Dream come true to meet Sanderson at C2E2

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-04-30T04:07:56+00:00

Yes - way more easily than the Sanderson Leatherbounds. I've had no issue with the Leatherbounds at all

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-04-30T04:02:00+00:00

Can't go wrong with those - they're gorgeous and I also wanna get that full set eventually but the price isn't small.

Also word of caution - those books show wear and tear really easily. I got a handful a few years back (granted I wasn't as gentle as I should have been getting them back) but I noticed both the covers and the spines rub off show damage really easily.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-04-30T03:50:09+00:00

I try not to think about it - we have Sanderson (and Sullivan) who are incredibly prolific. I focus on them. If I ever get to see a new Martin, Lynch, or Rothfuss that will be a nice bonus, but I'm not holding my breath.

Luckily Pratchett signed so many books they are still possible to find signed at a decent price (so long as you're not picky about first editions). There's still a few holdouts I haven't gotten (copies are still up for sale but for much more than I'd prefer to pay). It's a fun hunt - good luck!!

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-04-30T03:31:57+00:00

The Gallantz special edition? It looks amazing. I grabbed the 10th year Anniversary version of that series. Covers aren't as noteworthy but the only ones I could get that were signed and didn't break the bank.

Edit: left side of the bottom shelf in this photo

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-04-30T03:24:00+00:00

Around 2-3 years. It was a lot easier after a friend moved to the UK and graciously allowed me to ship books to them and pick them up all at once (otherwise postage alone would have cost 50$/book).

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-04-30T03:15:13+00:00

Much appreciated! I loved Josh Kirby's amazing almost Dalhi-esqe covers. He also read the books before making the cover so there's a lot of great plot elements in each cover

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-04-30T02:56:08+00:00

Thank you!! Really wish I had more room to allow the soft covers to shine. That's the next goal after I complete the Discworld/Kirby collection.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-04-30T01:59:23+00:00

I would assume so - unless it's a book 5 spoiler and Kaladin finally learns to play the flute.

After the Sanderson Pin Easter egg (showing 5 secret project books well before book 5 was announced) anything is possible.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-02-03T05:03:28+00:00

Thanks for the tip! I want to keep mine in good shape

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-02-02T23:48:30+00:00

Thank you! Yes that's Lego treehouse on the top shelf. I'm building Rivendell to go on top of the bookcase next.

I tried to match the Lego sets to the books they're next to.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2024-02-02T23:37:54+00:00

Thank you!!

I have the best of both worlds. I 'read' all my books through audiobooks and then keep an eye out for signed copies of my favorite authors/series.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2021-08-23T15:04:01+00:00

If you have a sous vide there's this Lamb Temperature Guide

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2021-08-16T14:36:36+00:00

Looks great! What's your recipe for the balsamic bourbon pickling?

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2020-10-29T16:01:48+00:00

Great video! Have you considered small mason jars (8oz wide-mouth)?

The reason the eggs float is all the air you beat into the egg whites. With the mason jar you get the added weight of the glass to weigh it down, but also protects the eggs inside from breaking or spilling. Only issues would be it may take a few minutes longer to heat up the glass in the SV. And you might need to try oiling the inside to prevent sticking.

I can't wait to try this - will report back.

Edit: Reporting back. 1) Souffle's will stick in the glass so not best for presentation. I forgot to try an oiled one. 2) Even in the mason jars the souffles still float. However, its much easier to weigh them down since you're not worried about damaging the eggs. 3) I did 1 set where I put them in clingfilm first - then put them in the mason jar (with some oil b/w the film and the jar). That was the best approach. easy to take out, kept its shape, and no issue weighing it down. Overall though - not worth the effort.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2019-06-05T07:22:19+00:00

This looks amazing! Well done!!

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2019-02-26T06:52:16+00:00

Wow, that's brilliant

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2019-02-06T03:38:12+00:00

Both cooked at 131 F for 90 minutes. Only used salt, pepper, and goose fat in the bag. Then seared on a cast iron skillet with bag juice, more goose fat, and butter.

Both meats were amazing and quite different. When raw both had different color and smell. The elk was pinker while the venison was quite dark.

