I've have tried several times over the past couple of months or so to
make genuine sourdough bread but have only met with limited success.
I'm looking for any help and suggestions anyone can offer to overcome
my principle difficulty: insufficient rise, particularly the final
rise.

Let me apoligize in advance for the length of this post. Normally,
I'd keep things brief; however, I want to be sure to provide a fairly
comprehensive overview of what I've done so far. Hopefully, it will
be easier to spot the mistakes I am obviously making. I've also given
references to the recipes I've used, indicating the books and pages
where they appear. I know that many of you have these books so I
thought that would be useful. Since these recipes are rather long and
involved, I thought I'd try this approach rather than making a long
post even longer! g If you need further details, I'd be happy to
provide them.

As the subject line indicates, I am new to sourdough although not to
baking bread. Over the last couple months, I've made two different
starters, both using only flour and water. The first was made using
the "Mild Starter" (levain) recipe found on page 79 of Peter
Reinhart's book, "Crust & Crumb." It was made following the formula
without any variations.

I used this starter to make the pain au levain (basic) recipe found
beginning on page 81 of the same book. Again, I followed the recipe
without significant variation. At stage 8 (final rise), the loafs had
not come near to doubling in size after 4 hours. They had risen a
little, but not much from the point of forming the loaves. I let them
rise for about an hour more and then baked them. There was a fairly
good "push" in the oven and the final loaves were about 4 or 5 inches
high. The oven was a bit hot and there was a small amount of burning
on the crust, but not much. Bottoms were dark but not burned. The
crust was a bit thick but about what I would have expected for a
typical sourdough. The crumb, however, was quite moist, and a little
"gummy." It was very dense. There was no raw dough or flour, just
seemed a bit underbaked. The taste was good and only mildly sour as
expected.

My second starter was made using the Seed Culture recipe and then the
Barm recipe beginning on page 229 of Reinhart's Bread Baker's
Apprentice. I used coarse whole rye to begin the seed culture and
then did the refreshments with KA bread flour. The barm was also made
with KA bread flour and, up until recently, all the refreshments have
been with KA bread flour. During the last week, I switched to
Arrowhead Mills AP. I've been feeding this starter generally twice a
week or a little less frequently for about a month.

This starter seems to be healthy...smells good and shows signs of
activity. I generally refresh half of the old starter, doubling it
with each feeding. Once I tripled it. It usually remains on the
counter after feeding for about 4 or 5 hours until some noticeable
activity starts to happen and then is refrigerated. It's kept in a
clear covered plastic covered "cannister" which is washed out after
removing the starter to a bowl during the feeding process (done in a
stainless steel bowl.) The consistency of the starter I would
describe as like wet bubblegum left in the sun. g

I first used this starter about 3 or 4 weeks ago to make the Basic
Sourdough recipe from page 233 in BBA. This recipe calls for making a
firm starter from the barm and then using 4.5 oz. high-gluten flour.
I used 4 oz. of KA bread flour and .5 oz of wheat gluten (55% protein)
to bring up the total protein level slightly. For the final dough, I
used 20 oz. of KA bread flour and 1 tsp. of gluten. The rest of the
ingredients were as indicated in the recipe.

Once again, I followed the recipe directions to the point of the final
proofing (step 9.) I did retard the loaves overnight as suggested and
then let them rise the next morning out of the refrigerator for about
4 hours. There was no noticeable rise. I baked them anyway.

The results were disappointing. There was very little rise in the
oven and the loaves were dense and had a very thick crust. The taste
was good but the mouthfeel was not as it was much too dense.

My third attempt was a disaster and I'm pretty sure I know at least
one of the reasons why. I'll describe what I did so you can either
confirm my suspicions and/or let me know what other mistakes I made.
g The recipe comes from The VIllage Baker by Joe Ortiz. It's the
one for Pain de Campagne found beginning on page 82 of that book.

The first mistake I think I made was right from the beginning. I
didn't make either the chef or do the first refreshment. Instead, I
started with second refreshment using my starter that had been
refreshed a few hours before. I then followed the rest of the recipe
pretty much as is up through the shaping of the loaves. The final
rise was supposed to take 10 hours. After 10 hours, there was no
visable rise at all. The dough had become slightly more slack but not
much else. I let it rise for about 6 more hours which is where I
think I made the next mistake. There was only slight rise and I went
ahead and baked the loaves. They came out almost like bricks...very
hard, dense and heavy. The taste was ok, but generally these were
doorstops! They got thrown away.

