Stock solution or pollution?

Kevin Calm down you have not invented anything new. This is like a Petite Marmite which classical and was  was beef and chicken stock combined, with either a Brunoise or Julianne of veges.. Read any classic cook book you will find it.

Thanks kvn2s.

I've just made bdlesqpagnole with mixture of beef and chicken stock because I can't source veal bones and beef is a little too powerful for a base, I'm trying to compromise towards lightness with depth...

My interest was piqued by a passage in KC where Tony describes admiring another chef from afar are overhearing awe-sruck buzz about him such as... "Scott doesn't use veal stock..... he uses chicken..." For demi-glace?

So Chief (fr. Chef) stock sounds like it has potential as a veal stock sub (chix frames are abundant).

Experiences?

Titomike, how did that bdlesqpagnole work out for you?

BDL, Esq.

The chinese have done a similar thing with pork and chicken in the same stock. I've seen it called a few different things but the one term that's coming to mind at the moment is highstock.

BDL ....very nicely so far, thankyou. It was the right piece of the puzzle at the right time.
As a mother she's still having her offspring naturally selected...a work in progress.

The beauty of our job down here on 'culinary border patrol' is you get/have to do everything across the board more or less from scratch...and, in this case, its my job to decide how & why we do it then train the crew to follow the system.
We're a new player from scratch as well so yep...a sweet deal though its been on the fly til now.

I'm big on sauces and my roots are classic. We're running 5 stocks already so I want to be as true to the opportunity as is practically possible. The emulsions and creams are sorted and while glace viande and jus lie can have their place, your '3/4 Espagnole' is going to be kinda the anchor of the sauce section. I see it as a retreat from the 'light' sauces of today towards the depth of old in both technique and body but not all the way. I can then justify it on a production level as part of the signature our product....'halfa**d' in a dedicated way ...or casual 'fine' dining which is already working nicely as cascadecatering describes here... http://www.cheftalk.com/forum/thread/60563/tired-of-the-hassels-of-being-a-line-cook#post_311049

Thanks again for the nudge in the right direction.

As for a veal stock sub I read a frank and furious discussion from which I gleaned... 'magical' ingredient, beef/pork,beef/vege, beef/water, beef/chicken, chicken as an order of preference but not necessarily for what I need it for.

Never tasted it that I can recollect so...?

Saucing, retro, but straight ahead at the same time.  Our culinary viewpoints are very closely aligned.  We need to put a glass with your name on it over the clubhouse bar. 

BDL

Make it a 'looking glass' and you guys can pop through for a spot kayak fishing across the road! ...and I'll pan-fry your snapper on the flattop....

Thanks ....an honour indeed though I won't earnt it til I've finished the 'bible' and got paid! On this job that's the tricky bit...how do intellectual property rights fit into an hourly wage?

Aaah...just goes to show there's no perfect set-up 

Kevin,

There are very, very few real no-no's when making stock, and you've not come near them. The main one is this: there are some ingredients that will dominate a stock no matter what else is used, and these ingredients must either be avoided or used purposefully. Lamb, fish, liver, and greens are the biggies to my palate: they make interesting stocks, but it's hard to imagine what you'd do with a lamb stock except make a lamb sauce or soup, you know? These ingredients, in turn, should only be combined in stock by someone willing to discard the entire result if it doesn't work. Consider: what would a stock including lamb bones, fish frames, and collard greens taste like? An interesting experiment, perhaps, but chances are it'd be horrible, right?

Other absolute no-no's aren't. It depends on what you want. The big one you usually hear about is fat: avoid it. Well, yes, assuming you don't want fat in your stock. But what if you do? There's a Chinese stock, used a lot in certain kinds of Japanese ramen dishes these days, sometimes called "cream stock." Basically you take pork and chicken and scallion and ginger, and lots of pork fat, and you boil it as hard as you can for as long as you can stand it, adding water as need be. The end-result is white from all that emulsified fat, and will never separate. Do you want that? Probably not, but it can be useful.

Don't put in salt. I adhere to this, because I like to manipulate quantities, but some people swear that without adding salt you won't get the fullest extraction of flavor. I think this is an illusion, but whatever. Give it a shot.

Last note. If it's only your family eating, why not use the bones off the table? And the leftover meat scraps. And any leftover sliced tomato and carrot and onion and so on. Use it all. Why not? Restaurants aren't allowed to do this any more, because of certain kinds of pathogens and such, but you know what diseases your family has, so don't waste things. You end up with lots of stock this way, and then you just cook more leftovers in it, add beans and pasta or rice, and serve it forth with grated cheese: healthy, stunningly cheap, and delicious.