/mixture in order to improve the extraction.
|
How do I finely strain fresh coconut milk? I had a lovely bunch of young coconuts. I extracted the water of most of them, and I blended all the meats and enough of the water (in the right proportion) to make something like 3 gallons of coconut milk. The only issue is that the milk has tiny coconut particles that I need to be rid of. I tried a fine cheesecloth (with multiple layers), but draining it is going to take days and if I force it, the tiny particles slip through. I thought about using a kitchen centrifuge, but I don't have one (if they make them). Any ideas to extract a completely smooth solution from what I've got? The 100mL of said nectar I got from the cheesecloth after much patience, has tantalized me. <Q> Alton Brown made coconut milk on his show <S> Good Eats <S> a few years ago, and he suggested using a clean tea towel and squeezing the pulp until it has given up all the liquid. <S> Here is more on it: http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/alton-brown/coconut-milk-and-cream-recipe/index.html <A> If the bits settle to the bottom of the container, you might be able to decant it rather than straining -- just let it settle, then ladle the liquid off the top. <S> You can also use the disposable plastic bag separating technique if it's type 1 settling (quick separating, don't have to let it sit for hours)-- <S> place the liquid in a clear bag, suspend it with one corner facing down, then after settling, poke a hole above where it separated. <A> You could try a food mill using the smallest hole set it provides <A> I had to return and answer this myself. <S> The tea towels broke first, and then the shirts (even heavy cloth ones). <S> They broke under the stress of squeezing the coconut milk out. <S> Then I realized I had an immersion blender. <S> The resulting milk after using the high setting, was smooth and delicious. <S> Finish smooth with an immersion blender. <A> In both cases the idea is that you make a gel which traps the particles but allows most of the liquid to escape. <S> With agar Dave Arnold demonstrates in the post linked above that you can make a gel with 0.2% agar, whisk, and then strain through a cheesecloth. <S> This relies on syneresis. <S> With gelatin the standard approach is to make a solution too weak to gel directly (about 0.5%), freeze, and then defrost slowly in a container with holes in the bottom.
|
A fool-proof method: Blend in normal blender, to make a gritty milk. Gel clarification, either with agar or with gelatin.
|
How can I store leftover puff pastry or make it more durable? I am going to be attempting a recipe for tarts which use shop-bought puff pastry. I am fairly new to baking and this will be the first time I am using puff pastry. I am unsure what I can do with the remainder of the puff pastry once I have cut the circles that I need. Can I just squash the piece together and stick it in the fridge for another time? Should I just bake them along with the tarts to use them up? Will they need to be thrown away? My concern is the butter in the pastry and the fact that it will have warmed up by my rolling and handling and what impact that will have on subsequent use. <Q> While it would be perfectly safe, it would ruin the layering that gives the rise and flakiness that is the reason for using puff pastry. <S> If you have a large enough section still intact, you could put in the refrigerator for a day or two, to use later. <S> Otherwise, a typical thing to do would be to prepare sweet or savory snacks with the surplus pieces. <S> Cut it into convenient shapes. <S> If you have large enough pieces, sticks would be good, even twisting them to give them an interesting texture. <S> Then, brush the pieces with butter (or oil), and sprinkle with cinnamon and sugar; or grated Parmesan cheese; or rosemary and salt; or some other complimentary flavor. <S> Bake the pieces up until they are puffed and golden brown <S> and they are very nice snacks or treats. <A> If you want to try to merge bits of layered dough to make large enough to use for something other than small bits, you should try to maintain the directions of the layers. <S> It won't be quite the same quality, but you can place bits edges together in two layers (top layer to cover any gaps in the bottom layer, then roll it out. <A> as long as you stack the layers and don't ball them up, the strata of flour and butter won't be compromised. <S> it will still puff.
|
No, you probably don't want to just squish leftover puff pastry dough together to save it. you can roll out the irregular pieces and cut them into strips for cheese or cinnamon sticks. or make irregular palm leaves, sprinkled liberally with sugar.
|
Basil Pesto Vinaigrette - what kind of vinegar? I have had this amazing pesto vinaigrette at a local restaurant recently, and I have been trying recreate it in my home quickly and easily. I know the best way to do it would be from scratch, but does anyone have suggestions on the type of vinegar to use to mix in with store-bought pesto? I have tried about 3 TBS of pesto to 1 TBS of white wine vinegar. It has some of the similar taste, but what I am looking for is a bit sweeter and a little less acidic. I don't want to add too much more vinegar, because the consistency I am going for is pourable but not overly watery. Any thoughts? Has anyone tried this with a different type of vinegar? Or should I just ask the restaurant for their recipe? <Q> They likely used white balsamic vinegar which is not cheap but has the kind of taste that sends people searching on the net ;) <S> In character, it is sweeter than white wine, rice wine, and normal white vinegar and less acidic. <S> btw, you can easily make your awesome own pesto in your blender using fresh basil, pine nuts, and olive oil. <S> If you blanch the basil, it'll stay bright green and pretty for the life of it. <A> You might try red wine vinegar, or a rice wine vinegar perhaps, maybe even balsamic (I would go young, but I don't think this will taste good). <S> You might just be missing a touch of sweetener like honey or sugar to cut the acid. <S> Depending on how up tight the chef is, they may tell you their recipe, chances are you're not going to get the same thing from store bought pesto as almost certainly some of the oil was subbed for the acid, or maybe more oil would have been added. <S> Pesto, also as a rule, tastes better fresh and only takes few seconds to whip up. <S> I recommend talking to the restaurant owner or executive chef, and see if they're willing to divulge their pesto recipe. <S> Also, searching Google for Pesto Vinegrette tells me you're at least on the right track: 1/2 cup Jayes Basil Pesto (see Recipe Center) or purchased basil pesto 3 tablespoons white wine vinegar 1 tablespoon fresh lemon juice 1/4 cup extra virgin olive oil <S> Salt Ground white pepper <S> http://www.bhg.com/recipe/salads/pesto-vinaigrette/ <A> The most common vinegar for salad dressings I've used in kitchens is apple cider vinegar. <S> It is definitely sweeter than white wine vinegar, and more affordable than balsamic. <S> In fact, I wouldn't recommend balsamic vinegar, as it could easily overpower the flavor of the pesto, leaving you with more of a balsamic vinaigrette. <S> Don't forget that you can always add some sugar while making the vinaigrette if you feel you need to boost the sweetness. <A> Balsamic vinegar! <S> I recently has this dressing at a restaurant and inquired and they said balsamic. <S> Trying to recreate it myself lol
|
Red wine vinegar is also common, and inexpensive, but lacks some of the sweetness it sounds like you are looking for.
|
What is the proper word/term/expression to describe a dish that appears to be something different I want to experiment with dishes that fool the senses. Dishes that look like one thing but taste completely different from what was visually expected (e.g. Heston's parsnip cereal ) I want to google for these kinds of recipies, but what seach terms should I use? Is there a term of art or word which describes these dishes? <Q> I believe the most common term, especially for foods that just visually look like another food, is Trompe-l'œil . <S> While the Wikipedia article linked focuses on other forms of art, the word is still applied to foods. <S> If you google " Trompe l'œil food ", you will find many examples of the term in use. <S> Note that Google seems smart enough to handle either "œ" or "oe". <A> They seemed to have been very popular in the middle ages: <S> Here's a description of the medieval feast I mentioned in a comment. <S> There's also a chapter on such foods in an online medieval cookbook. <S> But a quick search also finds pinterest boards and lists on general-interest websites. <A> They may under a few terms: <S> Mostly under Faux Food <S> Also Fake Out food <S> Also April Fools Day recipes <S> Sometimes they hide in plain sight and not so searchable. <S> Like these Vegan sunny side up Eggs .
|
The term seems to be illusion foods .
|
Egg replacement for fried chicken I often make fried chicken fingers the traditional way with an egg and milk covered cutlet dredged in seasoned flour, however my girlfriend is now on not only a gluten-free diet, but also a hypo-allergenic one which excludes eggs and dairy as well. My questions is, what are some ideas for an egg-less batter for fried chicken? For the dry mix, I'm mostly using rice flour as a GF alternative to standard all purpose flour, which is okay. My concern is with the wet mix, some things I have already tried for the wet potion of the mix: 3 parts cornstarch to 1 part water to replace the same quantity of eggs: This resulted in a good flavor, but lacked the flaky texture I was going for, the batter was very crunchy but smooth on the outside. A mixture of prepared mustard and water thickened up a bit with some of the dry mix: This resulted in the perfect flaky texture that I wanted, but I dislike the taste of the mustard in the batter. A mixture of apple sauce and water, thickened up with some of the dry mix: This resulted in a flavor that was better then the mustard, and a texture that was better then just the cornstarch, but I feel as though the apple flavor makes this option better suited to something like a pork schnitzel than a chicken cutlet. I do have gluten free bread crumbs as a last resort to help get the texture I want, but I usually prefer to have a bread crumb free batter in my chicken fingers. What might be a good egg alternative or a good wet mix substitute that will allow for a flaky texture with either a neutral flavor, or one that lends itself well to chicken. <Q> You should instead take a step back: rather than trying to create a substitution for egg in a breading which relies on their unique properties, instead use one of the many breading methods which does not. <S> Among them are: <S> Simply dredging in an acceptable starchy flour (such as corn meal) Using a (gluten free) tempura type batter Using a (gluten free) <S> beer batter without egg <S> All of them can be enhanced with spices or seasonings that you prefer such as chili powder, garlic powder, and so on. <S> The latter two can even accommodate wet prepared condiments (in reasonable quantities) like prepared mustard or soy sauce. <S> While the result will not be identical to the classic triple-layered French breading, it can be very good in its own right. <A> Managed to make crispy spicy seitan strips with the 'rough' texture I think is being described: boiled seitan in chicken-flavour stock; dipped strips in a mixture of aquafaba + oat milk; coated in a mix of corn flour + wheat bran instead of breadcrumbs (with spices); dabbed into chilli oil before frying at high heat. <A> Also you can just substitute out a fat instead of the egg wash, dredge the food in flour, then dip in whatever oil you may prefer (corn, olive, coconut, etc.) <S> coating completely, but be sure to press firmly into the breading (Outer coating). <S> Just to make sure it sticks well; I use this while baking a fried food rather than frying it in oil, just to make sure the breading doesn't fall off while frying.
|
It is not necessary to have any egg to make a breading.
|
Sous Vide Roast: What should I do with the excess liquid in the bag? I am new to sous vide. I am currently cooking a roast at 140 F. I can see there is a bit of liquid, and probably blood around the meat in the bag. It has been going for 8 hours now at or above 140, so all should be well as it is at it's largest, ~2 1/2" thick. I am going to serve with potatoes, onion, and carrot. I plan to stew the left overs. What should I do with the liquid currently in the bag? Would it be best to discard, or use for broth or to cook the vegtables? I considered draining and catching the bag of the liquid, and resealing the roast in a new bag to go back in the water bath. I could then use the liquid to cook the veggies. What would that do to the roast, if it cooked another 30 to 90 minutes? Note, I do plan to brown in a cast iron skillet for Maillard. Suggestions? Thanks. <Q> <A> First of all, don't drain it off. <S> You want to let the meat cook in its own juices the whole time. <S> If you take the liquid away, you'll be missing out on one of the main benefits of cooking meat in its own little bag: it gets cooked in its own juices and keeps all that flavor. <S> But there will of course still be some liquid left in the end. <S> Don't let the fact that you're new <S> to sous vide scare you here; that liquid is still just meat drippings like from a normal roast, just not cooked as hot and without a lot of the water evaporating away. <S> Depending on the roast, it'll have varying amounts of fat, and there's definitely plenty of strongly meat-flavored liquid, kind of like a concentrated broth. <S> So do with it what you'd usually do with those sorts of things. <S> Sure, you can cook your vegetables in it. <S> You can use it as the base for your stew. <S> If there's enough fat you can make a gravy. <S> Or save it for later and use it any other time you're looking for broth, keeping in mind that it'll be fairly strong. <A> I find the liquid remaining after a long cook (over a few hours) to be too beefy for my tastes. <S> I generally discard. <S> It is certainly safe. <S> I don't think it is necessary to drain and re-bag. <S> I do think it would overpower veggies. <S> This site is very helpful if you are new to low temp cooking: http://www.cookingissues.com/primers/sous-vide/ <A> I almost always use the liquid. <S> It's just jus. <S> The risk is that if you pre-salted the meat the jus can get excessively salty. <S> This is one reason I salt afterwards. <S> If you pour the jus into a pan and heat it you'll see that it clumps up and gets nasty. <S> This is the myoglobin coagulating. <S> A fine strainer removes this easily, and what's left behind should have a very clean, pure, meaty flavor. <S> I use it the way you'd use stock in a traditional pan sauce. <S> After searing the meat, use it (and some wine, and maybe some other stock) to deglaze the pan. <S> You can whip up a delicious sauce in just a few minutes.
|
If you are planning to stew the leftovers, I would use the juices there: as a gravy base.
|
What knife should I take if traveling? At home, my Santoku is used most, but there's no way I'm bringing that with me on my travels. In the event I don't find cooking utensils at respective hostels sanitary, I will opt to use a knife and a cork cutting board. But what type of knife should I bring? A serrated knife? my paring knife? Or should I get a utility knife? I plan on cooking entire meals for myself instead of going out to eat (to save money), and I definitely won't be cooking anything fancy. I do have a multi tool, but I'd rather not let that touch food as it's been used on all sorts of things and there's always the chance i rust my multi tool. <Q> Don't take anything that costs much: <S> You may have it taken away from you by border controls. <S> In some parts of the world being able to confiscate nice things is a perk of the job. <S> You want to enter (or leave) <S> the country, you part with the knife. <S> It could also be illegal to bring in knives over a certain size <S> Hostels are famous for being rife with theft. <S> Having some nice folding knife just begs for someone to take it Traveling is hard on equipment <S> It doesn't really matter anyway: who cares about the knife, anything will do. <S> Ingredients and technique are what matters <S> If I were you <S> Also make sure it looks like a cooking knife, you don't want anything that could be mistaken for a weapon! <S> If you lose it, or it gets stolen, or broken, or you give it to someone who needs it more than you do <S> then you just buy another cheap knife at a market somewhere. <S> If you have an expensive piece of equipment it's just another worry. <A> I would take an inexpensive paring knife. <S> For traveling I would want something small and lightweight, and cheap enough that I don't care if I manage to lose it or break it. <S> It should be fine for working with small fruits, vegetables and meats. <A> There are some very good utility knives out there. <S> I think my ones are mostly made by Victorinox, but the brand isn't critical. <S> Each knife costs the equivalent of about $5 US, and lasts in good sharp condition for about 2 years. <S> These are the knives I use all the time, as I'm usually too lazy to bring out (and then clean) <S> my proper "katana" knife. <S> Basically, any cook worth his salt will be able to drop pretenses and cook in field conditions as easily as at home. <A> Opinel folding knife: http://www.opinel-usa.com/proddetail.asp?prod=Opinel-No-8-carbon-steel-folding-knife Cheap, good quality, and it folds so you won't slice yourself while rooting around in your suitcase. <A> Depends how serious you're trying to be about cooking, and how you're traveling. <S> If you don't want to deal with packing a large, sharp knife, you're pretty much stuck with a paring knife and slightly limited cooking. <S> But if you want to be able to do anything you like, just find a cheap knife (or knife set) in the size/style you want. <S> For example, I bought <S> this three-piece set <S> (I think, they look right) maybe 8 years ago <S> and I still have them. <S> They're not the sharpest in the world, and I do have to hone them now <S> and then, but I can still cut a ripe tomato with the chef's knife. <S> I know there's a lot of expensive fancy knives out there, but there are also ridiculously cheap ones that'll do all right for you at home, let alone traveling. <A> In some stores you can find knives advertised as being for picnics. <S> They're generally small-ish (paring knife up to ~5" santoku), with a sheath of some sort (generally friction). <S> They generally sell for less than $15. <S> They're not that high of quality ... <S> I had one that I used for years <S> but as it wasn't full tang, and it was packed in the bottom of a bag, it got crushed and half the plastic handle snapped off ... <S> of course, I think I spent $8 on it. <S> They're often made of stainless steel, so they clean up well, but might not hold that great of an edge. <S> The sheaths generally are built so they can be rinsed out or go through a dishwasher (lots of holes on the sides).
|
I'd get a cheap, short cooking knife from some hardware store.
|
How to do a beer-butt chicken? A friend of mine told me how great Beer-Butt Chicken is. Apparently you take a chicken and beer flavors it in well, the butt. How can I cook the chicken like that while keeping the beer in the chicken? <Q> If you google beer can chicken , you will find many, many recipes and descriptions. <S> The basic idea is that you use a half-empty beer can as stand for the chicken, placing the chicken's cavity on top of the can before roasting or grilling. <S> The idea is that the aroma from the beer will transfer to the chicken, and the steam will help keep it moist. <S> You can even buy commercial racks to do the same thing without the beer can. <S> My personal opinion is that both of these ideas are bunk: <S> Very few if any aromatic molecules will transfer to the chicken, and even if they do, they will not penetrate past the surface <S> The steam will not keep the chicken moist, as the dryness of the meet is essentially a function only of the temperature to which you cook it, and very little else. <S> If the chicken is cooked to too high a temperature, then the proteins will tighten up and express water making the chicken tough, rubbery, and dry tasting. <S> The minimal amount of steam cannot change this fact. <A> What really makes a difference in flavor of chicken is a) getting a good quality chicken in the first place, and b) marinading or brining, and c) not overcooking it. <S> Get yourself some good chicken and a decent meat thermometer and go to town. <A> I use something similar to this . <S> I have found that beer does not flavor the meat very much <S> but I have used wine, chicken stock and especially aromatics such as onions and garlic in the "can" part <S> really seasons the chicken well. <S> Around here, chickens are generally butchered with a little bit of neck <S> and I try to push that closed. <S> Granted a little bit of room for steam to escape is good. <S> I have also used an actual can that I cut the top off and had the similar results but it tipped very easily. <A> Not only it's questionable whether the beer flavour transfer to the chicken, what does get transferred is the likely non-food-grade ink on the can. <S> First hand, I can tell you the ink left an awful taste and heaven knows what kind of chemicals. <S> The vertical roaster racks, however, do a much better job. <S> This article from meathead hits it dead on the head: Debunking Beer <S> Can Chicken <S> : A Waste Of Good Beer (And It Is Dangerous)
|
I have cooked many "beer can style" chickens. There has been testing on the cooking for engineers site which shows that using beer doesn't actually impart any real flavor. Another trick is to try to close the neck-hole as much as possible.
|
How to make smooth Chumus? I found many Chumus recipes online. The general gist is to cook the chickpeas for a few hours (or let them sit in water for a day, then cook them), grind them, add water/oil/Tehina/lemon juice, and salt/pepper. The result comes out more or less chunky (not that there are pieces, but it feels thick). I've seen "professionally made" Chummus (like Sabra) come out rich and smooth. How do they do it? <Q> I like mine really smooth, so I make the whole thing in a food processor. <S> You can use the "pulse" feature if you still want a little chunkiness, but if you want it really smooth, just process the heck out of it. <S> If you don't have a food processor, a blender may work too. <S> If you have neither of those, you could try a very fine potato masher but that would be a lot of work. <S> For extra fanciness, I also like to top my serving bowl with a little pool of chilli oil to allow my guests to add spiciness if they wish. <A> In my experience the two key factors to getting really smooth hummus are: Be sure that your chickpeas are cooked thoroughly. <S> This is not the time to leave them al dente, you want them to be completely tender. <S> Emulsify your hummus. <S> Puree your chickpeas, seasonings, and a bit of the cooking water until it is thick, but smooth. <S> Once you've got this as smooth as you can get it, slowly drizzle in your oil based ingredients (tahini & olive oil). <S> This seems to be the most important factor, as I've made incredibly smooth hummus without removing the chickpea skins. <A> This might be helpful , they use baking soda to soften the chickpeas before and during cooking. <A> One trick I've always used to "smoothen" things in the kitchen is to use a mesh strainer and a plastic bench scraper. <S> What you do is "push" the hummus through the fine mesh of the strainer after it's been run through the food processor. <S> This will give a very smooth texture and remove any large chunks that the processor missed. <A> In order to make really smooth hummus, you have to find a way to deal with the skins of the chickpeas. <S> One way might be a more powerful food-processor or blender, or simply more time pureeing, to get smaller chunks. <S> The better way would be to get rid of the skins altogether. <S> This is what a food mill is designed to do. <S> It purees the soft parts of food while holding back tough parts like skins. <S> Or you could peel the chickpeas. <S> One trick I heard uses two kitchen towels and a rolling pin: http://eatsblog.dallasnews.com/2012/05/paula-wolfert-smooth-talks-hum.html/ <A>
|
Cooking the chickpeas in a crockpot will yield a well cooked product that will puree into smooth hummus
|
What is the "grain" in 45 grain brown rice vinegar? I'm completely lost as to the meaning of "grain" in 45 grain brown rice vinegar . What does the grain number mean? <Q> It is the acidity percentage multiplied by 10, so 45 grain vinegar would be 4.5% acidity. <A> Just an addition with some boring math ... <S> Grain is also a weight unit (64.8mg) based on the average weight of a barley grain. <S> If you add 10 grains (.648g) of barley to a fluid ounce (28.4g) of water and assume that the barley contains 2/3 of fermentable starch (at least close enough for a rough estimate), you will end up with 0.286g of acetic acid dissolved in 28.4g of water if the ethanol and vinegar fermentation completes. <S> This is very close to a 1% solution. <A> -- converted from the comments regarding the origin of grain: -- It's possible the term 'grain' comes from Malt Vinegar which was traditionally made in England from barley (the grain). <S> The 'grain' number likely referred to amount of grain in the vat of work (water plus grain) which resulted in higher acidity. <S> Acetic acid (main acid in vinegar) is produced by fermentation of ethanol which is produced by fermentation of starch/sugars which is the starting point of the process. <S> Therefore the maximum acidity of a given batch is predetermined by the starting amount of sugar/starch in the grain. <S> And if the grain is uniform, it can be used as a unit.
|
Grain is a measurement of the acidity of the vinegar.
|
Why is my chicken all rubbery? I'm an (very) amateur chef who's just started cooking chicken. I've tried cooking chicken by boiling and frying it. I've managed to cook it right by boiling. The chicken is soft and tender. But no matter what I try I just can't seem to cook it right by frying. My fried chicken is all rubbery. I thought I'd increase cooking time to cook it more from inside. But that burnt it from the outside. Does rubbery mean it is under cooked? Is it possible to make this rubbery-ness go away by frying it more? (I am currently deep frying my chicken. Would frying it with less oil make a difference?) <Q> Frying is a challenging method to cook chicken, because it is very rapid, and easy to overcook the chicken. <S> Some of this <S> , you will simply learn by experience, based on the typical size of the parts you are frying, and the type of breading you use. <S> You will learn to recognize from the pattern of bubbles and how the breading looks when it is done. <S> In the mean time, if you have a quality instant read thermometer, you can take a piece out and measure its temperature. <S> White meat should be about 158 - 160 F, dark meat about 165 - 170 F (depending on your preference). <A> I had the same problem many years ago, not with frying chicken but making curries. <S> No matter what I did, my chicken would turn out very rubbery and dry. <S> Thr trick was to use the right kind of chicken pieces, at least it worked for me! <S> I was using chicken breast and over cooking it would just make it very dry. <S> So I started using chicken thigh and it has never disappointed me. <S> My chicken is still very moist and delicious now that I am using chicken thigh. <S> As this link explaines, chicken thigh has more of both fat and collagen than the chicken breast and so their cooking temperatures and times are different. <S> Having said that, you still should consider the nutritional value of both: http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/nutrition-chicken-breasts-vs-thighs-1815.html http://www.livestrong.com/article/418813-the-nutrition-of-chicken-breasts-vs-thighs/ <A> I brine my chicken before frying or roasting, and that keeps it <S> oh so tender and flavorful. <S> Overnight brining will give you the best ever results <S> but if you're in a hurry, 2 hours is acceptable. <S> In the brining solution, I add salt, sugar, peppercorns, bay leaves, coriander seeds, and lots of crushed fresh garlic (because I love garlic). <S> Make sure the whole chicken (or cut-ups) is covered. <S> Cover tightly.
|
Rubbery chicken is normally a sign that it is overcooked.
|
How long will whole coffee beans last in the freezer? I was gifted several bags of great coffee beans, which I won't be able to use all at once. If I store them in the freezer, how long will they last without losing flavor? I know some have noted that they can last months in the freezer, but I seem to notice a difference in taste after just a few weeks. <Q> but this is not the best way to store them as they lose flavor quickly (as little as 5-6 uses). <S> Even though the beans will last, storing them in the freezer is not ideal. <S> It affects flavor for a number of reasons. <S> ( See below ) <S> If you haven't opened the bag , store the bag in the cupboard, away from sunlight, heat, and excess humidity. <S> The best way to store coffee beans after being opened is in an opaque, airtight container at room temperature (unless you have a resealable bag with a degassing valve designed for storing coffee). <S> After being opened, the beans are considered fresh for 2-3 weeks, although if you are strict about the storage you may be able to get up to 5 out of them. <S> ( When I say fresh, I mean with minimal flavor change/loss ) <S> Why the freezer is bad: Freezing beans severely lowers the humidity in the bag or container. <S> This causes the beans to become stale very quickly. <S> In effect, you are slowly freeze drying them. <S> Also using cold beans in a grinder can mess with grind due to the oil on the beans being in a more solid state, which in turn affects the brewing. <S> If you do decide to store them in the freezer, put them in an airtight container and when you go to use the beans let the container warm up to room temperature before opening. <S> This way you do not mess with the overall humidity content of the container too much. <S> Especially let them warm up to room temperature before grinding. <S> Sources: <S> I am a Barista in a cafe and a lover of coffee at home. <S> I have tried both methods of coffee storage and have dealt with many customers who have tried both. <S> In my store we follow these regulations: <S> Beans that go into an opaque container that is not totally airtight are fresh for two weeks max. <S> Packaged beans with a degassing valve are fresh for six months or longer in the bag. <S> Beans, once ground, cannot be used after two hours (that being said, ground coffee starts losing flavor immediately). <S> Obviously, the sooner you use everything the better, but we follow those guidelines. <A> According to Home Barista , freezing coffee is pretty controversial. <S> He has, however, performed blind tasting experiments and concludes (emphasis added): <S> Two months is safe: <S> The article is fascinating; I recommend looking through it, even if you don't read every detail of his experimental methodology. <A> In the air tight containers with the degassing valve in the freezer should last till you consume them. <S> The degassing valve was designed by Fresco to keep freshly roasted coffee for up to Six Months and gave rise to StarBucks putting branches everywhere. <S> Barista Champions and international competitors run a very different game than the rest of us. <S> Some don't even check-in the coffee in luggage when flying due to the colder temperatures in the luggage compartment. <S> They also like to let the coffee breath for a couple of days after roasting to peak flavour. <S> For the rest of us mere mortals, unless you have a serious espresso machine and calibrate your machine and grinder hourly, you won't notice too much degradation and can enjoy it till the end. <S> This is because your extraction won't be optimal anyway. <S> Even after a whole year the freezer, good coffee that were frozen fresh will taste good to most coffee enthusiast. <S> Left outside, however, you will notice it much more. <S> Make sure you pull the bag out of the freezer and put in the hopper (grinder hopper) <S> a couple of days before grinding. <S> In the end, you'll notice that there are more forces at play here and as a home barista you can't control them all. <S> So just focus on enjoying the coffee.
|
Freshly roasted coffee that is immediately frozen after roasting in a near airtight container in a very cold freezer, can be kept undisturbed in the freezer for at least 2 months and be expected to produce espressos that are not obviously inferior to those made from fresh coffee that has never been frozen. They will technically last a long time in the freezer - up to many months -
|
Do lamb kidneys require their cores to be removed and what is the easiest way to remove them? I am cooking lamb kidneys by frying them on a pan. If I do not remove the cores of the kidneys , that tissue in the core remains and is hard to chew afterwards. Is there a way to cook the kidneys with the cores in place so that they become softer? this is because they are not easy to remove. What is the easiest technique for removing the cores if needed? <Q> The simplest way to remove kidney cores is to cut the kidneys in half (horizontally) then snip the cores out with a pair of sharp scissors. <S> With practice this can be done in two or three quick cuts. <A> You're asking two questions here. <S> (See Elendil's answer for how to remove the cores.) <S> Chewy connective tissues can be made tender by slow cooking. <S> If you want tender kidneys, and are interested in trying a different cooking method, you could make something like steak and kidney stew. <S> (Disclaimer: I've never actually made steak and kidney stew, so I'm making a few assumptions.) <A> Put either oil or some butter in the pan. <S> What this does is soften up the cores so they can be eaten. <S> I personally enjoy the cores and don't remove them. <A> For anyone still interested in this, I soak kidneys overnight in lemon juice (or at least a couple of hours) then drain before cooking. <S> I've never found them to be very chewy myself. <S> Maybe that might help.
|
You will never be able to soften them up by pan-frying.
|
How do I roast a whole duck so that fat drips out easily and the skin gets crispy? Duck is high in fat, so when roasting a whole duck you can end up with a lot of fat left with the duck inside the skin and soggier skin. How should the duck be prepared to avoid this? <Q> Among poultry, duck is exceptionally fatty, and a lot of its fat is directly underneath the skin. <S> This can present a challenge when cooking, because we want the fat to render out and the skin to become crispy and delicious. <S> The most common way to do this, classically, is to: Dock (or less commonly, score) <S> the skin all over, to permit the fat an exit path (when doing this, be careful to cut through the skin into the fat layer, but hopefully not into the meat itself) <S> Roast at a relatively low temperature for to permit the fat time to melt and drip away; many recipes then finish on a higher temperature for crisping and browning Like all poultry, salting the duck a day ahead, and then letting it sit in the refrigerator will also promote crispiness, but it is far less of a factor with duck which cooks and renders for a longer period of time. <A> I don't like greasy duck and after trying different methods found an indoor rotisserie and an adjustable bladed box cutter to be the solution. <S> The box cutter allows you to make shallow cuts thru the skin only and as the duck turns slowly on <S> the spit the melting fat bastes the duck resulting in a beautiful crispy non-greasy skin. <S> (My mouth waters just thinking about it) <A> I've seen many claims that this is the method typically used in Chinese and other eastern cuisines, but I can't confirm that from personal knowledge.
