 |
|
| Baking (rec.food.baking) For bakers, would-be bakers, and fans and consumers of breads, pastries, cakes, pies, cookies, crackers, bagels, and other items commonly found in a bakery. Includes all methods of preparation, both conventional and not. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
Bread without a formula
I had an interesting guest chef from Ireland at my cooking school last night
and I really liked the way he taught cooking. He kept talking about common sense ratios between ingredients and how recipes weren't much of an issue. What one really needed was some ratios, experience and common sense. I got to thinking about it relative to bread making which many people view as mysterious and difficult. When you analyze it, bread making could be the simplest and most obvious thing to make without a recipe or formula. Let's look at it. Let's say that 55% hydration is about normal for a bread dough. That means that the water you use will weight a little more than half the flour you use. We can always adjust things later but it's a logical place to start. If you want a 3 lb. dough, then a couple of pounds of flour and a pound of water plus a little should get the job done. You could cut that in half for a 1 1/2 lb. dough etc. Personally, I normally like to use about 1/2 oz. of fresh yeast for every lb. of flour. It's adjustable, of course, but the ratio should work pretty well for most doughs. OK, so lets make a 3 lb. dough. We need 2lbs. of flour, a lb. and a little water and an ounce of frest yeast. Put these ingredients in a mixer and you'll get a nice, workable dough that will bake up into a couple of perfectly fine loaves of bread of a little over a lb. each. I like a little salt in my bread to help bring out the flavors. I usually put about 1/2 oz. per lb. of flour. Sometimes I'll put 1/2 oz. per lb. of sugar to add another taste dimension. These two ingredients added to our flour water and yeast, make the typical hard crusted Italian bread you buy in the bakery. Want French bread? Add a little oil. How about between 1/2 oz. and 1 oz. per lb. of flour? This adds some "wetness" to the dough so I'd suggest cutting back about an oz. of water. You can always add more water as the dough mixes if you put in too little. Bingo, French bread with a softer crust than the Italian bread. Rye? No problem. Use 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 rye flour. I also like to put in a little molasses. You guessed it, about an oz. per lb. of flour. I reduce the water again by about 1 oz. per lb. of flour. I really like to add the zest of a couple of lemons to my rye bread. It really sings. See how easy this is. Whole wheat? Same thing. 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 whole wheat flour. Semolina bread? You're getting the idea. Want to add dried currants or maybe cinammon and raisins or a luscious Italian bread with garlic and rosemary? Throw them in there. A sweet bread like cinnamon raisin bread usually wants more sugar so I add about 2 to 3oz. per lb. Why? I don't know. It's just a ratio that's worked well for me in the past. If what you throw in is wet like some old dough from yesterday or a sourdough starter, just take out a little water. If it's dry like milk solids or wheat germ, add a little water. I tend to hydrate a little more for pan breads than I do for hearth breads. I don't know why. Experience has taught me I like it that way. I might go up to 60% water by weight or maybe higher. Some breads behave a little differently with different levels of hydration but I've found good ratios that work for me and my ovens. Some breads work better with a lot of mixing and others don't want too much. Some want to ferment for hours and others work best with just an hour or so. You see, since I'm not making bread commercially, I don't really need to have a formula since I don't need today's batch to taste exactly like last month's batch. I just need to understand the basic ratios and then I can create to my heart's content. As you begin mixing the dough, experience will tell you immediately how dry or wet the dough will turn out. It's a simple matter to add a little water or a little flour to adjust the texture of the dough. If you're going to mix it for a long time a little more water will help counteract the heat from the friction involved in mixing. The dough will still look right, feel right and bake right after the adjustments. So my suggestion is go out and create some great bread. Armed with a few simple ratios, you can make any amount of dough you like. Armed with a little experience you can adjust your dough to your ingredients. Go make some bread. It's so easy you don't even need a recipe. Good cooking. Fred Foodie Forums http://www.foodieforums.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in message >...
> What one really needed was some ratios, experience and common sense. > > I got to thinking about it relative to bread making which many people view > as mysterious and difficult. When you analyze it, bread making could be the > simplest and most obvious thing to make without a recipe or formula. Let's > look at it. > > Let's say that 55% hydration is about normal for a bread dough. That means > that the water you use will weight a little more than half the flour you > use. We can always adjust things later but it's a logical place to start. > If you want a 3 lb. dough, then a couple of pounds of flour and a pound of > water plus a little should get the job done. You could cut that in half for > a 1 1/2 lb. dough etc. Personally, I normally like to use about 1/2 oz. of > fresh yeast for every lb. of flour. It's adjustable, of course, but the > ratio should work pretty well for most doughs. > > OK, so lets make a 3 lb. dough. We need 2lbs. of flour, a lb. and a little > water and an ounce of frest yeast. Put these ingredients in a mixer and > you'll get a nice, workable dough that will bake up into a couple of > perfectly fine loaves of bread of a little over a lb. each. > > I like a little salt in my bread to help bring out the flavors. I usually > put about 1/2 oz. per lb. of flour. Sometimes I'll put 1/2 oz. per lb. of > sugar to add another taste dimension. These two ingredients added to our > flour water and yeast, make the typical hard crusted Italian bread you buy > in the bakery. > > Want French bread? Add a little oil. How about between 1/2 oz. and 1 oz. > per lb. of flour? This adds some "wetness" to the dough so I'd suggest > cutting back about an oz. of water. You can always add more water as the > dough mixes if you put in too little. Bingo, French bread with a softer > crust than the Italian bread. > > Rye? No problem. Use 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 rye flour. I also like to > put in a little molasses. You guessed it, about an oz. per lb. of flour. I > reduce the water again by about 1 oz. per lb. of flour. I really like to > add the zest of a couple of lemons to my rye bread. It really sings. See > how easy this is. > > Whole wheat? Same thing. 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 whole wheat flour. > Semolina bread? You're getting the idea. > > Want to add dried currants or maybe cinammon and raisins or a luscious > Italian bread with garlic and rosemary? Throw them in there. A sweet bread > like cinnamon raisin bread usually wants more sugar so I add about 2 to 3oz. > per lb. Why? I don't know. It's just a ratio that's worked well for me in > the past. If what you throw in is wet like some old dough from yesterday or > a sourdough starter, just take out a little water. If it's dry like milk > solids or wheat germ, add a little water. > > I tend to hydrate a little more for pan breads than I do for hearth breads. > I don't know why. Experience has taught me I like it that way. I might go > up to 60% water by weight or maybe higher. Some breads behave a little > differently with different levels of hydration but I've found good ratios > that work for me and my ovens. Some breads work better with a lot of mixing > and others don't want too much. Some want to ferment for hours and others > work best with just an hour or so. > > You see, since I'm not making bread commercially, I don't really need to > have a formula since I don't need today's batch to taste exactly like last > month's batch. I just need to understand the basic ratios and then I can > create to my heart's content. > > As you begin mixing the dough, experience will tell you immediately how dry > or wet the dough will turn out. It's a simple matter to add a little water > or a little flour to adjust the texture of the dough. If you're going to > mix it for a long time a little more water will help counteract the heat > from the friction involved in mixing. The dough will still look right, feel > right and bake right after the adjustments. > > So my suggestion is go out and create some great bread. Armed with a few > simple ratios, you can make any amount of dough you like. Armed with a > little experience you can adjust your dough to your ingredients. Go make > some bread. It's so easy you don't even need a recipe. Good cooking. > > Fred > Foodie Forums > http://www.foodieforums.com Hmnn ..... Instinctive baking eh? Well some institutional bakers do that but they are at loss to comprehend if something goes wrong.And many of them inspite of decades of experience still do not progress to the high level of technical understanding of their craft.They have honed their skill but not their overall knowledge. Besides its not as simple as reducing things to the simplest ratio and common sense. You have to find a (structured) relationship betweeen those quantities....and apply that principle in your daily baking chore. You may have known how much a scoop of flour weighs or how many liters is in a a pail of water....But its not enough. Trying to compare baking with cookery where the ever egoistic chef just dump anything at pan according to his whim ( to impress his traineee and staff?)is not that simple. Indeed cookery is an art that can be honed by experience but baking is both science and art and needs both dedicated practice and technical understanding of the methodology. The ingredient interactions in cookery is pretty simple if compared to baking... and yuo just judge the appropriateness of your cookery by experinced eye and sensory assessment of your foodstuff. In baking you have to go beyond that and see things not only from the macroscopic point of view but also in 'microscopic' perspective. In my observation (from experience) many of the best cooks are lousy bakers and conversely...It is just they have different thinking pattern. It is not just about formula but they understand also the mechanisms how thngs work. Two years ago I trained a really talented chef who want to improve his baking skills but his knack of doing things like what every chef does spoils his acquisition of proper baking skills. He hates measurements and do things by instinct and feel....he really applies ratio and common sense ;sometimes the bread or cake comes out good sometimes bad, there is no consistency.He never was able to understand nor could accept that ingredient interaction has a critical part in baking. AFter a few months he backed out....Yes He was able to bake better than before, but not to the same high level with his cookery skills. He lamented that you cannot have the best of both worlds (excellent chef and baker) and you have to specialize on one of them according to your aptitude as your deeply ingrained habits as part of your training in your formative years is difficult to change. So I would suggest that do not be carried away by overconfidence .....that simple idea might work at home as hobby as nobody there is keen enough to judge your culinary creation nor any superior to berate you if your baked goods is not as good as the previous days. Baking can be deceptive sometimes.... what you find as simple could be as illusory as a mirage... Just Keep your feet firmly on the ground ... Roy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in message >...