Before attempting another full blown sourdough recipe, I decided to
try out the New York Deli Rye recipe from BBA, page 236. This recipe
uses a rye sponge made using the sourdough starter (barm) but then
uses instant yeast in the final dough. This recipe came out perfectly
and produced two large and very tasty loaves of bread.

Finally, yesterday, I tried once more to make a straight sourdough
recipe. This time I attempted the San Francisco Sourdough from page
190 in The Village Baker. This time, however, I carefully followed
the recipe throughout up to the final proof. The only modification
was that I used about 1/8 cup less water in both the second
refreshment and in the dough as the dough seemed far too moist and
slack. Another point I need to make is that all the flour and water
were measured by volume and not by weight...I usually measure strictly
by weight which is what I did in all my previous attempts.

This recipe calls for a two stage proofing (before and after shaping)
which, according to the instructions is supposed to take approximately
10 hours or so for both stages. The commentary in the recipe suggests
that you split the time as seems appropriate depending on how the
dough is reacting. For me, the first stage was about 7.5 hours by
which time the dough had rised noticeably, if not quite doubled. It
was a hot day here in LA yesterday and the temperature in my kitchen
was in the high 80's to around 90f. After shaping the loaves and
placing them in bannetons to rise, I loosely covered them with plastic
wrap and then a kitchen towel. I also followed the hint to put a
small ball of dough in a mason jar full of water to help gauge when to
bake the loaves. The temperature in the kitchen at this point was
around 75f.

After fours hours, there was no visable rise and the test dough was
still at the bottom of the jar of water. After 2 more hours, there
was only the slightest hint of a rise along with some slackening of
the dough and the test ball remained at the bottom of the jar of
water. At this point, it was about 2 am and I decided to go to bed.
The temperature overnight never got below 70f.

This morning, around 8 am, I got up. The test ball of dough had begun
to liquify and was still mostly on the bottom of the jar. The loaves
had slackened a bit more but hadn't risen much if any. I heated the
oven as directed by the recipe, placed the loaves on a dusted peel,
glazed them with egg white wash, slashed them, and, after spraying
water several times in the hot oven, baked the loaves on a baking
stone in the lower 1/3rd of the oven for 45 minutes.

During the baking, the loaves spread out a bit and came out of the
oven looking more like ciabatti than round loaves. They were about
the thickness of ciabatti, too...about 3 inches high, maybe a bit
less. After cooling, I tasted the loaves. The taste is very sour and
very authentic to what I've had before as SF sourdough, maybe even a
bit more sour than usual. Given the extended proofing time, this is
what I'd expect. The crust also seems to be as it should; however,
the crumb is, once again, too dense and a bit too moist.

A few final points. I do use an oven thermometer. My oven is gas,
but not convection. I try to preheat the oven for around an hour when
I'm using the stone, which is what was used for all of these sourdough
attempts (except the NY Deli Onion Rye.) As noted, I live in Los
Angeles (nearly at sea level) and, with the exception of the final
recipe from yesterday and today, all of the prep and risings have been
done at temps between 70f and 75f. Finally, I've been lurking on
r.f.s. for a couple of months and have read all the faqs and visited
several websites mentioned in posts several of which have been very
useful.

OK, now I need your help to correct whatever mistakes I've obviously
been making. I really want to improve and start making better loaves.
I know I have a lot to learn and am looking forward to all comments
and suggestions for which I thank you in advance!

jeff higgins wrote:

I've have tried several times over the past couple of months or so to
make genuine sourdough bread but have only met with limited success.

.... looooong story ...

Apparently recipes don't do the trick for you.

You were successful when you used a yeast recipe and you tried several
pure sourdough recipes which more or less failed. Of the books you
mention, I have only the Village Baker and the recipe you did is fairly
complex over a very long period of time.

Also, it appears that you are trying several recipes, one after the
other instead of sticking with one, fairly simple and get this going
first.

If you do one and change one or two things at a time, you can see the
effect better.

Maybe it would be worth considering this approach?

To me it looks you have a starter issue. There are two main
possibilities - either over or under (not enough developed or too much),
but you probably don't know which way it is going. I think it is helpful
to know about the phases a starter goes through and be able to recognize
them. With white flour starters it is easily possible to be too quick
and have it overdeveloped and then it's a drag.

