As I mentioned in another thread, I was able to get a rye flour
starter to begin fermentation in a closed container using the recipe
on the Samartha website. I clearly saw little bubbles and a subtle
frothiness after about 24 hours - plus I could smell something that
reminded me of fermentation, sort of like a beer smell (I used to make
my own homebrew, so the smell is quite familiar). I assumed that with
a couple more days of feeding I would see this mix bubbling away.

That has not happened. It is still the same kind of mixture I had 3
days ago. This is going on day 4, and according to what I have read if
it hasn't taken off by now, I must toss it.

As an experiment I am trying to start another rye flour starter but
this time I left the lid off. It is sitting in a quiet place in the
kitchen where I have successfully make yeast starters before that
tasted good.

I realize that getting a natural starter going is a hit and miss
proposition, so I will continue to try. But first I would welcome any
comments and suggestions from people who know what they are talking
about. Maybe Ed World's book will come in from the library soon.

Bob wrote:

days ago. This is going on day 4, and according to what I have read if
it hasn't taken off by now, I must toss it.

Seeing as how you've read a bunch of crap, maybe you should consider
that this crap is no better than any of the other crap.

David
Making a new sourdough starter requires primarily _patience_. If you
continue to feed for a while, with a reasonable feeding schedule, no
matter what the starter looks or smells like, you will eventually
succeed. If you throw it out at the least provocation, you never will.

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:56:21 -0400, Feuer wrote:



Bob wrote:

days ago. This is going on day 4, and according to what I have read if
it hasn't taken off by now, I must toss it.

Seeing as how you've read a bunch of crap, maybe you should consider
that this crap is no better than any of the other crap.

Are you saying that Samartha's recipe is crap?

Making a new sourdough starter requires primarily _patience_. If you
continue to feed for a while, with a reasonable feeding schedule, no
matter what the starter looks or smells like, you will eventually
succeed. If you throw it out at the least provocation, you never will.

OK, then based on your recommendation, I will continue to feed it.
It's been 4 1/2 days and it does not smell bad, so apparently it's
still good.

Do you subscribe to the unorthodox notion that starters are made from
microorganisms contained in the grain and not the air? I say
"unorthodox" not in criticism but because almost every writer claims
that one must "catch" starter yeast from the air.

There is another unorthodox notion I have seen in a couple of places,
namely that no matter what you start with, your starter is going to
end up being dominated by local organisms. So if I acquired an
authentic San Francisco starter, the starter I make from it will
eventually degenerate into whatever would be produced by exposing
flour to my local environment.

Could it be possible that starters made with the lid on the jar start
because it is impossible to prevent contamination the environment?

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 09:56:21 -0400, Feuer wrote:

Making a new sourdough starter requires primarily _patience_. If you
continue to feed for a while, with a reasonable feeding schedule, no
matter what the starter looks or smells like, you will eventually
succeed. If you throw it out at the least provocation, you never will.

I just got off the phone with the head baker at the Bakehouse that
supplies Whole Foods Market and Starbucks Coffee, among 40 customers
total in Houston. He has been there for over 10 years and still uses
the same starter from when he began working there.

He told me that from his experience making artisan breads for a
demanding customer base that I should employ the following steps for
making my own starter.

1. Mix 75% wheat flour (KA bread flour is OK) and 25% rye flour.

[The article discussed below states 50%-50%.]

2. Hydrate 50%.

3. Place in an open container in the kitchen.

4. Fermentation should begin by 48 hours.

5. Feed the starter according to the schedule he sent me (see article
discussed below).

6. Refrigerate when not in use and use sponge method to make the
bread.

We did not get into the details past the part about making the
starter, but he did send me some pages from the National Baking
Center, Dunwoody Institute, on the sourdough process. That article has
a detailed schedule for feeding the culture in six steps ranging from
22 hrs to 6 hrs. Feedings are all 1/2 the original flour and water,
after discarding 1/2 of the previous step.

I asked him about "catching" microorganisms and he said that is the
best way to get the starter to begin fermentation. He even suggested
using grapes to get things going. You lightly wash the grapes and then
put them in water for 8 hours and use the water for the first stage of
the starter.

I have no way to critique his comments - all I can go on is he sounded
very authoritative and appeared to have the credentials to back his
claims. He did say that my 5-day old failed starter should be
discarded.

[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]

In article , Don Hellen
wrote:

Speaking of lactobacillus, when making a starter from
scratch, what is the consensus on introducing a lacto
culture form buttermilk or some other milk product by adding
a small amount of that product?