> What one really needed was some ratios, experience and common sense. > > I got to thinking about it relative to bread making which many people view > as mysterious and difficult. When you analyze it, bread making could be the > simplest and most obvious thing to make without a recipe or formula. Let's > look at it. > > Let's say that 55% hydration is about normal for a bread dough. That means > that the water you use will weight a little more than half the flour you > use. We can always adjust things later but it's a logical place to start. > If you want a 3 lb. dough, then a couple of pounds of flour and a pound of > water plus a little should get the job done. You could cut that in half for > a 1 1/2 lb. dough etc. Personally, I normally like to use about 1/2 oz. of > fresh yeast for every lb. of flour. It's adjustable, of course, but the > ratio should work pretty well for most doughs. > > OK, so lets make a 3 lb. dough. We need 2lbs. of flour, a lb. and a little > water and an ounce of frest yeast. Put these ingredients in a mixer and > you'll get a nice, workable dough that will bake up into a couple of > perfectly fine loaves of bread of a little over a lb. each. > > I like a little salt in my bread to help bring out the flavors. I usually > put about 1/2 oz. per lb. of flour. Sometimes I'll put 1/2 oz. per lb. of > sugar to add another taste dimension. These two ingredients added to our > flour water and yeast, make the typical hard crusted Italian bread you buy > in the bakery. > > Want French bread? Add a little oil. How about between 1/2 oz. and 1 oz. > per lb. of flour? This adds some "wetness" to the dough so I'd suggest > cutting back about an oz. of water. You can always add more water as the > dough mixes if you put in too little. Bingo, French bread with a softer > crust than the Italian bread. > > Rye? No problem. Use 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 rye flour. I also like to > put in a little molasses. You guessed it, about an oz. per lb. of flour. I > reduce the water again by about 1 oz. per lb. of flour. I really like to > add the zest of a couple of lemons to my rye bread. It really sings. See > how easy this is. > > Whole wheat? Same thing. 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 whole wheat flour. > Semolina bread? You're getting the idea. > > Want to add dried currants or maybe cinammon and raisins or a luscious > Italian bread with garlic and rosemary? Throw them in there. A sweet bread > like cinnamon raisin bread usually wants more sugar so I add about 2 to 3oz. > per lb. Why? I don't know. It's just a ratio that's worked well for me in > the past. If what you throw in is wet like some old dough from yesterday or > a sourdough starter, just take out a little water. If it's dry like milk > solids or wheat germ, add a little water. > > I tend to hydrate a little more for pan breads than I do for hearth breads. > I don't know why. Experience has taught me I like it that way. I might go > up to 60% water by weight or maybe higher. Some breads behave a little > differently with different levels of hydration but I've found good ratios > that work for me and my ovens. Some breads work better with a lot of mixing > and others don't want too much. Some want to ferment for hours and others > work best with just an hour or so. > > You see, since I'm not making bread commercially, I don't really need to > have a formula since I don't need today's batch to taste exactly like last > month's batch. I just need to understand the basic ratios and then I can > create to my heart's content. > > As you begin mixing the dough, experience will tell you immediately how dry > or wet the dough will turn out. It's a simple matter to add a little water > or a little flour to adjust the texture of the dough. If you're going to > mix it for a long time a little more water will help counteract the heat > from the friction involved in mixing. The dough will still look right, feel > right and bake right after the adjustments. > > So my suggestion is go out and create some great bread. Armed with a few > simple ratios, you can make any amount of dough you like. Armed with a > little experience you can adjust your dough to your ingredients. Go make > some bread. It's so easy you don't even need a recipe. Good cooking. > > Fred > Foodie Forums > http://www.foodieforums.com Hmnn ..... Instinctive baking eh? Well some institutional bakers do that but they are at loss to comprehend if something goes wrong.And many of them inspite of decades of experience still do not progress to the high level of technical understanding of their craft.They have honed their skill but not their overall knowledge. Besides its not as simple as reducing things to the simplest ratio and common sense. You have to find a (structured) relationship betweeen those quantities....and apply that principle in your daily baking chore. You may have known how much a scoop of flour weighs or how many liters is in a a pail of water....But its not enough. Trying to compare baking with cookery where the ever egoistic chef just dump anything at pan according to his whim ( to impress his traineee and staff?)is not that simple. Indeed cookery is an art that can be honed by experience but baking is both science and art and needs both dedicated practice and technical understanding of the methodology. The ingredient interactions in cookery is pretty simple if compared to baking... and yuo just judge the appropriateness of your cookery by experinced eye and sensory assessment of your foodstuff. In baking you have to go beyond that and see things not only from the macroscopic point of view but also in 'microscopic' perspective. In my observation (from experience) many of the best cooks are lousy bakers and conversely...It is just they have different thinking pattern. It is not just about formula but they understand also the mechanisms how thngs work. Two years ago I trained a really talented chef who want to improve his baking skills but his knack of doing things like what every chef does spoils his acquisition of proper baking skills. He hates measurements and do things by instinct and feel....he really applies ratio and common sense ;sometimes the bread or cake comes out good sometimes bad, there is no consistency.He never was able to understand nor could accept that ingredient interaction has a critical part in baking. AFter a few months he backed out....Yes He was able to bake better than before, but not to the same high level with his cookery skills. He lamented that you cannot have the best of both worlds (excellent chef and baker) and you have to specialize on one of them according to your aptitude as your deeply ingrained habits as part of your training in your formative years is difficult to change. So I would suggest that do not be carried away by overconfidence .....that simple idea might work at home as hobby as nobody there is keen enough to judge your culinary creation nor any superior to berate you if your baked goods is not as good as the previous days. Baking can be deceptive sometimes.... what you find as simple could be as illusory as a mirage... Just Keep your feet firmly on the ground ... Roy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Roy Basan" > wrote in message om... > "Fred" > wrote in message >... > > > What one really needed was some ratios, experience and common sense. > > > > I got to thinking about it relative to bread making which many people view > > as mysterious and difficult. When you analyze it, bread making could be the > > simplest and most obvious thing to make without a recipe or formula. Let's > > look at it. > > > > Let's say that 55% hydration is about normal for a bread dough. That means > > that the water you use will weight a little more than half the flour you > > use. We can always adjust things later but it's a logical place to start. > > If you want a 3 lb. dough, then a couple of pounds of flour and a pound of > > water plus a little should get the job done. You could cut that in half for > > a 1 1/2 lb. dough etc. Personally, I normally like to use about 1/2 oz. of > > fresh yeast for every lb. of flour. It's adjustable, of course, but the > > ratio should work pretty well for most doughs. > > > > OK, so lets make a 3 lb. dough. We need 2lbs. of flour, a lb. and a little > > water and an ounce of frest yeast. Put these ingredients in a mixer and > > you'll get a nice, workable dough that will bake up into a couple of > > perfectly fine loaves of bread of a little over a lb. each. > > > > I like a little salt in my bread to help bring out the flavors. I usually > > put about 1/2 oz. per lb. of flour. Sometimes I'll put 1/2 oz. per lb. of > > sugar to add another taste dimension. These two ingredients added to our > > flour water and yeast, make the typical hard crusted Italian bread you buy > > in the bakery. > > > > Want French bread? Add a little oil. How about between 1/2 oz. and 1 oz. > > per lb. of flour? This adds some "wetness" to the dough so I'd suggest > > cutting back about an oz. of water. You can always add more water as the > > dough mixes if you put in too little. Bingo, French bread with a softer > > crust than the Italian bread. > > > > Rye? No problem. Use 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 rye flour. I also like to > > put in a little molasses. You guessed it, about an oz. per lb. of flour. I > > reduce the water again by about 1 oz. per lb. of flour. I really like to > > add the zest of a couple of lemons to my rye bread. It really sings. See > > how easy this is. > > > > Whole wheat? Same thing. 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 whole wheat flour. > > Semolina bread? You're getting the idea. > > > > Want to add dried currants or maybe cinammon and raisins or a luscious > > Italian bread with garlic and rosemary? Throw them in there. A sweet bread > > like cinnamon raisin bread usually wants more sugar so I add about 2 to 3oz. > > per lb. Why? I don't know. It's just a ratio that's worked well for me in > > the past. If what you throw in is wet like some old dough from yesterday or > > a sourdough starter, just take out a little water. If it's dry like milk > > solids or wheat germ, add a little water. > > > > I tend to hydrate a little more for pan breads than I do for hearth breads. > > I don't know why. Experience has taught me I like it that way. I might go > > up to 60% water by weight or maybe higher. Some breads behave a little > > differently with different levels of hydration but I've found good ratios > > that work for me and my ovens. Some breads work better with a lot of mixing > > and others don't want too much. Some want to ferment for hours and others > > work best with just an hour or so. > > > > You see, since I'm not making bread commercially, I don't really need to > > have a formula since I don't need today's batch to taste exactly like last > > month's batch. I just need to understand the basic ratios and then I can > > create to my heart's content. > > > > As you begin mixing the dough, experience will tell you immediately how dry > > or wet the dough will turn out. It's a simple matter to add a little water > > or a little flour to adjust the texture of the dough. If you're going to > > mix it for a long time a little more water will help counteract the heat > > from the friction involved in mixing. The dough will still look right, feel > > right and bake right after the adjustments. > > > > So my suggestion is go out and create some great bread. Armed with a few > > simple ratios, you can make any amount of dough you like. Armed with a > > little experience you can adjust your dough to your ingredients. Go make > > some bread. It's so easy you don't even need a recipe. Good cooking. > > > > Fred > > Foodie Forums > > http://www.foodieforums.com > > Hmnn ..... Instinctive baking eh? > Well some institutional bakers do that but they are at loss to > comprehend if something goes wrong.And many of them inspite of decades > of experience still do not progress to the high level of technical > understanding of their craft.They have honed their skill but not their > overall knowledge. > Besides its not as simple as reducing things to the simplest ratio and > common sense. You have to find a (structured) relationship betweeen > those quantities....and apply that principle in your daily baking > chore. > You may have known how much a scoop of flour weighs or how many liters > is in a a pail of water....But its not enough. > Trying to compare baking with cookery where the ever egoistic chef > just dump anything at pan according to his whim ( to impress his > traineee and staff?)is not that simple. > Indeed cookery is an art that can be honed by experience but baking is > both science and art and needs both dedicated practice and technical > understanding of the methodology. > The ingredient interactions in cookery is pretty simple if compared > to baking... and yuo just judge the appropriateness of your cookery by > experinced eye and sensory assessment of your foodstuff. > > In baking you have to go beyond that and see things not only from the > macroscopic point of view but also in 'microscopic' perspective. > In my observation (from experience) many of the best cooks are lousy > bakers and conversely...It is just they have different thinking > pattern. > It is not just about formula but they understand also the mechanisms > how thngs work. > Two years ago I trained a really talented chef who want to improve his > baking skills but his knack of doing things like what every chef does > spoils his acquisition of proper baking skills. > He hates measurements and do things by instinct and feel....he really > applies ratio and common sense ;sometimes the bread or cake comes out > good sometimes bad, there is no consistency.He never was able to > understand nor could accept that ingredient interaction has a critical > part in baking. > AFter a few months he backed out....Yes He was able to bake better > than before, but not to the same high level with his cookery skills. > He lamented that you cannot have the best of both worlds (excellent > chef and baker) and you have to specialize on one of them according > to your aptitude as your deeply ingrained habits as part of your > training in your formative years is difficult to change. > So I would suggest that do not be carried away by overconfidence > ....that simple idea might work at home as hobby as nobody there is > keen enough to judge your culinary creation nor any superior to > berate you if your baked goods is not as good as the previous days. > Baking can be deceptive sometimes.... what you find as simple could be > as illusory as a mirage... > Just Keep your feet firmly on the ground ... > Roy Thanks for the pail of cold water. My purpose was to encourage people who are afraid of bread baking to try it. As strange as it may seem to you, I bake bread this way most of the time and have for a long time. Intuitive bread baking is certainly possible and, in fact, easy. Apparently you want to keep it mysterious and I obviously posted this in the wrong place. Fred Foodie Forums http://www.foodieforums.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in message