You mention that it's fairly warm where you live. When you feed your
starter, can you tell in which phase it was, how it is taking it, when
it peaks?

My approach to bread is not by following other recipes to every detail,
but to get the idea and then make it fit to my environment. I follow
formulas. One way for white bread, it's about 20 % of starter to full
dough weight (which is about 17 % starter flour in baker's %), 2 % salt,
between 60 % and 68 % hydration and fermenting time is 2 + 2 - 3 + 3
hours with punch down at half time.

Starter is grown in three steps to target weight by tripling (or
doubling the last step to get target weight) always before stage 5 at
100 % hydration. This approach lets the starter determine the next step.

I don't know if this approach helps, but sourdough works, that's a fact.

If you haven't, you may look at may web page (URL in footer), under
References, SD-Definition, there is the sourdough growth curve with
phases and under Playing Around, there is the No-Mind White bread, which
is showing a somewhat alternative way of doing this.

Samartha


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

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 22:27:31 -0600, Samartha Deva
wrote:


.... looooong story ...

Yes, I'm sorry about that.


Apparently recipes don't do the trick for you.

Not sure what you mean, Samartha. I try not to be a slave to the
recipe but to understand what's going on. As you know better than me,
bread cycles require you to adjust and, even with my very limited
experience, I can see that that holds true in spades for sourdough.


You were successful when you used a yeast recipe and you tried several
pure sourdough recipes which more or less failed. Of the books you
mention, I have only the Village Baker and the recipe you did is fairly
complex over a very long period of time.

Also, it appears that you are trying several recipes, one after the
other instead of sticking with one, fairly simple and get this going
first.


Of course, you are absolutely right about sticking with a single
recipe and working on that until I get it right...thanks for the
reminder! I guess I've just been casting about for a decent recipe to
work with for my maiden voyages with sourdough. I'm open to any
suggestions.

If you do one and change one or two things at a time, you can see the
effect better.

Agreed.

Maybe it would be worth considering this approach?


Considered, agreed, and accepted as the preferred approach.

To me it looks you have a starter issue. There are two main
possibilities - either over or under (not enough developed or too much),
but you probably don't know which way it is going. I think it is helpful
to know about the phases a starter goes through and be able to recognize
them. With white flour starters it is easily possible to be too quick
and have it overdeveloped and then it's a drag.

Thanks, I'll look more closely at that. I have been to your website
and it's been very helpful. I'll return and look at the reference you
give below.

You mention that it's fairly warm where you live. When you feed your
starter, can you tell in which phase it was, how it is taking it, when
it peaks?

Only to a degree as I'm still really new to all of this. I obviously
haven't paid enough attention to this important aspect. As far as the
weather here, it is generally very mild with occasional hot spells
where I live (LA basin.) Normally, my kitchen stays between 66f
(nights in winter) and 78f (days in summer). Most of the bread
development is done at temps in the low to mid-70's.

My approach to bread is not by following other recipes to every detail,
but to get the idea and then make it fit to my environment. I follow
formulas. One way for white bread, it's about 20 % of starter to full
dough weight (which is about 17 % starter flour in baker's %), 2 % salt,
between 60 % and 68 % hydration and fermenting time is 2 + 2 - 3 + 3
hours with punch down at half time.

Thanks for describing this. I'm familiar with using formulas and
making adjustments. I'll try to pay a bit more attention to this
approach.

Starter is grown in three steps to target weight by tripling (or
doubling the last step to get target weight) always before stage 5 at
100 % hydration. This approach lets the starter determine the next step.

I don't know if this approach helps, but sourdough works, that's a fact.

I certainly agree...not anywhere near losing faith! g

If you haven't, you may look at may web page (URL in footer), under
References, SD-Definition, there is the sourdough growth curve with
phases and under Playing Around, there is the No-Mind White bread, which
is showing a somewhat alternative way of doing this.

Samartha

Thank you very much. I'll seriously work on this using your
suggestions. I appreciate your guidance and patience very much. And,
of course, I'll report back to the group how things go!

* jeff higgins Tue, 21 Oct 2003 at 20:02 GMT:
This starter seems to be healthy...smells good and shows signs of
activity.

