Whats the most pretentious culinary buzzword?
Famous
>>7795092
je ne sais quoi
Glazed
Deconstructed
>>7795092
truffle.
>classic image.jpg
>>7795092
reduction
The phrase I fucking hate the most is "flavor profiles".
Holy shit that one sends me.
>>7795092
Seasoning
>>7795099
This fits the definition of pretentious perfectly.
>attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed
>>7795112
Do you have a better word? I can't see how reducing water being called reduction is pretentious.
>>7795120
Hey dick.
>>7795125
Depends how you say it. I regard it in the same light as deja vu. But I've never used it, because I always sais quoi.
>>7795127
This entire thread is just crossboard Summer trolls trying to bait people who actually cook. Just hide/sage/report/ignore.
>>7795139
While I am fine with the term reduction, you have to admit that pretension has crept into the cooking world like mad the last ten years.
OP is right about mouthfeel. Its fucking bullshit.
>>7795158
Its fucking bullshit what?
>>7795137
Yeah, it's really bad when you say it with an obviously fake French accent, and swirl your hand in the air romantically.
>>7795092
"All you can eat". Because that's the height of pretentiousness - roping people who have no business going out to eat into doing so.
>>7795165
fuck I can't imagine saying it without doing the hand swirl
please euthanize me
>>7795092
Umami
"Authentic". Culinary history isn't relevant to actually cooking and eating things.
I dont like how much artisan/artisinal gets labelled on everything
>>7795651
Umamiposters are the worst!
>molecular gastronomy because everyone is fucking different and you cant satisfy everyone's objective preferences and digestion with science, people are just too varied
>paleo/keto because just fucking say high protein low carb moslty raw. the weight loss diet has been the same forever
>organic because its bullshit thanks to the FDA
>GMO because most people dont actually understand what it entails and how much it's already been done over the past thousand years
>>7795092
"'cago"
>>7795092
aioli
Pretentious
>>7795092
palate.
>>7795092
oooomaammii
>>7795092
"""flavor"""
Mouth watering
>>7795100
>>7797269
Cross breeding plants for stronger offspring is not the same thing as DNA modification that produces 0 variety in the crop grown.
>>7795106
This word is another way of saying "I'm too lazy to do it right."
>>7795100
That usually applies to things that are literally glazed.
Not a buzzword.
>>7795092
Vegan.
>If it's vegan, it's healthier, even though I will be hooked on dietary pills (drugs) for the rest of my retarded, chronically-ill vegan life.
>>7795092
>mouthfeel
sounds 1984 core
>>7798140
idk, a lot of places use "aioli" (such as the place i work) to mean "mayonnaise mixed with something else" as opposed to being a garlic based emulsion sauce.
ex. Sriracha aioli
>>7795092
what word do anti fine dining fags use most? "pretentious"?
farm to table
>>7799708
expensive
>>7799688
It literally mean garlic and oil
>>7799688
Aioli is an emulsion, like mayo, but it's made with garlic, olive oil and whatever else is added.
>'za
It makes me irrationally mad and I hated it before it became a meme here.
gastropub
>>7798140
I hate "artisan" and "craft" are these buzzwords or actual things too?
Umami
>>7795092
"Pretentious" is kind of a bullshit term because it's meaning when applied to food is always subjective. To someone who regularly eats fast food the whole fast casual thing might seem pretentious. If you grew up with every meal served family style a meal served over several courses might seem pretentious. If you live on Sandra Lee level home cooking and dine out at chain restaurants white tablecloths and carefully plated dishes might seem pretentious to you. If you only eat at places where you order a la carte a tasting menu might seem pretentious to you.
Something can only be pretentious if it's being used to put on airs. The fact that words like deconstructed, truffle, reduction, flavor profile, umami and aioli are in this thread shows that many posters find restaurants run by actual chefs pretentious.
This says more about the posters themselves than what is or is not pretentious that they use terms identified with fine dining as examples of it. Obviously people with little or limited experience with fine dining, as >>7799708 correctly points out.
I don't see what's so pretentious about mouthfeel. It's basically just a way of saying how the food feels when you chew it.
>>7800053
Just say texture
>>7800110
Texture doesn't cover the same range of descriptions as mouthfeel, dumbshit.
>>7800125
Texture is good enough. Anything beyond that is pretentious.