> > Thanks for the pail of cold water. My purpose was to encourage people who > are afraid of bread baking to try it. As strange as it may seem to you, I > bake bread this way most of the time and have for a long time. Intuitive > bread baking is certainly possible and, in fact, easy. Apparently you want > to keep it mysterious and I obviously posted this in the wrong place. > > Fred > Foodie Forums > http://www.foodieforums.com Fred it was not my intention to do so.....In fact during my younger days I had the same notion as you....I was overconfident of my skills. I want to simplify everything, that led me to convert al my recipes from the cookbook recipes ,heirloom recipes,and the industrial ones which was so detailed in the lattter that if you miiss one of the material that will result in product failure. I had not probles with the previous two but a serious ones with the last one. I discovered and was humiliated that there is a limit to simplification. A formula developed by the industry was the fruit of years of product development work and every detail follows a specification that ensures that consistency is maintained everytime you made a product out of it.. Deviation even in terms of ingredient specification( but the same quantity) as dictated by the formula usually result in the variation in product quality.( that may not be very obvious) With that fact in mind I came to a realization that there is no mystery in the formula ..Abide by it and everything will be allright. Another occasion some decade back I worked for an employer who believe the same way as you, just simplicity and commonsense. Yes there is the succesful formula handed by the technical deviision of the parent company previousy )and was ever succesful in use) but my employer want me to cut corners as he find that the stipulated ingredients in the formula are expensive as you have to procure it from the approved suppliers abroad. Being in a different country where leniency is tolerrated due to scarcity of spcific ingedients I was obliged to follow my boss request to source the raw material locally and forget about details such as exacting product specification of the particular ingredient. WEll I was succesful as I was able to produce an identical material.( yeast raised and cake donut) the product was sold as the normal item but after some time we realized that our sales gradually dropped and my boss frantically called the parent company who after discovering the fault berated him for his stupidity that his franchise was revoked and my boss lost the business . that was a lesson that I always keep in mind until now. When I looked back how simple was the recipe but how detailed was the product specification of each ingredient that must be religiously followed to the letter to ensure of the maintenance of quality.that had kept the reputation of particular company intact. It led me to conclude that simplicity can be deceptive sometimes. and ingredient interaction that comes from using a substitute and using the stipulated ingredient had difference and that will result in product quality deviation. that customer will notice later on. Roy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in message
> > Thanks for the pail of cold water. My purpose was to encourage people who > are afraid of bread baking to try it. As strange as it may seem to you, I > bake bread this way most of the time and have for a long time. Intuitive > bread baking is certainly possible and, in fact, easy. Apparently you want > to keep it mysterious and I obviously posted this in the wrong place. > > Fred > Foodie Forums > http://www.foodieforums.com Fred it was not my intention to do so.....In fact during my younger days I had the same notion as you....I was overconfident of my skills. I want to simplify everything, that led me to convert al my recipes from the cookbook recipes ,heirloom recipes,and the industrial ones which was so detailed in the lattter that if you miiss one of the material that will result in product failure. I had not probles with the previous two but a serious ones with the last one. I discovered and was humiliated that there is a limit to simplification. A formula developed by the industry was the fruit of years of product development work and every detail follows a specification that ensures that consistency is maintained everytime you made a product out of it.. Deviation even in terms of ingredient specification( but the same quantity) as dictated by the formula usually result in the variation in product quality.( that may not be very obvious) With that fact in mind I came to a realization that there is no mystery in the formula ..Abide by it and everything will be allright. Another occasion some decade back I worked for an employer who believe the same way as you, just simplicity and commonsense. Yes there is the succesful formula handed by the technical deviision of the parent company previousy )and was ever succesful in use) but my employer want me to cut corners as he find that the stipulated ingredients in the formula are expensive as you have to procure it from the approved suppliers abroad. Being in a different country where leniency is tolerrated due to scarcity of spcific ingedients I was obliged to follow my boss request to source the raw material locally and forget about details such as exacting product specification of the particular ingredient. WEll I was succesful as I was able to produce an identical material.( yeast raised and cake donut) the product was sold as the normal item but after some time we realized that our sales gradually dropped and my boss frantically called the parent company who after discovering the fault berated him for his stupidity that his franchise was revoked and my boss lost the business . that was a lesson that I always keep in mind until now. When I looked back how simple was the recipe but how detailed was the product specification of each ingredient that must be religiously followed to the letter to ensure of the maintenance of quality.that had kept the reputation of particular company intact. It led me to conclude that simplicity can be deceptive sometimes. and ingredient interaction that comes from using a substitute and using the stipulated ingredient had difference and that will result in product quality deviation. that customer will notice later on. Roy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in message news  > > "Roy Basan" > wrote in message > om... > > "Fred" > wrote in message > >... > > > > > What one really needed was some ratios, experience and common sense. > > > > > > I got to thinking about it relative to bread making which many people > view > > > as mysterious and difficult. When you analyze it, bread making could be > the > > > simplest and most obvious thing to make without a recipe or formula. > Let's > > > look at it. > > > > > > Let's say that 55% hydration is about normal for a bread dough. That > means > > > that the water you use will weight a little more than half the flour you > > > use. We can always adjust things later but it's a logical place to > start. > > > If you want a 3 lb. dough, then a couple of pounds of flour and a pound > of > > > water plus a little should get the job done. You could cut that in half > for > > > a 1 1/2 lb. dough etc. Personally, I normally like to use about 1/2 oz. > of > > > fresh yeast for every lb. of flour. It's adjustable, of course, but the > > > ratio should work pretty well for most doughs. > > > > > > OK, so lets make a 3 lb. dough. We need 2lbs. of flour, a lb. and a > little > > > water and an ounce of frest yeast. Put these ingredients in a mixer and > > > you'll get a nice, workable dough that will bake up into a couple of > > > perfectly fine loaves of bread of a little over a lb. each. > > > > > > I like a little salt in my bread to help bring out the flavors. I > usually > > > put about 1/2 oz. per lb. of flour. Sometimes I'll put 1/2 oz. per lb. > of > > > sugar to add another taste dimension. These two ingredients added to > our > > > flour water and yeast, make the typical hard crusted Italian bread you > buy > > > in the bakery. > > > > > > Want French bread? Add a little oil. How about between 1/2 oz. and 1 > oz. > > > per lb. of flour? This adds some "wetness" to the dough so I'd suggest > > > cutting back about an oz. of water. You can always add more water as > the > > > dough mixes if you put in too little. Bingo, French bread with a softer > > > crust than the Italian bread. > > > > > > Rye? No problem. Use 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 rye flour. I also like > to > > > put in a little molasses. You guessed it, about an oz. per lb. of > flour. I > > > reduce the water again by about 1 oz. per lb. of flour. I really like > to > > > add the zest of a couple of lemons to my rye bread. It really sings. > See > > > how easy this is. > > > > > > Whole wheat? Same thing. 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 whole wheat flour. > > > Semolina bread? You're getting the idea. > > > > > > Want to add dried currants or maybe cinammon and raisins or a luscious > > > Italian bread with garlic and rosemary? Throw them in there. A sweet > bread > > > like cinnamon raisin bread usually wants more sugar so I add about 2 to > 3oz. > > > per lb. Why? I don't know. It's just a ratio that's worked well for > me in > > > the past. If what you throw in is wet like some old dough from > yesterday or > > > a sourdough starter, just take out a little water. If it's dry like > milk > > > solids or wheat germ, add a little water. > > > > > > I tend to hydrate a little more for pan breads than I do for hearth > breads. > > > I don't know why. Experience has taught me I like it that way. I might > go > > > up to 60% water by weight or maybe higher. Some breads behave a little > > > differently with different levels of hydration but I've found good > ratios > > > that work for me and my ovens. Some breads work better with a lot of > mixing > > > and others don't want too much. Some want to ferment for hours and > others > > > work best with just an hour or so. > > > > > > You see, since I'm not making bread commercially, I don't really need to > > > have a formula since I don't need today's batch to taste exactly like > last > > > month's batch. I just need to understand the basic ratios and then I > can > > > create to my heart's content. > > > > > > As you begin mixing the dough, experience will tell you immediately how > dry > > > or wet the dough will turn out. It's a simple matter to add a little > water > > > or a little flour to adjust the texture of the dough. If you're going > to > > > mix it for a long time a little more water will help counteract the heat > > > from the friction involved in mixing. The dough will still look right, > feel > > > right and bake right after the adjustments. > > > > > > So my suggestion is go out and create some great bread. Armed with a > few > > > simple ratios, you can make any amount of dough you like. Armed with a > > > little experience you can adjust your dough to your ingredients. Go > make > > > some bread. It's so easy you don't even need a recipe. Good cooking. > > > > > > Fred > > > Foodie Forums > > > http://www.foodieforums.com > > > > Hmnn ..... Instinctive baking eh? > > Well some institutional bakers do that but they are at loss to > > comprehend if something goes wrong.And many of them inspite of decades > > of experience still do not progress to the high level of technical > > understanding of their craft.They have honed their skill but not their > > overall knowledge. > > Besides its not as simple as reducing things to the simplest ratio and > > common sense. You have to find a (structured) relationship betweeen > > those quantities....and apply that principle in your daily baking > > chore. > > You may have known how much a scoop of flour weighs or how many liters > > is in a a pail of water....But its not enough. > > Trying to compare baking with cookery where the ever egoistic chef > > just dump anything at pan according to his whim ( to impress his > > traineee and staff?)is not that simple. > > Indeed cookery is an art that can be honed by experience but baking is > > both science and art and needs both dedicated practice and technical > > understanding of the methodology. > > The ingredient interactions in cookery is pretty simple if compared > > to baking... and yuo just judge the appropriateness of your cookery by > > experinced eye and sensory assessment of your foodstuff. > > > > In baking you have to go beyond that and see things not only from the > > macroscopic point of view but also in 'microscopic' perspective. > > In my observation (from experience) many of the best cooks are lousy > > bakers and conversely...It is just they have different thinking > > pattern. > > It is not just about formula but they understand also the mechanisms > > how thngs work. > > Two years ago I trained a really talented chef who want to improve his > > baking skills but his knack of doing things like what every chef does > > spoils his acquisition of proper baking skills. > > He hates measurements and do things by instinct and feel....he really > > applies ratio and common sense ;sometimes the bread or cake comes out > > good sometimes bad, there is no consistency.He never was able to > > understand nor could accept that ingredient interaction has a critical > > part in baking. > > AFter a few months he backed out....Yes He was able to bake better > > than