Stock

[Anonymous No.10917513]

Why does my home made stock taste bland?

>Used the bones of 4 chicken legs and 3 drumsticks.
>2 yellow onions, cut in parts, lightly roasted
>4 carrots
>2 sticks of celery
>A spring onion & bunch of chives (I wanted leek, but didn't have)
>A garlic bulb
>2 bay leaves (as if they matter)
>Parsley
>Thyme
>Rosemary
>bunch of peppercorns
>A rawit pepper
>Some of the oil and stuff left on the baking tray (from the chicken).
Simmered 1 hour normal, 1 hour pressure cooked simmer.
End result 2.5L, then reduced to 1L.
Still bland.
Fml.

I may just add MSG, because fuck this.

[Anonymous No.10917522]

>>10917513
Did you add salt?

[Anonymous No.10917533]

>>10917513
Where's the salt?
There's fucktons of salt in stock normally.

[Anonymous No.10917539]

>>10917522
Yes, some sea salt, but not a whole lot. Though it doesn't seem the missing salt kind of bland though, if understand what I mean.

[Anonymous No.10917545]

>>10917533
There is never salt in stocks... As soon as you add salt it's a soup or something.

[Anonymous No.10917555]

>>10917539
Try a bit of it that's properly salted.

[Anonymous No.10917561]

Reduce more until it's not bland
I usually do my stock for longer too

[Anonymous No.10917562]

>>10917513
my stock takes 2 days to make normally and ill add the herbs on the second day.

[Anonymous No.10917567]

>>10917513
I use whole chicken cut up, bones and skin and all. You only used bones?

[Anonymous No.10917569]

>>10917513
OP again. Forgot to mention I also added some dried shitake mushrooms I had lying around, just as an experiment.

[Anonymous No.10917571]

>>10917561
There's not much downside to using highly concentrated stock as it's easy to dilute

[Anonymous No.10917577]

>>10917567
Mostly, yes, but there was still meat on them. Quite a bit too. Does it matter much? I just adjusted the ingredients to less chicken.

[Anonymous No.10917584]

>>10917577
Did you break the bones first? You can also bake the bones and veggies in the oven before you make a stock to improve the flavor.

[Anonymous No.10917586]

>>10917562
I once did 16 hours and it turned out weird. When I tasted after 4 hours it was ok, then the next day it was like it went too far or something.
It's weird though, recipes I found online vary from half an hour to 8 hours, with pretty much the same ingredients.

[Anonymous No.10917588]

>>10917584
You can also add some turmeric root powder the yellow color helps with taste.

[Anonymous No.10917590]

>>10917584
>breaking bones
No I did not. Sounds like a good idea. Will write down for next attempt.

[Anonymous No.10917591]

>>10917513
Maybe salt and simmer it down a bit more?

[Anonymous No.10917598]

>>10917555
Salt feels overly present, but it helps.
Must say the aftertaste is pretty good.

[Anonymous No.10917600]

>>10917513
too much shit in there.
next time just do chicken, onion, carrot. possibly simmer for longer, and or roast broken chicken bones beforehand.

[Anonymous No.10917603]

>>10917545
bullshit
salt helps break up proteins

[Anonymous No.10917612]

>>10917586
We normally do 8 hours simmering on a wood burning stove to heat the house. It makes a rich gelatinous stock but we don't use anything other than the bones since we use it for a lot of ethnic food other than typical western dishes. You're making basically a french stock, the root of all western dishes that use stock.

[Anonymous No.10917613]

>>10917603
Stock doesn't have salt you add it later.

[Anonymous No.10917618]

>>10917545
Number 1 ingredient in all stock cubes is salt. Number 2 ingredient is MSG. Then there's fat and various sodium chemicals as well.

[Anonymous No.10917619]

>>10917513
need to add some MSG

[Anonymous No.10917632]

>>10917618
Processed version of a food has shit tons of salt who would have thought. liquid version contain very little salt if any at all.

[Anonymous No.10917638]

>>10917618
Comparing homemade stock to chemicaly produced stock.

[Anonymous No.10917648]

>>10917513
It probably is the MSG desu, nothing wrong with using a little of it for extra flavor.

[Anonymous No.10917671]

>>10917619
>>10917648
It feels like cheating, but it's ridiculous how much of a difference it makes.

[Anonymous No.10917704]

Stocks are overrated.

