Mouton 1994 and a steak contest.

[Musigny 151]

First the wine, a birth year wine for my son’s belated birthday. Surprised by how good this is. Slight browning at the edge, the wine is in a perfect place. Cassis fruit, spice packet, and mushroom. All nicely integrated, with a solid finish. 93

The steak off was a bet with my son. His sous vide or his reverse sear versus my boring sauté and finishing in a hot oven. Judge Nancy, my wife an impartial bystander, tasted them blind.


In third place, sous vide. Not bad, but texturally there was a slight mushiness to it.

Nothing to separate the top two. In the end, the traditional sear and oven was just beaten out by the reverse sear. Not on taste, but the reverse sear was more uniform in color.

[JimHow]

Mmmm sounds delish. I’ll always remember this wine from a dinner in Quebec City, must’ve been about 1999, back when you could get wines like this off a restaurant menu for $100. I opted for ‘94 Mouton at $100 over ‘95 Margaux at $175, which was just a little out of my price range. We had the Mouton with flaming duck. I remember the wine as inky, impenetrable black, closed and tannic at first, but just kept opening up gloriously with the rich French dinner. Magnifique.

[jal]

Isn't reverse sear also sous vide?

Happy Birthday to Philip!

[marcs]

Since I find the boring old stovetop sear/oven finish to be infinitely easier than any other method, especially now that I am old and set in my ways, I find the results of the steak taste test to be quite gratifying.

[JoelD]

Sounds like quite the night. Haven't tried the mouton but I have found 94 to be an underrated vintage with some other great chateau's.

Reverse sear is amazing normally. However I hacked this even further and the best steaks I have ever made are Bone in, grass fed ribeyes starting with a 250-260 degree reverse sear until meat temp of 100-105 and then quick finish on the grill instead of in a pan. Can't recommend this enough.

[DavidG]

Sounds like quite the night. Haven't tried the mouton but I have found 94 to be an underrated vintage with some other great chateau's.

Reverse sear is amazing normally. However I hacked this even further and the best steaks I have ever made are Bone in, grass fed ribeyes starting with a 250-260 degree reverse sear until meat temp of 100-105 and then quick finish on the grill instead of in a pan. Can't recommend this enough.

OK, I’m doing this tonight with a Flannery ribeye.

[Musigny 151]

Isn't reverse sear also sous vide?

Happy Birthday to Philip!

Reverse sear is putting into an oven until internal temperature reaches a certain temperature, and then searing quickly for color.
Sous Vide is putting into a vacuum bag, and setting the temperature of the water; the steak will eventually reach the temperature of the eater. Also seared quickly. Love sous vide for pork tenderloin for instance, and it is also superb for heating up food without cooking it.

[Comte Flaneur]

I sold a case of Mouton 1994 earlier this year, a wine I always defended as the ‘Prince of Darkness’ to a hostile press over here and to highlight it’s broodyness and how it could reward patience. The proceeds of that case went a very long way and were not banked but I still have a case left because these were purchased two and a half decades ago at what was then a very popular high street wine retailer called Oddbins at £29.99 a bottle, so I filled my boots. I drank Latour 1994 on holiday last month and it was splendid. Mark glad that the Mouton stepped up for your son’s birthday.

[AKR]

One plus of the sous vide + finish on a grill is that on a 110F day -- like today -- out here is that all the heat can be kept outside the house. We have turned off just about every heat creating appliance in the house, hoping to avoid the brownout / blackout zap.

I used to think the 94's were 'underrated' when I was much younger, but pretty much changed my view to 'underwhelming' ex a few of the Pomerols, as time went on. Fortunately, I used up a ton at my wedding in due course!

[jckba]

A ‘94 Las Cases pretty much held its own much to my surprise versus a ‘95 Mouton while at lunch with Parker late last year in MD.

And the veal chop at Vito’s Ristorante.

6ADDB02C-EA30-4B34-A39B-40D75CDBDF86.jpeg (98.59 KiB) Viewed 1104 times

[jal]

Reverse sear for me is searing the steak in a pan first, then putting it in a bag to sous vide.

[DavidG]

I thought reverse sear is slow cook at low temp first, then finish in a hot pan or on a hot grill to get the surface Maillard reaction. Would doing the sear first maintain that nice surface texture during sous vide? Or do you do another dear at the end?

No sous vide gadget here, but tried it tonight with a 250 degree oven to an internal temp of 110, rest 10 min, then 60-90 sec per side on the hot grill to get that yummy crust. Much better than straight grilling.

[JoelD]

I thought reverse sear is slow cook at low temp first, then finish in a hot pan or on a hot grill to get the surface Maillard reaction. Would doing the sear first maintain that nice surface texture during sous vide? Or do you do another dear at the end?

No sous vide gadget here, but tried it tonight with a 250 degree oven to an internal temp of 110, rest 10 min, then 60-90 sec per side on the hot grill to get that yummy crust. Much better than straight grilling.

You're right David. What he is talking about would just be a traditional "sear" that most restaurants do. Sear both sides, then finish on low temp in oven. Hence the reverse is what you did today. So his is a sear/ sous vide. I bet that a Sous vide then sear would be very good as well.

