Justin Dunham

's journal about making things

Understanding the differences between pasta shapes, or why it’s “fettucine alfredo”

Pasta. By flickr user stopherjones (click picture for source page)

There are 600 different varieties of pasta; even if you chalk 90% of them up to regional preference or marketing decisions, that still leaves a lot of variation to explain. Here’s some research I’ve conducted on why there are so many different pasta shapes and when you might want to use one or the other.

Understanding the functions of the basic pasta shapes

As a general taxonomy, you can split pasta up into a few categories: strands, shapes and tubes, and sheets.

Sheets are fairly easy to explain; they’re made for dishes like lasagna that are prepared as casseroles or as pies, rather than as a dish that’s eaten from a bowl with just a fork. Some have ruffles, I assume for sauce retention.

Strands are a pretty simple shape, right? The main variation among them is thickness.

  • Thin strands are meant for light sauces, like a simple angel hair with olive oil and garlic, or perhaps a thin tomato sauce. Otherwise, the strands get lost in the sauce, and you don’t get their texture at all. Also, with thin strands, the lubrication provided by thinner and oil-based sauces helps keep the strands from sticking together.
  • Thick strands are meant for heavy sauces. There’s a reason it’s fettucine alfredo, and not angel hair alfredo. (I think putting it this way does the best job of explaining the difference. If there were angel hair in your alfredo, would you even notice its presence?)
  • Spaghetti is kind of in the middle, and is a nice all-purpose pasta for this reason. If you are really detail-oriented, you can look for square spaghetti, which has slightly more surface area for sauce to stick to.

For tubes and shapes, the main variation is also by size.

  • Very small tubes, like ditalini, and small shapes, like orzo or even alphabet pasta, are meant for soup. Some authorities make distinctions between pasta for soup and pasta for broth, but I won’t get into that here.
  • The bigger the shape or tube gets, the heartier the sauce you can serve it with. So rigatoni, for example, could be good with a bolognese because the tubes are big enough to fill up with sauce and ground meat. Note that apparently spaghetti bolognese is not really served within Italy.
  • The giant shapes, like giant shells, are meant to be stuffed. Giant shells are also often baked, and this is generally possible with the larger pastas like ziti. They won’t fall apart after being in a hot oven for a while. Ravioli and tortellini are stuffed too, and their size is dictated by the same considerations as above, and also how much you’re putting in them.

Bronze-cut pasta.

Additional considerations

Ridges. In general, the larger pastas are good for heartier sauces as I said above. But you can also modify the degree to which sauce sticks to pasta, by choosing between ridged and unridged noodles.

  • For example, you might have a bolognese with fine chunks of meat in a thick tomato puree. If you get pasta with ridges, thick sauces will adhere more easily to the outside, as in rigatoni bolognese.
  • On the other hand, if the pasta is smooth, it can move more easily in an oil-based sauce. So serve penne with pesto.

How the pasta is cut. Have you ever seen the term “bronze die” on a pasta package before? This means that the dies (machine used for stamping) used to cut the pasta are made out of bronze, as opposed to a more modern material such as Teflon. The result? A rougher cut that, like ridges, holds sauce better.

Open vs. closed shapes. Most of the pasta shapes that come to mind, like wagon wheels, have nowhere for sauce to get trapped. But there are a few shapes, like tiny shells, or campanelle, that allow even a thin sauce to be part of each bite, if that’s what you want.

Curved vs. straight shapes. My best guess on this is that curved shapes are more appropriate for pasta dishes that are meant to be eaten like a casserole. Take macaroni and cheese, for example. I’ve made this with penne a few times, and it just isn’t as satisfying because it becomes somewhat harder to eat – without breaking up the individual pieces, you can’t fit them into your mouth as easily. Curved shapes get the right amount of pasta into a smaller bite.

Whether the pasta cooks uniformly. This is only really an issue for speculative or new pasta shapes, but here’s an interesting article on some attempted pasta redesigns by famous designers.

  • One issue that’s brought up by the (very perceptive) author is that these redesigns have points where the pasta has more than one layer – where it intersects with itself.
  • In traditional pasta shapes, this double-layering is generally minimized so that the pasta is cooked evenly. Probably not a problem you’ll face with standard pastas.

Wrap up

So, in conclusion, here’s my best guess on how to think about different pasta shapes:

  • In general, the bigger the pasta, the heartier / heavier the sauce you can serve it with. Very small shapes go in soup.
  • Tubes have the advantage of being able to contain small chunks of tomato, meat, or other flavorful sauce addins. Sort of like impromptu stuffing. Strands make sense in smoother sauces, or dishes where something is served alongside the pasta (such as, say, clams).
  • You can experiment not only with different sizes of the same pasta, but also with lots of other variables (shapes, ridges, how the pasta is cut) to achieve different culinary experiences.

Lastly, here’s a quick table to talk about what I think are the rationales behind certain famous pasta dishes.