[Anonymous No.10917706]

just get knorr stock pot

[Anonymous No.10917716]

>>10917706
I got this, but when you want gelatin there's nothing that beats home made stock.

[Anonymous No.10917728]

>>10917632
>yeast extract
Hmm.. that may be an idea.

[Anonymous No.10917869]

>>10917513

you need a couple pounds of bones, you retard. preferably the carcasses.

>>10917533

retard

>>10917603

FUCKING retard. stock has nothing to do with "breaking down proteins". it's about extracting the gelatin/collagen/flavor from bones and connective tissue mainly

>>10917618

fucking dipshit retard

>boillon cubes are the same as a regular stock

god dammit fuck you guys

[Anonymous No.10917879]

>>10917869
>i have never made stock BUT I READ A LOT OF RECIPES!!

[Anonymous No.10917887]

i'd imagine you don't have enough chicken parts and too much other crap

just mirepoix and a fuckton of chicken carcass next time

[Anonymous No.10917897]

>>10917513
Throw in more bones, at least a 2-3 pounds.

[Anonymous No.10917917]

>>10917513
YOU'RE UNDERSALTING YOUR STOCK

[Anonymous No.10917926]

>>10917879

i've made hundreds of stocks, kiddo

>roast bones
>roast celery/carrot/onion if you want a darker/richer stock
>garlic, black peppercorn, coriander, thyme, bay leaf
>bring to simmer, let simmer for ~12 hours.. don't boil, if you boil it makes cloudy stock
>if using veal/beef or any other large mammalian bones, do a second wash (re-fill stock pot with new water after straining the first wash and let it roll for another six hours or so)
>reduce second wash to match first

not hard, retard. adding salt to stock defeats the whole purpose of a stock. stock is neutrally seasoned, you season whatever you make with the stock.

[Anonymous No.10917947]

>>10917598
Then you're good. What you're missing is likely the recipe you want to use the stock in.

[Anonymous No.10917962]

>>10917947

no, he's not good. he was doomed from the start.

>>10917513

put your stock in the fridge. does it look like jello when it gets cold? if not, it's because YOU USED FOUR FUCKING LEG BONES AND TWO DRUMS INSTEAD OF MINIMUM 2-3 LBS OF BONES

whatever vessel you're using to make the stock should be basically full of bones, as much as you can fit in there.

[Anonymous No.10918009]

Try heston's recipe for chicken stock, it sounds pretty weird but it's actually really good.

[Anonymous No.10918012]

>>10918009
>(((heston blumenthal)))
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Anonymous No.10918018]

>>10917926
take your bland broth to the stock market kid, no one cares.

[Anonymous No.10918029]

>>10917513
>Simmered 1 hour normal, 1 hour pressure cooked simmer.
This is your problem. You're not simmering for nearly long enough. Get some good bones with lots of marrow, and simmer for like 24-48 hours. Add a little vinegar to dissolve the bones over time. If you're adding veggies, add them close to the end because that full cook time will completely destroy them. This is how I make stock and the end result is wonderful.

[Anonymous No.10918070]

>>10917513
I don't know how the pressure cooker time converts from normal cooking, but I normally simmer stock for 6-8 hours. You could try adding a bit of lemon or vinegar to brighten it up, that improves a lot of foods like this.

That doesn't really sound like enough bones for 1L of stock though. Especially with the amount of vegetables you used. You made a broth, but it's mostly a vegetable broth which is probably why it tastes bland. Next time try to get more bones and fill a pot with just those.

[Anonymous No.10918108]

>>10917869
>GIMME YOU'S
you're welcome

[Anonymous No.10918123]

>>10918018

Take your faggot retard ass to a cliff and kill yourself.. stock does not have salt, its not something you consume by itself. It doesnt get seasoned.

>>10918029

VINEGAR in stock? Simmering a long time destroys the veggies? What does that even mean?

Fucking retards, holy cow

[Anonymous No.10918137]

>>10918123
Holy cow?

Fucking pajeet.

[Anonymous No.10918170]

>>10917962
>HURR DURR NOBODY EVER TAKES ME SERIOUS IRL SO I RAGE ON INTERNET
So, you've really never heard of adjusting recipes to the amount of ingredients? You also never heard of vegetable stocks that don't even use chicken, which are nearly identical? You just shout the few things your simple brain manages to contain?
It's never fails that it's the true retards that like to start shouting retard on the internet. I don't blame you though, you probably think that's how people communicate, considering how often you hear it.

