Hiya
http://www.bradleysmoker.com/blog/smoked-prime-rib/
Why do they cut off the bones and put them back?
Thanks:)
Philip
Makes the carving easier after cooking for folks who want to slice it thinner than just between the bones. Personally I prefer just slicing between the bones for a mammoth chunk of rare beef.
Thanks!
So why the bones anyway?
Thanks
Philip
I agree with 3rensho, about having the ability to carve the slices to any thickness you like.
Why bone the meat, then tie the bones and meat back together before smoking? It's an odd way of doing it, but many (myself included) feel that the flavors from the bone enriches the flavor of cooked meat. I don't understand why they just wouldn't carve the meat off the bone after it has been cooked. It's very easy to carve prime rib off the bone.
The article is stating to have the butcher do it for you. So it may be stating that for convenience, to save you a step from carving the bone off.
Quote from: Phoenixworld on December 26, 2012, 01:12:27 AMSo why the bones anyway?
They hold the cow up off the ground.
In the case of prime rib, they also act as a natural roasting rack, assist in preventing moisture loss, and make it easier to carve.
Quote from: Habanero Smoker on December 26, 2012, 02:04:33 AM
I agree with 3rensho, about having the ability to carve the slices to any thickness you like.
Why bone the meat, then tie the bones and meat back together before smoking? It's an odd way of doing it, but many (myself included) feel that the flavors from the bone enriches the flavor of cooked meat. I don't understand why they just wouldn't carve the meat off the bone after it has been cooked. It's very easy to carve prime rib off the bone.
The article is stating to have the butcher do it for you. So it may be stating that for convenience, to save you a step from carving the bone off.
Ditto!
Ain't buying the "better flavor" argument any more (although I did for years). The guy at seriouseats.com pretty much disproved it with the following experiment...
"... four identical roasts. The first was cooked with the bone on. For the second, I removed the bone, but tied it back against the meat while cooking. For the third, I removed the bone, and tied it back to the meat with an intervening piece of impermeable heavy-duty aluminum foil. The fourth was cooked completely without the bone.
Tasted side-by-side, the first three were completely indistinguishable from each other. The fourth, on the other hand, was a little tougher in the region where the bone used to be.
What does this indicate? Well, first off, it means the flavor exchange theory is completely bunk—the completely intact piece of meat tasted exactly the same as the one with the intervening aluminum foil. But it also means that the bone does serve at least one important function: it insulates the meat, slowing its cooking, and providing less surface area to lose moisture."
Well, if "the guy at seriouseats.com" says it then it must be true. ;)
"The guy at seriouseats.com" (Kenji Lopez-Alt) is much smarter than I am (which admittedly is not too difficult) when it comes to the "science" part of cooking, especially prime rib. Since I'm too cheap to buy and cook four rib roasts at a time, I'll take his word for it on this one.
Just a little post holiday frivolity. :)
I thought you were just hung over.
For any subject you are going to find opposing points of views. I guess its what you want to read and/or believe. Cook Illustrated states leaving the bone in improves flavor and moisture, along with many other food publications. Its the marrow from the bone that creates the additional flavor, as does the marrow from bones make the best stock. Also my taste buds tell me there is a big difference also. :D
So should I really buy the natural roasting rack. :)
I hereby remove my dog from this fight.
Quote from: Ka Honu on December 26, 2012, 02:53:31 PM
I hereby remove my dog from this fight.
Ok I am lost now. When did we start discussing cooking dogs? :o
Quote from: Ka Honu on December 26, 2012, 02:53:31 PM
I hereby remove my dog from this fight.
I was just busting your chops! Just to go with my "opposing opinion" theory. :) I'm still withdrawing from bantering with relatives on Christmas Day.
No worries. The dog was arguing about the bones so I had to give him a "time out." For the record, his opinion was that I should cook the roast however I wanted, give the whole thing to him, and eat tofu or some other disgusting "human thing" that he doesn't consider food.