Ex-Microsoft CTO Writes $625 Cookbook

carusoj writes "Nathan Myhrvold, Microsoft's first CTO, made his mark in the tech world. Now he's cemented his place in the world of cooking and food science with the publication of a groundbreaking six-volume, 2,438-page cookbook. Some of the techniques in Myhrvold's Modernist Cuisine are intimidating, to put it mildly, calling for such daunting ingredients as liquid nitrogen and equipment such as centrifuges and rotor-stator homogenizers. But Myhrvold and his co-authors insist that the majority of recipes can be made in a conventional home kitchen — with a few recommended, inexpensive extras such as a digital gram scale and water bath for sous vide cooking." Dear Bosses: When you see the centrifuge on my March expense report, please note that this is a legitmate business expense. If you're still curious, we ran a story a couple years ago on Nathan's Kitchen Lab.

Comments

digital gram scale as an extra?

[acidfast7]

Every European kitchen I've cooked in had a gram scale (they're less the 10€ for an inexpensive model and 30€ for a decent one.) I don't understand how I got by living in the US without one ... I'm never giving it up now. Especially with baking, it's really not optional.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

For whatever reason, American cooking and recipes tend to use imperial volumetric measures(cups, half cups, teaspoons, etc.) rather than weights for most ingredients.

The imperial vs. metric thing is unsurprising enough; but I don't know why volume rather than weight is the typical criterion. Scales are certainly available, but you can traverse entire shelves of US recipes without be called to use one. Sometimes, ingredients that are commonly packaged by weight will be called for by weight; but generally in amounts that you can trivially infer from the packaging, without any measurement.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[DaGoatSpanka]

For general cooking, measurements don't need to be so exact you have to measure it to the gram.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[Samantha Wright]

There's no mystery here. That's just how it's always been done, and for very good reason: To measure a volume, all you need is a cup with a line drawn on it. Meaduring weight or mass with the same precision requires a scale. Since humans generally prepare food at SATP, these are pretty reliable metrics.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[ProppaT]

Traditional cooking is more of an art than a science. It's a lot easier to eyeball volume than it is weight. I rarely cook from recipes, but when I do I rarely ever use measuring devices. I know what a cup of liquid or a teaspoon or tablespoon of this or that looks like. A pinch or a dash is a perfectly fine measurement for cooking. In other words, it just makes sense.

This new style of chemical cooking is exactly that, chemistry, and things need to be very precise to get the wanted result. You need a scale to properly measure the ingredients to make gels, bubbles, etc. correctly.

As a side note, baking is less cooking and more of a science. Sometimes you will see bakers using scales and you need the right proportions of leavening, salt, etc. to gain the desired effect. It's very easy to make flat bread if things aren't done correctly.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[rgmoore]

Also, do you add liquids by weight too?

I can't speak for the parent, but when I'm baking I certainly do. Home volume measures just aren't precise enough to get really controllable, reproducible results. Besides, if you're already weighing out your flour, it's easier to hit the tare button and weigh in some water than it is to get a measuring cup.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[xaxa]

For general cooking, measurements don't need to be so exact you have to measure it to the gram.

For some ingredients, like flour, the density can vary significantly. If you're measuring using a normal spoon the heaping varies a lot too.

I don't really know what difference it makes, I don't bake very often (once a month, maybe) and my earliest memory of "helping mummy" to cook was weighing the ingredients.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[DrgnDancer]

Vegetables are the worst offenders in my opinion. Terms like "chop finely" or "chop roughly" are somewhat subjective, and changing the grain of your chop can have a *huge* impact on the volume of vegetables in a recipe. Especially stuff like broccoli or cauliflower, where florets occupy a large volume, but have a low density. I much, much prefer recipes that use weight rather than volume for measurement. I'm not too chuffed whether the weight is metric or imperial, my digital scale switches between them trivially.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[Artraze]

Agreed. If you can't do a least one tenth of a gram, you'll be back to volumetric measures for salt, spices, additives, etc. And while volumetric measure for them is generally more reliable than, say, flour, accuracy for them can be more important (as you mention). I think that hundredth of a gram is ideal, particularly if you're experimenting with smaller batches. Incidentally, just last night I needed to weigh spices in the range of 0.5 - 4 g. (I personally use an old digital lab balance precise to 1mg, but that's only because it was free; measurements better than 10mg aren't really feasible or worthwhile in the kitchen.)

