What is brown seasoning sauce?

[keltin]

Andy’s right. What you just described is a slurry of flour and water used to thicken the 1/4 cup of hot liquid from the dutch oven. The brown seasoning sauce in this recipe is definitely Kitchen Bouquet or Gravy Master. These sauces will add color and flavor to your gravy.....the gravy is made from the flour, wate,r and 1/4 cup of liquid.

The simplest gravy to make is a liquid plus a thickener. In your case, the thickener is the slurry of flour and water. In this recipe, they also want to add some seasoning and color to it as well, thus they call for the “brown seasoning sauce”.

Gravy Master has 120mg of sodium per teaspoon where as Kitchen Bouquet has only 10mg per teaspoon, so keep that in mind when you pick which one to use.

 

[jennyema]

You absolutely do not need browning agent in coq au vin! The sauce isn't supposed to be brown. It's made with red wine -- that's the coloring agent for the dish.

 

[gourmande]

You absolutely do not need browning agent in coq au vin! The sauce isn't supposed to be brown. It's made with red wine -- that's the coloring agent for the dish.

Agree, the wine is a major contributor to both colour and flavour in a traditional coq au vin recipe. However, without knowing the ingredient list of this particular recipe, one can only guess at why it might need the help of a flavour/colour enhancer.


G

 

[keltin]

You absolutely do not need browning agent in coq au vin! The sauce isn't supposed to be brown. It's made with red wine -- that's the coloring agent for the dish.

I’m betting that this version of the recipe isn’t using wine. That’s the only reason I could imagine it calling for the browning sauce. Also, notice it called for a flour and water slurry on the side (presumably at the end of cooking) and 1/4 cup of the Dutch Oven liquid (apparently this is cooked in a DO). Had this been a traditional version of Coq Au Vin, that liquid would have been thick enough as it is......which makes me think they didn’t flour or brown the chicken at the start of this recipe (or brown the chicken and then add flour later).

 

[jennyema]

You cannot make Coq au Vin without wine.

 

[Katie H]

Yep. Coq au vin means chicken with wine. Would have to be called coq sans vin otherwise.

 

[Andy M.]

Then it would be coq sans vin

 

[keltin]

Oh, I know. I’m just guessing as to what has happened in this recipe. It sounds more like chicken boiled in broth or water to me. Also, traditional Coq Au Vin would have added flour during the cooking process so that the final liquid was thick enough. Obviously, this recipe didn’t do that as it indicates using the liquid with a thickener and browning sauce....this implies the liquid is thin and pale in color. Obviously, red wine was not used. It could have been Coq Au Vin Blanc or Coq Au Vin avec Creme, made with white wine.....but that still doesn’t explain the absence of flour (which would have thickened the sauce) during the cooking process.

So, thinking out-loud, I mused that perhaps since this was a WW recipe, they eliminated the wine? True, that means it can not technically be Coq Au Vin (literally “rooster with wine”), but that doesn’t stop someone out there from taking the name of a recipe and applying it to something that does not deserve it. Look at the recipes for “Crab Salad” that use imitation crab......that’s not crab salad, that’s fish salad.

Or a vegetarian hamburger....no, that’s (loosely) a vegetable burger, but strictly where “burger” means beef, you would have to call the vegetarian version a vegetable patty. Or what about the “indoor grill” that are pans with ridges. That’s not grilling, that’s pan searing/frying/sautéing, but not grilling at all. So, that’s what I think happened here....someone at WW took the well known name of Coq Au Vin and applied it to a dish of chicken cooked in some kind of pale liquid.....which technically makes it a Coq Au Bouillon of sorts and not Coq Au Vin.

And why do they call it a hamburger......there is no ham in it. And let’s not get started on hot dogs!

 

[Andy M.]

...And why do they call it a hamburger......there is no ham in it. And let’s not get started on hot dogs!

And there's no Coke in coq au vin

 

[keltin]

And there's no Coke in coq au vin

But there IS blood in Blood Pudding!

 

[keltin]

Oh, and technically, you can not make Coq Au Vin with the chicken that is most often sold in markets today. Those are hens which would make the dish Poule Au Vin.

 

[kitchenelf]

I've been trying to post this now for about 30 minutes but keep losing connection. Here's my thoughts. Remember folks, this is a WEIGHT WATCHER'S recipe!!!!

I'm going to stick my little fat neck out and say I think it is made this way because #1, the chicken is probably skinless and is not browned first. Those browned bits impart a lot of flavor. So........the browning sauce is replacing that layer of flavor. It's used strictly for that bit of flavor (ever how slight it may be) that is lacking from the browned bits left in the pan.

While coq au vin needs the wine if this is a Weight Watchers (hahah, two words) version it very well may be "loosely" called coq au vin for the sake of giving it a name people recognize and can still enjoy.

 

[ducdebrabant]

There's a browning sauce made for cooking in the microwave, but it can't be that. I'm thinking it may be demiglace -- which you can buy from Williams Sonoma if you don't want to make it yourself. It's basically stock (in this case, chicken stock), cooked down to a rich dark thickness, virtually a paste. I can imagine that being added to coq au vin.

 

[ducdebrabant]

accidents will happen

But there IS blood in Blood Pudding!

Especially if I'm making it.

 

[Caine]

So, thinking out-loud, I mused that perhaps since this was a WW recipe, they eliminated the wine? True, that means it can not technically be Coq Au Vin (literally “rooster with wine”), but that doesn’t stop someone out there from taking the name of a recipe and applying it to something that does not deserve it. Look at the recipes for “Crab Salad” that use imitation crab......that’s not crab salad, that’s fish salad.

Or a vegetarian hamburger....no, that’s (loosely) a vegetable burger, but strictly where “burger” means beef, you would have to call the vegetarian version a vegetable patty. Or what about the “indoor grill” that are pans with ridges. That’s not grilling, that’s pan searing/frying/sautéing, but not grilling at all. So, that’s what I think happened here....someone at WW took the well known name of Coq Au Vin and applied it to a dish of chicken cooked in some kind of pale liquid.....which technically makes it a Coq Au Bouillon of sorts and not Coq Au Vin.

And why do they call it a hamburger......there is no ham in it. And let’s not get started on hot dogs!

And there's no Coke in coq au vin

But there IS blood in Blood Pudding!

Have you ever had an egg cream? Well, guess what? There ain't no egg in it! Guess what else? THERE AIN'T NO CREAM IN IT, EITHER!!

 

[Michael in FtW]

This has been most enlightening! I had never heard of a "browning and seasoning sauce" by that term - but I have heard of Kitchen Bouquet most of my life, and Gravy Master for several years - although I have never used either. But, after digging around WW's website - these appear to be what they are talking about (WW doesn't give a clue about it but I found references to both in their user blogs).