The BBQ BRETHREN FORUMS. - Polling Priorities #2- What Traits do we Conquer First?

The BBQ BRETHREN FORUMS. (https://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/index.php)

- Q-talk (https://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - Polling Priorities #2- What Traits do we Conquer First? (https://www.bbq-brethren.com/forum/showthread.php?t=77127)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MilitantSquatter (Post 1160584)

I disagree that moisture determines texture and even less taste..

You can boil your ribs, steam them in foil for part of the cook, or have chicken sit in a butter bath or those stupid muffin pans everyone is going crazy over.....

they will all likely be "moist"... but you will not have great texture and maybe not taste as that has more variables.

lol..ok you got me.
I should have said "proper" moisture determines texture.

I do not consider boiling or steaming "BBQ" so i did not figure that into my thought process.

You can certainly have moisture and have poor texture & poor taste.
Boiling/steaming fall into that category.
As does over cooked pork, which may well be moist, but it can also be mushy (mushy = too much moisture).

However - if you have "proper" moisture, and you have cooked your meat "in the BBQ way "[Dr. BBQ mod] then more than likely you will have proper texture and taste.

Now granted taste is subjective, but let's strip it down to the bare bones.

no foil, no sauce, no injections, no glaze, no rubs.

Just meat, wood (or charcoal...and yes..even pellets :roll:) fire, salt & pepper.

This takes it back to the basics of Q.
You master that, then the rest (appearance, glazes, sauces, rubs etc.) is just trial & error.

You do everything else right, but get your meat too dry..texture is poor, and taste goes right with it. (even with a great sauce - shoe leather is shoe leather)

So in my book moisture does in a large way determine texture & taste.

Quote:

Originally Posted by landarc (Post 1160606)

It is a funny argument for me, as coming from a culinary background that puts an emphasis on aesthetics for food, the idea that appearance, taste, texture and preparation can be separated is somewhat foreign to me. As a child, even if we ate family style, at my grandmother's house, food was arranged, the table was always set, food and condiments were presented. The appearance of the food was as important as any other element. The tradition being that we eat with our eyes first.

Yet, I choose taste given the task to break them apart. It seems to me, that the flavors are going to drive the decision to keep eating, even as a texture eater. No matter how texturally attractive, I am just not gonna eat something that tastes bad. And what of aroma?

You make a good point, but how many times have you been to expensive restaurant, and are served "art on a plate", that is visually stunning, in a great atmosphere, and served by great wait staff with impeccable service only to bite into the meal, and go...OMG...this is not very good.

I spent $XX.00 for this ?

You get drawn in by the atmosphere, the hype, the reputation for great service, but what you remember is...how did the food taste?