Let's begin by saying that I did not get any money from the flavouring industry.
In 1994, I created synthetic cooking, now known as "note by note cooking".
Why the nickname? Because of the following musical analogy.
A couple of centuries ago, people played the violin or the flute. When you lay your bow on the strings of a violin, you get a note — the sound of the violin.
And a couple of centuries ago, people cooked with ingredients. They used carrots, turnips, meats, fish… When you put a carrot into a saucepan, what you get is the taste of the carrot. There is a direct analogy between the sound of a musical note and the taste of carrot.
One century ago, scientists analyzed sounds and broke them down into elementary sound waves, every sound being comprised of fundamental and harmonics.
At the same period, chemists analysed food ingredients and found out that they were comprised of compounds (water, lipids, proteins, etc.). The parallel is striking.
Fifty years ago, in order to make synthetic music, you needed a big roomful of computers, whereas now you can buy a synthesiser for a child in a toy shop for a few euros.
But the equivalent for food was nowhere to be found!
So, in 1994, I decided to work on that analogy. Since food ingredients were made of compounds, I would use those compounds to prepare dishes.
It should really be called “synthetic cuisine”, but that would scare people away, so I brought forward the artistic side to name the concept, and Note to Note it was.
When I decided to organize an international competition around Note to Note Cuisine, I turned to Éric Angelini (Mane Company) for help. He proposed a partnership, awarding prizes…
Then a miracle happened, which I have never been able to explain. I received a box from Mane SA. It contained about fifteen preparations, each one a pure component in a food solvent, and they could be used like pepper, salt, or curry powder…
I got twenty of these boxes. I had to name the preparations, and just as there is Chanel n°5, there was Note to Note n°1, n°2, n°3…
Every other month, I went to various countries with the double aim of developing molecular gastronomy in universities and offering the box to the greatest chefs — Pierre Gagnaire, Philippe Conticini, Heston Blumenthal… — so that they could experiment with it.
Jean Mane gave away these boxes; he refused to sell them. That was amazing. Selling them wasn’t part of his plan, he only meant to help me to develop my project. So I am extremely grateful to him for having supported me at that crucial stage of the building of my Cuisine Note à Note.
Later Michael Pontif, a young French chemist, created a company called Iqemusu, in order to sell the same kind of products.
And Note by Note cooking is spreading, thanks to these people : thank you !
Ce blog contient: - des réflexions scientifiques - des mécanismes, des phénomènes, à partir de la cuisine - des idées sur les "études" (ce qui est fautivement nommé "enseignement" - des idées "politiques" : pour une vie en collectivité plus rationnelle et plus harmonieuse ; des relents des Lumières ! Pour me joindre par email : herve.this@inrae.fr
samedi 12 novembre 2022
I am grateful
dimanche 18 septembre 2022
Iberian Ham
In a recent cooking competition note to note, some candidates included in their dish a preparation that they named "Iberian ham".
I will not go back to the question of the reproduction of traditional, classic ingredients or dishes, but I propose that we be astonished to see so named... what was not Iberian ham, but a kind of copy, a reproduction of such a product: the name was usurped, and I do not believe that it is "fair", in the sense of the regulation of the food trade.
And then, why make something new by naming it like something old? The innovation is hidden, instead of being highlighted.
But, in reality, this post is more about sharing an astonishment: the composition of the preparations that were proposed by the candidates who made these "copies of Iberian ham" were actually so different... that it was very difficult to recognize Iberian ham.
For me, and for many people with whom I discussed the question, Iberian ham is served in very thin slices: there is even this Spanish ceremony which consists in putting the ham horizontally, on a support, and using a long knife, to make well-sliced strips.
But, above all, this ham is a beautiful, alternating red and white areas. In the red areas, my friends who have studied this product know that the proteins have been partially hydrolyzed and have released amino acids and peptides, among other things, so that these parts have a lot of flavor. In the white areas, it is fat, and here again, the long evolution of the ham, its maturation have led to the formation of odorant compounds.
Finally, the Iberian ham is characterized by this alternation of areas of different consistencies and different tastes, and in any case powerful.
But we must not forget that there is a lot of fat in total and that this marbling is essential for the quality of Iberian ham.
