pre-soaking pasta
In his recent article about Heat in the New York Times Harold McGee advocates pre-soaking dried pasta - much as you would dried beans - to shorten the cooking time. Has anyone ever done this? Not that pasta takes so long to cook but I'm curious. How would this affect the texture and or flavor? If you've tried this please tell how it worked!
-
my former mother in law would fill a pot with rigatoni, just cover it with water, put it on the heat and bring it to a boil. Nearly all the water would be absorbed by the pasta and the pasta tasted like paste to me. I'm not saying it's exactly the same principal, but I believe there is merit and maybe even a scientific reason to putting pasta into boiling water. (what does soaking the pasta do to the starches, are they being converted while sitting in water?? I don't know, i'm speculating)
I like the idea of turning the pot off, leaving it on the stove for reccomended cooking time and then draining! I will try this next time... oh wait! I just started South Beach Diet... never mind
-
I decided to try this last night. I used cool tap water and soaked the pasta overnight for 8 hours. This morning, the pasta was certainly done, but past the al dente state. I have to say that I didn't care for the texture. It seemed almost chalky. I probably soaked it for too long, so I'll try it again for 4 hours.
FWIW, I used curly egg noodles. I don't know if the type of pasta would make a difference in the texture.
›2 Replies -
I'm actually rather interested in this technique. Saving fuel (for myself, though of course it helps the environment!) is a concern of mine and it's one of the reasons I use my pressure cooker so much. If soaking pasta really can cut down cooking time from 12 minutes to 3 minutes then that would be very useful for me.
›7 Replies-
-
re: oldunc
On my stove maintaining a rolling boil on a large pot of water requires heat just below high. So if the pasta cooks just as well with a simmer or even off the heat, then it would save a good amount of energy.
I'm more concerned about fuel and water usage when camping than I am at home.
-
re: paulj
Neither the rolling boil nor the big pot is usually all that necessary, if you're willing to stir occasionally. If it takes that much to keep it boiling, it took a lot more to get it there. A lot of our culinary habits were developed at a time when conservation was much less of a general concern; even today, not many recipe writers give it much consideration.
-
-
-
I bring water to a boil, salt, put in pasta, return to boil, stir, turn off heat, and leave covered for the recommended cook time. Flawless.
›5 Replies -
-
-
-
-
re: greygarious
For you, perhaps.
But for me this method requires additional steps and a second pot just to save a few minutes' cooking time. So far no one's claimed that presoaking pasta results in a superior flavor and as long as that's the case I'm not worried about the energy consumption required by the additional five minutes' cooking time.
I don't see this as progress.
-
re: Roland Parker
@Roland Parker: Not sure why you need a second pot and if you read my original post on 3rd Sep'11 you will see that the benefits I get out of it were more than just 5 minutes worth of saved electricity. It does provide a superior texture as an alternative to par-cooking and then re-cooking pasta.
I'm on a SERIOUSLY tight budget so any savings I can make to my power bill, not matter how small, are vital.I think that different people have different priorities so pre-soaking might seem pointless to some people but there are others (such as me) who find advantages to it. I don't think anyone is claiming that it's the radical next step in the evolution of cooking dried starches; it's just a technique that some people might find useful in certain situations.
-
-
-
-
-
It's not the Italian thing to do. Marrone! Never heard of presoaking pasta except for this energy saving idea.
›7 Replies-
re: ChiliDude
I haven't pre-soaked but I sometimes do pasta kind of like risotto, barely toasting penne rigate in a little oil then adding liquids in stages. I learned it from one of the Italian cooking magazines. It was a good recipe except it added so much gorgonzola at the end that all the other delicious flavors that had developed were totally lost.
-
re: Betty
Interesting! Sorry to learn of the loss of flavors. I have another problem. My wife, she has the Italian genes, will not eat any ridged pasta because it tastes different than smooth pasta. Yeah, right. To me, all dried pasta tastes the same. Of course, I don't have Mediterranean blood.
-
-
-
He discusses several variations on the large pot of boiling water. Besides the soaking, he explores taking the boiling water with pasta off the burner for a while, and using much less water.
I've not tried the presoak, but have been using somewhat less water, or at least not worrying that I had the full amount suggested on the package. And I had already cooked finer pasta like rice - in just enough water to be absorbed (Spanish fiedua or Mexican sopa seca de fideos).
-
I know this is a really old thread but thought I'd reply since I do it quite successfully. Presoak the dried pasta for 3-4 hours; long shapes you can do in a roasting tray/dish. Then use straight away or drain and keep in a plastic bag in the fridge for a couple of days.
Benefits:
Pasta takes only 3 minutes or so to cook and you also need mega less water to cook it in because it is already hydrated. I'm in a small flat with no extractor fan over the stove so this method of cooking is great for not having to deal with huge amounts of steam that pasta normally generates. I live in a climate with high humidity so keeping things dry is very important.
My budget is very tight so nice to use less electricity when I can.Also good if you have to cook a large amount in a short amount of time (e.g. catering type situations) because the texture is far superior to par-cooking the pasta. Great for baked pasta dishes too - I just pre-soak the pasta, assemble the dish using a sauce that is more liquidy than usual and then bake it when needed.
›10 Replies-
re: Billy33
Thanks for posting. i will do this today. At the time I originated the following thread: http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/583856, I questioned whether pasta could be completely prepared by soaking in unheated water but since responders said it would be mush on the outside and raw inside, I never tried it. But the steeping off-heat in boiled water has been my only way to do pasta in several years now.
-
-
-
re: greygarious
Sold! I soaked for nearly 4 hours, scooped the pasta out, brought water to a simmer and added the pasta for 4 minutes. It could have used another minute, possibly because it wasn't at a rolling boil. It's hot and humid today. A half hour later the water in the pot was still hot enough to use to wash the dinner dishes although for the sake of a cooler kitchen I probably should have dumped it. .
-
-
-
-
-
-
sounds to jfood like the writer was under the weather and wrote an article from the comfort of his bed and had nothing else to write about. And how long will it take to fill and wash the extra pot. Jfood may place this on the list of silly things not to do in the kitchen.
›4 Replies -









