Try 4 to 6 hours in a Dutch oven with a good tight fitting lid in a 250 oven...Brown them on the stove top, remove to a platter....then cook some aromatics in the pan with some oil, when they are browned and falvorful, add the beef back, so0me liquid,,,broth or wine, and put into a 250 oven.

When they are fork tender, remove from the liquid, strain the broth and chill a bit to allow the fat to rise, so you can remove most of it. My objection to beef ribs is all the fat....and with sous vide it just stays in or on the meat and doesn't cook off
Once you have skimmed off a lot of the fat, proceed to thicken the drippings and make gravy or just serve with au jus.

arlinek,

If you cook your short ribs as what LindaC suggested, you will no question end up with delicious "tender" short ribs. It is a matter of boiling the meat long enough to tenderize the meat. Obviously beef cooked at above 70 F will be well done and no longer moist like medium or medium rare beef.

The precision temperature control feature of the sous vide method permits you to tenderize the meat without going above the degree of done-ness that you desire. I have tried short ribs sous vided at 136F, that is 76F below the normal cooking temperature. You can achieve the kind of tenderness and juiciness and mouth feel that is very different than tenderness from cooking at 212 degrees. Yes, many high-end restaurant are using sous vide for their meats.
The following are two write-ups I found on the WEB about others' short rib sous vide experiences

dcarch
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Being the BBQgeek, I am no stranger to low and slow cooking. In fact, I think low and slow might be exactly what drew me to buy a SVS and launch this blog. It's familiar territory. As I did my research on sous vide cooking, one cut of meat seemed to hold holy grail status - short ribs. Thomas Keller even included a tremendously sexy recipe for short ribs in Under Pressure. Keller goes to the extreme by cooking his short ribs for 72 hours. That's right, he cooks them for 4,320 minutes. Setting whole hog aside, the longest cook time for a cut of meat you will find in the BBQ world is roughly fourteen hours for a beef brisket. So, three days is seriously low and slow cooking. Sous vide short ribs appealed to me immediately. I've never anticipated a whole bunch of hurry-up-and-wait so much in my entire life."
------------------------------------------------
" Sous vide short ribs are often used as an example of how amazing sous vide cooking can be, and with good reason. This is because short ribs are composed of very tough meat and in order to tenderize them enough to eat you have to raise them to a high enough temperature to break down their collagen.

With most techniques, such as braising, by the time all the collagen is broken down the temperature of the short ribs is too high and they are dried out and over cooked. Short rib dishes still taste incredible though, due to the amazing flavor of the meat, which normally turns into a nice sauce.

However, using sous vide to cook the short ribs means you can cook them at a low enough temperature that the meat will not only tenderize, but the temperature of the short ribs will stay a perfect medium rare. Resulting in a tender, moist, and perfectly cooked short rib "

------------------------------------------

"It is a matter of boiling the meat long enough to tenderize the meat."

Respectfully, I disagree. Boiling meat will result in stringy tough meat no matter what cut you are using. A long slow simmer is what is neaded, but certainly not to the extreme of sous vide either. An oven proof vessle with a tight fitting lid (Dutch Oven, etc) will work perfectly, put it in the oven anywhere from 225 - 275 for a minimum of 4 hours, and if there is some acidity in the liquid it will help to break down the meat fibers even further - red wine is wonderful for that.

The following recipe is for a leg of lamb, but the idea would be the same.... and I do not use the flour paste to seal my Dutch Oven when I make things like this since my DO has a lid that fits well. Good luck and I know it will be delicious!