>>7795111
>classic >classic image.jpg
>>7799688
>>7799958
>Aioli or aïoli (/aJˈoʊli/ or /eJˈoʊli/; Provençal Occitan: alhòli [aˈʎɔli] or aiòli [aˈjɔli]; Catalan: allioli [ˌaʎiˈɔɫi]) is a Mediterranean sauce made of garlic and olive oil and, in some regions other emulsifiers such as egg. The sauce's names mean "oil and garlic" in Catalan and Provençal. It is particularly associated with the cuisines of the Mediterranean coasts of Spain (Valencia, Catalonia, the Balearic Islands, Murcia and eastern Andalusia), France (Provence), and Italy (Liguria). French-Provençal versions of the sauce are typically closer to a garlic mayonnaise incorporating also egg yolks, and lemon juice, whereas the Spanish versions is without egg and has considerably more garlic. This gives it a more pasty texture, as well as making it considerably more laborious to make.[1][2][3][4] There are many variations, such as adding lemon juice or other seasonings.
>>7800131
Part of the reason "mouthfeel" sounds so jarring in English is because it's a completely unnecessary word when talking about Western cuisine. But once you get into Asian (particularly Chinese) food you realize English is missing an essential descriptive term, and that's why mouthfeel was coined.
We have the same problem talking about wine. Many wine terms sound incredibly pretentious to those who aren't into wine because there were no proper English words to describe wine, so they were borrowed from French. Talking about a wine's typicity, minerality or its nose sound jarring, because these concepts really don't exist in English. The same discussion in French would sound perfectly natural. And mouthfeel applies there as well.
>>7800180
What is the difference between texture and mouthfeel though?
>>7800180
kys
>>7800191
a steak has a texture, what kind of texture does a sauce have?
>>7800197
Depends on the sauce. Some sauces are very thin and nearly watery in texture, like Tabasco. Others might be thick and sticky like BBQ sauce. Some might contain chunks of ingredients in them like Tex-Mex red salsa or Indian chutneys. Others might have a creamy texture like Mornay.
>>7800212
And some sauces are astringent, while others coat the inside of your mouth and feel heavy, while yet others dry out your mouth.
>>7800180
>it's a completely unnecessary word when talking about western cuisine
But you need it to say something as simple as, "a sauce thickened with roux has a different mouthfeel than a sauce thickened with cornstarch".
I don't see how that's supposed to be pretentious; that's Western cuisine 101. I also don't see how you would say the same thing with a word like "texture", which clearly isn't what we're talking about.
>>7795092
>mouthffeel
>>7799720
I'm actually mad
>>7800191
In Chinese food, or in wine? In Chinese cuisine some dishes are not eaten for taste at all, but for the physical pleasure of eating them. Two good examples are sea cucumbers and chicken feet. There are no English words to describe these textures in a positive light, because Westerners generally don't like them. How would you describe a sea cucumber? Squishy? Rubbery? How would you describe the pleasure of gnawing off every little bit meat, skin and cartilage off a chicken foot? An English description sounds like an unpleasant struggle for little reward. This is where the concept of mouthfeel as a value in food, as much as taste becomes useful. It explains something that it difficult to put across in English.
When it comes to wine things get worse. The French have been making wine for thousands of years, and exporting it for nearly as long. They have a full vocabulary for talking about wine. English was late to the game for developing such a vocabularity, because most English speakers who drank wine were generally upper class people who also spoke French. The borrowed French terms like minerality, typicity and nose sound weird in English, as do other wine terms like roundness, body, structure and crispness. It seems weird to apply those terms to a liquid. But they're in many cases an attempt to describe how the wine feels in the mouth.
wa la
>>7800223
>"a sauce thickened with roux has a different mouthfeel than a sauce thickened with cornstarch".
You could use the word "consistency" there. But we don't have much in English to describe the texture of tofu skin, jellyfish salad, or the particular numbing action of Sichuan peppercorns. Because the idea of valuing such things is not in Western cuisine. That's where the idea of moughfeel applies. It's not just about the texture itself, but about placing a value on how the food feels when you eat it - something that may be as important as flavor in some cases.
The closest to that we come in Western cuisine are things we already have words for, like crunchy and creamy.
>>7800269
"Consistency" hardly says anything about the feeling of how different sauces coat the mouth and feel on the palate.
Just because in China they eat gross shit for the texture doesn't mean that "mouthfeel" only applies to those kinds of foods (and wine). As I said earlier, the main difference between a sauced thickened with roux or a sauce thickened with cornstarch.
>>7800287
Neither does "taste" or "smell", but those are both ways in which we experience food.
Also just using the term "texture" makes it sound like a picky 5 year old is talking; "I don't like it because it has an icky texture!". Whereas when texture is used in a positive way it's typically just to comment on how a dish contains a variety of textures, which is usually pleasant.
>>7800287
True. But it allows one to place value on the physical feel of eating the dish, as much as the flavor. In the West this can be controversial, as some folks find dishes with serious ly high levels of mouthfeel disgusting.