But in the realisations that were submitted to me, there was no fat!
I must admit that I was a bit shocked and disappointed. Am I old-fashioned? Biased? I know that some members of the jury spontaneously made the same analysis as I did, so it is not idiosyncratic.
And here I am expressing my incomprehension/why did the competitors claim to be making a reproduction of Iberian ham when their preparation did not contain the fat that is almost the hallmark of this ham?
mardi 21 juin 2022
After lecturing on Note by Note Cooking, I answer to questions
Here the message to which I am answering :
"I really enjoyed the topics we learned and was fascinated where the direction of food is currently going.
Given how unsustainable factory farming is and with the development of synthetic food, I wondered if you personally visualize a mostly vegan world in the near future? There was a photo of a dish you posted of meat next to a fake meat, and you surprisingly seemed to indicate your preference for the fake meat (perhaps I misunderstood which one you preferred). However, as a vegan myself, I have to say it truly gave me hope of a meatless world being a reality somewhat soon.
I look forward to hopefully hearing your views on this subject either in class or by email if you have a chance."
And this is my answer
jeudi 14 mai 2020
Note by note cooking: explanations
An article with an audio interview :
https://latest.worldchefs.org/podcast/episode-4-is-note-by-note-the-future-of-food/?utm_source=ALLLL&utm_campaign=ca358340ed-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_11_25_12_11_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_217a14193d-ca358340ed-199477805
samedi 3 novembre 2018
More questions, more answers about molecular gastronomy and note by note cooking
The questions are in italics.
What does molecular gastronomy mean to you as a scientist, or as a chef if you cook?
Molecular gastronomy should mean someone to me in particular. It means the same for everybody: the scientific discipline looking for the mechanisms of phenomena occurring during culinary processes. Nothing else.
The question is as strange as if I was asked: what does a cat mean for you, as a scientist, or as a chef if you cook.
And by the way, even when I cook (daily, at home, for all evening dinners plus meals of the week ends), I am not a chef, but I remain a scientist, and a scientist that cooks. The same when I am walking: I remain a scientist, and a scientist that walks.
How was your relationship with Nicholas Kurti( Kürti Miklós)?
It was a "love affair", immediate friendship that began as soon as we spoke on the phone, in 1986. After some seconds, he decided to come to Paris and see me, and we had this wonderful meal together, when we shared a "poule au vin jaune et aux morilles", at Maitre Paul, rue Racine, in the Quartier Latin of Paris. Immediately, we decided that we could share our results, thoughts, experiments... He was 50 years older than me, but we behaved as friends, and he was certainly not my tutor. Only a friend.
We shared everything: when I was invited as honoris causa in a university, I asked him to be along, and when he was proposed to write a text, we did it both (generally, I was writing the first draft, and he was improving it).
We did everything in a wonderful harmony, experiments on soufflés, on vinegar, organizing the Erice workshops... We spoke on the phone daily, and when I was making an experiment in Paris, he repeated it in London. He was a very good physicist, and I learned a lot from him in this regard, whereas he got much from me in chemistry, of which he did not know much.
I am not sure I understood this that’s why I am asking it.
Yes, but you make a load on me. Please read more carefully and use Google translate (or another one), because the explanations are clearly given.
So is Note by Note for example when you deconstruct two material to their chemical structure and then construct it with another material with the same structure?
Note by note does not mean deconstructing two materials to their chemical structure ! Indeed the sentence has no meaning: what is the "chemical structure, for example? And note by note cooking does not deconstruct. It means building a dish from pure compounds (let's say "chemical species" if you prefer). And what you build does not have the same chemical composition or chemical structure as... As what, by the way?
Or how is this going? I have read that for example the garlic and the coffee has the same structure so they can be combined to invent a new dish?
By structure, you perhaps mean "composition". And no, garlic does not have the same chemical composition as coffee... otherwise they would be the same ! Please, also avoid the "I have read", and give precise references. By the way, only have good readings (can you recognize them?).
Finally, what you probably read is that coffee and garlic have one or more compounds in common, so that they would "pair". But this is a bad theory, that has nothing scientific as cooking is art, not a question of science.
I am sorry If I misunderstood this whole thing, it is a little hard for me to learn and write about such a hard theme in not my mother language.