|
An effective method is to score the skin a bit and then steam the duck until most of the fat has melted, then roast at high temperature.
|
Why do chefs use Gold and Silver Leaf? I don't cook myself, but I watch a fair few cooking shows. Recently the theme of gold and silver leaf has been quite recurring. My first thought was "Well it can't be actual gold . Who would eat gold ?" But it looked very shiny and metallic; like it was actually made out of metal. I thought maybe it was made of chocolate, since I'd seen it in a lot of desserts, and the closest thing I could come up with was "chocolate coins are covered in gold foil -> the gold leaf is in a dessert -> you'd think it has to be something edible -> maybe it's chocolate?" Well, finally I just looked it up. I found this website which goes into a good bit of detail about what gold leaf is. And...it's gold! I was definitely surprised. So my research uncovered that it was indeed made of gold, but now I'm left with another question which I did not find the answer to: Why do chefs use gold and silver leaf? I mean...you're eating metal. I'm sure it doesn't taste bad , or else professional chefs wouldn't use it. But I can't imagine it tastes good either, it's metal! I've tasted tinfoil before (not swallowed it, but come into contact with it enough to notice the taste) and it certainly isn't pleasant . So all I can think is that they add it because it looks pretty. And okay...sure, I'll give you that. It does look pretty. But you're eating metal , expensive precious metals at that! The world's gold is going down our digestive tracts? Curiouser and curiouser. So I suppose I'm looking for an objective reason why chefs would use this item. I see a lot of new and interesting and odd things on these food shows, but this is a real strange one for me. Is there an aspect I'm missing that makes the use of gold leaf make more sense? Or is it really just as simple as "it's pretty so we're putting it on there"? <Q> The leaf is so thin that you can't really tell it's there when you eat it; you're not really eating much metal. <S> That's also why it's not that expensive - for example <S> I see 25 sheets for $49 on Amazon . <S> Not cheap, but if someone uses one $2 sheet for a few dozen truffles sold for a dollar each, it doesn't seem quite as crazy anymore. <S> It's also not actually that new an idea. <S> For example, kaju barfi , a traditional Indian dessert, is commonly decorated with silver leaf. <S> See Google image search for pictures - it does actually look pretty cool. <A> You already have stated the major reason: because it looks attractive. <S> It really is nearly that simple. <S> Someone cynical would note that sociologically, consuming prestige and expensive items can be a way to establish rank and dominance, so chefs serving that audience may accommodate that need. <S> It is an example of conspicuous consumption — in this case, literally. <A> It is purely for decorative reasons. <S> The gold is so thin (therefore "leaf") that you cannot taste it, and it is relatively cheap. <S> Gold is used in many foods and drinks, there are a few alcoholic beverages that make use of gold leaf as a gimmick. <S> For example Goldschläger . <A> It is also a memorable and conversational piece to attract new customers. <S> We recently added a gold leaf to our desserts and have a new stream of customers. <S> Gold appeal has been with us for years. <S> Here is a list of gold leaf uses in the restaurant industry. <A> We have ingested metals medicinally for centuries. <S> Silver was the only cure for syphylis before penicillin and gold was used to modify the course of rheumatoid arthritis until a decade or so ago. <S> Of course metals such as lithium have psychotropic effects and is still used as a mood stabiliser. <S> So none of these metals are inert and all have potential to damage the kidneys if ingested daily over a long period but a tiny bit in gold leaf as an occasional indulgence will do nothing. <S> I will however strongly recommend against a mercury enema. <A> It's fun and decorative. <S> It looks great on wedding cakes or for special effects when you're wanting to mimic gold coins.
|
It's just decorative, in a bit of an extravagant way. The reason why chefs use gold leaf for any entrée is profit.
|
Smoking a pig at 225 F vs barbecuing one at 250F? I have seen many posts that say smoking a pork shoulder at 225F to an internal temperature of 195F will take 15 hours. I have also seen many posts that say you can barbecue a 90 pound whole hog at 250F in an above ground pit in 6-7 hours. How can this be possible? Both shoulders are whole, not cut up. Can 25F really make that much of a difference in cooking times? <Q> You may want to check out the following pages: What Influences Cooking Time Thermodynamics of Cooking Using their methods, I have not had a shoulder take 15 hours to come to temperature at a smoker temperature of 225 (computer-controlled). <S> I have never done whole hog, but as Jefromi stated the actual method of cooking makes a significant difference. <S> The Hawaiian imu (the bury-it-in-the-ground style of cooking using the retained heat from sand and rocks that were under the coals) is a much more efficient way to rapidly transfer the heat to the meat than using air to conduct the heat, and forced convection from the blower in my smoker is more efficient than natural convective currents. <S> If my smoker did not have the blower it would take longer to get the meat to temperature, but I still don't think it would take 15 hours for a shoulder. <S> Whole hog weight versus time at 250 degrees: <S> 40 pounds: 3.5 hours 75 pounds: 9 hours <S> 100 pounds: <S> 12 hours 125 pounds: 15 hours 150 pounds: 18 hours 175 pounds: 21 hours 200 pounds: 24 hours From Goin' <S> Whole Hog AmazingRibs.com is essentially a peer-reviewed barbecue site. <S> They don't publish a recipe until it has been tested multiple times and is nearly foolproof. <S> They also bust some of the barbecue myths that have been spread for generations. <S> I am not affiliated with it other than donating some money to them due to their high-quality articles. <A> It is not viable to compare cooking times for a single shoulder with that for a whole hog. <S> There are some reasons for this: Surface area is the biggest factor in determining cooking time per mass. <S> A 9-pound pork shoulder may take 12-16 hours to cook whole, but if you were to butterfly it, the cooking time would be drastically reduced. <S> You may have a 90-pound hog, but you are exposing a much greater amount of surface area to cooking at one time. <S> You are not going to cook a whole hog to nearly as high a temperature as you would a pork shoulder. <S> If you are only making pork shoulder or pork butt, you can cook it to 195f+ with no problem. <S> It will be moist, tender, and pull apart easily. <S> When you're doing whole hog, you're also including a lot of pig (loin, back, etc) that is not so amenable to cooking to that temperature. <S> The latter is cooked to a lower temperature, and is chopped to help tenderize it. <A> 1) A "market" size pig, i.e. one they cut up and sell in pieces at the grocery store is much bigger---(250 lbs or so) than a 90 lb. <S> "roaster." <S> Cooking time depends on the largest cut, so a shoulder from a market pig will be larger than the shoulder from a roaster, thus taking longer to cook; 2) <S> 25 degrees does make a very big difference in cooking--yes, hours; 3 <S> ) 6-7 hours for a 90 lb pig at 250 is not enough time in my experience. <S> I cook ribs for 5 hours at that temp-- <S> no way the shoulder or ham is getting done to an internal temp of 195-200 in that time. <S> A lot of the recipes for cooking whole hog use homemade cement block pits--not exactly precision cooking instruments. <S> There may be a thermometer somewhere in the pit that reads 250, but that may not be the temp at the meat which is exposed to the coals. <S> So, yes it could take 15 hours to cook a big shoulder at 225. <S> It will take much less time to cook a 90 lb roaster at 250, but more like 10 hours. <A> If you're aiming for an internal temperature of 195F, the difference between 225F and 250F is huge . <S> Heat transfer rates are proportional to the temperature gradient, or roughly, the difference in temperature between the hot part and the cold part. <S> Say you're trying to get those last 5 degrees, from 190F to 195F in the middle. <S> If the hot part is 225F, you've got a difference of 35F; if it's 250F you have a difference of 60F, 1.7 times as much. <S> So you'd expect it to take (very roughly) 70% longer at 225F. <S> And yes, the depth the heat has to penetrate (the distance from the surface to the center of the meat) has a similar effect, but from what I understand, when you're roasting a whole hog you flatten it out somewhat so that the thickness isn't actually that much larger than a pork shoulder. <S> (Still, as RudyB said, 15 hours is a pretty long time; it might be overkill.)
|
I have not cooked a 90lb pig, but the 65 lb ones I have cooked took over 7 hours cooking at temps higher than 250.
|
Is there a food that is halfway between a cheesecake and regular cake? While living in Korea, there was one special bakery I found that had a cake that I can only describe as being halfway between cheesecake and regular cake. It was creamy like a cheesecake, but had a density somewhere between an actual cheesecake and the airy texture of a regular out-of-the-box cake. It had the wonderful flavor of a cheesecake, but was lighter and fluffier. I would love to bake something like this so I can try it again. Is there a name for such a cake? The dessert looked like cake from the outside: it had tiny holes everywhere, albeit smaller than what you would see in a regular cake. It was also shaped into a loaf, and the top would rise a bit. It was more dense than a regular out-of-the-box cake, and definitely had a flavor similar to cheesecake. I would have called it a "cheesecake flavored cake" at first impression. It also had a bounce to it, if I pressed it down, it would bounce back up to a degree. <Q> Perhaps you're looking for the soufflé cheesecake , which has a moderate amount of flour in it. <S> This style is also popular in Japan. <S> The other style popular in Japan is the "rare cheesecake", which is set with gelatin instead of being baked. <S> I think this is probably denser than what you're referring to, so I left it out of my first edit, but worth considering if the soufflé style doesn't match your expectations. <S> In Germany, some quark cheesecakes have flour in them as well, and those often have a more sturdy texture with a bit more air than the New York style. <A> It sounds like it was just a fluffy cheesecake. <S> You didn't describe anything that sounds like it was regular cake, no mention of crumbs or any texture that'd indicate flour and leavening and such. <S> There's plenty of room for variety among cheesecakes; they can be dense and rich, or light and fluffy like the one you describe. <S> Generally, cheesecakes are fluffy simply because there's some air beaten into them one way or another. <S> I've seen hacky low-effort recipes that use things like marshmallows or cool whip to achieve this. <S> The more traditional way is to beat egg whites to soft peaks before folding them in, thus incorporating air. <S> I don't have a recipe to recommend, but if you search for "fluffy cheesecake" you'll find plenty of starting places, <S> like this one apparently taken from Cook's Illustrated . <A> <A> In Mexico, a popular desert is called Pay de Queso (which would translate to Cheese Pie). <S> it is similar to cheesecake, but less dense, and less sweet. <S> It, like Cheesecake, can be eaten plain, or with fruit or other toppings as well. <S> In my experience, it's also common that the terms Pay <S> de Queso <S> (Cheese Pie) and Pastel de Queso <S> (Cheesecake) are used interchangeably in Mexico, so finding a recipe for proper Pay de Queso could prove challenging. <S> Some (untested) recipes can be found here (in Spanish), and here is one in English
|
Japanese cheesecake is a good option since it's airier than regular but with the traditional flavors of cheesecake (minus the graham cracker crust).
|
Soak clams with cornmeal: yes or no? Many cook books advise that fresh clams should be soaked in salt water with a bit of corn meal added. The purpose is that the clams will consume the corn meal, thereby cleansing their gut of sand. However, I've seen it said elsewhere that this is unnecessary for farm raised clams since they are raised on a medium suspended above the bottom and therefore not exposed to sand. My question is twofold: 1) Is the first advice valid at all? Does this soaking improve the taste and/or quality of the clams? 2) If #1 is true, does it also apply to farm raised clams or is the step unnecessary? <Q> According to Ask A Chef <S> the cornmeal is not necessary. <S> It is the salt water that actually causes the clams to purge themselves: <S> The thought behind using cornmeal is that it is an irritant that causes the clam to "cough" and expel all sand that may be in its shell. <S> There is also a thought that it helps to change the flavor of the meat and make them less fishy <S> (I can't say I have noticed a flavor difference between a clam purged with cornmeal and one without). <S> Whether you use cornmeal or not you will need to use saltwater. <S> Soaking the clams in saltwater for an hour or two will allow them to cycle clean saltwater in and out of the shell and purge the sand. <S> Using cornmeal to purge is common and is thought to aid in the complete expulsion of the sand, but it really is not the real reason the purging will happen. <S> As far as purging farm raised clams, some (perhaps even most) <S> suppliers purge them for you before sending them to market, so doing it yourself may not be necessary. <S> However, I could not find an authoritative source that indicates this is always true. <A> Further info: <S> This weekend I made linguine with white clam sauce, so I tested the theory about farm-raised clams. <S> I soaked all but 5 of them in salt water (no corn meal). <S> I marked the shells on those 5 <S> so I would know which were which. <S> None of the clams had any sand, including the 5 un-soaked ones. <S> So either the producers purge farm-raised clams, or the way they're raised they don't need purging. <S> In a week or two <S> I'll try the same dish with wild clams and see if the soaking makes a difference for them. <A> I worked in the seafood industry for over 13 years. <S> We sold a ton of clam and never really had an issue with sand. <S> However, if you go clamming and bring back a bunch of clams, they will definitely need to be purged. <S> If you think about it, clams live on the sandy ocean floor(At least the wild ones do). <S> So putting them in sea water, or salty water that is close to the same consistency as the ocean, the clams would naturally eject the sand, as they take in new water. <S> You will want to change the water out, every 20-30 minutes <S> and they should be good to cook, after 2 or 3 soaks. <S> As far as corn meal goes, I have heard several people tell me that corn meal speeds up the process. <S> We recently went clamming and brought back our limit of cockles. <S> We tried the corn meal, but no one ever really said how much to put in. <S> We put in quite a bit(About a half a cup) into a 5 gallon bucket(Keep in mind <S> the clams came to about 1/3 of the way from the bottom. <S> And we filled the bucket with salt water, and let them sit over night. <S> They still had sand in them. <S> So it looks like, the key is changing the water a few times. <S> I hope this helps
|
Farm raised or commercial clams, do not need to be purged, because they have basically gone through a purging process, when they were stored.
|
Low fat marinades that still work I´m a huge fan of good meat marinades. However, marinades usually include a lot of oil and adding it to a high fat meat, e.g. lamb or pork is adding more calories in my food than I care for. Do you know of a good replacement for oil in marinades? I was thinking of using a mixture of water and mustard... <Q> If you google fat free marinade , you will find a myriad of recipes from many sources. <S> As a more general principal, you have many options: <S> For chicken and pork, brining (which seasons, but despite the myth does not add flavor) <S> Some marinades have soy, water, or citrus as their main base with little or no fat Dry <S> rub the meat with herbs and spices, which is probably the most effective method of adding flavor Use a sauce or mop (as the barbecue folks say) during the cooking to add flavor; these tend to be low fat. <A> There is always whiskey-balsamic marinade: 1 part whiskey <S> 1 part balsamic vinegar <A> Oil is needed for marinades when you are using spices, as most spices are oils. <S> The oil added to the marinade provides a medium for flavors like cumin and chili, helping liberate them from whatever powder or whole spice they are in. <S> Water doesn't do anywhere near the job that oil does on these, you're better off just rubbing them on directly. <S> Oil is also sticky, so it will cling to the meat after it is removed from the marinade, keeping some of the flavor outside. <S> So if you are making a marinade that uses powdered or whole spices you need oil to best extract them, and there is no substitute. <S> You are better off choosing a marinade that uses herbs, acids, water, and salt. <A> Try using spirits with little to no taste on their own (apart from the alcohol), like vodka. <S> Ethanol is a pretty good solvent and will help get the flavor out of your spices. <S> When heated, the ethanol will simply evaporate. <S> Be careful with the soy sauce, tho. <S> It contains a lot of salt.
|
Personally, I often use a ginger-garlic-soy sauce marinade with some alcohol added to give pork an amazing taste.
|
Black tea water: Does boiling water first make a difference? When I make black tea, I usually put the leaves (or tea bags) into cold or room-temperature water before I start boiling it. I've noticed that certain cultures always insist on first boiling the water, and only putting in tea leaves once it reaches a full, rolling boil. Does boiling the water before putting in the leaves make a difference? I tried both ways and couldn't find a difference in taste. It seems like boiling for more than a few minutes means both would have similar levels of oxygen (not sure why that would make a difference). To clarify: I personally * boil my tea leaves (or bag) for several minutes, as in 10-20 minutes or more. It seems like the other popular way to make tea is to steep in boiling water for several minutes. I would like clarity on whether putting the leaves/bags in cold water makes a difference, especially given the time-scale of boiling (should it be shortened). <Q> As you're heating the temperature of the water will rise at different rates, depending on the amount of heat, on the quantity of water, and on whether the pan is covered or not. <S> With the tea in the pan, this would create an infusion gradient, as the temperature rose over a varying number of minutes. <S> If you boil the water first, then infuse, you've fewer variables: the quantity of tea and the quantity of water. <S> So you'll have less to adjust to get the brew perfect. <S> I don't see how you could brew even the finest black tea for 10-20 minutes without over-extracting it, producing a stewed, bitter flavour that dries the tongue. <A> In Turkey, we have a two-pot system (çaydanlık) for making black tea. <S> Lower pot is used to boil the water, while upper pot contains the loose tea. <S> This helps the tea leaves to get somewhat conditioned before steeping. <S> Boiled water is poured over the loose tea, then steeped for about 15 mins. <S> The lower pot keeps the upper pot warm enough to help release all the flavors. <S> Then, the tea is diluted with the boiling water when served. <S> Glass is preferred for serving, to see the color mostly. <S> It is told that boiling the tea leaves or even adding boiling water could burn them and make the taste bitter. <S> This way tea tastes awesome. <A> so said in the box). <S> When I got loose tea leaves <S> (Twinings Earl Grey and English Breakfast caddies) I tried the same and the result wasn't as spectacular as I hoped. <S> For loose tea leaves it works best if the leaves are poured boiling water rather than getting boiled along with it
|
From my brief experience, I put my tea bag in the pot, pour a cup of tap water (room temperature) and heat until the boiling point - this gets me a better tasting tea from cheap tea bags (English Breakfast, Earl Grey - or
|
Is it possible to make a beverage that evaporates on contact with the consumer's tongue? In one episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation Guinan makes a Tzartak Aperitif , which is described as: When made properly, the evaporation point of the drink's main ingredient was one-half degree lower than the body temperature of the consumer. Thus, the liquid evaporated immediately after it touched the tongue, and the flavor was carried entirely by the vapors. Now I know that this drink is completely fictional, but it got me wondering if a similar effect has ever been achieved in the real world? Are there any (edible) substances, which can be used to create a beverage that evaporates on contact with the consumer's tongue? And for bonus points, are there any such substances which make a beverage that actually tastes good ? <Q> In the star trek world you have plenty of beings with body temperatures higher or lower than humans, so if you had a being with a body temp of 79C then ethanol would work out perfectly! <S> However, with humans the liquid which would fit the bill of vaporizing just below body temperature would be Pentane, which not only smells bad but is also toxic. <S> , you'd want a liquid with a much lower vaporization point than body temperature so it would boil off quickly. <S> If you pick a liquid that boils just below body temperature it would take some time to vaporize <S> and you wouldn't have the same effect. <S> All is not completely lost, you can still have some cool effects with liquids that are safe for consumption. <S> What you have to remember is that the closer a liquid gets to its boiling point the more it evaporates, and any volatiles in it will tend to remained suspended in the vapor and be detectable by the nose. <S> This is the effect you get when you sniff brandy or cognac that has been brought up to body temperature. <S> You can savor it by holding it on the tongue for a few seconds and letting the vapors fill your nasal cavity. <S> So all you need is some strong (at least 80 proof) and flavored (or more accurately scented) alcohol, and the right glasses. <S> Brandy snifters would work best as they are designed to capture the vapors so they can be inhaled. <S> You could then heat the liquid to just above human body temperature and then serve. <S> Keep the quantities served down unless you want some very drunk guests! <A> Diethyl ether has a boiling point just under human body temperature, so theoretically it'd work. <S> However, judging from the smell, the stuff would taste horrible, if you did manage to swallow any, you'd belch uncontrollably, and it'd knock you out quite quickly. <S> With a boiling point of 78.1 °C, perhaps one quarter atmosphere might do it, and might be survivable with enhanced oxygen content. <S> Still, 95% ethanol burns going down as a liquid, and I doubt the gas'd be much better. <A> There are three main liquids humans can consume without harm: water, ethanol, and certain lipids which are liquid at room temperature, such as olive oil or vegetable oil. <S> Any beverage would have to have at least one of those as its bulk ingredient. <S> None of these evaporate instantly upon contact with the tongue, or at anything like body temperature. <S> So, no, this is not reasonably possible; it was just fiction. <A> I was actually watching an episode of 'Brew Dogs' last year that dealt with something similar. <S> The show is based on a couple of Scottish guys who own Brew Dogs brewery and they went all over the USA, making beers that had elements of the places they created them. <S> They'd create all kinds of weird concoctions, but people usually like them. <S> When they went to San Francisco, CA, they made a beer where they collected condensed fog that rolled in off the bay to make their beer from. <S> Where your idea came in was when they created a vaporized portion of the beer with the help of a device that created flavored vapors. <S> Its been a while <S> and I can't really look it up do to the firewall <S> I'm behind right now, but I did find that the company was called 'Le Whaf'. <S> If you search that combination, I'm sure you'll find a video where they use it. <S> So it's not exactly a liquid that evaporates on your tongue, but a flavored fog. <S> I think it's pretty cool <S> and it's something available now.
|
The other option would be to lower the ambient air pressure to something where alcohol boils at around body temperature. The science behind it is wrong anyway
|
Gritty texture in cookies I made this recipe last weekend and while it came out very tasty, there was the occasional gritty texture/crunch similar to sand at the beach getting in your mouth. This was more of an issue since the recipe produces a more cake-like cookie, so the grit stands out more. The batter was pretty thick and difficult to stir, but it seemed fairly well mixed.I have a feeling this is somehow related to the baking powder/soda, but not entirely sure. [EDIT] SAJ14SAJ mentioned the creaming method being a possible source to the issue. I wasn't entirely sure with that step, how exactly would you "cream together" sugar and butter? It said only to soften and not melt, and it definitely didn't appear "creamy" when I was done with it. <Q> It is unlikely that the chemical leavening was a contributor to perceived grittiness. <S> If you had extra leavening, especially in clumps large enough to perceive, you would also have a very metallic off taste, that surely would have been worth mentioning. <S> These cookies are made by the creaming method, and have very little water. <S> The most likely suspect to cause graininess is the sugar. <S> The way to prevent this, if you consider the effort worth it, is to sift the sugar through a very fine strainer prior to using it in your dough. <A> Let the dough sit overnight. <S> The granulated sugar will 'dissolve' in the dough and the cookies won't have that granulated texture. <A> Cause of gritty sugar texture: Baking immediately after mixing dough instead of wrapping/ <S> covering it chilling and waiting at least 1 hour, 2 hours for best results. <S> Its common, no one wants to wait 2 hours for homemade cookies:)
|
If there were clumps in the granulated sugar for any reason, they might not dissolve completely during the mixing or baking, leaving a gritty texture.
|
What is the easiest way to grind poppy seeds? When I prepare a poppy seeds filling (e.g. for a pie), I currently use an old-style coffee grinder. It takes small amounts (like 2 tbsp at a time) of poppy seeds and grinds them into powder in 2-3 minutes. The resulting quality is OK for me, but the process is not very easy as I often need to stop for the grinder to cool down, to move around the seeds that got stuck to the inner walls, and it takes quite some time when you need to process 200-300 g of poppy seeds that way. So, my question is: Is there any kitchen appliance or just some other way to grind poppy seeds easier without losing on the quality? <Q> You need to acquire a poppy seed grinder (picture #1). <S> It's still not easy to grind a lot of poppy seed — you will need to break out your supply of elbow grease — but it's much more efficient than a coffee grinder. <S> It also does a better job, because it actually crushes the seeds to release all their oils and other goodness, rather than haphazardly cutting apart some of the seeds and not others. <S> (They do make electric grinders [picture #2], but they're aimed at bakeries and the like, not for home use.) <S> 1. <S> 2. <S> If you're stuck using what you have, namely the coffee grinder, try adding sugar. <S> It helps keep the poppy seed from sticking everywhere you don't want it to. <S> Naturally, you then need to take the sugar quantity into account when you're actually using the poppy seed. <A> Poppy seeds are already small enough, what you are most likely trying to do is to break the shell so the flavors can get out. <S> You can get the same result by crushing rather than grinding. <S> If you are going to be doing it often it may be worth investing in a poppy seed mill or grinder, you can get them off the web. <A> You don't need to specifically buy a poppy seed grinder. <S> Any burr grinder that can grind fine enough will do. <S> Personally I would use a burr hand grinder (usually still sold as coffee grinders), such as a Hario Skerton grinder. <A> I use the small 1 cup jar for my Oster Kitchen Center. <S> It takes lots of time to grind 2-3 Tbsp. <S> Shake the jar often to get the most even grind. <S> My Mom had grinder just for this.
|
Poppy seed grinders are also burr grinders, but with a general burr grinder you'll be able to adjust the size of your grind, so you'll still be able to use it for coffee, or other spices where you may not want a poppy-seed sized grind. A large mortar and pestle would likely give you a good result, and you could do much more at once.
|
Coolest part of the fridge If I need to cool something quickly or keep something at a lower temperature, do I put it in the top or bottom shelf of the fridge? Which part of the fridge is the coolest? <Q> Most refrigerators have the cold air outlet on the top, that way the cold air sinks down naturally to the bottom. <S> Air from the bottom is then circulated through the heat exchanger to make it colder and then goes back in the air outlet at the top. <S> So the very coldest place is right in front of the cold air inlet in the top. <S> That's generally below freezing though, so you may get things colder than you want. <S> Other than that the coldest place tends to be the bottom shelf. <S> You could also cool it down in the freezer for awhile and then transfer it to the refrigerator. <A> In general, unless your refrigerator manual says otherwise, the lower parts of the compartment will be the coldest. <S> This is in line with simple physics, as cold air is denser, and tends to sink. <S> You also don't want to store foods that need the coldest spot on the shelves built into the door. <S> In general, you may wish to take more proactive measures to rapidly cool food. <S> See also <S> What are some techniques to cool down a dish so that we can store it in the refrigerator safely? <S> for specific advice on this. <A> @GdD is right, the coldest part is usually the back of the top shelf as the coldest air blows directly on it. <S> The counter intuitive point is: the cold air won't survive long enough to make it to the bottom unless all the shelves and food in its path are at least as cold. <S> Otherwise, the top of the fridge would remain warmer and all the cold would settle in the bottom. <S> The fridge is not an ideal system, for the chimney effect of the cold air to work fast enough to make the bottom coldest, the temperature gradient in fridge would need to be a lot higher which would mean a badly designed fridge. <S> Fridges usually blow coldest AIR at the top and it slowly works its way down and form a gradient. <S> Only after the top shelf has had a chance to cool down to the incoming cold air temperature do the lower shelves stand a chance of getting cold. <S> This is even true with those little bar/office fridges with freezer inside at the top. <S> If you find the milk slightly frozen, move it DOWN a shelf <S> and it stops from partial freezing. <A> The door isn't quite as well insulated, and when you open it the front gets warmed up a little more than the back. <S> It's reasonably common to find things frozen at the back of the fridge, especially on the bottom shelf, while the rest of the fridge is at the desired slightly above freezing temperature. <S> If the fridge is more full, the top may be colder because all the food is blocking the cold air from actually getting to the bottom. <S> If you have drawers at the bottom, though, they're likely to be warmer in practice, because they get periodically warmed when you open them, and are slower to cool back down since they're mostly cut off from direct air flow. <S> Beyond that, wherever the cold air is being pumped into the fridge is the coldest. <S> The vents should be visible, and you can feel for cold air flowing while the fridge is running. <S> But the vents are usually at the top, not right next to a shelf, so that the air can flow around instead of freezing whatever's right in front of it. <S> Depending on your fridge, it may or may not be possible to stick something right in front of the vent.
|
Often the back of the fridge is the coldest, and the bottom is colder than the top if the fridge isn't too full.
|
How important is fresh ground coffee vs a good coffee grinder? Given a choice between using a good coffee grinder a few days in advance, or one of those whirly-chopper grinders immediately before brewing, which would you choose? <Q> A blade grinder doesn't produce evenly-sized particles; big particles will under-extract (losing flavour) and small particles will over-extract (introducing bitterness). <S> My wife and friends didn't believe me about the over-extraction potential of blade ground coffee, so we did a blind taste test between coffee beans ground with a blade and ground with a burr. <S> I identified the blade-ground coffee every time. <S> That's not the comparison you have, but in the absence of a burr grinder I'd go for pre-ground, for convenience. <A> It's really going to be a trade off between the flavor defects, but it also depends on the brewing method, and if it's drip or espresso. <S> For us, with drip, stale coffee tastes worse than badly ground coffee. <S> We can always tell if coffee has been freshly ground or not, because the characteristics and flavor profile change the longer <S> it's been ground. <S> Having a crappy grinder will affect the flavor as well, with some grounds being over extracted and under extracted. <S> At this point the quality of the coffee wouldn't even matter. <S> So, it really depends on what you'd prefer to sacrifice. <S> For me? <S> In this situation, I'd probably just drink tea. <A> Although there are trade-offs for both, I would suggest grinding right before brewing . <S> Here is why: As soon as you grind coffee beans, they begin to lose aroma and flavor. <S> This begins to happen as soon as the beans are ground. <S> In my opinion, this is a big problem if you want really great tasting coffee. <S> Although blade grinders do tend to produce some uneven particles, which can cause uneven extraction (over extraction for smaller particles and under extraction for larger particles), for the everyday cup of coffee, this isn't a significant problem. <S> Good blade grinders ($50 and up) do not have this problem as much. <S> The everyday coffee drinker will most likely notice less fresh coffee as opposed to an uneven extraction. <S> A burr grinder is the best way to go, but you need a really good quality one (expensive) to produce a good grind, and there are even downsides to this type of grinder. <S> In my cafe, we use industrial burr grinders that are very consistent. <S> At home, I use a good quality blade grinder and usually come up with good results, especially if I am grinding more coarsely (drip coffee, french press, etc). <S> I only really get problems with inconsistent grind when grinding finely for espresso. <S> I also find that if you shake the blade grinder (almost like a martini shaker), the grinds mix better during the process and you get more consistency. <S> That is just what I have found though, and you should be very careful when doing this. <A> In my experience, it seems to make a weaker brew when ground unless you use more in the pot. <S> I'm not a fan of weak coffee, so I just stick to a good brand of pre-ground. <A> Given that both have pros and cons, I would choose fresh ground with a blade over older burr-ground. <S> The smell is an indication of how it will taste, and it smells sooo <S> good immediately after grinding. <A> I don't think that freshly ground coffee tastes better than pre-ground coffee of the same age? <S> Personally, I cannot tell the difference.
