Nonsense the grass fed beef has way more flavor albeit livery and gamy to some that's their problem. My opinion (and I will freely admit that it is way against the grain) is that the fat flavor connection is coincidental. I already said we did an A/B of corn fed prime rib vs grass fed and the corn fed cooled on the platter in a mass of white fat then ended up in the bin.
Experiment, render pure fat out of meat and taste it. Lamb fat is gross in general greasy, high melting point, and only marginally digestible. So IMO charring some fat because it happens to be there anyway is what actually adds the flavor.
Chicken stock, roast and brown the meat first and religiously remove all fat after the stock is done, nothing lost.
The conclusion is that when braising or making stock the fat adds little or nothing at all to the flavor, the Maillard reaction is where its at. Does the fat facilitate it I don't know but IME the actual fat itself present in the final product contributes little flavor.
EDIT - If you want some real proof order a Scottish hare from d'Artagnan, no fat so needs traditional larding and tell me it has no taste.
Last edited:
Still trying steak techniques. Currently sear in oiled cast iron pan 60 seconds per side, then bake at 275F to internal temperature of 140-145 F for good looking cuts. 155-160 for cheaper cuts. For my cousins who insist on very well done, follow with a few minutes in a microwave. Leaves a hockey puck texture without any signs of burning.
I think so. Our local beef is range-grazed and rarely corn finished. Great flavor as Scott points out but it is a bit on the chewy side. Next time I cook a big steak like that I'll go longer in the sous-vide at a little lower temperature. I like the convenience of sous-vide and the ability to dial in texture and "doneness." It shines with pork chops and chicken breasts, and I love it for cooking potatoes to mash or puree.
Having said all that, the best steak I ever cooked was reverse-seared on the grill.
It's definitely a subjective thing so to each their own I prefer the leanness and flavor and can ignore the texture up to a point. And in order to disagree with Ed yet one more time I find 140F internal temperature medium well at best. I have moved over the years from 125 to 130 as right for me.
Leaner cuts do manage a bit better in the sous vide, if that's your style, as it does allow you more time/control to tenderize.
Big fan of 128F, especially using SV. I also prefer leaner cuts.
There's always Ducasse's method, modified in so many ways by anyone and everyone. This was my fave for those years without a grill.
Big fan of 128F, especially using SV. I also prefer leaner cuts.
There's always Ducasse's method, modified in so many ways by anyone and everyone. This was my fave for those years without a grill.
Ah, a man of culture
Grill, or very hot cast-iron skillet. Any other way isn't "steak" to me. Medium-rare to rare, otherwise it's for the dog or the in-laws.
Somehow I knew I would find Gordon behind that link.
Yup. Lots of chefs share the same method, but his demo is very quick and watchable. And yeah, I'm a fan, his book "Cooking for Friends" is great.
Doesn't the classic line cook method involve the oven? Sear both sides in pan, put it in hot oven for a few minutes.
Quoting Danny Finkleman on snack foods: "No fat, no salt, no flavour."
How I miss Finkleman's 45s on CBC!
Not being trained I just assumed GR does it the the basic way as it is taught. I never asked my daughter what they were trained to do in a large restaurant context. I like the idea of someone being assigned responsibility to hand craft my entree start to finish.
When I make stock I always try to include something acidic, in an uninformed belief that boiling the insoluble fats in the presnce of acid will cause the fats to isomerize and produce flavour components that are water soluble. No evidence, just a hunch.
So... that sounds like it has gobs of unpleasant flavours! (just me, I have hated liver since I was a child and never got past it. My favorite cat also hated liver.)
Absolutely, and I love lamb. The fat is heavy and nasty, but adds flavour when charred/grilled. Lamb plate or ribs with very little lean, done on the grill with lots of garlic and lemon (acid again) is greasy and wonderful after most of the fat is rendered.
And hes, degreasing is the secret of any stock. When I braised beef ribs last week I think I had to degrease the broth 3 times, but then it was like velvet (and jelly when cold).
If it were me I would have the oven at more like 375 or 425, but you have been doing the experiments so I defer to your judgment.
Yes 125 to 130 is right for good beef that isn't braised. Some cuts I will go higher (like 135) because the higher temp will render out more fat and break down some connective tissues. Any higher and it starts to dry out losing the benefit of the higher temp. If the starting point is that bad you are better off braising or stewing.
Ditto, and don't disturb the stock as after separating the bones out so it all floats up and solidifies.
Nez-- they're all pretty similar riffs of a common idea, pick and choose as you like.
Same observation on number 1 no evidence but I find the textural modifications to detract from the result and still find the dissolved products from the Maillard reaction add the most value. This relates to adding a lot of wine to a stock and when to add it. Unfortunately I have conducted dozens of these experiments and never logged what did or didn't work.
On the flavors I said it's personal preference, I love 'em high game, liver, kidney, bring it on.