Sorry for you, but I cannot help in this regard.
Can I do fruit caviars from agar-agar? Or is it just like gelatine but the vegetable matter of it?
You probably means "alginate pearls" with a liquid core, and for this, you need... sodium alginate. But it's true that I showed decades ago how to make it with gelatin: my solution is displayed on the internet site of Pierre Gagnaire. And I guess that I could also find a solution with agar-agar.
How can we invent totally new dishes with Note by Note?
Look at any recipe of the International Contest, or read my book Note by Note Cooking, at Columbia University Press.
Do you think that molecular gastronomy will be the future or not because it needs some hardly available items for it, or like liquid nitrogen. So will it be available in a normal kitchen or just for the best Restaurants?
You confuse molecular gastronomy (science) and note by note cooking. Molecular gastronomy is spreading in universities all over the world. And note by note is spreading in restaurants of all the world. But there are many answers about this elsewhere.
And note by note cooking will be able to used more and more common ingredients (remember this word: just as carrot and meat are ingredients of traditional cooking, pure compounds are the ingredients of note by note cooking).
Do you teach molecular gastronomy?
Yes, in a lot of contexts.
- in the Erasmus Mundus Plus Master Programme "Food Innovation and Product Design"
- in the IPP Master Programme of AgroParisTech
- at the Ecoles des Mines de Paris
- at AgroParisTech, in the context of the Courses of Molecular Gastronomy
- and others
lundi 16 juillet 2018
Many answers about note by note cooking
Neophobia is the human behavior of being cautious about new food. This is a quality, otherwise the human species would not be here today: we would have been poisoned by the consumption of plants (remember that nature is very dangerous, and we eat only the fruits and vegetables that we can eat, either because we are manipulated by plants, for dispersing their seeds, or because we domesticated some dangerous species).
I was thinking of the future and the use of Note by Note, and thought that, nutritionally, we could have a great gap between rich and pour when we separate components. We know a vitamin or phytochemical will be inevitably more expensive than a starch, cellulose or sugar.
Nowadays, we have more equality in this sense. When buying a vegetable or fruit, it comes as whole and everyone has access to it. It is, in a way, a more fair game.
This is really true : the compounds that makes up the majority of food ingredients (water, protides, glucides, lipids) are much more abundant than vitamins, for example, and this explain why they are cheaper. This is also part of the explanation of obesity in the world: when you eat too much fat and sugars, you gain weight and sick. And it is not a surprise that the poorest populations are the most obese in developed countries... But this last observation also shows that there is not much equality, even today.
My question is: what are the advantages of separating, at the farm, produce in its pure components besides increasing food creation possibilities? Why not just dry a whole carrot?
Indeed, forget about note by note cooking as a new art as a start, and let's start from facts :
1. we will have to feed 10 billion people in 2050, and the sole solution today is to fight spoilage. Why spoilage? In part because we consume fresh products: hence the idea to fractionate at the farm (by the way remember that the milk and wheat industries are already fractionating).
2. if we fractionate at the farm, we make the prices more level, and this is good for everybody, because if the efficiency of agriculture is increased, the price of products is not hampered by the price of spoilage.
3. imagine that someone would be able to pay for a fruit, why would he pay more for the fractions ?
Now, drying is very energy consuming, and membrane techniques are much more powerful. In France, il particular, they are already applied for making drinkable water as well as for milk fractionation.
Moreover, having the fractions of carrots (including vitamins and phytochemicals) has the advantage that :
- we would not transport water
- we would probably save energy for cooking
- we decide for the nutritional properties of food
- we decide for the toxicology of food (including managing questions of allergies).
We have quite a few studies and line of thoughts suggesting that highly processed food can be detrimental to our health.
One example from the book Whole: Rethinking the Science of Nutrition, T. Colin Campbell
“Every apple contains thousands of antioxidants whose names, beyond a few like vitamin C, are unfamiliar to us, and each of these powerful chemicals has the potential to play an important role in supporting our health. They impact thousands upon thousands of metabolic reactions inside the human body. But calculating the specific influence of each of these chemicals isn’t nearly sufficient to explain the effect of the apple as a whole. Because almost every chemical can affect every other chemical, there is an almost infinite number of possible biological consequences.”
