KitchenSavvy

Roll of the Dice

What is the difference between a brunoise and a mirepoix?

--Sylvia

Both brunoise (pronounced "broon-WAHZ") and mirepoix (pronounced "meer-PWAH") are preparations of vegetables used in cooking. 

A mirepoix is a dice or rough chop of carrots, onions and celery used as a flavor base in cooking.  The dice is usually around 1/4 inch (6 mm) to a side, although it may be larger, for example when used as a base on which meat is roasted.  In that case, it may be as large as an inch (25 mm), or larger, in order to keep the meat well above the drippings that come out during roasting.  According to Larousse Gastronomique mirepoix was invented by the cook of the Duc de Lévis-Mirepoix.  When used for cooking meats, the mirepoix may also contain ham or bacon, both of which will add flavor to the dish.

A brunoise, on the other hand, is any vegetable cut to a fine dice, around 1/8 inch (3mm).  Brunoise can be made from the same ingredients as a mirepoix, or it may include other vegetables, such as turnip, parsnip, bell peppers or zucchini. 

Both mirepoix and brunoise are used to add flavor to braises.  Mirepoix is also typical as an ingredient in the preparation of stocks where the fine dice of a brunoise is unnecessary, and either can be used as a garnish.  They may also both be used as an ingredient for stuffings, where they are frequently sautéed beforehand.

Because of the similarity in applications the two are frequently confused, but the differences are in the size of dice, brunoise being a finer dice, and ingredients since a mirepoix is limited to the three vegetable mentioned.

A mirepoix is essentially the same as a soffritto in Italian cooking, or if you replace the carrots with diced bell peppers, you have the holy trinity used in cajun and creole cooking.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Beef en Daube

On a recent trip to Victoria, British Columbia, Pat and I visited the home of some friends -- old friends for her, new friends for me.

As probably is happening among foodies all over nowadays, conversation turned to the movie Julie & Julia which had just come out and, with that, discussion of the supposedly challenging and difficult Boeuf Bourguignon recipe from Mastering the Art of French Cooking by Julia Child. 

Personally, I don't see what is so daunting about the recipe.  Still, I make a similar dish called Beef en Daube, which is somewhat simpler.  "Daube" refers to the earthenware pot in which the dish is traditionally cooked.  A good crockpot makes a modern substitute. While Beef en Daube is easier to make than Boeuf Bourguignon, you still need to count on a long slow cook to get tender meat and good flavor.

Here is the recipe:

4	oz	Bacon, cut into 1/4 inch strips
3	lbs	Stewing beef cut into 1 ½ inch cubes
1	large	Onion, peeled and cut in half crosswise
4		Cloves
1		Carrot, peeled and cut into 4 pieces
1	bottle	Sturdy red wine (Côtes du Rhône, Beaujoulais, Bordeaux)
3	cloves	Garlic, peeled and smashed
2	whole	Bay leaves
1/8	tsp	Dried thyme (optional)
10	fl oz	Condensed canned beef broth, preferably low salt, undiluted
2	tbsp	Tomato paste
20		Pearl onions, peeled (optional)
10		Button mushrooms, cleaned, stems cut off and quartered (optional)
3	tbsp	Butter, room temperature
5	tbsp	All-purpose flour
		Salt and pepper to taste

Method 1

1. Fry the bacon until crisp and then drain off the fat.
2. Stick the pointed ends of the cloves into the outside of the onion halves.  This makes them easier to remove later.
3. Put the bacon and all of the other ingredients, except the pearl onions, mushrooms, butter and flour, into the crockpot.  Following the manufacturers directions, cook for 4 to 6 hours, until the meat is tender.  If your crockpot has a heat adjustment, use the lowest heat that will keep the liquid at a very low boil.
4. A half hour before the dish is cooked, remove the large onion halves, bay leaves and the pieces of carrot using a slotted spoon.
5. Add the pearl onions and mushrooms.
6. In a bowl, mix together the butter and flour to make a paste.
7. Use your fingers, crumble about half of the butter and flour mixture into the liquid and stir.  Cover and allow to return to a boil to thicken the gravy.  If necessary, add more of the mixture and repeat until the gravy is the desired thickness.
8. Skim off the surface fat and serve hot, accompanied with mashed potatoes.

I like to use smoked bacon slices, since they add an interesting flavor.  If you prefer to not have the smokiness, use fatback or pancetta.  If it is salty, simmer in hot water for 10 minutes to remove the salt before proceeding.

If you don't have a crockpot, use a casserole and cook covered in a 325°F (165°C) oven.

