Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Veal stock


ktdid56
 Share

Recommended Posts

What Marlene said. I usually set up veal stock to cook after dinner, and pull it off the stove to strain in the morning. You don't have to roast your bones--roasting adds a different flavor and color to the stock. Unroasted bones make a "white veal stock" which is useful in other ways. Don't fear the cooking time, 12 hours is a minimum, and think how great the house will smell when you wake up. I do give you permission to pick some of the meat off the bones at the halfway point, though--sometimes that's hard to resist. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The length of time that you simmer the bones is dependent on their size, and the amount of yield that you're after. 6 hours is neither too long nor too short if the bone size was correct. Many people over cook their veal stock which causes the bones to start to break down, leaching other chemical components into the liquid. Thomas Keller does his in two batches of 6-8 hours, then combines and reduces them to the richness he prefers. Ducasse uses bones plus meat cuts - like the brisket - and suggests only 5 hours simmering time. So, it 's really about yield.

A simple trick. The richness and density of the stock is contingent on particles to water. So, to make your stock rich, reduce it by 40-50%. To make it into a demi-glace, reduce it by 65-75%. To make it into a glace, by 85-90 %.

I make about 22 litres at a time, and reduce it by 90 %, cool it (at which point you can cut it with a butter knife because of all the gelatin), cut it into cubes, and store them in the freezer. They usually last me 5 - 6 months.

Edited by MobyP (log)

"Gimme a pig's foot, and a bottle of beer..." Bessie Smith

Flickr Food

"111,111,111 x 111,111,111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321" Bruce Frigard 'Winesonoma' - RIP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent today on my first attempt at making a veal stock. After 6 hours+ of simmering 1.5 lbs of very meaty veal bones and a few veggies in a 3 quart pot, I ended up with a very thin stock and some extremely tender and (surprisingly) still tasty stewed veal. Unfortunately, I wanted a rich stock, and was expecting all the flavor to be cooked out of the veal. Any ideas what went wrong?

Apart from the things already mentioned, don't forget that stocks are unsalted. Try taking 1/4 cup of the veal stock, adding just a touch of salt so that it is seasoned and then tasting it again. I'm often very surprised about how much of a contrast there is.

PS: I am a guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This board is fantastic, thanks for all the advice. In response:

I did not roast the bones, I was going for a white stock to use in "sjoman's beef in spicy broth" from the Aquavit cookbook. Turned out well, but I will use less lime juice than the recipe called for in the future.

Although I considered reducing the stock some, Peterson's Sauces warns against it, especially if using bones. Next time i'll try for a double or triple stock, and jam another knuckle in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I am not familiar with Ducasse's stock recipe, I can second his suggestion of brisket. When boiled in a soup or stock, it lends a marvelously sweet (in a meaty-good sense) flavor that should definately augment a thin-tasting veal stock. While its not pure veal stock, it still tastes great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

I managed to get some 8lb of veal bones and breast and intend to make stock over the next couple days. I think I'll go with the French Laundry recipe w/o roasting.

I do have some questions though:

First I'm supposed to wash them well, does that mean give them a good rinse or scrub them? They all have some meat etc on them. The breast had quite some meat actually, I cut it all up to add.

(edit:) I just answered that myself, duh.... (:edit)

Then, the FL makes two stocks from the same bones and then pours them together, one first, then again with the same bones a weaker one. Now, why not just let the first one simmer twice as long? I don't quite understand why they make two.

I could not find a how to thread, if there is one pls merge.

Thanks!

Edited by OliverB (log)

"And don't forget music - music in the kitchen is an essential ingredient!"

- Thomas Keller

Diablo Kitchen, my food blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oliver,

By washing, Keller means literally to wash them in cool water to remove surface contaminants. He then blanches the bones (this is often called washing) to coagulate and remove impurities and rinses them again.

Stocks are run twice to take advantage of osmosis factors. (I think that's the correct term.)

The first run absorbs flavor and gelatin from the bones. Carried to the extreme, the stock and bones would approach equilibrium in their gelatin and flavor compounds.

You can increase the yield by starting with fresh water that is ready to draw more gelatin and flavor from the bones.

It is instructive to compare the texture and flavor of the two stocks. Sometimes the second run has more mouth feel due to higher level of gelatin.

