4 ms·
> Also it's not entirely insane to believe bones impart flavour Brown stock is made from roasted bones, among other things, so I too feel somewhat skeptical ab
by ckastner 5y ago
> Also it's not entirely insane to believe bones impart flavour
Brown stock is made from roasted bones, among other things, so I too feel somewhat skeptical about the claim that bones cannot import at least some sort of flavor.
- tptacek 5y agoHe tested this, for whatever it's worth to you: bone in, bone off, and bone detached and re-attached with a foil shield between the bone and the meat. Indistinguishable.
- ckastner 5y agoI understand that, and fully share his view that "tiny bits of connective tissue-rich meat, fat, and gristle stuck to the bone to be the tastiest part of the steak". I can also easily admit that it's possible that the "bone-in steak has more flavor" argument might actually just be a consequence of the above: people leaving the bone on may mistake the flavors of said meat and fat for flavor imparted by the bone, rather than being innate. However, I'm trying to weigh the one source here calling this a myth against plenty of reputable Chefs who subscribe to this myth - not just with steak, but also with poultry. It's quite possible that these Chefs are fooling themselves (they frequently do; I've seen enough contradictions), but it nevertheless is an extraordinary claim.
- Lazare 5y agoWith brown stock, you're eating bits of the bone. With a bone in steak, you're eating bits of meat that have been near the bone. It's not impossible that it would have an impact, but there's no obvious mechanism either. (And as the author points out, there's no particular reason why, even if flavour transfer was happening, it'd go the direction you want either.)