|
Both have downsides: Coffee that is ground more than a few hours before brewing loses aroma, which is obviously an important part of flavour. So, from my point of view, it's not important at all.
|
What's an effective method to strain liquids? When I make horchata or aqua frescas, I often have a large volume (quarts) of liquid that could benefit from straining. Usually only the small fine mesh strainer can get out the fine particles that remain after running the juices through the blender. I haven't really seen very fine mesh strainers that are bigger than a couple inches across; I'd like to be able to strain a large volume at once. Are there any tricks of the trade? <Q> More Details <S> I use a regular mesh strainer like the one below, and I line it with a few layers of cheese cloth. <S> Depending on your colander's design, it might work too. <S> The number of layers depends on what your straining, and how loose the cheesecloth is. <S> I use it more often to make mascarpone cheese <S> and I typically use 3 or 4 layers. <S> I set the strainer over a large bowl and load the strainer and cheese cloth with as much unstrained liquid as it will take. <S> Something like horchata shouldn't take too long, a few minutes maybe. <S> When I make mascarpone I set the strainer (in its bowl) in the refrigerator overnight. <A> Frequently health food stores and asian markets will have "milk bags" that are used for straining soy milk and nut milks. <S> They usually look either like a pillowcase with a drawstring at the open end, or occasionally a long cloth tube with a wire handle. <S> Either way, you pour the liquid in and the fine mesh of the cloth holds the particles back, but the large surface area allows the liquid to drain quickly. <S> You then rinse the cloth inside out and wash it before reusing. <S> I've used them to make both nut milks and cold brewed coffee <S> and they work a lot faster than a strainer of equivalent mesh size. <S> Another advantage is that the cloth allows you to squeeze the liquid out of the pulp for maximum yield. <A> Another type is the chinoise or china cap, which may or may not be suitable for your needs; these typically have very fine mesh. <S> These can be available in larger capacities. <S> You may also have success with a tamis, which is a drum type strainer, although these are harder to find. <A> I've been using this strainer To help me strain liquids, it has smaller holes and bigger space. <S> You can have some of these at Elisabeth Nielsen's webite.
|
Cheese cloth is easy to find and does a great job when we make horchata. At restaurant supply stores, you can get much larger fine strainers than consumer stores normally have.
|
How to get a sourdough like effect without the hassle of a real sourdough starter? I enjoy making bread, but the bread I make using standard yeast of course lacks that sourdough taste. But the process of making and maintaining a sourdough starter frankly requires a bit too much work and consistent attention from me. Is there a way to approximate that sourdough taste using a process less complicated and high-maintenance than a "real" sourdough starter? (As a footnote, ideally this would be a process that could start the night before one made bread, but not much more than that). <Q> You can try a pâté fermentee . <S> This is essentially a dough you leave to prove overnight. <S> It is how most french bread is made. <S> You simply make half a batch of dough, leave it overnight, then make the other half and knead the PF through it. <S> While the flavour isn't quite as sour as sourdough, it does have a bit more of a tang than 'normal' bread. <A> Some companies sell a "Sourdough flavor" that is usually just sourdough waste products, some deactivated yeast, and filler. <S> The waste products are what you usually taste in sourdough, so these might be somewhat effective. <S> Since a lot of the flavor is from acids like lactic acid, you could try adding something else that contains lactic acid. <S> These may contain other flavors though, so be sure they won't conflict with what you're trying to do. <S> For instance, kimchee frequently has garlic in it, so if you don't want the garlic flavor in your bread in addition to the sour flavor, be sure to find a kimchee that lacks garlic (or has less). <A> If you make home made sauerkraut you can use a half cup of the juice in place of some of the water. <S> The juice contains live lactic bacteria as well as lactic acid. <S> Make the dough the day before. <S> Cut the amount of yeast used in half and reduce the salt since the sauerkraut juice is salted. <S> Put the dough in a floured bowl and cover with plastic. <S> Let rise at room temp for a few hours then stick in the fridge. <S> The next day, remove the dough and shape to your liking. <S> Let rise for 2 hours. <S> Score and bake. <A> No, there is not. <S> The sour flavour of sourdough comes from the lactic acid produced by lactobacilli. <S> Lactobacilli have a symbiotic relationship with the wild yeast - you can't have one without the other. <S> The wild yeast develops slowly, and at lower concentrations that commercial yeast, which is why it takes days to make a good sour dough loaf. <S> However, if you just want better flavour then you can use a pre-ferment, such as a biga or a sponge. <S> That'll do some good magic over-night. <S> Or, if you're after the waxy crumb of sourdough, then you could try the semi-famous no-knead bread . <S> I've made this several times and it's delicious and very easy, possibly the easiest bread to make. <S> The crumb always seems to come out too sticky, so maybe I've not got it right yet, but the flavour is really good.
|
The juice from fermented pickles, sauerkraut, kimchee, yogurt, etc... should all contain some lactic acid and may give you a bit of the flavor you're looking for. You might also try a slow, 2 or 3 day prove in the fridge for any bread dough.
|
Coooking the Turkey the night before If I cook the turkey the night before then cut it up, put in refrigerator wrapped or covered in container is it safe to reheat the next day and if fluid added in pan will it moisten it? <Q> Even if you handle it perfectly the turkey is going to lose a great deal of moisture in the fridge overnight. <S> Moisture in the meat comes from fat in the tissues rather than water, once it's cooked out <S> it's gone, so putting water or pan juices in the container isn't going to do a thing for you. <S> Turkey is usually the centerpiece of the meal, and you want your centerpiece to be perfect no matter what it is. <S> If you cannot make it fresh, or using a method that will preserve flavor and moisture better, then my advice would be to chose a different centerpiece, or adjust your methods. <S> You could cut your turkey into parts and cook them separately, who is going to know? <S> Make a Turqui au Vin the day before and re-heat it, it will visually look amazing and taste great. <S> Or you could cook something else like a leg of lamb, beef, or pork joint. <S> If you are concerned that you won't have the time to make all the accompaniments and the turkey at the same time then you are in luck because much of what goes with a turkey can be made ahead of time and reheated without losing much quality. <S> Stuffing, mashed potatoes, gravy, pies, and many other things can be made ahead of time and re-heated. <S> Even some green vegetables like thick greens can be made the day before and re-heated, some would say the flavor's better the day after as well. <S> Many of these things can be frozen as well <S> , so you could start cooking for a big dinner party weeks ahead of time. <S> So perhaps you need to turn the question around and think about what else could be made the night before. <A> As others have said, it's perfectly safe to do this. <S> Leaving it out on the side all night would be a different story... <S> The trick is going to be making it nice. <S> Therefore you need to make sure you don't overcook the turkey. <S> It'll have to be cooked until it's only just cooked and no more, because reheating will also cause further cooking. <S> As for how to reheat... get an oven dish and arrange the turkey pieces in it. <S> Cover it tightly and put it in a low oven until it's up to serving temperature. <S> Or try putting it in a slow cooker. <S> You might be able to protect it from drying out around the edges from hot air by reheating it immersed in a sauce, but that only works if you want to serve it immersed in sauce already. <S> And if you do that, the sauce should already be cooked and ready to go and capable of holding at temperature while the turkey warms up in it without any detrimental effects on the sauce itself. <A> Yes, of course it is safe, assuming you follow good safe practices in general (cool it rapidly , don't leave at room temperature for a long time, and so on). <S> It seems the real core of your question is how to do so, and still have moist, succulent turkey. <S> Adding liquid later won't help, just as you can have tough, dry meat in soup . <S> Instead, the key is to not overcook it in the first place, nor to allow it to overcook when reheating. <S> There are a great number of methods to to help cook a turkey well, without over cooking it, including: Brining or dry brining which increases the margin of error Butterflying or "spatchcocking", or even (as I recommend) simply cutting it into pieces as you would a chicken before roasting Cooking the "stuffing" separately in a casserole rather than in the turkey cavity For very leftover friendly turkey, you may even consider a braising recipe , rather than a roasting recipe <S> The single most important thing, in my opinion, is to use a quality thermometer (either instant-read or probe) to ensure you take the turkey out of the oven when it is optimally cooked. <S> This can be a challenge as the dark meat generally should be cooked to a higher temperature than the white meat.
|
It is perfectly safe, however you don't want to as it won't be anywhere near as good the next day. You can't put moisture back into cooked meat once it's gone, so adding liquid when you reheat isn't going to help anything at all.
|
What are the preferred veal cuts for sausage making? I am going to be trying my hand at bockwurst tomorrow evening, and will be going to the butcher shortly to have meat cut for the process. For the pork, I'm going with shoulder/butt. I can't seem to find any recommendation on what veal cuts are best for sausage making. Are there standard cuts of veal which are traditionally reserved for making sausage? <Q> The chuck naturally has that best proportion of muscle to fat for sausage making. <S> That said I would actually discourage you from choosing veal as a meat for sausage making, ground veal is [IMHO] <S> really 'nothing special' in terms of flavor. <S> Veal's 'specialness' is in its tenderness, which is irrelevant in a sausage. <S> You would be better served to use an mature beef chuck from an angus or longhorn. <S> Lamb would also be a nice ancient flavor. <A> I agree with Cos - Veal is wasted in sausage in terms of flavor and especially in terms of fat content (not to mention the money you'd be spending!) <S> When making sausage, fat is crucial - in fact when I've made venison sausage in the past, I've always added some fatty cuts of pork (shoulder or similar) along with the venison as otherwise when it's cooked it's dry, unpalatable and the flavor you really want doesn't come through. <S> That said, I think you could make veal sausage so long as you mix in some fat - but you could also try something that goes with veal and also has some fat of its own - maybe sundried tomatoes? <A> There are two variations of bockwurst - Bavarian (a small weisswurst that can be grilled) and Berliner (larger and stronger flavored, commonly grilled/smoked and used for currywurst). <S> Both are made primarily with veal. <S> Veal/beef fat isn't the best for sausage-making. <S> I would get the cheapest, clear, veal trimmings (neck, rump), and mix with pork belly or back fat to get your +/- <S> 70:30 ratio. <S> DBF
|
Remember that veal is merely very young beef; the chuck (which is the beef equivalent to the pork shoulder) is probably your best choices.
|
Is cast iron skillet suitable for vegans? I have a cast iron skillet and one of the guests coming for dinner is vegan. Since cast iron is seasoned by all kinds of grease over time I wonder if this is suitable for vegans. I don't want to offend anyone or witness some drama. <Q> A vegan is not going to eat your pan, just the food that was made on it. <S> As no animals were harmed in the making of your pan (well, probably <S> but how would you know) <S> the pan itself wouldn't be an issue. <S> Of course if a tiny bit of pan seasoning could go into the food, however anything else used in the preparation of the meal like cutting boards could cause a small amount of meat product to go into the food as well. <S> I'd be extremely surprised if the subject of your pots and pans came up to be honest, vegans <S> I know appreciate people going to the effort of making a vegan meal for them. <A> You'd have to ask your vegan to be absolutely sure. <S> If they're practical, they'll acknowledge that there might be a bit of meat fat polymerized onto the pan <S> but they won't be actually eating it, as long as you've seasoned and cleaned well. <S> If however they're sufficiently strict, they could conceivably say, no, it's touching an animal product, I won't eat it. <S> I wouldn't call that person a common vegan (most are more practical), a reasonable vegan (they're not actually consuming animal products), or a polite guest (if you have extremely rare dietary restrictions you should communicate them clearly), but it's at least possible, so <S> I feel it's worth pointing out since you sounded like you might be prioritizing avoiding offense over reason. <S> You could in general safely assume she's the practical kind <S> - I don't know any vegetarians (or vegans) who would be that picky. <S> But if you can't ask her, there's of course no way to be totally sure, so if you want to make sure she'll eat everything and think she could be a very strict vegan, I suppose you could find another pan. <A> I am a vegetarian <S> and I am totally put off by the idea of seasoned pans that don't get cleaned with soap and water. <S> One of the reasons I am a vegetarian is because I consider meat to be unclean (not a religious objection, just my own many-years' judgment), and I won't eat out of a pan I would consider uncleaned, which seasoned pans would be to me. <S> It isn't that I don't understand the chemistry <S> ---I do <S> ---I know the germs are destroyed by the heat. <S> But the concept of having my food cooked in a pan that is never actually stripped of its old oil (for the sake of the iron pan's surface health and nonstickability) makes me know that seasoned pans would not be for me, even with someone else cooking for me, and I love to be cooked for. <S> Just a weigh-in here...also, all the vegans I've ever known are wayyyy fussier than I am, and I would be surprised that they wouldn't object to that type of pan. <A> I've only been a vegetarian for a little over 3 years. <S> My roommate used a cast-iron skillet with vegetarian-appropriate seasoning to fry burgers. <S> I thought I could handle it, but when the meat was cooking, and for several hours afterward, the smell of the cooked meat was literally disgusting. <S> I am most surprised at myself, as I always loved burgers, even miss them some times. <S> I didn't quit eating meat because I didn't like the taste, it was specifically for compassionate reasons. <S> I guess after 3 years, it has become repulsive. <S> I tried to cook with the pan after scrubbing it well, but the smell of the cooked meat rose up as soon as the pan was hot, and I knew I could not use the skillet again and went and bought a new one. <S> I don't care if he uses one of my non-stick pans, or forks or knives, they don't absorb the animal juices like the seasoned cast iron skillets do. <A> What people seem to be missing in some of these answers is that some people will become very ill upon eating trace amounts of animal material. <S> Ask you guest if it is suitable or inform your guest of your intent so they can decide for themselves if they would like to eat your food. <S> There's no dishonor in asking the question.
|
Your kitchen is not vegan, and if a vegan has a problem with that they should not come over for a meal.
|
Why do baking recipes call for instant coffee instead of fresh ground coffee? I have seen many recipes for cakes, cupcakes, coffee buttercream, etc. that call for instant coffee than the freshly ground/brewed coffee because the instant coffee produces much better flavour. Why is that when fresh coffee is considered much better and flavoursome than instant coffee? <Q> Fresh ground coffee requires some sort of brewing process to extract the flavor, generally extended time in hot water. <S> If you just dump some into a cup of warm water, you won't get much out of it - some wet grounds and some slightly coffee-ish water. <S> Same goes for baked goods: coffee grounds won't efficiently release their flavor. <S> If you brew it first, you'll have to add a lot of liquid in order to get enough coffee flavor, likely more than the recipe called for in the first place. <S> Instant coffee, on the other hand, is designed to dissolve and release all the flavor. <S> Used in baked goods, the same thing happens. <S> Sure, the coffee flavor itself isn't as good as you'd get from real coffee, but you get all of it. <S> It also happens to be much easier! <S> The main alternative is to use espresso; the flavor is much more concentrated, so a recipe may be able to replace some of its liquid with espresso and get enough flavor out of it, without throwing off the recipe. <A> Same reason that recipes call for cocoa powder and not a cup of hot chocolate - it doesn't contain any water, and it's easy to control quantities. <S> If you used brewed coffee then the recipe would have to be adjusted for water content - assuming that's even possible <S> and you're not adding the instant coffee to other dry ingredients. <S> There may not even be enough water in the recipe to make the adjustment, and if there is, variations on coffee beans/grounds, brewing methods, etc. would make it impractical to estimate the quantity needed. <S> That's not to say you can't use brewed coffee if you want to, but as a recipe writer it's far simpler to work with fixed/standardized quantities, and brewed coffee is about as far from that as you can possibly get. <A> For most baking applications, you want something with concentrated flavor that adds minimal moisture and won't change the texture of the finished product. <S> This usually means adding either a coffee extract or instant coffee. <S> For instance, in the cakes and cupcakes, adding brewed coffee would add water and run the risk of making the cake tough, while grounds would make the cake gritty (and probably not actually add that much flavor). <S> In buttercream, adding brewed coffee would involve too much liquid, probably make your frosting separate, and again, grounds would make the frosting gritty. <S> Any more nuanced flavors from good fresh coffee would be lost anyway. <A> When I make coffee to substitute for instant <S> I grind it real fine and make it in a small french press using triple the amount of coffee I would normally use for drinking . <S> I strain it and I reduce the amount of liquids in my recipes. <S> There are things it won't work for such as in chocolates as water will ruin chocolate. <S> I haven't tried brewing it with heated cream. <S> I find I need no more then two tablespoons of the triple strength french pressed coffee to substitute for 1 tsp instant.
|
While fresh coffee has a much better flavor for the purposes of drinking, in most baking applications there are enough other ingredients adding richness, sweetness, etc, that only the base flavor of the coffee will come through.
|
Is baking powder the same thing as baking flour? Are the two the same? I have no clue. A brief google search didn't provide much help. Update: Here's an example of baking flour <Q> If you're talking about "cake flour" or generally flour used in baking, no. <S> In fact, I don't know of any product that is called a flour that would be the same as baking powder. <S> Baking Powder is a leavening agent; it makes things rise, much like yeast. <S> It leavens by combining an acid (like Cream of Tarter) with an alkaline component (usually Baking Soda), and also usually contains an inert starch like cornstarch to prolong shelf life. <S> If your recipe is calling for cups of something, it's probably not baking powder :) <A> The important phrase in the description of the flour you linked to is "all purpose". <S> It's all-purpose flour, the middle of the road flour that's reasonably good for anything. <S> They chose to throw in the word "baking" to emphasize that you can bake with it, presumably because it's a gluten-free version which is designed to work for baking. <S> It has absolutely nothing to do with baking powder, a chemical leavener. <S> Besides the fact that it says "all purpose flour" in the name, you can also tell from the fact that it comes in a six-pound bag, and the fact that the ingredients are all non-wheat flours. <A> Baking powder is a mixture of baking soda, calcium acid phosphate, and starch. <S> It is used as a leavening. <S> So yes, there is a very big difference. <A> No: it is probably an uncommon term, but, as far as I know, baking flour either means just regular flour, or possibly self-rising flour, which is regular flour mixed with some baking powder and sometimes salt, usually the most common ratio used in recipes like pancakes, so for example a ratio of 5 % baking powder and 1 % salt.
|
Baking flour is ground wheat and covers all flours used for baking, including cake flour, pastry flour, all-purpose flour, and self-rising flour.
|
Where does the Asian dish "sang choi bow" come from? I'm currently travelling in Laos where my favourite local dish is called "larb" or "laap" (ລາບ in Lao, ลาบ in Thai). When I described it to my Australian friend he said it sounded like a dish that was one of his favourites called "San Choi Bow" and described it as "either a southern Chinese or Vietnamese word for the spicy mince in a lettuce leaf". I've been hunting on Wikipedia and there appears to be no English article though I have now found a Chinese Wikipedia article and the term does show up in a couple of articles on the English Wikipedia. There is lots of information on the Internet, I noticed especially from Australia. But the information is contradictory. Two Yahoo Answers questions about its origins give different answers with no further details: China , Thailand . There's at least seven other spellings I could find, all combinations of "san" vs. "sang", "choi" vs. "choy", and "bau" vs. "bow". To me this looks like Chinese but I couldn't find the Chinese characters and even if the dish has a Chinese name that doesn't mean it wasn't originally from a neighbouring country. Could it be that "larb" is a Southeast Asian version of "sang choi bow" or is "sang choi bow" a Chinese name for their version of "larb"? Sang choi bow, from the Chinese Wikipedia: Squid larb in Thailand: Pork laap in Laos: <Q> Probably Hong Kong. <S> It is written in Chinese as "生菜包", which in Pinyin is "shēngcài bāo" , noticeably different to any of its usual spellings in English. <S> However, in Cantonese it is "sang1 choi3 baau1" . <S> Much closer to the English spellings and pronunciation. <S> Cantonese is mainly spoken in Hong Kong, a great culinary exporter and major influence on "Chinese food" in the west. <S> 生菜 means "lettuce" and 包 means "wrap", <S> etc. <S> It does in fact have a Wikipedia article , but only on the Chinese Wikipedia. <S> The article is very short and Google Translate does not handle it well. <S> I will include the Chinese text here in case any readers who can read Chinese can find something of the dish's origin or history: <S> 生菜包 维基百科，自由的百科全书 生菜包是一种食品，寓意“生财” <S> 。 起源 <S> 生菜包源自广州市芳村的坑口生菜会，该活动举办的时间为从农历廿四至廿九一连六日（旧称前三日后三日），这里会设有戏台和比武台，唱粤曲的，舞狮的和比武的登台。为供村民观赏之余家人朋友共聚用餐，小贩便推出生菜包 <S> 。 <S> 材料 <S> 生菜菜叶包着特制的饭菜（通常有蚬肉碱菜等馅料）。 <S> 這是與食物相關的小作品。你可以通过编辑或修订扩充其内容 <S> 。 <S> Of course it's still possible the dish originated outside Hong Kong, the name is very literal and isn't necessarily the original name of the dish. <A> I can't give you exact origin of <S> sang choi bow but it is certainly not from Thailand or any of its neighbouring countries. <S> I found an article , the author has Chinese/Cantonese Singapore origin <S> and she said she never taste similar dish back in her home country either. <S> In Australia sang choi bow usually made from minced pork or chicken, stir fried with onion, shallot and various other vegetables, seasoned with soy sauce, oyster sauce and served with lettuce leaves. <S> The dish also served as a second course for pecking duck (made from left-over meat). <S> Different restaurant would have different variation of the dish. <S> The only thing they have in common is, it will always come with lettuce. <S> I could remember having similar dish from Chinese restaurants in Bangkok. <S> It was also prepared out of left-over meat from peking duck <S> but they never served it with lettuce. <S> Sang choi bow <S> is waaaaaay different to <S> larb though. <S> Larb is more or less a salad. <S> In fact larb beef in Australia is usually called Thai beef salad , although restaurants normally use sliced grilled beef instead of cooked minced meat. <S> Larb also seasoned with fish sauce, chilli, and lime juice, never with soy or oyster sauce. <A> Laab in Thai language is Verb mean to chop meat. <S> We have Northern Laab and North-eastern Laab which the way to seasoning and taste are difference. <S> From your picture Squid larb is north-eastern style seasoning with dried chili, lime juice, roasted sticky rice, fish sauce, sugar. <S> It's taste is sour <S> come first then salty with a little sweet. <S> It's normally spicy because Thai people put a lot of dried chili in it and they also add herbs: culantro, shallot, spring onion, mint leaf. <A> Sang Choi Bow was originated from Guangzhou, China. <S> As Sangchoi is lettuce in Chinese, and it pronounced similar like "To get rich" in Chinese.
|
But it is clear it came to the English speaking world by way of Hong Kong. It is a common option for entrée (appetizer) in Thai, Veitnamese or Chinese restaurants.
|
What's the difference between a cupcake and a muffin? I was debating with someone today whether what we were eating was a cupcake or a muffin, but realized we didn't really know the difference. So what's the difference between a cupcake and a muffin in American English? In case you're wondering, what we were eating had a sweet batter, but not overly; had blueberries in the batter; had no icing or frosting; was perhaps about three fluid ounces (1 dL) big; and had been baked with a paper wrapper. <Q> There is considerable overlap between cupcakes and muffins. <S> Method <S> From a technical point of view, muffins are made by the muffin method , making them small quickbreads. <S> In the muffin method, the wet ingredients are combined in one bowl; and the dry ingredients are combined in another bowl. <S> Then the two are quickly incorporated together with minimal mixing to avoid gluten development. <S> This gives muffins a somewhat coarse crumb. <S> Cupcakes are small cakes, and are made by one of the traditional cake methods such as the creaming method, the reverse creaming method, the genoise method, the chiffon method, and so on. <S> They tend to have a finer crumb than muffins. <S> Contrast <S> While no single criterion distinguishes a muffin from a cupcake if you do not adopt the technical definition above, the following trends exist: <A> And cupcakes always have frosting. <S> For me, that's actually the real defining feature: frosting. <S> A drizzle of glaze is one thing, but once you put frosting on a muffin, it's no longer a muffin in our mind. <S> Hey, you have to draw the line somewhere! <A> Due to thekitchn website <S> the difference between muffins and cupcakes is the following: <S> A muffin is something that's relatively healthy. <S> It's not too sweet, perhaps made with whole wheat flour, and is more likely to be loaded with fruit than candy (ex: Blueberries). <S> A muffin can also be savory instead of sweet. <S> The texture is usually dryer and slightly denser than their cupcake cousins. <S> Cupcakes are, well, miniature cakes. <S> They're sweet by definition, coming in flavors like vanilla, chocolate, and red velvet. <S> A cupcake is tender and rich with eggs and butter. <S> They're a dessert item, not an everyday breakfast food. <S> And cupcakes always have frosting. <S> Another definition of muffins due to Diana <S> ’s Desserts is: 'A basic formula for muffins is 2 cups flour, 2-4 tablespoons sugar, 2½ teaspoons baking powder, <S> ½ teaspoon salt, 1 egg, ¼ cup oil, shortening or butter and 1 cup milk. <S> When the fat, sugar and egg ratio in a recipe reaches double or more than this, you have reached the cake level.' <S> Due to the preceding formulas, we can deduce that the muffin is lighter and healthier than a cupcake by having less fats (butter and milk), less eggs and sometimes whole wheat or oats instead of normal flour. <A> I took some time to compare cupcakes and muffins with each other and I listed all the differences in a convenient chart on my blog: <S> https://backdirndl4you.wordpress.com/2015/01/19/muffin-vs-cupcake/ Have a baketastic baking day,
|
Cupcakes tend to be sweeter than muffins; there are savory muffins such as cornbread Cupcakes are often iced or frosted, whereas muffins tend to have no topping, or a simple crumb topping Cupcakes usually have a head or top no larger than the body of the cupcake; muffins are often encouraged to overflow their baking cup, so that their top is larger in diameter, giving them somewhat of a mushroom shape Cupcakes are almost always, well, cupcake shaped; muffins can be made as just muffin tops Cupcakes are almost never crispy or crunchy; muffins are often encouraged to brown and develop texture, especially on the tops
|
secret ingredient in a restaurant bolognese I have dabbled with almost every ingredient I can think of in varying amount to get my Bolognese to taste similar to a restaurant made Bolognese in the italian alps. Including:PepperSugarSaltTomatos and tomato puree, tinned and chopped tomatosgarliclea & perrins / Worcester sauceOnions & onion gravy granulesdifferent meats, pork, beef and vealHerbs Basil, greek basil, thyme and oreganored wineand most recently balsamic vinegar These all get close and do make a nice Bolognese. However the secret ingredient is still missing! <Q> If you are missing an umami note, it's possible you are missing a very common ingredient in bolognese - chicken livers. <S> These give a meaty, almost sweet flavour. <S> Soak them in water for a few minutes, then finely chop or pulse in a food processor. <S> I use minced (ground) pork, beef and chicken livers. <S> You might also try adding pancetta, to add a smoky tinge. <A> I've found that this is (often) <S> the difference between a really rich, flavourful, sauce and one that is lacking oomph. <A> In my experience, there is no Bolognese without celery. <S> I normally use very finely chopped celery stems, and add them after the onions have softened a little. <S> There is also something to be said for finely chopped carrots, but the effect on the overall flavor isn't that big. <A> Not sure what flavor you're looking for, but try adding a parmesan rind. <S> Pull it out at the end of cooking. <A> Milk <S> I don't see any dairy listed in the things you tried, but a true Ragù Bolognese (ie, in the style of Bologna, not the British tomato & meat sauce) contains a bit of dairy in it. <S> It also requires cooking for hours, as you want the meat to completely fall apart. <S> By that time, the milk's completely incorporated and impossible to distinguish in the final sauce. <A> Dried, reconstituted porcinis? <S> I've been tweaking Bolognese for a while now, adding those was an AHA moment. <S> After reconstituting and chopping, I sauteed them with the sofrito. <S> Very nice. <S> I viscerally hate liver. <A> A pinch of sugar cuts through the acidity of the tomatoes, also slow cooking improves texture and flavors. <A> I love adding a chorizo sausage during the slow simmer also!!!
|
Sweet cherry, smoked bacon, heaps of basil and a glass or 2 while cooking helps for a great spaghetti bolognese. The chicken livers mentioned above could be the key too, I just can't do it. You can use celery salt too, but fresh celery is best. My guess is a good, highly reduced, veal stock;
|
Is the "gamey" taste of venison just a polite name for "rotten"? I have had a theory for a long time that it is the blood in the deer which causes the gamey flavor. Hunters gut the deer soon after a kill, but they don't bleed it or chill it for hours or days. It takes time to haul it from the woods, then drive home and wait until the next day before visiting the processor. It seems that the blood would be the first part of the animal to spoil. It is my opinion that the bad reputation of venison’s “gamey” flavor comes from poor processing habits and the serving of meat that is actually rancid or at least borderline. The key to fresh tasting meat it to get it cool and skinned as fast as possible. Leaving it hot or leaving the hide on will cause it to rot quickly and leave your meat tasting quite “pungent” (i.e.: rotten). This is important whether you plan to butcher the animal yourself or are taking it to a pro. If you leave the hide on longer than necessary or don’t cool the meat quickly, it will have a bad flavor. http://lazyhomesteader.com/2012/08/21/the-gamey-taste-of-game-meat-part-ii/ Is it true that the gamey taste is caused by spoiled blood in the meat? <Q> According to the University of Minnesota Extension (emphasis added): <S> What causes the wild or gamey taste in venison? <S> Venison refers to themeat of antlered animals such as deer, moose, elk and caribou. <S> The'wild' flavor of venison is directly related to what the animal eats. <S> Corn fed deer will have a milder flavor than those that eat acorns orsage. <S> The 'gamey' flavor is more noticeable in the fat. <S> Removing thefat, connective tissue, silver skin, bone and hair during processinglessens the 'gamey' taste. <S> However, undesirable strong flavors are dueto inadequate bleeding, delay in field dressing or failure to cool thecarcass promptly. <S> So while some gaminess is simply due to the diet of the wild animals, improper dressing or treatment can be a contributing factor. <A> The short answer: <S> No, the gamey taste of venison is not a euphemism for rotten. <S> Factors that may contribute to strong or "gamey" flavor in venison include: the animal's diet (animals that forage a lot of grain from farm fields rather than grasses, wild plants, and nuts have a less gamey flavor) its age (older animals tend to be gamier) <S> the inclusion of large amounts of venison tallow or connective tissue in hamburger or sausage Inadequate bleeding and purging <S> The season <S> the animal is harvested Poor processing can lead to other off flavors which can include rottenness: Failure to age the meat Delay in field dressing and skinning Bacterial contamination from poor procedure during gutting and skinning Contamination from tools from improper cleaning Contamination from improper removal of tarsal and metatarsal glands Failure to cool meat quickly <A> As a lifelong hunter I must comment on the debate on what causes the gamey taste in venison. <S> I learned from my Mom as well as generations of hunters before me that soaking the meat for a few days in ice water only makes for the best tasting venison. <S> Also I need to point out that when deer are in the rut,It is the musk of the male deer that causes the strong odor in the meat. <S> The female deer do not produce this musk and are therefore tastier and requires less soaking time to remove the blood from the cuts of meat. <S> When soaking the meat, look for a pinkish to white color of the meat that indicates the meat has purged the blood. <S> Happy hunting!! <A> As well to add on to the comment above and might be in relation to the cooling and aging of the meat, overcooking it (medium at most) causes it to become gamey and tough. <S> I love the gamey flavor however. <S> Try Colorado Lamb and compare it to New Zeleand Lamb big difference in flavor
|
It is actually the blood of the animal if not soaked properly that gives venison the gamey taste.
