On 02-Jul-16 13:01, dejamos wrote:
> On 7/2/2016 8:55 AM, Dusty wrote:
>> On 02-Jul-16 06:42, dejamos wrote:
>>> On 7/1/2016 7:34 PM, Dusty wrote:
>>>> I used to get this bread from a local supplier (Costco). They no
>>>> longer
>>>> do so. Now, I've found several recipes for bread of this kind, but
>>>> they
>>>> differ in both content and construction. I was hoping that someone
>>>> here
>>>> might have knowledge of a recipe like this, and have some pertinent
>>>> tips.
>>>>
>>>> Take care and be well all,
>>>> Dusty
>>> I don't have anything for you but I would be interested in a recipe for
>>> that as well.
>> Okay, excellent! I'll be fooling with the ones I managed to dig up over
>> the next few weeks. If I get one that turns out as I remember the
>> original bread to be, I'll be sure to send it to you.
>>
>> Dusty
>
> That would be great!
>
> There is something I read somewhere online about sourdough and rye, and
> that is to use the rye for the starter rather than adding it with the
> other flour/s. If I remember correctly it had something to do with the
> rye then being used as the leavening agent. I don't know if that has
> any scientific basis but I used that method to make this Rye Sourdough:
> http://www.thefreshloaf.com/node/241...-sunflower-and
> -pumpkin-seed-cold-soaker
>
> It made a delicious loaf with a good rise so I tend to use that method
> whenever I make a sourdough with rye.
Well, past experience is certainly valuable. Sadly, too often in my
cooking pursuits, I've found that too many of those old "rule-of-thumb"
sayings were without merit. I'll give your suggestion a try, but
that'll be after I've made it work with my regular starter (as I've done
for years and years--which means that's it's both handy and available
today ). Then at least I'll have the opportunity to compare one to
the other...cuz THAT'S where one learns the value of techniques of that
kind. I'm always on the lookout for a newer, better way of making bread
happen. And your tip may well be the one I've been looking for.
I think that my biggest bugaboo is the notion by so many posting in
places like this, that YOU MUST WEIGHT ALL THINGS TO GET IT RIGHT! An
utter load of rubbish! Yes, the "pro's" do it that way. Having worked
by/with some of them, I also learned why they do it. It's because today
they'll make 36 units of something, and tomorrow they'll need to make
104. That is why they do it by weight. It's the only rational thing to
do, given what and how they're doing things. But for the single loaves
that we reading here usually make, volume measurements are far more
useful. I can scoop out a cup of flour in a flash...having to weigh it
out is a pain in the behind. There's no inherent accuracy advantage
from using volumetric measurements as opposed to weight measurements.
It's easy to grab 1-1/4 teaspoons of salt. But a real PITA to ramp it
up for 104 units of bread. That's when using weight shines (especially
metrics). Oh well...I guess it's like with so many things...ya use what
works for you. Demonstrate the advantages...let me see what works...as
opposed to preaching them as accomplished gospel.
It's going to be a few days before I can tackle that (on the road ATM),
but I'll certainly give it a lash sometime soon. Thanks again for your
kind words, recipe, and tip.

Dusty
Dodging the raindrops in the ever-damp Pacific North West.
--
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been
fooled." - Mark Twain