Seven hour Lamb
GIGOT DE SEPT HEURES
From Les Halles and Anthony Bourdain

1 leg of lamb, about 6#
4 garlic cloves, sliced, plus 20 whole garlic cloves
1/4 cup olive oil
salt & pepper
2 small onions, thinly sliced
4 carrots, peeled
1 bouquet garni
1 cup dry white wine
1 cup flour, 1 cup water
Preheat oven to 275 F. Make many small incisions in lamb, place slivers of garlic in each incision. Rub lamb well with olive oil, season with salt & pepper. (At this point I would brown the lamb on all sides��"but that’s not necessary.) Place it in Dutch oven and add onions, carrots, bouquet garni, garlic, wine. Put lid on Dutch oven. Combine flour and water, make a 'caulk' and use it to seal the lid to the dutch oven. Place it in the 275 degree oven and cook for 7 hours. Yes, 7 hours. NO PEEKING--leave it alone.
Remove the Dutch oven and break the seal. You don't have to eat the cooked flour paste.
That's it. About a half hour to an hour of prep, then you leave it the heck alone for 7 hours. It's nearly foolproof. Serve it with whatever else you want, and a medium bodied red wine goes quite well with this (say, a nice Zinfandel) but a dry white (such as the remainder of the bottle you opened to get the cup of wine in the recipe) is fine as well if that's your preference. Bon appetit!

"Respectfully, I disagree. Boiling meat will result in stringy tough meat no matter what cut you are using. A long slow simmer is what is neaded, ---"

Simmer, stew, braise, -----

If you set your Dutch oven in a 225F - 275F oven for more than 4 hours, boiling is unavoidable. With a heavy tight-fitting cover, boiling point will be slightly higher, but not that much.

Personally, I have not figured out why you put a covered Dutch oven in an oven and use up a lot more energy. To the meat, 212 F is 212 F, makes no difference if the heat comes from the oven or from the stove.

I also don't understand the dough seal idea. It takes 15 p.s.i. (pounds per sq. in.) for a pressure cooker in order to achieve 252F. A six-quart dutch over has a lid about 113 sq. in. Just one p.s.i. will mean the dough has to hold back 113 lbs (minus the weight of the lid) of lifting force.

In any case, let me be clear, again, comparing sous vide and normal cooking is like comparing oranges and chickens. You will get very delicious meals cooking beef the normal way, sous vide cooking just give you a different texture and mouth-feel. Depending on your preference, one is not necessarily better than the other. You may even find tender short ribs medium rare texture taste weird.

Sous vide cooking has been around for a long long time. Finally, a sous vide cooker is now affordable for home cooking. It is not $5,000 anymore.

The major food texture modifying appliances besides the stove:

Pressure cooker
Deep fryer
Freezer
Baking/roasting oven
Fire / grill

And now sous vide cooker

dcarch

dcarch - Aside from a mere cup of white wine there's no added liquid in that recipe. I don't think you can call it braising. Probably why they call for a seal - to keep in what moisture there is. Yes, the outermost portion of the meat will reach boiling temperature. How far in though? I don't know, but certainly not as much as if you were boiling it in a pot of water.

Anyway, do you have Thomas Keller's recipe? Or any other recipe/method to recommend that's more detailed than "sous vide at X degrees for Y hours"? I'd love to try sous vide short ribs.

Arlene - Sorry for perpetuating the hijacking of this thead. I know you specifically asked for NON sous vide discussion. :(

Why does any matter of how to cook meat deteriorate into a discussion of sous vide? it's especially regrettable when the OP specifically asked that sous vide NOT be a method she would consider.
surely you didn't really mean really to recommend cooking beef at 70F?
Sous vide is putting under pressure. You can cook it in that bag you have created a vacuum in, or store it or marinate it.
Frankly the only thing I have eaten that was cooked sous vide was roast beef and I didn't much like the texture. The fat was sort of like....well like very soft fat. (shudder)
Some things maybe fine cooked sous vide, but I don't believe short ribs are one. A long and slow braise cooks and softens the collagen and puts it into the liquid in the pot and creates that umami that is so sought after.

Then there are the concerns for the safety of sous vide, some are concerned about the long contact the food must have with plastic while cooking when it's recommended not to microwave anything in plastic, and also the issue of botulism in a food product kept in an air free non acid and warm enviornment for hours and hours.

Braise those short ribs song and slow, with some wine aromatic vegetables and herbs and you'll have all the yummy umami you want.
Linda C

Posted by lindac
First thank you for pointing out the 70F error. Should be 70C. Beef is very well done above 70C. Never do any writing while rushing to work. I might be making many more mistakes writing this during my lunch break.