While the above recipe will make an adequate Beef en Daube, you may find the flavor a little one dimensional.  In cooking, you can add depths of flavor by a number of different techniques.  To make a more flavorful Beef en Daube, try the following:

Method 2

1. Fry the bacon until crisp.  Remove the bacon from the fat and set aside.
2. Working in batches if necessary, brown the meat on all sides in the hot bacon fat.  Place on a plate covered with two layers of paper towel to remove some of the excess fat.
3. Stick the pointed ends of the cloves into the outside of the onion halves.  This makes them easier to remove later.  Brown the cut surfaces of the onion halves in the bacon fat.  Drain on paper towel with the meat.
4. Put all of the ingredients, except the pearl onions, mushrooms, butter and flour, into the crockpot.  Following the manufacturers directions, cook for 4 to 6 hours, until the meat is tender.  If your crockpot has a heat adjustment, use the lowest heat that will keep the liquid at a very low boil.
5. About a half hour before the dish is done, remove the large onion halves, bay leaves and the pieces of carrot using a slotted spoon.
6. Saute the pearl onions and mushrooms in a little olive oil over medium high heat until browned.  Add to the crockpot and cook 30 minutes longer.
7. In a bowl, mix together the butter and flour to make a paste.
8. Using your fingers, crumble about half of the butter and flour mixture into the liquid and stir.  Cover and allow to return to a boil to thicken the gravy.  If necessary, add more of the mixture and repeat until the gravy is the desired thickness.
9. Skim off the surface fat and serve hot, accompanied with mashed potatoes.

The few extra step of browning the meat, onions and mushrooms will pay off in making a much tastier dish.

The butter and flour mixture is referred to as a beurre manié, or kneaded butter. The butter helps to keep the flour from clumping, and adds richness to the dish.  If you prefer not to use butter, you can make a slurry of the flour with 1/4 of water and use that to thicken the liquid.  As with the recipe above, use about half and see how thick the gravy gets before adding more.

Beef en Daube can be made a day or two ahead and reheated gently before serving.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Ounces Weight vs Fluid Ounces Volume

Isn't it true that an 16 oz of dry goods is different that 16 oz of liquid measure.  If a recipe calls for 8oz of flour, you should measure it using a scale rather than using a cup (which is a liquid measure, no matter what kind of cup you use).  I'm confused.

--SM

The confusion comes from the fact that in English we use the word "ounce" when talking about both the weight of something or the volume  it occupies.  In cooking, if you are talking about the volume of something, technically you should refer to the measure as "fluid ounces" and if  you are weighing something then you can say just "ounces."

Ingredients such as beans, sugar or flour can be conveniently measured by volume in cups, pints, quarts, liters and all of the other units that are used to calculate volume, including fluid ounces.  They can also be weighed in pounds, kilograms and ounces.

Depending on what ingredient you are measuring, the weight in ounces and the volume in fluid ounces may be close to the same or vastly different.  Sixteen fluid ounces of water weigh very close to 16 ounces (1 pound)^*.

Sixteen fluid ounces (2 cups) of flour will weigh around 8 ounces (1/2 pound) if it is sifted, and somewhat more, around 9 ounces, if it is unsifted.  This is just a rough estimate, though.

So, if your recipe calls for "fluid ounces" then you are definitely using a volume measuring device, such as a liquid or dry measure.  See the post Difference Between Dry and Liquid Measuring Cups for guidance on which to use and how.

If the recipe just says "ounces", for some ingredients you may be able to assume that the author means to measure by weight.  For ingredients like flour, though, the author may mean either weight or volume so you need to be careful to understand which is being used.  In books on baking there is frequently a section near the start on techniques where sometimes they may clarify which measure they are using.

As a further note, fluid ounces may be abbreviated in recipes as "fl. oz." and ounces as just "oz."

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

^* The scientist in me wants to say that is true provided that the water is close to room temperature and the ambient air pressure is close to standard pressure at sea level, but for most practical purposes you can consider them to be equivalent.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Baking Soda and Baking Powder - The Saga Continues

What on earth!   Here is my internet journey, seeking the answer to "Baking soda vs. baking powder."

1. Baking powder can replace baking soda
2. Baking powder cant replace baking soda
3. Baking powder can't replace baking soda and vice versa.

Here are some excerpts:

• "You can substitute baking powder in place of baking soda (you'll need more baking powder and it may affect the taste), but you can't use baking soda when a recipe calls for baking powder." http://chemistry.about.com/cs/foodchemistry/f/blbaking.htm /li>
• "In recipes calling for baking powder, baking soda can be used, along with some cornstarch and cream of tartar. Baking powder cannot, however, be used to replace baking soda." http://kitchensavvy.typepad.com/journal/2005/01/baking_soda_vs_.html
• "While you can't swap baking soda for baking powder, or vice versa ..." http://www.asianonlinerecipes.com/food_articles/baking-soda-baking-powder.php

So which one is it?

