Sqwertz > wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 03:14:21 +0000 (UTC), Steve Pope wrote:

>> I'm curious to understand the advantages if any of "wet aging".

>http://www.goodcooking.com/steak/aging/aging.htm

>Some sort of aging is necessary. You'd never want to plug a bolt in
>the head of cow and start cooking it right away unless you're
>braising it for a long time.

Yeah, for sure; what seems wrong though is any sort of claim
that so-called "wet aging" is superior to, or equal to, dry aging.

In the U.S. beef that is not dry aged could be said to be
"wet aged" for usually four to seven days, but that's not
really "aging", it's just verbiage for the minimal processing
necessary to get beef that's not like jello. (I disagree
with your link that the beef becomes more tender. Totally
fresh meat will have this awful texture where it sort of
wobbles and that's primarily what you're getting rid of in that
four-day interval. Maybe it becomes slightly more tender
as well, but not remotely in the manner of dry-aging.)

Steve