Different lactobacillus involved with milk products, so it is probably
a waste of time adding them IMHO.

http://www.nyx.net/~dgreenw/whatsall...naturalle.html

Cheers,

Darrell

--
To reply, substitute .net for .invalid in address, i.e., darrell.usenet2 (at)
telus.net

Don Hellen wrote:

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:12:24 GMT, (Bob) wrote:

So if I acquired an
authentic San Francisco starter, the starter I make from it will
eventually degenerate into whatever would be produced by exposing
flour to my local environment.

I've read this in several places myself. I would agree that
it might become mixed (contaminated???) with local wild
yeasts and lactobacillus bacteria, but would the SF yeast
eventually die out due to the competition from the local
yeasts?

Given that the LB SF's are absolute champions in the field of sourdough
fermentation, any local field and meadow LB's and yeasts will loose out
once these players come into the field.

Why then would this bacteria be found in bakeries all over the planet
and only found in sourdoughs, if there would be a danger of local
contamination?

In other words, you will have to fear for the existence of your local
"caught" organisms growing from the flour and eventually going to be
"assimilated" into superior beings.

Btw., the superiority of LB bacteria's metabolism in sourdoughs has been
scientifically researched and found out probably because somebody was
curious about the oddity that they were found all over the planet and
only in sourdoughs.

Speaking of lactobacillus, when making a starter from
scratch, what is the consensus on introducing a lacto
culture form buttermilk or some other milk product by adding
a small amount of that product?

I'd count this into the same category as the
grape/potatoe/strawberry/open air catching folklore.

Btw., the sourdough yeasts and bacteria are doing it anaerobic and
without spores, so there is nothing light and especially air worthy
involved.

And frankly, the idiocy involved with information about sourdough,
sourdough breads and especially with pumpernickels is outrageous!

I went into a book store today and browsed through several great looking
bread books mainly searching for sourdough rye bread and pumpernickel.

There was not a single rye bread recipe without yeast and all but one
starter recipe had yeast as well, often as first ingredient! The
pumpernickel correctness rate (long baking process) was 0 %. The
baloneyness is baffling.

Anytime somebody coming up with a starter recipe involving the slightest
complexity other than water, flour time and temperature, be it baker,
king or president - be cautious, especially if it involves marriage of
one of your kins to such a person.


Samartha

--
remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one
SD page is the http://samartha.net/SD/

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 23:31:22 -0600, Samartha Deva
wrote:

I'd count this into the same category as the
grape/potatoe/strawberry/open air catching folklore.

Could it be that airborne organisms are needed to get a culture
started and once that happens the organisms in the flour that you
refer to take over?

If so, could one use the slightest amount of yeast to "catalyze" the
starter reaction - like a few grains?

"Bob" wrote:

Could it be that airborne organisms are needed to get a culture
started and once that happens the organisms in the flour that you
refer to take over?

If so, could one use the slightest amount of yeast to "catalyze" the
starter reaction - like a few grains?

Bob:

I've been following your quest for making a starter. I think you may be
getting confused by looking at different methods (grapes, yeast, etc.) for
getting it going. The instructions on Samartha's website are just fine for
getting a starter going. I have used a similar method myself.

I've made starters covered, and uncovered, with organic bread flour, rye, KA
bread flour, and most recently Gold Medal AP flour. I've been successful
every time. My conclusion, based on my success rate, isn't that I have some
magical touch it's that making a starter is not that difficult.

My gut feel is that most people who run into problems with starting
starters, as someone else eluded to, is impatience. I think that if you
follow Samartha's instructions, and just continue feeding, eventually you
will end up with a good starter. If you do get antsy that it's not working
just start another one while you continue the feeding schedule on the first.
My guess is that the first will come around before the second.

Good luck,
-Mike

"Mike Pearce" wrote in message =
news:CXclb.83164$sp2.81439@lakeread04...

[ ... ]

My gut feel is that most people who run into problems with starting
starters, as someone else eluded to, is impatience ...

It is doubtful the time has yet come to discount stupidity entirely.

--=20
Dick Adams
firstname dot lastnameat bigfoot dot com

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 11:13:12 -0500, "Mike Pearce"
wrote:

I've made starters covered, and uncovered, with organic bread flour, rye, KA
bread flour, and most recently Gold Medal AP flour. I've been successful
every time. My conclusion, based on my success rate, isn't that I have some
magical touch it's that making a starter is not that difficult.

My gut feel is that most people who run into problems with starting
starters, as someone else eluded to, is impatience. I think that if you
follow Samartha's instructions, and just continue feeding, eventually you
will end up with a good starter. If you do get antsy that it's not working
just start another one while you continue the feeding schedule on the first.
My guess is that the first will come around before the second.

Here's why I am impatient: Samartha states that the starter should
fermenting in 12 hours and if it hasn't, email him. Unless he just
likes to receive email, he appears to be doing that because he
suspects something is very wrong. Also, nowhere that I can find on his
site or some others like his site is there any mention that the
culture should go for 5 full days without any pronounced activity. In
fact several sites state clearly that if the culture hasn't doubled in
size in 3-5 days, toss it.