|
How to achieve tender or crunchy toasted lentil sprouts? A few days ago, I started sprouting a batch of lentils. This morning, I took some of the beans, now with 0.5-1 mm shoots growing out of them, tossed them in salt, pepper, and paprika, and spread them in a single layer on a pie tim, which I baked in a preheated 250F oven for about 20 minutes.When they came out they had a lovely flavor, but were a bit gummier than I'd like. I'm going to perform the experiment again with the remainder of my sprouts tomorrow, but I'll probably change something.What I'd like is something crunchier--I've had toasted chickpea sprouts that are crunchy and delicious, and I can only hope that a similar effect can be achieved with lentils. Does anyone have any suggestions? I could bake them longer, change the temperature, only add the salt after cooking (as one does to prevent beans in soup from toughening up)... Also, by tomorrow the sprouts will be more developed, with longer shoots. I suspect the chemical changes that take place will also make a difference. <Q> If they're gummy, they might still have too much moisture in them. <S> Try roasting them at higher temperatures or longer and see if they crisp up. <A> I soaked some Guy de Puy lentils until they had 1/8 inch shoots. <S> Then, I coated my toaster oven tray with a little coconut oil. <S> I took the sprouts and tossed them in a bowl with some ginger powder, chili powder, and sea salt. <S> I spread them out on the toaster oven tray, and baked them at 250F for 60 minutes. <S> Every 10 minutes while they cooked, I opened up the toaster oven to stir the lentils with a spatula and spread them out again. <S> What I ended up with is delightfully crunchy with a warm flavor. <S> I will definitely be trying this experiment out again! <A> In our country, Philippines, if we needed to make something a bit crunchy we would put them in a batter of egg and flour and deep fry them. <S> I have been researching on this as well because I have a batch of lentils that I want to cook and make a snack out of. <S> I am thinking that baking will make it either hard or soggy and roasting like on a pan <S> might burn it <S> so I want to try and deep fry it. <S> Hope this helps! :-) <A> The result was fluffy and soft dough and then crunchy nutty lentil sprouts inside. <S> I'll try deep frying the lentils later and just add some spices to flavor it, I'll update as well. :-)
|
I made banana chocolate lentil balls yesterday, added the lentil sprouts, mashed banana and flour and egg and made balls with them and deep-fried in oil.
|
Steel Cut Oats: cooking in milk vs. water Most of the recipes I've seen (including Good Eats ) recommend simmering the oats in 4 cups of liquid for 1 cup of oats. Alton Brown recommends 3 cups of water for ~25 mins and then (1/2 cup of milk + 1/2 cup of buttermilk) for ~10 mins. However, I would like to do away with water entirely (just curious). Could I just simmer 1 cup of oats in 4 cups of milk for ~40mins? Or is the first ~25mins of simmering in water designed to maximize water absorption? Also, if anyone has cooked oats mostly in milk before, I'd like to hear their opinion as well. <Q> Yes, this is possible. <S> From my childhood experience, oats were always cooked in milk, never in water. <S> I can't tell you specifics of how to do it, because it was my mother and grandmothers who made them. <S> But based on the behavior of other grains cooked in milk, from complete kernels to flours, I don't think that you need to make any changes as compared to cooking in water. <S> Take for example polenta - both the ratio and the method stay the same for cooking in water vs. milk. <S> The resulting product is creamier and tastier. <S> For oats, it is also slightly slimy (but not unpleasant), I don't know if this happens with water. <S> As for water absorption, some grains do well if soaked before cooking, others don't need it. <S> This shouldn't change in the milk vs. water scenario. <S> The comments mention burning the milk. <S> It never happened with my mother's oats and I am sure she did it on a stove, not in a slow cooker. <S> Obviously, you want it to simmer, not boil. <S> I assume that this is how you do it in water too, but if you don't, change your method for the milk, or you'll have a disaster on your hands. <S> The mix may need stirring while it simmers, but maybe you can do it without stirring too, polenta in milk does not need it if you don't turn your burner too high. <A> Yes, you can entirely replace water with milk. <S> The main thing to be aware of is how prone it is to boiling over. <S> Milk will eagerly do that on its own, and starchy water will too, so the combination has to be cooked on very low heat to avoid making a huge mess. <S> (I think this is why the original recipe starts with water: less time with potential for boiling over, and more stable temperature when you add the milk.) <S> You'll also probably want to be more careful about stirring the first time; if the heat is a little higher than you realize, you will start accumulating a layer on the bottom of the pan. <S> If you want them to cook faster and have less potential boiling over to worry about, you can always presoak in milk beforehand. <S> I've done this overnight in the fridge, which was enough to let me make (admittedly slightly chewy) steel-cut oats in the microwave the next morning. <A> It takes about 5 to 10 minutes to cook, and is done when it starts bubbling. <S> The result is usually already fairly thick, and it thickens as it cools. <A> You could always do it in a covered dish and put it in a low temp oven. <S> You could start low maybe at 200 and bump up the heat if it doesn't get anywhere in 40 mins. <A> Using milk instead of water makes the outcome definitely creamier, although it may take a little longer (I start my burner on low-medium so the milk won't boil over). <S> Once the milk starts to foam <S> I add the steel cut oats and stir occasionally. <S> 20 minutes or so is enough if you like them nuttier, or longer if you like them softer. <S> I add a little milk and sugar to the bowl. <S> Yep sugar, it's a lot less than than the pre-sugared oats which are much too sweet. <S> But you can certainly be creative as to what you add. <S> They're a great breakfast or anytime :) <A> My mother always made the rolled oats in milk as my parents wanted us to have the extra nutrition that the milk offers. <S> As an adult, I discovered steel cut oats and haven't gone back to the rolled type since. <S> The first and last time I made the steel cut oats, I used water as the package called for. <S> I think I gave it to the dogs. <S> No comparison to making it with the milk. <S> I use the same amount of milk as the recipe calls for water (4 c milk to 1 c oats), pinch of salt, and simmer for about 45 minutes. <S> Yes, I have scorched the bottom of my pot at times <S> but I attribute that to difficulty with setting my gas stove to simmer. <S> Also found it best to use a bigger pot. <S> Today I made a batch in a 2 1/2 qt pot and had no trouble with it scorching or boiling over. <S> Towards the end of cooking time, I added a handful of golden raisins. <S> It came out great! <S> Didn't even need to add any sweetener to my bowl. <A> I make steel cut oats with almond milk and a pinch of salt, cooking for 20-30 minutes at a low simmer, stirring throughout. <S> I've also added some cut-up medjool dates near the end of the cooking time, which softens the dates and sweetens the oatmeal. <S> Another sweetening alternative is a touch of pure maple syrup and a cut-up banana. <S> All delicious. <S> If some of your oatmeal sticks to the bottom of the pan just fill the empty pan with water, put it back on the stove and bring it to a boil. <S> Once that cools your pan should be easy to wash. <A> I do it all the time, and I think it's waaaay better than water <S> The trick is you have to watch the heat to ensure it doesn't burn or boil over <S> Haven't tried a double-boiler, but that seems like a good idea
|
I'm not quite sure what your goal is, but the standard recipe for porridge which I grew up with is 1 cup of oats to 2 cups of milk, stirring frequently to avoid burning.
|
When should I add spinach to homemade pizza? When making pizza, do you put the spinach on raw or cooked? I would prefer to put it on raw, but I am concerned that the high water content in the spinach will release in the oven and make the crust wet. I have used well drained cooked spinach in the past but I find no matter how hard you ring it out, it is still very wet for a topping! I am using baby spinach. Any suggestions? <Q> The moisture that you're talking about really has nothing to do with draining it or wringing it out. <S> When it's heated, the cell structure breaks down and the water in the cells is released. <S> Since it's predominately water, that means you have a lot of moisture on your pizza to make your crust soggy. <S> At the restaurant I used to work at we had two methods. <S> If there wasn't going to be a lot of spinach on the pizza, then we would just put it on raw. <S> If there was going to be a lot of it, then we would give it a quick saute and then put it on the pizza. <S> I would do the same thing with squash, eggplant, etc. <S> Anything with a high moisture content. <S> You could also roast it first. <S> In both cases, I wouldn't cook it for long as the goal is to just get most of the water out and then let it finish on the pizza in the oven. <A> There are at least three different styles of 'spinach pies' that I've had (that were pizza, and not other types of 'pie') <S> : Spinich is cooked fully before adding to the pizza. <S> Often is sautéd with garlic and other seasonings. <S> Spinich is added fresh to the pizza before it's cooked. <S> I'm not going to say that any one is particularly right or wrong. <S> I grew up with the first style (I guess I'll call it 'Philadelphia style' for lack of a better designation, as we always had it when visiting my great-grandmother in South Philly). <S> I've had it with tomato sauce, but it'd be more common to be a white pizza with sliced tomatoes <S> (so you don't start with as much liquid as on other pizzas). <S> The third one seems to be a more California type thing, but I've also had fresh greens on pizza ~20 years ago at Generous George's (when they were still on Duke Street in Alexandria, VA). <S> It only really works with baby spinach or other tender greens. <S> I've never been impressed with the middle one. <S> I suspect it requires really knowing the heat of your oven so that it cooks the spinich just right in the same time it takes the rest of the pie to cook. <S> You also want to put it above any cheese, so that the moisture gets a chance to evaporate rather than just being held in. <A> I find the best results from super-brief blanching. <S> Drop washed spinach in boiling water for about 5 seconds, drain quickly, shock in ice water, squeeze out water <S> (I use a sushi mat), chop if desired. <S> When baked for typical pizza cooking time (90sec-12 minutes depending on style) <S> the color stays vibrant, the flavor is generally not bitter, and it doesn't dry out. <S> Young spinach can be ok without blanching; it doesn't dry out if kept underneath the cheese, for example. <S> But I think the visual effect and flavor is more pleasant when spinach is blanched. <A> I just baked the baby spinach pizza with uncooked spinach under shredded cheese. <S> It didn't come out soggy <S> but some of the leaf edges were dry. <S> Also, even though the spinach was piled high, there wasn't as much of it as I would like after it cooked down. <S> Next time I will try using thinly sliced cheese over the spinach leaving just enough space between the slices for steam to escape. <S> I used a thick tomato sauce, and baked on a pizza stone in a 475° oven. <S> The overall result was good. <A> I would wash the spinach and put it in a hot pan to wilt (the moisture from the washing is all it needs), then add it to the cooked pizza when it comes out of the oven. <S> The heat of an oven, especially a hot, pizza-cooking oven, will just destroy it. <A> Just rip up the spinach add to pizza spray with water and the crust,to add moisture where needed and stop crust from drying out.
|
Spinich is added fresh to the pizza after it's cooked.
|
How can I thicken margaritas? I've been making margaritas and I've found that, unlike fancy bar/restaraunt bought margaritas, my margaritas come out more like a liquid drink with shaved ice sitting in it than a mixture. I have a Margarittaville mixer for proper shaved ice, but the final drink lacks the same thickness I'm used to in a margarita; the exception being strawberry margaritas. With (lots of) real strawberries the drink comes out much thicker and smoother to drink. Is there some ingredient that can thicken the mix for a smoother drink? Generally I use tequila, triple sec, agave nectar and then either a mix, strawberries, limeade or whatever for flavor. <Q> If the restaurant or bar is using a margarita mix, they frequently contain additional syrups and stabilizing gums or starches which add body to the drinks. <S> If you want to try making it thicker at home, the agave nectar is a good start. <S> You could also try adding very small amounts of food gums, like guar gum or gum arabic. <S> It may also help to chill all of your ingredients thoroughly before blending to keep it as frozen as possible. <A> Most restaurants/bars use a special machine for frozen margaritas; blenders are too noisy and too small-scale if they're selling enough of them (unless their entire business is frozen drinks, in which case they'll structure their bar around the blenders like an alcoholic Jamba Juice). <S> These machines are virtually identical to frozen slush drink (icee/slurpee) machines, the only difference is what goes in them. <S> The slush is made by chilling the mix below freezing while keeping it moving; that way it can't freeze solid like ice cubes. <S> Short of buying your own (the real foodservice-grade machines start around $1200) or even renting (they can cost $100 a half-day, and often the minimum capacity is a few gallons' worth of mix), here are some tips: Make your ice from your base drink mix ahead of time (i.e. your 7-4-3 mix of tequila, triple sec/syrup and lime juice for a margarita; you can add your strawberries, mangos etc in the blender). <S> This helps in two ways; first, the ice slush won't weaken the drink as it melts, even if your guests really hit them hard up front leaving that snowball in their glass, and second, a little alcohol and sugar in the ice will keep it from forming that tough crystal structure, so the ice will be weaker and blend more easily. <S> Chill the frozen drink glasses. <S> Pouring frozen margarita into a room-temp glass will create that "ice chunk in water" effect just as you say. <S> Understand that unless you're serving these outside on your patio in February, there's not much you can do to avoid this effect happening to some degree as the drink warms, but you can minimize it. <S> Don't be afraid to play with the proportions of ice and mix in the blender. <S> You're probably using too little, a common mistake as you don't want to weaken the drink. <S> If it's blending up too sloshy, add a few more ice cubes and keep blending. <S> If it's coming out like a snow cone, add more mix. <A> Just add more ice. <S> I was a bartender for years. <S> Don't use guar gum. <S> If it's too soupy then add more ice a few cubes at a time. <S> I use blenders and have never used a margaritaVille mixer so that might be the issue. <S> If you take a pint glass and fill it heaping with ice put it in the blender. <S> Then add 2 ounces of tequila and 1 Oz of triple sec, or cointreau,or razzmatazz or any other flavored you want. <S> Then you can add no more than 2.5 ounces of liquid (margarita mix) to that. <S> If you are working with purees than you can use 2 ounces of like strawberry puree with a half an ounce of margarita mix.
|
It could also be that the high powered blenders frequently used in bars will be better at creating a smoother and thicker texture, or a more 'emulsified' slush.
|
How do I pour from a dutch oven without making a mess? This is a seemingly simple question, but I can't seem to find good helpful techniques or suggestions for this. After frying in a dutch oven (or any other pot with little or no lip) and letting the oil cool down a bit, I like to store the oil in the container it came in. Whenever I do so, even with a funnel, I end up spilling almost as much as I save. Typically it runs down the side of the pot instead of pouring out. Now this is a problem with trying to save any liquid (e.g. soup, sauce). Is there a trick that doesn't involve making a mess? <Q> If you have one that is not easy to pour from, minimize the amount of pouring that you do by transferring the content out with a ladle... or since ladling can be slow.... <S> I use a glass measuring cup as a scoop. <S> These tend to pour quite well, hold a lot (I have three sizes, including one that holds a quart or liter) and have a handle so you don't get your hand messy. <S> Once most of the content is transferred, you can pour the last part. <S> Usually this will not make as much of a mess, but if it does still drip down the side of the oven, there was much less of the product involved. <S> Lastly, do the transfer in or over the sink. <S> This won't save you from having some of the content escape, but it does make cleanup much, much easier. <A> Ladling can be slow, but I recommend it as well. <S> Part of the reason why its difficult to pour is because the Dutch oven has no corner from which you could make a spout. <S> If you had a big square container, one with enough open surface area that you don't have to be precise, pour it there first, then pour from there. <S> Also, rather than slowly angling the pan, which will cause the liquid to drip down the sides first, try quickly getting it to the 30º-or-so angle. <S> It takes confidence :) <A> I have the same problem with my Lodge dutch oven, and the large measuring cup seems to be the best way to do it. <S> However you end up doing it, as a tip for the oil-running-down-the-side-of-the-bottle problem, Get a couple large rubber bands and band <S> some folded paper towels around the bottle about 1/3 of the way down. <S> That absorbs a good amount of the drips, usually all. <S> And ALWAYS do it in the sink or a thick plastic bag, in case of a catastrophic slip. <A> Disclosure: I asked the original question without intending to post the following answer. <S> AND I have not attempted this myself. <S> But it seems different enough to be worth mentioning. <S> The discussions here mentioned the lack of a spout as being the cause of the messiness. <S> This is undoubtedly true, as I don't have this problem (as much) on my cookware that has spouts. <S> So I decided to look online to see if it's possible to put a spout on a pot temporarily. <S> I found this: a slip-on pour spout and a clip on Spout , monotasking devices intended to provide a spout to pots and pans that don't have one. <S> Reviews seem mixed to negative, so YMMV. <S> But this is a solution that doesn't involve a ladle or cup. <A> Let it cool, then siphon the oil with a small hose or tube.
|
Some dutch ovens are easier to pour from than others; it depends on the how the edge or lip of the pot is curved.
|
Advice on use and care of Le Creuset cast iron skillet Below is a picture of my current cast iron skillet from Le Creuset. As a relative cooking novice, could someone let me know if I have possibly damaged my pan, or if this is normal? I have a Le Creuset dutch oven, and have always cleaned with soap/water and it is perfect, I thought I would do the same here (since both are enameled), but it looks like it may be in need of special treatment. If this isn't normal, what is the recommended process of keeping this pan clean (daily use and/or the occasional deep clean). <Q> The above pan is not a typical Teflon coated non-stick item. <S> It is a cast iron skillet with red exterior enamel and an interior "Satin Black" enamel. <S> It is not identical to a Lodge cast iron pan, but for care and maintenance, it can be treated similarly. <S> A patina can form on the interior "Satin Black" enamel, which is desirable. <S> Le Creuset says seasoning is not required (unlike other cast iron pans like Lodge), but seasoning the pan will form a better patina, which does improve the natural non-stick properties. <S> As you said, the patina develops naturally, but if you don’t want to wait, then you can help it along by seasoning it. <S> Check Le Creuset's website (someone else linked it) for other details. <S> I usually just use hot water and paper towel to clean with periodic seasoning. <A> This pan should be cleaned only with a wet cloth and little bit of soap. <S> No scrubbing is required as it can damage the pan. <S> This link may be more useful. <A> It's difficult to tell in the picture exactly what is going on. <S> There are a few possibilities: <S> The coating has flaked off, and the non-shiny portions are the bare metal underneath. <S> You've developed a bit of a coating on top of the pan. <S> We're looking at the coating, but it's lost its shine. <S> In the case of #1, it's likely a ruined pan. <S> It might be possible to re-enamel, and if it's non-stick, it might be possible to torch off the non-stick and season it as a non-enameled cast iron pan, but this will give off poisonous gas in the process. <S> For #2 & 3, it shouldn't be a big deal, you just won't have as much of a non-stick process. <S> If it's #3 and a non-stick pan, be careful, as this is a sign that you've been over-heating the pan, and will likely start flaking off in the future. <A> Just soak it and scrub it with a plastic scrubber. <S> Then coat with lard or oil and heat it up and wipe off the excess with a paper towel. <S> Le Creuset is enameled and tough stuff, it never peels. <S> I recommend never using soap.
|
The brownish looking area on the surface of the pan is from caramelization, which occurs during the cooking process.
|
Who knows what this fruit is called? It has a slightly thick skin like an apple, semi-dry and grainy texture, with a slight apple flavor, about the size of a large grape, with one pit, reminiscent of that of a date. <Q> Those look like jujubes (not to be confused with the candy). <S> They're also known as Chinese dates, and are frequently found dried. <A> These are jujubes. <S> We find them mostly in the Mediterranean region starting from like 500 m <S> height(I have one of these tree in my garden). <S> You should just be careful <S> if there is no holes made by worms in there, then you souldn't eat it. <S> It's not poisonous but it will probably taste bad. <S> To know, you bite it in the middle to check. <S> It grows during the end of august and start of september. <S> It's not too sweet unless it's dried up. <S> They are red when grown and green when not. <S> Some are both: part green, part red. <A> i'm from india <S> and we use this fruit for festivals,widely known here.we called it as indian Jujube. <S> This also known as Ber. <S> Chinee Apple, Jujube, Indian plum and Masau is a tropical fruit tree species belonging to the family Rhamnaceae. <A> Hope its not too late an answer <S> but they are called Masawu here in zim and am having some right now. <S> They have a slimish feel in the mouth sort of like okra slime but tasty sweet to sour depending on the tree. <S> worms love them too so if you mind look out for them. <S> If you are like me anything that eats fruit is edible. <A> I'm from Turkey <S> and it's a widely known fruit here. <S> We call it "iğde", <A> More commonly known as date-plum . <S> (Hence the pit as you noticed). <S> If you taste them, they have a chalky texture with hints of sweetness. <S> They usually have a great aroma and smell. <S> They are also good dried with tea.
|
English dictionary calls it: " oleaster (kitchen)" " eleagnus (botanical)". It's a lotus, or to be specific: Diospyros lotus
|
How much turkey should I plan per person? For the holidays, I plan to do a turkey, but I need to order in advance since the place I'm buying from is popular and usually sells out in pre-orders. Estimates of how much turkey to plan per person vary widely across the internet; does anyone have authoritative data on how much turkey to buy? There's clearly a difference between a small child and a hefty eater, for example, and I'd imagine the meat-to-bone ratio changes as the turkey gets larger or smaller. I also want to plan to have leftovers, since my family enjoys leftover turkey sandwiches. Does it matter how many sides I plan to make? Note that this is for Americans at Thanksgiving, so portion sizes are intended to be larger than normal. <Q> Unless you're feeding 20, chances are you want the smallest bird they have. <S> It doesn't really matter if you should have 1 lb per person or 1.5 if you have 8 people and their smallest bird <S> is 12 pounds - <S> and I'm willing to bet that's the case. <S> That said, I generally allow 1 lb per person and don't count the smallest children (say, haven't started school yet.) <S> I also tend to send a lot of leftovers home with other people. <S> Our feasts are very veggie heavy, but as I mentioned above you may have less control over this than you think. <A> Typically for any whole animal (turkey, pig, or chicken) cooked for a holiday feast I plan for 1lb (dressed weight) per person. <S> If there are going to be a lot of children, you can revise that down a half lb for each child under 12. <S> In my experience this formula usually ends up with enough leftovers for people to take some home, but not so many that you're stuck eating turkey for 3 weeks. <S> For example, last week I cooked a 5 lb turkey breast for 5 people, after dinner there was approx 1.25 lbs leftover, which is easily enough for 3-4 sandwiches or a pot pie. <S> Keep in mind that this meal did not include a lot of heavy side dishes, so it yielded a few less leftovers than a typical holiday dinner would using the same formula. <S> Butterball's planning calculator suggests 1.5 lbs per adult and 1 lb per child if you want to be sure to have leftovers and are "light eaters". <S> I think that's probably overkill <S> and/or their way to sell 50% more turkey... <S> especially if you plan on having 3 or more side dishes. <A> I work in a deli and over the holidays we cook and debone a lot of turkeys. <S> I can tell you from experience that a 20# turkey will yield about 8-10 pounds of meat. <S> This is because when the turkey cooks it releases a surprising amount of liquid. <S> Add in all the bones and you loose a lot of your starting weight. <A> We found a 7lb turkey which, for the three of us, gave almost no leftovers. <S> So clearly the 1-lb per person measure breaks down at sufficiently small numbers of people :( <A> At Serious Eats , Kenji Lopez Alt says: As a general rule, larger birds will have plumper breasts (a higher meat to bone ratio), so you'll want to use a little bit less turkey per person by weight. <S> [...] if you're the type who likes leftovers (I do). <S> I'd aim for 3/4 pounds of live weight per person to be safe. <S> This is in line with my own experiences. <S> It matches the Butterball recommendation for Turkey Breast, as well, although they don't seem to post on their main website a recommended estimate for whole turkeys. <A>
|
I think if you have a 3 to 4 adults, a 3-pound boneless turkey, plus 1 or 2 drumsticks alongside the breast is a VERY ample amount of meat....and some leftover too! So you really do want to figure 1 1/2 to 2 pounds per person, especially if you want leftovers.
|
Kimchi in Mason Jars -- Too Sealed? I recently mixed 8 quarts of kimchi. I stuffed my cabbage into 8, 1-quart Mason Jars. I left the typical buffer space (about 1-inch) below the lid. I told someone else that I had jarred the kimchi in glass and they seemed concerned that the jars would explode. I read that you can relieve pressure intermittently for the first few days and then the fermentation will lessen in intensity -- no worry for explosion. My question is this -- because my kimchi is in mason jars, it gets no air and I was wondering if I should use cheesecloth covering next time. Do the lids stifle fermentation because of their seal? Is it just a bad idea to stuff kimchi and krauts into mason jars? <Q> If your jars aren't in the refrigerator already, I highly recommend unscrewing the lids as soon as possible...unless you want to be able to share stories about how you found glass shards and the smell of kimchi everywhere in your kitchen one day. <S> Depending on when you mean to eat them, I'd recommend a mix of room temperature ripening and fridge storage. <S> Keep the lid completely unscrewed while at room temp until ripened to a stage you prefer, and keep it loosely on in the fridge and eat it up in the next few weeks (where it will continue to ferment some more but slow down drastically). <S> Cheesecloth is overkill, but you could choose to use that or anything that'll cover the top of a jar without making it airtight while at room temp. <S> Glass jars are used often in commercial kimchi production and sale, so other than making sure the lid isn't fully screwed on <S> they're fine to use. <S> The explosion concern is mostly when you leave it too long (more than several hours?) <S> at room temp or in the fridge for more than a couple weeks - while the jar is completely sealed. <S> This all depends on the kind of kimchi you are storing, of course. <S> I'm assuming it's the freshly made napa cabbage type you're talking about. <S> Some kimchis don't ferment as much or at all. <A> When making kimchi (or other fermented products like it) it's best to ferment the whole batch together for the first phase (this depends on what you're making, how much of it you're making, and how sour you want it to be - but a week is a good rule of thumb). <S> This helps to make the whole batch more consistent, as one batch will ferment at the same pace - as opposed to many small batches fermenting in different ways - and in general will cut down on variables which is always a good idea when fermenting. <S> When I make kimchi, I usually make 5-10 liters at a time and put it all into an appropriately sized jar. <S> If there is extra headspace, you have a few options, the easiest of which is to take a clean plastic trash bag, put it into the jar and fill it with water, then tie <S> /close the bag <S> so the water can't come out. <S> This will make it so no oxygen comes into contact with the top layer of kimchi which should ideally be submerged in its own juice at all times. <S> I leave the jar in a slightly cooler than room temperature room, in the dark (or at least wearing an old sweatshirt so no light gets in) for 1 week to 10 days, then fill smaller bottles and store them in the refrigerator. <S> At this point they can be given away to other kimchi lovers, or kept in the fridge for ~6 months (probably longer, in fact, if they're not opened, but I've never gone longer than that - and in fact it's rarely lasted that long). <S> In your present situation, I think you'll be fine opening the lids just a bit, but if you're storing them in the fridge there should be no worries at all - it won't continue fermenting in so cold an environment. <A> I am a bit late to be of use to OP but had to add that in my almost-50 years of native Korean kimchi experience <S> The most that happens is juice overflowing the top of a plastic lidded jar. <S> A mason jar with a tight metal lid <S> I'd expect loosening of the lid and overflow and/or the gas warping the metal lid upwards into a slight dome. <S> Unless one needs a lot of mature kimchi quickly, standard practice is to leave at room temp for a day or so, then move into fridge. <S> Also, less contact with air is better for pleasant fermented taste. <S> In the olden times palace chefs would make numerous smaller jars, to open a new one for each of the king's meal. <A> I have been making kimchi and putting it in mason jars for years. <S> I have never had one explosion no matter how fermented it has become. <A> My hypothesis is that you don't really need something to push the kimchi down to prevent it from oxygen if you just carefully bleed a little bit of pressure from the jars in the beginning of fermentation. <S> The active bacteria and yeasts will secrete CO2 which is heavier than air and you will bleed out the air on top, leaving a covering blanket of CO2 on top of the kimchi, protecting it from oxygen. <S> At least this is common practice when fermenting and kegging beer.
|
It's not a terrible idea to put something like a sheet pan under the jars just in case one overflows. i've never heard of a kimchi jar explosion at room temp - at least not the kind where you see pieces of glass and kimchi all over.