This question of transformed food being detrimental to health is not correctly managed in the public debate. For example, recently, there were articles about a certain (and bad) "Nova" categorization of food... but one forget to say that if you eat too much salt, sugar and fat, you get sick ! And remember that smoking is the worst... and main cause ! Drinking alcohol as well, is bad. And driving too fast. And, etc.
This is exactly the topic of my last book: bad faith! Because we all say that we want healthy food, but we forget that dietetics knows ONLY ONE rule: we have to eat of everything in small quantities, and make exercise. Do we apply this rule? No, certainly no... and this is why we are too fat, and sick.
I understand you classify process food/artificial food as any food that was, in some way, modified from its natural status. Example: boiled potato, scramble egg, etc. But when drying, coping (color or flavor compounds additions) and extracting pure components, we made those dishes much more artificial than boiling a potato.
Is it true ? For years, I tried to tackle this question without finding an answer. Consider a choucroute, for example: the cabbage was selected, cultivated, fermented, cooking for hours. The sausage was produced from meat that was destroyed, added with ingredients, processed... About spicy crab? The sauce seems to be important, and you know perfectly how it is made, with spices addition. Indeed I could not find an "index of naturality".
And to finish about the potato:
- the potato that we have today is the result of MANY selections, like apples are certainly not wild apples
- is boiling more or less "natural" (indeed we should say artificial) than frying ?
I am thinking of ingredients’ natural “chemical balance” or proportions and level of processes.
I don’t think, eating Note by Note, or highly process food once in a while will kill you, but if Note by Note is the future of food, how much are we looking into its health impact when consumed daily?
When you speak of "natural balance", may I tell you that you are going too far ? There is no proof that there is any balance at all ! And the proof was given by elementary nutritional studies: when you give meat stock only to dogs, they die. I remind you the sole rule in dietetics: we have to eat of everything in small quantities and make moderate exercise.
By the way, all compounds from fruits, vegetables, meat, fish, etc. are toxic at various levels. And this is why we have to vary, to change, otherwise we would get over the toxicity level. For example, one whole nutmeg would kill you; or basil, or tarragon, or the phenolics of grapes; or lycopene from carrots; or beta carotene from carrots...
This is why I am promoting the idea that we now have 30 years in front of us in order to work scientifically so that we get ready when note by note cooking will be the main way of feeding people. I don't say that I have THE solution; I simply say that we have to work fast in order to be ready. And this calls for a lot of nutrition, toxicology, but also culinary work in order to be able to produce the needed dishes (I make a difference between a bunch of compounds and a dish, for many reasons, including questions of satiety and pleasure, but here I would be too long explaining).
I was thinking of the peach pie/tart you’ve mentioned in one of your lectures. You told us it was more sour (acidic) once was cooked. During that session I thought: maybe it was just perceived as more sour. Maybe before cooked its natural shape does not let our taste buds capture the acidic flavour or sensation, but once its cooked and the shape it’s changed or released your taste buds than can perceive the flavour. I’ve imagined the acid component being “trapped” in some structure which changes once cooked. In its natural form not anatomically suitable to our taste buds.
The time I was working with salt crystals and its different shapes and how salty we perceive a product depending on the salt crystal used.
Indeed I did not discuss peach by apricots. For sure, the issue of perceiving is important, but why would the perception so much changed ? This calls for interpreting the chemical and physical environment of the various acids in the fruit. And yes, perceived acidity is not the same as pH, as shows the experiment of drinking vinegar vs vinegar with a lot of sugar: whereas the pH does not change with the addition of sugar, there is certainly a difference in perception. But anyway I am smiling because this question about apricots is only one of the thousands of questions that I have... and I shall not spend too much on this one in particular, but I find it useful for the discussion of scientific strategy ;-).
For salt, yes, the various salts give various salt perceptions, but this is only when the crystals are present (and crunchiness or ions release is then to be considered); when the different crystals are put in solution, we did not observe any difference, when the chemical composition of the crystals are the same.
vendredi 15 juin 2018
Atelier d'activités pratique note à note / Note by Note activities
One word of explanation: I produced this after I did a workshop yesterday for a Swiss laboratory, after a lecture. These are very easy experiments producing new food, and in particular note by note food.