Fried chicken is a great example. Someone who is really into mouthfeel not only appreciates the crunchy shin against the tender meat, but takes nearly equal pleasure getting every little bit of meat, then the cartilage, and maybe even chewing off the softer bits of bone and some of the marrow. Those put off by serious mouthfeel experience will just dip boneless nuggets or tendedrs into honey mustard.
>>7795092
"fresh"
I hate when restaurants advertise their food as using "fresh ingredients" like it's some big selling point. I should damn well hope they're not using rotten ones.
>>7800310
The opposite of fresh in this context isn't rotten...
>>7795092
Suicide.
>>7795092
jus
>>7799986
now that 'za is a meme, i don't mind it. before, when some were actually referring to pizza as 'za, i wanted to climb through the internet and strangle them.
>>7800191
there are some food chemicals that give the illusion of texture. recently, pepsico added a chemical to diet pepsi so that it would seem to be syrupy. it's not actually syrupy, but when you drink it, it appears to be.
it's fucking disgusting.
>>7800229
"How would you describe the texture of this dish?"
"Crunchy."
"How would you describe the mouthfeel of this dish?"
"Delightfully crunchy."
>>7800413
Mouthfeel is more about how a food feels when it's just sitting in your mouth (think "viscous" or "waxy" rather than "hot", for example), not what the texture is like when you're chewing on it.
>>7800442
When it's just sitting there it feels like a wet blob of mush. How appetizing.
I guess OP was right
>>7800413
>i am unable to understand nuances and therefore must reduce everything to extremes in order to understand what is happening
hello autism
>>7800463
>when it's just sitting there it feels like a wet blob of mush
And in that case there's no reason to talk about mouthfeel because it isn't an applicable term to whatever food you're eating.
>>7800442
>How is the food?
>Like eating a candle this mouthfeel is so middle ages
>>7800476
That's the point. There's never a reason to talk about it. It's a nonsense term. If it needed to be used it would've been invented centuries ago.
>>7800543
If everything you eat feels like a wet blob of mush I'd suggest going somewhere other than a fast food restaurant, or at least get up the courage to eat there while it's still hot, instead of letting it get cold and soggy on the ride back to sitting in front of your computer, as comfortable as eating off a paper plate and shitposting on /ck/ might sound.
>>7795096
underrated
>>7800136
Christ
>>7800543
Depending on your diet it might be nonsense. We have all the words we need to describe the Western diet. Terms like: crispy, crunchy, creamy, tender, flaky, soft, smooth, thick, al dente, and the like.
But like I said before the idea of mouthfeel is placing a value on that in a way more common in Asia. We don't have good words to describe the particular pleasure of gnawing on a chicken foot. Many Westerners don't even see where the pleasure is in that. It's a foreign concept to them. Difficult to explain to someone who might prefer never being served meat with bones in it, anything squishy or gelatinous or soft shell shellfish.
So coining a term to describe it makes sense.
"Authentic"
Usually used by 3rd or 4th generation immigrants who have no idea what their culinary heritage actually tastes like, and just want to sound elitist against the globalized, western nation they grew up in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo59LlkTDe4
>>7795092
When someone describes the flavor of something as "flavorful". It's so utterly retarded.
>>7800772
I don't know. While I agree the word "authentic" has become nothing more meaningful than any other advertising buzzword I disagree with your assessment of 3rd or 4th generation immigrants. Their culinary heritage is EXACTLY what they're serving - a taste of their immigrant experience over three or four generations. If I want a taste of regional Italian cooking I go to a good Italian restaurant. But when I want a taste of the Italian American experience I go to an Italian American place. There may be some overlap between the two, but much of the food is totally different, and that's the point of why one might choose one over the other. Same is true for other immigrant groups that have operated restaurants here for generations.
>>7796095
>Culinary history isn't relevant to actually cooking and eating
idk fampai, ancient and medieval culinary history and can be pretty fascinating to get into; but i agree with your disdain for those "authentic" fetishists.
>>7797400
>oooomaammii
i'm on the fence about this one, man. i mean, there's definitely a 5th taste that's triggered by glutamates. what do we call it though? the japanese word umami is just dumb and pretentious sounding though (even though it just means "yummy") when compared to "sweet, salty, bitter, sour". what should we call it?
>>7800041
to be fair anon, i think what people hate about these words is the fact that untalented chefs will name a dish with lots of "foody terms" and then the dish itself is disgusting or lackluster at best. sure a mushroom safron aioli reduction sounds like something interesting but more often than not it's used to hide behind lack of actual technique.