Good luck,

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Tim, that makes sense! Interesting. I'll just follow Keller's instructions, my guess is that he knows what he's doing ;-)

I'm looking forward to seeing the difference. Bones are washed and blanched and the first stock will go on the stove shortly, just have to figure out my timing so I don't have to deal with it in the middle of the night.

Oliver

"And don't forget music - music in the kitchen is an essential ingredient!"

- Thomas Keller

Diablo Kitchen, my food blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been working a lamb sauce from FL for a few days now. Not sure of your end point but mine will end up under a fan of sliced lamb.

One interesting point came when after all the skimming and de-scumming. I put in the tomato paste and final seasonings and started to reduce it down more. So I had a nice thick, very clean sauce in the pot. (I did this over a double boiler because one time I had the sauce separate because it accidentally boiled.) I then went to the final chinois step and ended up with a very thick, but flavorful paste in the cone. It had the thickness and color of Marmite, but with a rich lamb stock flavor. Below the chinois I had a beautifully clear more viscous stock.

Now I am trying to figure out what to do with that flavorful paste - seemd a shame to toss it at this point. I guess is that it is mostly tomato paste meat that has absorbed some flavors. I am planning to try it on some toasts as a spread possibly topped with a slice of roasted mushroom and chives.

But it occurred to me that I could have left it in and had a thicker, clean sauce (because it had been through the chinois a few times already - so you may want to consider how you will use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually not sure yet what I'll do with it, I just wanted to make it sometime and since I came across the bones....

I made both stocks, put them together and am now boiling it slowly down. I did not add tomato at all though, it's more a mix between the regular stock and the white stock in the book. I just figured that I might not always want tomato in what I might be doing with it, and if I want it, I can add it later on.

The initial poach turned up some serious scum, pretty icky stuff, but since then there was little to skim. Now while reducing there's always a thin skin building up, I skim that off. Should be down to manageable amounts soon, then I can pack and freeze it. And think about the soups or sauces to make with the stuff :-)

"And don't forget music - music in the kitchen is an essential ingredient!"

- Thomas Keller

Diablo Kitchen, my food blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, don't know why I did not look into that book! I made the double boil and simmered it down, it's cooling now.

Question though, that thin skin that's always forming, should I skim it? I did, but I'm wondering if that's just some yummy gelatine that I'm throwing out there... It is almost invisible but dark brown when skimmed all into one place. A bit on the slimy side and very sticky too.

"And don't forget music - music in the kitchen is an essential ingredient!"

- Thomas Keller

Diablo Kitchen, my food blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gelatin doesn't float to the top. You're skimming fat, and odd bits of protein and impurities (anything that shows up as froth and skin).

Besides skimming like you've got OCD, one of the best things you can do for your stock is turn down the heat. Most books don't emphasize this enough. They say "simmer," but that's easy to interpret as a more vigorous bubbling than the ideal. Any stream of bubbles that you see indicates too much agitation. It's a recipe for fats and impurities getting churned into an emulsion and clouding the stock, instead of floating to the top.

The French have an expression for a low simmer where the surface just barely shimmers, and a bubble rises once in a while: "making the pot smile." That's what you're looking for.

Edited by paulraphael (log)
  • Like 1

Notes from the underbelly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, don't know why I did not look into that book! I made the double boil and simmered it down, it's cooling now.

Question though, that thin skin that's always forming, should I skim it? I did, but I'm wondering if that's just some yummy gelatine that I'm throwing out there... It is almost invisible but dark brown when skimmed all into one place. A bit on the slimy side and very sticky too.

Oliver,

Yes, remove that skin that forms on top, but do not toss it. Like you say is is a yummy gelatin. It will be less clear than your remaining stock and fabulous flavor.

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks all! I skimmed and skimmed (and did throw it away, I'll try it next time. Was very sticky stuff) and I did have the pot on a very low simmer, I'm pretty sure it smiled :-) But it's good to mention it in this thread, yes, you don't want much movement in the water.

Now I just have to pack it and freeze it - oh, and make something with it of course :-)

"And don't forget music - music in the kitchen is an essential ingredient!"