Wöhler sauce
This one is a synthetic sauce, like a wine sauce.
1. in a pan, add 200 g water
2. add phenolics, tartaric acid, salt, msg, a spoon of grilled corn starch, and one small glass of ordinary oil.
3. put to the boil while whipping.
Wöhler was a remarkable German chemist.
Würtz
Wurtz are gelified foams.
The protocole is the following:
1. in a large bowl, put 5 g gelatine
2. add 200 g aqueous solution
3. add 100 g sugar
4. heat until the gelatine is dissolved
5. whip extensively while cooling (put the pan in a larger pan with cold water or ice) until a large volume of foam is obtained
6. store in the fridge for gelification of gelatine.
The name is from Charles Adolphe Würtz, a famous chemist from Alsace.
Gibbs
This is a soufflé that you can make in some seconds, but more precisely, it is a chemically coagulated gel.
The protocole is:
1. In a large bowl, put 1 tea spoon of coagulating proteins (such as egg white powder).
2. Add 2 spoons of water
3. Add oil while whipping until the system is like a white mayonnaise sauce (probably about 200 g of oil)
4. Put this emulsion in small cups
5. Heat the cups in the microwave oven, until you observe an expansion by about 40 %: you get the chemically coagulated emulsions.
Now, repeat the experiment, but before cooking (step 5), add sugar (50-100 g), a pinch of salt, food colorant, odorant compound.
The name is from the famous American physical chemist Josiah Willard Gibbs.
Record volume for whipped egg white and Geoffreys
You have to know that today, we have the world record of the largest volume of foam from one egg white: we made more than 40 litres.
And if you try to beat this record, be ready to spend some time, and have multiple collaborators, with large vessels.
1. put one egg white in a vessel
2. whip
3. when it is fully whipped, add 1 spoon of sugar, and whip
4. then add one spoon of a liquid (with no fat : apple juice, etc.), and whip
5. while whipping, add alternatively sugar and liquid
6. when the volume is more that can be stored in one vessel, divide in two vessels and whip the two
7. and so on until you beat the record.
In the end, you can add color, taste (sugar, salt, citric acid...), odorant compounds (taking into account that oil can "kill" foams).
Also in the end, you can distribute volume of foams in cups or glasses, and cook in a microwave oven, until a chemically gellified foam is obtained, and this is a Geoffroy, from a French chemist of the XVIIIth century.
Conglomeles
Conglomeles are artificial plant tissues. They are made from alginates pearls with liquid core, glued together.
1. In a large vessel, dissolve 2 g of sodium alginate in 300 g water
2. Mix with a blender
3. In 1 L of orange juice, add 200 g of calcium lactate.
4. Pour drops of orange juice in the water with alginate
5. Recover the pearls and rince them.
For making conglomeles :
6. put the pearls in a bowl
7. in a pan, heat water with citric acid, sugar and gelatine
8. Pour this liquide on the pearles and cool unti it is set.
Liebig (sheets of dressing)
Liebigs are physically gellified emulsions.
The idea is to make an emulsion using gelatine as a surfactant. When cooling, it will gelify.
1. In a large vessel, put 1 g of gelatine
2. Add 100 g of vinegar
3. whip oil added slowly until a thick consistency is reached.
4. Pour this emulsion on a silicone sheet or in an oiled plate
5. put in the fridge
6. when gelified, detach the "sheet" of dressing.
Justus von Liebig was a German chemist. He began his studies in Giessen, and finished in Munich.
Diracs
Diracs are artificial meats.
In order to choose the right consistency (not too hard, not too soft), one has to make the following experiment:
1. In one large bowl, pit 50 % water and 50 % egg white proteins. Mix thoroughly.
2. Take a sample of this mixture and put it in a small cup or glass.
3. Then add 50 % water to the remnant, mix and keep a sample in another cup or glass.
4. And repeat, forming a series of glasses with decreasing quantities of proteins.
5. Put all glasses in the microwave oven and heat: you will get coagulated masses in decreasing order of toughness.
Select now the consistency that you need, and make it again, adding finally color, odor, taste, and cook.
For emulsified diracs, you have to add oil in the dirac preparation before cooking.