"Why does any matter of how to cook meat deteriorate into a discussion of sous vide? it's especially regrettable when the OP specifically asked that sous vide NOT be a method she would consider. "

Thanks again, I will make sure to watch out for my nasty habit of always making any discussion "deteriorate" into "regrettable" directions.

The OP stated "Do they ALL sous vide them or IS there another way to achieve that lovely taste and texture?", my response, IMHO, I thought was appropriate to distinguish the different tenderness in meat quality under different temperature conditions. Apparently not, according to your expertise.

"Sous vide is putting under pressure. You can cook it in that bag you have created a vacuum in, or store it or marinate it. "

While sous vide means under vacuum, but in fact it is just airless, I believe no pressure is involved under most sous vide conditions. That understanding could be my pseudo scientific training.

"Frankly the only thing I have eaten that was cooked sous vide was roast beef and I didn't much like the texture. The fat was sort of like....well like very soft fat. (shudder) Some things maybe fine cooked sous vide, but I don't believe short ribs are one. A long and slow braise cooks and softens the collagen and puts it into the liquid in the pot and creates that umami that is so sought after. "

I am glad that you are so confident that your taste is universal.

"Then there are the concerns for the safety of sous vide, some are concerned about the long contact the food must have with plastic while cooking when it's recommended not to microwave anything in plastic, and also the issue of botulism in a food product kept in an air free non acid and warm enviornment for hours and hours. "

I guess I have not been here in the CF long enough to be able to go off-topic whenever I feel like it. So I will not go into this extremely complicated topic of food safety.

"Braise those short ribs song and slow, with some wine aromatic vegetables and herbs and you'll have all the yummy umami you want. Linda C"

It is amazing how often we are in agreement. I have stated the same thing above to the OP.

dcarch

Posted by FOAS:

"-----Probably why they call for a seal - to keep in what moisture there is. ----"

I do not believe that is the case. The moisture evaporation is based on one thing only, namely the conductivity of the container. Unless you can change the conductivity, which you cannot, the BTU absorbed will be the same, seal or no seal, and the same BTUs will evaporate the same amount of moisture. The only time the situation changes is when the seal is so tight that is can develop significant internal pressure as in a pressure cooker.

In this regard, putting the dutch oven on the stove has a slight advantage. On the stove, the cover (Lid) is lower in the room temperature than if it is in the oven. Water evaporated from the food will condense on the lid and redeposit into the food.

"-----Yes, the outermost portion of the meat will reach boiling temperature. How far in though? I don't know, but certainly not as much as if you were boiling it in a pot of water.---"

It would be the same in either situation. How far in is governed by the conductivity of water (and food), which is a constant.

-----------------------------------------------

You may notice that I did not say dutch oven in an oven will not work and nor have I said the seal idea is meaningless. I said based on the few basic law of physics, it cannot be explained that they would be better, It cannot be ruled out that there could be theories I have neglected.

However, I may be able to determine whether they are or are not meaningless if I have done a side-by-side blind taste test which I have not done.

Meanwhile go on with whatever you have been doing if you feel you have achieved the end result you desire.

dcarch

I like short ribs a lot and have eaten them at a number of restaurants, cooked/grilled by friends and family, and cooked at home by several methods. I'm not going to mention my cooking preferences but instead answer the question from a different perspective.

The title of the thread is "ISO: Rest. qlty, boneless short rib recipe." I can, and do, also get lovely, well marbled short ribs at Costco. But, last year I was absolutely blown away by the tenderness, juiciness and flavor of PRIME short ribs that I cooked at home. One of our smaller chain markets periodically has prime boneless chuck roasts, and prime short ribs. The first time I cooked a prime chuck roast, my first thought on tasting it was that it definitely rivaled a pot roast meal in one of our better restaurants here. My comment to my DH was that it was like a $28.00 restaurant pot roast entree.

So another approach for you might be to seek out prime beef. Fortunately prime short ribs are not at the same price point as say prime ribeye. They may seem expensive for short ribs, but, at least IMHO, they were fantastic. I would not suggest WH or a butcher because they will probably be more expensive there. If you have a smaller market, whose meat you like, ask there.

