On 23 Sep, 17:07, "Dusty da baker"
wrote:
And - the LB's sure take in glucose (sugar) and produce lactic acid and
alcohol from that. ...

Dusty you should know that Sam can't stick to the point. By the way
Sam. Sugar (the type you buy in a packet) glucose.

I did some test a few years ago and though the trial was very small I
found the sugar (sucrose) inhibited the reactivation of the starter.

Jim

On 23 Sep, 17:19, Mike Romain wrote:
....
My little critters make alcohol somehow and produce 'hooch'. I thought
that was a waste product of them digesting sugars they get from the food.



Mike

There are many sugars (look up mono- di- polysaccharide in Wikipedia)
and many more alcohols the list is huge.

Jim

Brian Mailman wrote:
Mike Avery wrote:
Brian Mailman wrote:

I'm not taking a position either way, but you may have noticed
there's a lot of contradictory writings in the FAQ.

That's why I recommend that people new to sourdough avoid the FAQ. It
has a LOT of very good information in it, but it is written from too
many viewpoints to serve as a good tutorial.

That's what I meant... that it shouldn't be used to bludgeon someone as
an "authoritive" source.

B/

So you folks are saying that the FAQ is 'totally' wrong on something so
basic as proofing the Starter???

If that is so, then the person that posts this 'FAQ' should be informed
and asked nicely to cease and desist posting misleading or just plain
Wrong information to the group.

I am looking for a ten minute to half hour test for viability of a dried
starter, not a regrow that takes days.

I am on several automotive groups and if someone posted total garbage
and called it a 'FAQ' about a vehicle, they would be seriously chastised
and a BS Warning would be posted every time the fool posts the crap
again if they didn't get the point the first time. People can die from
wrong automotive information.

I will do my own test and take photos. My starter is on a 'long' grow
period of feeding it once a day right now to get the 'flavor' parts up
in volume for another drying batch run.

Unfortunately I am using the 'FAQ' directions for this this time. :-(

Last time I let it grow with only a cloth over it so a hard shell was
formed and used this shell. It only lasted 3 or 4 months on the shelf,
but worked really well during that period.

Mike

Mike Romain wrote:
Brian Mailman wrote:
Mike Avery wrote:
Brian Mailman wrote:

I'm not taking a position either way, but you may have noticed
there's a lot of contradictory writings in the FAQ.

That's why I recommend that people new to sourdough avoid the FAQ. It
has a LOT of very good information in it, but it is written from too
many viewpoints to serve as a good tutorial.

That's what I meant... that it shouldn't be used to bludgeon someone as
an "authoritive" source.

So you folks are saying that the FAQ is 'totally' wrong on something so
basic as proofing the Starter???

No.

You're cordially invited to read what's written.

B/

Mike Romain wrote:
So you folks are saying that the FAQ is 'totally' wrong on something so
basic as proofing the Starter???


No, I wouldn't say that. I would say that all of worked for someone,
somewhere at some time. While I don't think the FAQ is a good tutorial,
it is a valuable resource from a historical perspective. There are
large parts of it that do not represent what most of the people in
rec.food.sourdough are doing today. If those portions were removed, I
think the document would be less valuable than it is. Perhaps a shorter
FAQ that represents what people are doing today would be a good thing(tm).

I am looking for a ten minute to half hour test for viability of a dried
starter, not a regrow that takes days.

And I'm looking for a way to turn lead into gold. I was looking for the
northwest passage, but I hear that has been found and is open.

Sourdough does not work as quickly as commercial bakers yeast. You
aren't going to get a half hour test. When people around here try to
revive an old starter, they tend to start two batches. One with the
saved culture, one with just flour and water. This gives them an idea
of whether what was revived was the culture they wanted or something
from the flour they used. In trying to re-start a culture, some things
help success. Use bleached white all-purpose flour. It has, as Dick
points out, a lower critter count on it, reducing the chance of starting
a new culture. You can also do a poor man's sterilization of the
media. Measure your water and bring it to a boil. Measure your flour
and pour the boiling water over it. Stir and allow to cool. Then add
the saved culture.

The essence of baking is patience. The essence of sourdough baking is
patience squared.
I am on several automotive groups and if someone posted total garbage
and called it a 'FAQ' about a vehicle, they would be seriously chastised
and a BS Warning would be posted every time the fool posts the crap
again if they didn't get the point the first time. People can die from
wrong automotive information.

