Last summer, a reader took the opportunity to excoriate me for my perceived show-offery when a sorbet recipe I posted mentioned the use of an ice cream maker. Well, for one, a goodly percentage of ice cream, sherbet and sorbet recipes conclude with the mandate to "freeze according to ice cream maker's directions" and for another, it was a goshdarned wedding gift!

Perhaps some small accord could be struck, or perhaps even kicked with the use of the UCO Play & Freeze Ice Cream Maker. Ice and rock salt are added to one chamber and edible ingredients to another. The whole unit is then hand-tightened together and the merrymaking/ice cream churning commences. The ball can be tossed, shaken, passed and generally frolicked about with, then opened and stirred, resealed and agitated again until the mixture reaches a pleasing consistency, and co-churners have worn out all "Have a ball!" related puns.

Still, should the $16.50 expenditure (via Amazon) still seem a tad schmancy, I included a coffee can agitation method in a post on Soul-Saving Sweet Tea Sherbet a while back.

UCO's Play & Freeze Ice Cream Maker

I've never made ice cream. It's one of those foods that I think it's unnecessary to make because what you can buy in the store is just as good (if not better) than what you could make at home. I feel the same way about pasta.

But I was reading one of Andy Rooney's books (he's one of my favorite writers) and he makes ice cream a lot. He has a very simple recipe, and it doesn't include eggs at all. He says that if you add eggs, it's not ice cream, it's custard. He was on Martha Stewart's show one time, making ice cream, and she agreed that adding eggs was a bad idea. But when she was on CBS a while later, she made ice cream, and she added eggs!

So I'm curious: who's right in this? Is ice cream better with no eggs? Do eggs make it richer in some way, or just turn it into something else?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if you're going to make ice cream at home, it is worth it to get an ice cream maker. In fact, it is necessary to get an ice cream maker because it ensures that you will always get the optimal results from your frozen desserts. There are a wide range of ice cream makers to choose from, but there will definitely be at least one that fits your kitchen and your budget. After a batch or three of homemade ice cream, every single one will pay for itself in taste alone.

Ice Cream Ball - play with it and make ice cream. It's a great way to give your kids something to keep them occupied while they wait for the ice cream to be ready. $29

Cuisinart 1.5-qt. Yogurt, Ice Cream and Sorbet Maker - a great, easy-to-use all-purpose machine that can handle most family-sized jobs. Keep the extra freezer bowl in the freezer at all times so you're ready to go. Recommended by me (I own this model, pictured, and love it) and America's Test Kitchen. $49.95

Speaking of the cost effectiveness of kitchen gadgets, what do you think that your most and least used appliances/tools are? I know that I use my ice cream maker quite often, though it was voted as the least cost-effective appliance. On a near-daily basis, I use my espresso machine and my oven, and I use my toaster and blender less frequently. My stand mixer gets a good amount of use, too. I'm not going to work out the exact cost per use, but I think that these have all paid for themselves.

In terms of least used items, my waffle iron only makes occasional appearances in my kitchen, but I got such a good deal on it that it could be considered "cost effective" even if I only used it twice. My slow cooker is an appliance that I want to use more often than I actually do, as well. Fortunately, I don't think I have anything that I have never used. I'm sure that that is more indicative of the fact that I cook a lot than the potential usefulness of the gadget.

I'm willing to bet that sometimes the least used things in the kitchen are some of the least expensive, like my waffle iron. Things that were expensive tend to motivate people, myself included, to use them in an attempt to justify the cost. If it seemed like too good a deal to pass up at the time, you probably didn't buy it because you actually needed it, like that 6th unusually shaped whisk or yet another cheese grater that is now collecting dust at the back of the pantry.

How many times have you come across a neat looking gadget or seemingly useful appliance at the store and bought it, thinking that it would be useful? Maybe you rationalized your purchase by thinking , I always wanted to make my own ice cream, or perhaps even something like, the toaster on the TV show I watched last night looked just like this one and it made perfect toast! Not all kitchen gadgets are as costly, or as cost effective, as they sound. Pricegrabber.co.uk did a study of the cost-effectiveness of 30 household items, based on a survey of 1,500 UK shoppers that asked about how often they had used the items in the past year.

The least cost effective item was an ice cream maker, costing £19.48 ($35) per use! Clearly, nothing that is used only once or twice is a very cost effective item. Kitchen gadgets that were cost effective were tea kettles, averaging 5p (10¢) per use, and toasters, which ran about 18p (32¢).