Anyway, there was enough chicken bones & meat. It was about 50/50 chicken parts/veggies.

[Anonymous No.10918175]

>>10917962
I use the carcasses of the $5 rotisseries you can get at any place now

[Anonymous No.10918301]

>>10918170

Youre a retarded faggot who doesnt know what hes doing. Of course i know what veg stock is, thats what you made. You were trying to make chicken stock, you tard.

Put it in the fridge, lets see if it sets up.

[Anonymous No.10918885]

>>10918123
>VINEGAR in stock?
If you read my whole post, I said to simmer it for 24-48 hours. This means that the ascetic acid boils off by the time you're done and doesn't affect the flavor. However, by creating a more acidic environment in the beginning it causes the bone to dissolve at a faster rate so you get more nutrients and I think a heartier end product.
>Simmering a long time destroys the veggies?
If you simmer veggies for 24-48 hours, it will destroy the flavor you wish to impart, so it's best to put in veggies relatively closer to when you wish to serve the stock. These instructions are primarily for big beef bones, so putting in veggies too early might be tantamount to simmering a fish broth for ten times too long.
>What does that even mean?
It means a superior stock.

[Anonymous No.10919027]

>>10918885

Do you really think the end product is any better simmering for 48 hours vs 12? And what kind of stock? Seems super unnecessary.

I dont believe you when you say that you cant taste the vinegar at the end as youd have to put a decent amount in to “dissolve” the bone.

[Anonymous No.10919060]

>>10919027
>Do you really think the end product is any better simmering for 48 hours vs 12?
If you're using big beef bones, you can see them very slowly disintegrate over time. I've never done it, but if you were to go several days you could probably get them down to just about nothing. Regardless, there's definitely a significant difference even past 12 hours. I recently made one that went for about 48 hours, and the smell changed continuously. It was very fragrant, almost flower-like, at about 36 hours, so I'll probably try stopping there next time.
>I dont believe you when you say that you cant taste the vinegar at the end as youd have to put a decent amount in to “dissolve” the bone.
Have you ever tasted balsamic reduction for example? It'll leave a taste, but it won't contain a significant amount of acetic acid if you do it right. If it does taste of vinegar still, just keep it on the heat until it doesn't; not too complex, just taste as you go.

[Anonymous No.10919100]

Short list of potential problems:

Are you roasting the bones before you put them in?

Not enough salt

you didnt reduced enough

You need more chicken. If you can get a whole carcass it would be best.

Cheat with some msg if it still doesnt taste right.

[Anonymous No.10919126]

>>10919060
This is why I store all my trimming in the summer to make stock in the winter. Just take a big lobster pot and plop it on the woodstove and let it simmer all day. It drives the dog nuts.

[Anonymous No.10919161]

>>10917513
>Simmered 1 hour
uhhhhhhh

[Anonymous No.10921244]

>>10919161

Right.. veg stock takes an hour. Chicken stock goes overnight.

[Anonymous No.10921557]

>>10917513

Buy a whole chicken and break it down. Roast the carcass and wingtips and any skin you weren't planning to eat. Rolling boil water, put chicken in for a few minutes, huge amount of scum should form on surface. Throw all this water away along with the scum. New pot of water, cold,put all chicken pieces in and pressure cook for 1.5 hours with whatever scraps you have (avoid root veg skins): parsley stems, carrot ends, onion tip, leek ends etc...

The parts you used don't have a lot of potential in either taste or texture. "might as well throw them in" tier. Think of stock like something you make for free as a bonus when you have the right bits and pieces. Keep unsalted but when tasting sprinkle some salt into a tablespoon, keeping the rest unsalted. Reduce to your liking (overconcentrated is convenient for storage) and freeze in ice cube trays, transfer to ziplock bag.

[Anonymous No.10922213]

>>10918301
You're obviously an incompetent mongoloid who would be satisfied with seared dog shit. You don't know shit about good cooking. You'd fart on a stale bread and call it top cuisine. You have the palate of a dung beetle and are proud of it.

[Anonymous No.10922234]

>>10919161
>reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.10922250]

Whaddayaknow. It's wobbly like jelly.

