Normally, when I cook broth I just take all of the bones that I have saved up over 2-3 months from various different dinners (fried chicken bones, pork stew bones, beef soup bones, etc.) and then throw them all in a pot with a bit of vinegar. I boil them for one day.
However, I have been reading some different posts about other ways of cooking broth/stock. The things that are new to me are:
1. instructions to roast the bones first at 350 degrees for 30-60 minutes.
2. make the broth for three days instead of just one day.
For the first new piece of advice I read, how does one know when the bones are 'done' after 30 minutes have elasped but before 60 minutes goes by?
For the second new piece of advice, I don't understand how the broth making works if you make it for three days. As far as I know you are not supposed to use too much water when making broth/stock, only enough to cover the bones. Then you bring the broth to a gentle boil very slowly on a low temperature over time (~1-2 hours).
But if I cook the broth for three days;
2a. First, won't I have to continuously add water as it boils down? If so, then won't the water that is boiling away be the water with all the nutrients in it, and then the new water that I add will just be water, correct? I would think it would make more sense to use a huge pot and add enough water to be able to boil for three days without disturbing it. This way when three days has past the water used will be full of nutrients and it will not have boiled away.
If I cook the bones for three days, won't some or all the bones themselves actually just completely disintegrate into the soup? If that happens, won't that equate to me actually eating the bones? Is that dangerous for one's health?
^ Is this all correct?
Currently, I have a stock boiling that has roasted beef bones in it. I am thinking of adding some unroasted beef feet bones and tendon to it and adding more water so it can boil for three days. Will this work out just fine?