Lee

I meant "WF" not WH.

I prefer to cook the ribs in the dutch oven in my oven because I can set a fairly precise temperature and know that it stays there.
Where, because what you call "The laws of physics" the mass of the cast iron pot heats up slowly and can get too hot on the stove top eventually and the gas flame will have to be turned down or put on a flame tamer if I am using the smaller pot. In the oven means that after i have browned the meat and added the aromatics and wine, I can set it and forget it. I get condensation on the lid which drips down showing that the lid is holding the moisture in the pot.

Linked is some more info about sous vide cooking and concerns about safety, having scrupulously clean hands when handling the food and the necessity of bringing the food to the pasteurizing temperature before the long slow cook.

I am sure sous vide as a method of food preparation has it's merit and place. It allows a restaurant to offer a prime rib in many degrees of doneness as well as other specialities that can be stored in the refrigerator, or frozen and reheated to order. However, I cannot believe it's a desirable way to cook everything from clams, oysters, shrimp, pork shoulder, lamb chops, steaks, ribs etc etc etc.

and my apologies to Arline for sending more of this discussion to her email box

Here is a link that might be useful: More about sous vide

"However, I cannot believe it's a desirable way to cook everything from clams, oysters, shrimp, pork shoulder, lamb chops, steaks, ribs etc etc etc."

Lindac - I have not tried sous vide. I'm just taking dcarch at his word. He certainly puts enough time and effort into it. I can't imagine spending that kind of time on something if it did not have it's benefits.

Just curious lindac - have you had the opportunity to try sous vide cooking?

Teresa

Read my post again, yes.

Just curious lindac - have you had the opportunity to try sous vide cooking?

I doubt she's tried making it herself, but I have. Thus far I've had one good result, no great results, a handful of bad. I'm not ready to give up yet because my experience is obviously limited, and because I honestly don't know if I'm choosing wrong cooking times or otherwise messing up the recipe. But google "sous vide mushy" and there are plenty of results so I've got company.

My current experiment underway is to see how it does reheating pre-grilled, frozen food. I'll report on that when the time comes.

But I'd really like to cook something great! That's why I keep asking dcarch for a recipes he likes - it's paint by numbers so you really can't mess up. I think this would help me make an informed decision on whether or not I like sous vide. Waiting...! (Unlike LindaC I think short ribs are a perfect candidate for sous vide.)

One thing I can say for certain: Sous vide makes makes very pretty steaks. Jury's still out on taste/texture.

Prime sirloin is on sale this week - maybe I'll pick up a big steak and try sous vide short, med, long cook time, all finished on the grill, and one done entirely on the grill. All to same center temp. And have some friends over for a blind taste test. Hey, great idea! I just thought of that as I was typing!

p.s. dcarch - Technically of course you're right that the food is packed air removed, not under vacuum. Since sous vide means under vacuum, why don't you petition your cooking authority friends to change the name to sans l'air or similar? ;-)

lindac - I see that you have tried beef that was sous vide. My question was - have you tried the method itself?

So FOAS - if you've had one good result, perhaps practice will make perfect! Also, having tried the method, do you feel that it is possible to do all of the different items dcarch has tried?

I will be interested in the results of your blind taste test on your friends.

Teresa

This is my favorite recipe for short ribs of beef, I also get mine at Costco. You make them the day before serving, they are moist and tender, and a bonus is by making a day ahead and chilling you can remove most of the excess fat.
The recipe calls for bone-in ribs but I get the boneless from Costco and they're fine.

And if you think a whole bottle of red wine may be overpowering, it really isn't. The alcohol cooks off (non-drinking DH loves them) and the sauce is delicious. I don't make the horseradish sauce, don't care for it. Yummy with bread to sop up the sauce.

Here is a link that might be useful: Sara Moulton's short ribs recipe

I think the best way to have a tasty steak cooked sous vide would be to sear it on the grill BEFORE putting it into vacuum pack bag. You would miss the crisp exterior but maybe the grill flavor would permeate the meat.
Never tried to cook sous vide....just eaten restaurant prime rib, which I suspect is the main use for the method.