If baking is all about accuracy, then why is it that I constantly find conflicting information, all from experts?  How does anything ever get baked and turn out edible, if everyone has so many different opinions?

I am starting to believe that bakers are actually other-worldly beings that are unknowingly just manipulating ingredients with their minds.

--Curtis

OK, before you go reporting a Close Encounter, let's see if we can set this straight.

First, just a touch of chemistry.  Baking soda or bicarbonate of soda (NaHCO₃) is a mild base that has a number of applications in baking.  Among those are to cause chemical leavening by releasing bubbles of carbon dioxide gas when combined with an acid, and changing level of acidity or basicity of a recipe.

The acidity/basicity can be important in a number of ways.  For example, cookies that are slightly basic will spread more and brown more than ones that are slightly acidic.  If you are making a chocolate cake that is too acidic, it will turn the chocolate color from dark brown to light brown to red.  That's part of the secret to a Red velvet cake.

Baking powder is baking soda with an acid added to cause the chemical leavening.  The type of acid varies with different formulations and applications, as can be found in the KitchenSavvy article mentioned above.

As discussed in Let Them Eat Cake, as well as the above KitchenSavvy article, when recipes use both baking soda and baking powder, there is usually another acidic ingredient such as molasses, brown sugar, buttermilk or sour cream that combines with the baking soda to create bubbles.

So, which of the above is it? 

Since baking powder contains baking soda, you can indeed use it to replace baking soda.  The problems is that the leftover acid that is not neutralized in your recipe will affect the flavor and may also affect the result.  A cookie that is supposed to spread during cooking likely won't, and it may not brown properly, or may end up over cooked if you try to brown it enough.  Also, the final color of the product may not be what you expect since the product is acidic.  So, point 1 above is technically correct, as far as it goes, but you may not like the result. 

If you insist on trying, though, you will need up to four times as much baking powder as the amount of baking soda that was called for in the recipe.   Just don't say I told you it was a good idea!

Point 2 is correct, since what you are actually doing when you combine baking soda with cream of tartar is making your own homemade baking powder.  What you are really doing is substituting baking powder that someone mixed up for you with baking powder you made yourself.  The cornstarch is just filler to make up 1/4 more so the total volume works out the same but isn't really necessary.

And point 3 is correct, since you can't just swap them one for one.  As the referenced site goes on to explain, if you don't have baking powder you can make your own homemade stuff by using 1/4 the volume of baking powder specified of baking soda plus 1/2 the volume of cream of tartar.  Since you need to include the cream of tartar, you are really not just substituting one for the other.

The postings referenced in points 2 and 3 pretty much agree in what they say.  The problem with the first reference is it ignores the other aspects of food chemistry that come into play when you start altering the acid/base ratios in recipes.

Hopefully, all of this helps.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Can I Use Olive Oil to Marinate Beef

I have a family favorite flank steak marinade that uses vegetable oil.  Can I substitute olive oil (health reasons) and get the same taste and marinade?  I am worried that when the meat is marinaded over night in the refrigerator that the olive oil will harden.  Thank you for your assistance.

--Sandy

The reason for using fat of any sort in a marinade is because many flavor compounds dissolve in fat, but very little or not at all in water.  The oil carries those flavor compounds onto the surface of the meat.

Very little oil is actually needed to accomplish this.  Only enough to lightly coat the meat.  For a typical marinade, a few tablespoons of oil per cup of other liquids should be enough.  The exception, of course, being pastes that are made of herbs puréed in an oil base, like pesto.

Contrary to popular belief, the oil does not help to tenderize the meat.  Marinades only penetrate the outer 1/8" (3 mm) or so and therefore can not affect the interior.  Since the meat is made up largely of muscle fibers which are saturated with water, it is almost impossible for the oil in particular to penetrate even that far.

So, to answer your question, olive oil will be perfectly fine, as it doesn't have to stay liquid to do its job.  In fact, I use olive oil for marinades all of the time.

In order to be sure that the oil soluble flavor compounds are carried to the meat, finely chop any fresh herbs that you use, and mince or press garlic.  Combine the herbs, spices and other flavoring ingredients like garlic with the oil before adding the other liquids.  Also, I am a fan of putting the meat and marinade into a resealable plastic bag, since this allows you to redistribute the marinade by "massaging" the meat through the bag.  This helps distribute the oil, and therefore the flavors, over the surface of the meat.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Beating Egg Whites - How Cream of Tartar Helps

While you mentioned that cream of tartar, in a properly sealed container, can be kept indefinitely, I used mine last evening and the beaten egg whites did not turn out to be stiff as described in the recipe.  I suspect the culprit is my cream of tartar being too old, even though it was kept in a tightly sealed container.