before, but not to the same high level with his cookery skills. > > He lamented that you cannot have the best of both worlds (excellent > > chef and baker) and you have to specialize on one of them according > > to your aptitude as your deeply ingrained habits as part of your > > training in your formative years is difficult to change. > > So I would suggest that do not be carried away by overconfidence > > ....that simple idea might work at home as hobby as nobody there is > > keen enough to judge your culinary creation nor any superior to > > berate you if your baked goods is not as good as the previous days. > > Baking can be deceptive sometimes.... what you find as simple could be > > as illusory as a mirage... > > Just Keep your feet firmly on the ground ... > > Roy > > Thanks for the pail of cold water. My purpose was to encourage people who > are afraid of bread baking to try it. As strange as it may seem to you, I > bake bread this way most of the time and have for a long time. Intuitive > bread baking is certainly possible and, in fact, easy. Apparently you want > to keep it mysterious and I obviously posted this in the wrong place. > > Fred > Foodie Forums > http://www.foodieforums.com > > > I don't think any of you understood me. I'm not knocking formulas. I'm simply explaining how I developed most of mine and I'm encouraging others to do the same. I hate the concept of making baking mysterious. After all, what is baking? It is flour and water and heat in different proportions with different things added to it. The whole panoply of baked products vary sometimes only very subtely from one another in terms of ingredients or ratios or methods. You boil a dough to get that bagel crust. If you don't, you get a bialy with a softer crust. Completely different product, same ingredients. The difference is a few seconds in boiling water. I understand. Sorry to disagree but there is absolutely nothing wrong with experimentation in baking. Every forumula was developed from an experiment. All experimentation doesn't yield expected results. Some experimentation yields magic. No experimentation, for me at least, yields boredom. Sure, I can knock out Italian loaf after Italian loaf with all the consistency one could request. I have books full of commercial bread formulas. Most of them have to be adjusted anyway for ingredients, equipment and even ambient humidity. Heck my basic Italian formula has a 3 oz.. more water in the Winter than it does in the Summer. Who cares? I'd rather see what happens if I put this in, or shape it this way, or ferment it this long or lower an oven rack. At the moment I have access to a programmable oven. It's a kick to play around with steam and program in changes in temperature and humidity. I like to call it the dial-a-crust oven because that's what you can do with it among other things. It's also very eye-opening. It's always interesting. I rarely get bad bread. I've already learned what makes bad bread and it's reasonably easy to avoid those things. I've made some awful breads and some brilliant ones. Nothing wrong with that. Even a major league player never bats 1.000. In fact they rarely get a third of the way there. It's just flour, water and leavening, after all. The possibilies past that bit of simplicity are endless. Why not try a few and see what happens? It can only make a more accomplished baker out of you. OK, the soap box is yours. I'm tuning out. Fred Foodie Forums http://www.foodieforums.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in message news > > "Roy Basan" > wrote in message > om... > > "Fred" > wrote in message > >... > > > > > What one really needed was some ratios, experience and common sense. > > > > > > I got to thinking about it relative to bread making which many people > view > > > as mysterious and difficult. When you analyze it, bread making could be > the > > > simplest and most obvious thing to make without a recipe or formula. > Let's > > > look at it. > > > > > > Let's say that 55% hydration is about normal for a bread dough. That > means > > > that the water you use will weight a little more than half the flour you > > > use. We can always adjust things later but it's a logical place to > start. > > > If you want a 3 lb. dough, then a couple of pounds of flour and a pound > of > > > water plus a little should get the job done. You could cut that in half > for > > > a 1 1/2 lb. dough etc. Personally, I normally like to use about 1/2 oz. > of > > > fresh yeast for every lb. of flour. It's adjustable, of course, but the > > > ratio should work pretty well for most doughs. > > > > > > OK, so lets make a 3 lb. dough. We need 2lbs. of flour, a lb. and a > little > > > water and an ounce of frest yeast. Put these ingredients in a mixer and > > > you'll get a nice, workable dough that will bake up into a couple of > > > perfectly fine loaves of bread of a little over a lb. each. > > > > > > I like a little salt in my bread to help bring out the flavors. I > usually > > > put about 1/2 oz. per lb. of flour. Sometimes I'll put 1/2 oz. per lb. > of > > > sugar to add another taste dimension. These two ingredients added to > our > > > flour water and yeast, make the typical hard crusted Italian bread you > buy > > > in the bakery. > > > > > > Want French bread? Add a little oil. How about between 1/2 oz. and 1 > oz. > > > per lb. of flour? This adds some "wetness" to the dough so I'd suggest > > > cutting back about an oz. of water. You can always add more water as > the > > > dough mixes if you put in too little. Bingo, French bread with a softer > > > crust than the Italian bread. > > > > > > Rye? No problem. Use 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 rye flour. I also like > to > > > put in a little molasses. You guessed it, about an oz. per lb. of > flour. I > > > reduce the water again by about 1 oz. per lb. of flour. I really like > to > > > add the zest of a couple of lemons to my rye bread. It really sings. > See > > > how easy this is. > > > > > > Whole wheat? Same thing. 1/2 bread flour and 1/2 whole wheat flour. > > > Semolina bread? You're getting the idea. > > > > > > Want to add dried currants or maybe cinammon and raisins or a luscious > > > Italian bread with garlic and rosemary? Throw them in there. A sweet > bread > > > like cinnamon raisin bread usually wants more sugar so I add about 2 to > 3oz. > > > per lb. Why? I don't know. It's just a ratio that's worked well for > me in > > > the past. If what you throw in is wet like some old dough from > yesterday or > > > a sourdough starter, just take out a little water. If it's dry like > milk > > > solids or wheat germ, add a little water. > > > > > > I tend to hydrate a little more for pan breads than I do for hearth > breads. > > > I don't know why. Experience has taught me I like it that way. I might > go > > > up to 60% water by weight or maybe higher. Some breads behave a little > > > differently with different levels of hydration but I've found good > ratios > > > that work for me and my ovens. Some breads work better with a lot of > mixing > > > and others don't want too much. Some want to ferment for hours and > others > > > work best with just an hour or so. > > > > > > You see, since I'm not making bread commercially, I don't really need to > > > have a formula since I don't need today's batch to taste exactly like > last > > > month's batch. I just need to understand the basic ratios and then I > can > > > create to my heart's content. > > > > > > As you begin mixing the dough, experience will tell you immediately how > dry > > > or wet the dough will turn out. It's a simple matter to add a little > water > > > or a little flour to adjust the texture of the dough. If you're going > to > > > mix it for a long time a little more water will help counteract the heat > > > from the friction involved in mixing. The dough will still look right, > feel > > > right and bake right after the adjustments. > > > > > > So my suggestion is go out and create some great bread. Armed with a > few > > > simple ratios, you can make any amount of dough you like. Armed with a > > > little experience you can adjust your dough to your ingredients. Go > make > > > some bread. It's so easy you don't even need a recipe. Good cooking. > > > > > > Fred > > > Foodie Forums > > > http://www.foodieforums.com > > > > Hmnn ..... Instinctive baking eh? > > Well some institutional bakers do that but they are at loss to > > comprehend if something goes wrong.And many of them inspite of decades > > of experience still do not progress to the high level of technical > > understanding of their craft.They have honed their skill but not their > > overall knowledge. > > Besides its not as simple as reducing things to the simplest ratio and > > common sense. You have to find a (structured) relationship betweeen > > those quantities....and apply that principle in your daily baking > > chore. > > You may have known how much a scoop of flour weighs or how many liters > > is in a a pail of water....But its not enough. > > Trying to compare baking with cookery where the ever egoistic chef > > just dump anything at pan according to his whim ( to impress his > > traineee and staff?)is not that simple. > > Indeed cookery is an art that can be honed by experience but baking is > > both science and art and needs both dedicated practice and technical > > understanding of the methodology. > > The ingredient interactions in cookery is pretty simple if compared > > to baking... and yuo just judge the appropriateness of your cookery by > > experinced eye and sensory assessment of your foodstuff. > > > > In baking you have to go beyond that and see things not only from the > > macroscopic point of view but also in 'microscopic' perspective. > > In my observation (from experience) many of the best cooks are lousy > > bakers and conversely...It is just they have different thinking > > pattern. > > It is not just about formula but they understand also the mechanisms > > how thngs work. > > Two years ago I trained a really talented chef who want to improve his > > baking skills but his knack of doing things like what every chef does > > spoils his acquisition of proper baking skills. > > He hates measurements and do things by instinct and feel....he really > > applies ratio and common sense ;sometimes the bread or cake comes out > > good sometimes bad, there is no consistency.He never was able to > > understand nor could accept that ingredient interaction has a critical > > part in baking. > > AFter a few months he backed out....Yes He was able to bake better > > than before, but not to the same high level with his cookery skills. > > He lamented that you cannot have the best of both worlds (excellent > > chef and baker) and you have to specialize on one of them according > > to your aptitude as your deeply ingrained habits as part of your > > training in your formative years is difficult to change. > > So I would suggest that do not be carried away by overconfidence > > ....that simple idea might work at home as hobby as nobody there is > > keen enough to judge your culinary creation nor any superior to > > berate you if your baked goods is not as good as the previous days. > > Baking can be deceptive sometimes.... what you find as simple could be > > as illusory as a mirage... > > Just Keep your feet firmly on the ground ... > > Roy > > Thanks for the pail of cold water. My purpose was to encourage people who > are afraid of bread baking to try it. As strange as it may seem to you, I > bake bread this way most of the time and have for a long time. Intuitive > bread baking is certainly possible and, in fact, easy. Apparently you want > to keep it mysterious and I obviously posted this in the wrong place. > > Fred > Foodie Forums > http://www.foodieforums.com > > > I don't think any of you understood me. I'm not knocking formulas. I'm simply explaining how I developed most of mine and I'm encouraging others to do the same. I hate the concept of making baking mysterious. After all, what is baking? It is flour and water and heat in different proportions with different things added to it. The whole panoply of baked products vary sometimes only very subtely from one another in terms of ingredients or ratios or methods. You boil a dough to get that bagel crust. If you don't, you get a bialy with a softer crust. Completely different product, same ingredients. The difference is a few seconds in boiling water. I understand. Sorry to disagree but there is absolutely nothing wrong with experimentation in baking. Every forumula was developed from an experiment. All experimentation doesn't yield expected results. Some experimentation yields magic. No experimentation, for me at least, yields boredom. Sure, I can knock out Italian loaf after Italian loaf with all the consistency one could request. I have books full of commercial bread formulas. Most of them have to be adjusted anyway for ingredients, equipment and even ambient humidity. Heck my basic Italian formula has a 3 oz.. more water in the Winter than it does in the Summer. Who cares? I'd rather see what happens if I put this in, or shape it this way, or ferment it this long or lower an oven rack. At the moment I have access to a programmable oven. It's a kick to play around with steam and program in changes in temperature and humidity. I like to call it the dial-a-crust oven because that's what you can do with it among other things. It's also very eye-opening. It's always interesting. I rarely get bad bread. I've already learned what makes bad bread and it's reasonably easy to avoid those things. I've made some awful breads and some brilliant ones. Nothing wrong with that. Even a major league player never bats 1.000. In fact they rarely get a third of the way there. It's just flour, water and leavening, after all. The possibilies past that bit of simplicity are endless. Why not try a few and see what happens? It can only make a more accomplished baker out of you. OK, the soap box is yours. I'm tuning out. Fred Foodie Forums http://www.foodieforums.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in news:O3s0d.170$pf.28
@fe25.usenetserver.com: > I hate the concept of making baking mysterious. Why do you think Baking is mysterious? I don't understand, I don't see any mystery. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in message >...
