"James" > wrote in message
om...
> The other question is does it matter what part of the chicken you use
> to make soup? If it tastes the same I would use the cheap cuts.
> Chicken backs are cheap but lots of bones. Chicken legs are usually
> cheap and have lots of meat. Does whole chicken or brest make better
> soup?

Are you asking about soup or stock? That's two different things. Bones are
the most essential ingredient for stock -- the chicken meat adds very little
flavor to the liquid. Backs and necks are ideal -- some stores (but very
few anymore) sell them separately, or you can save them in the freezer
whenever you cut up a chicken. If you want to save the stock for later,
cool it in the refrigerator until the fat forms a solid crust on the top (at
least 24 hours). Skim off the fat, return the chicken to the heat, and
reduce by at least half. Then freeze it. If you just want to use it right
away for soup, you don't have to do reduce it (but you will probably want to
remove most of the fat).

If you're asking about chicken soup, always start with stock -- not water.
Then you can add your vegetables and pieces of chicken. Simmer the chicken
only until it's just cooked through, so it remains tender. I find I have
more control if I cook the chicken pieces separately, let them cool, cut
them into bite size chunks, and then add them to the soup without any
further cooking. Don't forget white meat is done sooner than dark meat.

>Thanks for your input.
>
>You are not going to believe this; but the last time I used what was
>left of the broth/stock I made, was las Wednesday, to make barley
>mushroom soup. I was inspired by an e-mail I received from Adeils
>(spelling? ) sausages which included a recipe using his Portabello
>sausage. Used the broth, sautéed some onion, peppers (red for color,)
>and garlic, added mushrooms in some butter to sauté, then added it all
>to the pot with a bit of Dry Sack sherry and some herbs and spices. It
>was a meal of its own. THe only thing I screwed up on was adding too
>much barley. I'll know for next time.
>
>Rich

Yup, barley grows... done that. I try to find time to cook the barley
separately, in lightly salted water, then add it to the soup... doesn't suck up
so much stock, and the barley actually tastes like barley.

---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

>Thanks for your input.
>
>You are not going to believe this; but the last time I used what was
>left of the broth/stock I made, was las Wednesday, to make barley
>mushroom soup. I was inspired by an e-mail I received from Adeils
>(spelling? ) sausages which included a recipe using his Portabello
>sausage. Used the broth, sautéed some onion, peppers (red for color,)
>and garlic, added mushrooms in some butter to sauté, then added it all
>to the pot with a bit of Dry Sack sherry and some herbs and spices. It
>was a meal of its own. THe only thing I screwed up on was adding too
>much barley. I'll know for next time.
>
>Rich

Yup, barley grows... done that. I try to find time to cook the barley
separately, in lightly salted water, then add it to the soup... doesn't suck up
so much stock, and the barley actually tastes like barley.

---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

In article >,
Melba's Jammin' > wrote:

> In article >,
> (James) wrote:
>
> > I wonder if I can mix up a batch of scrambled eggs in a blender and
> > bottle it for use for a whole week?
>
> I don't know about a week -- a day or two maybe. But, why not crack the
> eggs as needed? It's not a real tough task. But, hey, if you want to
> try it, go for it. If you're trying to save time cracking eggs, break a
> bunch of them into a container without scrambling them before
> refrigerating. When you want scrambled eggs, put a couple into a
> shallow bowl, beat with a fork or a whisk, and viola!, scrambled eggs
> ready to cook.
>
> > The other question is does it matter what part of the chicken you use
> > to make soup?
>
> Nope.
>
> >If it tastes the same I would use the cheap cuts. Chicken backs are
> >cheap but lots of bones.
>
> Right. I like backs, necks, and wings, and feet when I can get them.
> And a few gizzards.
>
> > Chicken legs are usually cheap and have lots of meat. Does whole
> > chicken or brest make better soup?
>
> Better tasting? I don't especially think so. The feet(not the thighs
> and drumsticks) and wingtips add a gelatinous quality to the soup when
> it's cold. And you can play with the feet before you cook them in the
> soup, too.
>
> And it depends on your definition of chicken soup, too. Where I come
> from, the soup is really chicken broth with vegetables and noodles in
> the bowls. No meat -- the meat was used for another meal, if the pieces
> were large. If the broth was made from mostly bones, we'd pick it off
> and eat it on the spot.
>
> My European cousins get a couple meals from one hapless chicken: Soup
> first; birdie is cooked until the meat is tender, then the breast meat
> is removed from the bones and the bones are returned to the soup kettle.
> They panfry the dark meat boiled chicken for serving - crisps up the
> skin, I guess.

Awesome... ;-)
Another chicken foot lover! <lol>
I can get them at "Fiesta" in Austin.
They are SO good!!! And make the best, bounciest stock in the world.

K.

--
Sprout the Mung Bean to reply...

>,,<Cat's Haven Hobby Farm>,,<Katraatcenturyteldotnet>,,<

http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...user id=katra

In article >,
(PENMART01) wrote:

> >Chicken soup is chicken soup.
> >I usually use the cheapest parts I can get
> >
> >K.
>
> Stock is not soup. And with stock you get out what you put in... stock made
> from garbage is well, garbage... what's the point of simmering a pot for
> hours
> if it's filled with scraps that belong in the trash, an exercise in futility,
> even wasted your seasonings, not to mention your time and effort. I won't
> bother dirtying a pot unless I use whole chickens, which don't cost all that
> much.... and then I cut out the backs and toss em in the trash, because
> spinal
> glop fercockts the stock. Whole roasters are often on sale for 79¢/lb... a
> 6lb
> roaster costs under five bucks, a mere pittance compared to the cost of all
> the
> other ingredients I may use to go with that stock The mark of a good cook is
> in
> after preparing a ten quart potful of robust spoon-standing soup is knowing
> all
> the wonderful ways to use the extra meat.
>
> Sheldon

I personally prefer fresh killed cockerels from my chicken yard. ;-)
Those make the best soup, stock, or whatever that there is!
Much richer flavor than anything you can get at the store, especially if
you process them at about 6 months of age.

You have a farm Shel', do you raise chickens?

K.

(James) wrote in message . com>...
> I wonder if I can mix up a batch of scrambled eggs in a blender and
> bottle it for use for a whole week?
>
> The other question is does it matter what part of the chicken you use
> to make soup? If it tastes the same I would use the cheap cuts.
> Chicken backs are cheap but lots of bones. Chicken legs are usually
> cheap and have lots of meat. Does whole chicken or brest make better
> soup?

You want lots of bones for good chicken soup, so chicken backs are
especially useful if it's soup you want.

You can roast a whole chicken and save the bones and scraps of meat
for soup.

Save the chicken breasts for something else; using them for soup may
be an expensive disappointment.

--
Chris Green