Dish Description Possible rationale
Rigatoni bolognese Rigatoni in a thick, tomato and meat sauce Rigatoni is a fairly large shape that stands up well to this sauce, while also allowing the sauce to infiltrate the inside of the shape. The ridges provide even more sauce adhesion.
Fettucine alfredo Fettucine strands in a thick cream and cheese sauce Thick strands stand up well to the heavy cream sauce; you’re eating pasta in a sauce, not the other way around. Using tubes or other shapes wouldn’t improve surface area availability.
Linguine alle vongole Flat, medium width strands served with clams and an olive oil and white wine sauce Relatively thin strands are able to move around easily in the sauce; since the flavors of the sauce are relatively subtle, the linguine stand up to it just fine. (One thing I’m not sure about is why linguine are used instead of, say, spaghetti. Though note that linguine, being flat, have a higher ratio of volume to surface area.)
Macaroni and cheese Macaroni, or sometimes other small, tubular pasta, in a cheese sauce Similar to fettucine alfredo, except that using relatively small, curved tubes allows the resulting dish to be eaten like a casserole.

Oil-poached turbot

Filed under: Cooking Journal — Tags: , , , , — Justin Dunham on July 29, 2011

The completed dish.

Setting up the turbot, parsley and lemon in a cast-iron pan

The oil shimmers ominously as it heats. It will need to reach 300 degrees.

The oil poured over the fish, lemon and parsley. Next, it goes in the oven to bake for a few minutes.

There’s a technique that’s been on my list for quite a while to try – oil poaching. Poaching generally means just simmering something in a liquid. Poached eggs are one example; eggs are simmered gently in water and a little vinegar until they are cooked through. You can also poach in white wine, or in stock, or in other liquids. The general idea is a gentle, slow cooking, sort of like a fast braise.

So, when I came across this olive-oil poached flounder recipe, it seemed like a good opportunity to try this technique out. (Whole Foods was out of flounder, so I used turbot. The point was to get another fish with a mild taste that would stand up to the hot oil).

Here’s how the recipe works. First of all, note that oil poaching is not to be confused with frying, which would mean cooking food rather quickly in hot oil. Instead, the technique is as follows. You put whatever is to be poached in a pan, ideally an oven-safe one. (I used my cast iron pan, which I’d estimate I use for 90% of my cooking tasks these days).

This recipe calls for a layer of parsley and thin lemon slices on the bottom, then the fish, then more parsley and thin lemon slices on the top. It’s good to have these extra flavor components, since they’ll infuse the oil, and therefore your fish, with extra flavor.

The oil is then heated in a separate pan, up to about 300 degrees. Obviously, it’s important not to hit the smoke point, since then you’ll burn your oil and have to start again. That would be an expensive mistake given how much oil you’re using! The oil will just sit there as it heats, no bubbling or anything. This is why a good thermometer is important.

You then pour the very, very, very hot oil carefully into your prepared pan, and stick it in an oven heated to about 350. After it cooks for ten minutes, you’re done; pour off the extra oil and serve out of the pan.

If you are like me, this recipe sounds kind of dangerous. You’re going to heat 3 cups of oil to 300 degrees, then try to do things with it? While the oil quietly heats up and starts to shimmer, you’ll envision it spontaneously exploding, getting hot oil all over you and generally wrecking your day. You will ask everyone to else to leave the kitchen, and you’ll don what protective gear you have (a welding helmet and gloves). It was like that scene in Back to the Future when Doc was dropping the plutonium rods into the DeLorean.

Look, I’m not sure how to reassure you other than to say that I did it once and I seem to be OK. Also… totally worth it, because:

  • Fish is delicious, especially when cooked through perfectly so that it is flaky but not mushy. It is almost impossible to achieve any other result by using this recipe.
  • Olive oil is also delicious, and its unctuous, savory sweetness is a perfect complement to the similar textures and tastes of the fish.
  • Parsley and lemon aren’t too bad a combo, either. And when you poach everything together, the essential oils from the lemon and parsley also flood into the olive oil, and from there into the fish. So you get a burst of full flavor from those ingredients in every bite.

I served it with some mashed potatoes with sour cream. This dish gets even better as it ages in your fridge and the flavors meld.

Pâté with balsamic onions, olive oil ice cream and polenta cake, carrot ginger soup with spheres, trout meuniere

Sauteeing some chicken livers with capers, anchovies and oil

Toast components: pâté, pâté with parsley salad, pâté with salad and balsamic onions. Yum!

Trout meuniere and salad with roasted tomatoes.

Polenta cake, olive oil ice cream, and some pears poached in marsala

Had some friends over for dinner last weekend. This meal was my return to serious cooking (I took a break for most of January and February), so I wanted to make it interesting. Also, my fiancée was back in Philadelphia for the weekend, and she loves pâté, so I thought that would be a nice surprise. Accordingly, I made the following:

This was a fun meal to make. Pâté is surprisingly easy, and this one just consisted of chicken livers, capers, anchovies, white wine, and a couple of other things, pureed. That’s it.

Another advantage (besides impressing your significant other) is that if you were to buy a pound of chicken liver pate at the store, it would cost you, what, $10 or $20? A pound of chicken livers costs about $3, and then you add maybe $1 or $2 in additional ingredients to make it yourself. And you know exactly what’s in it.