-- Lucy

Cream of tartar does not affect the stiffness to which egg whites can be beat nearly as much as it helps stop beaten egg whites from collapsing. 

When you beat egg whites, proteins in the whites unfold from their natural shape and become tangled with each other.  At the same time, you are beating air into the whites, forming small bubbles.  The protein molecules become attached to each other through chemical and electrical bonds that reinforce the skin of the air bubbles.  Over time, these bonds can pull the proteins closer together, forcing out the water trapped in the surface of the bubbles.  Eventually, the proteins pull themselves together so strongly that compact, grainy protein lumps form and the liquid pools in the bottom of the bowl.

This is where the cream of tartar comes in.  It helps prevent the formation of chemical bonds between protein molecules.

To understand this, first a little chemistry.  Protein molecules have, along their length, sulfur atoms that in turn may have a hydrogen atom attached.  If the sulfur atoms release their attached hydrogen into the surrounding liquid, then they can attach to something else.  Sometimes, that something else is a sulfur atom on another protein molecule.   If too many sulfur - sulfur bonds occur, the proteins pull together too strongly and the foam collapses, as above.

Because it is acidic, the cream of tartar increases the number of free hydrogen atoms in the liquid.  These extra hydrogen atoms either stop the sulfur atoms from releasing their attached hydrogen, or else provide another hydrogen atom to quickly take its place.  Because of this, the rate at which sulfur - sulfur bonds can be created is slowed down enough to help keep the egg whites stiff long enough to be used.

Any acid can be used for this purpose, although cream of tartar and lemon juice are the most common.  The amounts needed are 1/8 teaspoon per egg white for cream of tartar and 1/4 teaspoon per egg white for lemon juice.

If you are having trouble beating egg whites to stiff peaks, there may be one of three causes.  If you got any of the yolk from the eggs into the whites while separating them, this can lessen the ability of the eggs to form stiff peaks, as can contamination from oil, fat or detergent on the utensils.  You should never use a plastic bowl to beat egg whites, since fat molecules are attracted to some plastics and may leave a film on the inside of the bowl.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com

Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Adjusting Baking Powder in Pumpkin Muffins

I am making low cal pumpkin muffins using a box of spice cake mix combined with a can of pumpkin. Can I add a little baking powder to make them rise up and be a little bigger?

--Judy

You can certainly try adding more baking powder, but there are a few things you might want to consider before you try that. 

First, you don't say whether you are making the cake mix according to the instructions on the box, or modifying it in any way.  According to the USDA nutritional analysis for canned pumpkin, one cup of pumpkin contains around 7.5 fluid ounces of water.  By weight, canned pumpkin is over 91% water.  If you are using canned pumpkin pie mix, things are slightly better.  A cup of that contains only 6.5 fluid ounces of water.  That is still 71.5% water by weight, though.

For cakes or muffins, if the batter is too thin, then the bubbles released by the baking powder, or other leavening, may rise to the surface and escape before the batter starts to set and is able to trap the bubbles.  If you are not compensating for the water in the canned pumpkin, that may make your batter too thin.  Since the water is trapped inside the pumpkin, the batter may look good going into the oven, but still be too wet.

To remove some of the excess water from canned pumpkin, the folks at America's Test Kitchen line a rimmed baking sheet with a few layers of paper towel, spread the pumpkin evenly over that and then cover with another layer of towel.  Pat lightly to press the top layer of paper towel into contact with the pumpkin.  Peel off the top layer of paper towel and then roll the pumpkin off the bottom paper towel as if you were making a jelly roll.  This technique will remove over a quarter cup, or about 1/3 of the water.

You could also correct  the cake recipe by reducing the other liquids used.

On the other hand, if the batter is too thick, then it is more difficult for the leavener to work, so if you are only using the mix and canned pumpkin, you may need to add a bit more liquid.  Either way, you will likely need to experiment a bit to get the desired result.

So, back to the original question, yes, you can try adding more baking powder, too.  Start with maybe 1/2 teaspoon or so, and see what happens.  Too much baking pwder, though can cause your muffins to rise too quickly, resulting in them splitting open or collapsing.  If that happens, reduce the amount of added baking powder and try again.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

How to Tell if Eggs are Fresh

I have a carton of eggs without a best-before date on it.  I think I have had the eggs for about two or three weeks.  Is there any way to tell if they are fresh?

