You don’t know what you’re talking about.
We have a few sous viders on this board, so I’m sure somebody can chime in. I’ve tried it once, myself, with steak, but was underwhelmed. A sample of one doesn’t count though.
Miller - while I think Dio is somewhat exaggerating, there is a lot of truth to what he is saying. A good steak is one (for me) that tastes good raw. It’s nutty, buttery, minerally, and has a velvety texture. When it’s cooked to well done, many of those characteristics do disappear, or at least become very changed. I do think a prime steak cooked well tastes better and has a more pleasing texture than, say, an average select or choice grade of steak, but the differences–once again, to me–are much more striking at the lower levels of doneness. For example, I’ve tried cuts of select or supermarket standard wet-aged choice ribeye raw, and they can be almost impossible to chew through raw. (It depends, though, as you can sometimes find choice that looks very near prime and has great texture and flavor.) Cooked well, though, it’s not my style, but at least I could eat it. A dry-aged choice or a prime cut, though, tastes great and is not chewy at all in its raw state.Cooked well, which I have had off my mother’s plate, the difference between that and one of the above cuts is not that stark.
Anything above medium should be a crime.
That would be my definition of the three shades of medium. Problem is an awful lot of steak-cookers don’t use the same definitions. When I order in an unfamiliar place and am asked how it want it done, I just answer “medium rare” without even thinking about it and have gotten everything from “pretty-darn rare” to “not-quite well.” Fortunately, unlike the eternal Visigoth vs. effete debates, I’m pretty tolerant of how well it’s done and eat it anyway. When I’m at a place I frequent often enough to know their definitions, I adjust my order accordingly.
Then, I’ll do my time; at lest in prison we won’t be getting any undercooked stuff.
I really can see the point in “red”. I even understand medium, but rare has terrible texture.
There’s nothing like a no-hurry, well-done meat.
This last one is for professional cooks. If the customer wants charcoal-done or still-twitching steak, he’s paying so you give him what he wants and use the same meat no matter what; if not say so clealry on your menu: “well-done beef will be served using inferior quality meat”.
Like I said above, it’s very doubtful that you will get an “inferior” quality meat by ordering it well-done at a steak house. I would not be surprised if you got one of the lesser looking cuts of prime, but you’ll still get good meat.
My mother (and a lot of Eastern Europeans I know) is a bit of an odd one. She likes beefsteak tartare, but cannot eat a steak or burger that is not cooked well. I’ve never quite been able to understand this seemingly incongruous pair of tastes, but it’s common enough from what I’ve seen. (And, to your point, obviously the rare enthusiasts prefer the texture to the cooked one. As I said above, I like a little of both, much more of the rare than the cooked, hence my preference for medium rare.)
Nope, not me. The word “rare” always indicated to me that there was red in the middle, not pink. So “medium rare” would be “brown outside, red inside.” For the sake of comparison, my definition of “rare” is “why’d you bother putting it on the grill?”
I still need to try steak tartare.
Oooh! Cooked? Yeah, great idea! Never tried it that way before.
Oh, I see, not how WOULD you like that cooked, but HOW would you like that cooked?
Oh, lessee… With gas? Electricity? Wood stove? Oxy-acetalin torch? I’m not picky; heat is heat.
I like Blue steaks anywhere in Britain or Europe as you usually get the best quality steak.
If you have it well done you tend to get the gristly steak.
Had a Blue steak in the U.S. not too long ago and it was bloody awful.
Pun intended?
I dunno. I spent almost 6 years in Europe (and, yes, Europe is a big place with a lot of variation–for me the Brits did steaks the best), and I have to say, I far prefer American beef. Pork and chicken, though–I generally prefer what’s served in most parts of Europe to what’s served in most parts of America.
Where did you eat your steak? Did you get prime? Was it dry aged? What kind of cut did you get? What kind of cut do you normally get in Britain and continental Europe? A good steak should not be gristly at all.
I honestly can’t remember the cut, but it was on International Drive in Orlando; at a chain steakhouse not far from Wet’nWild but on the opposite side of the road.
I seem to recall a vaguely Western theme with Long horns outside but I might be wrong as their was another chain steakhouse next door.
BIG disappointment ! A bit like going into an British cafe and finding that they do a crap English breakfast.l
I wonder if you ended up at the Ponderosa…or the Sizzler. Both chains on International Drive, almost next door to each other (according to Google maps). Both, well, not the finest examples of steaks. They’re kind of like the McDonald’s and Burger King of steakhouses. Cheap and effective, but not somewhere I would send a steak lover, certainly not if one likes them blue.
Do you remember if it had something of a cafeteria style ordering syetm where you had to drag a tray along a rack and order the steak at the window, then go to a salad bar?
If so, that does sound like the Ponderosa/Bonanza style steak houses that Pulykamell is talking about. Those are about a half a step above fast food and definitely not a good representation of American steak houses.
Of cpourse, there are other examples of mediocre to bad steak house chains in the US too. Best Steakhouse is not.
Yeah, Ponderosa and Bonanza mostly target the “family on a budget who still likes to eat out occasionally” market, not the “high-quality food experience” market. You can do much better, even in chain places (and of course also pay more).
I’ve never tried steak tartare, but I can see how those preferences would work together. I can take rare/med-rare steak a hell of a lot better after it’s room temp; the taste and texture is completely different and altogether more appealing. There’s just something about the way steak tastes when it’s in that hot but raw stage that’s really off-putting that I don’t pick up in cold rare meat or hot medium meat. The juices are…sort of minerally, I guess. Not quite metallic like the smell or taste of blood, but not real far off. Sort of like water from an old well. Being cold helps dull those flavors.
Btw, I have the same issues with vegetables. I love 'em raw, I love 'em thoroughly cooked, I hate hate hate hate hate 'em “lightly steamed to crisp-tender.” They pick up this very metallic taste, like licking a bit of zinc wire, that disappears when you cook them tender. People I tell this think I’m nuts because they don’t taste it, but they also don’t taste the detergent/rotting garbage flavor from cilantro, so clearly their judgement is suspect. 
Never had the rotten taste from cilantro, but on occasion I’ve had a soapy taste–especially if they throw too much of it on my food.
Me, medium rare.
But Dad used to say, “Just pass mine quickly over a 25-watt bulb”.
mmm
You’re now making me think of the best steak I’ve ever had.
In the Australian outback, Broken Hill, at a restaurant for a big Saturday night dinner for all the staff living in the nurses’ home at the base hospital, many moons ago.
I asked for rare and I got properly rare: marbled, bloody, wonderful, and I think it was a T-bone steak.
No idea what the place was called, but it was great.
Broken Hill has two things going or it- a bar with 2-for-1 $5 cocktails and this steak joint. The reason I can’t remember the name of the restaurant is because we’d gone for cocktails first.