Glad it turned out well. It works in a pan too, but the grill adds that extra flavor. Personally, I don't let it rest much before the sear on the grill. Just a couple min of transfer time, then let it rest for 5-10 min after taking it off before serving. Did this a couple weeks ago with a 1990 Pichon Baron. The steak was one of my best ever, so it actually outshone the PB. Next time I will pick a better pairing as this one just didn't have enough tannic structure to hold up to the meat. The 2000 or 2005 PB would have been a perfect pair.

[DavidG]

The other advantage of finishing on the grill is no grease spatter in the kitchen.

I'll try with a little lower internal temp (maybe 100?) and a shorter rest before searing next time. It came out med-rare while I was shooting for closer to rare.

[AKR]

Depending on the cut one could get flareups on the grill too.

Lamb fat is really gross when it catches on fire!

[DavidG]

Yes, have to monitor carefully on the grill and shift placement for flare ups. But it’s only a couple of minutes and no mess in the kitchen.

No kidding about lamb fat!

[JoelD]

The other advantage of finishing on the grill is no grease spatter in the kitchen.

I'll try with a little lower internal temp (maybe 100?) and a shorter rest before searing next time. It came out med-rare while I was shooting for closer to rare.

If you are going for rare, definitely shoot for 100. I also flip the meat around the halfway mark in the oven(20-25min). Mine turns out medium rare to rare depending on the section (on a 1.5-2lb bone in ribeye) but will keep cooking a little while sitting. The reason I like to take it straight to searing is that I can continue to check the temp there. I shoot for 120-125 internal temp off the grill. And use the grill to cook just a tad longer if it needs it. I do a little below medium heat on the grill as I don't like the outside overly crispy.

Let me know how the next one turns out. Also if you have any perfect pairings you come across.

[DavidG]

Thanks Joel, will try these tips. Any mature Bordeaux or N. Rhone is a great match here. The less-ripe Chateauneufs are great: Beaucastel, VT, Charvin, Pegau. Olga Raffault Picasses with some age, mmm... And even a big bold Napa Cab if I'm in the mood.

[Tom In DC]

Kenji Lopez-Alt's quick take on reverse sear

I've tried the "sear first and then sous vide" a few times for steak - it seems to imbue some grilled flavor into the steak -- but it makes loading the bags a bit harder and it still needs another sear at the end to get the crispy sizzle. They do look better in the water bath, though.

[JoelD]

Thanks Joel, will try these tips. Any mature Bordeaux or N. Rhone is a great match here. The less-ripe Chateauneufs are great: Beaucastel, VT, Charvin, Pegau. Olga Raffault Picasses with some age, mmm... And even a big bold Napa Cab if I'm in the mood.

Hope they turn out well for you, let me know. If you have a specific bottle of Bordeaux that turns out amazing with this recipe, I would love to hear about it. I may get some grief here but to date, 05 Pavie is by far the best pairing I have had with these steaks. Multiple times. Something about the backwards vintage and the tannins. Maybe its too ripe, but felt balanced by the others. I am sure a Las Cases would go quite well.

[Blanquito]

... a very popular high street wine retailer called Oddbins a...

This used to be my regular wine shop in St. Andrews in the early 90's...

[marcs]

How does 94 compare to current "off vintages"? I am finding 2001, 2002, 2004 etc as they age to just be very good vintages, not really "off", and suspect that 2008 etc. will go that way too. I wonder if I am tasting the equivalent of what 1988, 1994, etc. were or if the general quality of vintages has improved.

Re steak, I usually sear in a pan two minutes a side and then finish off in a *hot* oven (450-500) for 8 minutes or so, is that not right?

[Blanquito]

I use the reverse sear for steaks: https://jesspryles.com/recipe/how-to-co ... ar-method/

It's pretty much foolproof, with the only variable being how thick the steak is (for medium-thick steaks, I set the thermometer alarm to 130F; for thinner to 125-128F and thicker tenderloins I'll go to 135F).

[AKR]

How does 94 compare to current "off vintages"? I am finding 2001, 2002, 2004 etc as they age to just be very good vintages, not really "off", and suspect that 2008 etc. will go that way too. I wonder if I am tasting the equivalent of what 1988, 1994, etc. were or if the general quality of vintages has improved.

Re steak, I usually sear in a pan two minutes a side and then finish off in a *hot* oven (450-500) for 8 minutes or so, is that not right?

I probably drank 10 cases of various 1994's over the years, and my observation was that they were hard tannic wines, with little fruit to compensate. And they generally hollowed out further as time went on. It seems after the 91, 92, 93 dismal years, there was great eagerness to declare something good, and sell wine, so everyone kind of accepted that. Ironically, reviewers used a lower grading scale then, so in the fullness of time, I think the initial scores actually reflect where they should stand in the vintage standings. Like 1995, my feel is that they were sort of like 1975, hard wines with some pockets of quality on the right bank.

The thing I miss most about the 94's: the prices !

I think the lesser regarded recent vintages are vastly better.

[stefan]

2001, 2002, and 2003 are much better than 1994 IMO. I liked 1993 more than 1994 because some of the 1993s had a wonderful bouquet. I don't think that I have a bottle of either vintage left.