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 Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-09-2004, 02:53 AM
Fred
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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




  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-09-2004, 08:46 AM
Roy Basan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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
  #3 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-09-2004, 08:46 AM
Roy Basan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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
  #4 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-09-2004, 01:39 PM
Fred
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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



  #5 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-09-2004, 10:16 PM
Roy Basan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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


  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 10-09-2004, 10:16 PM
Roy Basan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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
  #7 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-09-2004, 12:26 AM
Alex Rast
 
Posts: n/a
Default

at Fri, 10 Sep 2004 07:46:22 GMT in
,
(Roy Basan) wrote :

"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. ...


Hmnn ..... Instinctive baking eh?

....
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.


I have to agree with Roy on this one, especially based on my own
experience. Most people who try my stuff think I am an excellent baker. But
I'm not a great chef. My dad, by contrast, was a great chef but not a good
baker. The pattern applies likewise to my friends.

But more than that, Roy's description of the difference in approach is
spot-on. I like to understand, in detail, the chemical and mechanical
transformations, and when I'm baking, I tend to keep those squarely in
mind. Part of the fun of baking for me is, indeed, discovering the
relationships and "laws", if you like, that govern the process and being
able to predict and control them.

Meanwhile, my dad, and every good cook that I know, seems to do everything
entirely by intuition. He was the best rice cook I ever knew. I begged him
to show me how, my own efforts invariably being bad. However, what he
demonstrated was an entirely intuitive, seat-of-the-pants methodology. "You
put enough water to cover the rice... boil until most of the water is gone,
then put a paper towel over it..." etc. etc. Of course those kinds of
instructions were of little use to me. COVER?! the rice? What does this
mean? To what depth? In what size pot? For how much rice? And so it went.

Meanwhile I've often given baking recipes to friends. They've "tried" them,
and they came out badly. Then they ask me why. I then discover that they'll
have made some modification : "Oh, I didn't have whole milk so I used 2%."
"I folded the eggs in instead of stirring". "My oven always runs hot so I
reduced the temperature by 25 degrees". And so on. It usually takes a while
to convince them that even modifications that to their mind seem trivial
can have an enormous impact on the final result.

A great chef and great baker is a rare thing indeed.

--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)
  #8 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-09-2004, 01:55 AM
Fred
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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



  #9 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-09-2004, 01:55 AM
Fred
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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



  #10 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-09-2004, 09:14 AM
Michael H.
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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.


  #11 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-09-2004, 02:25 PM
Roy Basan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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
  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-09-2004, 02:25 PM
Roy Basan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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
  #13 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-09-2004, 09:36 PM
FMW
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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


  #14 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 11-09-2004, 09:36 PM
FMW
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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


  #15 (permalink)   Report Post  
Old 12-09-2004, 11:03 AM
Roy Basan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flexitol, has the formula changed? Julie Bove[_2_] General Cooking 2 12-11-2012 10:41 PM
Converting Sourdough Formula To Non-Sourdough Formula KMIAA Baking 0 27-06-2011 08:28 PM
Did Mateus change its formula? Leo Bueno Wine 2 21-04-2006 08:41 PM
Soya baby formula Red Vegan 8 26-02-2005 10:20 AM
Muffin & Cake Formula? rbisson Baking 1 14-11-2003 06:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"

 

Copyright © 2017