For aerated or foramy diracs, whip the water+protein mixture before cooking.
Paul Adrien Marie Dirac was one founding father of quantum physics. He was from England.
Chocolate Chantilly
This one is not "note by note", but it is frequently asked. It is a chocolate mousse without eggs, with a very delicate consistency as whipped cream.
1. in a pan, put 200 g water
2. add 225 g of ordinary chocolate
3. Heat until the chocolate has melted and makes an emulsion
4. Put the pan on cold water or ice and whip until the consistency changes (as well as color: becoming whiter).
5. Stop immediately whipping. You can store it in the fridge.
jeudi 31 mai 2018
Questions and answers
Today, some questions are answered, in view of a trip to Singapore, at then end of June
1. In recent media reports, it was written that “note-by-note” cooking approach can “stave off energy crisis, eliminate food waste and end world hunger”. Can you please explain more about the NbN approach and its potential?
- Can this approach be applicable to the F&B industry in Asia? If yes, how can this approach be integrated with or adopted to Asian cuisine?
- You are scheduled to give a speech to the graduating culinary and pastry batches at Singapore’s At-Sunrice Global Chef Academy this month. Can you share with us some of the advice that you will impart to these newly graduated chefs?
- How do you see the future of food preparation? Do you think that chefs in Asia should create more molecular gastronomy offerings in their menu?
- What do you think chefs in Asia should do to get more diners to try molecular gastronomy offerings?
- What are your future plans concerning NbN approach and molecular gastronomy? Will you be participating in more events here in the region in connection with promoting these culinary disciplines?
vendredi 2 mars 2018
Questions About Note by Note Cooking
To say it in one sentence: note by note cooking means making dishes from ingredients that are pure compounds (such as water, triglycerides, proteins, lipids, phenolics, colorants, odorants compounds, taste compounds, vitamins, oligo-elements).
In order to understand better, a comparison with synthetic music is helpful.
Indeed, two centuries ago, music was performed using traditional instruments, and cooking was using traditional ingredients. Then one century ago, physicists began analyzing sounds into pure waves, as chemists were analyzing food into pure compounds. About 50 years ago, one room full of computers was used to synthesize music from pure waves, but today a synthesizer costs only 20 euros in a shop for children. For food? Pure compounds are cheap, and it's easy to make synthetic food. This is note by note cooking.
You have said in the future we won't cook with fruit, vegetables or meat, but note by note with pure compounds. Why?
I am not sure that I would say that exactly... and I don't have crystal ball!
But I say that fruits and vegetables are fragile physical-chemical systems, full of water, so that they are expansive to transport (transporting water!), and they are easily damaged.
In order to reduce spoilage, it would be useful to extract water from plant tissues at the farm, so that only "dry" nutrients would be transported, without cold systems (expansive, energy consuming, bad gases for the climate).
This would also have the advantage of making the prices more regular, because of the possibility of storage.
And of course, the plants needed to produce sugars, lipids, amino-acids and proteins, etc. would not be the traditional ones.
But instead of saying that there would be no carrots, I would say that as for music, there will probably be traditional as well as new food ingredients.
How can the industry prepare for note by note cooking? Particularly suppliers, manufacturers, supermarkets and chefs?
Today, we observe the creation of small companies selling products for note by note cooking, but indeed this is one of my old goals: selling additives, odorant compounds, etc. to anybody. Just as gelatin was introduced in supermarkets and vanillin preparations, pure compounds for note by note cooking can be sold there.
Indeed I am confident because having introduced gelling agents from algae in the food sector, I see them now in supermarkets. The same for some tools such as siphons or low temperature cooking.
For note by note cooking, it will follow the same process.
How can you see note by note cooking changing the way we make and sell food?
Indeed note by note cooking done as it is done today is probably too difficult for the public, just as the first synthesizers were to complex, and only for specialists. But music companies made simpler synthesizers for children, so that today anybody can use them.
I have the feeling that food companies have an opportunity to create tools for cooking (3D printing systems, for example), but also "kits", instead of pure compounds.
What new dishes could be created through this cooking?
Note by note cooking is cooking, not producing new ingredients. It creates new dishes (second part of the question). And here, the possibilities are infinite: using note by note cooking, you can create EVERYTHING! The shape you want, the consistencies you want, the colors you want, the odor you want, the number of calories you decide, etc.
