SC - Re: SC pots and pans

[Philip & Susan Troy]

Karen O wrote:
> 
> the Calphalon comes in three choices: professional anodized, professional
> nonstick, or commercial nonstick.  Is one better than the other?  or is it
> just personal prefrence?

To some extent, yes, it depends on what you want. The anodized
Calphalon, the original stuff, is considered to be "stick-resistant",
but not exactly non-stick in the sense that, oh, something like Teflon
or Silverstone stuff is considered to be. I have no idea what either
commercial non-stick or professional non-stick are, but my experience in
professional kitchens is that they almost _never_ use any type of
non-stick pans, or, for that matter, the anodized Calphalon either.

Anything that is really non-stick still occasionally has food stick to
it, and in a restaurant, that means it tends to be subjected to the
untender mercies of a dishwasher with something like steel wool. In
short, there's pretty much no point. One burnt pancake and a thoughtless
second with a steel spatule and it's all over. 

Most often I've seen heavy aluminum cookware, and it's heavier than
Calphalon, but without any type of coating other than the seasoning it
acquires (just like iron or thin steel pans) with oil and repeated use.
I've seen stainless-steel pots and pans for non-reactive use with wine
and vinegar preparations, tomatoes, etc., and aluminum or
copper-jacketed stainless-steel. I think the idea is that no matter
what, these pots are going to take a severe beating over a fairly short
time, and as long as it will do a good job in the short term, and
doesn't cost too much, and doesn't poison anybody, it's the material of
choice for professionals.

Not that I'm dissing Calphalon or other non-stick pans, but I do want to
emphasize that the idea that it's what professionals use should not be a
selling point, because it's untrue, at least as far as I've seen. I've
sometimes seen restaurant kitchens keep _one_ non-stick skillet for
oil-free sauteeing, more or less under lock and key.  

  The Le Creuset looks too yuppy  not worth it's
> pricyness, unless you are really into color coordinated kitchen stuff  ( tho
> I may be wrong about this)
> 
>         Or is there a better product line  out there?

Again, it depends on what you want/need. I actually like Le Creuset for
home use: it's a bit delicate, but it's not just enamelled to look
pretty. Its purpose is to combine the qualities of an iron pan and an
earthenware one, so it's absolutely wonderful for baking in, gratins,
casseroles, dishes braised in the oven, that sort of thing. The fact
that it can be served from by the soulless picky types is a bonus.

I guess my simplest advice would be to get a variety of pots and pans
that you need for the kind of cooking you do, and never let the fact
that it's a beautifully matched set affect your choice. It would be like
a surgeon choosing a beautifully matched set of scalpels; it still
remains to be seen whether they will do the job.

Adamantius
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com
============================================================================

To be removed from the SCA-Cooks mailing list, please send a message to
Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe SCA-Cooks".

============================================================================