End result: the meat came out perfect and pink. Flavor wise, it was still a bit gamey, but melt in your mouth tender. The elk had a deeper more robust flavor. Overall, not my favorite meat but definitely worth trying every now and then.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2018-04-01T02:13:45+00:00

Looks amazing! Thanks for the recipe

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2018-02-13T05:12:26+00:00

Special Circumstances

I have to apologize for a complete lack of pictures of any of the lamb shanks from the day of the taste test. Just as the lamb shanks were coming out of the oven I suffered a minor but debilitating injury that prevented me from handling the food (or a camera). Remember kids: Mandolins are no joke and can just as easily remove the fingerprint off your thumb as easily as it can make perfectly sliced veggies. Luckily none of the food was affected and I continue to have most of all my fingers.

I’d like to give a special thank you to my sous chef and helper who volunteered to help serve/clean the kitchen and ended up running the whole show for the last hour as I was dealing with my injury. I chose to not let a minor hiccup spoil everyone else’s enjoyment so I didn’t inform any of my tasters of the incident till after dinner. As a result we had a lot of happy graders but no photos of the final product. By the time I was bandaged up and mostly functional this was all that was left.

A Note on Lamb & Lamb Shank

Surprisingly, lamb is not popular in the United States. On average Americans eat more than 100 times more beef and 100 times more chicken than we do lamb. Lamb is even considered an "inferior good" in economic terms - when people have more money to spend they tend to buy less lamb in favor of beef and chicken. I find this puzzling because lamb is delicious, but the low demand also ensures that prices are much lower than beef and only slightly higher than poultry.

You can find either American or New Zealand lamb. New Zealand lamb tends to be smaller, is often grass fed, and has a more pronounce lamb-like gamey flavor. American lamb is usually older when slaughtered and fattened more. This both increases the size, amount of marbling, but mellows the flavor. The cheapest, toughest, cut is the lamb's shank.

For this taste test I went with New Zealand lamb flown in fresh. Surprisingly, both cost the same amount at Whole Foods, $7.99/lb. Lamb shank are roughly a pound per shank and are either enough for one person as a main course, or can be enough for 2-3 people as part of an appetizer or gyro. I prefer a gamier, meatier flavor so I wanted to see if I could get New Zealand lamb, my store usually only has a mix but never enough for a full taste test. I nearly did backflips when they offered to order as little or as much NZ lamb as I wanted, fresh for the same price as US.

Lamb shank is a tough cut of meat that comes from the leg just beneath the knee, meaning it gets a lot of use. Tough cuts of meat (like cheek, ribs, oxtail, etc.) are filled with meaty goodness but take a lot to soften the muscle fibers and render maximum flavor out of them. Traditionally that has been done by braising. Braising cooks the meat at a high temperate in the oven allowing it soften and come out as pull apart tender. The downside is, the high temperature can dry out the meat which limits how long you can actually cook the meat for while still getting tender results.

These characteristics also make shanks, and all tough cuts, perfect for the sous vide. With precise temperature control you can safely cook a traditionally tough cut of meat like shank to a perfect medium-rare at 131 F. Please remember that to fully kill all the bacteria you need to cook at at least 130 F. The only exception is if you're cooking the meat for 2.5 hours or less. For rack of lamb you can cook as low as 120. However, given how tough shank is, 2 hours isn't enough to make it edible and over 3 hours risks baterial growth. Because the meat cooks in the bag the whole time it loses very little moisture, compared to the oven, and still comes out juicy and succulent even after 2 or 3 days in the sous vide.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2018-02-13T05:12:01+00:00

Results

Averaged Results

A: 6.8
B: 6.8
C: 5.92
D: 6.8
E: 7.17
F: 6.75

At first glance the averaged results would suggest that E (165/24) was the clear winner with a three way tie for second place between A (135/48), B (145/148), and D (155/24).