- Thomas Keller

Diablo Kitchen, my food blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awesome topic! Veal stock is my favorite thing to make. i personally love real dark roasted bones, but it depends on the application. Just a tip, if i make mine at home i will reduce it and reduce it, being careful to wipe down the sides of the pot with a damp towel so you don't get any burnt flavor and freeze it that way so i don't take up so much room in my freezer. When I want to use it i just pull out a small amount and add a little water. Have fun and enjoy!

Wait a minute Doc. Are you telling me this thing runs on Plutonium?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick FYI - the veal stock recipe in the Bouchon book is very similar but does not include the second extraction (the remouillage). I have made this and it is very very tasty.

I made the FL version exactly once. As a home cook, the remouillage just adds too much extra pain and labor to the process to do it regularly. I try to concentrate on getting maximum extraction the first time around, which means it spends a lot of time in a low oven after and fat or scum is ladled off.

It's might be worth comparing the method used in Bouchon with Sokolov's in Saucier's Apprentice. The differences in method can be instructive (and Sokolov also skips the remouillage).

"There's nothing like a pork belly to steady the nerves."

Fergus Henderson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will also try the version Ruhlman put into Elements of Cooking. Wish I'd have the time and room to try them all and compare...

It's a fairly different recipe. Ruhlman mentioned to me that the TFL recipe is made without browned veal bones, as to be intentionally neutral for the variety of sauces that it is a base ingredient of.

For home use, I tend to follow most of TK's recipe and blow off the remouillage. Though recently, I've heard of just making the remouillage it's own separate white stock, so I may give it a shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

You are missing something wonderful by skipping the second run. The only added work is refilling your stockpot with cold water (one or two minutes) and bringing it to a simmer (maybe 30 minutes of waiting) and straining (less than 2 minutes) at the end.

The fresh water is able to extract flavor and gelatin that cannot be obtained by added simmering with your first run. It is a whole new batch of stock for three minutes of work and the time it takes to establish your simmer.

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not see the 2nd run as work, there wasn't even that much skimming necessary anymore. It makes sense to me that the 2nd run will pull more good things from the bones after the first pot got saturated.

I ended up with a bit less than 7 cups of stock, I had it in the fridge overnight and it turned into the most wonderful wobbly jello with a great color. Made 6 packages that are now in the freezer waiting for good use. I'm roasting a duck tonight and have duck stock for that sauce, the veal stock will have to wait a couple days.

It tastes very mild, mostly like veggie stock, but has a very different mouth feel, somehow coating the mouth with goodness. I'm very happy with the outcome, if I get to it I might add some photos later on. A great thing to do on a day when you're around the house/kitchen anyway.

The FL book has two stocks, the white one uses no tomatoes and after blanching the bones are scrubbed clean before they're put back in the pot. The aromatics differ a little too. Scrubbing all those bones clean seemed a bit too much work and I also had some veal breast that hat quite some meat on it in there, so I did not go that way. Might try it some day with less bones.

Thanks for all the input!!

"And don't forget music - music in the kitchen is an essential ingredient!"

- Thomas Keller

Diablo Kitchen, my food blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are missing something wonderful by skipping the second run.  The only added work is refilling your stockpot with cold water (one or two minutes) and bringing it to a simmer (maybe 30 minutes of waiting) and straining (less than 2 minutes) at the end.

Tim, I'm looking at the second extraction details in TFL right now. The first extraction takes 5-6 hours. Keller then recommends another 5-6 hours for the second extraction, and then another 8-9 hours to reduce the combined stocks "to concentrate color and consistency." That would seem to add at least another 13 hours minimum to the process.

Of course, TFL is not the only way of doing things. McGee says that 8 hours should be enough to get maximum extraction from veal and beef. Yes, you might squeeze that last little weak bit of gelatin and flavor from the remouillage, but that seems like saving lemons after you squeeze them, so you can boil and extract yet more flavor from them. Actually I think you would get more real flavor out of recycling the lemons than you would out of the remouillage.

"There's nothing like a pork belly to steady the nerves."

Fergus Henderson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to skip the 2nd run, too, for years and years -- just never thought it necessary, but it really does add to the stock. I just had to stock up on veal stock this weekend, and it did take a long time -- but it cooked itself while I played in the garden. You'll still have a great stock with 1 run, but once you start with the 2nd, you'll be glad you did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...