Signs of activity is not enough. A healthy active starter should nearly
triple in volume in 5 or 6 hours after feeding, if kept at warm room
temperature. I think you are getting ahead of yourself. You need a good
working starter before trying to make bread. I believe the best approach
for a newbie is to begin with a known good starter. I like Carl's:

http://home.att.net/~carlsfriends

You can make your own starter but don't waste your time trying to make
bread until your starter is at least doubling in volume after feeding.

I generally refresh half of the old starter, doubling it
with each feeding. Once I tripled it.

Tripling (one part starter, one part flour, one part water by weight)
is better than doubling.

It usually remains on the
counter after feeding for about 4 or 5 hours until some noticeable
activity starts to happen and then is refrigerated.

I would keep it warm, feed (triple) every 8-12 hours until it is showing
strong activity (at least doubling in volume). Discard all but about a
Tablespoon of starter each time. The idea here is to let each cycle go
long enough so that culture reaches maximum activity but not long enough
to become very acidic.

good luck!

--
Steve W
s (dot) wal (at) verizon (dot) net

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 05:49:44 GMT, jeff higgins
wrote:

where I live (LA basin.)

I read that a home baker could make sourdough starter anywhere along
the California coast except the LA basin. He said he never could get a
starter going there.

For people like that the solution is simple - buy a sourdough starter,
e.g., the "LA-4 French sourdough starter" from King Arthur Flour for
$6.95 postpaid - which they claim has the San Francisco sourdough
organism present.

www.kingarthurflour.com
800-827-6836

I chose KA because they have true experts on their staff, so if I get
into any trouble they can help me by email. Also I use KA bread flour,
so I am familiar with the company.

You will have a known product that will work and you can spend your
time and energy on baking bread. If you still want to experiment with
homegrown starters you still can in background - while you enjoy
eating homemade sourdough bread.

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 14:40:07 GMT, Steve W
wrote:


snip some very helpful advice

Steve,

Thanks for some very useful advice. I do plan to order the starter
from Carls; however, I still want to experiment some more with
homemade starters. I've never seen a doubling or tripling of my
existing starter after feeding, although I have seen activity (slow
bubbling.) Given the hydration level (100%), I find it hard to
believe my starter could ever sustain a doubling or tripling for long
without swiftly collapsing. I'll pay closer attention, though.

I'm going to try to work a bit with this starter on a couple of
different theories: it is either not active enough (probable, given
your comments) or I'm allowing it to go too far beyond it's peak
before using to bake. I'll be running experiments on both hypotheses
with portions of the starter, although not simultaneously.

In addition, this morning I began another starter using the
instructions from Samartha's website. I'll keep this going as a rye
starter as his instructions indicate. Assuming this works out, I'll
probably try to convert some of this to a wheat starter at some point
after it's established, hopefully in a week or two.

In all cases, I plan to pay a lot closer attention to what's going on
and to document things in writing as I go along. I think this is
probably the best way for me to learn. I'm in no particular hurry
with any of this. I can certainly work at it until I eventually have
some success, whether it's with my own homemade starters or by using
the Carl's starter. In the meantime, the experiments will be fun and
I can reliably continue enjoying the yeast breads that I already know
how to make! g

Thank you, again, for your very useful advice!

On 22 Oct 2003 16:36:58 GMT, Ignoramus7261
wrote:

Not all starters are created equal. Some starters are better than
others. It could be that your homegrown starters are lousy
starters. Try buying some known good starter that is known for
reliability and the ability to survive being dried and mailed. If you
live in Chicagoland, I can give my own super reliable starter.

i

Thanks for your reply. Steve made this suggestion also...please see
my longer reply to his post.

P.S. While I used to live in Chicago, and I appreciate your offer
sincerely, I now live in Los Angeles.

On 22 Oct 2003 20:19:29 GMT, Ignoramus7261
wrote:

i can mail you some starter...

i

In article , jeff higgins wrote:
On 22 Oct 2003 16:36:58 GMT, Ignoramus7261
wrote:

Not all starters are created equal. Some starters are better than
others. It could be that your homegrown starters are lousy
starters. Try buying some known good starter that is known for
reliability and the ability to survive being dried and mailed. If you
live in Chicagoland, I can give my own super reliable starter.

i

Thanks for your reply. Steve made this suggestion also...please see
my longer reply to his post.

P.S. While I used to live in Chicago, and I appreciate your offer
sincerely, I now live in Los Angeles.