WELL!! I've been gone for a day and a half and got soooo excited - as when I first looked, I only had one response (lindac) and no other recipes. Then I just looked and 15 responses were indicated (recipes????!) and was THRILLED. I guess this post took an other-worldly turn, however - lol ... but I actually enjoyed all the exchanges, heated though some may be. I've been fascinated with sous vide for awhile and know it's only a matter of time till I try it, prob. after making a home-made one. So, no prob. with all the input and hijacking. Since re-reading these responses, I'm pretty sure that those restaurants that had the MOST tender and tasty short ribs probably were sous vided - and I DO like that unique mouth-feel that dcarch mentions and cherishes - at least in sh. ribs. The texture was just too unique and *I* really liked it. The ribs I can buy at our local Costco are marbled to the extent that I would confidently call them prime quality, not choice, with the amount of marbling so visible. Having experienced REAL Kobe beef in Japan, I'll never forget it and am always trying to re-achieve that taste and texture. I DID look online today and found some recipes from chefs who specify FLANKEN type of short ribs, which I haven't purchased or used and am wondering if that also might contribute to a better texture/less stringy. I'll have to ck. around. I AM cooking some right now, but got a very late start so I WILL report back. I basically used Lindac's method (but not so slow), quite similar to my previous attempts actually - just a little different ingredients (no balsamic vinegar this time). We shall see ...

Here's a recipe for flanken style spare ribs which sounds very good to me.
You worry me!! my recipe but not so slow?? Low and slow's the name of the game!!

Here is a link that might be useful: Flanken cut ribs

Yes, lindac, prob. poorly worded on my part. I didn't have time to do the slow method, yet they did cook for over 3 hrs. in the oven at 350 degrees. I liked it better without the balsamic but again, the stringyness was still very prevalent. That's why I'm wondering if flanken style might be the answer. The particular ones I had in a rest. were totally boneless, without any obvious stringyness in the meat and virtually melted in my mouth. I think that stringyness in the traditional boneless short ribs will ALWAYS be there no matter how they are cooked as that can't be eradicated - hence, considering the flanken style. That link sounds good for the flanken; thank you lindac. But, I'm really gravitating towards either trying sous vide or flanken, as I can't imagine that even sous vide'g the more stringy ones I buy will make the stringyness go "away" ... dcarch????

arlinek, I think I know exactly what you are talking about.

When tenderness is discussed in meat, I believe there are two kinds of tenderness.

When any meat is cooked at 212F, it gets tough, not actually dry because not much moisture has lost. Cooking the meat longer eventually can cause a sequence of molecular changes and the meat can get soft, but not juicy tender the same way as prime meat cooked medium rare.

The sous vide method permits the meat to be cooked at low temperature to avoid "well-done" overcooking, and to be cooked for as long as needed for the molecular changes to take place. The end result is tenderness with a juicy mouth-feel. I have sous vide cooked short ribs many times, with exceptional melt-in-your-mouth end results.

I did a sous vide pulled pork. If you take a look at my thread and the video you can almost see how juicy the pulled pork is in the pictures, and how truly "melt-in-your-mouth" the video shows the texture.

pulled pork

pulled pork video

dcarch

Arline....lower the temp of your oven and cook longer.....
350 degrees is a raging boil, guaranteed to make the meat stringy.

Isn't it true that regardless what temperature above 212F you set your oven, as long as there is water in the pot, the temperature of the pot can never go above 212F?

Water will get boiled away quicker, but not hotter than 212F.

dcarch

Why would the water boil away quicker? Because you're transferring more heat at a more rapid pace?

Posted by foodonastump "Why would the water boil away quicker? Because you're transferring more heat at a more rapid pace?"

Yes, that is correct. Almost. :-).

More accurate statement would be:
The high the temperature, the greater will be the potential difference for more energy to transfer. The pace is governed by conductivity of the various elements in the path of heat travel.

Ignoring the salts in the liquids, which will raise the boiling point of water a little.
Ignoring the alcohol in the liquid, which will lower the boiling point a little,
Ignoring relative humidity of the air,
Ignoring viscosity of the contends in the vessel,

At normal atmospheric pressure (not at high altitude) water will boil at 212F. How vigorously it will boil away (evaporate) will depend on how much heat (BTUs) is supplied to overcome the latent heat of vaporization (phase change) for the water.