>>7801037
Generations of good cooks all over the world have worked out delicious dishes using the ingredients available to them, and figured out how to put those dishes together into great meals. Even if you don't give a fuck about "authenticity" if you cook you'd be a fool to ignore the combined wisdom of those who have gone before you.
>>7800215
a sauce can also be cloying on the palate, or starchy. there are plenty of terms, i think typically it's idiot amerifats with limited vocabularies who think that describing food with words is "pretentious"
>>7801053
Dunno, I call it savory. That's the best way I can describe it.
>>7800228
kek'd. yup, farm to table is the biggest meme out there right now.
>>7801076
absolutely, but to be a slave to that past is just as bad as ignoring it, i think; both parts in moderation is the probably the best way forward.
>>7801066
I get it, but that doesn't make these terms pretentious. For example I'm going to eat at Mission Chinese tonight. I already know it's going to be a very expensive and possibly uneven experience, because Bowien is brilliant but wildly uneven. But I also know that while much of his food is inspired by Sichuan it's not going to be Sichuan cuisine. So it won't be "authentic", and many of the dishes will only be describable using lots of "foodie terms". And as I said, it's gonna be expensive.
But I'm into food, and this is how I'm choosing to spend my money - to enjoy a "food as entertainment" meal with a group of friends. I don't see how that qualifies as pretentious.
>>7801092
I think it best to know as much about food tradition and history as you can. How much of that knowledge you decide to apply to any particular situation is up to you. But if you're going to cook it's really good to know that stuff.
>>7801053
kevin.
>>7800041
+9001
/thread
>>7800370
>recently, pepsico added a chemical to diet pepsi
citation needed, faggot.
gourmet
>>7795092
umami easily.
I feel like fresh has become a buzzword. I mean how fucked up is it that people have to brag about their ingredients being fresh? I thought that was supposed to be expected.
natural.
all food is natural.
and just because it's natural doesn't mean it's good: I took an all natural shit this morning.
>>7801357
Canned food is pretty good senpai so much easier
>>7801374
I flushed mine. I would never take one, that's just gross.
>>7795127
Thicken...
>>7795127
sauce.
usually that word is used on the menu in a context like "(some kind of steak) with a shallot-red wine reduction" just call it a sauce.
>>7801429
Thickening can be both a reductive and additive process
>>7795092
"Authentic"
Makes me ayylmao everytime.
Cooked
>>7801429
You can thicken using a Roux, beurre meuniere, waiting for it to cool, reducing, etc
>>7801493
I always just add corn starch.
>>7801437
Sauces can be made on a variety of ways. Reduction is specific.
Unagi.
>>7801476
Jack get out you fat fuck
>>7801501
it's also pretentious when written on a menu. it's there to make the food sound fanicer by showing off that the chef knows how to do something that the average customer doesn't.
>>7801517
You're right. All menus should just say "cooked beef" or "cooked fish" because preparation methods and specific cuts/species are also pretentious since a customer may not be familiar with them.
>>7797256
Have to agree with this. Any time "artisinal" or "artisan" show up, it's just a pretentious way of calling something pretentious.
>>7800010
"Craft" is only acceptable when spelled with a K and followed with "macaroni and cheese."
>>7801567
that's obviously not the same thing.
>>7801767
But it is. A reduction is just cooking the sauce until it's to the desired consistency.
Literally anyone who can operate a stove can make a reduction.
>>7801131
you sound like a huge dick desu
>>7801768
right, but to most people it is the sauce, not the reduction. people aren't going to understand how a reduction effects the way the sauce tastes in the same way they will understand grilling vs baking vs boiling. it's a term chefs and "foodie" people will understand.
>>7801780
Just because you're too stupid for the word, doesn't mean everyone else is.
>>7801767
Yes it is. If you don't know what a reduction is then you most likely don't know what braising, poaching, or searing, are and just as likely don't know any fish that aren't salmon, tuna, and tilapia.
>>7801783
it's the other way around. I know what it means, other people don't know what it means. it sounds pretentious, just call it a fucking sauce. reducing doesnt effect the flavor of the sauce to the extent grilling vs baking vs boiling does.
>>7801794
Yes it does
>>7801796
no, it doesn't. people aren't going to eat a sauce and immediately know it was a reduction vs some other method. they will with the cooking methods I mentioned.
>>7801794
>other people don't know what it means
Everyone I've ever known has known what it means. Why are you so pretentious that you think you're so much better than everyone else?
You some kinda atheistfaggot?
Also, learn to use capital letters if you want to be taken seriously as an adult.
Also also, it's "affect" when used as a verb, retard.
Finally, yes, a reduction does affect the flavor as it's reduced down to the point that the flavor is more potent. And the reason they don't call it "sauce" is because that implies it's from a can or a pre-packaged bottle.
