Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: McGee 2004 vs 1984

  1. #1
    Greg Esres Guest

    Default McGee 2004 vs 1984

    I have a 1984 edition of Harold McGee's "On Food and Cooking". Does
    anyone know if the 2004 edition has any significant new information
    that's worth the price of upgrade?

    Thanks

  2. #2
    aem Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Jun 2, 6:52*pm, Greg Esres <ges...@boundvortex.com> wrote:
    > I have a 1984 edition of Harold McGee's "On Food and Cooking". *Does
    > anyone know if the 2004 edition has any significant new information
    > that's worth the price of upgrade?
    >

    Very much so! The original was groundbreaking but the revision is
    greatly expanded. No one who liked the original should fail to
    replace it with the new edition.. The scope of food now includes Asia
    and Mexico, there's lots of new analysis of the chemistry of flavor to
    put some things on a factual footing rather than vague "taste
    preferences". And much more that I can't describe here. -aem

  3. #3
    aem Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Jun 2, 6:52*pm, Greg Esres <ges...@boundvortex.com> wrote:
    > I have a 1984 edition of Harold McGee's "On Food and Cooking". *Does
    > anyone know if the 2004 edition has any significant new information
    > that's worth the price of upgrade?
    >

    Very much so! The original was groundbreaking but the revision is
    greatly expanded. No one who liked the original should fail to
    replace it with the new edition.. The scope of food now includes Asia
    and Mexico, there's lots of new analysis of the chemistry of flavor to
    put some things on a factual footing rather than vague "taste
    preferences". And much more that I can't describe here. -aem

  4. #4
    Greg Esres Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    aem wrote:

    <<but the revision is greatly expanded. >>

    Darn! Guess I'll have to get it, then. Thanks!

  5. #5
    Greg Esres Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    aem wrote:

    <<but the revision is greatly expanded. >>

    Darn! Guess I'll have to get it, then. Thanks!

  6. #6
    Terry Pulliam Burd Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 08:53:49 -0700 (PDT), aem <[email protected]>
    fired up random neurons and synapses to opine:

    >On Jun 2, 6:52*pm, Greg Esres <ges...@boundvortex.com> wrote:
    >> I have a 1984 edition of Harold McGee's "On Food and Cooking". *Does
    >> anyone know if the 2004 edition has any significant new information
    >> that's worth the price of upgrade?
    >>

    >Very much so! The original was groundbreaking but the revision is
    >greatly expanded. No one who liked the original should fail to
    >replace it with the new edition.. The scope of food now includes Asia
    >and Mexico, there's lots of new analysis of the chemistry of flavor to
    >put some things on a factual footing rather than vague "taste
    >preferences". And much more that I can't describe here. -aem


    Question: I wandered over to amazon.com to check out the above
    cookbook. There appear to be two of roughly the same title, but
    different subtitles: _McGee on Food and Cooking: An Encyclopedia of
    Cooking Science, History and Culture_ and _On Food and Cooking: The
    Science and Lore of the Kitchen_. There is a considerable price
    difference, which is one of the reasons I ask.

    --

    Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

    "Some weasel took the cork out of my lunch!"

    -- W.C. Fields

  7. #7
    Terry Pulliam Burd Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 08:53:49 -0700 (PDT), aem <[email protected]>
    fired up random neurons and synapses to opine:

    >On Jun 2, 6:52*pm, Greg Esres <ges...@boundvortex.com> wrote:
    >> I have a 1984 edition of Harold McGee's "On Food and Cooking". *Does
    >> anyone know if the 2004 edition has any significant new information
    >> that's worth the price of upgrade?
    >>

    >Very much so! The original was groundbreaking but the revision is
    >greatly expanded. No one who liked the original should fail to
    >replace it with the new edition.. The scope of food now includes Asia
    >and Mexico, there's lots of new analysis of the chemistry of flavor to
    >put some things on a factual footing rather than vague "taste
    >preferences". And much more that I can't describe here. -aem


    Question: I wandered over to amazon.com to check out the above
    cookbook. There appear to be two of roughly the same title, but
    different subtitles: _McGee on Food and Cooking: An Encyclopedia of
    Cooking Science, History and Culture_ and _On Food and Cooking: The
    Science and Lore of the Kitchen_. There is a considerable price
    difference, which is one of the reasons I ask.

    --

    Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

    "Some weasel took the cork out of my lunch!"