> > I don't think any of you understood me. I'm not knocking formulas. I'm > simply explaining how I developed most of mine and I'm encouraging others to > do the same. I hate the concept of making baking mysterious. I understand your purpose , but I just was to throw caution in such things..... > After all, what is baking? It is flour and water and heat in different > proportions with different things added to it. The whole panoply of baked > products vary sometimes only very subtely from one another in terms of > ingredients or ratios or methods. You boil a dough to get that bagel crust. > If you don't, you get a bialy with a softer crust. Completely different > product, same ingredients. The difference is a few seconds in boiling > water. I understand. Almost any baker I met say the same thing.... What is the big deal about bread it just four ingredients flour, yeast, salt and water I am sorry to disagree with those peopel and you in this point but I never see those thing as simple as they are. When I was just begun my training I also tend to dismiss that baking is just pretty simple, but the more I was involved in it the more I realize that I was fooled by its obvious simplicity, and found out that there was more than just the melange of those ingredients. A lot of bakers can make the same bread from those four ingredients but the resulting bread has uniqueness of chanacter that can an be either on excellent and inferior product. and can reflect the skill and ability of the person who made it. The master craftsman never see those things as simple as they are nor as lowly as they are that they just add ohter things to make other items out of it or vary the taste by modifying the ratio and ingredients. Therefore a master breadmaker will stick with a recipe that will bring the best bread from those ingredients but a dabbler does not see that but want to create many things from a single recipe without concern that the harmony of the composition is destroyed in that process. The latter does not show respect to the ingredient interactions where the master shows concern at it knowing that any variations that can affect quality will literally destroy the soul of his creation. The soul is the term as most skilled breadmaker are at a loss to understand the chemistry of ingredient interactions and the significance of a formula that was developed after years of dedicated practice. There is nothing wrong with flexing a recipe by adding this , removing that, replacing this ,increasing that etc. but would those values that was in your mind do really reflect the essence of the particular item you really want to make? An italian bakers may say that a french bread is just an italian bread made in france; and a french bakers may say conversely.But they fact is they are unique product by itself. Then if you say that by adding some thing you can convert that to a bagel or a sweet dough then that bread dough lacks a personality of its own and you can say that my bagel is the ******* son of the french bread made by using high gluten flour and adding some sugar and malt in it and dipping it in boiling water but still baked in the same steamy oven. Yes there is nothing wrong with that but its doubtul that with that perspective in mind you are not trying to make the best of each bread according to the uniqueness of its recipe but becaue of the idea that they can be made out of each other by just varying the ratio. and changing the ingredients. Hmmn I think I remember somethiing similar, more than two decades ago, a certain baker made a big batch of partially mixed bread dough, using one recipe, but he divided the undermixed dough into different portion and remixed it with other ingredients to make other varieties of bread following the same principle as you did but in a different manner. the resulting bread looks satisfactory and taste properly as well; but a nother baker of the neighboring bakery made bread unique from each other by mixing a dough according to each recipe and parameters of the product. If you compare the product of the two bakeries they have similar names and appearance, but comparing the taste of each iitem, it is noticeable that the product made uniquely by iltself and not derived /modified from one another is more delicious and customers like more the taste of product of the shop where the bakers took pains to make its dough unique from each other and feel that the bread from the other bakery seems to taste the same and uninteresting. Therefore this implies that if due care is done in pre paring the dough the results can manifest in better consumer acceptance. > Sorry to disagree but there is absolutely nothing wrong with experimentation > in baking. Every forumula was developed from an experiment. All > experimentation doesn't yield expected results. Some experimentation yields > magic. No experimentation, for me at least, yields boredom. Sure, I can > knock out Italian loaf after Italian loaf with all the consistency one could > request. I have books full of commercial bread formulas. Most of them have > to be adjusted anyway for ingredients, equipment and even ambient humidity. > Heck my basic Italian formula has a 3 oz.. more water in the Winter than it > does in the Summer. Who cares? I'd rather see what happens if I put this > in, or shape it this way, or ferment it this long or lower an oven rack. Fred I also loved experimentation but t prefer to do the planned one, ( not trial and error)where I anticipate in the expected product in my mind, considering the principle of ingredient interaction ie. If I add A to B what will happen when it interacts with C that is already interacting with D. Woudl the four ingredients can innteract harmoniously so that I can get a product I expect. Taking into conideration the properties of ABCD and its peculiarities and the mode of their interactions I can predict what is the hypothetical outcome of my experiment roughly. Supposing I add another variable E and predict accoriding to the chracteristics of this fifth element E( and how it interacts with the matrix of ABCD I ask myself will it improve the overall quality of the ABCD ? Upon thinking later oh the reaction kinetics would be more complicated and the increase of entropy in the dough system might make the product approach equilibrium( harmony) with difficulty due to more disturbance in the system. I have made a complicated blend that may exhibit different phase pattern. And may have to draw a possible phase diagram of the system if possible.. therefore with things that I can assume I had predicted the outcome then I can go with the actual experiment. Make a statistical and probabilistic study of the results of the preliminary experiment. Do more replicates and analyse the result statisctically. .Then use that result for the finalixation of the application experiments.. in many cases the results of previous related experiments are used as models for the future experiments and help assist in the prediction or results and graphically drawing the curve that will help you visualize the outcome Finally I had a product that is both physico-chemcially and mathematically derived and later experimentally proven that it works. if the recipe is made as simple as possible you had to delimit the permutation(such as altering the recipe and modifying it with other ingredients ; that will make the mathematical analyiis of the resulting system extremely diffficult. So if you see the things in a deeper manner you have no time to complicate the simple system of basic formula by contnously changing it because you think that they are the same when in fact they are not. It is easier said than done that the morphing a recipe into another one will led to an improvement of the product which actually does not. > At the moment I have access to a programmable oven. It's a kick to play > around with steam and program in changes in temperature and humidity. I > like to call it the dial-a-crust oven because that's what you can do with it > among other things. It's also very eye-opening. It's always interesting. > I rarely get bad bread. I've already learned what makes bad bread and it's > reasonably easy to avoid those things. > > I've made some awful breads and some brilliant ones. Nothing wrong with > that. Even a major league player never bats 1.000. In fact they rarely get > a third of the way there. It's just flour, water and leavening, after all. > The possibilies past that bit of simplicity are endless. Why not try a few > and see what happens? Yes the possibliitles and permutation are endless, but that is good if you are brainstoming for new ideas. In fact occasionally I tinker with such things when time permits; >It can only make a more accomplished baker out of > you. I had done so many experiments Fred, what ever the outcome the real accomplishment is you learn something out of it. be it success or failure. I still consider them all ACCOMPLISHMENTs .. >OK, the soap box is yours. I'm tuning out. Fred I think you are not serious in your idea about the metamorphosizing the recipes if you avoid it being discussed. I stilll find you idea interesting and in deed would inspire other people to do the same, I appreciate your unique iinput....do not be descouraged you had just done a great jobl yuo lit a bulb in the head of many baking hobbyist here! Please Try to maintain the light..... Roy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Fred" > wrote in message >...
> > I don't think any of you understood me. I'm not knocking formulas. I'm > simply explaining how I developed most of mine and I'm encouraging others to > do the same. I hate the concept of making baking mysterious. I understand your purpose , but I just was to throw caution in such things..... > After all, what is baking? It is flour and water and heat in different > proportions with different things added to it. The whole panoply of baked > products vary sometimes only very subtely from one another in terms of > ingredients or ratios or methods. You boil a dough to get that bagel crust. > If you don't, you get a bialy with a softer crust. Completely different > product, same ingredients. The difference is a few seconds in boiling > water. I understand. Almost any baker I met say the same thing.... What is the big deal about bread it just four ingredients flour, yeast, salt and water I am sorry to disagree with those peopel and you in this point but I never see those thing as simple as they are. When I was just begun my training I also tend to dismiss that baking is just pretty simple, but the more I was involved in it the more I realize that I was fooled by its obvious simplicity, and found out that there was more than just the melange of those ingredients. A lot of bakers can make the same bread from those four ingredients but the resulting bread has uniqueness of chanacter that can an be either on excellent and inferior product. and can reflect the skill and ability of the person who made it. The master craftsman never see those things as simple as they are nor as lowly as they are that they just add ohter things to make other items out of it or vary the taste by modifying the ratio and ingredients. Therefore a master breadmaker will stick with a recipe that will bring the best bread from those ingredients but a dabbler does not see that but want to create many things from a single recipe without concern that the harmony of the composition is destroyed in that process. The latter does not show respect to the ingredient interactions where the master shows concern at it knowing that any variations that can affect quality will literally destroy the soul of his creation. The soul is the term as most skilled breadmaker are at a loss to understand the chemistry of ingredient interactions and the significance of a formula that was developed after years of dedicated practice. There is nothing wrong with flexing a recipe by adding this , removing that, replacing this ,increasing that etc. but would those values that was in your mind do really reflect the essence of the particular item you really want to make? An italian bakers may say that a french bread is just an italian bread made in france; and a french bakers may say conversely.But they fact is they are unique product by itself. Then if you say that by adding some thing you can convert that to a bagel or a sweet dough then that bread dough lacks a personality of its own and you can say that my bagel is the ******* son of the french bread made by using high gluten flour and adding some sugar and malt in it and dipping it in boiling water but still baked in the same steamy oven. Yes there is nothing wrong with that but its doubtul that with that perspective in mind you are not trying to make the best of each bread according to the uniqueness of its recipe but becaue of the idea that they can be made out of each other by just varying the ratio. and changing the ingredients. Hmmn I think I remember somethiing similar, more than two decades ago, a certain baker made a big batch of partially mixed bread dough, using one recipe, but he divided the undermixed dough into different portion and remixed it with other ingredients to make other varieties of bread following the same principle as you did but in a different manner. the resulting bread looks satisfactory and taste properly as well; but a nother baker of the neighboring bakery made bread unique from each other by mixing a dough according to each recipe and parameters of the product. If you compare the product of the two bakeries they have similar names and appearance, but comparing the taste of each iitem, it is noticeable that the product made uniquely by iltself and not derived /modified from one another is more delicious and customers like more the taste of product of the shop where the bakers took pains to make its dough unique from each other and feel that the bread from the other bakery seems to taste the same and uninteresting. Therefore this implies that if due care is done in pre paring the dough the results can manifest in better consumer acceptance. > Sorry to disagree but there is absolutely nothing wrong with experimentation > in baking. Every forumula was developed from an experiment. All > experimentation doesn't yield expected results. Some experimentation yields > magic. No experimentation, for me at least, yields boredom. Sure, I can > knock out Italian loaf after Italian loaf with all the consistency one could > request. I have books full of commercial bread formulas. Most of them have > to be adjusted anyway for ingredients, equipment and even ambient humidity. > Heck my basic Italian formula has a 3 oz.. more water in the Winter than it > does in the Summer. Who cares? I'd rather see what happens if I put this > in, or shape it this way, or ferment it this long or lower an oven rack. Fred I also loved experimentation but t prefer to do the planned one, ( not trial and error)where I anticipate in the expected product in my mind, considering the principle of ingredient interaction ie. If I add A to B what will happen when it interacts with C that is already interacting with D. Woudl the four ingredients can innteract harmoniously so that I can get a product I expect. Taking into conideration the properties of ABCD and its peculiarities and the mode of their interactions I can predict what is the hypothetical outcome of my experiment roughly. Supposing I add another variable E and predict accoriding to the chracteristics of this fifth element E( and how it interacts with the matrix of ABCD I ask myself will it improve the overall quality of the ABCD ? Upon thinking later oh the reaction kinetics would be more complicated and the increase of entropy in the dough system might