or Connect
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › Chicken "Espagnole"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Chicken "Espagnole"

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 

For want of a classic Sauce Bordelaise (a la James Peterson), making the want of a demi-glace, making the want of a Sauce Espagnole, but lacking a sufficient quantity of brown beef/veal stock, I realized I had some brown chicken stock and wondered if it might work.  The chicken stock was strong flavored with good gelatin extraction.  He talks about using pork or turkey but not chicken.

 

I used a standard recipe for the Espagnole, but at the end, I think the tomato came to much to the front of the flavor while everything else seemed roughly balanced.  Not chicken-y.  The flavor overall was not quite as strong as it would be using beef/veal stock, of course.

 

I added the limited beef/veal stock I had for the demi-glace and now the taste really seems to be straightening itself out so that by the time I get to the wine reduction, it will probably be fine.

 

My question is for anyone who might use chicken stock in place of beef/veal stock for brown sauces.  I don't think the chicken Espagnole on it's own would have worked at all but requires some glacé or beef/veal stock in the end.  I may try again with less tomato. To be a cleaner experiment, I probably should have used more chicken stock in the second demi-glace step instead of the meat stock.  My only reason for experimenting with chicken-based brown sauces is that I tend to have more chicken stock than beef/veal stock on hand.  It also would be cheaper. 

 

Just curious if anyone tries chicken stock for some of the classic brown sauces or has any other ideas for tweaking it.

 

Thanks. 

post #2 of 14
Thread Starter 

"Noncooks think it's silly to invest two hours' work in two minutes' enjoyment; but if cooking is evanescent, well, so is the ballet." -- Julia Child.

 

post #3 of 14

It's surprising you decided to go for the classic recipe, which I don't believe many people make any more, not at home, but not in restaurants either. Cooking has evolved and Espagnole has gotten a bad name, nowadays most cooks choose to eschew it to get a more modern sauce that is lighter and where the original flavor is more concentrated. In France today, Bordelaise is mostly made without Espagnole, and without tomato.

 

As for chicken stock, if it's well gelatinized it should work, typically veal stock is used because it's easier to give body to your sauce out of a veal stock vs a chicken stock. 

post #4 of 14

I'll come back later with a longer reply but for now I'll just throw out there that I find adding a pig's foot to stock helps with body and gelatin. 

I don't see why you couldn't do a chicken Espagnole with just chicken stock. The end uses might change but the idea is the same. 

post #5 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by French Fries View Post
 

It's surprising you decided to go for the classic recipe, which I don't believe many people make any more, not at home, but not in restaurants either. Cooking has evolved and Espagnole has gotten a bad name, nowadays most cooks choose to eschew it to get a more modern sauce that is lighter and where the original flavor is more concentrated. In France today, Bordelaise is mostly made without Espagnole, and without tomato.

 

As for chicken stock, if it's well gelatinized it should work, typically veal stock is used because it's easier to give body to your sauce out of a veal stock vs a chicken stock. 


Since I'm pretty much self taught, a lot of this is just culinary exercise, you know, learn the rules so you can break them properly.

 

It seems that most Bordelaise I see now is simply a deglazing with red wine and shallots and maybe a bit of stock for richness and viscosity.   Is that your experience?  Besides, I have a couple of expensive steaks that seem worth all this trouble at least once.  :D  Also, do you mean that even in a closer to classic Espagnole, tomato is omitted?

post #6 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chefwriter View Post
 

I'll come back later with a longer reply but for now I'll just throw out there that I find adding a pig's foot to stock helps with body and gelatin. 

I don't see why you couldn't do a chicken Espagnole with just chicken stock. The end uses might change but the idea is the same. 


Do you add pig's feet to most of your stocks?  I find with 18-24 hours I can get chicken jello just from chicken parts.

 

I was just curious if enough of the original character remains of the meat to make a difference.  I imagine the crux of why beef/veal are used is gelatin but it may also be the stronger flavor?

post #7 of 14

I do add a pig's foot to most stocks. Not as necessary in veal stock but I like to gild the lily when I can. Gelatin comes from most stocks I make but I read somewhere about adding pigs' feet and then I saw them for sale in the local asian market for a pretty fair price. So now I do it all the time just because I can get the pigs feet.  

     I have never cooked a chicken stock for 18 hours and don't know why you would need to. My yardstick is that the ends of the bones are clean, all the cartilage having dissolved into the stock. Usually less then six hours.     

      Beef is used for beef flavor, specifically for beef dishes most of the time.  Chicken for chicken flavor but as it's a milder flavor, you can use it to strengthen the flavor of other dishes and not have it dominate if you don't want it to. But you should notice that chicken stock flavor changes the longer you simmer it. Very strong, bright chicken flavor after about an hour or two, then deepens. So you can play with that in how you want to use the stock. I prefer the shorter cooked stock for chicken soup, the longer for other uses. I like to get three old hens from the asian market and make about three gallons, then reduce that and freeze it in small containers for later. Then I can add it when needed to whatever I'm making for dinner. 