|
How to pack items that may leak liquids for lunch? Today my husband packed me some shrimp burritos for lunch. They were very tasty, but unfortunately, a lot of liquid drained from them between morning and lunchtime, so the bottom burrito in the pile was too soggy to eat without a knife and fork. Is there a better way to pack foods of this type so that they retain their expected consistency? <Q> For your situation I would recommend packing the burritos individually (or 2 at once) <S> so this does not happen. <S> You can achieve this by using foil, plastic wrap, or bags. <S> Alternatively, you may try putting a sheet of wax paper (or foil/plastic wrap - but remove before microwaving) between each layer of burritos. <S> If this does not work for you, try the following: Here are two methods that can be used to try to preserve expected consistency: The easiest, and most sure to actually work: <S> Store the components that are wet and going to leak liquid in a different container. <S> Unfortunately, this may involve you having to build your burrito when you want to eat it, yet this is sure to prevent a soggy burrito. <S> One can also purchase plastic food containers with multiple compartments specifically made for this purpose (separation of different food items). <S> For an example, here is a product listed on Amazon. <S> The second way: <S> This isn't a long-term fix nor is it as efficient as a multi-compartment food container. <S> One can strategically build certain food items so that they are less likely to make bread or tortillas soggy. <S> You have to place a food item <S> , that will not let the bread absorb the liquid as quickly, next to the bread. <S> The best example I can give you is that when I make a BLT sandwich that I am not going to eat immediately, I place the lettuce right next to the bread instead of putting the tomato right next to the bread. <S> The lettuce provides a barrier between the two. <S> Like I said though, it will not be as efficient as multi-compartment food containers. <A> I often take burritos for lunch at work. <S> It microwaves great and it's filling. <S> What I do is wrap the burrito in foil and put it in the freezer this way I can take it in a plastic bag with the container for the other ingredients of the meal (rice,salad,etc') <S> I found putting the burritos in the freezer overnight and then putting them in the fridge at work preserves them in nearly perfect condition since by the time I get to eat them <S> they are 90% thawed. <S> I usually do this with chicken and beef <S> but I suppose it won't hurt the shrimp too badly either. <A> Shrimp, especially pre-cooked ones you get from most supermarkets, are full of water so they are the most likely culprit. <S> The only sure-fire way to avoid a soggy burrito is to avoid ingredients that may make them soggy, this limits the list of ingredients somewhat <S> but there's still loads to chose from. <S> Otherwise you will have to pack the ingredients separately and put it all together before eating, which is a bit of a pain if all you want is a grab and go meal. <S> Alternatively you could put in ingredients what will absorb moisture. <S> Anything dried like fruits (tomatoes included), dessicated coconut, or freeze-dried anything will absorb a bit. <S> Whether that's the flavor you want is another story.
|
To do this you can use separate containers, bags, or however you normally package a burrito.
|
Milk instead of water for sourdough? I have a nice, healthy Type 110 wheat-based sourdough starter that I use to make bread and pancakes. I've recently discovered that it may be possible to feed the starter with milk instead of water. Is this true? I'm a bit paranoid that rotting milk will introduce unwanted bugs that rotting flour won't. How would it affect my starter? Or should I just stick to water in the starter, but add milk to the bread, instead? <Q> Adding milk works because milk is mostly water . <S> It might even work better, as it also contains sugar (lactose) which will be eaten by your starter's yeasts and bacteria. <S> But it also contains other stuff, such as fats. <S> And fats, after some time, get rancid. <S> You probably won't want that taste in bread or pancakes. <S> I would stick to water (which quite probably you'll find cheaper than milk). <S> Don't worry about rotten milk: <S> your starter is already rotten. <S> And it's a hostile environment for most microbes. <S> It's very very improbable new microbes would survive there. <S> But if they do, they'll be quite similar to the already existing ones. <A> I have always fed my sourdough starters milk and flour. <S> I have tried it with water, but I feel it was not as tangy as the milk started bread. <S> As far as the dough goes, I usually use water or milk, depending on what I have on hand. <S> That doesn't make nearly as big a difference. <A> If you want you can use nonfat milk, too! <S> I use 1% - have done so ever since I started -- 10 or more years -- I tried switching to water, just didn't work well. <A> I use curdled milk and cream for my bread and pancake recipes. <S> The thing you want to watch out for is mold. <S> Watch out for Google images of moldy starter, because many of them are showing normal starter that has gotten bubbly, has alcohol floating on top, or just has a dark grey color. <S> All these are normal for mother. <S> Whether you use milk or water with your starter, just check for black or green spots to know if there is a problem. <S> Remember, you are not supposed to eat raw bread dough (although I do every time), and certainly do not eat your starter unless it has been cooked first. <S> The easiest thing to do is have a water/flour starter. <S> Now when you want a different effect, you just propagate your starter by mixing a different flour/liquid combination and then let it set until the mix becomes bubbly. <S> There is not one better than the other, it's just what you want for the particular recipe. <S> On the other hand, if I do a milk bread recipe using 90% milk and 10% water from my water/flour starter, does the final bread really know the difference. <S> You'll need to experiment to find out.
|
I agree, milk makes a better starter - much more sour.
|
How to freeze your own produce & meals, without cell wall break down? I've just spend 30 minutes reading online, and got a bit frustrated. I want to be able to freeze my own grown vegetables & even meals to a very high standard. I can't quite be bothered with liquid nitrogen, but I'd like to get great quality and I'm up for almost anything. Given things lose quality due to cell wall break down, what I'd like is for someone with experience to explain, how I can get good results, freezing food. I get the feeling a traditional freezer just isn't cold enough, how do we get around this? Is there a certain temperature? Are there colder freezer's than normal? If I increase the surface area of the food, does that prevent cell wall break down? Any techniques? What sort of quality have you had with freezing foods? Any recomendations? <Q> ...far from an expert, but I think there are two issues. <S> First, the speed with which you can get an item frozen. <S> Quicker freezing means smaller ice crystals. <S> I assume this leads to a reduced cell structure breakdown. <S> LN might get you there quickly, but the item will warm up when you put it in your freezer. <S> The second issue is, not only is a home freezer not cold enough for prolonged storage without cell structure breakdown, but it probably also has an auto defrost cycle that cause temperature fluctuation. <S> This probably leads to additional cell structure breakdown as things warm and cool over time. <S> There are definitely other pieces of equipment, blast freezers and super low temperature freezers, however most make little economic sense for the home. <S> Personally, my best success has been with vacuum sealed foods...used in weeks, not months. <A> I've made a comment already, but on thinking about it, I've more to say. <S> Mostly, when you freeze foods, the cell walls are already ruptured because you've either cooked or blanched the produce beforehand. <S> Raw meats undergo changes when frozen, but I can't speak to how much they lose nutritionally, or even if they do. <S> Certainly, the advice to cooks regarding beef (steak or a joint) is to always freeze it before use, because it helps to break down the fibres, giving a more tender meat once cooked. <S> Cell walls are also ruptured by slicing, dicing or cutting, and many vegetables will have been treated in such a way before freezing. <S> Being both a cook and a gardener, I can pass on that everyone <S> I know who freezes runner beans <S> (washed and sliced first) or rhubarb (chopped) does not bother to blanch before freezing, since the only advantage it's supposed to confer is preserving the colour if you wanted to keep them frozen for longer than six months. <S> With rhubarb, I haven't found that to be the case anyway, it always loses its colour when it's finally cooked, whether it's been blanched or not. <S> You do need to look at cookery resource material for a fuller answer. <S> Industrial freezers do have lower temperatures than home ones, but an efficient home freezer is perfectly adequate for most requirements. <A> This may not be quite what you are asking, but you might want to check out the book <S> The Gardener's A-Z Guide to Growing Organic Food . <S> For every veggie and fruit in the book, the author gives recommendations on the best way to preserve. <S> Sometimes that means freezing; other times it is drying, canning, or pickling. <S> It really all depends. <S> Personally, I opt to preserve using the method that gives the most flavorful results, and then I cook to the strengths of the preserved food. <S> My frozen beans, for example, never have the lovely crisp freshness of beans of just picked, so I put them into dishes that don't need that crispness for them to shine.
|
I can tell you that certain foods keep for shorter times in a freezer than others, and sometimes that varies with how it's prepared, and certainly on whether you purchased it frozen in the first place, or froze it yourself.
|
Ma Po Doufu without Pork In China there is a famous dish called Ma Po Doufu 麻婆豆腐 and most of the recipes I find online have pork. I was wondering if anyone knew if pork was an essential part of the dish (in terms of flavoring) or if there was something you could do to make it a vegetarian option? Would the dish work with chicken/beef? <Q> A number of Chinese restaurants are happy to prepare it without pork or beef. <S> I've seen it with pork (most common) or <S> beef (sometimes). <S> A vegetarian Chinese place that I occasionally visit uses a "vegetarian ham" along with some vegetables like peas to augment the custardy texture of the soft tofu. <S> I like to add some ja tsai (zasai, depending on romanization preferences) pickles in there, though I'd guess that's not that common. <A> Kenji Lopez-Alt at SeriousEats.com <S> has a very nice article about coming up with this recipe for a vegan Mapo Tofu that he (otherwise a happy meat eater) claims is even better than the pork one. <S> The main replacement for the pork is mushrooms (he recommends a mix of wood ear, morel, and porcini), because of the good match in flavour. <S> To get the texture he uses the Chinese technique of "dry frying", typically used for meat. <S> I'll leave it to Mr. Lopez-Alt to explain the details - he does it better than I! <A> Using a combination of mushrooms as Kenji suggests (reconstituted shiitake plus plenty "normal" mushrooms), combined with finely crumbled (squeeze in your hand until you disintegrate the block, then drive the back of a fork through it) and well sauteed firm tofu (yes, adding tofu twice) yields an excellent texture here. <S> Dicing the mushrooms finely (brunoise-like size is best, but doing that to a pound of mushrooms is more work than you think :). <S> DO NOT attempt to use a food processor, that tends to leave you with much mush and little room.) <S> helps, as does sauteeing the tofu separately and adding some of your salt/sugar budget for the dish at that stage (it helps drive out the water). <S> Small TVP flakes also work reasonably well, as a substitute for the crumbled tofu or as an addition. <S> If one wants to avoid having soy tofu twice in the dish, burmese tofu (which you make from chickpeas) can be used as the topping too, but caution not to overcook it is advisable. <S> For some extra umami, adding some finely cut/broken douchi (salted black beans) in with the aromatics works great. <A> There a a lot of variants of Mapo Doufu. <S> I know of a vegetarian/vegan version that replaces the minced pork with fermented black beans (Douchi). <S> Works very well. <S> There is a recipe in the book Every Grain of Rice by Fuchsia Dunlop . <S> An online version can be found here <S> Another version i know is with minced beef. <S> I don't know the source.
|
Pork is not absolutely essential to the identity of the dish, but it's certainly the most likely version to be served.
|
Why is milk powder used in bread machine recipes? In a bread machine bread recipe, why is milk powder included? And is milk powder needed? I have baked several loaves without milk powder. When the bread is baking sometimes the loaf collapses with a 'crater' depression of about 3 cm. <Q> Milk or milk powder are not strictly needed in bread recipes. <S> There are many formulas that omit it: <S> the minimal ingredients for a loaf are water, flour and yeast; salt is probably essential for a loaf that is tasty. <S> Add flavor to the loaf Enhance browning of the crust due to the potential carmelization of the milk sugars <S> The use of milk powder as opposed to liquid milk may be just for convenience, or because there is sufficient hydration in the loaf from other reasons, so it avoids adding additional water as part of the milk. <S> You may choose to omit the milk powder, but you will lose its benefits. <S> Instead, I suggest you find one of the myriad bread recipes designed for bread machines that doesn't include it if you don't want to use it. <S> The cratering issue is likely to be unrelated to milk or milk powder. <A> In the manual for my bread machine, the use of milk powder was said to be because the machine might be set to cook hours later via the timer and having the milk sitting on the counter for hours might lead to spoilage. <S> If you decide to use milk when making bread right away, you probably should reduce the water added an equivalent amount. <A> Your loaf may have cratered due to the lack of salt. <S> Salt is essential to deactivate the yeast. <S> Putting less yeast in will solve the problem but this may also affect the rise so a good balance of yeast and salt, on opposite sides of the pan, is essential. <S> As a guide, about 2 teaspoons, 10 grams, of fast acting yeast and the same of salt is about right for a 500 gram, 1 pound, loaf. <S> There's very little difference between the milk and the milk powder as said above, however most bread machine manufacturers recommend the powder if you're making an enriched dough as if the machine is left overnight on timer, the milk will not spoil. <S> Happy baking!
|
Milk (or milk powder) is a way of enhancing the dough to: Make a softer loaf (due to the milkfat acting as a tenderizer by interfering with gluten production)
|
What is the purpose of adding oil when cooking scrambled eggs on non-stick pan? Today I had… hard conversation with my girlfriend whether to use or not oil (semi refined sunflower) when cooking scrambled eggs on a non-stick pan. My point is that there is no reason for oil, because coating of the pan will prevent eggs to stick. Was I right or adding oil is essential for some other reason than prevention eggs to stick? <Q> I always add butter, as much for the flavor as to keep the eggs from sticking. <S> In scrambled eggs, butter is as necessary for me as salt and pepper. <A> You can certainly try your pan without oil, and see how it goes. <S> If the nonstick coating is still in good shape, you'll be able to cook your eggs just fine. <S> You might still miss the flavor of butter, and if you try fried eggs, you may find that they don't brown the way you want. <S> But once your pan ages a bit, the coating won't work as well, and you'll want to start using oil again. <S> The pan will last a long, long time after that, so you'll probably end up using oil for most of the life of the pan. <A> Adding oil or butter makes scrambled eggs more creamy by giving the egg protein something to hold onto and not curl as tight. <S> The ideal formula for scrambled eggs is one extra yolk for every 4 eggs plus a little fat. <S> I didn't like scrambled eggs until I tried this formula <S> and it's awesome. <S> Credit goes to either Jack Bishop (Cooks Illustrated) and/or Nathan Myhrvold (Modernist Cuisine) <S> unfortunately I can't remember which of the two clever gents I heard it from. <A> Oil is not just about keeping things from sticking, it also helps with heat transfer. <S> With eggs it is not such a big issue although it does help some, however with something like a piece of chicken or stir frying vegetables adding oil is necessary. <A> Non-stick is not the only reason for using oil. <S> Some oils do have flavors as well. <S> If you cook with spices, sometimes these are placed in the pan prior to the egg, you will need the oil to sauté and meld the flavors together. <A> To me, it just makes it tastier.
|
The oil ensures good heat transfer, especially after the egg is no longer liquid, has an uneven surface and may not contact the pan evenly when you have flipped it.
|
I ate undercooked steak, what can happen to me? What are the risks of eating undercooked steak? I tried to cooked medium rare steak for the first time and I did not know about the palm trick to see it the meat is ready. I ate a bite and it was very soft. After I googled and found the hand/palm firmness trick,I realizes my meat was not cooked. <Q> The risks of eating undercooked steak vary based on the the region, the risk status of the person involved (are they a child, elderly, or immunocompromised in any way). <S> Nothing might happen <S> You might suffer from food-borne illness, most likely e coli. <S> from steak, with consequences ranging from: You might get a "tummy ache" You might suffer flu-like symptoms or vomiting for a few days You might die, but it is quite unlikely <S> Note that food borne illness normally takes at least 24-48 hours to develop, and is related to the quantity of contaminated food consumed. <S> One bite is lower risk than a whole meal (lower, not none). <S> If you are seriously concerned, you should consult your physician. <S> See also: <S> Foodborne Diseases <S> Factsheet from Texas state government <A> Exactly how it's been undercooked is also a factor. <S> If you have an item that's been well-cooked on one side, without being cooked on another side, you're at a much higher chance for pathogens than something that's been well seared but still rare in the middle. <S> Besides what SAJ14SAJ has mentioned, you want to cook all exposed surfaces. <S> In the case of ground meat (which exotec has mentioned) almost everything is an exposed surface, which makes it much more difficult to deal with, and you're dealing with more complicated machinery that's more difficult to clean than a simple blade. <S> You then have other factors, such as how it's raised, where it's been processed, how long it's been since it was cut and what temperature it was held at, etc. <S> In general, the less time since it's been cut, the less risky it is, assuming all other things (like the cleanliness of where it was processed) being equal. <S> All of that being said, eating raw beef on its own is not a problem. <S> There are plenty of places where it's still practiced. <S> My experience has been with Ethiopean food -- kitfo is raw, ground beef with spices, while gored gored is cubed, raw beef. <S> Inuit also eat raw meat, but it's typically frozen first, and rarely beef. <S> As for what might happen ... <S> that's been pretty well covered on the bad side ... <S> but there are also groups out there who advocate eating raw meat, or even rotting meat to help with digestive issues. <S> I don't know that I'd personally recommend it, though. <A> There is nothing wrong with eating rare meat, assuming the meat is fresh and was handled and refrigerated properly. <S> I have been eating blue rare meat my whole life, and often eat raw beef in sushi or tartar. <S> There is no need to worry. <S> Rare hamburger, on the other hand, can be risky due to the surface area of the meat and the fact that portions of the meat that are inside the burger will have potentially been exposed to bacteria. <A> I had eaten a blue rare 6oz steak, cooked very briefly on the grill, both sides, and was having sever diahrreah, abdominal pain, and vomiting for 2 days before it went away. <S> This was also in North Dakota and was cut very fresh and of the highest grade!Let's keep in mind that everyone digests food differently, some better than others (this has a lot to do with blood type and genetics). <S> So if your able to eat blue rare steak or other undercooked meats, do not think everybody else will be able to as well! <S> This is dangerous advice and could get someone seriously ill. <S> Some of the confidence shown in undercooked meat on this thread is very worrisome, as my family in particular has trouble processing undercooked meats, especially low grade. <S> Stay safe and cook it to at least a light pink if your unsure! <S> Better to eat safe than sorry
|
For normal healthy adults, the risks of eating a single bit of under cooked steak in any of the industrialized nations are fairly small.
|
Can anyone identify this chocolate? A recent date left this for me to find...a surprise gift, how sweet! I'd love to know just how sweet :) It's 1 3/8 inches, 3.5 cm thick. The larger piece weighs 143 grams or 5 ounces. It tastes pretty good (but I am definitely no connoisseur) and it's certainly in the semi-sweet/bittersweet range. I just discovered one more possible hint, WinCo Foods sells chocolate block pieces in their bulk food section, there are WinCos in my date's home state of Idaho. They carry both what they call dark chocolate and bittersweet chocolate. <Q> This Chocolate is Van-Leer semi sweet. <S> It does have a distinct slab style. <S> This is available in the bulk section at Winco. <S> Here's a picture: You can also order it online here <A> Joe's PoundPlus slab . <S> Unfortunately, I don't have one around to check if the marks match. <A> This might sound crazy but aside from TJ's and Whole Foods, try Pier 1. <S> Once upon a time I bought gigantic shards of odds-and-ends chocolate there, and the chocolate came from everywhere, as you might expect. <S> Not sure if they still do it, but there's always a chance. :) <A> It's certainly a piece off of a 5-lb block. <S> It does not look like any of the "big guys" that I know of... <S> Peter's, Ambrosia, Callebaut, Sharffen Berger, Merckens, Guittard, Ghirardelli, Valrhona, or Wilbur. <S> I'd say the best bet is to ask the person where they got it, and call the store to see what brand it is. <S> My local Kroger grocery store sells dark chocolate chunks in the "Bulk Food" section along with the oat groats and dried pineapples.
|
It was an old American chocolate manufacturer that was recently purchased by Callebaut. The thickness of the shards makes me think it's from a Trader
|
Looking to bake side dishes, having problems with dryness When I cook my meat, I usually bake or broil it, I basically use the oven. I like using the oven to make the side dish while baking the meat. Usually the side dish consists of a combination of sweet potatoes / yams, broccoli and onions. I slice the potatoes and make sure the broccoli pieces and onions are large enough so they will not overcook / burn. However, usually this combination ends up being really dry, and everything sticks to the aluminum foil. Now, I don't really like throwing oil on everything, I want my meals to be healthy, and covering everything with alot of oil is not appealing to me. Do you know of any alternatives to prevent the dryness? I might just have to revert to boiling the potatoes and broccoli, although I have never heard of boiling onions. <Q> To prevent the sticking, you might want to use a spray oil, maybe even just on the foil before you put the vegetables and potatoes on. <S> It's a tiny amount of oil, not enough to make things noticeably greasy, but will be pretty effective. <S> Another spray over the top will make them brown a little more nicely and may even prevent a little drying out. <S> Alternatively, you can just toss them all in a bowl with a small amount of oil; it really doesn't take much, and I'd hardly describe it as "covering with a lot of oil." <S> As for preventing things from drying out, first and foremost, don't overcook them. <S> Broccoli and onions both roast very nicely, but you definitely want to pull it out before it starts browning/burning too much. <S> If you slice the potatoes thinly enough, they'll cook in roughly the same amount of time as the broccoli and onions. <S> So if things are getting overcooked, just don't leave them in the oven as long. <S> You can also always try covering them. <S> Another sheet of foil over the top will trap a fair amount of moisture, letting them steam a bit and probably preventing some burning as well. <S> (I suppose it's also possible that it's all drying out because you're cooking them too slowly, so they have plenty of time for moisture to escape, but that seems less likely given the way you described things.) <A> What I wanted to say was partly said, but I wanted to generalize a bit, and add a detail or two, so a new answer :) <S> You have two options with vegetables in the oven: roasting them or stewing them. <S> If you want them roasted, then you are on the right way. <S> Jefromi explained the details, but to summarize: brush or spray very little oil against sticking, or roast on a grate or shashlik instead of a tin. <S> To prevent drying out, leave them in for a shorter time (ideally, put them in later, so you will have warm meat and sides at the same time). <S> The easier option, provided you are all right with the end result, is to stew them instead of roasting them. <S> SAJ14SAJ's answer is a variation of that. <S> Instead of pouches, you can also use an earthenware baking pot, or small individual pots, or ramekins. <S> If you don't have earthenware pots with lids, you can cover with foil, or, in an individual pot, break a whole egg on the vegetables in the middle of the baking time. <S> Pouches and earthenware are the most common ways of stewing in an oven, but in a pinch, any pot which allows them to sit in their own juices will do. <A> If you are committed to only using the oven, you might wish to use the technique the French call en <S> papillote, which means in paper. <S> In the classic technique, the food is securely folded in parchment, so that it steams in its own juices as it cooks: <S> In more modern practice, you would make the pouch with aluminum foil, instead of parchment, although of course parchment still works, and looks better for presentation if you are having guests. <S> This works well with vegetables, chicken, and fish, assuming that all of the food pieces are cut into sizes that will cook through in approximately the same time. <S> You can include a squirt of lemon or lime juice (or even slices of the citrus), or some herbs or spices in the pouch for additional flavor, along with the principal ingredients. <S> Googling baked in parchment recipe may give you some ideas for getting started. <A> I think getting a different pan for roasting will make a big difference for you. <S> For cast iron, get a big one like a 12"+ to fit enough. <S> For stoneware, I roast vegetables on a pizza stone. <S> A company called the Pampered Chef also makes great stoneware baking pans , with a lip around it <S> so stuff won't slide off. <S> Cast iron and stoneware are great because you don't need to add any oil - they are naturally non-stick. <S> You don't use any soap to clean these, as they build up a seasoning layer, though you may want to re-season cast iron one in a while by adding a thin layer of oil with a paper towel. <S> To clean, just scrape with a plastic scraper and/or use water and brush. <S> They will do a better job than most pans or cookie sheets + aluminum foil as they provide great heat retention and even cooking. <S> You will get a nice crispy crust on the outside, which will help to seal in some of the moisture you are losing. <S> Alternatively, you can bake in a pot with a lid, which will steam or braise the food and keep it moist. <S> For this I would recommend using a dutch oven. <S> Again cast iron or enamelware will be the best for you if you don't want to use oil, as they are both naturally non-stick. <S> These tools are a good investment if you don't own them already and will save you money on aluminum foil in the long run. <S> Really the only thing I'd use aluminum for is wrapped baked potatoes or beets where you want to seal in the moisture and juices. <S> Sometime I use parchment paper on really sticky items (marinades) but it's rarely necessary. <S> I also recommend Mark Bittman's How to Cook Everything <S> Vegetarian for great recipes for vegetable dishes - everything in there is simple and well-tested, with recipes for roasting or braising just about every vegetable you can find. <S> You'll find all the correct times and temps in there.
|
For roasting potatoes or brussel sprouts or a lot of other things I recommend getting a heavy cast iron skillet or a stoneware pan or pizza stone.
|
How to substitute butter with combination of butter and shortening in cookie/biscuit making? Sometimes when I bake cookies, they either come out too soft or they become rock hard. I have read somewhere that baking cookies with butter makes is spreadable in the oven and gives it crispy texture, while using shortening makes it firm in the oven and gives it a flaky texture. What if I can use both in any of the cookie recipe replacing it with 100% butter or shortening? I want my cookies to have melting in the mouth and flaky texture. <Q> The texture of a cookie is based on much more than the fat used, shortening or butter. <S> In fact, within some basic limits, they are fairly interchangeable in most cookie recipes, flavor not withstanding. <S> Switching to part or all vegetable shortening will not yield a flaky texture. <S> The method by which the ingredients are combined, and how the cookies are treated, mixed, or rolled is a dominant factor in the final texture. <S> As Sourd'oh points out, your variation is more likely to be a result of over-cooking or under-cooking. <S> The individual size of each cookie can make a considerable difference, especially with very small cookies. <S> If you are getting inconsistency within the same tray , you may not have uniformly sized cookies. <S> A cookie scoop or disher can help with that, as can practice. <S> To get a truly flaky texture, you would need to use a recipe and method specifically designed to create flakiness. <S> These cookies are often built with a variation on the laminated methods used for biscuits, where butter is cut into the dough, and then moistened. <S> When they are rolled out, the pieces of butter flatten into layers, separating the flour layers, and providing the flakiness. <A> You certainly can use a combination of butter and shortening in most recipes. <S> The key difference is the melting point of each. <S> Butter melts at a lower temperature, so <S> the cookies will begin to spread before the starch and eggs set. <S> Shortening melts at a higher temperature <S> so the starch and eggs will begin to set up before the shortening melts. <S> Neither one of these will make your cookies "rock hard" though, that's more likely from them being overbaked. <A> You can replace shortening 1 for 1 with butter in most cookies. <S> (I like to get shortening stick form for this; to simplify measuring.) <S> It's been my experience that using shortening instead of butter can reduce the greasiness of a cookie, though you will usually see a little less browning during baking. <S> So start out by baking a batch with half the butter replaced by an equal volume of shortening. <S> But, if your cookies are either too hard or too soft, the main culprit probably isn't the presence of butter. <S> The first thing I would look at is how you're measuring flour - too much flour will lead to hard cookies and too little will prevent the cookies from staying together. <S> The most accurate way to measure flour is by weight with a scale. <S> If you only have measuring cups (measure by volume), then the most accurate method of measuring would be to pour flour into the cup, and level it off the cup with a flat edge. <S> If your cookies are spreading too much, it's more likely that your dough is too warm (due to a warm room temperature); try chilling the formed cookies for 20 minutes in the refrigerator before baking. <S> Also, it could be that your oven's temperature is too low; use an in-oven thermometer and perhaps a baking stone (or bricks, or any other thermal mass).
|
I commonly replace up to half or all of the butter in a cookie recipe with shortening.
|
How to make a sandwich bread with a very soft crust? And what is the ideal temperature to bake sandwich bread? I have to ask this question as I really tried hard to achieve a soft crust for sandwich bread but couldn't succeed. I have tried lots of techniques and different recipes but I really couldn't make a bread having a very soft crust that we get in supermarkets. And many recipes say to bake the sandwich bread at 200 degrees C and many other say 180 degrees C, but what is the ideal temperature to bake a sandwich bread with really soft crust? I know that crusty bread is good but many people, especially children don't like to have a crusty sandwich bread! <Q> Use a Pullman loaf pan (aka Pain de Mie pan). <S> You'll also get a square loaf great for sandwiches. <S> Grilled cheese, anyone? <S> The lid inhibits a "crusty" crust on all sides, just like a regular loaf pan does on all sides but the top. <S> I use my 9" Pullman all the time. <S> These are my two favorite, foolproof Pain de Mie recipes. <S> Honey Oat <S> White <S> I don't know that it's always the right temperature for soft crusts, but for those loaves, I always use 350F (175C). <A> The ideal temperature is going to vary depending on your specific formula, the size of your loaves, and so on, so I cannot comment on that. <S> To encourage a soft crust: <S> Use a formula that is enriched with milk or butter for a softer crumb, as well as a softer crust Use a loaf pan, as only the top crust will get the extra development from being exposed directly to the air of the oven, which allows it to more easily dry out <S> Don't use steam in the oven to encourage crust development <S> Don't brush the top of the loaf before baking with anything or brush with milk or cream <S> Do brush the top of the loaf after baking with melted butter <A> Then I slice and bag the bread - works quite well and we are in high, dry Colorado! <A> I put a dry towel over my loaves as soon as I take them out of the oven and remove them from the pan <S> (I put them on a cooling rack). <S> Leave the towel on the loaves for a minimum of 10 minutes. <S> This works well for me, even on the odd times <S> when I over bake the loaf. <A> In my experience covering loaves with a dry (never tried wet) cloth while they cool results in a soft crust. <S> I never glaze the loaves either pre or post baking.
|
I've had the best success getting a soft crust by setting the bread on a cooling rack, spreading a little margarine (I just use the end of a stick rubbed into the bread), and then draping a damp cheesecloth over the bread while it cools.