I think the gram precision thing is more an issue of dynamic range... Most people are using their scales for weighing out flour, confectioners sugar, etc. These things are usually needed in the 500g range, and coupled with the weight of a measuring bowl, you need a scale that can handle 1kg or so. That means a gram scale needs a range of 0.1% and a hundredth gram scale would need 0.001%. That's expensive, and so most cooks would rather just buy something cheap for flour that does ~5g and stick with volumetric measure for spices. Of course, they could always get two scales, but that would be crazy ;).

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[Sax Maniac]

Digital scales are quite handy for cooking. I use them more and more often, the more I cook. First, it's really great for things like flour or other loose/granular things where the volume varies wildly, and you want a consistent result. All you have to do is weigh out a few cups of flour, and compare it against the box weight, to see how inaccurate volume can be at times. Cakes and breads dramatically improve with a scale.

Once you figure out the weight of something, you can reuse it, since we tend to the same make recipes a lot. I annotate my most-used recipes with weight. Using a scale also saves dirty measuring cups and spoons, since you can tare the scale, add the new ingredient, and repeat indefinitely.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[_0xd0ad]

I think many of the recipes in the book actually need a scale with more precision than one gram. Some of the ingredients used, such as xantham gum, can have radically different effects on a sauce at 1% concentration than at .5%. For 100g of sauce, you need a tenth of a gram precision.

The obvious answer to that (if you can't just make an industrial-sized batch) is to make a supply of stock diluted to a low enough concentration that the ingredient can be accurately measured. Then reduce the amount of water or oil or whatever it is you diluted the stock with.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[sydneyfong]

but it's a pretty significant problem if you're using half as much broccoli as the author intended

From my experience, it's not.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[vijayiyer]

She probably doesn't bake by volume, but instead by feel (a.k.a. experience). Baking by volume just doesn't really work well, especially for things like bread. You're better off just adding flour till it feels right if you don't use a scale.

Re:digital gram scale as an extra?

[DerekLyons]

First, it's really great for things like flour or other loose/granular things where the volume varies wildly, and you want a consistent result.

The problem is, except for flour, the weight/volume doesn't vary wildly for virtually all loose/granular things. (Not unless you're particularly inept at scoop-and-sweep.) For those few things other than flour (like brown sugar for example) the weight/volume not only doesn't vary wildly, it doesn't really make that big a difference for virtually all recipies they're used in.
 

Cakes and breads dramatically improve with a scale.

And their primary ingredient is flour - pretty much the only ingredient used in bulk whose weight/volume varies wildly and whose precise volume/weight matters greatly. If you're making beef stew whether you use 900 grams of carrots or 910 grams is virtually irrelevant. If you're making spaghetti sauce the difference between .5 and .7 grams (or between 1 level teaspoon and 1 heaping teaspoon) is virtually unnoticaeble.
 
Experienced cooks cook by their senses anyway, all 'precise' measurements do is give inexperienced or unskilled cooks a false sense of confidence.

normal part of hte process

[l2718]

It always takes time for technological advances to make their way from the workshop to the home. The first servo motors were expensive devices; today we take it for granted that a DVD player will automatically retract the platter. Same here: applying the scientific method to cooking starts as a high-end expensive hobby, but eventually the lessons learned and some of the technology will become household items.

Some interesting cooking with centrifuges.

[surzirra]

I read an article in a magazine about using centrifuges to "[concentrate] the flavor molecules in a powerfully aromatic liquid layer that is ideal for cooking." I also love Sub Zero ice cream.

Despite the coolness and interesting factor, I doubt I will be going out and buying a centrifuge or a bottle of liquid nitrogen for my next meal.

the real process

[cashman73]

What the article didn't tell us is that after the first rejection of the manuscript by the publisher, Myhrvold was overheard in his office screaming, "F*****g Wolfgang Puck is a f*****g pussy. I'm going to f*****g bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f*****g kill Food Network!" A few chairs were seen outside in the parking lot later that afternoon as well,. . .

His Credentials

[crackspackle]

Aside from being Microsoft CTO, from the article:

Myhrvold's academic tech credentials are supreme. He's earned degrees in mathematics, geophysics, and space physics from UCLA, and PhDs in mathematical economics and theoretical physics from Princeton University. In his post-doctoral work at Cambridge University, Myhrvold worked on quantum theories of gravity with cosmologist Stephen Hawking.