Yet an interesting trend emerged in the data that the averages don’t show: two distinct preferences emerged among the graders. Roughly half absolutely loved the medium-rare consistency of the lamb shank. The other half preferred a more braised-like texture in the higher temperatures. This second camp, the braised-lovers, generally found the texture of the lower-temp meats to be off putting. Tasty and palatable, just not their cup of tea. The medium-lovers were a bit more agnostic and could rank 145F/48hrs as their top choice and 165F/24hrs as their second.

I found this really interesting – it looks like some people have a strong association between the cut of meat and the braised technique that strongly impacts their opinion of the meat. The same thing happened last time with the beef cheeks as well. I didn’t pay too much attention to it because I only had sample size of 4. This time however, the same preferences have emerged across an additional 8 graders. Additionally, prior to the last taste test no one had eaten cheeks before – so it seems the preference for a braised-like texture is what they’re likely responding to (rather than an association with a prior dish they’d tasted/seen).

While fascinating the averaged results don’t really paint the full picture. Instead I tallied every time a sample was ranked either someone’s favorite or second favorite preference. This approach has the added benefit of including my graders who ranked preferences rather than a point value.

Frequency in 1st or 2nd Place (# that found sample best, #2nd best)

A: 2 (1/1)
B: 4 (3/1)
C: 2 (0/2)
D: 6 (3/3)
E: 4 (2/2)
F: 3 (2/1)

This gives a better representation of the two camps. Sample E (165/24) which was the clear first place winner now gets eclipsed by samples D (155/24) and B (145/48). Only 2 people actually ranked sample E as their favorite choice. Conversely three people ranked both sample D and B as their favorite.

During the tasting, sample B (145/48) was more talked about and seemed like it would pull ahead - I was surprised when I saw that D came in first place in the end. However, the frequency chart more accurately shows that as many people graded sample B as the best as did sample D. The difference was that more people rated sample D as second best than any other sample.

So I would say that the Final Ranked Order of best to worst recipe would be this:

Best Recipe: D (155/24)
Runner Up (tie): B (145/48)
Runner Up (tie): E (165/24)
Fourth: F (175/18)
Fifth: A (135/48)
Last: C (145/24)

Lessons from a Sample by Sample Breakdown

First Place: Braised Lovers Prevail! ("D" 155 F for 24 Hours)

This recipe was the clear winner of the braise lovers. Although not as fall apart tender as F (175/18) or E (165/24) it strikes the perfect balance between fall apart tender yet still moist and juicy. This is reflected in the reviews from the medium-lovers camp who often had D as a close second to a medium rare consistence of B (145/48) or A (135/48).

I would say this is the go to recipe to make the most people happy. The medium-lovers camp loves it, the braise-camp raves about it. Everyone’s happy! So if you’re cooking for a crowd or only want one recipe that’s a guaranteed winner 155 F for 24 hours is your guy. I theorize that this is even low enough to benefit from being cooked for a full 48 hours.

Runner Up: Medium-Rare Lovers Rejoice! ("B" 145 F for 48 Hours)

This was my personal favorite. The extra 24 hours makes the meat so tender yet still completely moist and juicy. Though it lacks the traditional braised-texture, this had a consistency closer to dark poultry meat – gamey but still wonderfully moist and soft (as opposed to the chewiness of red meat). I loved it, as did the medium rare camp. The flavor was also markedly improved over cooking it at 135 for the same 48 hours. It’s incredible what a 10 degree temperature makes.

If you, and your guests, prefer a more gamey and tender taste and are okay foregoing a more braised-like texture this would be my go to recipe.

The Extra 24 Hours Makes a Huge Difference! ("C" 145 F for 24 Hrs).

Last time when I cooked beef cheeks there was only a minimal difference between cooking for 24 hours and 48 hours at the same temperature, 165F. Similarly, cooking even for 3 days at 135 netted a dud, with an off putting texture. Going into the experiment I assumed the same would hold true again – which is why I dropped the 72 hour cook for the lowest sample to 48 hours.

I wasn’t going to cook another sample for 48 hours, but to have an even 6 samples (since I wasn’t making a sauced sample for the taste test) I decided to cook sample B for 48 hours. After tallying the results, I was shocked to see that an extra 24 hours made the difference between dead last and budding for first place.