"Reduction" implies that it's done in-house by the staff.
>>7801800
Why are you so autistically upset that people don't use your preferred plebword?
>>7801806
>autism: the post.
>>7801808
this is a pretentious culinary buzzword thread.
>>7801809
>I have no argument
Good to know.
>>7801812
>I'm mad: the post.
>>7801800
You're wrong.
>>7801814
>I still have nothing so I'll just shitpost
You're adorable.
>>7795092
"Simple" and forms
runners up is "natural"
>>7801841
>I'm mad so I'll also shitpost
youre a dream.
>>7801836
You're wrong.
>>7801876
I am not.
>>7801880
neither am I.
>>7801437
Sauce implies more the one ingredient, where as a reduction is something like a Demi glacé. Reducing the water content to concentrate flavor. There you get reduction. Trying to explain this plainly as possible for you.
>>7801911
to me that's pretentious. I don't need to know all that when I'm ordering, and it doesn't impress me.
>>7801921
>i'm still too stupid to understand basic terms so that's pretentious
Autism, the autistmo.
>>7800041
Let's get real here, actual fine dining is based on half pretentiousness, half trying too hard at being different.
>>7801958
>youre stupid because you don't understand my foodie/chef term
>this isn't pretentious
>>7801921
Ok then go to Chili's holy shit...there is nothing wrong with accurately describing the food being served in an establishment. You're the faggot here.
>>7801978
>I'm mad: the post.
>>7800776
Nah that one I get. I had a pizza the other day that was pretty bland. Usually the ones I get there are really zesty. For some reason this one was just lacking, and hence wasn't "flavorful".
>>7801881
Of course you are. I'll let you have the last word to soften the blow though, so respond freely.
>>7801969
It's not pretentious when you're legitimately better.
>>7801053
Every time I see umami there's an * next to it and at the bottom of the page the note tells me it means savory. So just call it savory.
>>7801993
trust me, I would know.
>>7801985
reduction.
>>7801961
>actual fine dining
You might actually be right except for the fact that you used the word "actual". There's fuccboi fine dining, which you described perfectly. Then there's real nigga fine dining which can truly be a transcendent experience.
Both of them use the same terminology and language, but the difference is in the execution.
>>7802023
Execution may vary but the result is still the same: a waste of money and the feel that you have eaten nothing at all
>>7798140
>this much autism
Wew
>>7801982
You can imply I'm mad all you want. Doesn't detract from what I said making logical sense vs you just whining about cooking techniques.
""""Gluten-free""""
>>7802098
>I've been mad for the last 20 minutes: the post
>>7795092
Organic
>>7802000
But then we could end up losing the original definition of savoury, which has long been a useful term for anything that isn't sweet.
>julienne
Just say "sliced" for fucks sake.
>>7799580
Doublegood foodstack
aspartame.
>>7800776
I think they mean it as opposed to "bland". It sounds like something they would say on first impression, but then clarify what flavor they're tasting
>>7802203
Stevia
>>7802148
Julienne is the size of the cut, it's similar to the size of a matchstick.
>>7802249
thanks, good to know. now it's suddenly not pretentious.
>>7802255
This is a thread for buzzwords, not what you feel is pretentious. Go complain on your blog or tumblr. This is a cooking board, cooking specific jargon is not pretentious.
>>7802148
The term julienne is more passé than pretentious
>>7802262
hey man, I didnt post that original thing, I just saw your post when I was checking if the guy that was mad that I said "reduction" decided to post again and thought I could make you mad, which i think I did.
>>7802268
It's neither if you work in a kitchen.
>>7802278
I don't work in a kitchen because I know how to make better financial decisions than that.
>>7802281
Like eating fast food and avoiding any nice restaurant like the plague because, heaven forbid, they use a word like mouthfeel, reduction, or julienne on their menu? Worse yet, they'd probably expect you to tip at the end of the night, even though they clearly listed the prices right on the menu at the beginning.
It must be awesome to be you.
>>7802278
On a menu it is often perceived as passé by the customer
>>7802303
dude every restaurant I eat at has at least something with the word "reduction" on it and it grinds my gears. that's why I posted it.
on fathers day one of the vegetable sides was julienned squash, zuccini and some other thing I dont remember. they didnt put that on the menu, though.. I dont really care about julienned, just the constant "(insert protein) with a (this kind of) reduction" is on so many menus at actual restaurants - I never see it at a diner. it sounds like theyre trying to make the food sound fancier, which makes it seem pretentious to me. I dont know why i'm reviving this again, youre wrong.
I always tip $20 or 25%, whichever is higher.
