Introduction:

Methodology:

Results:

Conclusions:

Whole Foods snags the win here, coming in first overall, as well as for the subratings of taste and texture. I'm positing that their secret for success was that the steak was generally very enjoyable to all the tasters, almost serving as a sort of "middle ground" with its tender, non-gristle-y consistency, moderate fattiness, and pleasing, though not overbearing flavor. There was nothing to dislike about the steak, and indeed, all of the tasters rated it at least moderately high.

The correlation between deliciousness and price wasn't as strong as we were expecting. Even the least expensive, commodity steaks of the bunch were serviceable. Hell, the Ralphs Select came in in fifth place (though personally, it was my least favorite of the bunch).

As far as appearance went, all the steaks looked relatively similar when cooked, so next time, I'd probably skip the "Looks" subrating. Going even further, perhaps we should eliminate subratings altogether and just go with an overall score. Keep it simple right?

Looking at the variability data, we see that people tended to be in agreement about the LaFrieda and the Flannery California Reserve, while the Lindy & Grundy was undeniably polarizing, as was the Walmart steak.

We aimed for a consistent 1.5" thickness across all the steaks, but this was difficult to enforce in practice. We found that the NY strips were, in every case, thicker than specified.

In certain cases, there was a large disparity between a steak's taste and texture scores. For example, the Flannery California Reserve scored well on taste, but was dead last for texture; the LaFrieda was even starker in that regard. On the other hand, the Costco steak fared far better in texture than taste.

I'm sure that part of the inconsistencies in the bullet point above was due to our cooking methods. The super-premium steaks--the Flannery and LaFrieda--were all rather fatty, and thus could've benefitted from a higher temperature setting on the immersion circulator, something closer to 130°F. This would've done a better job of cooking and integrating the marbling, which would likely get rid of complaints that the steaks were overly firm and chewy. Unfortunately, doing so would probably overcook many of the other steaks. In any case, I do believe that the LaFrieda and Flannery were shortchanged somewhat, and could've done much better.

As the sole grass-fed steak in the lot, the Lindy & Grundy bore the brunt of the tasters' unfamiliarity with the meat. Grass-fed steaks account for only a small percentage of the beef market, and most people simply have a hard time accepting the significantly different flavor profile of the meat, which I'm sure was only amplified by the six-week dry aging we had here. It's a leaner, healthier type of beef that's also better for the animals and the environment, but is definitely an acquired taste as we've seen here. Just look at the huge 44% RSD value for its taste rating; some people really didn't like it. I'm not surprised at the result, but for next time, perhaps an unaged grass-fed cut would fare better.

This has been a long time coming. Several of my friends and I had been talking about doing a steak tasting for a while now, so this past weekend we finally muscled up the gumption to actually go through with it. We purchased nine NY strip loins from a wide variety of vendors ranging from ultra high-end mail order companies to local butcher shops to mainstream chain retailers. The steaks are summarized in the table below, sorted in descending order of price:In an attempt to eliminate bias, we tried to do the tasting as blind as possible. As such, what I did was remove the steaks from their packaging, lay them out bare on plates, and assign a letter to each one (as seen on the piece of paper to the left). The person actually cooking the meat then came in and, not knowing my letter assignment and thus which steak was which, randomly assigned a number to each letter (the paper on the right), keeping the mapping away from me. In effect, we had a two-part "encryption" method wherein no one person would know both parts of the "key" necessary to relate the name of the steak with its assigned number. The two "keys" were only put together at the end of the tasting.With that out of the way, another member of the tasting party seasoned all sides of each steak with a mixture of ground pink Himalayan salt and Tellicherry peppercorn.The steaks were then sealed in plastic bags using a FoodSaver V3240 vacuum sealer During the prep process, we sampled thethat one of the tasters brought. Good stuff!With all the meat prepped and ready to go, we plopped the bags into a PolyScience immersion circulator . The steaks were cooked sous vide at 123°F for at least two hours, then finished on cast iron (one minute on the top and bottom, then 30 seconds for the sides) with butter immediately prior to serving.The steaks were selected in random order, finished, sliced, photographed, and then sliced some more into bite-size pieces.The meat was then brought to the table for our nine tasters to sample, identified merely by a number. Tasters were provided Shun knives and score sheets, which were collected at the end of the evening and tabulated. Along with the steak, we were also served mashed potatoes and a simple salad.In a nod toward consistency, we all drank the same wine throughout the tasting, the, a bright, lively Petite Sirah-based California blend that stood up well to the meat without overshadowing it. Water was also provided, in addition to cola for the teetotaler in the group.The steaks are shown below in the order that they were tasted. I'll present my personal thoughts on each before delving into the aggregate results.We got started with what was easily the most expensive (and most beautiful) steak of the group. What the price bought you was some pretty incredible marbling, in fact probably the most marbling I'd ever seen in a non-wagyu-style steak. The result of this was a super intense, super fatty flavor that was delicious, but at the same time, almost too much. The issue here, though, was the texture, which was quite chewy at times. This could've greatly benefitted from some more cooking.Next was the second priciest steak, from famed New York butcher Pat LaFrieda. This one showed off an almost foie gras-esque richness and lushness to it, and just oozed fat upon mastication. Unfortunately, it also suffered from the textural problems witnessed in the Flannery above, but was overall more balanced and easier-eating.The Costco steak shined in the area of texture, especially compared to the two preceding cuts. It was obviously much more restrained in character, with a slight nuttiness and a nice crust, and was something that I'd have no problem eating a large portion of.Beef Palace is a well-regarded butcher located in sunny Huntington Beach, CA. I'd heard some great things about the place, and its product did not disappoint. I actually found it quite similar to the Kirkland steak, and also rated it highly.The Walmart steak pleasantly surprised most of us, myself included, despite being the thinnest of the bunch. It had a great sear and char, and was balanced, mild, and non-offensive in presentation. There wasn't a huge amount of flavor here, but I really didn't mind eating it.I'd had Whole Foods steaks before, and they'd always been solid. This was no exception, displaying a very well-integrated fattiness and a delectable earthiness on the close.For me, the second Flannery entry also suffered from the same problems we saw in the first, which, unfortunately, was likely a byproduct of our methodology rather than an inherent flaw in the meat. That being said, the steak was certainly flavorful, but parts of it seemed strangely bland at times.Upon biting into the L&G, I knew instantly that this was grass-fed. The eating experience is just that different. The flavor here was intense to say the least, with a grassy, almost seaweed-like taste that's certainly not for everyone (though I'm ok with it). Texturally, I found this surprisingly pleasing despite the leanness of the meat.We ended with a USDA Select cut from Ralphs, which is probably representative of your typical supermarket steak. It was definitely on the lean side, though I thought it was surprisingly juicy. Taste-wise, I wasn't in love, deeming the meat minerally and austere, with a nutty tinge. It was my least favorite of the bunch.Now that we have my thoughts out of the way, we'll take a look at the aggregate data for the entire group. In the table below, I show the average (mean) values for all the steaks across each category, as well as the resultant rankings. I also have some select comments from the other tasters, some of which were quite eye-opening.Though the rankings are obviously important, they're only part of the story, and I think it's also worthwhile to take a look at the variability in the scores:We had a blast holding this steak tasting, and I'm glad I enforced a bit of rigor to the process, which made for some enlightening results. I'm satisfied with how things turned out, but I think we definitely had some lessons learned as well about how we'd do things differently next time (and I'm pretty sure there will be a next time, I'm thinking with rib eyes). For Steak Tasting 2.0, what should we change? Which other steak purveyors should be included in the comparison?