Why does smoked salmon look 'raw'? And why does it taste so different from a cooked fillet?
Why does smoked salmon look 'raw'? And why does it taste so different from a cooked fillet?
I don't tend to eat much fish, but in the supermarket earlier I saw some smoked salmon which didn't need cooking, and some salmon fillets which did. They looked the same really - both 'raw'. I decided to buy some of the fillet. It was nice, but a very different flavour from when I've tried smoked salmon in the past. The cooked fillet was quite chicken-y with a slight earthy/fishy taste, whereas smoked salmon has a very strong fish flavour.
Why do they taste so different? And why is smoked salmon safe to eat without cooking when other smoked fish do need cooking?
You're viewing a single thread.
Smoked salmon looks "raw" largely because it is raw. It has never been heated.
Smoking the fish does indeed give a very different flavour to non-smoked fillet. That shouldn't be any great surprise.
Why is it safe? Well good quality raw salmon is also safe (see sushi). But the smoking does have an effect of preserving the fish and making it less of an environment where bacteria would thrive.
Smoked salmon looks "raw" largely because it is raw. It has never been heated.
I am curious about the process of smoking without heat.
I they're referring to cold smoking. It's just smoking at a temp of like 80 degrees for like 18 hours or something. It's how you make lox.
Traditional lox is just brined in salt, no smoking.
Gravadlax is brined in salt and sugar with spices.
Smoked salmon is just smoked salmon, like nova, in the US.
Due to customer preference and lack of knowledge, most want smoked salmon when they ask for lox, so are sold lox.