|
Are cooked shrimp shells edible? Some Chinese shrimp dishes like the spicy garlic shrimp is served with the shell still on but head removed. Since the shell was on during cooking, the seasoning is all over it. Are you supposed to eat the whole shrimp with the shell, or remove the shell and only eat the meat? I usually taste the seasoning on the shell and then peel it away to eat the meat only. <Q> This depends partially on the cooking technique and the shrimp variety/size (= <S> > thickness of the shell). <S> However, if boiled, the shells are chewy and extremely unpleasant - in this case you have to peel them. <S> I am not familiar with the spicy garlic shrimp, but you can just try if the shell is crunchy, is pleasant to eat, and does not require excessive painful chewing - go for it, if not return to your old practice of pealing it and just licking the flavoring of the shells. <A> The shells are edible (no harm would come to you) but unpleasant. <S> You're supposed to remove the shell and eat the shrimp. <S> If no no one is looking I'll suck on the shells because they do have nice flavor. <S> If you can save a decent sized pile of them, you can make a pretty serviceable broth by boiling them for a couple of minutes, but that is usually done with raw shells. <A> I'm Chinese American and when I order garlic shrimp I prefer to eat the little feet beneath the abdomen because it's slightly crunchy and thoroughly marinated in sauce. <S> But I always peel off the rest of the shell since it's hard to chew and usually tough. <S> A couple of years ago I went to an Indonesian restaurant in New York City and tried a dish where the shrimp had been flash fried in extremely high heat, so the shell was thin, brittle, and edible. <S> The dish was called Nasi Goreng Sambal Udang Petai, or Shrimp with Stink Beans and Rice. <S> I won't go into the unusual beans, which deserve its own StackExchange question, but the shrimp had been fried so that the shell nearly disintegrates when you bite into the shrimp. <S> I found the shrimp shell to be incredibly delicious and ever since then I've tried try to eat shrimp shells if they're not too tough. <S> So, yes, shrimp shells are edible and, based on recent scientific research, may also provide health benefits, like lowering cholesterol and improving cartilage and joint health. <A> My wife is from China (Northeast) and she ALWAYS eats the shrimp (fried) with the shells intact. <S> (chopsticks, fork, hands, whatever) I do too now, and prefer it that way. <A> You're supposed to eat the shrimp with chopsticks, picking one up from the platter, bite off a piece if they're large, chewing up the whole thing, and swallowing only the meat and spitting out the shells as politely as you can on the table. <S> I'm going to guess that if you are served shrimp prepared in this way, the shrimp are probably large. <S> The purpose of this method of preparation is to cook the shrimp without toughing it up. <A> My brother in law is from Bangladesh <S> and he's making beautiful prawn curries and dishes with shells still intact. <S> So when it comes to eating we all eat the prawns iwth the shell and head. <S> It's super yummie and crunchy from the outside and soft from the inside. <S> Try it, when grilled prawns taste great with their shells still intact. <A> The fact is that the Prawn/shrimp shell/skin is edible item. <S> But it depends only on how the item is cooked. <S> If you cook a plain Prawn/shrimp in an electric oven at higher degree for longer duration(try your own by trial & error way the temp & time, also other way of frying/putting on direct fire/grill helps), no matter how big it is, you can enjoy eating them whole with excellent taste. <S> This way you get more calcium and other minerals and their benefits too. <S> But it is not advisable to eat the shells if they don't get to powder form while biting (generally other ways of cooking has this problem). <S> It may even upset your stomach. <A> Shrimp shells are edible but what she said they are not pleasant. <S> Shrimp skin is very healthy and have a lot of health benefits like it can help you lower blood pressure and lose weight easily.
|
If the shrimp is deep fried the shell can turn crispy and is super fun to eat.
|
Replacement for pasta that is natural and fairly low carb I'm looking for something with the physical properties of pasta (spaghetti or similar, not lasagne). Something that I can toss with a sauce or oil and serve in a large bowl for a weekday supper. Something grain-free and natural. I've tried a large onion cut into thin strips (probably the most successful) and leeks (tend to be too floppy / wet). Any other suggestions? <Q> The classic example would be spaghetti squash . <S> It has the unique property that when you cook it, it can be pulled apart into long, thin, pasta-like strands. <S> You can then sauce it or use it in a manner analogous to pasta, but its nutritional profile is far more similar to squash, because, well, it is squash. <A> Have you tried spiralized zucchini, yellow squash or carrots? <S> I use this: <S> Once they're cut I just blanch them and then toss into any pasta recipe, like so: <A> Shirataki noodles are quite the rage, although I've never actually tried them. <S> I understand that they smell fishy when you first open the package, but that goes away. <S> They claim to be made of naturally water soluble fiber with no fat, sugar, or starch. <S> Supposedly some varieties have zero net carbs and zero calories. <S> They have been recommended for Italian style and Asian style applications. <S> I need to place an Amazon order anyway, so I'm going to give them a try. <S> EDIT: <S> Now that I've tried them, I can say that I kind of like them in Asian style applications (especially soup). <S> I can't even imagine them with a marinara type sauce, I think they'd be awful. <S> They'd probably be fine with any kind of seafood. <S> The packages are smaller than I realized, so they are even more expensive than I thought. <S> For me, they are pretty close to price prohibitive. <A> One that I've had a lot of success with is shredded cabbage. <S> You can easily and quickly cut it into strips of varying width depending on the pasta you are trying to mimic. <S> Lightly boiled in some salt, and served with the sauce of choice the top it comes out quite well. <A> In italy we have protein based pasta. <S> It's kinda tasty <S> and it's low on carbs (percentage may change depending on brands). <S> http://www.produzioneintegratori.it/Alimenti/Pasta_proteica.html http://www.nutriwellshop.it/pasta <A> You could consider Miracle Noodle . <S> Contains Zero Net Carbohydrates, <S> Zero Calories, No Gluten <S> Made of a Naturally dietary fiber called Glucomannan with no fat, sugar, or starch
|
Miracle Noodles Look around at the reviews, that will give you some kind of idea what they are (besides expensive).
|
Is unwrapped refrigerated cheese safe? Is unwrapped, refrigerated cheese safe? I usually have Australian or New Zealand cheddar cheese or similar cheese in my refrigerator. Recently I've been discarding the original wrapping which usually is not resealable and also not bothering with "cling wrap". I simply put it on a laminated disposable paper dish and refrigerate. Is this practice safe? A 250 gram block is usually consumed within 5 days if not much sooner. <Q> It is almost certainly safe unless it was left out at warm temperatures to spoil, or has molded, or otherwise spoiled in a manner not directly related to being uncovered. <S> It may, however, be unpalatable due to: <S> Drying out Picking up flavors or odors from other items in the refrigerator Since you are eating it relatively quickly, if you are not experiencing these issues, your practice should be just fine. <A> I know you've already accepted an answer, but this piece of information is missing: cheese, kept unwrapped (or uncontained inside something) in a refrigerator, easily picks up bacteria from other foods, particularly meats, raw or cooked, and from the fridge itself. <S> Which is why it should be, preferably, loosely wrapped in cheese paper, baking parchment or greaseproof paper as a minimum safety standard. <S> What I'm saying can be backed up here: British Cheese FAQ , North Dakota University (go to page 14) , WikiHow on Food Selection and Storage . <S> I could go on, but really, I can't think why I should <S> , it ain't difficult to find this info. <S> Course, if you want to store cheese badly, don't matter to me, I ain't eating it anyway. <A> It is safe. <S> In fact, my father only eats Gouda when it's old and hard. <S> After my mother ate the fresh cheese, it would lie unwrapped in the fridge for 2 or 3 weeks until it was hard enough for my father to enjoy it.
|
My own personal preferred method is to put my cheese chunks in a zip lock type bag, which substantially cuts down on the drying, especially for moister cheeses like mozzarella or semi-firm cheddar.
|
Is it possible to make transparent / translucent pastry? I'm looking for something that works like pastry (malleable before baking, rigid after baking, mild unobtrusive flavour) that is transparent or translucent. The idea is to use for topping savoury pies, where the base and sides are regular shortcrust pastry and the top is something similar but translucent, so that you can have a selection of different pies of the same size and shape on a sharing plate and people can see which is which - without leaving the top open so not exposing the contents to the elements. Since things like glass noodles and translucent dough wrappings for Chinese dumplings exist, I'm sure it must be possible - maybe based on corn flour, or pure starch like glass noodles? Apparently translucent rice is also a thing . The closest I've found are recipes like this one for transparent Chinese dumpling dough - but these aren't very transparent and are gooier than would be ideal alongside pastry. If there's no such thing that has an established name or recipes, it would be great to have a few basic principles on how it might work: for example, how the pure starch that glass noddles are apparently made from could be sourced and adapted to be pastry-like without losing translucency? Perhaps simply making a starch dough, glazing it with oil then baking might be enough to make it work like pastry? <Q> I will never apply for the job, I promise. <A> I respect Jolenealaska's creative thought, but nothing truly resembling pastry is going to be translucent or transparent unless it is exceedingly thin. <S> The structure alone will refract light, making the product opaque in the same way snow is opaque even though individual water crystals are fairly transparent, if they don't have air inclusions. <S> This is because any real pastry will have a complex structure of starch, fat, protein, and so on. <S> While I respect the idea of trying to use a very thin noodle (which is only really somewhat translucent because it is thin , much like tissue paper), that is not likely to be delicious , and will be somewhat incongruous in a western style savory pie. <S> Instead, I suggest you achieve your goal (making it clear which pie is which) <S> by the more traditional means of one or more of: <S> Different crimping styles at the rim Using different patterns for the steam vents Cutting out and baking on crust garnishes in different shapes for different types of filling; you could even cut out letters <S> Use food coloring, or natural ingredients like beet juice or annatto to color the pastry, with different colors for each pie variation <S> For example, one Caribbean restaurant near me has vegetable patties (a hand pie) with pale crust, and chicken patties with a pale greeny-yellow crust (not sure what they use, probably a touch of their curry mixture), and beef patties with a richer orangish colored crust (they might have used annatto). <A> If you want the least obtrusive flavor, the best you can go with is thickened water. <S> While you can probably prepare sheets with the right hydrocolloid and lots of care and plastic foil, I would suggest choosing a thickener which thickens on cooling, and pouring the warm mixture over the pie. <S> Arrowroot starch is frequently used in this role on fruit pies, I don't see a reason why it shouldn't work on savory pies. <S> But if you have meat in the pie, a gelatine texture would probably feel more natural. <S> In both cases, don't add anything to the mixture, just the thickener and water, and process in the usual way. <A> While it wouldn't be a pastry, per se (or at all), using discs of cast sugar might work for what you need. <S> If you poured thin disks of cast sugar into a ring mold the size of the top of your pie, you could probably attach them with marzipan or a starch wash or something after cooking the pie. <S> If they were thin enough, you should be able to cut through them to serve the pie (though they probably wouldn't cut neatly). <S> I agree with the previous answers on several other points though. <S> You could use something akin to a Korean sweet potato noodle. <S> They are exceptionally clear, but the gummy and chewy texture probably wouldn't do a pie any favors. <S> Anything resembling a more traditional pastry is going to be opaque (even a single layer of phyllo dough is opaque when baked).
|
Less traditionally, at least for savory pies: Use a lattice crust, so the filling is visible, but you still have some pastry on top With great skill, a true artist could do what you describe with Thai/Vietnamese rice paper, the dinner plate sized, extra thin ones, like for Fresh Spring Rolls.
|
Can soft-boiled eggs be reboiled and turned into hard-boiled eggs? I recently boiled some eggs, then put them in the fridge. When I went to use them, they were not boiled all the way through. Can I reboil them or should I throw them away? <Q> In terms of food safety, as long as the egg would have been safe to eat as it is (that is, it still is in its unbroken shell, has been cooled rapidly after cooking and then refrigerated), it is safe to recook. <S> In terms of quality, I am not sure that you will get a very palatable result. <S> You are likely to end up with overcooked and rubbery whites at the very least. <A> You absolutely can. <S> I boiled some eggs last night. <S> Ran them under cold water and put them in the fridge. <S> Went to eat them today and they were too soft, like, whites still runny too soft. <S> Stuck them back in boiling water for a few minutes today and then ran 'em under cold water again. <S> They were perfect! <S> Delicious, perfect texture, perfect. <S> You can absolutely re-boil them! <A> I just boiled a dozen eggs following "the perfect boiled egg" recipe (which said bring to boil and cover for 17 minutes) but after cooling under cold water they were soft boiled. <S> I put them back in pot reboiled the water and took them out after it began to boil and covered them (again) and cooled them with cold water (again). <S> This time they were done but when I peeled them the shell broke off in small pieces that took twice (3x) as long to get off... <S> but they were fine. <A> I had cracked the whole dozen and started to peel them. <S> Then I found them undercooked. <S> Saved the day!! <A> I did this today without a problem. <S> Put cold/tepid water in the pan, took the half-done eggs out of their cold water bath, put the eggs back in the pan and brought the water up to a boil, left them in there about 15 minutes on low. <S> Then put them in cold water bath again to make sure they would peel well. <S> No problem at all. <S> Eggs turned out fine.
|
I just brought a pan of water to a boil and dropped the cracked eggs in, boiled them for 14 more minutes, drained and cooled them, they came out perfect.
|
How to keep pumpkin fresh for a long time? I want to store some (about 10 kg.s) fresh pumpkin for a long time (3-6 months) to use in pumpkin pies mostly. What's the most useful way of doing it? Can I put them in freezer? Raw or cooked? And if I do does it losequality/taste after defrosting? Another option I have is to can them in glass jars. Considering taste which one is the best option? <Q> According to the National Center for Home Food Preservation (emphasis added): <S> Freezing is the easiest way to preserve pumpkin, and it yields the best quality product. <S> Select full-colored mature pumpkin with fine texture (not stringy or dry). <S> Wash, cut into cooking-size sections and remove seeds. <S> Cook until soft in boiling water, in steam, in a pressure cooker, or in an oven. <S> Remove pulp from rind and mash. <S> To cool, place pan containing pumpkin in cold water and stir occasionally (So Easy to Preserve, 2006). <S> Pack into rigid containers leaving headspace, and freeze. <S> They offer suggest a variety of cooking methods before freezing the flesh of the pumpkin, but you may find that roasting offers the least work and best flavor development. <S> Pressure canning of cubed (but not mashed or pureed) <S> pumpkin is also possible (as pumpkin is a low acid fruit, boiling water canning is not appropriate). <S> You should use only a trusted recipe if you choose to go this route. <S> You can also make pumpkin leather , although this does not to leave the pumpkin suitable for many recipes, and is only suitable if this the actual product you desire. <A> I clean out and cut fresh pie pumpkins into about 12 pieces each. <S> I use my pressure cooker to cook the pumpkin pieces...about 15 minutes under pressure. <S> Once the cool, the skins peel right off. <S> I then mash the pumpkin into a purée. <S> I put 2 cups each of purée in 1-quart freezer bags... <S> about the amount in a typical US can of pumpkin. <S> Then freeze, of course. <S> We just used some year-old pumpkin in a batch of pumpkin bread, and it tastes as fresh as when I made it. <S> Great for pumpkin pie, bars and pancakes. <A> I have had a great deal of success with turning the pumpkin in " Pumpkin Puree " and freezing it. <S> The puree can be easily portioned and stored in freezer bags. <S> Once thawed the puree can be used for any purpose. <A> Some pumpkins and other hard squashes will survive 3 months storage as they are , as long as you leave them intact. <S> Optimum storage conditions are described on legions of gardening websites. <S> This http://extension.oregonstate.edu/lane/sites/default/files/documents/ec1632.pdf extension office document suggests to "Cure squash and pumpkin for 10 days at temperatures of 80 to 85°F and a relative humidity of 80 to 85 degrees." <S> (that has probably already happened if you buy a pumpkin), "For best results, store sound, well-cured fruit at 50 to 55°F in a 50 to 70% relative humidity. <S> " , "Squash and pumpkin deteriorate rapidly if stored at temperatures below 50°F", "Keep the surface of the fruit dry", "Do not store pumpkin or squash near apples, pears, or other ripening fruit".
|
Nothing better than using homemade pumpkin purée with fresh spices!
|
Keeping scrambled eggs with tomatoes from being too watery When cooking scrambled eggs with tomatoes, I find that the longer the tomatoes cook with the eggs, the a. more they decompose, b. the more water the put into the pan. My ideal would be scrambled eggs / omlette that have well formed tomato dice, and are not watery. What's the best way to achieve this? Some initial hypotheses involve that the tomatoes I'm using are riper, thus juicer, and as such are prone to disintegration and exhaust more water. So potentual solutions to that could be a. less ripe tomatoes, b. draining cut tomatoes with paper towels or something ahead of time. Haven't tried those solutions, but was hoping for some tips here. Thanks. <Q> Another effective method (not mentioned in the link SAJ14SAJ provided) is salting. <S> Dice the tomatoes, generously salt them and leave them in a sieve for 20 minutes or so. <S> You probably want to squeeze off some of the juicy bits first. <S> Flip the tomatoes half-way through the resting time. <S> That will draw off a lot of water without pre-cooking the tomatoes (which will also work, but will change (not necessarily negatively) the taste of the tomatoes. <S> If you use kosher or other coarse salt, you'll be able to shake or wipe off quite a bit of the salt before proceeding with your application. <A> When I have very fresh and very ripe tomatoes, I don't like to cook them as their structure breaks down with heat and quickly becomes grainy. <S> Another option in addition to others' wonderful recommendations is just to prep the tomatoes separately. <S> Peel them by blanching and shocking them <S> so the skin comes apart, split, and scoop out the seeds. <S> Dice, and add chopped fresh tomato to the omelette at the very end of cooking. <A> Usually I will fry my tomatoes alone on high heat before making the omelette - if you cut each tomato into eighths and fry them facedown for a minute then flip for another minute <S> , the outside is seared and some of the internal water will have cooked off. <A> I suggest effectively partially sun drying them by putting them in a very low oven for a very long time. <A> From a horticultural point of view, the breed of tomato you're using will make a difference. <S> There is one by Nunhems called 'Intense (tm)' - this one was developed specifically for professional sandwich makers, because they have fewer pips and pulp, and so don't make the bread soggy. <A> In my experience, the seedier the tomato, the more juice it produces, so I agree with "horticulture guy". <S> What I do is simply cut away the seed portion of the tomato and use the rest, adding it as late as possible in the recipe. <S> When using tomatoes in my omelets I frequently sprinkle the diced tomato on the very top just prior to removing it from the pan. <S> Delicious, and it makes a pretty presentation on the plate. <A> Here's my solution. <S> First, it helps to use a firm tomato. <S> After I dice them, I put them in a paper towel and squeeze as much water out of them as I can, over the sink, and then add them to the egg mixture. <S> The end result might look a little weird, but the flavor is all there, and most importantly there is no excess water. <S> This method is fast, it's easy, and it has never failed me. <A> The two main ways you can remove as much moisture as possible (you'll never get rid of all of it) <S> is:1. <S> salting, either before you throw it into the pan to drain as much liquid as possible <S> and/or while you pan fry <S> it dust salt over it (to taste) and let the pan's heat evaporate the water2. <S> removing the seeds as much as you can. <S> either cut the tomato in half and scoop out or blanch and scoop. <S> If you don't like these solutions, Kiwis have a great way of baking tomatoes in the oven <S> (slice in halves and put the cut side up on a baking sheet) with some salt and pepper. <S> You could top with cheese if you want them to be extra indulgent. <S> Even though it's an extra step, it removes a lot of the water and you can still eat them with the scrambled eggs on the side.
|
You might find that using the right variety of tomato helps, though I imagine even 'Intense' will produce moisture when cooked.
|
Safe to leave oven on at 180F while at work to cook ribs? I'm currently at work and I'm having a little panic attack. I followed a recipe that require the ribs to be wrapped in foil and cooked at 180F for 9hours. I left about 30 minutes ago and for who knows why I didn't think it could be a bad idea before, but now I'm feeling unsure and worried. The ribs are wrapped in two layers of aluminium sitting on a baking sheet. The ribs were coated since last night in a dry rub and I've added sauce on them this morning before closing the wrapping again. Please give me your thought. Edit: I just wanted to give you guys an update. So by precaution I asked my boss if I could take the rest of the day off and he agreed to let me go around noon (4+ hours into cooking), a risk I had to live with. When I got home, my house was still standing in one piece and when I opened the door the smell running through my nose was incredible. I left the ribs to cook in the oven for another 5 hours before attempting to put them on the grill of the BBQ at high setting. The ribs were a bit too tender so I lost some in the process of grilling them, but the taste was amazing. It's the first time I manage to cook rib without boiling them first and I can honestly say I'm satisfied with the result, though I would probably cut down on the last hour in the oven. As for the safety of this adventure, I think it would be safe to redo it unattended especially because of how low temperature is set, but as other people mentioned it is important to have a clean oven. Happy safe cooking everyone. EDIT 2: I have an electric oven. <Q> Yes, there's a risk, but it's not significantly higher than having most other home appliances <S> turned on (eg, a lamp, dehumidifier, dish washer or dryer ). <S> Although it heats up, a full-sized oven is insulated, and you're not operating at a very high temperature. <S> Provided it seals well, even if there's a fire, there would be little oxygen to sustain it. <S> I would not trust a toaster oven or desktop oven. <S> with this sort of thing, as they're not as well insulated, nor do they tend to seal well. <S> As ovens are based on temperature, and will cycle on an off, rather than just feed in a constant amount of power (such as a cook top) ... <S> so it won't get so hot that it causes other issues. <S> Update: <S> I made the (possibly incorrect) assumption that this was an electric oven. <S> I don't know that I'd trust a gas oven the same way (as I would assume that it is not well sealed) ... <S> although people leave their home heating systems and water heaters on without shutting them off when they leave each day, so it's probably not an issue. <A> There are three issues here: <S> The quality of the food The safety of the food <S> The safety of your home Food Quality From a palatability perspective <S> , you may or may not get a decent result, <S> depending on how high the internal temperature of the ribs rises. <S> 180 F is very close to the temperature that needs to be achieved to effectively convert gelatin into collagen and create the tender texture out of the tough ribs as any kind of reasonable rate. <S> If the temperature inside the ribs doesn't rise that high--and air is a poor transmitter of heat, which is why you can stick your hand inside a 500 F oven <S> --you may not get a great result. <S> Food Safety <S> The same issue--temperature--is key for safety. <S> You want the ribs above 140 F as quickly as reasonably possible to inhibit pathogen growth. <S> This is exacerbated by the fact that most ovens have a considerable margin of error between the set temperature and the actual temperature (which also varies above and below the set point). <S> Home Safety <S> RI Swamp Yankee has located a reference to the US Fire Administration which clearly recommends not leaving cooking appliances unattended when no one is home: <S> The leading cause of fires in the kitchen is unattended cooking. <S> If you leave the kitchen for even a short period of time, turn off the stove. <S> If you are simmering, baking, roasting, or boiling food, check it regularly, remain in the home while food is cooking, and use a timer to remind you that you're cooking. <S> Stay alert! <S> To prevent cooking fires, you have to be alert. <S> You won't be if you are sleepy, have been drinking alcohol, or have taken medicine that makes you drowsy. <A> Slow cookers are generally recognized to be safe when used unattended - and there are a variety of slow-cooker rib recipes out there. <S> I've made them to great success before - they're fine braising in their own juices , or with a little liquid, such as root beer or Dr. Pepper. <S> The problem with the oven is the lack of temperature control at low temperatures and the amount of electricity it uses - with a gas oven, carbon monoxide would be a worry leaving it on for 8 or 9 hours at a stretch, as well as steep gas bills. <S> There would be a very low risk of fire, but enough of one where fire safety experts do not recommend leaving it unattended.
|
It is not clear that the ribs will get that hot in such a low oven, or if they do so, if they will do it in a reasonable period of time (less than say, an hour) so you may have a potential food safety issue. Stay in the kitchen when you are frying, grilling, or broiling food.
|
Wine sediment clinging to top of bottle? I recently bought a fairly old bottle of wine (bottled in 2008) and I noticed that there was a bunch of schmutz clinging to the top third of the inside of the bottle after I poured a glass. What is this and what does it mean about my wine? Is it a bad thing? <Q> Sediment is normal in "older" wines, it can simply be small particles of yeast that was not caught by the filtration. <S> As time goes by, the particles will stick together and fall to the bottom of the bottles. <S> Most of the time it will not affect the (taste and flavor) quality of the wine, but will show up more when not being cautious when pouring the wine. <S> Just be more careful when pouring wine; you can also use a decanter. <S> Slowly pour the wine into the decanter from the bottle to let the sediment get caught in the shoulder of the bottle. <S> If there are sediments, you will loose maybe 1 teaspoon of wine; but you will be assured that the wine in the decanter will be free of sediment and when pouring for friends at the table there will not be any sediment in the glasses. <A> The particles and cloudiness might be one of two things: <S> If you sipped it thought it was "off", then best to avoid it. <S> If the particles settle, these are probably just excess acid molecules and that's okay. <S> Source: <S> On food and cooking by Harold McGee <A> Sediment in wine, is not only a good thing, but can be seen as a sign of quality...or at least that the wine was made without filtration (which is often seen as a short cut). <S> As you can see here sediment is made up of colloids and tartrates. <S> If you remove the entire foil cap before uncorking and older wine, you can often see the sediment clinging to the neck of the bottle, if it has been stored on its side. <S> It's a good idea to stand older bottles upright for a while before opening so that any additional/loose sediment will sink to the bottom. <S> Then, once opened, you can decant or simply pour slowly from the bottle so as to avoid stirring up the sediment and pouring it into the glass (or decanter). <S> The sediment is perfectly safe. <S> It is an unpleasant experience, but not harmful if you happen to ingest some. <A> it is normal that older red wines hold some sediment. <S> Usually, the sediment remains in the bottom of the bottle and becomes an issue when pouring the last couple glasses. <S> In your case, I'd think that the bottle has been moved (a lot?) <S> before you opened it? <S> With old red wines, it is best to store them "standing". <S> At least for the 24h before intending on drinking it. <S> Because then the sediment has time to falls to the bottom and accumulate there. <S> And then it is best to decant the red wine. <S> Use a decanter or any vessel fitting. <S> It is best if the vessel has a flat base. <S> Because then you can use for two things: 1. separating the wine from the sediment and 2. <S> to continue with the actual decanting process. <S> "Sediment and crumbled cork that can often be found in, for example, older red wines and Vintage Ports. <S> So pouring into a decanter can help by filtering and removing any sediment. <S> As well as bitter tastes and flavours that are associated with aged wines." <S> -quoted from a page I'll refer to later. <S> There are different ways of decanting. <S> One of them is the candle method. <S> Here is explained how to do it: How to use a wine decanter and The Candle Method <S> The same page I quoted from. <S> Well, that's how I do it. <S> You can also read there about the decanting process if you're interested.
|
If the particles don't settle to the bottom (form a sediment), it could be bacterial fermentation which is undesirable and it "spoils" the wine, producing off-flavors.
|
What's the skinny on fat asparagus? I had always heard that pencil thin asparagus is the best, and that has always been what I look for. But now I've heard from a few (what I would consider reliable) sources that skinny isn't better when choosing asparagus. My local grocery tends to get really fat (stems easily an inch in diameter) asparagus that otherwise looks great (nice color, tight tips, no wrinkling). I've always avoided this asparagus even though I love roasted fresh asparagus, because I've expected it to be woody. Is that the case? I've never peeled asparagus, I've just snapped off the ends at the "break" point. If the consensus is that this fat asparagus is worth trying, should I peel it before roasting? <Q> Martha's Vinyard Magazine suggests that the diamater of the stalks is not directly related to their age as one might suspect: Some might assume thinner spears are younger and therefore more tender. <S> The diameter, however, has more to do with the age of the plant itself and the particular asparagus variety. <S> They go on to cite Cook's Illustrated, saying: [T]hin and thick spears as equally sweet, nutty, and grassy, but ... <S> The reason is that the fiber is somewhat more concentrated in thinner spears. <S> You can peel asparagus if you choose to. <S> Personally, I peel the base of thicker stalks. <S> Mark Bittman recommends peeling from just under the flowers to the base of the stalk on the thicker stalks. <S> Thinner stalks may be easier to saute or grill, and thicker ones more suited to steaming, poaching, and so on, but this is more related to the time it takes them to cook through. <S> See also: Mark Bittman writing in the New York Times Better Homes and Gardens <S> Martha's Vinyard Magazine <A> Well, after reading the answers and comments here, I was anxious to try the fat asparagus next time I saw it in the store. <S> Wouldn't you know it? <S> For the next several months all I found was the normal, skinny stuff. <S> Then lo and behold, yesterday my store had the fat asparagus again. <S> (BTW, a US quarter has a diameter of 24.26 mm, 0.955 in.) <S> I treated it my favorite way, which is to toss it with garlic butter, salt and pepper, then roast it at 400F. Usually that only takes 8-9 minutes, this asparagus took 15 minutes. <S> In the name of science, I peeled the stalks of half of it and left the other half unpeeled. <S> It was delicious. <S> I found the peeling to be an unnecessary step. <S> I might peel fat asparagus again, but only if the meal was particularly elegant. <S> Bottom line is that this was some of best asparagus I've ever had. <S> Assuming everything else looks <S> good (no wrinkling, tight tips, good color) <S> I would not hesitate again to buy fat asparagus. <S> BTW, it's a good idea to make a little tin foil envelope to protect the tips of asparagus for roasting. <S> I think I learned that trick from Alton Brown. <A> I think it depends on the flavors you want to get from the asparagus: If you're looking for roasted, char-y flavors, it's pencil-thin all the way. <S> Thick ones wouldn't be cooked through in the time it takes for the surface to be nicely charred. <S> If you're looking for more vegetal flavors, thick ones work well, because you can boil or steam them without having them go limp. <A> It totally depends what you are doing with it. <S> My use cases for different thicknesses: Thin - steam, boil or fry and serve whole as-is. <S> Medium - Chop into chunks, and stir fryThick - Soups, purees etc.
|
thicker spears have a slightly better, more tender texture.