>>7802318
>I never see it at a diner
Maybe because diners don't make reductions?
>Ugh! Sausage "gravy"? Just call it sausage sauce. Fucking pretentious.
>>7802324
youre wrong and i'm right. deal with it.
>>7802329
On a subjective matter like this consensus determines right and wrong and you are outside of the consensus.
>>7802342
>pretentious: the post
>>7802342
nah youre wrong and i'm right.
I call salad dressing "sauce". Come at me.
>>7802356
you mean you call olive oil with a balsamic reduction a sauce?
what a fag.
>>7800307
How does something feel? It's texture.
How does it feel in your mouth? The texture on your mouth. Just because you're feeling it with your mouth doesn't mean it needs a dumbass new word to describe it. What you're essentially doing is no different than feeling a texture with any other part of your body. If I poured soup into your hands, you wouldn't call it the soup's "handfeel" would you? No. That's stupid.
>>7795111
fuck off already cunt
>>7802634
>if I poured soup into your hands, you wouldn't call it the soup's "handfeel" would you
Have you ever washed your hands before? You know how soap feels kind of slippery yet coats your hands and is kind of slimy? Yeah, that's not "texture".
>>7802655
Actually that is in fact the texture the soap leaves on your skin, if you're using cheap soap. That's the texture your skin now has if you leave it that way. It's not your "handfeel", it's just the slippery, slimy, texture that the soap scum leaves.
>>7802655
Sorry for doubleposting, but also, don't tell me mouthfeel is supposed to mean the coating my mouth gets after I eat something either. It's just texture. Stop making up stupid words.
>>7802669
Go chew on a sansho pepper and describe the mouthfeel in terms of "texture".
>>7802675
Why not describe to me what you mean by "mouthfeel" and how it's distinct from "texture" without resorting to parroting obscure foods as if that justifies your argument. If "mouthfeel" exists, you should be able to describe it. I refuse to believe that somehow only sansho peppers or whatever else you want to bring up have "mouthfeel"; it's simply not how the word is used in the world. If that's your argument, then "mouthfeel" is still horribly overused, and therefore perfectly pretentious, and more importantly, useless in Western contexts. So again, what is "mouthfeel"?
>>7802702
Numerous examples have been given. Read the thread.
>more importantly, useless in western contexts
Now you're just shitposting. If you think it somehow makes sense (why?) in non-Western contexts then you obviously think the term has some kind of meaning.
>>7802655
It is texture. It's the texture of wet soap versus a dry bar of soap.
>>7802706
None of those examples satisfy me, and your inability to provide a suitable example from Western cuisine renders doubt unto whether "mouthfeel" is an applicable and non pretentious word to Western cuisine at all.
>If you think it somehow makes sense (why?) in non-Western contexts then you obviously think the term has some kind of meaning.
I was merely following your line of thought, and the general sentiment of the thread of you "mouthfeel" supporters, in bringing up the vague argument that "mouthfeel" is something the West just doesn't understand, or doesn't get, while still existing as a valid term in Asian cuisine. But this misses the point: I'm willing to concede that there are dishes I've never tried, flavors I've never tasted, meals I will never experience, so I can't say that "mouthfeel" is NOT a thing in Asian cuisine. The argument at hand, however, is whether or not it's applicable to Western contexts, as it is used in America. If mouthfeel only exists in Asian Cuisine, it is being fundamentally misused in America to describe things that are better off being described with the already handy food word "texture". I can't see how you can dispute that without either bringing up examples from non Asian cuisine that have "mouthfeel" independent of "texture", and on that point I can't see how you can say that it's not pretentious to use "mouthfeel" in America if it somehow is a thing that exists in Asian food but not in the West.
Either it doesn't exist, and it's a pretentious word that is better off being replaced by "texture", or, as the proponents have claimed in this thread, it exists somehow only in Asian Cuisine, and thus it is still pretentious to be used in America, and completely unnecessary.
Either provide me suitable examples of "mouthfeel" or concede that in America it is simply pretentious. Every time I see someone describe the "mouthfeel" of their Mac & Cheese, I bristle. Enlighten me.
>>7802742
I was arguing against the other anon who was trying to say "mouthfeel" is a Chinese thing used to describe stuff like chicken feet.
My simplest example was describing the difference between a sauce thickened with roux, and the exact same sauce thickened with corn starch. They taste the same, have the same thickness and viscosity, yet because of the thickening agent used they coat the tongue differently. And again, this is Western cuisine 101.
And literally nobody has every talked about the "mouthfeel" of mac and cheese; you're just spouting bullshit at this point.
>>7802768
>I was arguing against the other anon who was trying to say "mouthfeel" is a Chinese thing used to describe stuff like chicken feet.