--Lin

There are two ways to tell how fresh your eggs are, but you need to remember that these are rough guidelines and that they don't necessarily tell you if the eggs are safe to eat.

The first method is to fill a container with cold water.  If your egg is fairly fresh, it will sink to the bottom of the bowl and lay on its side, maybe tilted a little toward the rounder end up.  As the egg gets older, it loses moisture and the air sac inside the rounder end enlarges.  A somewhat older egg may still sink to the bottom of the bowl, but will rest on the pointy end.  If the egg floats with the round end slightly above water, then it is old and should be discarded.

The container needs to be deep enough that you can clearly see if the egg is submerged, touching the bottom, or floating.  A four cup (one liter) glass measuring cup is ideal for this test.

If you were planning to crack the egg anyway, you can also tell the freshness by emptying the egg onto a flat dish, such as a side plate.  If the egg is completely fresh, the white will stay together and mound up noticeably around the yolk so that it clearly can be seen to have two levels.  The yolk will be rounded and well domed.  As the egg get older, the white becomes more runny, spreads more on the plate and doesn't rise around the yolk.  The yolk also becomes flatter.  If the white is watery and shows little or no rise in level around the yolk, then the egg is quite old.

As I said above though, these are tests only of the age of an egg and don't tell you about the safety.  Improperly stored eggs can be contaminated and still pass these tests.  For safety, always try to be sure and buy eggs in a carton with a clear date, keep them in the carton, and don't move eggs from one partly used carton into another.  Always use eggs before the best-before date.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com



Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

How Long will Leftover Turkey Keep in the Fridge?

We roasted a fresh turkey un-stuffed on Thanksgiving and the left-over pieces have been stored in the refrigerator in it's own container.  How long is too long to safely consume the left-over turkey?  Thank you.

--Betty

In our house, most of the leftover turkey is consumed for late night snacks or lunch the next day as Turkey Buns.  In fact, I have been known to say the only reason to roast a turkey for supper is to have leftovers for turkey buns.  Still, there is always some leftover for turkey with gravy, tetrazzini or some other dish.

The general rule for meat is that it will safely keep for about three days, provided that:

• the meat was thoroughly cooked;
• it was not left in the "danger zone" temperatures of between 140°F (60°C) and 40°F (4°C) for more than two hours; and
• the refrigerator is kept below 40°F (4°C).

If any of the above is not done, then the storage time will be reduced, and the risk of food-borne illness greatly increased.

For turkey and chicken, the meat must be cooked to at least 165°F (74°C) throughout, although you likely want to cook the dark meat to closer to 180°F (82°C) for the best results.  If the turkey had been stuffed, then the stuffing should be completely removed from the bird and refrigerated separately.  Because of the extra moisture in stuffing, it will only keep for one or at most two days.    See the posting "Dis-dressed Turkey" for more about stuffing safety.

As much as possible, the meat should be stored in large pieces.  Most food safety experts recommend taking all of the meat off of the bones before refrigerating.  The carcass can be discarded or used to make stock or soup.

Reheat the leftover turkey to at least 165°F (74°C), preferably in gravy, or some other sauce, before serving.

To learn more about how long food can be left out before refrigeration and the danger zone, read How Long Can Cooked Food Be Left Out.

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com
Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward

Smoke Point

I recently heard a TV chef say that she prefers a certain kind of oil because it has a high smoke point.  What is a smoke point, and why does it matter?

--Sean

The smoke point of any oil or fat is the temperature at which it begins to smoke.  This is  important because at or near the smoke point, the oil begins to also undergo chemical breakdown.  The byproducts of this breakdown can ruin the taste of the food being prepared.  Also, at this temperature there is greater risk that the fumes given off could igniting, causing a fire.

Oils with a higher smoke point will withstand higher temperatures for longer periods of time without degrading as quickly.  Chefs prefer certain oils like peanut oil for deep frying because of their high smoke point,  and neutral color and flavor.

According to The New Professional Chef, Sixth Edition from the Culinary Institute Of America the smoke points for some common oils are:

	Smoke Point
Oil or Fat	°F	°C
Butter, whole	300	150
Butter, clarified	300	150
Corn Oil	350	175
Lard	375	190
Olive Oil	375	190
Peanut Oil	440	225
Safflower Oil	510	265
Vegetable Shortening	325	165
Sunflower Oil	440	225

---

If you have food or cooking questions, send them to Questions@KitchenSavvy.com
Due to the volume of questions received, not all can be answered.
© Lost Hobbit Enterprises 2004 onward