Originally posted by: Ns1
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: mellondust
Many of you ask what the difference is so I will try to explain best I can. (Anyone else feel free to add any additional comments on the difference) First off, if you don't eat rice that much or don't care about the texture then any old rice cooker will do. I didn't know the difference until I had a friend in college from Japan with a real rice cooker and I loved the way it turned out. I can eat this type of rice plain but not the other. You almost have to eat rice from a good rice cooker to truly see the difference but it is not the same rice that comes out. As best I understand it, the nicer rice cookers presure cook the rice instead of boil it. The rice is more evenly cooked and does not burn. There are also many automated functions for cooking different types of rices or styles and other controls like keeping rice warm, delayed cooking so it is done when you get home from work an so on. My current cheapo rice cooker that uses the boil method will eventually dry the rice out if left on warm, where as the others keep it fresh. They sell even more expensive ones than this but I am on a budget. Like I said before, people that are not big rice eaters don't need anything like this. A good comparison question would be like asking why buy an electric mixer when I can mix it by hand. Hope this answers some of your questions.
I'd be willing to bet that if you took the same rice cooked in a rice cooker and cooked properly on a stove top and did a blind taste test that you couldn't tell the difference.
The difference is this:
stove = you gotta know what you're doing
cheap rice cooker = insert water, insert rice, cook. rice can be sometimes mushy sometimes dry
zojirushi/baller rice cookers = insert water, insert rice, press button. perfect rice everytime. automatically compensates for too much water, too little water, etc.
Facebook
Twitter