I wasn't aware, but I agree with you that saying that mouthfeel is Asian Cuisine specific is ludicrous.
I don't think I can agree that a sauce with roux vs a sauce with cornstarch are going to have the same texture. Roux offers richness, cornstarch does not. This affects the texture. Furthermore, I can't agree that they taste the same, or even have the same thickness.
If you're saying mouthfeel is how it coats the tongue, that's the texture of the food against your tongue m8. I feel like this is an argumentative impasse because I don't know how to convince you that there's no difference between feeling things with your hands and your tongue; they're both texture.
>>7802785
>i feel like this is an argumentative impasse
Fair enough.
You are going to insist that "texture" can replace "mouthfeel" in every possible example given, but that's just simply not how the terms are used. Texture usually refers to something like "crunch factor" (don't even know if that's considered a buzzword), not how a sauce coats the tongue with a silky emulsion, or dries out the mouth.
>>7801961
I think you're misusing the word pretentious. For the kind of people who can afford to regularly eat at fine dining establishments none of that shit is pretentious, it's just going out to eat at a nice place. Sometimes it gets a little trendy, gimmicky or slavish in its devotion to fashion, but that's he world these people live in. But people who dine out often tend to be critical, and expect a minimum set of standards when it comes to the actual food. They quickly tire of the theatrics if the food doesn't live up to the hype.
>>7802023
I appreciate the distinction you're trying to make, but it's a pretty fine line. Yes, there are places where the rich go to see and be seen. The food is generally good. Then there are places where the food is amazing, and the economic realities of turning out that level of quality mean pretty much only rich people can eat there regularly. As a squarely middle class diner knowing the difference between the two is exactly what determines my dining out splurges. But that's more a matter of following the careers of chefs than detecting "pretentiousness" in menu descriptions.
>>7802030
If you make bad choices. I went to Mission Chinese tonight. Five of us ordered sever dishes for the table, doubling up on one. We all had a drink, too. We left stuffed. Two dishes were OK, two were great and two were amazing.One of the amazing ones was a large plate that wrecked us all at the end of the meal. $56pp including tax and tip. Not exactly fine dining, but an hour and a half of OK to amazing food for a pretty low cost of entry. Best meal I've had in a while, and I'd consider it a bargain.
>>7802702
>Why not describe to me what you mean by "mouthfeel" and how it's distinct from "texture" without resorting to parroting obscure foods as if that justifies your argument.
But he has to reference foods obscure in the West because mouthfeel is not a Western concept. Best I can offer to make sense of it in familiar terms is here >>7800308
>>7802825
You're correct. I fail to see how crunchiness as a texture felt by the tongue is any different than the texture of a sauce as felt by the tongue, or the texture of one's mouth after eating a particular dish. As an example that conveniently uses traditionally Western cuisine, in >>7800308 this anon mentions fried chicken as having "mouthfeel" due to the eating experience, but how are any of the sensations experienced while eating the fried chicken if not through the confluence and interplay of multiple textures?
On that point, regarding >>7802835 I disagree that mouthfeel is a "non-Western" concept. It simply either doesn't exist or it does. Asians don't experience food differently, they simply have different food, not different sensory organs. The touch sensations on their mouths are responding to the textures of the food just the same as my Western mouth.
>>7802851
>the confluence and interplay of multiple textures?
Because it's as much about the physical act of scraping and grinding these textures off the bone as it is the textures themselves. It's putting a value on something that in the Western world is often debased.
>Asians don't experience food differently, they simply have different food,
They kind of do experience it differently, because of a different set of values. In the West it's rude to make any noise while eating. In Asia you slurp your noodles. In the West high class joints serve steaks and fillets, and when when meat is served on the bone you're supposed to dissect it with a knife and fork. Gnawing on a bone would be bad manners. In much of asia meat is served on the bone, and gnawing on bones is part of the pleasure of eating.
I'd call that a stark difference in values, and placing a value on the pleasure of mouthfeel is exactly why.
>>7802851
Fried chicken is a terrible example, and that sounds like the same person who keeps bringing up Asia's appreciation of different textures as though that's what mouthfeel means, which it isn't. The fried chicken example is a perfect example of contrasting textures, but has nothing to do with what people call "mouthfeel".
>>7802825
Hahahahaha you don't own a dictionary. Baka gaijin
>>7802889
>when when meat is served on the bone you're supposed to dissect it with a knife and fork
>gnawing on a bone would be bad manners
Go to any high end steak house and you'll see people in $2000 suits picking up the bone with their hands and gnawing off the meat, and then being given wet-naps with the bill.