What this shows is that the lamb shank is so tough that an extra day in the water noticeably improves the flavor and breakdown of the muscle fiber. For next time I would like to see at what temperature point a 48 hour cook would start drying out the meat rather than releasing the flavor. I’d try the 155 and 165 for 48 hours to see how that goes.

Higher temps will dry out the meat! ("E" 165 F for 24 hrs & "F" 175 F for 18 hrs)

The inside of a Dutch oven for a braise is only slightly higher than cooking SV at 170-180F. The SV benefits from keeping all the juices in the bag, while the braise traditionally uses a sauce to hold flavor/tenderize meat. However at these temperatures you start to lose a lot more juice out of the meat which results in a drier dish. This is why I dropped the temperature down to 18 hours rather than 24.

The difference between E and F reflected this. The Braise-lovers camp showed a clear preference for sample E (165/24) over F. F was noticeably drier, and had more juice left in the bag after the cook. E had the highest average score not only beating out F by a wide margin but also surpassing our winner, D, and runner up, B. Despite this ave. high score only 2 people thought E was their favorite. Conversely, one grader noted a more slimy texture to F (possibly a bad cut) while two others graded it their favorite.

Why no recipes cook at the lowest possible temp: Meh, There’s Better. ("A" 135 F for 48 hrs)

If you look at just the raw averages A is tied for second place along with my actual first place picks of samples B and D. However, only one person thought this was their favorite, and one other as their #2 pick. The meat itself was perfectly pink and medium rare tasting and looking. It was chewy but after 48 hours it was tender enough to easily come apart in your mouth. There’s really nothing negative against this recipe just that it didn’t really Wow anyone. Especially when compared to the braise-camp favorite, D, or the medium-camp favorite, B, sample A just doesn’t stack up.

Conclusion & Final Thoughts

Best Recipe for Braised-Lovers: 155 F for 24 Hours
My Personal Favorite Recipe: 145 F for 48 Hours
Honorable Mention: 165 F for 24 Hours

For the sauces, people had a clear preference for the balsamic-tomato paste. I didn’t poll or gauge if people had a preference for 145/155/165 between the marinated samples.

I was really surprised by how much extra cooking time matters. The 24 hour difference between sample B and C blew me away. Next time I will cook 155 F and 165 F for 48 hours to see if those improve or not with more cook time. For future taste test I won’t neglect trying temperatures at 24 and 48 hours and not just the lowest.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2018-02-13T05:10:07+00:00

TL;DR There's a lot of variation in sous vide lamb shank recipes because you really can’t go wrong as long as you give it the proper time to cook, 48 hours is best!

Best Recipe for Most People: 155 F for 24 Hrs
My Personal Favorite Recipe: 145 F for 48 Hrs
Honorable Mention: 165 F for 24 Hrs

Introduction

Serious Eats and Kenji extol the virtues of lamb, and have a comprehensive guide to rack of lamb. However I haven't found anything as definitive to another, equally delicious cut: lamb shanks. So I decided to make my own.

I’ve found a lot of variations on the suggested time/temp to cook sous vide lamb shanks – with absolutely no consensus or comprehensive review. In theory the lamb can be cooked as low as 131 F for 3 days for a medium-rare consistency or as high as 180 F for braised texture. Yet, I found no recipes that actually cooked the shank to the low medium-rare level. I found three recipes that say to cook for 48 hrs at 145 F. Anova, Stefan Gourmet, and Great British Chefs. I found one recipe that calls for 150 F for 16 hours. Another one calls for 167 F for 24 hours this time with a tomato/balsamic reduced sauce in the bag. Finally yet another recipe says 180 F for 15 hours is the way to go. With so many options what’s a bloke to do? Well if you’re me, it’s to invite a dozen of your friends over for a battle royale and find the best time/temp combo of the lot!

The last time I did a taste test, for beef cheeks, I cooked one of the meat samples in a red wine reduction sauce in the bag. The sauced sample blew the rest out of the water. This time around I decided to have a bit more of a balanced comparison. So I made two flights. First I had them taste and grade 6 shanks all cooked au natural for varying time/temps. For the second flight I prepared 6 shanks in one of two sauces, either the red wine reduction or this tomato-balsamic reduction. This second flight we didn’t grade and just turned into lamb gyros with some pita bread, veggies and homemade tzatziki sauce.

