Reducing Liquids For Sauce

[aliaseater]

I'm making Beef Burgundy.

I wonder if it really makes a difference if I reduce the wine before adding the stock and simmering. I assume the end result will be the same if I add my liquids at the same time.

Would this also apply to other sauces using a combination of alcohol and stock?

[Brad S]

You don't want to add your liquids at the same time. You see,the wine is what will release the fond from the bottom of your pan,you then want to use a flat wooded spatula to scrape the bottom and concentrate the wine.

It is the acid in the wine that will create your fond and then they will mellow.

By doing this you also avoid discoloring your miro poix (or in this case mushrooms and onions)

[marie-louise]

I also add the wine first. But I have no idea why-that's just the way I do it. It seems any liquid would release the fond from the bottom, and as long as it is boiling, the alcohol would burn off whether there was another liquid mixed it or not-isn't it the heat that evaporates the alcohol?

[Bux]

I'd add the wine first only so that I'm sure the alcohol evaporates. Adding stock at the same time is fine if you're sure your proportions are fine--and if they're not you can add more stock or water later. I've deglazed saute pans with wine, brandy, water, stock, broth, and probably some other liquids I can't think of right now and haven't seen a difference between them in dissolving the bits stuck to the pan. Scraping the bottom and stirring is important to get it all dissolved.

I'm not sure I understand the referrence to discoloring the onions and mushrooms.

[Dave the Cook]

Two reasons to add wine first, I think: 1) So that it's concentrated and somewhat thickened, which eventually will help you achieve the proper sauce consistency with the smallest amount of thickeners; 2) Heat that is high enough to promote reduction also creates a lot of more complex flavoring compounds, adding depth and interest to the sauce. If you added the stock at the same time, you'd expend a lot more energy to get the same effect, and the wine would be no more concentrated than the stock. Since wine is essential to the dish, you want its flavor to stand out.

marie-louise and Bux are right: virtually any liquid with a low concentration of dissolved solids will do the job of deglazing. Water, stock, vinegar, and many fruit juices work, but things like milk won't -- in fact, they'll leave their own glaze. Brad might have a point that acid in the wine helps a bit. In my opinion, the effect is not enough to limit yourself to only wine if you've got something else in mind. Besides, fruit juices and vinegar are acidic (stock is usually neutral to slightly alkaline).

I'm not sure about the idea that acid will set the color of mushrooms and onions. Certainly it's a effective trick for some color compounds, but maybe that's not what Brad meant.

Given sufficient heat and time, most (though probably not every last drop) of residual alcohol will evaporate. Most Beef Bourguinonne recipes call for a full bottle of wine and a covered simmer. In these cases, and especially if you're simmering on the stovetop instead of in the oven, the alcohol evaporates, then condenses on the lid of the pot and drips back down into the stew. Only when you lift the lid do you break the cycle. The initial reduction during deglazing is not enough to evaporate all of the alcohol, either because you don't dump all the wine in at once to deglaze, or you aren't likely to leave it uncovered long enough for full dissipation to occur. (I'm basing this on a study I read a couple of years ago that unfortunately I can't put my hands on. It said, in brief, that even an uncovered simmer of two hours didn't evaporate the alcohol entirely. I was surprised, but the study was pretty convincing.)

Edited November 9, 2003 by Dave the Cook (log)

[schneich]

achieving a very nice consistency is possible without adding ANY thickener.

first deglaze the pan, then cook your sauce down to your taste. break a third

off a gelatine sheet, dissolve in NOmore cooking sauce. monter au beurre (of course with

very cold butter) and voila :) a very nice sauce consistency... (you can use an immersionblender to make

texture even foamier...

cheers

t.

[fyfas]

Isn't it all really about concentrating flavors and building layers of flavors ? I'm tugging on my memory but it seems to me I've alway read recipes to call for wine first then stock then whatever fat (if any) is called for; i.e. heavy cream/half-and-half then the tablespoon(s) of butter.

[Brad S]

Bux,Just to clarify about the discoloring of vegetable.

When you braise,you start with your miro poix,develope there sugars and then remove,add your protien and sear it off,then deglaze and reduce the wine,if you add the wine to the miro poix it "stains them"

[Brad S]

From Jorge de la Torre

Laboratory Coordinater

J&W Denver.