[Anonymous No.10922332]

>>10921557
Thank god there are still people here that know their stuff. Added to the notes.
Doubt I'll be buying whole chickens just for stock though. I usually just make it when I have a lot of left over bones that I don't just want to throw away. But I won't mind getting one for practicing purposes.

[Anonymous No.10922348]

>>10917513
>>A garlic bulb
>>2 bay leaves (as if they matter)
>>Parsley
>>Thyme
>>Rosemary
Next time, use more poultry-centric seasonings. Forego parsley and use savory. Use more bay leaves too, they have a great flavor for chicken.
Also, only 2 hours seems like a really short time for making stock. I would have at least tripled the simmering time before you put it in the pressure cooker.

[Anonymous No.10922411]

>>10917513
Did you remember the MSG and sodium inosinate? You could skip the stock amd just put that in some water really.

[Anonymous No.10922442]

>>10922348
>bay leaves (as if they matter)
They do when you're not buying flavorless shit from wallyworld.

[Anonymous No.10922449]

>>10922442
Tell it to OP, I greentexted off his post.

[Anonymous No.10922464]

>>10922449
OP used hardly any chicken for a fuckload of water and then wondered why his stock was bland. I'm not sure OP is capable of improvement.

[Anonymous No.10922465]

>>10922442
I've bought them from so many places. Fresh, dried, the result is always the same. I wish I knew where those elusive quality leaves are located, because I would love to have a few.

[Anonymous No.10922475]

>>10922464
>1 liter
>fuckload of water
This place just loves to bitch, like the bunch of bitches you are.

[Anonymous No.10922496]

>>10922475
OP said he got 2.5L and then reduced it to 1L.

Using standard recipes, 1 liter of stock requires 1 kg of bones. The bones from 4 legs and 3 drums is nowhere near 1 kg. OP needed a lot more chicken than he had.

[Anonymous No.10922537]

>>10922496
>The bones from 4 legs and 3 drums is nowhere near 1 kg.
>All these wild assumptions just to bitch
The 4 legs alone were (packaged) 1.5kg, which is about as much as a whole chicken. Lots of meat and some skin was still on them, so they'd easily made 750gram alone. The drumsticks were big ones, so combined they'd definitely make 1kg.

Can all the bitches please leave now?

[Anonymous No.10922543]

>>10917513
Ya need some salt in there bro.

[Anonymous No.10922563]

>>10922543
Already added a bit more, then added a pinch of MSG and some turmeric (like one anon suggested) and it's already much better now.
Next time I'll break the bones first too, that sounded like a good plan too. Might try the yeast extract thing also, as was shown on that organic stock label another anon posted. There are some good tips hidden in this thread.

[Anonymous No.10922565]

>>10922537
Obviously I didn't measure the materials used since I'm not OP but that seems like a very poor estimate to me. According to The Professional Chef, the yield of chicken legs is 75% and drums 69%, meaning the bone and skin content is 100 minus those figures.

1.5 kg of legs would therefore provide ~375g of bones, and 3 very large drumsticks would be about the same. You don't have enough bone. Once you factor in that reducing the stock will cook off some of the flavor and that bones aren't the greatest for stock anyway it's expected that the stock will be fairly bland.

Use feet, necks, and wingtips next time, and weigh out your chicken so you know how much water to add.

[Anonymous No.10922570]

>>10922563
>There are some good tips hidden in this thread.
Stop relying on "tricks" and just use the correct proportion of chicken.

[Anonymous No.10922573]

>>10922537
not the guy you're responding to, but did you weigh them? because they probably aren't that heavy. also that recipe is probably just not good enough either - add more chicken bones.

[Anonymous No.10922594]

>>10922332
I mean you're buying the chicken for the meat, as I said stock should be thought of as a freebie (when cooking domestically, ofc in the restaurant the stock must be made to a standard). My butcher sells two for £7 large chooks so I get those and freeze the meat and use the two carcasses to make stock (more efficient obviously). But if you dread having meat in your freezer, save all your bones from when you buy chicken pieces and dry them out in the oven next you use it. When you have loads, make stock. Without spine, neck, wing tips, or skin you won't get a good texture no matter how many bones. Without some leftover meat (unsalvageable carcass meat) you'll lack flavour. This is why you really want a carcass as it's the complete package.

[Anonymous No.10922605]

>>10922573
All I can say is that the amount of bones and vegetables that came out of the pan were easily three times the amount of stock I have now. The same sized container I used for the stock I used to scoop in the bones and veggies, and it was beyond topped off.