Do you think more unusual ingredients could become more accepted (like algae for example) if note by note cooking is introduced?
It is a hope, and a goal. I hate the idea that additives are only for companies. Either such compounds are useful, and the public should have it, or they are not, and the industry should not use them. The same for odorant compounds, or "flavourings".
And I want to give the public the possibility to decide and innovate. Consider, for example, a flavourings with a "strawberry flavour". This steals from the chef the possibility to decide for the flavour of the dishes that he or she is creating. And this is why, for odors, I want pure odorant compounds being sold (dissolved in oil, for example), so that the creator can decide.
By the way, I analyze that the public fear of additives and other products is partly due to the fact that it cannot buy it and use it in home kitchens.
What problems in the world could note by note cooking tackle? Is it expensive?
Food security, by fighting spoilage
Energy savings: transportation and cold techniques
Water savings in arid countries
Making prices even
Allergies
Quantity of calories
Making food from unedible plants (by fractionation, keeping only the good compounds)
No, it's not expensive: you can buy plant proteins by tons, for example, and odorant compounds are very cheap, because a pure bottle of one of them is about 10 euros... and you have to dissolve by one billion, often.
vendredi 9 février 2018
A propos de cuisine note à note/ About note by note cooking
About note by note cooking, some questions today, with comments :
I searched some award-winning Note by Note dishes done by students.
Why only "by students" ? I don't see any difference between students, lay people, chefs... And remember that often, chef design recipes for others, who have simply to follow.
They look really high-end fine dining.
I don't know what you where you looked at, but if you go on the site of the International Centre for molécular gastronomy AgroParisTech-Inra (hosted on AgroParisTech), you can see many recipes. Some are fine dining, and some are more simple. For example, the demonstration of the dirac, of the gibbs, etc. are very simple.
But the article only mentioned equipment like a siphon and alginate bath were used.
You say "the article", but there are hundreds of pages, dozens of articles.
Siphons can be obtained in very popular supermarkets today. And "alginate bath" does not mean anything. A bath is a bath, which mean a vessel full of water. Alginate (generally sodium alginate) is something that you can find in supermarkets as well. It is a powder that you just need to put in water, in order to get a sodium alginate solution. But I don't see the relationship with note by note cooking in particular.
I'm wondering: is Note by Note cooking very difficult for common people?
The answer is no. And the dirac and gibbs demonstrate this fully.
Indeed, the issue of note by note cooking is not to use modern tools (this was for molecular cuisine), but instead to have new ingredients. Making a "dirac" by mixing 25% proteins, 75% water, plus compounds for color, taste and odor is straightforward. And this is one goal: to make it easy!
What tools are they required?
Is it difficult? No! And I would even say that it will be even easier in the past. Remember the comparison with electronic music: at the beginning, one room full of computers was needed, but today a synthesiser for children costs only 20 euros.
At home, today, I don't have particular tools, only the traditional ones, as anybody.
Is it possible to bring it to people's home?
Yes. Remember that I succeeded in having siphons everywhere in the world, as well as agar-agar... even to the point that people speak today of "plant gelatin", which is meaningless, because gelatin is an animal product; indeed they want to say plant jelling agent.
And do you want to bring common people cook in Note by Note way?
Yes, for sure, otherwise I would not take one second answering your questions. Coming back to tools: they are not the difficulty for todays practitioners. The difficulty is that fact that I have, and they lack, the knowledge for deciding which compounds to mix. This means that, for the lay people in the future, already make "mixes" or kits will have to be designed and sold (remember that you find that already today, with ready to use custards, flours for bread, etc.
By the way, it is exactly as in the beginnings of synthetic music: a room full of computers was needed... and today it's simmle.
You mentioned "note by note cooking" is the key, in particular in regard to food 3D printing. Can you explain it in detail?
In order to use the full potential of 3D printers, it's better to use products that have a very specific functionality, and this means pure compounds, hence note by note cooking.
How do you see the relationship between food 3D printing and Note by Note cooking?
Same answer than above.
Is it possible that food 3D printing combines and prints the compound for people?