This is the same method I was tought 24 years ago at J&W.

"Let’s take Osso Buco for instance. This is a dish that takes hours to make the meat flavorful but also, along with accompaniments, uses many types of cooking methods. You will have to have an already finished product but the gremolata and polenta can be done in the classroom a la minute. With the fresh osso buco, you could flour it and show them how to brown meats using the sauté method while discussing why cuts of meat such as shank are cooked that way. You could then sauté the mirepoix, discussing the importance of caramelization, the size of the cuts and why they are of that particular size. You could then add the wine to the pan and show how to deglaze. You would then add the braising liquid and discuss the proper braising technique."

Edited November 9, 2003 by Brad S (log)

[Dave the Cook]

Isn't it all really about concentrating flavors and building layers of flavors ?  I'm tugging on my memory but it seems to me I've alway read recipes to call for wine first then stock then whatever fat (if any) is called for; i.e. heavy cream/half-and-half  then the tablespoon(s) of butter.

I agree. I tried to say this in the first paragraph of my post, but for some reason, the concept of "layering" eluded me. Thanks, fyfas.

When you braise,you start with your miro poix,develope there sugars and then remove,add your protien and sear it off,then deglaze and reduce the wine,if you add the wine to the miro poix it "stains them"

Thank you for the clarification, Brad; I get it now. This is why the recipe in Julia and Jacques' book does the onions and mushrooms as a completely separate step. They don't even do a standard mirepoix. They dump aromatics into a cheesecloth pouch which is removed after the simmering, and the separately sauteed 'shrooms and onions are added just before service. It's an elegant method, in my opinion, and completely sidesteps the discoloring problem.

[Bicycle Lee]

if you have the time and the ingredients you don't need gelatin or starch... And adding wine first not only helps get the goods off the pan, but the goods in the pan help to mellow out the acidity in the wine...James Peterson suggests adding hunks of meat (whichever one matches your stock) if your sauce is too acidic. Reduce the wine until it starts to thicken, add quite a bit of stock and reduce that until it is as thick as you want. Of course, you'll have to start with a lot of stock, but the end result is great when you have a nice nape' sauce that required no gelatin, starch, milk, roux, or other thickeners except the natural gelatin present in the stock...

Edited November 9, 2003 by Bicycle Lee (log)

[Mottmott]

You always add the wine first so you can drink the remainder while finishing off your recipe.

[snowangel]

You always add the wine first so you can drink the remainder while finishing off your recipe.

[fyfas]

Yup, Topic now closed... Mottmott said it all - we do the wine first to get the bottle open ! That poured glass while doing the prep and work is key, integral to our culinary success. Also explains why I've screwed up when I have !

Edited November 10, 2003 by fyfas (log)

[bunkyoc]

Interesting...and all very valid points...and yes, you must always drink wine while cooking....

P.S. to Dave the cook, the "bundle" of aromatics is usually called a bouquet garne....did I spell that right?

[aliaseater]

Two reasons to add wine first, I think: 1) So that it's concentrated and somewhat thickened, which eventually will help you achieve the proper sauce consistency with the smallest amount of thickeners; 2) Heat that is high enough to promote reduction also creates a lot of more complex flavoring compounds, adding depth and interest to the sauce. If you added the stock at the same time, you'd expend a lot more energy to get the same effect, and the wine would be no more concentrated than the stock. Since wine is essential to the dish, you want its flavor to stand out.

Thanks for all your replies, but I'm still not convinced that adding the wine first and reducing it by itself will make a difference.

Once you add stock to the reduced wine aren't you diluting its concentration? Unless you reduce the wine to the point where it carmelizes to a certain degree I don't think that there will be a difference.

The idea of "layering" flavors is a nice one, but let's not fool ourselves--we're creating a collage, or a stew--not a painting, or a terrine.

The suggestion that the acidity of the wine reacts in a specific way with the other ingredients is more of what I am looking for--a scientific analysis of what really happens in the pot.

[Bux]

Bux,Just to clarify about the discoloring of vegetable.

When you braise,you start with your miro poix,develope there sugars and then remove,add your protien and sear it off,then deglaze and reduce the wine,if you add the wine to the miro poix it "stains them"

Gotcha. I was assuming the solids were out of the pan and that the question was only about adding wine before stock or wine and stock at the same time. In fact, your later post regarding osso bucco was precisely what I had in mind in terms of order.

