I am looking for chocolate to make truffles with. Specifically, I want to
find couverture. I prefer thin coat to thick. I do not have a preference for
liquor content, as I make different centers, and can use just about any
"darkness" of coating.
Locally, there is some Valrhona at one gourmet grocery, but only with
hazelnut, something I do not care for. There is a chocolate candy retail
store, but between the poor customer service, and the mediocre quality, I
don't bother to spend my money there. I usually buy online.
By your range, I enjoy eating the mid-range brands you mention, but I have
never cooked with them. (That doesn't sound right - what do you call it when
you make candies? Candy-made? Candied?) I have tried several of the quality
brands you mentioned, but my opinion differs from your when it comes to
Ghirardelli. I much prefer Scharffenberger. For milk chocolate, the best
I've tasted is British Cadburys - not the exported American version, but the
real deal.
--
Wendy
http://griffinsflight.com/Quilting/quilt1.htm
De-Fang email address to reply
"Alex Rast" > wrote in message
...
> at Fri, 23 Jan 2004 02:07:57 GMT in
>> Half of this depends on what's available to you. I can give you
> *exhaustive* characterizations of brands, properties, and application
> suitabilities. Clearly publishing all this information in one posting
would
> overwhelm the system. So if you have a series of specific applications in
> mind, let me know and I can give detailed recommendations, descriptions,
> where to buy, etc. I can likewise match your personal taste preferences
to
> brands and chocolates. However, here's some general leanings of different
> brands. This is very, very broad and won't apply uniformly to all the
> products in their lines. I'm also including only the more common or well-
> known and regarded brands. I've broken it into some rough quality
> categories.
>
> Low-end:
>
> Baker's : Terrible. Don't even consider. Invariably overroasted, very dry
> (low cocoa butter), coarse, and tasteless.
> Hershey's : Somewhat improved on Baker's, but not by much. Usually very
> sweet. They prefer earthier chocolates, mostly, I suspect, because that
> type of bean is cheap.
> Nestle : In Europe, some of it is pretty good, in the US, most of it
isn't.
> But it does improve on the brands above. They go for a very dark roast.
> Cocoa butter is usually middle-of-the-pack. Texture is below average.
> Cadbury's : Famous for pushing vegelate. Always far too sweet. Usually
they
> choose surprisingly tasteless, flat beans, although the roast is generally
> not badly overdone. Texture is typically fudgy, not surprising given that
> it's usually vegelate (i.e. uses other vegetable fats than cocoa butter)
>
> Mid-range consumer:
>
> Droste : As one might expect, they go for Dutch processing. This means a
> flat, metallic taste. Texture is usually below average, but not by much.
> Lindt : Usually fruity and uncomplex. The flavour tends to be
> overwhelmingly a single note. Sometimes that can be good, as in the 85%,
> sometimes not so good, as in the Surfin. Texture is usually about average.
> The milk chocolate is so mild it could be white chocolate.
> Caffarel : Very dark roasting predominates. They lean towards a nutty
> flavour, with an affinity for hazelnuts. Usually not especially complex,
> and chocolate impact is often a bit lacking. Texture is generally a bit
dry
> and somewhat coarse.
>
> Quality chocolate:
>
> Ghirardelli : In the US, the best, by far, of the consumer brands. Fruity
> tastes predominate, signifying light roasting. Texture generally slightly
> above average. Their milk chocolate is superb. In spite of being a volume
> producer they're also a high-quality producer, quite a feat. One of the
> hidden gems of many a supermarket.
> Callebaut : Similar to Ghirardelli across the board. If anything, a little
> fruitier. The milk chocolate, however, isn't in the same league as
> Ghirardelli.
> Guittard : Very high cocoa butter ensures a melt-in-the-mouth creaminess.
> Usually very well balanced flavour profiles, often complex but with no one
> component really standing out. Roasting is spot-on, neither high nor low.
> However, bean quality isn't usually at the ultimate level, and so there's
a
> bit of a generic taste to them.
> El Rey : Usually very earthy, but not in an unpleasant way. They use very
> high quality beans indeed. The roast is perhaps a little heavy-handed, and
> therefore the chocolate can be a bit dark and lacking in character, but
> it's still pretty good. Texture, however, needs work: it usually is
> somewhat rough and dry. The white chocolate from them is the best in the
> world by miles - literally the only white chocolate you should ever
> consider buying.
> Scharffen Berger : Incredibly fruity, to a degree that becomes
distracting.
> I think they're underroasted. Leans towards blackberry/cherry notes.
> Usually very smooth texture, with plenty of cocoa butter. The bitterness
> hits you with a mighty punch.
>
> Elite brands:
>
> Valrhona : Also very fruity, not perhaps as extreme. Also, perhaps a more
> subtle, pleasant fruitiness, towards the raspberry/currant spectrum. They
> set the reference standard in the industry for texture, invariably silky
> without even a hint of grittiness to them at all.
> Michel Cluizel : A darker roast than Valrhona, combined with perhaps even
> better beans, results in chocolates with extraordinary balance and
> exceptional richness. The flavours are somewhat more nutty/spicy than
> Valrhona, but still retain fruity characteristics as highlights. Texture
is
> very similar to Valrhona, super-smooth, although if a judgement must be
> made Valrhona might barely edge him out in terms of texture.
> Domori : It's expensive, but it's very good. Darker than either Cluizel or
> Valrhona, very resolutely towards the nutty/woody/spicy end of the
> spectrum. The varietals bring out the best characteristics of each bean
> excellently. Similar to Cluizel texture-wise.
>
> --
> Alex Rast
>
> (remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)