I don’t buy pans. I make them all at home by hand.
Are you a farrier too?
You could make a good living out here in the wild west!
I don’t buy horses either.
Ten minutes, tops, right? Once you streamline the smelting and hammering.
Nanobond is more versatile, Vecchioumo,
It works on induction:
This can be a confusing question.
First, let’s prune away the unhelpful nomenclature. ‘Fait tout’ holds the meaning(s) we attach to it, and unfortunately those meanings are several and different. Pan shape-wise, some cooks mean an oven. Others mean a splayed shape like a Windsor, sauteuse evassee, or the current crop of “everyday” or “chef’s” pans. Another example is a “Russe”–to some chefs, it’s a taller saucepan or milk pan; to others, it’s just any saucepan.
Next, the whole concept of “does all” is bankrupt in a functional sense. No one shape or geometry can possibly do everything. Crepes in a couscousier?
Still, it’s a fair question to ask what one shape/size/construction does the MOST the best (or the least the WORST). This usually devolves to asking what’s most versatile, which is also what most people are pondering when they ask after the last pan they’d sell, or which would be their “desert island” pan.
For me, the most versatile pan would be a rondeau. And if I’m marooned by myself, it might be a smallish Pommes Ana, because the top serves as a second, shallower pan. But I still wouldn’t be happy making stock in it.
I have a similar one, with a steamer insert, that does a lot of things, but not all the things.
I don’t think I would choose to sear a steak in it.
I think this thread is different and I’m interested in reading and discussing more.
I’m surprising myself because it use to be a SS saute pan with lid.
Now it is a Kuradori nonstick Wok.
Not sure what the heck is going on because I’m usually repelled by non stick not attracted to it !
I do a lot of stir-frying and zero searing of steaks, so I need those sloping sides.
This is a wok?
It’s considered a flat bottomed wok, I was surprised as well.
Not that the name affects its utility, but it’s not what I think of as a wok. The maker may call it such, but IMO doing so cheapens the traditional meaning and distinctions.
I did look it up, and it has a fairly thick base, >3mm.
I know that a base of a wok is 2 mm and this one is 3.2 mm.
I originally thought that it was a fry pan with a wok type look with the curved edge sides.
I’m just calling it that because that is what the company decided to call it.
Also if anyone wants to look it up then they are able to find the right one.
I think it depends on what you mean by “tout”.
Not every cook uses a pan (or pans) the same way. A Chinese cook, for example, will stir fry, but a typical “American” style cook will most likely not. On the other hand, a Chinese or most Asian cooks will never have use for an oven safe pan (or dutch oven) or even a griddle.
So, like many things in life, it just depends. And in this case depends on what you mean by “tout” because no one really – in theory or practice – does everything.
This is part of the charm of this thread hearing what is most important to each cook.
Do you think it’s the same pan? I’ve had it a long time and don’t know what it’s called, but it is Calphalon. I’ve never thought of using it for stir frying!
No, mine is more wok-shaped, the rim is different, and the lid is glass.
I’d go with a copper sauteuse rather than a rondeau. I more often tilt the pan for sauces (which is easier in the sauteuse than in a rondeau) than transfer to the oven which is easier in the rondeau than sauteuse.
Yet my most commonly used pan at home is a 12” steel lined copper skillet.
Kenji might pick a Wok.