[Dave the Cook]

Thanks for  all your replies, but I'm still not convinced that adding the wine first and reducing it by itself will make a difference.

Well, you can try it yourself and see if it makes a difference to you. If there was only one way to do a dish, we'd only need one cookbook!

Once you add stock to the reduced wine aren't you diluting its concentration? Unless you reduce the wine to the point where it carmelizes to a certain degree I don't think that there will be a difference.

Yes, you could think of it that way. But another way to describe it is that you're replacing water (something without much flavor and no body, which you evaporate in the process of reduction), with stock, something that has a lot of flavor and body. Also, wine is full of compounds that transform at temperatures below the boiling point, so the intense application of caramelization isn't necessary to effect a change in flavor.

The idea of "layering" flavors is a nice one, but let's not fool ourselves--we're creating a collage, or a stew--not a painting, or a terrine.

You underestimate yourself, I think. Certainly a word like "layer" can mean different things to different people, but much, much better cooks than I (Pepin and Prudhomme, to name a couple) have employed the word, even in referring to rustic dishes like Boeuf Bourguignon. In my opinion, there can be a lot of sublety in Coq au Vin or Crawfish Etouffee; since the basics are pretty much a given, it's the subleties that separate a good version from a great one.

The suggestion that the acidity of the wine reacts in a specific way with the other ingredients is more of what I am looking for--a scientific analysis of what really happens in the pot.

You can look for it, but if you seek a chemical reaction sort of thing, it's not there in this dish (meaning Beef Burgundy), other than the how temperature affects wine esters. However, acidity certainly contributes to flavor in Beef Burgundy, as well as many, many other dishes.

P.S. to Dave the cook, the "bundle" of aromatics is usually called a bouquet garne....did I spell that right?

I wasn't clear about what went into the pouch in Jacques and Julia's recipe: a good handful each of chopped onions and carrots, a head's worth of smashed garlic, and the usual thyme, bay and parsley. It's a pretty healthy bouquet garni.

[fyfas]

some thoughts for aliaseater who seems a bit skeptical of the concept of "layering" flavors -

Yes reducing does create a very intense concentration of the flavors developed to that point. Alone that concentrated substance would not taste good but would "assault" the taste buds. The next liquid does dilute the creation but in so doing adds another flavor which is then concentrated before adding something else.

I agree that in a stew or something like beef burgundy the result may seem like it is a single flavor rather than an assortment of tastes but as one does this - repeatedly - you will find that, as an example, in a complex sauce you can still discern the flavor of, say, the thyme or the sage or some other component.

I recall that among my frustrations when I first began cooking, while I got o.k. looking sauces, once the sauce was on the entree (chicken, fish whatever) I only tasted the sauce. Conversely eating in a better restaurant I got the flavor of a sauce but could still taste the specific taste of the item under or above it (seared scallops, say). I could then taste a companion's plate and experience the same thing but all different flavors entirely. I've found that as I forced myself to be patient when cooking and to be concious of layering flavors as I cook, I've been able to achieve the same thing at home. I'm not always confident when I sit down at the table but when it works - and it mostly does now - it is for me an accomplishment and enough of one that when I have a dish I really like out I do try to re-create it. It is as much a challenge as it is a desire to re-experience something.

Another thought... cooking is essentiall food chemistry. In college I had a summer job in a printing ink research laboratory. We developed printing inks for things like Coca Cola cans. Formulas were constantly being revised to allow for things like scratching of the can. If I took someone else's formula and dumped everything together and stirred I did not get the required ink. If I followed the steps and added things in order and did the mixing as the formula suggested, different ingredients reacted with each other each time creating something new that then reacted uniquely with the next item to yield the desired product. The most minute deviation from formula yielded a "dud" and the collective scratching of lots of heads. I believe that our kitchen attempts at sauces is a similar proposition even though in the kitchen many of us are proud not to use measuring spoons but to measure by eye.

[oraklet]

any recipe i've seen for boeuf bourg. tells that the flour should be "worked into" the cubed meat before searing/sauteing, and that the flour is what basically thinkens the sauce. but that may be old fashioned, perhaps.