It's not that I am so impatient as I am concerned that if I let the
culture go past these recommended time periods that I will end up with
something undesireable. IOW, I am tossing these failed cultures not
out of frustration but out of caution. Nowhere have I seen anyone,
Samartha included, sanction letting a culture sit for 5 days without
noticeable activity.

Maybe the temperature is wrong. It's 75-80F in the kitchen which I
believe is acceptable. I realize I do not want to heat the culture too
hot or I will sterilize it.

I just ordered some sourdough starter from KA - it should get here in
a week. In the meantime I will continue to experiment in the hope that
something clicks. Otherwise when the KA starter comes, I am going to
use it instead of trying to start it naturally.

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 16:31:55 GMT, "Dick Adams"
wrote:

My gut feel is that most people who run into problems with starting
starters, as someone else eluded to, is impatience ...

It is doubtful the time has yet come to discount stupidity entirely.

Did that smart ass crack make you feel like a big shot expert?

Do you really believe that rational people can't see thru your
psychopathic personality?

"Bob" wrote:
"Mike Pearce" wrote:

snip

My gut feel is that most people who run into problems with starting
starters, as someone else eluded to, is impatience.

snip

Here's why I am impatient:

Maybe my gut feel is right. g

Samartha states that the starter should
fermenting in 12 hours and if it hasn't, email him. Unless he just
likes to receive email, he appears to be doing that because he
suspects something is very wrong.

Samartha knows a hell of a lot more about sourdough than I. Even with your
assumption that he might be suspecting something is "very wrong", my guess
is that if it sounded like you were not doing something wrong in the process
his response would be to give it more time. (I hope Samartha will correct me
if my guess is wrong)

Also, nowhere that I can find on his
site or some others like his site is there any mention that the
culture should go for 5 full days without any pronounced activity. In
fact several sites state clearly that if the culture hasn't doubled in
size in 3-5 days, toss it.

The last time I made a starter was with Gold Medal AP flour. The feeding
schedule I used wasn't as agressive as Samartha's and it was a good five
days before it was barely noticibly getting going and a couple of days after
that before I felt comfortable that it was successful. I don't buy the idea
of a five day time limit. If I remember correctly this one was the slowest
or my starters to come around.

I guess I would become impatient and give up after maybe 10 days or so, but
probably not before that. It's never come to that though.

The point I was trying to make is that instructions like Samartha's work,
and in my case every time. If one follows them and is unsuccessful it is
probably a freak occurrence or the result of impatience. There is no reason
to look elsewhere, just try again.

I just ordered some sourdough starter from KA

On the other hand, I believe Dick Adams (another who knows a lot more than
I) has suggested to some to get proven starters. Maybe this is a good idea.
Hopefully you won't run into similar issues reviving it and keeping it
alive.

-Mike

"Dick Adams" wrote:

"Mike Pearce" wrote:
[ ... ]

My gut feel is that most people who run into problems with starting
starters, as someone else eluded to, is impatience ...

It is doubtful the time has yet come to discount stupidity entirely.


How would I then explain my success?

-Mike

"Mike Pearce" wrote in message =
newsselb.83862$sp2.54230@lakeread04...

... It is doubtful the time has yet come to discount=20
stupidity entirely.

How would I then explain my success?

Dumb luck, maybe?

Real dirty flour, possibly. Sniffing probably.

Maybe "Bob" is a non sniffer.

Do not discount the human nose as an effective collector of
atmospheric dirt.

---
DickA

Mike Pearce wrote:

... My conclusion... making a starter is not that difficult...

My gut feel is that most people who run into problems with starting
starters, as someone else eluded to, is impatience... just continue feeding,
eventually you
will end up with a good starter.

Maybe yes, maybe not. Over a span of thirty plus years, I tried many times to
get a starter going. usually after getting fired up by reading some lying book
or phoney article. I got some things to bubble a bit , but never anything that
would make bread. It wasn't until Carl was kind enough to send me a start that
I was successful with sourdough. I don't think that my problem was impatience.
More like ignorance.

I was, however, always able to make a rye sour on the occaisions that I thought
to make some form of rye bread. Too bad that I was not clever enough to realise
that a rye sour and sourdough were the same thing , just different flours. If I
had realised that I could have just switched flours on a rye sour and had a
white flour starter years earlier.

Maybe I might even be closer to finding the Holy Grail of a white, free form,
high rise, big holey, sour, tasty, sourdough loaf.

Ticker laughs out loud at the thought of my ignorance, but is kind enough to
withold comment on the issue of stupidity.

Regards,

Charles


--
Charles Perry
Reply to:

** A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand **