I tried it, tonight. I did a stove-top boneless pork chop. Came out
nice, but I coulda done the exact same thing in a skillet in 8 mins.

I'm thinking this might not be quite the thing for yer everyday home
cook. I can see restos doing a lotta sous vide, as it's a great way
to hold/prep a lotta protein w/o it going bad. For the home cook, not
so much.

The only advantage I can see, for me, is really long cook times at
very low temps to make really cheap pieces of beef specially tender.
I can't do that until I get some sorta auto heater/circulator that will
remain constant for 10-20 hrs, as stove top sous vide requires waaaay
too much attention for that sorta set-up. The stove-top pork chop
only took a little over 1 hr, so not too bad. 10-20 hrs is a whole
'nuther ballgame.

I'm wondering if sous vide is any more convenient, for me, than a
pressure cooker. I can do boef Bourguignon in under 1 hr in my pressure
cooker and it's tender as I want it to be.

nb

On Monday, October 5, 2015 at 9:57:37 PM UTC-4, notbob wrote:
>
> I'm wondering if sous vide is any more convenient, for me, than a
> pressure cooker. I can do boef Bourguignon in under 1 hr in my pressure
> cooker and it's tender as I want it to be.
>
> nb

Beef Bourguignon in the oven is also as tender as can be. Most of the time is spent in prep. However, point taken. I'm also not sure sous vide is useful for the home cook. (But I've never tried it.)

http://www.richardfisher.com

On 6 Oct 2015 01:57:33 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>I tried it, tonight. I did a stove-top boneless pork chop. Came out
>nice, but I coulda done the exact same thing in a skillet in 8 mins.
>
>I'm thinking this might not be quite the thing for yer everyday home
>cook. I can see restos doing a lotta sous vide, as it's a great way
>to hold/prep a lotta protein w/o it going bad. For the home cook, not
>so much.
>
>The only advantage I can see, for me, is really long cook times at
>very low temps to make really cheap pieces of beef specially tender.
>I can't do that until I get some sorta auto heater/circulator that will
>remain constant for 10-20 hrs, as stove top sous vide requires waaaay
>too much attention for that sorta set-up. The stove-top pork chop
>only took a little over 1 hr, so not too bad. 10-20 hrs is a whole
>'nuther ballgame.
>
>I'm wondering if sous vide is any more convenient, for me, than a
>pressure cooker. I can do boef Bourguignon in under 1 hr in my pressure
>cooker and it's tender as I want it to be.
>
>nb

Sous vide is NOT a great way to cook for most people. And you are
correct. Like with smoking meats, it's results of tenderizing tougher
cuts of meat is sous vide's one main advantage but sous vide adds no
good flavors like smoking can. It's a fad, a newest latest and
greatest thing. Bastes your ego more than anything.

John Kuthe...