Broth vs. Stock

[mishalak]

No cook worth his salt will ever make a broth. This is because broth is the most incredibly spendthrift way to make a soup that I can imagine. You take whole meat and cook it in water until all the good juices come out to the point where the meat is inedible. Then you use that to make soup. Stock on the other hand is made using the left over bits after you've eaten the meat. The bones and little bits of meat stuck on them. Very resourceful and it produces a good tasting soup. Why in the name of luck would anyone ever make broth unless he's a rich man showing off how much food he can waste?

This came up for me watching a program called America's Test Kitchen one day. Normally I love their recipies because often they are well designed in terms of time and how much one has to spend upon them. But this broth where they cooked the dark meat until it gave up its jucies then discared. The used a whole chicken to make the soup but the only meat in it was the chicken breast. Arrrrggggg!

Comments

[von-krag.livejournal.com]

I can get 10lb of beef or chicken bones for under 2 bucks. Why do a broth? Time and flavor I guess. Roast yer own bones then make stock, waste nothing in the kitchen.

[mishalak.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's what I figure. Roast then put the bones in something like a crock-pot to slow cook and not have to watch it closely. I suppose that was the main reason for the broth on America's Test Kitchen, speed. Still they talked about freezing broth in muffin tins to use it later. If you're going to use it later make stock!