make the product approach equilibrium( harmony) with difficulty due to more disturbance in the system. I have made a complicated blend that may exhibit different phase pattern. And may have to draw a possible phase diagram of the system if possible.. therefore with things that I can assume I had predicted the outcome then I can go with the actual experiment. Make a statistical and probabilistic study of the results of the preliminary experiment. Do more replicates and analyse the result statisctically. .Then use that result for the finalixation of the application experiments.. in many cases the results of previous related experiments are used as models for the future experiments and help assist in the prediction or results and graphically drawing the curve that will help you visualize the outcome Finally I had a product that is both physico-chemcially and mathematically derived and later experimentally proven that it works. if the recipe is made as simple as possible you had to delimit the permutation(such as altering the recipe and modifying it with other ingredients ; that will make the mathematical analyiis of the resulting system extremely diffficult. So if you see the things in a deeper manner you have no time to complicate the simple system of basic formula by contnously changing it because you think that they are the same when in fact they are not. It is easier said than done that the morphing a recipe into another one will led to an improvement of the product which actually does not. > At the moment I have access to a programmable oven. It's a kick to play > around with steam and program in changes in temperature and humidity. I > like to call it the dial-a-crust oven because that's what you can do with it > among other things. It's also very eye-opening. It's always interesting. > I rarely get bad bread. I've already learned what makes bad bread and it's > reasonably easy to avoid those things. > > I've made some awful breads and some brilliant ones. Nothing wrong with > that. Even a major league player never bats 1.000. In fact they rarely get > a third of the way there. It's just flour, water and leavening, after all. > The possibilies past that bit of simplicity are endless. Why not try a few > and see what happens? Yes the possibliitles and permutation are endless, but that is good if you are brainstoming for new ideas. In fact occasionally I tinker with such things when time permits; >It can only make a more accomplished baker out of > you. I had done so many experiments Fred, what ever the outcome the real accomplishment is you learn something out of it. be it success or failure. I still consider them all ACCOMPLISHMENTs .. >OK, the soap box is yours. I'm tuning out. Fred I think you are not serious in your idea about the metamorphosizing the recipes if you avoid it being discussed. I stilll find you idea interesting and in deed would inspire other people to do the same, I appreciate your unique iinput....do not be descouraged you had just done a great jobl yuo lit a bulb in the head of many baking hobbyist here! Please Try to maintain the light..... Roy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Roy Basan" > wrote in message om... > "Fred" > wrote in message >... > > > > > I don't think any of you understood me. I'm not knocking formulas. I'm > > simply explaining how I developed most of mine and I'm encouraging others to > > do the same. I hate the concept of making baking mysterious. > I understand your purpose , but I just was to throw caution in such > things..... > > After all, what is baking? It is flour and water and heat in different > > proportions with different things added to it. The whole panoply of baked > > products vary sometimes only very subtely from one another in terms of > > ingredients or ratios or methods. You boil a dough to get that bagel crust. > > If you don't, you get a bialy with a softer crust. Completely different > > product, same ingredients. The difference is a few seconds in boiling > > water. I understand. > Almost any baker I met say the same thing.... > What is the big deal about bread it just four ingredients flour, > yeast, salt and water > I am sorry to disagree with those peopel and you in this point but I > never see those thing as simple as they are. > When I was just begun my training I also tend to dismiss that baking > is just pretty simple, but the more I was involved in it the more I > realize that I was fooled by its obvious simplicity, and found out > that there was more than just the melange of those ingredients. A lot > of bakers can make the same bread from those four ingredients but the > resulting bread has uniqueness of chanacter that can an be either on > excellent and inferior product. and can reflect the skill and ability > of the person who made it. > The master craftsman never see those things as simple as they are nor > as lowly as they are that they just add ohter things to make other > items out of it or vary the taste by modifying the ratio and > ingredients. > Therefore a master breadmaker will stick with a recipe that will bring > the best bread from those ingredients but a dabbler does not see > that but want to create many things from a single recipe without > concern that the harmony of the composition is destroyed in that > process. The latter does not show respect to the ingredient > interactions where the master shows concern at it knowing that any > variations that can affect quality will literally destroy the soul of > his creation. The soul is the term as most skilled breadmaker are at > a loss to understand the chemistry of ingredient interactions and the > significance of a formula that was developed after years of dedicated > practice. > There is nothing wrong with flexing a recipe by adding this , removing > that, replacing this ,increasing that etc. but would those values that > was in your mind do really reflect the essence of the particular item > you really want to make? > An italian bakers may say that a french bread is just an italian > bread made in france; and a french bakers may say conversely.But they > fact is they are unique product by itself. Then if you say that by > adding some thing you can > convert that to a bagel or a sweet dough then that bread dough lacks > a personality of its own and you can say that my bagel is the ******* > son of the french bread made by using high gluten flour and adding > some sugar and malt in it and dipping it in boiling water but still > baked in the same steamy oven. Yes there is nothing wrong with that > but its doubtul that with that perspective in mind you are not trying > to make the best of each bread according to the uniqueness of its > recipe but becaue of the idea that they can be made out of each > other by just varying the ratio. and changing the ingredients. > Hmmn I think I remember somethiing similar, more than two decades ago, > a certain baker made a big batch of partially mixed bread dough, > using one recipe, but he divided the undermixed dough into different > portion and remixed it with other ingredients to make other varieties > of bread following the same principle as you did but in a different > manner. > the resulting bread looks satisfactory and taste properly as well; but > a nother baker of the neighboring bakery made bread unique from each > other by mixing a dough according to each recipe and parameters of the > product. > If you compare the product of the two bakeries they have similar names > and appearance, but comparing the taste of each iitem, it is > noticeable that the product made uniquely by iltself and not derived > /modified from one another is more delicious and customers like more > the taste of product of the shop where the bakers took pains to make > its dough unique from each other and feel that the bread from the > other bakery seems to taste the same and uninteresting. > Therefore this implies that if due care is done in pre paring the > dough the > results can manifest in better consumer acceptance. > > Sorry to disagree but there is absolutely nothing wrong with experimentation > > in baking. Every forumula was developed from an experiment. All > > experimentation doesn't yield expected results. Some experimentation yields > > magic. No experimentation, for me at least, yields boredom. Sure, I can > > knock out Italian loaf after Italian loaf with all the consistency one could > > request. I have books full of commercial bread formulas. Most of them have > > to be adjusted anyway for ingredients, equipment and even ambient humidity. > > Heck my basic Italian formula has a 3 oz.. more water in the Winter than it > > does in the Summer. Who cares? I'd rather see what happens if I put this > > in, or shape it this way, or ferment it this long or lower an oven rack. > Fred I also loved experimentation but t prefer to do the planned one, > ( not trial and error)where I anticipate in the expected product in my > mind, considering the principle of ingredient interaction ie. If I add > A to B what will happen when it interacts with C that is already > interacting with D. Woudl the four ingredients can innteract > harmoniously so that I can get a product I expect. Taking into > conideration the properties of ABCD and its peculiarities and the > mode of their interactions I can predict what is the hypothetical > outcome of my experiment roughly. > Supposing I add another variable E and predict accoriding to the > chracteristics of this fifth element E( and how it interacts with the > matrix of ABCD I ask myself will it improve the overall quality of > the ABCD ? Upon thinking later oh the reaction kinetics would be more > complicated and the increase of entropy in the dough system might make > the product approach equilibrium( harmony) with difficulty due to > more disturbance in the system. I have made a complicated blend that > may exhibit different phase pattern. And may have to draw a possible > phase diagram of the system if possible.. > therefore with things that I can assume I had predicted the outcome > then I can go with the actual experiment. Make a statistical and > probabilistic study of the results of the preliminary experiment. Do > more replicates and analyse the result statisctically. .Then use that > result for the finalixation of the application experiments.. > in many cases the results of previous related experiments are used as > models for the future experiments and help assist in the prediction or > results and graphically drawing the curve that will help you visualize > the outcome > Finally I had a product that is both physico-chemcially and > mathematically derived and later experimentally proven that it works. > if the recipe is made as simple as possible you had to delimit the > permutation(such as altering the recipe and modifying it with other > ingredients ; that will make the mathematical analyiis of the > resulting system extremely diffficult. > So if you see the things in a deeper manner you have no time to > complicate the simple system of basic formula by contnously changing > it because you think that they are the same when in fact they are > not. > It is easier said than done that the morphing a recipe into another > one will led to an improvement of the product which actually does > not. > > At the moment I have access to a programmable oven. It's a kick to play > > around with steam and program in changes in temperature and humidity. I > > like to call it the dial-a-crust oven because that's what you can do with it > > among other things. It's also very eye-opening. It's always interesting. > > I rarely get bad bread. I've already learned what makes bad bread and it's > > reasonably easy to avoid those things. > > > > I've made some awful breads and some brilliant ones. Nothing wrong with > > that. Even a major league player never bats 1.000. In fact they rarely get > > a third of the way there. It's just flour, water and leavening, after all. > > The possibilies past that bit of simplicity are endless. Why not try a few > > and see what happens? > Yes the possibliitles and permutation are endless, but that is good > if you are brainstoming for new ideas. > In fact occasionally I tinker with such things when time permits; > >It can only make a more accomplished baker out of > > you. > I had done so many experiments Fred, what ever the outcome the real > accomplishment is you learn something out of it. be it success or > failure. I still consider them all ACCOMPLISHMENTs > . > >OK, the soap box is yours. I'm tuning out. > > Fred I think you are not serious in your idea about the > metamorphosizing the recipes if you avoid it being discussed. I stilll > find you idea interesting > and in deed would inspire other people to do the same, > I appreciate your unique iinput....do not be descouraged you had just > done a great jobl yuo lit a bulb in the head of many baking hobbyist > here! > Please Try to maintain the light..... > Roy OK, let's take an example from today's bread making. I've been working on a formula for Tunisian bread. I started with a formula from a french bread making text. The ingredients are flour, semolina, oil, salt, water and yeast. When I made the French formula the bread was flat and overhydrated. No surprise. I'm using different flour and different yeast than the French bakers who developed the formula. So I adjusted it for my high gluten flour and my yeast. The result was a bread of good texture but it developed a gas ball that separated the top crust from the crumb. I've spent the past two weeks trying to get rid of that gas ball. I've adjusted the ratio of semolina to bread flour, I've adjusted hydration from a near batter to a dough that causes my mixer to labor, I've adjusted the fermentation and proofing. I've adjusted baking temps. Today's bread had two adjustments - one was a longer mixing time and the other was an increase of flour over semolina in the ratio. The gas ball was bigger than ever. Tomorrow I'll increase the semolina and reduce the fermentation time and slash it to provide a place for gas to escape. The original formula is quite clear that the bread shouldn't be slashed. In other words, I started with an established formula that needs to be made in France with French ingredients to work right. Adapting it to the U.S. has been very difficult. You can't blindly follow a formula until it has been tested in your kitchen with your ingredients. Since I don't have a formula for it designed for an American kitchen I have to redesign it myself. Experimentation is absolutely necessary. I don't see any other way. The alternative is to limit oneself only to formulas that have been tested locally. Fred Foodie Forums http://www.foodieforums.