    -- W.C. Fields

  8. #8
    aem Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Jun 4, 6:37*pm, Terry Pulliam Burd <ntpull...@meatloaf.net> wrote:
    > On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 08:53:49 -0700 (PDT), aem <aem_ag...@yahoo.com>
    > fired up random neurons and synapses to opine:
    >
    > >On Jun 2, 6:52*pm, Greg Esres <ges...@boundvortex.com> wrote:
    > >> I have a 1984 edition of Harold McGee's "On Food and Cooking". *Does
    > >> anyone know if the 2004 edition has any significant new information
    > >> that's worth the price of upgrade?

    >
    > >Very much so! *The original was groundbreaking but the revision is
    > >greatly expanded. *No one who liked the original should fail to
    > >replace it with the new edition.. *The scope of food now includes Asia
    > >and Mexico, there's lots of new analysis of the chemistry of flavor to
    > >put some things on a factual footing rather than vague "taste
    > >preferences". * And much more that I can't describe here. * * -aem

    >
    > Question: I wandered over to amazon.com to check out the above
    > cookbook. There appear to be two of roughly the same title, but
    > different subtitles: _McGee on Food and Cooking: An Encyclopedia of
    > Cooking Science, History and Culture_ and _On Food and Cooking: The
    > Science and Lore of the Kitchen_. There is a considerable price
    > difference, which is one of the reasons I ask.
    >

    The second one, science and lore, is the 2004 edition, the one you
    want. But don't expect a "cookbook" in any standard sense. It's
    *about* food and cooking and it will improve your cooking but it's not
    a collection of recipes. -aem

  9. #9
    aem Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Jun 4, 6:37*pm, Terry Pulliam Burd <ntpull...@meatloaf.net> wrote:
    > On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 08:53:49 -0700 (PDT), aem <aem_ag...@yahoo.com>
    > fired up random neurons and synapses to opine:
    >
    > >On Jun 2, 6:52*pm, Greg Esres <ges...@boundvortex.com> wrote:
    > >> I have a 1984 edition of Harold McGee's "On Food and Cooking". *Does
    > >> anyone know if the 2004 edition has any significant new information
    > >> that's worth the price of upgrade?

    >
    > >Very much so! *The original was groundbreaking but the revision is
    > >greatly expanded. *No one who liked the original should fail to
    > >replace it with the new edition.. *The scope of food now includes Asia
    > >and Mexico, there's lots of new analysis of the chemistry of flavor to
    > >put some things on a factual footing rather than vague "taste
    > >preferences". * And much more that I can't describe here. * * -aem

    >
    > Question: I wandered over to amazon.com to check out the above
    > cookbook. There appear to be two of roughly the same title, but
    > different subtitles: _McGee on Food and Cooking: An Encyclopedia of
    > Cooking Science, History and Culture_ and _On Food and Cooking: The
    > Science and Lore of the Kitchen_. There is a considerable price
    > difference, which is one of the reasons I ask.
    >

    The second one, science and lore, is the 2004 edition, the one you
    want. But don't expect a "cookbook" in any standard sense. It's
    *about* food and cooking and it will improve your cooking but it's not
    a collection of recipes. -aem

  10. #10
    aem Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Jun 4, 7:55*pm, aem <aem_ag...@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > The second one, science and lore, is the 2004 edition, the one you
    > want. *But don't expect a "cookbook" in any standard sense. *It's
    > *about* food and cooking and it will improve your cooking but it's not
    > a collection of recipes. * * -aem


    You can get an idea of his approach and style by reading some of his
    writings for the NY Times on his website: http://www.curiouscook.com/cook/home.php
    -aem

  11. #11
    aem Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Jun 4, 7:55*pm, aem <aem_ag...@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > The second one, science and lore, is the 2004 edition, the one you
    > want. *But don't expect a "cookbook" in any standard sense. *It's
    > *about* food and cooking and it will improve your cooking but it's not
    > a collection of recipes. * * -aem


    You can get an idea of his approach and style by reading some of his
    writings for the NY Times on his website: http://www.curiouscook.com/cook/home.php
    -aem

  12. #12
    David Scheidt Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    Terry Pulliam Burd <[email protected]> wrote:

    :Question: I wandered over to amazon.com to check out the above
    :cookbook. There appear to be two of roughly the same title, but
    :different subtitles: _McGee on Food and Cooking: An Encyclopedia of
    :Cooking Science, History and Culture_ and _On Food and Cooking: The
    :Science and Lore of the Kitchen_. There is a considerable price
    :difference, which is one of the reasons I ask.