One other thing, too. By making pate yourself, you might learn to like it if you didn’t already. My original experience with pate, as it was with mayonnaise, is that I found it rather… unpleasant to contemplate. But when I saw what actually goes into it – basically just a few incredibly strong and delicious flavors – and how it’s made, I lost my dislike of it. Pate will probably never be my favorite food, but I definitely have more of an appreciation for it now. The combination of the pate, parsley salad and onions sauteed in balsamic vinegar was also… pretty awesome.

As for the carrot-ginger soup, I’ve made it before. But this time, I added an experimental ingredient. If you add some sodium alginate to a relatively neutral liquid (such as carrot juice, apple cider, or certain other things), and then put drops of the resulting combination into a bath of water and calcium chloride, the liquid immediately becomes solid spheres that burst in your mouth when you bite them. This is exactly the same experience as eating caviar. I will write a separate entry about this later, but I (actually we – I invited everyone to help) performed this procedure with some apple cider, resulting in little spheres of cider that burst in your mouth when you bite them. We then put these spheres in our soup… and also tried putting them in our water as well, which was actually sort of interesting.

I’ve written about trout meuniere before, so I won’t say too much more about that here. I served it along with a simple salad of arugula and some tomatoes that were roasted for an hour or so in oil, garlic and onions. Delicious.

Finally, there’s the dessert. I’ve been waiting to make polenta cake again for quite a while, but I didn’t know what to serve it with; the grapefruit mousse I made last time was not repeatable and not amazing. Recently, I came upon a recipe for olive oil ice cream, which seemed like the perfect complement

Let me tell you, this stuff is weird. First of all, the recipe uses raw egg yolks – no cooking as with normal ice cream. Secondly, it is made out of freaking olive oil. But man, it is really delicious. The first time you take a bite, it tastes a little unexpected. But then you want another bite… and another. I served this whole thing with some pears poached in marsala, which were a good accompaniment but which I’m not sure I’ll make again.

Beet Salad, Fried Chicken etc., Polenta Cake

Filed under: Cooking Journal — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Justin Dunham on April 6, 2010

The main course.

Beet salad.

Polenta cake, with raspberry and grapefruit mousses.

Last week I made my first three-course meal in a while. First course: Beet salad with candied walnuts and goat cheese. Second course: Fried chicken with macaroni and cheese and beet greens. Third course: Polenta cake.

The beet salad was great. Building on my lessons with canned beets, I bought fresh beets and roasted them myself. The orange juice concentrate in the dressing really does give it a great, syrupy flavor.

Actual beets also often come with free beet greens, which I steamed and then sauteed until they were almost distintegrated. Pretty good.

The polenta cake was in some ways the highlight of the meal. I served it along with some of the mousses I made. Polenta and olive oil are major components of the dish, which results in an extremely moist cake that also has a difficult-to-identify, but wonderful, almost flowery aroma.

Puff Pastry Tarts, and Experimenting with Glazes

Filed under: Cooking Journal — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Justin Dunham on March 24, 2010

The tarts before they go in the oven.

After.

Apple tarts, with an apricot jam glaze. Picture's a little fuzzy, sorry.

Inspired by this episode of Good Eats, I decided to experiment with puff pastry. Puff pastry’s pretty neat. The basic process for making is that you take dough and cover it with a ton of butter. You then fold the dough over so it’s like a butter sandwich.

If you keep folding it over itself, you eventually end with thousands of layers of dough and butter. When you bake it, the water in the butter boils off, causing it to… well, yes. One thing I don’t understand yet is how the layering action helps with this process.

Because it’s essentially impossible to make without industrial equipment, puff pastry is one of the few things I buy readymade these days. It’s in the freezer section. It’s not that expensive, but it allows you to produce some very good-looking and tasty stuff quite easily.

I bought one package of puff pastry and used it to produce 3 sets of tarts – one apple, one pear, and one mushroom, basil and cheese. The apple tart was straight from Good Eats, but the pear and mushroom tarts were my own experiments. Since I don’t like to waste things, I also threw the remaining scraps of dough into the oven as an experiment.

Probably the best result was the mushroom tarts. They turned out like mini-pizzas, with a croissant-like crust. Really good. I brushed the crusts with olive oil to give them a little bit of shine, which sort of worked. Anyway, one day I will actually try making a bona fide pizza this way, and I’m surprised I haven’t encountered this yet.

The apple tarts came out pretty well also. Part of what helps is that apples are really easy to work with. You can slice them really thin, which you need to do for this recipe, but they will not get waterlogged when you put them in a water / lemon juice bath (which is what I usually do to prevent browning). I melted some apricot jam and put this over the top as a glaze, which was easy.

I made some pear tarts as well. Problem number one was that the thin pear slices, after being submerged in water for a couple of hours, essentially disintegrated. This didn’t affect the taste very much, which was fine, but it did make them look… rustic. For this tart, I also experiment with an egg wash glaze, but I went a bit overboard and so the resulting tart was a little like a pear omelette. It wasn’t bad by any means, just not exactly what I wanted.

Oh yeah, as I mentioned above I also threw the pastry scraps in the oven to see what would happen. This works fine – you get little biscuit-like things which I’m sure would be delicious with dinner.

Creative Commons License
.