Anyway, I can't help but wonder if 50% more bones will really suddenly make that much of a difference. That makes me wonder if the veggies and herbs have any effect at all. I mean, they're called aromatics for a reason I'd think. I really thought the problem was in there, not the chicken.

[Anonymous No.10922612]

>>10917869
This guy knows his shit. You guys should listen.

Making stock with with 2 legbones and some wings lol

[Anonymous No.10922620]

For laughs sake (I guess), this is one of the videos I took notes from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOTUU9S_pXc

[Anonymous No.10922628]

>>10922612
>this guy knows his shit
Stop promoting yourself, dip

[Anonymous No.10922632]

>>10922612
Don't you mean two nuggets and a feather?

[Anonymous No.10922634]

>>10918301

[Anonymous No.10922648]

>>10922634
>having to respond to yourself for attention

[Anonymous No.10922722]

>>10922348
Your link is broken, what was in post No. 2 ???

[Anonymous No.10922728]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Oi4DjS5EJU

[Anonymous No.10923202]

>>10922250

Im surprised it set up that much desu, but then again you had to REDUCE IT BY OVER HALF.

Dude you have no idea what the fuck youre doing. A proper stock should not need reduction and definitely should not need salt. Are you trying to make a demi glace? No? Then it doesnt get reduced, you absolute retard.

>>10922537

Hey RETARD, you dont boil the fucking chicken with the meat on it! Holy fucking shit.. YOU USE THE BONES.

>>10922563

Literally the only thing you need to so is use more bones and ROAST THEM, you FUCKING RETARD SHITHEAD

>>10922605

Dude where do you live? If its anywhere near me ill drive over right now and fucking STRANGLE YOU. No shit, because you reduced the end result by over half!! Veggies arent aromatics, RETARD.

>>10922628
>>10922648

These posts werent me, just two fellow >100 IQ posters with the appropriate amount of chromosomes

[Anonymous No.10923243]

>>10923202
Literal autism

[Anonymous No.10923260]

>>10923243

Hello, OP. Im going to find you and im going to murder you with my bare hands.

[Anonymous No.10924058]

>>10922648

nigger

[Anonymous No.10924081]

>>10917513
did you brown every thing in the pan first and scrape up all the bits before adding liquid?

[Anonymous No.10924107]

>>10917513
you need more bones for sure. also skim that fat off the top. also don't listen to the retards saying to add salt, stocks are made unsalted, it's not a broth. there's a lot of flavor in a good stock, but it's not going to be very tasty on its own.

>>10923202
>A proper stock should not need reduction and definitely should not need salt
first off, stock application varies and reduction can be necessary if you fucking want it. secondly, a stock doesn't have salt because it will most likely be reduced and other components will have salt, you do final adjustments. however, your stock will certainly taste like bland shit because there is no salt, salt a bit and taste it, it should be good
> and ROAST THEM
>gives advice despite not knowing there are different applications for stocks, some which involve roasting and others not, some using already roasted bones
>because you reduced the end result by over half
yes, that's pretty common, you fucking brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10924154]

>>10924107

You seriously think this retard has any clue about the nuances of adjusting stock recipes for different applications?

He boiled whole chicken thighs lmao. His stock was so shitty that he had to reduce it to make it taste like anything. He cooked it for one hour. Hes a total failure.

[Anonymous No.10924167]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=74tZ-yOOPy0

[Anonymous No.10924211]

You actually SHOULD add a little salt when the stock is simmering.
But, like, VERY little. You don't need much to get the chemical benefits of it. You add more later when it's done for flavor.

Also, add peppercorns early, then remove them.
also, cook it longer.

[Anonymous No.10924595]

>>10924211

Why salt?

[Anonymous No.10924655]

>>10922612
You can make good stock with any amount of bones, as long as you scale the water accordingly.

[Anonymous No.10924854]

>>10924655

No shit

[Anonymous No.10925210]

>>10917513
>no salt

[Anonymous No.10925262]

>>10925210
You don't consume stock directly. So you don't salt it. You salt what ever you are making with the stock.

[Anonymous No.10925628]

>>10925262

Fuck, thank you. This thread made me feel like i was taking crazy pills or something

[Anonymous No.10925689]

>>10924595
salt enhances flavor, are you an alien?