|
Any suggestions on caps for Bakers and Chefs plastic squeeze bottles? I purchased some Bakers and Chefs clear plastic squeeze bottles , which do not come with caps; however, there is a ridge about 1/3" down on the bottle, suggesting that they're intended to work with a cap. Some of the reviewers on Amazon mentioned using foil, as well as some plastic cap they found in hardware store. I'm hoping to find something that fits well and ideally can be ordered online. Anyone have any suggestions? <Q> The product you link has the cap in the picture. <S> The idea is that you cut off the tip on the apex of the cap to the point where it is the width of your desired opening. <S> You could use an uncut cap, or just cover the tip with foil if you need to refrigerate for some time. <S> The kind of things put into a squeeze bottles are rarely highly perishable, so simply placing them in refrigerator (for a reasonable period of time) is a normal practice. <S> Squeeze bottles are not meant for long term storage. <S> I certainly would not go to the trouble of special ordering caps. <A> I've been searching for a while. <S> I use my squeeze bottles for various things, and the tip caps are helpful. <S> It keeps royal icing from drying out, and prevents leaks when shaking up a bottle of vinaigrette. <S> Here's what I found: http://www.usplastic.com/catalog/item.aspx?itemid=91498&catid=536 http://www.dharmatrading.com/tools/squeeze-bottles-yorker-spouts-and-caps.html <A> Similar bottles will sometimes come with a little red or black plastic cap that covers the tip of the bottle after it has been cut. <S> If the bottles you bought didn't come with these caps, I don't know that there's a way to get them separately. <S> Frequently to close up the bottles overnight or between uses, you take off the screw top with the spout, place plastic wrap over the top of the bottle, and then screw the top back on. <S> As SAJ14SAJ points out, bottles like this aren't really intended for long term storage and caps generally aren't a priority. <S> Edited to add: The restaurant supply store nearest my house now sells the caps separately. <S> They are in a package of about a dozen, but very cheap. <A> You might find something useful at US Plastics, for example at: http://www.usplastic.com/catalog/item.aspx?itemid=91498&catid=536 <S> These are the whole twist-on cap, not just the snap-on tip <S> but they are inexpensive. <A> Crayola's Model Magic is non-toxic (with a lot of sites claiming it's food safe). <S> If you have access to that or similar clay, you could make your own cover, no matter the size. <S> (but I don't suggest raiding your kids' supply ... get a fresh container, use what you need, then let the kids get their hands in there) <A> Here's what I ended up using, which I picked up from Home Depot in the Hardware aisle. <S> It fits quite snug, and cost about $0.60 for pack of 2. <S> WARNING <S> : no guarantees this cap is safe for food. <S> Use at your own risk (even though it is molded plastic, the dyes and treatment process <S> may make the plastic prone to leaking chemicals)
|
Occasionally a restaurant supply store will let you switch out bottle tops when buying the bottles, but other than that, I think you may be out of luck.
|
How long to steam eggs for? (Instead of hard boiling) I'm steaming eggs, rather than hard-boiling (I want the same effect), because it's convenient as I'm using the steam from some boiling chickpeas underneath. But I can't seem to find a definitive estimate for how long to keep them steaming. One source says 20 minutes. http://www.communitychickens.com/2012/08/the-best-way-to-hardboil-eggs-is-to.html#.Uk0oAX-aejs I imagine that's too long. Another source implies 7 minutes. http://whatscookingwithkids.com/2011/05/27/forget-hard-boiling-eggs-steamed-eggs-are-easy-to-peel/ (In the comments.) And then there is the usual time for hard-boiling, which is 10 minutes. I don't want to cook them any longer than necessary. <Q> Always turns out perfectly for me this way (and as a bonus, they're much easier to peel than boiled eggs). <S> Here's the video from Alton's show, with some extra information in it: <S> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUHKpHek2E8 <S> And while unrelated (since you want to steam them), if you want to know everything there is to know about hard boiled eggs, this Food Lab edition on Serious Eats <S> has you covered: http://www.seriouseats.com/2009/10/the-food-lab-science-of-how-to-cook-perfect-boiled-eggs.html <A> 20 minutes is perfect. <S> I brought a large egg to room temperature and steamed it over gently boiling water in a tightly covered pot. <S> After exactly 20 minutes I plunged it into ice water, waited one minute, then peeled. <S> It was as perfectly "hard boiled" as I've ever seen or tasted. <S> For what it's worth, I'm at sea level. <S> It makes me want to do deviled eggs! <S> I think I'm going to do it this way from now on. <S> Be sure to read the comments on post meridiem's answer. <S> Here's a perfect "hard-boiled" egg, brought to room temperature, steamed over rapidly boiling water for 13 minutes and then plunged into ice water. <A> I steam mine all the time because it makes them much easier to peel. <S> I own a restaurant <S> and I'm all about easy and fast. <S> I agree that 10 minutes is plenty of time for them to be done. <A> Bring the water to a boil first then cover and reduce the heat to med-high, not low then set timer for 10 to 15 minutes depending on size of eggs and how done you want the center. <S> I like them slightly soft and do extra large eggs at 11 minutes. <S> If you put everything in the pot then turn on the heat and start the timer you have to account for the time it takes the water to boil- <S> thus the 20 minute time. <A> I steam mine in my rice cooker, start it up to make sure it's warm <S> then I set it to steam for 12 minutes. <S> It's nice because the steam basket fits nicely into the ice bath after <S> and it's all easy clean up. <S> Mine turn out perfectly every time, no green and no raw parts :) <A> Steaming should take about 12 minutes - variation possible for size, altitude, personal preferences. <S> Science Friday covered this pretty thoroughly a while back. <S> The key points being: Ease of peeling is due to cooking the outer layer quickly enough to bind the membrane to the inside of the shell. <S> A cold water bath at the end only matters if you're looking for round bottoms for presentation purposes
|
I like to follow Alton Brown's approach: steam for 12 minutes, drop into ice bath.
|
What is the definition of a cup of coffee My wife and I had a discussion in regards of my consumption of coffee during office hours. Health gurus always talk about a maximum amount of coffee during a day - measured in cups! But what is the definition of 1 cup of coffee, and how much coffee is one cup? We have several types of cups etc. at the office and at home, so its hard to know how many "cups" I drank over the day! <Q> The most common global standard for recipe and marketing purposes <S> ** <S> is 150 ml (5 oz), with a caffeine content around 100 mg. <S> This commonly refers to instant, filter, or drip coffee, or a mixed espresso coffee like a latte <S> Coffee is traditionally served in a smaller cup than other hot beverages, mainly due to strength and expense. <S> For example, an Italian espresso cup is around 30 to 60 ml (1 to 2 oz) in size, with a caffeine content a little more <S> then 100 mg <S> Some references <S> http://www.ico.org/caffeine.asp <S> http://www.scaa.org/?page=resources&d=cupping-standards <S> ** <S> e.g. marketing description of a "6 cup coffee maker" refers to 6 x 150 ml cups <A> Unfortunately, that still doesn't answer your concerns as the strength of coffee varies widely. <S> Is a "cup" on a coffee maker <S> always 6 <S> oz? <S> Is this a standard in the US? <A> A standard cup according to the Specialty Coffee Association of America is defined as 8.25 grams of roasted coffee beans in 150 ml of water. <A> It's not the size of the cup, it's the amount of coffee in it. <S> But if you want a more objective answer, things start to get murky because different coffee experts define a cup different things depending on their agenda. <S> Most of the big-name percolator companies including KitchenAid, Bunn, Mr. Coffee, etc. <S> advertise a "cup of coffee" as being 5-oz. <S> because it makes their coffee pots seem larger. <S> Folgers says a "cup of coffee" is 6 <S> oz. <S> because they work with these percolators, but they want people to use more coffee grounds. <S> Starbucks sells cups of coffee at 8 oz. <S> at the lowest because what do they care? <S> They want to make customers happy. <S> It gets even more muddled when you start getting into commercial urns and percolators who consider a cup anywhere between the demitasse size of 2 ounces to the imperial size of 8 ounces. <S> It's actually a very controversial topic. <S> There are some camps who believe that a cup is 5 ounces always and there are other camps who think we should only go by the 8-ounce cup for simplicity. <S> If you're interested, there's more information about the debate here: http://www.jesrestaurantequipment.com/jesrestaurantequipmentblog/coffee-carafe-sizing/ <A> Drip percolators (the kind on many/most kitchen counters in the US) usually count a cup as between 4.5 - 6 oz. <S> So, a 10-cup coffee machine brews 60 ounces (depending on the brand). <S> If you pour those 60 ounces into the also very common 12-oz 'to-go cup' (or cofee mug, for that matter), you have 5 servings. <S> As you see in the other answers, there are different kinds of coffee and different kinds of cups ( <S> the ones I just mentioned are not the standard-measure 8 ounce cups). <S> I'm not sure what a health guru is, but I have seen claims of the reverse - that more coffee is healthier. <S> I'm inclined to agree. <A> I did a small measurement on my Mr. Coffee pot and got between 5.2 - 5.5 U.S. fluid ounces per "cup", definitely not the six. <S> I then looked at the instruction manual for a Mr. Coffee coffee maker, and it says one "cup" is equal to 5 ounces. <A> Short version: <S> Effective July 16, 2016 in the US, the official serving size of a cup of coffee is 12 ounces . <S> Long version: For purposes of nutritional labeling <S> , the US Food and Drug Administration has set "Reference amounts customarily consumed (RACC) per eating occasion" for common foods. <S> The official reference amount for a sweetened cup of coffee was 8 ounces (240 mL). <S> Interesting, that black coffee has no reference amount. <S> I believe that black coffee is exempt from nutrition labeling (and reference amounts) because black coffee has scant nutritional value. <S> You notice I stated " <S> was 8 ounces. <S> " <S> Effective July 16, 2016, the official description of a cup of coffee will be 12 ounces <S> ( 21 CFR 101.12 <S> it's about a quarter way down the page). <S> The Federal Register entry announcing the change said: Since that time, consumption patterns have changed so that the RACC for some beverages has increased from 8 oz to 12 oz . <S> Because the consumption amount has increased for certain beverages, such products for which the RACC has increased may appropriately no longer be able to make ‘‘free’’ claims. <S> As noted previously, we intend to consider in a future rulemaking issues such as whether any changes in eligibility for claims would assist consumers in constructing healthy diets and whether the criteria for claims remain appropriate.
|
In the US, generally a "cup" of coffee is six ounces.
|
Why stuff a roast chicken with lemon, onion, and thyme? I just made a classic roast chicken and the recipe called for stuffing a lemon, thyme, and onion inside the cavity of the chicken. Why even bother stuffing the cavity with anything? What does it accomplish? <Q> Lemon, herbs, onions, and garlic too are all aromatics that infuse into the chicken as it cooks giving it a lovely flavor. <S> It doesn't absorb the flavors enough to call it a lemon chicken, but gives the chicken some flavor depth and acts as an enhancement. <S> Salt and pepper,too, should go in the cavity. <A> Putting ingredients inside as well as on the surface helps spread the flavors throughout the meat. <S> They're also very moist so it helps the bird stay juicier . <S> Plus, it adds to the aroma which, believe it or not, affects the flavor .All <S> in all, it's an easy way to make your chicken more delicious ! <A> Hopefully, you pierced the lemon before stuffing it into the bird... <S> I have an old Italian recipe that calls for one or two (depending on sizes of lemons and the bird) lemons, placing them into the cavity and sewing up the opening before roasting. <S> Prior to going in, then lemons are rolled to loosen the skin and pierced several times with a skewer. <S> For the first part of the roasting, the bird is placed on it's breast (to let the juices flow into the meat), and then turned up the right way to let the breast crisp up and to even the cooking. <S> This method doesn't require basting of any kind - the lemon juices both moisten and infuse flavour into the meat. <S> Tastes delicious.
|
Stuffing the chicken helps these flavors to infuse better into the meat than spreading them around.
|
Is a black coating dangerous when cooking on cast iron? A lot of times when I use my cast iron pan, I'll sometimes get some "black stuff" which I assume is gristle on my food. It doesn't taste bad, it's not a "TON" - I'm assuming it's a combo of burnt+black stuff from the cast iron pan. Is this in any way dangerous? <Q> Black stuff on a cast iron skillet is most likely just a thin layer of burned food. <S> It's not horribly dangerous <S> (I'm sure you've eaten some charred things before) <S> but it does make your food look worse, so you may as well just keep your skillet clean and well-seasoned and avoid it. <A> Neither will hurt you. <S> I have cooked with cast iron for more than 30 years. <S> It is tough and very near care free. <S> I might season a pan a couple time in the first month after buying but after that there is just no need. <S> Black iron pans have been in use for hundreds of years. <S> They can be used over an open fire, scrubbed out with a hand full of sand from the brook and dried with your shirt tail. <S> If you use that method however you will need more frequent seasoning because sand is very hard and sharp. <S> I clean mine with a plastic scrubby under running hot water and virtually never need to season it. <S> (I'll bet the frequent seasoning thing got its start back when sand was being used as a cleaner.) <A> If you need to re-season your cast iron, first rinse carefully and put it upside down in your oven on self-clean. <S> It will remove all the "dead black crust" and leave it brand spanking clean. <S> THEN, rub it down all over (especially inside) with a layer of shortening and put it in a slow over (250 def.) <S> for a couple of hours. <S> Turn off the heat and let the pan cool inside the oven. <A> That black stuff is a phony pre-coated seasoning on these newer Skillets that shouldn't be there. <S> To start with I took a grinder and got rid of that stuff on my pan. <S> A real cast iron skillet is smooth not bumpy and it's not painted with anything. <S> To pre-seasoned you have to wash it ,dry it or let It season it by putting it in an oven at 250 degrees that actually burns a layer of oil onto the surface and makes it non-stick. <S> These new Skillets coming out with this black stuff on it, that's what's coming off on your food <S> and it shouldn't be there.. <S> also once it's seasoned never ever wash it with soap again .The <S> soap will cut the seasoning, simply wipe it out to clean it and put another layer of oil on it. <S> To start from scratch and clean the entire pan after it's been used for years and is crusty on the outside you throw it in a burn pile or burn barrel and burn it with the trash. <S> when the ashes are cool take it out it'll be spanking new clean <S> and you can start reseasoning it again. <S> Im from old North Carolina hill people. <S> I know who to wield a skillet!
|
The "black stuff" is either bits of charred food from your last meal or flakes of the polymerized oil that is the "seasoning" coating.
|
Italian Sausage still a little pink? So im a little scared, I was cooking some italian sausage links on my cast iron skillet. I cooked them 8-10 min a side on medium , then turned to low and cooked 7-8 minutes a side. I checked the temp on the very middle and they all registered about 170 degrees (This was after they had been on low, at the very end) Anyways I ate them, tasted fine etc... But upon eating another one later, I discovered that there was still a pinkish color in the middle. (More towards the edges). It wasn't a lot....but the thing is I know this thermometer is accurate and I always use it.....Plus I cook them like this all the time. So I didn't understand why it was still a little pink on the inside. Just for reference I stuck the thermometer on the inner most part, I made doubly sure. And they were all checked and all were 170-180 after they had been cooking on low (So it was prolly a high temp earlier when they were on medium) Any ideas? Im kinda scared. For reference these were Sweet Italian Sausages (not sure if that would matter) <Q> The salt treatment in sausage can cause it to retain a pinker color for a given temperature than would normal ground meat. <A> You mention that the pink was more toward the edges. <S> Could it have been a smoke ring? <S> Picture . <A> I agree with the response regarding the salt content. <S> Salt preserves and cures the meat and helps it keep it's color. <S> That's why bacon is reddish and not grey when cooked. <S> I recently made a batch of loose breakfast sausage and had the same experience. <S> I then placed a 1/4# in a Ziplock and poached it to 160 and one to 175 degrees and when I broke it open it was still pinkish.
|
The fact that you used a trusted thermometer, and that the sausages were well in the safe zone (even conservatively 165 F is more than enough) indicates that the sausage was perfectly safe.
|
Can you develop an immunity to chopping onions causing tears? I just chopped a particularly strong onion, I noticed some slight irritation but no tears. I realized then that onions haven't made me cry for years, decades even. I use all kinds of onions and take no special precaution to prevent tears. I don't refrigerate them, remove the core, use goggles, light a candle, anything like that. Granted, I've gotten better (faster) at it over the years, but I remember hating chopping onions in my youth because of the eye irritation. It doesn't seem that speed alone could account for the difference in my reaction. Can I chalk it up to a similar phenomenon that gives me asbestos fingers and my tolerance for extremely hot (spicy) food? <Q> Given that the tear-causing effect of onions is due to a straight forward chemical process, it seems highly unlikely that you would develop any kind of actual immunity in terms of the effect. <S> Scientific American describes it: <S> Peeling, cutting or crushing an onion's tissue releases enzymes called allinases, which convert these molecules to sulfenic acids. <S> The sulfenic acids, in turn, spontaneously rearrange to form syn-propanethial-S-oxide, the chemical that triggers the tears. <S> They also condense to form odorous thiosulfinates, coincidentally evoking the pungent odor associated with chopping onions and eliciting the false accusation that it is the odor that causes the weepy eye. <S> Incidentally, sulfenic acid in garlic takes a different chemical route, sparing the eyes. <S> The formation of syn-propanethial-S-oxide peaks at about 30 seconds after mechanical damage to the onion and completes its cycle of chemical evolution over about five minutes. <S> [ ... ] <S> Free nerve endings [on the cornea] detect syn-propanethial-S-oxide on the cornea and drive activity in the ciliary nerve--which the central nervous system interprets as a burning sensation--in proportion to the compound's concentration. <S> This nerve activity reflexively activates the autonomic fibers, which then carry a signal back to the eye ordering the lachrymal glands to wash the irritant away. <S> It turns out that newer science indicates the conversion is not spontaneous, but due to an enzyme for this purpose, now named lachrymatory-factor synthase. <A> Yes, you can. <S> Apparently workers at plants handling large amounts of onions have no problem: <S> At the plant, they say you get used to cutting onions and stop crying after a few minutes. <S> Source: Hartel, Richard W., and AnnaKate Hartel. <S> " <S> At Work in a Vale of Tears." Food Bites. <S> Springer New York, 2008. <S> Page 32 <A> I don't know how old you are, but the most likely explanation is simply biological changes. <S> Thermo receptors in the human body, most noticeably at hands and feet, become less sensitive as we get older, or, to put it another way, the threshold at which we experience these sensations is much higher, and that's an ongoing process as we grow and mature. <S> There's a clue in this, for example - the reason why you're advised to test the baby's bath water with your elbow, even if you are in your twenties, is because the baby's receptors are on full alert and the skin is much more vulnerable than older skin, so your hands, at 25, won't experience great heat when a baby's will. <S> There's a complicated scientific explanation regarding nerve fibres, but I won't go into that. <S> I'm assuming this may also apply to the tongue, particularly given that we lose taste buds over the years roughly as follows - you may start out with thousands (some people have higher numbers at birth), but around age 80, <S> the average human has about 80 left. <S> Regarding the lack of tears - I don't cry with onions any more either, although I still get the burning sensation. <S> The reason I don't is because I've got something called Sjogrens, and am now rarely able to actually produce tears, no matter how much I may feel like it. <S> I doubt this is the explanation for you, or your tongue would be too sore to put up with hot, spicy food, but there are other conditions that cause less fluid to be available to the tear ducts, again related with ageing, so your eye may, first, be less sensitive due to nerve fibre changes, and secondly, the tear response is not so readily activated even if a perceived irritant is detected. <S> Not very cheerful I know, and yet more proof that the obsolesence factor is built in... <A> I noticed that the third time I was exposed to tear gas in boot camp I was getting less sensitive. <S> The next time that I chopped onions it bothered me not at all. <S> I'm also not in agony if I get jalapeno juice in my eyes. <S> So I would say I learned it somehow; whether or not that's applicable for others I don't know. <S> No one else in boot camp was anything except extremely vulnerable to tear gas, period, so it wasn't bad batches. <A> With sharper knives (- <S> > less ruptured cells, less "tear gass") and faster work (-> less exposure time) <S> you gained confidence and are not tempted to watch yourself work as closely as you probably did as a beginner: <S> Instead of bending over your cutting board you work in front of you . <S> (And thus are less exposed to raising fumes.) <S> I observed this working with my children in the kitchen: They will look closely and from the top - hey, those knives are sharp and close to the fingers! - and tear up. <S> When I had them work in front of them, we had a lot less trouble. <S> My 5yo now can cut onions without tearing up - provided she remembers to keep her hands off her face. <A> The best way to obtain an "immunity" is to use an extremely sharp knife. <S> I've probably cut 3000 onions over the past few years and only twice have I even slightly teared up, and that is when I was cooking at my mothers with god awful knives. <S> Also, never use a serated knife with an onion.
|
What is likely, especially for an experienced cook are: Improved knife skills and speed, lowering the amount of time in close contact with the irritating gasses produced by chopping onions Increased tolerance for the specific sensation Apart from biologial changes (as discussed by the other posters) I strongly suspect another factor: Your improved equipment & technique.
|
What ingredient, besides beans, creates a complete protein together with rice? I want a cheap option for complete proteins, which includes rice. But I do not like beans. Which other ingredients can I combine with rice in order to get a complete protein? I do eat meat, but I am looking for cheaper solutions. <Q> So want you need to complement the rice are foods high in lysine. <S> Remember that the average adult male only needs about 3g of lysine daily which is easily provided by 3-4oz (90-120g) of meat, eggs, dairy, or soy protein (tofu, tempeh, lufu, miso, etc). <S> Since you do eat meat, all you need to do to save money and still get a complete protein is to eat less. <S> If you need more bulk in your meals, include a variety of vegetables, or a salad topped with nuts or seeds. <S> People who eat meat and other animal products to meet their recommended protein intake don't need to worry about not getting enough of any individual amino acid. <S> Even vegetarians usually don't have a problem with this as long as they eat a variety of different plant-based protein sources, since beans with grains, beans with nuts or seeds and grains with nuts or seeds are all combinations that provide enough of all of the essential amino acids. <S> Also, it is not necessary to take in the full complement of essential amino acids in one sitting, as long as you eat at least the minimum required amounts over a 24 hour period. <A> There's a middle-eastern dish called Mejadra, which at its simplest is basically rice and lentils with some fried onions and seasoning. <S> You'll find plenty of recipes for it online. <A> How about Dirty Rice? <S> Google it for a lot of good recipes. <S> Meat, veggies and starch in a one pot meal. <S> Liver (yuck) is optional, keep looking if you don't like it either.
|
Rice tends to be high in the sulfur-containing amino acids, cysteine and methionine, but low in lysine.
|
Which part of the coffee brew is best? At work we have a coffee machine that makes 10 cups of coffee in about 3 minutes. Sometimes, 3 minutes is too long to wait for coffee :P So I will poach it as it comes out of the dispenser and then quickly replace the coffee pot so the rest is caught. However, I am not sure if I am getting the short end of the stick. Should I wait for the entire process to finish before getting coffee? Is the coffee that is first dispensed from the machine the same quality as the coffee which is dispensed in the middle or end of the process? <Q> It is not simply a matter of strong versus weak. <S> Rather, different qualities are extracted from the coffee over different parts of the brewing process. <S> The most volatile components are extracted early in the brew, and the less volatile components come out over the length of the brew. <S> So the distribution of flavors varies over the brew. <S> Total brew time is carefully calibrated in quality coffee makers to extract the most desirable flavors possible, and minimize the least desirable. <S> By taking some out early, you are guaranteed a bad first cup, and are consigning the remainder of the pot to be less than it could be. <S> For best quality, you should wait for the entire brew, so that the flavors are balanced from the entire brew time. <A> Espresso machines (not your machine, I know) are balanced to extract the full flavour in about 30'. <S> When extracting longer, more bitter flavour is extracted. <S> Read more here <S> According to McGee , stronger coffee is not better coffee. <S> Getting the first cup will get you the strongest most flavourful cup, but will leave your cow-workers with a lousy drab. <S> Not that strongest is best. <S> Your best trade-off between quality and strength, is probably to wait until the last minute before 'stealing' your cup. <S> It's also more solitary with your colleagues. <S> Lastly, the best possible coffee is probably the most recently brewed. <S> Coffee that's let to sit (on the heater) loses quality fast. <A> In my opinion (this is subjective) you should wait. <A> The first coffee produced is very strong and the last coffee produced is very weak, so I would go for the middle. <S> This is also the only way to be fair to others. <S> If you take the first, the pot will be weaker than normal, and if you take the last, the pot will be stronger than normal. <A> You can tell when someone knows what he is doing is wrong when he says he poaches the first cup, and doesn't want to make it obvious to everyone else. <S> In my experience the first part of the brew is the strongest, and if you take it the rest is noticeably inferior. <S> It doesn't even have a pleasant smell or flavor anymore. <S> All I can say is let it finish brewing because you are cheating anyone who takes a cup after you.
|
I've noticed that the first cup is usually the best (strongest) and if you swipe it the rest of the pot is weaker by comparison.
|
How to avoid avocado in sushi rolls from darkening? We are making some avocado rolls and want to put them in the fridge for eating tomorrow. We will of course wrap them very well but how to avoid the avocado turning black or darkening? <Q> You can try dipping it into acidulated water <S> (water with acid added, either lemon juice or vinegar, or even a powdered vitamin c tablet). <S> This should delay the browning, but I am not sure it will last long enough to hold the rolls overnight. <S> You will have the additional problem that the nori will begin to soften overnight. <S> See also: <S> What's the best way to keep sushi fresh for the following day? <A> Placing whole avocado (with intact skins) in a water bath at 43°C for a couple of hours will deactivate the enzyme that causes browning. <S> See Avocado Tests <A> Ditto the suggestions on dipping the avocado slices in some sort of citric acid. <S> But trying to hold the rolls isn't the best idea. <S> As stated, the nori will become soft, the avocado with brown and turn mushy and the rice will dry out. <S> If you insist on holding it try this method. <S> Wrap the entire cylindrical roll tightly (no air) in plastic wrap, store in the fridge, then unwrap and slice them up right before serving. <S> Best of luck to you!
|
You might want to consider omitting the avocado.
|
Rehydrating Dried Rosemary for Bread? I love the flavor of rosemary but I don't like its prickliness. It's worse dried, but I don't even like that particular quality in fresh rosemary. I'm experimenting with a yeast bread that will include both water and fat (in this case, bacon fat). I want distinct pieces of rosemary (although they can be small), so I don't want to grind the rosemary. I also want to avoid a green tinge in the bread itself. I'm thinking of manually crushing the rosemary into a couple of tablespoons of water and bringing the mixture to a boil in the microwave, letting it cool, straining and adding the rosemary to the bacon fat and giving it a quick saute. I guess I'd add the rosemary water to the water in the recipe if it isn't too green. Does that sound like it would work? I want the flavor, but no sharp edges. Edit...Hmmm, I've reached the point in the experiment that the crushed rosemary and water have been in the microwave and cooled. At first I was optimistic, the texture seems like what I am going for. However, the flavor is strong - even bitter. <Q> I would suggest heating some fresh rosemary in the bacon fat. <S> Then discard the rosemary. <S> You will get the flavor without the part you don't want. <A> My solution would be a bit more long-term, which would be to put some rosemary sprigs in olive oil and let it infuse for a few weeks. <A> As it turns out, I went forward with the experiment as I laid out in the question. <S> Yes, it seemed a bit too strong as I added the rehydrated rosemary to the bacon fat, but in the final product it turned out exactly as I hoped it would. <S> My bread contains onions sauteed in bacon fat, the rosemary sauteed with the onions, and crispy pieces of bacon. <S> This one will stay in my "forever" file. <S> I can see the bits of rosemary, I can taste them, but I can't feel them. <S> The water I used to rehydrate the rosemary seemed too green, so I discarded that. <S> I am reminded how much I do like the flavor of rosemary, so next time I shop <S> I will get some fresh to infuse. <S> With an infused olive oil I'll probably use the flavor more often. <S> Also the saute of the rosemary definitely helped to bring out yet mellow the flavor.
|
I have a bottle of rosemary, sage, and garlic oil which I use in breads and it works extremely well.
|
What can I do with badly cooked honeycomb? I've made a batch of honeycomb but I didn't quite get the temperature of the sugar right. Now it seems to have the consistency of toffee. What can I do with this honeycomb? It would seem a bit of a waste to just through it away... <Q> The thing is, the candy has already got the full level of baking soda reactants (either sodium carbonate or sodium oxide) from from the first cooking, which may contribute to some off flavors. <S> Instead, if it is enjoyable as is, I would suggest just eating it as a toffee like candy. <S> Otherwise, chalk it up to experience and watch the temperature more closely next time. <A> Do the hokey pokey. <S> Smack it into small pieces and mix with plain soft icecream, re-freeze, and the kids will love it <A> I have a batch of gooey toffee now too. <S> So im just either enjoying it as is or adding bit or chunks of it to my coffee or ice cream.
|
It might be possible to dissolve the candy, and then boil it down again, foaming it with fresh baking soda when it hits the proper stage.
|
Fresh tomatoes for home-made pizzas, is it worth it? I figured fresh tomatoes would be the best choice for making a tasty pizza sauce, so I bought like 8 kg of fresh Roma tomatoes as I found a good price opportunity, to make jars. I already made a try a few months ago and it was a disaster, way too watery, but this time I planned on either draining tomatoes or removing seeds and gel/pulp before cooking them. However now I'm starting to wonder if it's worth wasting my time again. Indeed reading more on the web it seems that canned tomatoes are much more suitable for a tasty pizza sauce than fresh tomatoes. Add to that that I'm not sure how mature the tomatoes are and should be and that in any case I'm not going to keep the fire below the pan for 5 hours or more, and the following question seriously pops up : is it really worth my time ? Keep in mind that we're talking of home-made pizzas, I don't own a wood-fired oven myself, mine goes only up to 250 °C, so arguments for professional pizzas baked in 2 minutes may not apply. <Q> No, it's not worth the bother. <S> Get a few cans of crushed tomatoes and simmer them slowly with whole garlic cloves and some chopped onion for a few hours until it's thickened ( <S> but not like paste). <S> Season and you're good to go. <A> I've never tried it with canned tomatoes, so I'm not sure if there's any difference in taste, but you can definitely make it work. <S> As a plus, once you've blended/strained them, you can make a tomato-based soup with the leftovers! <A> :) <S> Fresh tomatoes are the WOW factor in my home made pizzas, I also store it for the winter and make huge amounts in the summer. <S> Experiment with seasoning and make sure you reduce the sauce well to avoid watery pizzas. <S> The important thing is also to buy good fresh tomatoes, there are plenty bland ones in the market, in which case the canned might make more sense. <S> If you go with canned, go with Italian San Marzano with a DOP label. <S> UPDATE: <S> There are also differences between San Marzano DOP brands. <S> I just discovered one that is <S> so amazing, even fresh ones have to be really good to beat them. <S> Unfortunately due to Stack rules I can't post the brand.
|
It's worth to bother! I like using fresh tomatoes, and I just put them in the oven (with basil and thyme, and blend them with garlic) to dry them out a little while making the dough.
