<p>Slate had an article about Sous-Vide and I was curious.
Does anyone have one? What do you make in it? any thoughts or comments? </p>
<p>[Sous</a> vide at home: Why thermal immersion circulators are the microwave of the future. - Slate Magazine](<a href=“http://www.slate.com/articles/life/food/2013/07/sous_vide_at_home_why_thermal_immersion_circulators_are_the_microwave_of.html]Sous”>Sous vide at home: Why thermal immersion circulators are the microwave of the future.)</p>
<p>I’ve played around with homemade ones. You need a temperature regulator and a thermometer and a crock pot. There are now in design some ready-made versions that do this. I found [this</a> one](<a href=“http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/codlo/codlo-a-powerful-compact-controller-for-sous-vide]this”>http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/codlo/codlo-a-powerful-compact-controller-for-sous-vide) trying to raise money on Kickstarter.</p>
<p>My issue with sous vide machines is they are, to me, likely to become the next bread maker: lots bought, few used. But lots of us have cheap crockpots and they work just fine for sous vide if you have a controller that keeps the temperature exactly where you set it. They don’t circulate the water but my impression is you don’t need that in a home sized machine. If you have a big water bath and are cooking joints of meat and whole fish, then you have a temperature probe somewhere and you need to keep the water temperature relatively constant throughout. But in a crockpot? Not an issue. </p>
<p>You also “should” have a vacuum sealer, yet another piece of equipment, but you can do without. </p>
<p>There are a few oddities, notable of course that meat doesn’t brown. I don’t eat a lot of meat, but I’ve found it easier to cook it and then brown it. (Good use for a blow torch if you’re really into gadgetry.) If you brown first, the outside doesn’t have the texture of “crust”. </p>
<p>I haven’t experimented much; I was more curious about how it worked. Put stuff in a bag - spices, marinade, etc. - turn on. Kind of weird how easy it is.</p>
<p>Thanks!
You like the taste?</p>
<p>It tastes like food. The only issue is the lack of browning. </p>
<p>You can put in eggs and set it to a temperature for perfect soft-cooked and it will take them there and keep them there. It’s neat to do tricks like that. You put some vegetables in a bag with some butter and they come out perfectly cooked, not like the old boil bags of peas.</p>
<p>I use my Sous Vide Magic to make rack of lamb. At a temperature of 145 cooked for 48 hours it is absolutely heaven. Super tender and full of flavor. I will never cook my lamb any other way.</p>
<p>Thanks for indulging my curiosity</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Unless you actually watch someone cook it on a grill or in a wok, or you are at someplace like McDonald’s, 90-100% of the food you get in restaurants is cooked sous vide (if it’s cooked at all). The fancier the restaurant, the closer you get to 100%. If you order steak, it’s cooked sous vide and then finished (quickly) on a grill.</p>
<p>I had no idea
thanks</p>
<p>I completely agree with JHS. I would also add how wonderful chicken tastes when cooked Sous Vide. The only problem you will run into is figuring out what texture you like. Cooking sous vide is akin to being a culinary artist. The same recipe doesn’t always result in the same taste. You can express different flavors by simply modifying the temperature. Lamb at 143 is completely different from lamb at 145. You have to experiment until you find what you like. I have not found the right method for beef. While a sous vide steak looks amazing when you slice it (uniform color), I miss the chewy texture. I think the restaurant WD 50 in NYC exemplifies what you can do with sous vide and modifying textures. Hope the OP gets an opportunity to eat at a restaurant with some good sous vide cooked food.</p>
<p>What are these so called “food-safe” bags made of? Some sort of plastic? We complain about <em>cold</em> water getting contaminated if it sits for an hour in a Nalgene water bottle (remember the plasticizer issues?), yet people would be Ok with heating their food in a plastic bag for 2 days? :eek: I would like to know - who (and how) tested these bags?</p>
<p>“My issue with sous vide machines is they are, to me, likely to become the next bread maker: lots bought, few used. But lots of us have cheap crockpots and they work just fine for sous vide if you have a controller that keeps the temperature exactly where you set it. They don’t circulate the water but my impression is you don’t need that in a home sized machine. If you have a big water bath and are cooking joints of meat and whole fish, then you have a temperature probe somewhere and you need to keep the water temperature relatively constant throughout. But in a crockpot? Not an issue.”</p>
<p>Lergnom, are you a process chemist, by any chance? ;)</p>
<p>This is fascinating. I am inclined to be skeptical, since breadmakers make inferior bread and microwaves are only good for reheating–both IMNSHO, of course 
--and even crockpots require that one do some things such as browning the meat and caramelizing onions and so forth in a real pan first in order to get a really good result. Maybe I will have to try to eat at WD 50 when I take S to Columbia later this month. :)</p>
<p>I’m with Bunsen. My ex went to culinary school and they learned sous vide using quart zip lock bags. I can’t believe there is no chemical transfer.</p>
<p>Leaving food to cook in anything for 2 days will likely result in transfer. I know that food saver bags and contenders are BPA free and are just polyethylene (with nylon?). There may still be some estrogenically active - if that’s the phrase - chemicals. In this context, remember the discussions about aluminum pans and the links to dementia? </p>
<p>But I know that in tests, you get transfer from just about any plastic, including baby bottles, microwave containers, and plastic bottles. I’m not sure this is different … if we’re not talking about 2 days, especially at relatively high heat. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t eat my entire diet out of a sous vide but I spent my childhood being served boil in a bag veggies and all sorts of food made in containers, including plastics, that must have transferred to me.</p>
<p>Polyethylene and other polymers may not have BPA, but they have other plasticizers and also oligomers (smaller chains), because polymer is actually a distribution of molecules of various lengths. The smaller ones have the potential to get dissolved in the food being cooked in the baggie. Two parameters facilitate this transfer - temperature and time. I’m not concerned about getting BPA from cold water that has stayed in a Nalgene bottle for 2 hours, but two days of heating food in a plastic bag to 145 degrees worry me…</p>
<p>I think it’s better to pick an example more in line with actual use. There is no need to hold something at 145 degrees for 2 days. When it reaches temperature, it’s done. Fish takes less than an hour. Meat can take a while, particularly big cuts and parts like ribs. That I don’t do - can’t imagine sous vide ribs - but steaks and the like take an hour to 3 or 4 hours. A boneless chicken breast might take 2-3 hours to reach 160 degrees. These are more reasonable examples. Vegetables on the whole take a lot less time, under an hour except for some root vegetables - and you can cut them up!</p>
<p>Yes, the extreme example was from one of the earlier posts, but I would be worried about 2 hours at 160 degrees, too. Time, heat or time/heat… People would not reheat leftovers in a plastic dish because heat could extract stuff out of the plastic. Sorry, plastic is simply not meant for cooking. :)</p>
<p>Lergnom, specifically with lamb, there is a huge reason to keep it at the 145 temperature for 2 days. The collagen starts to break down at some point, don’t know when, and this leads to a tenderness that is unparallel. I have not had this occur at 24 or even 30 hours.</p>
<p>Me, I would worry about keeping the food in plastic at temp for so long.</p>