Thanks for the generous offer. I may very well take you up on this;
but, first, I think I'd like to get my footing a bit with the Carl's
starter that I just ordered and, hopefully, with at least one of the
two homemade starters I have going at the moment. Frankly, in the
long run, the most I would want to keep going at one time would be two
starters, one rye and one wheat. More than that I neither have the
time nor the space to accomodate.

I'm also trying to cut down on the number of variables and to
concentrate on a single recipe/formula and a single starter (the
others are only for backup at this point) until I am able to get
consistently satisfactory results. As Samartha suggested, in the past
I failed to do that with, I suppose, predicable failing results. So,
this time, I'm regrouping and trying to keep things simpler.

I'll certainly keep your offer in mind and will let you know if I can
use that sample! g Thanks, again!

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 19:35:01 GMT, jeff higgins
wrote:

Given the hydration level (100%), I find it hard to
believe my starter could ever sustain a doubling or tripling for long
without swiftly collapsing.

Howdy,

This depends, in part, on the shape of the container. A while back I
experimented a bit with such expansion in a graduate cylinder from a
lab. I could get a rise of 5X easily...

HTH,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 19:48:41 -0400, Kenneth
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 19:35:01 GMT, jeff higgins
wrote:

Given the hydration level (100%), I find it hard to
believe my starter could ever sustain a doubling or tripling for long
without swiftly collapsing.

Howdy,

This depends, in part, on the shape of the container. A while back I
experimented a bit with such expansion in a graduate cylinder from a
lab. I could get a rise of 5X easily...

HTH,

Ooops... at 100% I should add.

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

On 23 Oct 2003 00:58:39 GMT, Ignoramus7261
wrote:

if yu have one good starter, concentrate on it, do not try to make
your own.

Why not? Because of the difficulty or because it's not necessary - or
both?

Ignoramus7261 wrote:

if yu have one good starter, concentrate on it, do not try to make
your own.


I have a totally different opinion. If the reason to do something is not
so much the final product - bread, but the process which leads to it, it
can be a fun and rewarding experience and it changes the whole
perspective.

That's only one reason out of many possibilities IMO.

Also, I find that nobody should be discouraged to make his/her own
starter from scratch, especially on this newsgroup. On the opposite,
they should be helped. It's much less an affair than generally perceived
and reflected here.

Samartha

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

On 23 Oct 2003 03:14:02 GMT, Ignoramus7261
wrote:

In article , Bob wrote:
On 23 Oct 2003 00:58:39 GMT, Ignoramus7261
wrote:

if yu have one good starter, concentrate on it, do not try to make
your own.

Why not? Because of the difficulty or because it's not necessary - or
both?


Because of the principle that first things go first. With a good
starter, he will be able to bake good bread. Without one, he won't be
able. Once he is on track and baking good bread, he can experiment
with new stuff without feeling frustrated.

To me this sourdough thing is just like any other food. You make it to
supply you with nutrients in a pleasant fashion. It is a practical
product. You can have fun with it etc, however some useful output
(bread) is required or the process is more or less a waste of time.

Damn Straight!

Take a well-deserved bow for your articulate representation of common
sense.

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 23:11:05 -0600, Samartha Deva
wrote:

Ignoramus7261 wrote:

if yu have one good starter, concentrate on it, do not try to make
your own.

I have a totally different opinion. If the reason to do something is not
so much the final product - bread, but the process which leads to it, it
can be a fun and rewarding experience and it changes the whole
perspective.

That's only one reason out of many possibilities IMO.

Also, I find that nobody should be discouraged to make his/her own
starter from scratch, especially on this newsgroup. On the opposite,
they should be helped. It's much less an affair than generally perceived
and reflected here.

Samartha

The original poster was not attempting to discourage people from
having fun by experimentation, and that includes making their own
starter from scratch.

What the original poster was attempting to do, if I read the original
post correctly, is to point out that experimentation is not fun if it
never leads to making any bread or leads to making bad bread.

Make bread first and foremost, even if it takes using a known good
starter supplied by someone else. Now that you have good bread coming
in at a steady rate, you can experiment all you want in background.

That is what I intend to do - I have ordered a starter from KA and
when I get it I plan to use it immediately. Once I get some bread
baked with it, I will have the opportunity to continue my kitchen
experiments making starter from scratch.

Actually it would be advantageous to have a known good starter, like
the one from KA, because not only do you get to make known-quality
bread, but you can compare it with whatever results you get from your
experimentation.