    This one:

    http://www.amazon.com/Food-Cooking-S...dp/0684800012/

    is what was being talked about. It's not a cookbook, in that it
    doesn't have any recipes (well, it's got a few historical examples).
    It's an encyclopedia, and tells you immense amount about food, why it
    behaves the way it does, tastes the way it does, etc. Not really
    something to read cover to cover (well, I did, but I'm weird.), but
    more to browse, or look things up.

  13. #13
    David Scheidt Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    Terry Pulliam Burd <[email protected]> wrote:

    :Question: I wandered over to amazon.com to check out the above
    :cookbook. There appear to be two of roughly the same title, but
    :different subtitles: _McGee on Food and Cooking: An Encyclopedia of
    :Cooking Science, History and Culture_ and _On Food and Cooking: The
    :Science and Lore of the Kitchen_. There is a considerable price
    :difference, which is one of the reasons I ask.

    This one:

    http://www.amazon.com/Food-Cooking-S...dp/0684800012/

    is what was being talked about. It's not a cookbook, in that it
    doesn't have any recipes (well, it's got a few historical examples).
    It's an encyclopedia, and tells you immense amount about food, why it
    behaves the way it does, tastes the way it does, etc. Not really
    something to read cover to cover (well, I did, but I'm weird.), but
    more to browse, or look things up.

  14. #14
    Terry Pulliam Burd Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 19:55:21 -0700 (PDT), aem <[email protected]>
    fired up random neurons and synapses to opine:

    >The second one, science and lore, is the 2004 edition, the one you
    >want. But don't expect a "cookbook" in any standard sense. It's
    >*about* food and cooking and it will improve your cooking but it's not
    >a collection of recipes. -aem


    Okay - got it. Something along the lines of _Le Cordon Bleu Complete
    Cooking Techniques_? So, if I have that one, would it make sense to
    "have to have" _On Food and Cooking: The Science and Lore of the
    Kitchen_ ?

    Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd
    --
    "If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
    old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
    waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

    -- Duncan Hines

    To reply, replace "meatloaf" with "cox"





  15. #15
    Terry Pulliam Burd Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 19:55:21 -0700 (PDT), aem <[email protected]>
    fired up random neurons and synapses to opine:

    >The second one, science and lore, is the 2004 edition, the one you
    >want. But don't expect a "cookbook" in any standard sense. It's
    >*about* food and cooking and it will improve your cooking but it's not
    >a collection of recipes. -aem


    Okay - got it. Something along the lines of _Le Cordon Bleu Complete
    Cooking Techniques_? So, if I have that one, would it make sense to
    "have to have" _On Food and Cooking: The Science and Lore of the
    Kitchen_ ?

    Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd
    --
    "If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
    old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
    waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

    -- Duncan Hines

    To reply, replace "meatloaf" with "cox"





  16. #16
    Tamzen Cannoy Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Terry Pulliam Burd <[email protected]> wrote:


    > Okay - got it. Something along the lines of _Le Cordon Bleu Complete
    > Cooking Techniques_? So, if I have that one, would it make sense to
    > "have to have" _On Food and Cooking: The Science and Lore of the
    > Kitchen_ ?
    >
    > Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

    \

    Well yes you need it but only if you like the SCIENCE of food and
    cooking. It's not techniques, it's an encyclopedia of arcane knowledge
    of odd foods, chemistry and physics of cooking and cooking processes. It
    debunks myths like why you shouldn't wash mushrooms and how searing meat
    doesn't seal juices in. It's a must have for serious cooks or curious
    ones but it won't necessarily make you a better cook or teach you how to
    cook anything.

    It's great for browsing in bed or as bathroom reading but it is a
    real encyclopedia. Go to a real book store and browse it before buying.

  17. #17
    Tamzen Cannoy Guest

    Default Re: McGee 2004 vs 1984

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Terry Pulliam Burd <[email protected]> wrote:


    > Okay - got it. Something along the lines of _Le Cordon Bleu Complete
    > Cooking Techniques_? So, if I have that one, would it make sense to
    > "have to have" _On Food and Cooking: The Science and Lore of the
    > Kitchen_ ?
    >
    > Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

    \

    Well yes you need it but only if you like the SCIENCE of food and
    cooking. It's not techniques, it's an encyclopedia of arcane knowledge
    of odd foods, chemistry and physics of cooking and cooking processes. It
    debunks myths like why you shouldn't wash mushrooms and how searing meat
    doesn't seal juices in. It's a must have for serious cooks or curious
    ones but it won't necessarily make you a better cook or teach you how to
    cook anything.

    It's great for browsing in bed or as bathroom reading but it is a
    real encyclopedia. Go to a real book store and browse it before buying.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32