How much and how fast heat (BTUs) is supplied to the water is dependent on the temperature of the oven and the conductivity of the vessel.

As long as the oven is set at higher than 212F, given time, the water will boil; However, even if you set the oven temperature to 1,000F, as long as there is still water in the vessel, the meat will be cooked at the exact temperature of 212F and no higher.

dcarch

So couldn't this "potential difference for more energy to transfer" have an effect on not just the braising liquid, but also on the meat that's in the vessel? Or was America's Test Kitchen completely dillusional when they experimented with cooking pot roast in a dutch oven, in an oven at various temperatures and found:

"We then tested higher temperatures to reduce the cooking time. Heat levels at above 350 degrees boiled the meat to a stringy, dry texture because the exterior of the roast overcooked before the interior was cooked and tender. The magic temperature turned out to be 300 degrees - enough heat to keep the meat at a low simmer while high enough to shave a few more minutes off the cooking time."

By the way, the oven cooking time for their pot roast is 3.5-4 hours after the liquid comes to a simmer, stove top. And yes, with an internal temperature of 210 degrees they themselves called the roast "overcooked", in quotes. In other words it was a desirable result in this case.

Again, unless they're dilussional, it sure sounds to me like there's 212, and then there's 212. And that generations of cooks weren't wrong.

Last note - you asked why do it in the oven rather than stove-top. ATK found what LindaC mentioned above: "After a few rounds of stovetop cooking, we felt that it was too difficult to maintain a steady, low temperature, so we began pot-roasting in the oven, starting out at 250 degrees. This method required no supervision, just a turn of the meat every 30 to 40 minutes to ensure even cooking."

Posted by foodonastump "So couldn't this "potential difference for more energy to transfer" have an effect on not just the braising liquid, but also on the meat that's in the vessel? Or was America's Test Kitchen completely dillusional when they experimented with cooking pot roast in a dutch oven, in an oven at various temperatures and found:
"We then tested higher temperatures to reduce the cooking time. Heat levels at above 350 degrees boiled the meat to a stringy, dry texture because the exterior of the roast overcooked before the interior was cooked and tender. The magic temperature turned out to be 300 degrees - enough heat to keep the meat at a low simmer while high enough to shave a few more minutes off the cooking time."

Excellent questions.

First, It seems to me that we can all accept that:

1. To the meat in the liquid inside the vessel, it makes no difference where the 212F heat comes from. By the very definition of thermal energy, there is no difference between heat from the oven, stove, coal, candle, -------.

2. However, to the meat, how long the meat stays in the 212F will make a difference.

To tenderize the meat, it is important to cook it long, in the ATK experiment, as they stated, they cook the meat at 350 but shorter time, therefore some of the meat is tougher.

"By the way, the oven cooking time for their pot roast is 3.5-4 hours after the liquid comes to a simmer, stove top. And yes, with an internal temperature of 210 degrees they themselves called the roast "overcooked", in quotes. In other words it was a desirable result in this case. Again, unless they're dilussional, it sure sounds to me like there's 212, and then there's 212. And that generations of cooks weren't wrong. "

I don't think that generation of cooks were wrong. Cooking with a covered Dutch oven inside an oven will produce wonderful results. Whether that will have more delicious end results than doing it with the Dutch oven on the stove top is my question.

"Last note - you asked why do it in the oven rather than stove-top. ATK found what LindaC mentioned above: "After a few rounds of stovetop cooking, we felt that it was too difficult to maintain a steady, low temperature, so we began pot-roasting in the oven, starting out at 250 degrees. This method required no supervision, just a turn of the meat every 30 to 40 minutes to ensure even cooking."