Luckily sourdough is more forgiving.

I will do my own test and take photos. My starter is on a 'long' grow
period of feeding it once a day right now to get the 'flavor' parts up
in volume for another drying batch run.


I do not feel that a once a day feeding is adequate, regardless what
some others say. A number of professional bakers I know have tried to
feed their starters once a day and ALL have given up on it. This
stresses the starter to a point where other organisms can take over, and
the character of the starter can change. Often irreversibly. It is
easy enough to start a new starter, however, if you are emotionally
attached to your starter, you need to feed it at least twice a day while
it is at room temperature. Each feeding should be enough to double the
size of the starter you are feeding. (Which is why discarding starter
is not a bad thing.) And the mix of flour and water should be about 1
part flour to 1 part water by weight, or 2 parts water to 3 parts flour
by volume.
Last time I let it grow with only a cloth over it so a hard shell was
formed and used this shell. It only lasted 3 or 4 months on the shelf,
but worked really well during that period.

Ahhh... right. I doubt you got those handling instructions from the
FAQ, or any web page I've seen.

Mike


--
Mike Avery mavery at mail dot otherwhen dot com
part time baker ICQ 16241692
networking guru AIM, yahoo and skype mavery81230
wordsmith

Once seen on road signs all over the United States:
Smith Brothers
Would look immense
If they'd just
Cough up 50 cents
For half pound jar
Burma-Shave

Mike Avery wrote:
Mike Romain wrote:
So you folks are saying that the FAQ is 'totally' wrong on something
so basic as proofing the Starter???


No, I wouldn't say that. I would say that all of worked for someone,
somewhere at some time. While I don't think the FAQ is a good tutorial,

That is unfortunate. To me a FAQ should be just that.

I am looking for a ten minute to half hour test for viability of a
dried starter, not a regrow that takes days.


Sourdough does not work as quickly as commercial bakers yeast. You
aren't going to get a half hour test.

When I was reviving my last batch of dried starter, I had bubble action
in flour water within 2 to 4 hours

When people around here try to
revive an old starter, they tend to start two batches. One with the
saved culture, one with just flour and water. This gives them an idea
of whether what was revived was the culture they wanted or something
from the flour they used.

I use the same unbleached flour my original starter was made from which
I used a pinch of to start my SD rye starter, so cross breeding yeasts
isn't a worry to me yet....


The essence of baking is patience. The essence of sourdough baking is
patience squared.

LOL! Now that is for sure.


I do not feel that a once a day feeding is adequate, regardless what
some others say.

I agree, mine gets 'really' strong that way both in colour and aroma. I
am just doing that because I read in the FAQ that long grows were the
best way to prep for drying. Some is going into a mason jar and the
fridge for storing.

After my first dried batch's short life, I decided to 'read the
directions' this time and thought the FAQ would be them.

Mike

On 25 Sep, 16:28, Mike Romain wrote:
Mike Avery wrote:
Mike Romain wrote:
So you .... .
To me a FAQ should be just that
.....
After my first dried batch's short life, I decided to 'read the
directions' this time and thought the FAQ would be them.

Mike

Mike, I think it's important to remember that FAQ stands for
Frequently Asked Questions. Not Fabulous Answers Quoted. I shouldn't
speak for Darrell but I suspect that they, the answers, have been
selected to give a balanced view. What works in one set of conditions
may not work in another. It's not easy to know the conditions in
someone else's kitchen unless your the clairvoyant one in the NG. I've
found that people want just a simple 'do this' answer rather than an
explanation of the workings, so inevitably you're going to get
conflicting advice. Add to that people's differing needs from their
starter and you've got a very confusing mix.

Jim

TG wrote:
On 25 Sep, 16:28, Mike Romain wrote:
Mike Avery wrote:
Mike Romain wrote:
So you .... .
To me a FAQ should be just that
.....
After my first dried batch's short life, I decided to 'read the
directions' this time and thought the FAQ would be them.

Mike, I think it's important to remember that FAQ stands for
Frequently Asked Questions. Not Fabulous Answers Quoted.

I wish I'd thought of that.

B/

On 26 Sep, 17:53, Brian Mailman wrote:
....
Mike, I think it's important to remember that FAQ stands for
Frequently Asked Questions. Not Fabulous Answers Quoted.

I wish I'd thought of that.

B/

Brian, I've got a long way to go to catch you up. : -)

Jim