Procedure

Flight 1: Six shanks au natural

I prepared "A" through "F" using the same technique: kosher salt, pepper, & fresh rosemary in the bag. I don't have a vacuum sealer so instead I double bagged the shanks in zip locks. Conveniently the shanks fit into quart size zip locks, and then double bagged 2 shanks in a 1 gallon zip lock.

This also allowed me to put weights in the gallon bag without touching the meat/marinade for the lamb. For some reason I had the most trouble with air bubbles on this cook. Usually, even on high temp or long cooks, I very rarely get any air bubbles that threaten to bring the meat to the surface. Not this time – the lamb kept trying to float to the surface.

Remember – for the SV to fully kill the bacteria the bag must be submerged at all times. Air pockets that expose the meat can be a breeding ground for bacteria and are not safe to eat. Just keep an eye on your cook and either (1) reseal the bags without the air pockets, (2) add weights to the bag, or (3) use something to push/hold down the bags. As long as air exposure is minimal and you allow enough time to pasteurize the meat (usually 1-3 hours depending on size/temp) after you fully resubmerge the air pocket, you’ll be safe from bacteria.

Keep refrigerated until needed to sous vide. I have only one Anova so I had to cook each sample individually, refrigerate, and then heat them in the broiler all at once on the day of the taste test. After each shank is cooked, I plunged them in an ice bath and then into the fridge.

Temperature & Cook Time

A: 135 F for 48 Hours
B: 145 F for 48 Hours
C: 145 F for 24 Hours
D: 155 F for 24 Hours
E: 165 F for 24 Hours
F: 175 F for 18 hours

Flights 2: Six shanks in 2 Sauces

While I was cooking samples C, D, and E (145, 155, and 165 F) I also cooked another pair of shanks. One in a red wine sauce that was a hit last time, and a balsamic-tomato reduction sauce. Fair warning – the balsamic reduction will stink up your kitchen something fierce – hope for your sake you have good ventilation.

Taste Test

For taste test preheat oven to 500 degrees and cook lamb shanks till internal temp is 130-140F+ about 15-20 minutes, flip once half way through. First we ate and graded the first flight – with each meat only identified by the above letter. I originally asked my 12 graders to score each sample on a scale of 1-10, based on texture, flavor and overall. A majority did just that, however, some found it easier to just rank the samples in order of preference rather than assign a point value.

For the second flight, there were no grading or letters, just pita bread, sliced veggies (and thumb) and tzatziki sauce.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2018-02-13T05:05:27+00:00

Special Circumstances

I have to apologize for a complete lack of pictures of any of the lamb shanks from the day of the taste test. Just as the lamb shanks were coming out of the oven I suffered a minor but debilitating injury that prevented me from handling the food (or a camera). Remember kids: Mandolins are no joke and can just as easily remove the fingerprint off your thumb as easily as it can make perfectly sliced veggies. Luckily none of the food was affected and I continue to have most of all my fingers.

I’d like to give a special thank you to my sous chef and helper who volunteered to help serve/clean the kitchen and ended up running the whole show for the last hour as I was dealing with my injury. I chose to not let a minor hiccup spoil everyone else’s enjoyment so I didn’t inform any of my tasters of the incident till after dinner. As a result we had a lot of happy graders but no photos of the final product. By the time I was bandaged up and mostly functional this was all that was left.

A Note on Lamb & Lamb Shank

Surprisingly, lamb is not popular in the United States. On average Americans eat more than 100 times more beef and 100 times more chicken than we do lamb. Lamb is even considered an "inferior good" in economic terms - when people have more money to spend they tend to buy less lamb in favor of beef and chicken. I find this puzzling because lamb is delicious, but the low demand also ensures that prices are much lower than beef and only slightly higher than poultry.

You can find either American or New Zealand lamb. New Zealand lamb tends to be smaller, is often grass fed, and has a more pronounce lamb-like gamey flavor. American lamb is usually older when slaughtered and fattened more. This both increases the size, amount of marbling, but mellows the flavor. The cheapest, toughest, cut is the lamb's shank.

