Sous Vide Stock and Defatting

[EatingBen]

I made chicken stock in the sous vide, a kilo of chicken wings (on special and I went too) with a little onion, celery and carrot with 1.5L of water. I started at a temp of 90c for a few hours and then dropped it too 65c over night and unleashed the amazing this morning when I snipped off the corner of the bag and let the incredible liquid flow into a pot. 

 

I have never ever tasted stock that was so utterly perfect, I've made stock in the pressure cooker, old fashioned stove top, done it low and slow in slow cookers and super fast in pressure cookers and a combination, I've doubled stocks, tripled them to intensified flavours and reduced the hell out of them and never gotten this. 

 

BUT I need to defat the stock but it's already turned to jelly in the fridge which kinda makes it a little more difficult to get the fat out of the stock, when I pulled the stock out to remove the fat I was more astounded that I had made chicken jelly that was so intently chicken and smelt so good even cold. 

 

So really, if there any new methods that I might not know about to remove the fat? or maybe a way to emulsify the fat into the stock and it be stable? 

 

I can't wait to try beef stock and make vegetable stock, what an amazing and lazy way to make such amazing stocks!!

 

Quote

So, as was mentioned by a few below it looks like my stock just didn't render the chicken fat, I had no later of fat to remove from the stock once it cooled. Having never done sous bide chicken stock I hadn't anticipated such minimal amounts of fat or it being jelly without reduction. But it looks like it might be the age of the chickens and the low temp that made a delicious although lower fat stock. 

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by EatingBen (log)

[torolover]

One trick I use when making Ramen stock is I put fat and stock into a blender and blend on high.  The fat emulsifies into the stock. 

 

Next time you sous vide stock, how about not adding any water?  The stock will be pure chicken essence!

[nickrey]

I use a gravy jug where you pour the stock from the bottom of the jug, leaving the fat behind.  Works a treat.

[liuzhou]

I am struggling to understand what relevance the stock making method has to the de-fatting issue. How did you de-fat the stock you made by all the other methods? What worked best? Do the same.

[KennethT]

I assume you put the pot with the chicken stock into the fridge to cool?  I do the same thing, and I find that the fat floats to the surface and solidifies on the chicken jelly.  I just scrape it off with a spoon, knife, or palette knife - whatever is easier..

[EatingBen]

Usually I defat by cooling the stock and removing the solidified fat, then I'd reduce the stock. Unfortunately that's not what happened here the stock solidified and only small amounts of fat where on the surface. 

I managed to get about a teaspoon of fat off the top of the stock but there is more that I can't seem to get out since the stock is still somewhat oily but it seems to be somewhat stuck I'm really not sure how to get it to rise to the surface. 

 

I'll just heat it back up and keep trying until I get it all. amazing stock but it solidifies so fast. 

 

[EatingBen]

1 hour ago, KennethT said:

I assume you put the pot with the chicken stock into the fridge to cool?  I do the same thing, and I find that the fat floats to the surface and solidifies on the chicken jelly.  I just scrape it off with a spoon, knife, or palette knife - whatever is easier..

That's what I normally do then I reduce the stock. But the stock turned to jelly pretty fast and the fat didn't have much of a chance to rise to the surface. 

[quiet1]

Sounds like maybe it is actually too concentrated? Try reheating and add just a small amount of water to thin it out a touch so it takes longer to jell/doesn't jell as firmly?

[btbyrd]

Fat doesn't take long to rise to the surface if it's going to rise to the surface. All my stocks set up like jello and I just scrape the fat off the top. If you think, for whatever reason, that the stock just needs more time for the fat to rise up, just warm it through on the stovetop to 130F and hold it there for as long as you need to. Then chill down the entire pot (rather than pouring it off, which would agitate the fat) and scrape off the fat. I don't think that's going to help you because I don't think the problem is that it sets up too fast. But if that is the problem, this would solve it. Adding more water won't significantly alter the gel strength and will only serve to dilute the flavor.

[Anna N]

Yes, I have read through the thread again and I too am puzzled. At first I thought perhaps the OP had put the bag into the fridge which might have been a challenge but a careful reading of the first post suggests that it was removed from the bag and poured into a pot. I, too, have made chicken stock in more traditional ways that resulted in a very gelatinized product but was still able to skim the fat from the top. So yes, I'm just as puzzled.  

[MSRadell]

I don't know what temperature chicken fat starts to melt, I know pork fat is about 180°- 190° or so. I wonder if possibly the temperatures he brought the chicken up to when making the stock didn't actually extract all of the fat from the chicken? That could explain why he did that much fat float to the surface.

[quiet1]

I've gotten very gelatinous stock from using a pressure cooker and never had a major fat problem, either. Are there particulates in the stock the fat might be clinging to that are keeping it more emulsified?

[Martin Fisher]

This sounds like a fat rendering issue.

Temp not high enough and/or long enough to properly render the fat well.

And, or, in combination......

You bought a bunch of chicken wings....if the wings are from old birds — that can certainly contribute...they don't give up their fat as readily as young birds.

Older birds also tend to have more flavor, which may also explain your comment ....."I have never ever tasted stock that was so utterly perfect,"

 

 

 

Edited December 12, 2016 by DiggingDogFarm (log)

[EatingBen]

Well I put the stock on a digital hot plate and got it up to 55c.. there are small droplets over the surface of the stock but no large fat layer like I'm used too. 

 

I think that it might be that the fat just didn't get rendered as fully, it's a beautiful stock and one I"m super impressed and proud of and will do it again but it's definitely lacking fat that I can get too. 

 

I'll leave the stock warm for a little while and then chill it back down and freeze.

[EatingBen]

6 hours ago, Anna N said:

Yes, I have read through the thread again and I too am puzzled. At first I thought perhaps the OP had put the bag into the fridge which might have been a challenge but a careful reading of the first post suggests that it was removed from the bag and poured into a pot. I, too, have made chicken stock in more traditional ways that resulted in a very gelatinized product but was still able to skim the fat from the top. So yes, I'm just as puzzled.  

Not my intention to confuse, the chicken stock was done in a bag and the stock removed from the bag to a pot to cool in the fridge after it was done in the sous vide water bath. 

 

I had expected a layer of fat to form but it never did I just got these tiny flecks that I couldn't get out, I thought something had gone wrong. The stock tastes amazing but I've never had stock with so little fat before I think I just got prematurely worried. 

I'm so used to the cook chicken stock with lots of water, reduce, reduce, reduce. Even doing it in a pressure cooker I never got this.

[paulraphael]

On 12/11/2016 at 5:10 PM, MSRadell said:

I don't know what temperature chicken fat starts to melt, I know pork fat is about 180°- 190° or so. I wonder if possibly the temperatures he brought the chicken up to when making the stock didn't actually extract all of the fat from the chicken? That could explain why he did that much fat float to the surface.

 

Those high temperatures are for rendering fat from fatty tissue. The actual fat melting point is much lower. It's usually somewhere around body temperature of the animal it belonged to. That's why cold water fish oils are mostly unsaturated ... they need to stay fluid at ocean temperatures.

[EatingBen]

9 hours ago, paulraphael said:

 

Those high temperatures are for rendering fat from fatty tissue. The actual fat melting point is much lower. It's usually somewhere around body temperature of the animal it belonged to. That's why cold water fish oils are mostly unsaturated ... they need to stay fluid at ocean temperatures.

Well, what ever it is I got less then a teaspoon of fat and I've made a few more batches and they are the same. It's fantastically good!