I can understand that. For the purpose of the repeatability of the experiment, as in any experiment, it is important to maintain recordable and verifiable environmental conditions, and that is much easier done in an oven which has a limiting thermostat. There is no practical way to do that on the stove top. However, I am not sure for everyday cooking anyone would have a problem to get the Dutch oven to be on simmering low-fire setting on the stove top.
----------------------------------------------
BTW, ATK has provided much very useful and important information to the public, however, most of their tests are done in somewhat informal settings.
To confirm a true test of 350F vs. 300F in the quality of the meat, I believe the experiment must be done in an oven with an electronic PID type of thermostat which has the ability to control the environment to 0.1 F resolution. Mechanical bi-metal or capillary hydraulic type of thermostats in normal ovens can vary as much as 30F to 50F. Humidity of the cooking environment should be monitored, and a chart recorder should be in operation to record temperature swings throughout the entire cooking time. Because testing by individuals chewing is highly unreliable, it depends on subjectivity, and where the meat from the same cut is taken for the chewing. Proper way to do it perhaps would be using a durometer tester. Finally, no test result is to be considered conclusive until the same test is performed by another independent testing facility.

Bottom line:

Stewing using a Dutch oven in an oven will make wonderful and delicious stew.
However, beef "tenderness" cooked at 212 F is very different texturally than beef tenderness cooked at 135F.

dcarch

I think you've completely missed my point, which is that there seems to be a clear difference in transfer of heat when the oven was set at 250, 300 and 350. 250 is great, 300 speeds up the center becoming tender, 350 speeds it up further but at the risk of ruining the outer meat before the center is good and tender. What does this tell me? That temperature differences - above 212 - matter!

If I'm being honest, dcarch, I think you've got yourself buried too deep in your 212 theory. You can talk science until the cows come home but practical experience simply doesn't support your claims as I read them. And I think I'm reading them right, because they're pretty clear.

When it comes to the science of cooking, I think you need to come up with explanations that support practical experience, not the other way around. I don't care what you say about a prime rib roasting at a temperature greater than 212 deg, the FACT is that when the center of the roast is at 125 (or whatever) there will be a different doneness profile when it's been roasted at 250 versus 500. Even though both are greater than 212.

As a general comment, if you sense some frustration in some of my posts, you're right. After all these months of you promoting sous vide here I'm the only poster that I know of thus far that has taken the interest, time and expense to try to jump on the bandwagon. (One other might be close.) You were most helpful with the setup, yet I can't seem to get a recipe or method from you, whether it's re short ribs here, scallops via email, etc.

Please don't worry about food safety and liability, as I suspect you do. No one here puts disclaimers on their responses to "is the chicken I left on the counter overnight still good" questions, recipes for egg nog or caesar dressing using raw eggs, carpaccio, etc. We're all capable of making our own decisions. And believe me, I won't follow ANY sous vide recipe without referring to the charts.

I think there are a lot of presumptions being made that the meat is totally submerged in the cooking liquid. There is only a very little bit of meat submerged in the cooking liquid.
And braised short ribs SHOULD be cooked well done to cook out some of the fat. I postulate that the difference you find in restaurant quality ribs and the ones you are cooking is the quality of the meat. Young tender prime beef vs whatever they have at Costco.

For a very simple illustration of how temperature applied effects the rate of evaporation of water....heat a griddle or a fry pan on your stove....when it gets a little warm, shake a few drops of water on it and note how fast it evaporates.....heat more and shake more water on the pan....
I still use this test to determine when my griddle is hot enough for the pancakes.
Linda C

"I think you've completely missed my point, which is that there seems to be a clear difference in transfer of heat when the oven was set at 250, 300 and 350. 250 is great, 300 speeds up the center becoming tender, 350 speeds it up further but at the risk of ruining the outer meat before the center is good and tender. What does this tell me? That temperature differences - above 212 - matter! "

I not sure where have I disagreed with that empirical result.
1. Shorter cooking time, tougher meat.
2. Higher heat, bigger potential energy difference, quicker boiling (212F).
3. One thing I did point out above, but didn't want to complicate the discussion was the importance of viscosity. High viscosity impedes convective current in the liquid. Higher temperature encourages rapid and rigorous boiling, therefore better heat transfer.