[Anonymous No.10925727]

>>10925689

I get how salt works. Why would you salt something thats supposed to be a neutrally seasoned ingredient that yiu use to make food? It doesnt make any sense.

Especially for things that will be reduced or that require the absorption of said stock, you season afterward.

[Anonymous No.10925798]

>>10925727
OP tastes his stock alone without using it to cook anything and said it was lacking depth. Why don't you read the OP, first. He wasn't saying that xyz made with the stock was bland, he said the stock itself was bland.

[Anonymous No.10925808]

>>10925798

Stock isnt supposed to be consumed by itself therefore it doesnt get seasoned, what the fuck do you guys not get?

Stock isnt broth/soup

[Anonymous No.10925910]

>>10917869
retard

[Anonymous No.10925912]

>>10924154
nice google image reddit tourist nematode

[Anonymous No.10925924]

>>10925808
if stock tastes bland you fucked up anyway

[Anonymous No.10925929]

>>10925924

Which he did. If you have to salt stock to make it not be “bland” you did indeed fuck up.

>>10925912

What does this even mean

[Anonymous No.10925944]

>>10925808
maybe i'm autistic but if someone asks how to improve a base ingredient, you can't just tell them to wait until it's used in another product. if the stock is shit, whatever you make out of it is gonna be shit too

[Anonymous No.10925967]

>>10917513
Cause you're white and suck at cooking.

[Anonymous No.10925969]

>>10925944

You dont use stock to season a dish, stock is neutral in that regard. You build a dish using stock, its one piece of the pizzle. Salt is another piece of the pizzle. What are you not getting?

[Anonymous No.10925990]

>>10925969
idk, guess i know my stock is slaty so i don't salt whatever i'm making with it. i tend to make stuffing and squash soups with my stock that i have in the freezer. i never really salt either because my stock does the job.

[Anonymous No.10925997]

>>10925990

Sure, if im making rice or polenta or cois cous with stock ill salt the stock. Its just like, once its in there its in there and now your stock is less versatile than it was before it was salted.

[Anonymous No.10926466]

>>10917513
Too much veg. You wanna add two carcasses and some bone with meat. Roast the bones in the oven for an hour. Add half an onion, half a carrot, a stick of celery and 1 or 2 cloves of garlic. Go easy on the herbs. Just cover bones. with liquid.

[Anonymous No.10926740]

>>10917917
YOU DONT SALT STOCK

TRY MAKING DEMI GLACE OUT OF YOUR STOCK AND TELL ME HOW IT WENT

[Anonymous No.10926756]

>>10918885
The acetate may boil off but that won't increase the pH back to a neutral 7. Secondly, you don't want the mineral component of your bones to dissolve, you want the collagen in them to bbreak down into gelatin, which happens with heat and time, not acidity.

[Anonymous No.10926793]

>>10922722
Did you read the OP?

">2 bay leaves (as if they matter)"

Got double greentexted to

">>2 bay leaves (as if they matter)"

What happens to posts containing >> followed by a number?

[Anonymous No.10927023]

>>10917926
Not trolling, Isn’t simmering a low boil? Tell more about a second “wash”. Is that so you can get more stock with the same bones? I would think the marrow amount in the two stocks would be different. Thanks. Trying to master stock making.

[Anonymous No.10927032]

>>10926793
>What happens to posts containing >> followed by a number?

The system tries to make a link to a different post number. If that post number doesn't exist then it gets a strikethrough. In this case there is no post number "2".

[Anonymous No.10927036]

>>10927023
>Isn’t simmering a low boil?
Simmering is a "boil" so low that there's only the occaisional bubble breaking the surface once every several seconds.

>> Is that so you can get more stock with the same bones?
Yes.

>>I would think the marrow amount in the two stocks would be different.
It is. the 2nd one is much weaker than the first. Many cooks don't even bother doing it. Normally the 2nd one is never used on its own but rather is saved to make more stock with.

[Anonymous No.10927041]

>>10926756
>The acetate may boil off
It doesn't.

> Secondly, you don't want the mineral component of your bones to dissolve, you want the collagen in them to bbreak down into gelatin, which happens with heat and time, not acidity.
Correct.

[Anonymous No.10927051]

>>10927036
Thanks!