       Beef is pretty strong so isn't used much that I know of for anything but beef dishes, i.e., Bordelaise, Demi, stews, braises, beef soup, etc.

     Veal is a nice flavorful stock and lots of gelatin without much character of its' own so it takes on the flavor of most anything. You can use veal stock for things like duck stock when you don't have many duck bones but still want a fair quantity. 

   I have found making stocks to be a good way to learn to follow small directions and develop the patience required to see it through correctly from start to finish,  something I didn't do so well earlier in my career. Long, slow simmering and skimming frequently as mentioned already. Not taking the last bit of stock when removing it so the rest stays clear. I find this taxes my patience but I get a visceral pleasure when I see I have created a clear, rich, flavorful stock.

 When I make a stock at home, I prefer to use fresh vegetables cut in largish chunks, not the peels, added about an hour or so before I think the stock will be done. The vegetables have time to give up their contribution but don't get overdone. Then I usually eat them for a snack.

   Don't overlook the importance of making sure your herbs and spices are fresh and haven't been sitting in the cupboard for too long. Even dried spices lose their essential oils over time. (Six months is typically considered time enough to freshen up your supply.) The freshness of the spices will make a huge difference in your stock. 

post #8 of 14
Thread Starter 

If you use pig's feet in chicken stock, you don't get a pork-y undertone?

 

I'll still have to discuss with my psychiatrist leaving that last bit.  I am almost never able to do it.  I hate waste.  It usually becomes the base for a velouté and a chicken pot pie with some of the meat I salvaged.  I always find myself thinking how some hungry person somewhere would love that little bit of liquid.  What can I say?

post #9 of 14

Nope, no pork undertones. The foot is mostly cartilage and bone. 

I typically save the last bit of stock too, for other purposes. No need to waste it. But I do keep it separate from the rest of the stock. 

post #10 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpooley View Post
 


Since I'm pretty much self taught, a lot of this is just culinary exercise, you know, learn the rules so you can break them properly.

 

It seems that most Bordelaise I see now is simply a deglazing with red wine and shallots and maybe a bit of stock for richness and viscosity.   Is that your experience?  Besides, I have a couple of expensive steaks that seem worth all this trouble at least once.  :D  Also, do you mean that even in a closer to classic Espagnole, tomato is omitted?

Deglazing shallots with red wine, reduce slowly until you get the "mirror", add stock or "fond lié" and reduce until you get the desired viscosity. Strain and monte with butter. Add diced poached bone marrow.

 

And I meant that Espagnole, which is the one that contains the tomato, is no longer used in sauce fabrication nowadays (at least not for the past few decades in France). 

post #11 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by French Fries View Post
 

Deglazing shallots with red wine, reduce slowly until you get the "mirror", add stock or "fond lié" and reduce until you get the desired viscosity. Strain and monte with butter. Add diced poached bone marrow.

 

And I meant that Espagnole, which is the one that contains the tomato, is no longer used in sauce fabrication nowadays (at least not for the past few decades in France). 

 

Right, so it seems my idea of Bordelaise currently is correct in that it is just a red wine deglazed sauce with a bit of stock, with or without marrow (usually without in most restaurants).   I think though there is some educational benefit for tasting these sauces based on their original recipes even if no on really makes it that way anymore.

post #12 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpooley View Post
 

Right, so it seems my idea of Bordelaise currently is correct in that it is just a red wine deglazed sauce with a bit of stock, with or without marrow (usually without in most restaurants). 

 

 

If you omit the bone marrow then it's a simple red wine reduction. In France, that's called "Sauce Marchand de vin." IMO Bordelaise cannot be made without bone marrow... (the bone marrow is what makes Bordelaise different than a basic red wine reduction) but maybe that's yet another name/recipe that has been bastardized here in the U.S.? 

post #13 of 14
Thread Starter 

I think it has been altered.  I see it all the time on menus as "Bordelaise" but don't seem to see any marrow.

post #14 of 14
Thread Starter 
@French Fries Somewhat unrelated but I saw your location is partly in France so I'll take advantage to ask a question. I have a copy of " La cuisine de Madame St Ange" in French and there is a section under roasted and braised meats entitled "glaçage". As far as I can tell (with my bad French), when the meat is done, one moistens it with some of the braising liquid and runs it under a medium boiler for caramelization, repeating this process a couple of times. I don't see it mentioned in any English books I have and was wondering if I am interpreting it correctly. Thanks.
Edited by rpooley - 10/2/16 at 12:58pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Food & Cooking
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › Chicken "Espagnole"