"If I'm being honest, dcarch, I think you've got yourself buried too deep in your 212 theory. You can talk science until the cows come home but practical experience simply doesn't support your claims as I read them. And I think I'm reading them right, because they're pretty clear. "

Again, I may have to read what I wrote again to see if I did somehow mislead you. 212F is the basic scientific fact that is not to be disputed (except in the super-heated water situation). It serves as the starting point to investigate other hidden causes for phenomenon which seemingly contrary to that fact.

"When it comes to the science of cooking, I think you need to come up with explanations that support practical experience, not the other way around. I don't care what you say about a prime rib roasting at a temperature greater than 212 deg, the FACT is that when the center of the roast is at 125 (or whatever) there will be a different doneness profile when it's been roasted at 250 versus 500. Even though both are greater than 212. "

I don't think I have ever disputed that. I have said prime rib cooked at 212 F will be over cooked. I have said that at higher temperature, as long as there is water in the meat, it cannot be higher than 212F, regardless of the outside temperature, however it will get burnt faster at higher heat.

"As a general comment, if you sense some frustration in some of my posts, you're right. After all these months of you promoting sous vide here I'm the only poster that I know of thus far that has taken the interest, time and expense to try to jump on the bandwagon. (One other might be close.) You were most helpful with the setup, yet I can't seem to get a recipe or method from you, whether it's re short ribs here, scallops via email, etc. "

It is a well justified frustration due to my lack of time. Just want to be clear, I am not here to promote anything. I am here only to have fun and to share new way of doing things. And when you "Bing" "sous vide", you will get 65 million hits. That shows how much excitement is out there.
"Please don't worry about food safety and liability, as I suspect you do. No one here puts disclaimers on their responses to "is the chicken I left on the counter overnight still good" questions, recipes for egg nog or caesar dressing using raw eggs, carpaccio, etc. We're all capable of making our own decisions. And believe me, I won't follow ANY sous vide recipe without referring to the charts."

Liability is just one of the many reasons, I just don't want to get into a huge heated discussion here with anyone about food safety. You know how easy that is for it to happen here.

dcarch

Posted by lindac "I think there are a lot of presumptions being made that the meat is totally submerged in the cooking liquid. There is only a very little bit of meat submerged in the cooking liquid. ---"

With a coverd Ductch oven in an oven that is set at above 300F, The part of the meat that is not submerged in liquid will be subjected to steam temperature at around 212F, furthermore, the meat will be subject to heat from radiant radiation from the cover, which is why you can brown meat in a Dutch oven.

"For a very simple illustration of how temperature applied effects the rate of evaporation of water....heat a griddle or a fry pan on your stove....when it gets a little warm, shake a few drops of water on it and note how fast it evaporates.....heat more and shake more water on the pan.... "

Exactly what I have been saying, more heat (BTUs) higher rate of evaporation.

dcarch

I still haven't seen a recipe for any sous vide....anything.
As a matter of fact, I can't remember any recipe for anything from dcarch....just pictures and discourses one quipment and heat control. I think the closest to a recipe was how to blacken elephant garlic.....and that only because of the specialized equipment.

And if you have ever tried to "brown meat" in a dutch oven by the steam rising from the liquid in the pot you will know it doesn't happen.

It is a well justified frustration due to my lack of time.

LOL, I've never never accused you of lacking a sense of humor!

foodonastump "----LOL, I've never never accused you of lacking a sense of humor!"

There is no statue of limitations for that. :-)

---------------------------------------
Posted by lindac :

"And if you have ever tried to "brown meat" in a dutch oven by the steam rising from the liquid in the pot you will know it doesn't happen."

Two points:

1. The discussion was about radiant heat from the cover, which can be as hot as the temperature you set the oven at. As a matter of fact, many bread recipes are based on that. Dutch oven baking is well practiced.

2. In fact you can have steam temperature go way beyond 212F. It is dependent of the pressure you can create. You will be fried crispy instantly if you touch a high pressure steam pipe.

"I still haven't seen a recipe for any sous vide....anything.
As a matter of fact, I can't remember any recipe for anything from dcarch-----"

Why that is so not acceptable. No excuse for that appalling behavior! I will make an effort to post recipes as frequently as your posting pictures of your wonderful meals in this forum all these years.

dcarch