This sentence has no meaning. A compound is a compound: sucrose, amylopectin, ovalbumin... You cannot "print a compound" (sorry, but you need to know more chemistry, and I cannot make a full course here).
I personally think that cooking with compounds make people lose the primary emotional attachment and memory to food (raw material).
I don't care about personal opinions of people (and yours in particular, sorry). And all this is old stuff. What do you think about the "primary emotional attachment and memory" concerning sugar? Would you be ready to extract sugar from beetroot yourself?
And more generally do you still ride a horse or do you have trains, planes? And do you make your own ink, writing with feathers?
Such "attachment" is fantasy, and you can trust me that when people are hungry, they don't behave like well fed city dwellers. By the way, do you cultivate your vegetables yourself?
Finally, you should have a look to the history of potato introduction in France, at a time when the Faculty of medicine was publishing that this Solanacae was a cause of lepra. Don't forget, as well, to read about the times when it was said that trains would make the milk "turn" into cows, or about the "heavier than air" that would never fly.
Please stop being afraid.
As compounds don't have any shape, color, texture or smell, it cannot trigger people's memory to food.
Why do you confuse compounds and dishes. By the way, compounds can have shape, and note by note dishes have a shape: this is even the first step of note by note cooking, i.e. deciding for a shape.
And finally, do we need to trigger people's memory to food? Really?
In this way, people cannot predict what this dish would be smell or taste in the end, and they think compounds cannot bring the cooking pleasure as meat & vegetable did.
Wrong idea based on the previous wrong idea.
But yes, you can make a dish for which the guest have no idea of the flavour... but it's already the case with old cooking. Imagine that you make a pie: can you guess if the stuffing is sweet or not ? No.
About "cooking pleasure", perhaps you mean "the pleasure of cooking", or "the pleasure of eating".
When I am cooking note by note, I have the same pleasure than when I am cooking in the old way: I am doing my best, so that :
1. my friends are happy
2. it is "good", i.e. beautiful to eat.
What do you think about this? Note by Note cooking is a big leap, how do you think people can adapt it?
I don't care, because I have nothing to sell. Remember that I don't get one pence on note by note cooking, no investment in companies, no patent... and I don't care about being "famous" (what's the use when you are dead?).
Indeed, note by note cooking will be here soon for many reasons :
- 10 billions people in 2050
- spoilage to fight
- energy crisis
- water crisis
- high demand for proteins
- farmers to enrich (because they are in charge of environment, landscapes and primarily food security) (please don't confuse food security and food safety).
But finally, remember that I shall succeed, because:
1. I am using the right strategy (give it to the king, and the public will ask for it)
2. it is the only new culinary art trend
3. it is new (and the media have to advertise new ideas, not old ones)
4. it is already spreading.
jeudi 11 janvier 2018
A very short history of note by note cooking. I tell you (for years) that I will succeed !
Royale de sous bois, blanc-manger truffé et bouillon
légèrement mousseux Profondeur iodée de poulpe et Saint-Pierre, écume et transparence de spaghettis aux cèpes Pigeonneau en deux cuissons, sa compotée de cuisses, potimarron fondant, gelée aux polyphénols, asperges virtuelles Mille-feuille de chèvre frais au siphon Guimauve en deux textures Ardoise « This » Sucrette glacée au parfum de Menton |
Sur une idée d'huitres : huitres de tapioca, bavarois
d'amylopectine, tapioca de citron vert, eau de mer gelée, crème
d'huitres, vapeur cristallisée Soufflé au homard, sauce wöhler et gelée de framboises Fibres de bœuf, capellini, cylindres orange Boule de cassis |
Mille feuilles terre et mer trois couleurs, souligné des deux
sauces Kientzheim et crustacés Recherche note à note en pot-au-feu Reconstitution d'une mozarella, huile d'olive et mâche Le dessert Cordon bleu |
Recette
Texture de riz « Note by
Note »
Feuille de texture recouvrante
“Note by Note”
|
Amuses bouche 1-cis-hexen-3-ol gaïacol et 2,4,6-triisobutyl-5-dihydro-4H-1,3,5-dithiazine 2-acétylthiazole acétyl méthyl carbinol acétyl propionyl pipérine Chick Corea benzaldéhyde |