Myhrvold worked for two years as a stagier at Rover's, a top French restaurant in Seattle, and he trained at the Ecole De La Varenne. Myhrvold's culinary adventures also include a stint as Chief Gastronomic Officer for Zagat Survey, which publishes the Zagat restaurant guides.

After leaving Microsoft in 1999, Myhrvold went on to become CEO of Intellectual Ventures, a patent company he founded (along with three others) to shepherd inventions and commercialize intellectual property.

First off, how the hell does one do all this ? Second, with all his knowledge, why become a patent troll ?

Iran should buy a few copies

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Iran: "We are not using these centrifuges to enrich uranium. We are just trying out some recipes in this cookbook."

International Atomic Energy Agency Inspector: "Well, I do have to admit that the concentrated flavor molecules in this powerfully aromatic liquid layer is ideal for cooking."

Re:Piracy

[Locutus]

first he has to sucker the world+dog into believing it's something they must have and no other cookbook is useful because the recipes are incompatible. Using exotic equipment is a good start at making it incompatible. It'll cost a few billion in marketing to get the drones to believe they must have it and nothing else will work.

LoB

Re:Groundbreaking?

[sed quid in infernos]

Funny you should mention Ferran Adria. He seems to like the book, as does David Chang:

Ferran Adrià of El Bulli has said, “This book will change the way we understand the kitchen.” David Chang, the chef and owner of Momofuku, called “Modernist Cuisine” “the cookbook to end all cookbooks.” As Mr. Chang explained, “Only someone like Nathan could do something this comprehensive and rigorous, and we will probably never see another cookbook like it again.”

Blumenthal likes it too (and Wylie Dusfresne, too):

"A fascinating overview of the techniques of modern gastronomy." --Heston Blumenthal

Myhrvold has always acknowledged the contributions of people like Blumenthal, Dufresne, and Adria to modernist cuisine and to the techniques he describes in his book. That's probably why he co-authored the book with one of Blumenthal's protoges.

Re:Copy-pasted recipes from Bing (i.e. Google)

[gstoddart]

Seriously, I really hope he actually wrote and did not copy-paste texts from Bing (i.e. Google). Cook book authors tend to reuse others' recipes.

I see you've already visited the web page by your comment below, but for anybody thinking you could just grab these kinds of recipes from a web search -- this stuff is more like a lab experiment than your standard recipe.

This is the research-science branch of preparing food. When you read just who is praising this book you quickly realize these are the guys who are doing this in high-end restaurants.

I'd love to flip through this set, but, alas, I fear the pricetag is a little more than I'm willing to spend for something I likely will never be able to employ most of the techniques.

Kudos to the authors for putting this together.

Heston Blumenthal does it for a living

[Kupfernigk]

Heston Blumenthal has been doing this for years. His restaurant (The Fat Duck) at Bray (West of London - hint, not cheap and a long, long wait) is world famous. Not so well known is that he also has a first class gastro-pub at Bray, and that the Little Chef first on the left on the Westbound A303 has a Blumenthal menu available - it fills up very early at weekends.

Re:Copy-pasted recipes from Bing (i.e. Google)

[sconeu]

Don't you know? Myrhvold has patents on every recipe there, and plans to sue anyone who uses them without a license.

Re:Groundbreaking?

[gstoddart]

I rather expect that regardless of how many pages he's filled, Myhrvold has more to learn from Adria than Adria has to learn from Myrhvold.

So? Learning from the pioneers and exhaustively documenting everything is part of science -- and, make no mistake, this is about the science of cooking.

Hell, look at the index which he's made available in PDF. It's 60 pages, and as someone who cook a fair bit, I'm reading through it and see all sorts of interesting teasers and how-to's that extend beyond just molecular gastronomy. It seems to cover the entirety of cooking -- hell, it's got an index entry for Mathematica. :-P

I don't think any of the reviews of this book are just "quid pro quo back scratching, friendly overture, or pure puffery" -- looking at the information on this book, I really do think it's exactly what those quotes say. This is like Knuth's Art of Computer Programming, but for food. Yes, that sounds like hyperbole, but I've never seen any books which have all of the stuff he's got in there, and I've got some cookbooks that are used in culinary schools.

Yes, but ...

[amw]

... does he use open sauce?