[Anonymous No.10927103]

Anon, I'm not from here, and I'm a fucking amateur, and I basically can't cook, BUT. When I make chicken soup, adding potatoes is one of the steps that give a lot of flavor to the initial stock.
I make "stock" by boiling chicken breast for about an hour and as you might expect it tastes like pretty much nothing. However, adding potatoes quickly produces some actual chicken flavor.

[Anonymous No.10927224]

>>10917522
Sometimes it frustrate me that salt matter so much at the end, it feels like at my effort was optional

This is prob the only thing bothers me from making some dish.

[Anonymous No.10927255]

can I safely put frozen stock in with fresh stock then refreeze it?

I never have enough bit left over to make very much.

[Anonymous No.10927258]

>>10927255
Of course you can.

[Anonymous No.10927475]

>>10917869
It can have salt in it. This is a preservation tactic in many old recipes its vital. Your stock is bland without salt. There were wars over salt. Salt is essential for almost every dish in existence.

[Anonymous No.10927484]

Never actually have had stock before, but what are the pros to making a home-made stock, over buying pre-made? Isn't it the exact same process minus the time consuming boil over-night? Seems easier to just get a base stock, and add ingredients to it, no?

[Anonymous No.10927488]

>>10927484
It tastes much better if you know what you're doing. Avoid cubes. Roast bones, giblets, and meats for more flavor.

[Anonymous No.10927489]

>>10927475
>Salt is essential for almost every dish in existence.
Yes. But the idea is to salt your finished dish as opposed to salting the stock. That maintains the flexibility of the stock in as many applications as possible.

For example, let's say you make chicken stock and you salt it to taste. That's fine if you are making a soup and you aren't adding any other ingredients which might be salty on their own. but if you want to use other salty ingredients in your soup now you have too much salt. Likewise if you want to reduce the stock to make a sauce now you have far too much salt. Nobody is saying don't add salt. We're saying don't add it to the stock stage of cooking, add it to the finished dish instead.

>>preservation tactic
Irrelevant given that today we store stock in fridges and freezers, or we can use a pressure canner. We don't need salt for preservation of stock.

[Anonymous No.10927497]

>>10927484
Several, really:
1) it tastes a fuck of a lot better.
2) it saves money since you can make it from scraps and leftovers
3) homemade stock contains a lot of gelatin. that gives a much better texture to your stews, soups, and sauces. you don't get that texture from the vast majority of storebought stock.
4) premade stock and bouillon cubes usually loaded with salt. that is a health concern for some people, and a flavor concern for everyone. Cooking with premade stocks can easily make your food taste too salty.

[Anonymous No.10927534]

>>10927489
So which is it anon. It stock traditionally used with salt(the proper way to make stock and the method humanity has used the longest) or you nu age shitty bland saltless stock that is only possible to keep on the shelf with modern age equipment?

[Anonymous No.10927541]

>>10927534
*is stock
*or your

[Anonymous No.10927542]

>>10927534
Which is what, anon?

I'm advocating that you make your stock without salt, thereby enabling you to use that stock in a larger number of applications.

We don't need to limit ourselves by salting our stock anymore, there is no actual advantage provided by salting it so why do so?

[Anonymous No.10927545]

>>10927542
Your stock advice is shit and the salt is not just a flavor in its own it brings out the flavors of everything else not just from cooking but from storing it as well. If you add enough salt to effect ANY recipe calling for it in a negative way, you have ruined your stock with too much salt.

[Anonymous No.10927551]

>>10927534
I've worked for 10 years in this shit hole industry, and no restaurant has ever seasoned stock, only supermarket stock has salt in it.

[Anonymous No.10927555]

>>10917513
add a chicken boullion cube op

[Anonymous No.10927561]

>>10927545
>Your stock advice is shit
I disagree.

> and the salt is not just a flavor in its own it brings out the flavors of everything else not just from cooking but from storing it as well.
your chemistry knowledge is atrocious. It makes no difference in flavor whether you add salt at the beginning of stockmaking or if you add it later in the cooking process. The "bringing out flavors" is not a literal chemical process, it's a psychological one that works as long is salt is present in the finished dish. If you want to read more about the chemistry (or lack thereof) refer to Monderist Cuisine, volume 1 pg 330, and also Vol. 2 288.

>If you add enough salt to effect ANY recipe calling for it in a negative way, you have ruined your stock with too much salt.
So how do you know how much salt to add to your stock? If you pre-salt it enough to taste good in a soup it will be far too salty when used in a reduction. Salting the finished dish instead of the stock avoids that problem.