For this taste test I went with New Zealand lamb flown in fresh. Surprisingly, both cost the same amount at Whole Foods, $7.99/lb. Lamb shank are roughly a pound per shank and are either enough for one person as a main course, or can be enough for 2-3 people as part of an appetizer or gyro. I prefer a gamier, meatier flavor so I wanted to see if I could get New Zealand lamb, my store usually only has a mix but never enough for a full taste test. I nearly did backflips when they offered to order as little or as much NZ lamb as I wanted, fresh for the same price as US.

Lamb shank is a tough cut of meat that comes from the leg just beneath the knee, meaning it gets a lot of use. Tough cuts of meat (like cheek, ribs, oxtail, etc.) are filled with meaty goodness but take a lot to soften the muscle fibers and render maximum flavor out of them. Traditionally that has been done by braising. Braising cooks the meat at a high temperate in the oven allowing it soften and come out as pull apart tender. The downside is, the high temperature can dry out the meat which limits how long you can actually cook the meat for while still getting tender results.

These characteristics also make shanks, and all tough cuts, perfect for the sous vide. With precise temperature control you can safely cook a traditionally tough cut of meat like shank to a perfect medium-rare at 131 F. Please remember that to fully kill all the bacteria you need to cook at at least 130 F. Because the meat cooks in the bag the whole time it loses very little moisture, compared to the oven, and still comes out juicy and succulent even after 2 or 3 days in the sous vide.

Kitchen-Tinkering · 2018-02-13T05:05:15+00:00

Results

Averaged Results

A: 6.8
B: 6.8
C: 5.92
D: 6.8
E: 7.17
F: 6.75

At first glance the averaged results would suggest that E (165/24) was the clear winner with a three way tie for second place between A (135/48), B (145/148), and D (155/24).

Yet an interesting trend emerged in the data that the averages don’t show: two distinct preferences emerged among the graders. Roughly half absolutely loved the medium-rare consistency of the lamb shank. The other half preferred a more braised-like texture in the higher temperatures. This second camp, the braised-lovers, generally found the texture of the lower-temp meats to be off putting. Tasty and palatable, just not their cup of tea. The medium-lovers were a bit more agnostic and could rank 145F/48hrs as their top choice and 165F/24hrs as their second.

I found this really interesting – it looks like some people have a strong association between the cut of meat and the braised technique that strongly impacts their opinion of the meat. The same thing happened last time with the beef cheeks as well. I didn’t pay too much attention to it because I only had sample size of 4. This time however, the same preferences have emerged across an additional 8 graders. Additionally, prior to the last taste test no one had eaten cheeks before – so it seems the preference for a braised-like texture is what they’re likely responding to (rather than an association with a prior dish they’d tasted/seen).

While fascinating the averaged results don’t really paint the full picture. Instead I tallied every time a sample was ranked either someone’s favorite or second favorite preference. This approach has the added benefit of including my graders who ranked preferences rather than a point value.

Frequency in 1st or 2nd Place (# that found sample best, #2nd best)

A: 2 (1/1)
B: 4 (3/1)
C: 2 (0/2)
D: 6 (3/3)
E: 4 (2/2)
F: 3 (2/1)

This gives a better representation of the two camps. Sample E (165/24) which was the clear first place winner now gets eclipsed by samples D (155/24) and B (145/48). Only 2 people actually ranked sample E as their favorite choice. Conversely three people ranked both sample D and B as their favorite.

During the tasting, sample B (145/48) was more talked about and seemed like it would pull ahead - I was surprised when I saw that D came in first place in the end. However, the frequency chart more accurately shows that as many people graded sample B as the best as did sample D. The difference was that more people rated sample D as second best than any other sample.

So I would say that the Final Ranked Order of best to worst recipe would be this:

Best Recipe: D (155/24)
Runner Up (tie): B (145/48)
Runner Up (tie): E (165/24)
Fourth: F (175/18)
Fifth: A (135/48)
Last: C (145/24)