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Roy Basan" > wrote in message om... > "Fred" > wrote in message >... > > > > > I don't think any of you understood me. I'm not knocking formulas. I'm > > simply explaining how I developed most of mine and I'm encouraging others to > > do the same. I hate the concept of making baking mysterious. > I understand your purpose , but I just was to throw caution in such > things..... > > After all, what is baking? It is flour and water and heat in different > > proportions with different things added to it. The whole panoply of baked > > products vary sometimes only very subtely from one another in terms of > > ingredients or ratios or methods. You boil a dough to get that bagel crust. > > If you don't, you get a bialy with a softer crust. Completely different > > product, same ingredients. The difference is a few seconds in boiling > > water. I understand. > Almost any baker I met say the same thing.... > What is the big deal about bread it just four ingredients flour, > yeast, salt and water > I am sorry to disagree with those peopel and you in this point but I > never see those thing as simple as they are. > When I was just begun my training I also tend to dismiss that baking > is just pretty simple, but the more I was involved in it the more I > realize that I was fooled by its obvious simplicity, and found out > that there was more than just the melange of those ingredients. A lot > of bakers can make the same bread from those four ingredients but the > resulting bread has uniqueness of chanacter that can an be either on > excellent and inferior product. and can reflect the skill and ability > of the person who made it. > The master craftsman never see those things as simple as they are nor > as lowly as they are that they just add ohter things to make other > items out of it or vary the taste by modifying the ratio and > ingredients. > Therefore a master breadmaker will stick with a recipe that will bring > the best bread from those ingredients but a dabbler does not see > that but want to create many things from a single recipe without > concern that the harmony of the composition is destroyed in that > process. The latter does not show respect to the ingredient > interactions where the master shows concern at it knowing that any > variations that can affect quality will literally destroy the soul of > his creation. The soul is the term as most skilled breadmaker are at > a loss to understand the chemistry of ingredient interactions and the > significance of a formula that was developed after years of dedicated > practice. > There is nothing wrong with flexing a recipe by adding this , removing > that, replacing this ,increasing that etc. but would those values that > was in your mind do really reflect the essence of the particular item > you really want to make? > An italian bakers may say that a french bread is just an italian > bread made in france; and a french bakers may say conversely.But they > fact is they are unique product by itself. Then if you say that by > adding some thing you can > convert that to a bagel or a sweet dough then that bread dough lacks > a personality of its own and you can say that my bagel is the ******* > son of the french bread made by using high gluten flour and adding > some sugar and malt in it and dipping it in boiling water but still > baked in the same steamy oven. Yes there is nothing wrong with that > but its doubtul that with that perspective in mind you are not trying > to make the best of each bread according to the uniqueness of its > recipe but becaue of the idea that they can be made out of each > other by just varying the ratio. and changing the ingredients. > Hmmn I think I remember somethiing similar, more than two decades ago, > a certain baker made a big batch of partially mixed bread dough, > using one recipe, but he divided the undermixed dough into different > portion and remixed it with other ingredients to make other varieties > of bread following the same principle as you did but in a different > manner. > the resulting bread looks satisfactory and taste properly as well; but > a nother baker of the neighboring bakery made bread unique from each > other by mixing a dough according to each recipe and parameters of the > product. > If you compare the product of the two bakeries they have similar names > and appearance, but comparing the taste of each iitem, it is > noticeable that the product made uniquely by iltself and not derived > /modified from one another is more delicious and customers like more > the taste of product of the shop where the bakers took pains to make > its dough unique from each other and feel that the bread from the > other bakery seems to taste the same and uninteresting. > Therefore this implies that if due care is done in pre paring the > dough the > results can manifest in better consumer acceptance. > > Sorry to disagree but there is absolutely nothing wrong with experimentation > > in baking. Every forumula was developed from an experiment. All > > experimentation doesn't yield expected results. Some experimentation yields > > magic. No experimentation, for me at least, yields boredom. Sure, I can > > knock out Italian loaf after Italian loaf with all the consistency one could > > request. I have books full of commercial bread formulas. Most of them have > > to be adjusted anyway for ingredients, equipment and even ambient humidity. > > Heck my basic Italian formula has a 3 oz.. more water in the Winter than it > > does in the Summer. Who cares? I'd rather see what happens if I put this > > in, or shape it this way, or ferment it this long or lower an oven rack. > Fred I also loved experimentation but t prefer to do the planned one, > ( not trial and error)where I anticipate in the expected product in my > mind, considering the principle of ingredient interaction ie. If I add > A to B what will happen when it interacts with C that is already > interacting with D. Woudl the four ingredients can innteract > harmoniously so that I can get a product I expect. Taking into > conideration the properties of ABCD and its peculiarities and the > mode of their interactions I can predict what is the hypothetical > outcome of my experiment roughly. > Supposing I add another variable E and predict accoriding to the > chracteristics of this fifth element E( and how it interacts with the > matrix of ABCD I ask myself will it improve the overall quality of > the ABCD ? Upon thinking later oh the reaction kinetics would be more > complicated and the increase of entropy in the dough system might make > the product approach equilibrium( harmony) with difficulty due to > more disturbance in the system. I have made a complicated blend that > may exhibit different phase pattern. And may have to draw a possible > phase diagram of the system if possible.. > therefore with things that I can assume I had predicted the outcome > then I can go with the actual experiment. Make a statistical and > probabilistic study of the results of the preliminary experiment. Do > more replicates and analyse the result statisctically. .Then use that > result for the finalixation of the application experiments.. > in many cases the results of previous related experiments are used as > models for the future experiments and help assist in the prediction or > results and graphically drawing the curve that will help you visualize > the outcome > Finally I had a product that is both physico-chemcially and > mathematically derived and later experimentally proven that it works. > if the recipe is made as simple as possible you had to delimit the > permutation(such as altering the recipe and modifying it with other > ingredients ; that will make the mathematical analyiis of the > resulting system extremely diffficult. > So if you see the things in a deeper manner you have no time to > complicate the simple system of basic formula by contnously changing > it because you think that they are the same when in fact they are > not. > It is easier said than done that the morphing a recipe into another > one will led to an improvement of the product which actually does > not. > > At the moment I have access to a programmable oven. It's a kick to play > > around with steam and program in changes in temperature and humidity. I > > like to call it the dial-a-crust oven because that's what you can do with it > > among other things. It's also very eye-opening. It's always interesting. > > I rarely get bad bread. I've already learned what makes bad bread and it's > > reasonably easy to avoid those things. > > > > I've made some awful breads and some brilliant ones. Nothing wrong with > > that. Even a major league player never bats 1.000. In fact they rarely get > > a third of the way there. It's just flour, water and leavening, after all. > > The possibilies past that bit of simplicity are endless. Why not try a few > > and see what happens? > Yes the possibliitles and permutation are endless, but that is good > if you are brainstoming for new ideas. > In fact occasionally I tinker with such things when time permits; > >It can only make a more accomplished baker out of > > you. > I had done so many experiments Fred, what ever the outcome the real > accomplishment is you learn something out of it. be it success or > failure. I still consider them all ACCOMPLISHMENTs > . > >OK, the soap box is yours. I'm tuning out. > > Fred I think you are not serious in your idea about the > metamorphosizing the recipes if you avoid it being discussed. I stilll > find you idea interesting > and in deed would inspire other people to do the same, > I appreciate your unique iinput....do not be descouraged you had just > done a great jobl yuo lit a bulb in the head of many baking hobbyist > here! > Please Try to maintain the light..... > Roy OK, let's take an example from today's bread making. I've been working on a formula for Tunisian bread. I started with a formula from a french bread making text. The ingredients are flour, semolina, oil, salt, water and yeast. When I made the French formula the bread was flat and overhydrated. No surprise. I'm using different flour and different yeast than the French bakers who developed the formula. So I adjusted it for my high gluten flour and my yeast. The result was a bread of good texture but it developed a gas ball that separated the top crust from the crumb. I've spent the past two weeks trying to get rid of that gas ball. I've adjusted the ratio of semolina to bread flour, I've adjusted hydration from a near batter to a dough that causes my mixer to labor, I've adjusted the fermentation and proofing. I've adjusted baking temps. Today's bread had two adjustments - one was a longer mixing time and the other was an increase of flour over semolina in the ratio. The gas ball was bigger than ever. Tomorrow I'll increase the semolina and reduce the fermentation time and slash it to provide a place for gas to escape. The original formula is quite clear that the bread shouldn't be slashed. In other words, I started with an established formula that needs to be made in France with French ingredients to work right. Adapting it to the U.S. has been very difficult. You can't blindly follow a formula until it has been tested in your kitchen with your ingredients. Since I don't have a formula for it designed for an American kitchen I have to redesign it myself. Experimentation is absolutely necessary. I don't see any other way. The alternative is to limit oneself only to formulas that have been tested locally. Fred Foodie Forums http://www.foodieforums.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"FMW" > wrote in message >...
> > OK, let's take an example from today's bread making. I've been working on a > formula for Tunisian bread. I started with a formula from a french bread > making text. The ingredients are flour, semolina, oil, salt, water and > yeast. When I made the French formula the bread was flat and overhydrated. > No surprise. I'm using different flour and different yeast than the French > bakers who developed the formula. So I adjusted it for my high gluten flour > and my yeast. The result was a bread of good texture but it developed a gas > ball that separated the top crust from the crumb. I've spent the past two > weeks trying to get rid of that gas ball. I've adjusted the ratio of > semolina to bread flour, I've adjusted hydration from a near batter to a > dough that causes my mixer to labor, I've adjusted the fermentation and > proofing. I've adjusted baking temps. Today's bread had two adjustments - > one was a longer mixing time and the other was an increase of flour over > semolina in the ratio. The gas ball was bigger than ever. Tomorrow I'll > increase the semolina and reduce the fermentation time and slash it to > provide a place for gas to escape. The original formula is quite clear that > the bread shouldn't be slashed. In other words, I started with an > established formula that needs to be made in France with French ingredients > to work right. Adapting it to the U.S. has been very difficult. You can't > blindly follow a formula until it has been tested in your kitchen with your > ingredients. Since I don't have a formula for it designed for an American > kitchen I have to redesign it myself. Experimentation is absolutely > necessary. I don't see any other way. The alternative is to limit oneself > only to formulas that have been tested locally. > > Fred > Foodie Forums > http://www.foodieforums.com I agree with that point that every formula if adapted to a different location should be modifed in order to fit the existing ingredients conditions ,No big deal as you are not dealing with technically exacting formula as used in industrial bakeries. And any sensible baker would do the same thing as you do, extensively test the recipe to fit the existing condtions. Going to your problem.... I think it has nothing to do with yeast, as that ingredient is fairly uniform, I am aware that most yeast in the north african region are imported from europe and turkey. Others are using their locally made compressed yeast. If that tunisian bread was made with a weaker flour then the use of high gluten will provide stronger gluten that is different from the wheats being used in tunisia...It is an overkill, may even promote defect due to the different naure of the gluten quality that will result in a slightly differnt ingredient interaction for thta particular recipe., besides a stronger flour tends to make a bigger gas bubbles that is not an asset in most arabic breads. How about using the medium gluten wheats but reduce your hydration. I am familiar with some arabic wheat milled and grown in the desert condtions where the protein level is lower and the milling quality is not the same as in the United states. Most african flour had higher ash content but medium protein..It can have the similar protein content of the T-55 french flour but the gluten quality is a g bit tighter.due to the dry condtions of wheat growing in the desert. I am also aware that in algerria an tunisia they mix the local flour with french flour ; Your choice of flour is too strong for such bread, and you are not processing the way how this arabic bakers do to their dough; and as far as I know tunisian bakers use the fork type of mixers that is known for its gentler development of the dough than the standard planetary and spiral mixer. Hence knowing that they mix the dough longer but not continously but intermittently. I had also remembered when I was in the middle east in particular saudi arabia, I met a tunisian expatriate baker who followed the french system of baking. What I noticed in their baking habit is the habitual use of autolysis. The mix the dough partly and then allow it to rest, then remix again and the cycle is repeated many times depending upon the strength of the flour. before its finally allowed longer fermentation. In that process the gluten is allowed to be at the same time developed and relaxed preventing unsightly gas formation to develop.in the resulting dough. hence they are using the mutli step mixing and resting to develope and mature the dough properly.. They are also known to use old dough that they add to their new batch. IIRC The guy was doing it to enable the bread to be even grained,.. He was always watchful about the hydration that he either reduce the water or add more flour to attain the consistency that he feels allright. That tuniisan baker just do things by feel, no problem with that, he has mastered his bread making., And he never follow the cookbook hydration, he knows very well that flour quality are variable Ii am not sure if its related to your problem. Roy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"FMW" > wrote in message >...
