IME there is a lot of flavor in the drippings of a nonstick pan, probably just as much as with the dry fond of a standard pan - and with less chance that the drippings will burn before the cook realizes how dark and dry they are. If you canāt closely monitor your pan, a nonstick is a good option.
1 Like
Once again, you put yourself atop and ahead of the authorities. Larousse, Bocuse, Peterson, Lopez-Alt, McGee, innumerable others, no matter, all wrong.
God Himself, all His Angels and Saints could disagree with your conclusions and workarounds, and you would still claim to be right.
I think Iām done with this topic.
Great, go your own way.
That Scanpan Classic non stick roasting pan looks pretty good. Not a bad deal at SLT.
Yes, thatās a good price.
Iām replying to myself here, so as not to start another war. But in the interest of completeness, Harold McGee got back to me. Hereās his take, FWIW:
āAnd about nonstick pans and deglazing: I agree that they donāt do a great job, and would say the main reason is that a nonstick hydrophobic surface encourages the fluids cooked out of the food to stick to the food instead, so less material remains in the pan. I also have the impression that the surface encourages sautĆ©ing juices to form a water-in-oil emulsion that buffers the reactive stuff from direct pan heat and delays Maillard browning.ā
Aloha,
Kaleo
1 Like
Interesting idea. Wonder if others also have similar views on this.
Not engaging. Take it up with Harold (and all the rest) if you like.
I will just ask everyone to keep in mind that please debate, but please donāt target participants.
Please feel free to disagree with others, but please do not disparagingly label othersā ideas that you do not agree with.
Forum rules here: https://www.hungryonion.org/faq