|
Reduce the watering from tomatoes in a dish or sauce There are many questions asking on how to reduce the watering from (fresh) tomatoes in a dish or a sauce (most likely baked): How do I prevent tomato making quiche soggy (mentioned in comments by SAJ14SAJ) How to avoid getting the pizza all watery? Can I turn my marinara sauce recipe into "pizza sauce"? how to improve the consistency of my pizza sauce How to thicken marinara sauce? My tomato sauce is very watery etc. There are several ways to do that, but what are the pros and cons of each technique? <Q> Simmering Let tomatoes simmer slowly for hours. <S> Pros: probably the tastiest solution. <S> Cons: time consuming, energy (gas/power) consuming, loss of "fresh" tomato flavor, if you want that. <S> Adding thickener Add flour/bread/carrots/potatoes/whatever to add consistency. <S> Pros: <S> quick and easy. <S> Cons: may change the flavour. <S> May require heating to near-boil to activate the starch. <S> Seeding Remove seeds and gel/pulp with fingers or a spoon. <S> Pros: <S> quick, and removes seeds, which may give a bitter taste. <S> Cons: removes pulp (which gives most of the 'umami' flavor) and juice. <S> Filtering Use a strainer to remove the watery part. <S> Pros: ? <S> Cons: removes part of the juice. <S> a (very) light salting helps to draw out excess liquid. <S> Pros: Removing liquid before allows for less cooking time and preservation of fresh tomato flavor <S> Cons: waiting time, and removes part of the juice. <S> Roasting Halve and place on a sheet pan, then bake until sufficiently dewatered for your purposes. <S> May have to leave oven door cracked open. <S> Pros : <S> Easy. <S> Skins are easy to peel after roasting. <S> Adds some caramel/roasted flavors where the sugars burned. <S> Cons : <S> Not quick. <S> Not good if you want skins on. <S> Loses the 'fresh tomato' flavor. <S> Dehydrating Bake <S> as you would to create a sun dried tomato (at low heat) but don't put it in olive oil. <S> Can reduce the time to not remove as much moisture. <S> Pros : <S> Easy. <S> Cons : <S> Very slow (we're talking most of the day slow). <S> Loss of the fresh tomato flavor. <S> Tomato Selection Use a plum tomato, or other variant that has a higher flesh to gel ratio. <S> Pros : <S> Extremely easy (if you can get them at your market) <S> Cons : Often have less flavor than beefsteak, heirloom and other varieties (but may not be noticeable if you're buying from a grocery store) <A> Here's another question where I mention salting, which doesn't seem to be included in the links you've mentioned Keeping scrambled eggs with tomatoes from being too watery . <S> Of course it removes juice, but isn't that the point? <S> EDIT: <S> So the "pros" of salting would primarily be the maximum reduction of moisture without losing the flavor and texture of fresh, raw tomatoes (if that's what you'd like to accomplish). <S> The cons would be the loss of juice (although I find it hard to think of that being a "con" when reduction of moisture is a goal) and of course excessive saltiness if that particular issue is troublesome. <S> The use of kosher or other coarse salt instead of table salt ameliorates that particular issue to a point, coarse salt can be more easily brushed off than table salt. . <A> Bake as you would to create a sun dried tomato but don't put it in olive oil. <S> Cut in half and spoon or squeeze out the pulp. <S> Look up recipes for sun dried tomatoes but maybe reduce the time to not remove as much moisture.
|
Draining Drain (without seeding) tomatoes before to bake them - I like salting in any application where you want to keep that "fresh" flavor and texture but want less water.
|
Differences between canned and fresh tomatoes I read on the web (including here) that canned tomatoes are usually more suitable for tomato sauces (in particular pizza sauce) than fresh tomatoes. It is unquestionable that both are really different, but What makes them so different ? Canned tomatoes aren't supposed to be baked already, or are they ? I'm thinking it may have to do with the maceration in tomato juice, in which case one should be able to achieve similar results by making jars of fresh tomatoes. Another possible (partial) cause could be that tomatoes are much more mature than fresh tomatoes a normal human would pick. Of course I'm assuming we are considering similar tomato varieties (e.g. Roma, I guess). <Q> Canned tomatoes, compared to fresh, are: Cooked. <S> As part of the canning process, they are fully cooked. <S> Peeled. <S> Most canned tomatoes are peeled Acidic. <S> For safety reasons, canned tomatoes often have additional citric acid added to the can (this prevents botulism growth) <S> Ripe. <S> Most of these attributes are actually an advantage in creating a pizza sauce, and so starting with a quality canned tomato may be far more convenient and flavorful than starting with raw tomatoes. <A> It's really a matter of time, and cost. <S> You can make a great tomato sauce with fresh tomatoes, and it will beat anything you get out of a can. <S> However, you need a whole load of very good tomatoes, and lots of time and effort to scald them, peel them, then cook them down until they thicken. <S> It's not worth making a tomato sauce out of mediocre tomatoes, you'll spend a lot of time on a bland sauce, so depending on where you are and the time of year it's an expensive proposition. <S> Good canned tomatoes are picked at the peak of ripeness and then immediately used, sometimes they are partially processed before they even leave the field. <S> Store bought tomatoes are picked before they are at their peak (most are still green!) <S> and then artificially ripened after they are transported, which is why you can get tomatoes all through the year <S> but mostly they taste like cardboard. <S> So the ones you get in the can are probably better than the ones you can buy. <S> This is why I grow my own, they aren't that much work <S> and there's nothing better in the world. <S> If you can get really good tomatoes and can afford to do so then by all means make your own sauce from scratch as it does taste different from canned, generally fresher and less acidic. <S> If that's not an option buy the best quality canned tomatoes you can get afford, they will be very tasty and they are instantly ready. <A> Most canned tomatoes are processed so that the natural pectin is locked in. <S> This helps keep the shape, but is no good if you want to make a thick sauce. <S> That's why most recipes using canned tomatoes also use tomato paste. <S> The paste supplies available pectin. <S> You don't need to worry about any of this with garden tomatoes.
|
The tomatoes to be canned are often vine ripened to a more ideal ripeness than retail tomatoes, and then immediately harvested, processed and canned.
|
What to do with browned butter after frying a steak I have cooked a steak Gordon Ramsay style (oil, butter, thyme and garlic). Now after I have prepared and seared the steak, what can I do with the remainders in the pan? Its brown butter with the seasoning in it, do I just dispose of it, use for some other meat (although I have an issue making it medium-rare, since the pan is supposed to be extremely hot before dropping the meat in, but that would burn the thyme and garlic completely). <Q> Methods vary, but might include sauteeing some shallots or onions in the fat, deglazing with wine, and/or adding a slurry of flour to thicken. <S> You would then serve with the steak. <S> Other than this <S> , there is no general purpose use for the left over pan drippings. <A> I tend to keep some of the butter that I have use in cooking previously, especially if it isn't burned and has some good flavour infused into it. <S> For example, the next time you cook your steak <S> why don't you strain the butter and set it again in the fridge. <S> The next time you fancy a steak sandwich use that butter for the bread. <S> It will add a little bit extra to the sandwich that you won't get from the steak alone. <S> I wouldn't keep butter made this way too long though as it will spoil. <S> If you ever make bacon lardons by "deep" frying them in butter (I used to do this for caesar salads when I was a chef), you can then set the bacony butter in the fridge and it makes a fantastic medium for frying fish in. <S> Try it with salmon or inexpensive white flat fish instead of a beurre noisette. <A> I concur with the other posters. <S> Make a sauce. <S> I actually am fond of making tomato sauces with the fat residue left in frying pans. <S> Sometimes I use a jar of pasta sauce which with the fat makes a great sauce. <S> You can also use general canned tomatoes. <S> Even things like onion relish can be really good when made with this. <S> Dont be afraid to use some flower to give the sauce a nice consistency.
|
Often, assuming they are not too burned, you would make a simple pan sauce from the fond and fat left after pan-cooking a steak.
|
How do I make oatmeal chocolate chip cookies that are thick? I'm looking for a way to make "heavy" oatmeal choco chip cookies. When baked, the cookie keeps the shape of the scoop instead of spreading out. Does using eggs or baking soda make cookies spread out? <Q> Some keys to keeping cookies thick, beyond the chilled dough, are: use a starchier flour, use a fat with a high melting point, and use baking powder. <S> A starchier flour, like cake flour, will spread less than a flour that has higher protein, like all purpose. <S> If you can't find cake flour, you could replace some of the flour in your recipe with a starch, like cornstarch or potato starch. <S> Shortening has a higher melting point than butter, replacing all or some of the butter in your recipe with shortening will allow the cookie to begin to set before the fat melts completely. <S> Finally, baking powder contains acids which help to keep the dough tighter. <S> This helps it to "puff" more and spread less. <S> If you can't use baking powder, you could add a bit of some other acidic ingredient to your dough (but cut the baking soda a bit as well <S> or you might end up with cookies that are too cakey). <S> A bit of a fruit vinegar, citrus juice, or cream of tartar would probably do the trick. <A> One thing you definitely want to look for is recipes that include chilling the dough. <S> Here's one, for example. <S> http://www.tastebook.com/recipes/2692646-Thick-Chewy-Oatmeal-Cookies?full_recipe=true <S> The effect of chilling the dough is two-fold. <S> First, because the dough will be cold when you put it in the oven the very outside of the cookie will become "baked", somewhat hardened and crystallized, giving the cookie its final shape even before the interior of the cookie is done, hence thicker cookie. <S> This also illustrates another point. <S> Be sure your baking sheet is cool, even cold. <S> You might want to put it in the fridge between batches. <S> The second effect of chilling the dough is more about time than temperature. <S> During the time the oatmeal chills, it is soaking up the liquid ingredients of your recipe. <S> Less free liquid equals less spread. <A> I think I understand your thinking, you want them to be thick so make the dough drier so that they don't spread out too much. <S> In your case you've gone too far, adding too much flour or not enough moisture. <S> Cooking with oats is tricky because they absorb so much moisture, they do have a tendency to such moisture out if there isn't enough to rehydrate them. <S> Try adding bit more butter, milk, or water (whatever the recipe calls for) until you get the right amounts. <S> Also, you could soak the oats a bit before you mix them in to get them on their way <S> so they don't absorb so much of the recipe moisture. <S> The benefit of soaking them a bit is that you can tell sooner if you have the right consistency - if you add dry oats you need to let the mix sit for awhile so the oats hydrate, and only then will you tell if your consistency is right. <S> Also, let the cookie sheets cool completely before putting more dough on them when batch baking, <S> if your sheets are warm the first cookie dough balls you put on will start to spread out before you get the last ones on. <A> I half the sugar and marginally increase the flour with the result you desire.
|
@Jolenealaska is right, if you want a thicker cookie then chill the dough it will help keep them from spreading too much before they crystallize.
|
What can I use as a replacement for Curry Powder? I do not like the taste of curry powder. I have a recipe that calls for the use of this spice. What do you suggest that I can use in place of the curry powder? <Q> Curry powder is a blend of spices to some recipe or merchant's taste, as a convenience. <S> More traditionally, a particular blend of spices would be created for each individual dish, tailored to that dishes idiosyncrasies. <S> You can research one of many current powder recipes on available, and simply make your own blend without whichever spice or spices it is that you do not enjoy. <A> Replace 1 teaspoon curry powder with 2 tablespoons chicken powder. <A> True, it is a blend and different blends might work depending on one's tastes. <S> There are lots of recipes/combinations, so research them if you want. <S> I am not much of a curry powder fan either, but I have tried making my own with good results. <S> I have a recipe that I am going to make next, calling for two tablespoons of curry powder, and one pound of unseasoned ground meat just to give an idea of scale. <S> That seems like a lot of chili powder, so probably not an equivalent substitution. <S> I hope that helps. <A> If you have the following items. <S> These acts as a good replacement for curry powder 1/2 tsp <S> turmeric1 tsp ground cumin powder1/2 tsp ground coriander powder1/2 red chili powder, to taste To know more you can check out <S> the http://www.ask.com/question/what-is-a-good-substitute-for-curry-powder
|
Chili powder used with a light hand, has worked well for me, I would suggest adapting the flavor profile from Asian to more of a Mexican one, if one does this.
|
How can I make my cheese sauce creamier? I made my cheese sauce with pre-shredded cheese (first problem I know), milk and butter. I tried to make a roux but without the flour I think I made it fail. To make the cheese sauce, I put milk and butter in a pot and brought it to a boil. When it frothed, I mixed in the cheese, then stirred it every so often. When I took it off the heat, the cheese was separated, with a milk and butter mix at the top. I strained it over my pasta and it was in chunks. (I'm keeping the milk and butter mix for my next cooking adventure, but I'm not sure what yet.) Where did I go wrong, and what can I do for next time? I'm trying to keep it relatively cheap. I thought doing homemade would be more cost-effective than buying Velveeta or a million boxes of macaroni and cheese. <Q> I know it seems that mac 'n cheese should be a simple thing for a beginner cook to make. <S> It isn't. <S> Without a solid recipe, even experienced cooks can royally screw up mac 'n cheese. <S> Generally it starts with a bechamel, also known as a white sauce. <S> You're right, that starts with a roux which requires flour, or at least some kind of starch. <S> Once you've got a good white sauce, then you add the shredded cheese. <S> You're right again, pre-shredded cheese is not a good idea. <S> Pre-shredded cheese is covered with cellulose so it doesn't clump up in the bag. <S> That doesn't make for smooth melting. <S> Alton Brown's stovetop recipe is about as simple as homemade mac 'n cheese gets. <S> I would recommend mastering this <S> then moving on to (written and highly rated) recipes that start with a bechamel. <S> And grate your own cheese. <S> AB's Stovetop Mac 'n Cheese . <S> One more thing - Cheese sauce for mac 'n cheese is one application for which high quality (read that "expensive") cheese may not be your best choice. <S> High quality, expensive cheeses tend to be aged, making them melt with a texture you might consider grainy. <S> Some people go so far as to use (gasp) American cheese or even (double gasp) Velveeta for smooth melting. <S> I'm not sure that I'd recommend going that far except for pre-teen palates. <S> For me a happy medium (so to speak) is store-brand medium cheddar. <S> AB's recipe calls for sharp cheddar, but he has other ingredients that ameliorate potential graininess. <A> The reduced water content of the milk helps keep it smoother and more emulsified. <S> I usually pour all but 2 tablespoons of the milk into a pan, heat it up, whisk in the cheese until it's completely melted. <S> I then add some starch to the saved milk and make a slurry to thicken the sauce (if needed). <S> I've also made a roux with butter and flour and used the evaporated milk, and that works as well. <S> Another key to keep in mind is that not all cheeses will melt equally. <S> Cheeses with lower water contents can become grainy and greasy in a sauce, so you're better off using softer cheeses (or using less of harder cheeses). <A> The starch in a cheese sauce is not just for thickening; it also helps maintain the emulsion of the cheese, keeping the sauce smooth and creamy. <S> Without resorting to modernist cuisine methods ( sodium citrate ), your best approach would be to make a traditional bechemel sauce (roux, cream), and then add in shredded cheese. <S> You should find countless recipes by googling cheese sauce recipe . <A> Sodium citrate . <S> It's not some crazy scientific chemical, you have it in plenty of other foods. <S> I've made and messed up a lot of mac and cheese in my day and sodium citrate is the way to go. <S> This page is very helpful. <S> If you don't have some on hand mix a bit of vinegar and baking soda together until they no longer react and add a bit at a time of that solution until <S> consistency and texture is to your liking. <S> Just be careful when using it at first because it can make your sauce seem bitter and or salty. <S> I would not suggest using strong IPA if you're doing a beer cheese sauce - I speak from experience. <A> In addition to the other responses, you should take the sauce off heat before adding the cheese. <S> Heat (and acid) will cause the cheese to separate.
|
A sort of cheaty way to make a smooth cheese sauce is to melt cheese into evaporated milk.
|
Why are some foods preferentially eaten at certain times of day? At least in North America, eggs are most often eaten (or at least stereotypically eaten) for breakfast, sandwiches for lunch, and a big hearty meal for dinner, accompanied with a sweet dessert. I understand that this isn't always the custom around the world. However, since it is a phenomenon that is so prevalent, one must wonder if there's a reason behind it, or if it's really just coincidence. Are there taste advantages to eating particular types of foods in the morning, afternoon and night? <Q> rumtscho's answer is right (upvoted it), it's more custom than anything. <S> In parts of Holland, they eat cheese at breakfast, quite a lot of it. <S> Most Brits these days eat cereal grains of some sort, replacing the old, common breakfast of bacon and eggs. <S> From a nutritional point of view, eating protein in the morning isn't a bad thing to do - it keeps you from feeling hungry for up to four hours, and if you suffer from that sluggish, I can't get going feeling when you get up, eating protein (preferably without carbohydrates such as bread) will help with that. <S> The protein doesn't have to be eggs, can be fish, meat or cheese. <A> Traditionally energy availability is one of the biggest factors in what we eat, what we store, how we prepare it, and how and when we cook it Energy for light, cooking, and food preservation used to be very expensive in time and money until the last century or so. <S> It still is for around half the world’s <S> population <S> When your only clock is the rising and sinking of the sun, routine becomes more prevalent and necessary <S> Your modern western stereotypical breakfast/lunch/dinner is now more a factor of the working week and the clocking on the "job" requirements, than energy and time availability. <S> Check out some independant self-employed people, and see what strange food clocks they develop :-/ <S> For example: The switch from the main meal being in the evening instead of midday only happened in the west in the last 100 years or less. <S> Post WWII in many cases. <S> Some western cultures still have their main meal at midday though Also post WWII, post "Ford" era, the midday main meal was enjoyed at home. <S> Farmers went to their house, workers walked home as you could only work where you could walk too due to lack of energy resource (time and money again). <S> Many more people where self-employed and worked from home too. <S> So going home for a big midday meal was not an issue, and having a long midday break was reasonable Cultures have changed fast in the last century, what will happen next? <S> I am going for 3D printed food machines in your pocket, though hopefully not an iChef as that would only use a limited ingredient menu :-) <A> Nutrition is outside of the scope of this site, so I wouldn't discuss that part even if I knew an answer to it. <S> And no, there are no taste advantages. <S> If eggs were universally tasty in the morning only, nobody would have eggs for dinner, but there are cultures where this preference is actually the other way round. <S> So, these preferences are all a coincidence. <S> They probably are not a pure coincidence. <S> There could be a socio-economic reason for that. <S> Let me spin a theory: Eggs are eaten for breakfast in cold climates, where the fire was kept going for the whole night, and the housewife could fry them in the morning. <S> The theory is completely bogus (I don't even know if there is a cold-hot separation in the egg-for-breakfast vs egg-for-dinner regions), but it is an example of how whimsical the real reason could be. <S> They just are. <A> The reasons we eat specific foods at specific times are idiosyncratic cultural issues—which is a fancy way of saying "we don't know." <S> The reasons are lost in the details of history. <S> While one can make educated speculation on any particular ingredient, in a specific culture or region, many times the specific factors that lead to a specific behavior have buried in the mists of time. <S> A specific example of this would be the wide-spread consumption of fried chicken (specifically Kentucky Fried Chicken brand) in Japan on Christmas . <S> The company has spent a lot of money advertising to extend and preserve a trend that started when some US expatriates couldn't get turkey, and went looking for the next closest thing. <S> These are interesting and legitimate questions of food anthropology, but asking it in general for every food in every place is too broad. <S> You have to ask, why this food in this place and this time to start to get intelligent answers, if you can find credible historical documents. <S> See also: <S> Why does Mexican food taste dissonant with balsamic vinegar?
|
In hot climates, fire was made in the evening for cooking, and people fried their eggs then. Sometimes, for recent food trends, there is a documented historical event—such as an advertising campaign—that leads to a chance in food habits. Some dieticians argue that we eat the wrong way round - we should have our largest meal in the morning, then a good lunch, with a supper or tea which is significantly smaller than the other meals at the end of the day, on the understanding that you'll be active throughout the day, but not particularly active in the evening. Still, from a culinary point of view, there is no reason for regional preferences.
|
The importance of timing to adding spices From beer making, we learn that the earlier in the brewing process we add an ingredient, the more it contributes to taste, while the later we add the ingredient, the more it contributes to aroma. Does this translate to other cooking, too? <Q> Not directly. <S> Many spices gain, change or lose taste when heat-treated. <S> Fresh dill or parsley leaves, after a hour of simmering are worthless, losing all aroma. <S> Add at the very end of cooking. <S> Black pepper changes its taste and loses spiciness under heat. <S> You can add it twice , the pepper added early contributing completely differently than added late. <S> Paprika doesn't change much over first few hours, so it really doesn't matter - unless you leave it in slow cooker for 8+ hours. <S> It will turn acrid and unpleasant. <S> Fresh garlic is entirely different than garlic that underwent even several minutes of heat treatment - and garlic that was heat-processed, in order, doesn't change much in time, but infuses other products, so your choices are between fresh (sharp, spicy taste), thickly chopped cooked shortly (strong nodes of garlic taste, as ingredient, not spice) or boiled long (the taste infusing the food.) <S> Salt doesn't change taste over time (although it may infuse foods deeper) but affects many processes. <S> Water boils at higher temperature, resulting in pasta or potatoes cooked better; some meats get much harder so it should be added late; vegetables go soft very fast and "drop" resulting in more evenly distributed frying heat (so salt fried veggies early)... <S> Cumin fried on clean, dry pan (no oil) in high temperature <S> gets a significantly different, very strong, pleasant aroma. <S> You won't obtain it by normal boiling or frying with other foodstuffs, no matter how long, as this requires higher temperatures than others. <S> Fry it first, and only add other ingredients when it's ready. <S> Each spice has its caveats concerning adding time. <S> Sometimes you need to add them at the very end - especially fresh herbs. <S> In other cases (like salt) the time depends on the foodstuffs - early for vegetables, late for meats. <A> It is also true that prolonged heat to woody herbs such as rosemary and thyme can remove most of the flavour you are trying to impart. <S> For example if you wish to infuse a sauce with one of these herbs it is best to introduce them after the majority of the cooking is done, but while the sauce is still warm. <S> This is because these are aromatic herbs meaning that their flavour compounds are extremely volatile and will be lost if exposed to excessive heat. <S> Similarly they can escape a sauce if infused at too high a temperature. <S> Quite often in professional kitchens herbs and spices are included in a vacuum pouch when cooking using the sous vide method in order to impart the flavour of those compounds to whatever is in the bag. <S> We used to use thyme, garlic and a little olive oil for example with our Sunday beef when I worked in a hotel. <S> The lower temperatures and slower cooking allowed the meat to take on the flavour of the ingredients and added a depth to the taste. <S> Incidentally sous vide makes for some very nice tender meat cuts (and if you can find a bag big enough, and don't mind not having a whole bird on your table at Christmas, can make a very tasty turkey breast). <A> I,ve found bolognese sauce tastes very different depending whether i fry a strand of rosemary and then add the beef. <S> Or add the rosemary after the beef is browned. <S> My preference and recommendation is add rosemary to heated oil, fry a minute or 2, then continue with the beef and recipe as normal. <S> It adds another layer of pleasant flavour to the bolognese. <A> If it is about sauces, it matters in how they are composed at the time the spices are added - in indian and chinese cuisines, some spices/aromatics are added while the dominant liquid at that stage of cooking is oil, to infuse aromatic compounds into the oil. <S> pH at that time could also be relevant. <S> Temperature and salt/sugar levels (osmosis!) <S> at that time can also influence how certain compounds are extracted. <S> Also in indian cooking, adding aromatics/spices twice (fried in oil both when setting the sauce up, and added from a ladle/pan with hot oil at the end) is not uncommon... <S> Some spices/aromatics will react with others - Star anise is believed to interact with onions if fried together with them. <S> If using whole spices, there are practical considerations when to add and remove them - if a sauce is to be pureed and strained at a later stage, you have to decide whether to remove them or blend them in...
|
You must know given spice and when to add it.
|
Does simple syrup require refrigeration? I'm curious about plain simple syrup and simple syrup with other ingredients. For instance, cardamon simply syrup. Do other ingredients make a difference? <Q> The key factor in syrup's shelf life is the water activity in the syrup, rather than the ingredients used to make it. <S> Generally, the water is all 'bound up' with dissolved sugar <S> so microorganisms can't use it to grow, but the lighter the syrup, the more available water it will have. <S> In my experience, simple syrup is usually kept refrigerated except for small portions that will be used within a day or two. <S> For a chart of water activity (aW) of related foods, check here: Water Activity Table <A> I've done a lot of reading on this subject - as well as quite a bit of my own experimenting - and this is what I've concluded: <S> I recommend glass bottles with phenolic or otherwise lined caps. <S> I use a 2 to 1 ratio (2 sugar, 1 water) and simmer my solution for at least 15 mins to reduce it and to allow my other ingredients to absorb. <S> I primarily use whole vanilla beans and various spices. <S> I do recommend refrigeration after the bottles have been opened to prevent any microbes from sneaking in. <S> Use best kitchen practices and keep everything clean and your syrups will likely be fine. <A> Adding a tablespoon of vodka/cup will extend the life of the syrup significantly.
|
A highly concentrated simple syrup produced in a sterile environment and stored in sterile containers (with sterile caps) has a shelf life of at least a month as long as the containers remain unopened.
|
Metal vs paper filter for Chemex? What is the significant difference between using a paper filter over a reusable metal mesh filter for Chemex? <Q> A paper filter is a true "filter" in that it basically only allows liquid to pass through. <S> This means that you will have no sediment in your coffee, if that is a concern to you. <S> The paper can also lead to a papery flavor in your coffee. <S> Metal filters only filter out particulates of a certain size, so you will frequently end up with a layer of "sludge" at the bottom of your pot. <S> Metal filters should be non-reactive though, so they will not add a flavor to your coffee and will allow everything extracted from your coffee to pass through. <S> If cholesterol isn't a concern, I'd say try both and see which you like better. <S> Types of Coffee Filters Coffee & Cholesterol <A> AHHH! <S> Now I get it! <S> I've used both. <S> A lot. <S> The fact is, I don't taste a difference. <S> I only pick one over the other for convenience or economics. <S> It's cool to just dump a disposable filter, no muss, no fuss. <S> But disposable filters cost money. <S> The other one is already paid for. <S> Funny thing, I've used nothing but the metal one for over a year. <S> It would cost me $5 to replenish my supply of coffee filters, it seems I always have some other way I'd rather spend that $5. <S> One tiny caveat is that the metal type will leave a tiny bit of sludge in the bottom of your carafe. <S> Don't pour it into your cup <S> and you'd hardly know it was there. <A> I actually use both together! <S> I prewet the Chemex paper filter and put it into a Kone S/S filter. <S> The result is a no sludge/no paper aftertaste and a faster pour over. <S> YMMV. <A> Paper filters, essentially allow water to pass through with the lack of sediment in your brew. <S> They absorb well enough, but at the same time can absorb some of your coffees flavor. <S> I've heard of many people complaining about a paper-like, or chemical-like taste to their coffee when using a paper filter. <S> Everyone has their own opinion and tastes though when it comes to this. <S> Metal filters, or the stainless steel filter route can be handy for a number of reasons. <S> The lack of waste after brewing is nice to have. <S> The fact that they're reusable is quite handy and can save you a lot of money in the long run. <S> One of the most important aspects of a metal filter is the retention of oils in your coffee. <S> These filters can give you a nice full-flavored cup. <S> Hope <S> this helps and happy brewing. <S> Feel free to hit me up for any questions, recipes or roast suggestions. <S> @CrucialCoffee
|
Paper filters are absorbent though, so some of the flavor compounds of the coffee will be absorbed into the paper, and some other compounds as well (a chemical in coffee that causes a rise in cholesterol is absorbed by the paper).
|
Milk temperature for white sauce Should I introduce the milk hot or cold when making white (béchamel) sauce? Searching around I found multiple opposite opnions, like on this answer (see the comments). Also different advice from famous chefs: "heat the milk in a separate pan until just about to boil" - Mario Batali "a great tip is to make sure your milk is really cold, this will stop your sauce from going lumpy" - Gordon Ramsay "if you have a hot rue, you have cold liquid; if you have a hot liquid, you have a cold rue" - Marco Pierre <Q> As you see from the variety of advise from reputable sources, many combinations of hot/cold roux and liquid will work. <S> From a convenience point of view, you want at least one of them hot in order to speed the integration. <S> If you started both of them cold, it would probably work but take a while to warm up to melt the butter in the roux, and free the flour particles to integrate and create the sauce@mdash;and <S> it will won't fully thicken until the mixture is at a boil, so this is inefficient. <S> You would probably also have to mash and stir more frequently to prevent local burning. <S> If you start with both hot, it will also work, although you might have to whisk relatively quickly—but who has both a hot base and a hot roux sitting around? <S> Usually, at least one was prepared in advance, even if only by a few minutes. <S> Batali is recommending this method, but note that in the professional kitchen, where he lives, time is the most constrained resource, so this is his method of choice. <S> His line cooks probably have hot roux ready at all times. <S> A hot roux is easier to scoop and measure. <S> A hot liquid will quickly melt and dissolve the roux. <S> But in any case, if the roux is properly made, the starch granules are surrounded by fat, and so are not going to cause lumping in any case, despite Ramsay's advise. <S> As soon as the mixture is warm enough to melt the butter, the particles are going to move away from one another, and won't be able to clump together before they are hydrated. <S> So I would not worry about this in the slightest. <A> Keeping the hob temperature low, add a splash of milk to the butter/flour mixture, stir, and repeat. <S> Gradually increase the amount of milk added in each turn, and soon you'll have a smooth white sauce with no lumps. <S> When the sauce is looking more liquid than solid you can increase the hob temperature slightly too, but don't over-do it as the sauce might curdle. <S> I haven't found any difference between using room-temperature milk, and milk straight from the fridge. <S> The biggest factor is not adding too much milk at the earliest stages - patience is the key! <A> I have had trouble when adding cold milk to very hot roux. <S> The first milk to hit the pan thickens too fast into a paste that I then have to work out of the sauce. <S> I have had decent luck using a cool roux with cold milk, but the smoothest and fastest sauce has been with hot roux and hot milk, added 1 cup at a time. <A> If you heat the milk there is no need to add it slowly or in tiny amounts. <S> Heat it in the microwave, and While it's heating, crush together the butter & flour with a fork. <S> Then add the hot milk to the pan and scrape in the butter/flour mix. <S> The hot milk gets to work on the butter/flour and immediately the flour does its job and thickens, it's prevented from lumping by being mixed with the butter; <S> stir <S> briskly until it's all incorporated, then add the cheese and flavourings. <S> You'll thank me!!!
|
In my experience the secret to great roux sauce is to add the milk very slowly at the beginning .
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.