> > OK, let's take an example from today's bread making. I've been working on a > formula for Tunisian bread. I started with a formula from a french bread > making text. The ingredients are flour, semolina, oil, salt, water and > yeast. When I made the French formula the bread was flat and overhydrated. > No surprise. I'm using different flour and different yeast than the French > bakers who developed the formula. So I adjusted it for my high gluten flour > and my yeast. The result was a bread of good texture but it developed a gas > ball that separated the top crust from the crumb. I've spent the past two > weeks trying to get rid of that gas ball. I've adjusted the ratio of > semolina to bread flour, I've adjusted hydration from a near batter to a > dough that causes my mixer to labor, I've adjusted the fermentation and > proofing. I've adjusted baking temps. Today's bread had two adjustments - > one was a longer mixing time and the other was an increase of flour over > semolina in the ratio. The gas ball was bigger than ever. Tomorrow I'll > increase the semolina and reduce the fermentation time and slash it to > provide a place for gas to escape. The original formula is quite clear that > the bread shouldn't be slashed. In other words, I started with an > established formula that needs to be made in France with French ingredients > to work right. Adapting it to the U.S. has been very difficult. You can't > blindly follow a formula until it has been tested in your kitchen with your > ingredients. Since I don't have a formula for it designed for an American > kitchen I have to redesign it myself. Experimentation is absolutely > necessary. I don't see any other way. The alternative is to limit oneself > only to formulas that have been tested locally. > > Fred > Foodie Forums > http://www.foodieforums.com I agree with that point that every formula if adapted to a different location should be modifed in order to fit the existing ingredients conditions ,No big deal as you are not dealing with technically exacting formula as used in industrial bakeries. And any sensible baker would do the same thing as you do, extensively test the recipe to fit the existing condtions. Going to your problem.... I think it has nothing to do with yeast, as that ingredient is fairly uniform, I am aware that most yeast in the north african region are imported from europe and turkey. Others are using their locally made compressed yeast. If that tunisian bread was made with a weaker flour then the use of high gluten will provide stronger gluten that is different from the wheats being used in tunisia...It is an overkill, may even promote defect due to the different naure of the gluten quality that will result in a slightly differnt ingredient interaction for thta particular recipe., besides a stronger flour tends to make a bigger gas bubbles that is not an asset in most arabic breads. How about using the medium gluten wheats but reduce your hydration. I am familiar with some arabic wheat milled and grown in the desert condtions where the protein level is lower and the milling quality is not the same as in the United states. Most african flour had higher ash content but medium protein..It can have the similar protein content of the T-55 french flour but the gluten quality is a g bit tighter.due to the dry condtions of wheat growing in the desert. I am also aware that in algerria an tunisia they mix the local flour with french flour ; Your choice of flour is too strong for such bread, and you are not processing the way how this arabic bakers do to their dough; and as far as I know tunisian bakers use the fork type of mixers that is known for its gentler development of the dough than the standard planetary and spiral mixer. Hence knowing that they mix the dough longer but not continously but intermittently. I had also remembered when I was in the middle east in particular saudi arabia, I met a tunisian expatriate baker who followed the french system of baking. What I noticed in their baking habit is the habitual use of autolysis. The mix the dough partly and then allow it to rest, then remix again and the cycle is repeated many times depending upon the strength of the flour. before its finally allowed longer fermentation. In that process the gluten is allowed to be at the same time developed and relaxed preventing unsightly gas formation to develop.in the resulting dough. hence they are using the mutli step mixing and resting to develope and mature the dough properly.. They are also known to use old dough that they add to their new batch. IIRC The guy was doing it to enable the bread to be even grained,.. He was always watchful about the hydration that he either reduce the water or add more flour to attain the consistency that he feels allright. That tuniisan baker just do things by feel, no problem with that, he has mastered his bread making., And he never follow the cookbook hydration, he knows very well that flour quality are variable Ii am not sure if its related to your problem. Roy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 07:39:50 -0500, Fred wrote:
> Thanks for the pail of cold water. Speaking of which.... I worked for a while in a bakery run by a guy from Europe. His way was to be percise about the water, salt and yeast but the flour.. forgedabatit!! anyone seen weighing flour out was 'taken down'. It was all done by look and feel (and even sound).. reason? Water is a consistant hydration flour is not. I never like that myself for a commercial setting eventhough it made sense. My conclusion is that for home baking, after the first flush of experience, the 'look and feel' approach really is the only way to develope a good understanding of bread but first one has to understand what they are looking at and what they are feeling. btw Want to scare a cook? tell them to bake!! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Roy Basan" > wrote in message om... > "FMW" > wrote in message >... > > > > > OK, let's take an example from today's bread making. I've been working on a > > formula for Tunisian bread. I started with a formula from a french bread > > making text. The ingredients are flour, semolina, oil, salt, water and > > yeast. When I made the French formula the bread was flat and overhydrated. > > No surprise. I'm using different flour and different yeast than the French > > bakers who developed the formula. So I adjusted it for my high gluten flour > > and my yeast. The result was a bread of good texture but it developed a gas > > ball that separated the top crust from the crumb. I've spent the past two > > weeks trying to get rid of that gas ball. I've adjusted the ratio of > > semolina to bread flour, I've adjusted hydration from a near batter to a > > dough that causes my mixer to labor, I've adjusted the fermentation and > > proofing. I've adjusted baking temps. Today's bread had two adjustments - > > one was a longer mixing time and the other was an increase of flour over > > semolina in the ratio. The gas ball was bigger than ever. Tomorrow I'll > > increase the semolina and reduce the fermentation time and slash it to > > provide a place for gas to escape. The original formula is quite clear that > > the bread shouldn't be slashed. In other words, I started with an > > established formula that needs to be made in France with French ingredients > > to work right. Adapting it to the U.S. has been very difficult. You can't > > blindly follow a formula until it has been tested in your kitchen with your > > ingredients. Since I don't have a formula for it designed for an American > > kitchen I have to redesign it myself. Experimentation is absolutely > > necessary. I don't see any other way. The alternative is to limit oneself > > only to formulas that have been tested locally. > > > > Fred > > Foodie Forums > > http://www.foodieforums.com > I agree with that point that every formula if adapted to a different > location should be modifed in order to fit the existing ingredients > conditions ,No big deal as you are not dealing with technically > exacting formula as used in industrial bakeries. > And any sensible baker would do the same thing as you do, extensively > test the recipe to fit the existing condtions. > Going to your problem.... > I think it has nothing to do with yeast, as that ingredient is fairly > uniform, > I am aware that most yeast in the north african region are imported > from europe and turkey. Others are using their locally made compressed > yeast. > If that tunisian bread was made with a weaker flour then the use of > high gluten will provide stronger gluten that is different from the > wheats being used in tunisia...It is an overkill, may even promote > defect due to the different naure of the gluten quality that will > result in a slightly differnt ingredient interaction for thta > particular recipe., besides a stronger flour tends to make a bigger > gas bubbles that is not an asset in most arabic breads. How about > using the medium gluten wheats but reduce your hydration. > I am familiar with some arabic wheat milled and grown in the desert > condtions where the protein level is lower and the milling quality is > not the same as in the United states. Most african flour had higher > ash content but medium protein..It can have the similar protein > content of the T-55 french flour but the gluten quality is a g bit > tighter.due to the dry condtions of wheat growing in the desert. > I am also aware that in algerria an tunisia they mix the local flour > with french flour ; > Your choice of flour is too strong for such bread, and you are not > processing the way how this arabic bakers do to their dough; and as > far as I know tunisian bakers use the fork type of mixers that is > known for its gentler development of the dough than the standard > planetary and spiral mixer. Hence knowing that they mix the dough > longer but not continously but intermittently. > I had also remembered when I was in the middle east in particular > saudi arabia, I met a tunisian expatriate baker who followed the > french system of baking. What I noticed in their baking habit is the > habitual use of autolysis. The mix the dough partly and then allow > it to rest, then remix again and the cycle is repeated many times > depending upon the strength of the flour. before its finally allowed > longer fermentation. > In that process the gluten is allowed to be at the same time developed > and relaxed preventing unsightly gas formation to develop.in the > resulting dough. hence they are using the mutli step mixing and > resting to develope and mature the dough properly.. > They are also known to use old dough that they add to their new > batch. > IIRC The guy was doing it to enable the bread to be even grained,.. > He was always watchful about the hydration that he either reduce the > water or add more flour to attain the consistency that he feels > allright. > That tuniisan baker just do things by feel, no problem with that, he > has mastered his bread making., > And he never follow the cookbook hydration, he knows very well that > flour quality are variable > Ii am not sure if its related to your problem. > Roy I finally got a proper Tunisian bread. I went back to the original forumula. The original formula called for 6 oz. of oil to go with 2 lb. of flour. That's a really oily bread and I had cut it back to 3 oz. to make it more palatable to myself. That change had reduced the amount of retardation the fat contributes and, apparently, caused the gas ball. The bread was oily and flat compared to my less oily version and I didn't particularly like it, but I do understand the problem now. I'm going to cut the semolina in half. That's a pretty hard flour and reducing it's share of the load may bring the problem under control, at least a little. It won't taste the same but the difference should be relatively subtle and won't bother me as much as loaves that have "blown their tops." Thanks for the input. Fred Foodie Forums http://www.foodieforums.com |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"FMW" > wrote in message >...
> I finally got a proper Tunisian bread. I went back to the original > forumula. The original formula called for 6 oz. of oil to go with 2 lb. of > flour. That's a really oily bread and I had cut it back to 3 oz. to make it > more palatable to myself. That change had reduced the amount of retardation > the fat contributes and, apparently, caused the gas ball. The bread was > oily and flat compared to my less oily version and I didn't particularly > like it, but I do understand the problem now. I'm going to cut the > semolina in half. That's a pretty hard flour and reducing it's share of the > load may bring the problem under control, at least a little. It won't taste > the same but the difference should be relatively subtle and won't bother me > as much as loaves that have "blown their tops." Thanks for the input. Fred,I am pleased to hear about your results.... I recently located a recipe of pain tunis in my formula archives, which looks related to your product.It is a flattish looking bread with a shiny crust. Your 6 oz oil per 2 lbs flour is slightly lesser but reasonably near to the original formula which.... It is basically a blend of 50/50 bread/ durum semolina, 2% salt,2.5-3% compressed yeast,1.5-2%whole milk powder,and about 20-25% vegetable oil, the water was 30-32%. The supposed purpose of the high amount of oils is to enable it for the bread to have a softer crumb. the dough is supposed to be relatively stiff, not slack. The amount of yeast is moderate for an arabic type bread but the presence of semolina, milk powder and high amount of oil has a slowing effect on yeast and add some burden to the flour so (its reasonable) the ingredient interaction would be balanced among the ingredients. Which means that the depressing effect of the other ingredients on the flour would be balanced by a moderate fermentation speed which helps maintain the dough symmetry during proofing . Meanwhile the dough consistency was firmer so as to maintain a tight crumb structure. A alacker dough would favor an uneven grain appearance and the tendency for lopsided symmetry which will be aggraved by uneven oven spring during baking. Now to ensure that the bread should come out evenly it is docked( with a skewer or fork is used to release some gas bubbles and loosen the tight dough elasticity) ensuring that the bread will come out evenly. This reminds me of some other arabic breads ( of similar shape and thickness)that are usually docked before being proofed and others before baking to remove all those gas bubbles and uneveness in surface appearance. Roy |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Flexitol, has the formula changed? | General Cooking | |||
| Converting Sourdough Formula To Non-Sourdough Formula | Baking | |||
| Did Mateus change its formula? | Wine | |||
| Soya baby formula | Vegan | |||
| Muffin & Cake Formula? | Baking | |||
Linear Mode
