I am really enjoying my new, cheap pressure cooker, but I had some thoughts and questions.
I really like the way this pressure cooker cuts the time for preparing dried beans--I am truly on a dried bean kick since getting this thing--and tripe, which would otherwise take literally hours on the stove top.
I do, however, find that an overnight soak is still a good thing for dried beans. The pressure cooker will do it for beans that have not been soaked overnight at room temperature, or that have been brought to a boil not under pressure and allowed to soak for an hour. But the texture of the beans is not as good when they have not gone overnight. Sort of broken up and "exploded" or something. Is that a typical experience?
Second, it seems to me so far, and I realize this could be a matter of getting the seasoning and, say, proportions of water, right, that things cooked under pressure taste different than things cooked in an open pot on the stove top. I'm not even saying at this point that I prefer one taste over the other, but my sense is I like the flavor of open container cooking better. Seems more complex. Perhaps more intense. Is that a typical experience? Any other thoughts on that? Maybe some flavors are good to keep contained and under pressure. Forced back into the food, so to speak. While there maybe other flavors are better to boil off into the air.
I have not yet gotten used to not being able to monitor things closely as they are cooking, either. In an open (or conventionally covered) pot one has the opportunity to constantly adjust various things, such as the amount of liquid and seasonings. Not so in a pressure cooker. I tend to taste a lot as I go along and adjust anyway.
Maybe one thing to do is to limit the use of pressure cooking to only parts of the cooking process. Beginning and end, for instance. The bottom of the pressure cooker is a nice heavy pot to use for any purpose.
No question that the speed and, say, lack of stirring, is advantageous and so far, fun. This could turn out to be a limited use appliance for me, though. Seems worth it for even limited uses though. I would get higher pressure and stainless steel if I had it to do over again, though, which would be more expensive, I am guessing.
Final question, I have considered getting a slow cooker, but they seem more utilitarian than fun. Am I wrong about that? Do folks find big flavor differences from dishes prepared more conventionally--whether good, bad, or indifferent? Are there parallels with pressure cooking?
I wonder if one can put oil in a conventional pressure cooker and get a "KFC" effect? <g> Seems dicey and I do not even like KFC!!! I imagine that a cooker designed to use oil under pressure is an expensive item though, and the safety features of any modern pressure cooker are impressive.
Thanks!
I really like the way this pressure cooker cuts the time for preparing dried beans--I am truly on a dried bean kick since getting this thing--and tripe, which would otherwise take literally hours on the stove top.
I do, however, find that an overnight soak is still a good thing for dried beans. The pressure cooker will do it for beans that have not been soaked overnight at room temperature, or that have been brought to a boil not under pressure and allowed to soak for an hour. But the texture of the beans is not as good when they have not gone overnight. Sort of broken up and "exploded" or something. Is that a typical experience?
Second, it seems to me so far, and I realize this could be a matter of getting the seasoning and, say, proportions of water, right, that things cooked under pressure taste different than things cooked in an open pot on the stove top. I'm not even saying at this point that I prefer one taste over the other, but my sense is I like the flavor of open container cooking better. Seems more complex. Perhaps more intense. Is that a typical experience? Any other thoughts on that? Maybe some flavors are good to keep contained and under pressure. Forced back into the food, so to speak. While there maybe other flavors are better to boil off into the air.
I have not yet gotten used to not being able to monitor things closely as they are cooking, either. In an open (or conventionally covered) pot one has the opportunity to constantly adjust various things, such as the amount of liquid and seasonings. Not so in a pressure cooker. I tend to taste a lot as I go along and adjust anyway.
Maybe one thing to do is to limit the use of pressure cooking to only parts of the cooking process. Beginning and end, for instance. The bottom of the pressure cooker is a nice heavy pot to use for any purpose.
No question that the speed and, say, lack of stirring, is advantageous and so far, fun. This could turn out to be a limited use appliance for me, though. Seems worth it for even limited uses though. I would get higher pressure and stainless steel if I had it to do over again, though, which would be more expensive, I am guessing.
Final question, I have considered getting a slow cooker, but they seem more utilitarian than fun. Am I wrong about that? Do folks find big flavor differences from dishes prepared more conventionally--whether good, bad, or indifferent? Are there parallels with pressure cooking?
I wonder if one can put oil in a conventional pressure cooker and get a "KFC" effect? <g> Seems dicey and I do not even like KFC!!! I imagine that a cooker designed to use oil under pressure is an expensive item though, and the safety features of any modern pressure cooker are impressive.
Thanks!