>>7802900
I've owned a number of dictionaries, but I'm guessing you're probably too young to know what that's like.
>>7802889
>>7802898
Since you two don't seem to agree on what "mouthfeel" is, I'll respond separately.
>>7802889
>the physical act
All I'm hearing here is the textural experience of eating. Feeling different textures with your mouth isn't something exclusive to certain foods in my opinion. Just as valid could be the eating of corn off of a cob, or the eating of ribs off the bone. This isn't something independent of texture; it's the experience of textures.
>I'd call that a stark difference in values, and placing a value on the pleasure of mouthfeel is exactly why.
Slurping soup and gnawing on bones might be experiencing the textures in a different way, but it's still fundamentally the textural experience of eating.
>>7802898
>The fried chicken example is a perfect example of contrasting textures, but has nothing to do with what people call "mouthfeel".
If "mouthfeel" isn't the experience of contrasting textures, then what would you describe it as?
>>7802898
It's not so much an example of mouthfeel as it is a good indicator of who appreciates it and who doesn't. The person who enjoys the fried chicken, then takes the extra step to not only leave the bones completele cleaned, but maybe even took joy in crunching part of the wing bones and chewing the cartilage off the ends of the leg bone? That's someone who appreciates mouthfeel. The person who enjoyed eating the chicken but would have been happier with nuggets or tenders is someone who doesn't,
>>7800136
Oh holy fuck.......I give up on this world.....
>Locavore
This idiotic word makes me want to punch a baby.
>>7802917
Taking pleasure in unique textures of food, once again, is not the same as mouthfeel.
You seemed to know what you were talking about with wine, but you keep bringing up mouthfeel being a way of describing people who enjoy chewing on cartilage, which is a texture thing and obscures the difference from what mouthfeel means in relation to something like wine.
>>7802901
>>7802913
Sure, but those same folks might not be willing to come out and say they value texture as much as taste when it comes to eating because SOME textures gross them out, whether it beans, raw tomatoes, soft tofu or raw shellfish. Mouthfeel is kind of a catch all term for the enjoyment of food texture for its own sake.
>>7802938
It is entirely different in relation to wine. When it comes to food I understand mouthfeel in a more Chinese context, because that's where I've most encountered it beyond wine. Personally I wouldn't use it to describe Western food that wasn't some kind of fusion cuisine.
>>7795092
Umami.
Umami, I'd say is better described as meaty than yummy. Savory is what the word actually means
ITT: uncultured swine
>>7795092
What the fuck does mouthfeel even mean?
Is it like consistency/texture, or something?
>>7806221
The way it feels... in your mouth. The literal sensations caused by the food's physical and chemical properties.
Cohesiveness: Degree to which the sample deforms before rupturing when biting with molars.
Density: Compactness of cross section of the sample after biting completely through with the molars.
Dryness: Degree to which the sample feels dry in the mouth.
Fracturability: Force with which the sample crumbles, cracks or shatters. Fracturability encompasses crumbliness, crispiness, crunchiness and brittleness.
Graininess: Degree to which a sample contains small grainy particles.
Gumminess: Energy required to disintegrate a semi-solid food to a state ready for swallowing.
Hardness: Force required to deform the product to given distance, i.e., force to compress between molars, bite through with incisors, compress between tongue and palate.
Heaviness: Weight of product perceived when first placed on tongue.
Moisture absorption: Amount of saliva absorbed by product.
Moisture release: Amount of wetness/juiciness released from sample.
Mouthcoating: Type and degree of coating in the mouth after mastication (for example, fat/oil).
Roughness: Degree of abrasiveness of product's surface perceived by the tongue.
Slipperiness: Degree to which the product slides over the tongue.
Smoothness: Absence of any particles, lumps, bumps, etc., in the product.
Uniformity: Degree to which the sample is even throughout; homogeneity.
Uniformity of Bite: Evenness of force through bite.
Uniformity of Chew: Degree to which the chewing characteristics of the product are even throughout mastication.
Viscosity: Force required to draw a liquid from a spoon over the tongue.
Wetness: Amount of moisture perceived on product's surface.
>FLAVORTOWN NIGGA!
>>7806243
Why not just say "feeling" f@malam?
>>7795092
vegetable
>>7801806
Most people don't know what a reduction is, fuck off retard
>>7806243
Thanks senpai I'm gonna post this on Reddit as my own OC.
>upboates galore
>>7795111
>classic faggot.post
"Rustic"
"Deconstruction"
"Artisan" when referred to blatantly mass-produced goods
Those are really high up my shit list.
>>7795092
Mother fucking umami
>>7806787
Look up bespoke
>>7808412
It is NOT synonymous with savoury.