[Anonymous No.10927574]

>>10927551
>muh authority
fuck off and provide an actual argument against salt in stock other than the clear fact you used too much once and it ruined it for whatever recipe you planned it for. Even just a little bit of salt will help break everything down into the stock, without adding too much of a salty flavor. And restaurants blow chunks with hardly passable food for high dollar prices, its why I started cooking at home because your food is shitty and expensive. If youre a chef, then its all coming together for me now on why they suck.

When you skip the salt, you don't get the full flavor of the bones and marrow. end of the fucking story.

[Anonymous No.10927581]

>>10927574
>>muh authority
but anon, didn't you know that just because it's old it MUST be good.

don't trust that MRI and antibiotic shit that doctors have these days, it's all about balancing the humors via bloodletting like we traditionally used.

[Anonymous No.10927588]

>>10927581
Youre a rambling lunatic at this point, look at what I've done to you.

[Anonymous No.10927599]

>>10927551
>>shit hole industry
>>>no restaurant has ever seasoned stock
hmmm

[Anonymous No.10927604]

>>10927588
>look at what I've done to you.
It appears to me that you've given up on the argument because you were BTFO, and now you're deflecting.

[Anonymous No.10927640]

>>10927224
Salt accentuates and brings forward the flavor, but there needs to be a flavor to bring forward first, that's where your effort is shown.

[Anonymous No.10927647]

>>10927604
No, I mean you truly are an incoherent rambling lunatic. What does an appealing to authority fallacy have to do with my appeal to traditions fallacy? You are not only wrong about stock, you're a cancer to the industry and also illiterate.

[Anonymous No.10927773]

>>10927647
You seem to be confusing me with another poster. I posted >>10927561 and >>10927581, but I did not post >>10927574

>>What does an appealing to authority fallacy have to do with my appeal to traditions fallacy?
Again, you'd have to ask the other dude, but they're pretty much the same thing.

>>You are not only wrong about stock
I've posted citations to back up my claims. All you're doing is whining about tradition and then admitting that is a fallacy.

[Anonymous No.10927953]

>>10927574

Youve never cooked, dude. Having saltnin your stock makes itnless versatile, period. How do you know how mich stock to use now that the stock has salt in it? What if youre using shit that has salt in itnalready like anything cured or brined or whatever?

Salt doesnt help “break down” ingredients or “bring out more flavors” chemically while cooking. You dont know dick.. Like other anon said, what about if youre using your stock for demi glace or pan sauce? In what world does it make sense to season something BEFORE you reduce?

Fuck you you stupid piece of faggot. I seriously hate you for being so stupid.

[Anonymous No.10928896]

Why would you even make or use stock when burgers, fries, hot dogs and tendies are a thing? Fucking /pol/ retards.

[Anonymous No.10929153]

>>10927640
Good point, Thanks that's a relief

[Anonymous No.10929170]

MSG is safer than salt and should be used in nearly every savory dish
don't tell me you fell for (((their))) tastelet tricks

[Anonymous No.10929306]

>>10929170
>msg is safer than salt
>*fucks with your brain chemistry and artificially increases your appetite*

[Anonymous No.10929935]

>>10929306

Hurr durrrrrrr ahahhauzhfbhbdhtwuhUhyhjsjsjJSJSJ

[Anonymous No.10929950]

>>10929935
Case in point. Good job.

[Anonymous No.10930039]

>>10929170
Jews launched a campaign against MSG because sians used to to get american addicted to their tasty foods. They couldn't handle the competition asians bring, which is why its even harder to get into a college as an asian than a white.

[Anonymous No.10930085]

Post stock recipe/process

>Roast bones and carcasses and ideally some turkey necks and chicken feet at 500 for 30 min
>Bring to boil in tall pot with a pinch of salt, starting from cold water
>Reduce to simmer, add halved onion, 2 peeled carrot, and 3 peeled garlic cloves, possibly other vegetables depending on intended use like fennel or celery
>Simmer till it tastes right
>Strain, cool, refridgerate
>Strain fat, add single clove, a few pepper corns, bay leaf, possibly other whole spices, simmer on low all day and all of tomorrow until it's almost too thick to strain
>Freeze in ice cube trays

[Anonymous No.10930106]

>>10917513
should have gone for 6 hours anon