Can fish stock be left simmering for a long time without damaging the flavor?
After reading this question regarding how to make a Cantonese fish soup I was considering adding an answer expounding on the fact that fish stock shouldn't be left simmering for too long, or you'll get a "glue flavor" in your soup because of bad tasting compounds being released from the fish trimmings.
However, upon googling for some sources to validate my claim I came upon this article, which among other things claims that
If no flat-fish bones are used, the stock can cook for four to six hours; this slow cooking extracts all the gelatin from the bones and makes a wonderful, rich broth.
Is it correct that it is only certain kinds of fish / fish trimmings which will create a bad tasting stock if left to simmer for too long? If so, are there any other kinds of fish than flat-fish which can create this bad taste?
Best Answer
I am a European trained chef. This is a very interesting question and there are quite a few answers. In my opinion and experience, the simmer time of a good fish stock is 100% based on the type of fish bones that you are developing the stock with. I remember asking the question many times on my travels through Europe and North Africa. I will share my preferred methods for a few species of fish.
- Turbot, 20 minutes after it comes to the boil, bay leaf only in the stock.
- Dover Sole, a full mirapoix, simmer for 30 minutes.
- Salmon, bring to boil and shut off, a full mirapoix is needed
- Northern Hake, 45 minutes full mirapoix
- John Dory, 45 minutes full mirapoix, white wine may be added if desired.
I hope that helps you out. Regards.
Michael
Pictures about "Can fish stock be left simmering for a long time without damaging the flavor?"
Quick Answer about "Can fish stock be left simmering for a long time without damaging the flavor?"
Due to the short cook time, fish stocks should be cooked at a slightly higher temperature than meat stocks – somewhere between a simmer and a light boil. I'd advise letting your fish carcasses go for about 45 minutes; anything longer than that is unnecessary and could result in a bitter flavor.What happens if you cook fish stock for too long?
I eventually learned where the ''don't overcook stock'' rule came from. French restaurant chefs use flat fish -- flounder and sole -- for their stocks, because they cook these fish in quantity and have the bones and heads readily available. However, these fish do make a bitter stock if cooked longer than 20 minutes.Can you simmer stock for too long?
Simmer Your Bones Long Enough, But Not Too Long Yet, if you cook your broth too long, it will develop overcooked, off-flavors that can become particularly unpleasant if you've added vegetables to the broth pot which tend to break down, tasting at once bitter and overly sweet.How long does fish stock need to simmer?
Bring almost to a boil over high heat (do not let it come to a boil). Reduce heat to low and cook at a bare simmer, skimming any foam that rises to surface, until flavors meld, 20\u201330 minutes. Strain stock through a fine-mesh sieve lined with cheesecloth into an 8-cup measuring cup or another pot; discard solids.Why should stock not be boiled?
Just as when you're making stock for soups or stews, boiling will cause soluble proteins and rendered fat to emulsify into the cooking liquid. By simmering, you avoid emulsifying the fat and thus keep the stock clearer, and we found that the scum created simply settled to the bottom of the pot.Gordon Ramsay's Guide To Fish
More answers regarding can fish stock be left simmering for a long time without damaging the flavor?
Answer 2
From experience I cannot say because I never simmer stock beyond 20 minutes.
I follow this rule because nearly every master chef(no not the television show) I've read says so. Michel Roux states that in his book Sauces. And James Peterson, a former chemist, states it in his book Sauces, and he teaches at the French Culinary Institute.
Michel Roux makes the statement that for certain bones, less time is better.
Jennifer McLagan, in her book Bones, only states that flat fish bones are preferable because of their higher level of gelatin. As regards to time, she only states that fish bones "yield their essence quickly."
One would think that James Peterson would have commented on the chemistry of this, but he doesn't, despite talking at length of the various chemicals released when making veal and beef broth.
If Jennifer's comment on the issue gives us any clue, it would lead us to hypothesize that because fish bones yield their essence rather quickly, they must be delicate and probably burn or change after those 30 to 40 minutes of continuous heat.
We do know that stocks expire, so we might conclude that fish stocks are more susceptible to time and also to heat.
Answer 3
I'm not sure about a glue flavor (I kicked the habit in kindergarten ), but I made a stock with king mackerel bits, including the head and tail fin and it made an amazing base for gumbo. Be prepared for the smell to linger a bit though.
Answer 4
I always try to simmer my stock for a long period of time and have never gotten a bad taste. I have never heard about the "glue" taste but the broth that is extracted from the bones is a very tasty broth just like bone broth from meat.
Sources: Stack Exchange - This article follows the attribution requirements of Stack Exchange and is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
Images: Ylanite Koppens, mali maeder, Juan Garcia, Pixabay