Hi,

I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
teaspoon.

But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only

Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
provder.



Thanks, Mike

Oh pshaw, on Mon 12 Jun 2006 04:10:52a, Mike meant to say...

> Hi,
>
> I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
> teaspoon.
>
> But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
> indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
> teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only
>
> Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
> provder.

It should be leveled off unless otherwise stipulated. Older recipes in
particular may call for a rounded teaspoon or scant teaspoon, etc.

--
Wayne Boatwright @¿@¬
_____________________

"Mike" > schreef in bericht
oups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
> teaspoon.
>
> But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
> indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
> teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only
>
> Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
> provder.
>
>
>
> Thanks, Mike

Level, But teaspoons have different sizes in different countires, so you
might want to find out what size the author of a recipe means.
>

"Michael "Dog3" Lonergan" > wrote in message
6.121...
> "Mike" >
> oups.com:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
>> teaspoon.
>>
>> But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
>> indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
>> teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only
>>
>> Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
>> provder.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks, Mike
>
> Mike, it should be leveled unless the recipe calls for rounded or heaping.
> Don't do like I do and eyeball it
>

If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If you're
just cooking, eyeball it.

--Rich

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
> "Rich" >
> :
>
>>
>> If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
>> you're just cooking, eyeball it.
>>
>> --Rich
>
> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't
> bake worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back.
> Followed the recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with
> hockey pucks.
>
> Michael

I used to be able to make a mean batch of buttermilk biscuits. Somewhere
over the years I lost the knack. Can't figure it out; nothing changed about
my recipe or the method. What used to turn out meltingly soft and flaky now
turns out, as you say, hockey pucks. Go figure.

Jill

--
Larry T

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
. ..
> Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
> > "Rich" >
> > :
> >
> >>
> >> If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
> >> you're just cooking, eyeball it.
> >>
> >> --Rich
> >
> > I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't
> > bake worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back.
> > Followed the recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with
> > hockey pucks.
> >
> > Michael
>
> I used to be able to make a mean batch of buttermilk biscuits. Somewhere
> over the years I lost the knack. Can't figure it out; nothing changed
about
> my recipe or the method. What used to turn out meltingly soft and flaky
now
> turns out, as you say, hockey pucks. Go figure.
>
> Jill
Not an expert here, but I've observed that over mixing will cause the HP
syndrome(hockey puck) in biscuits that made by cutting in shortening. You
also might see this if the shortening is too warm, or the flower too old and
damp.

Larry T (who doesn't do this cause it's too messy, but loves to eat them)

In article >, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
>> "Rich" >
>> :
>>
>>> If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
>>> you're just cooking, eyeball it.
>>
>> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't
>> bake worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back.
>> Followed the recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with
>> hockey pucks.
>
>I used to be able to make a mean batch of buttermilk biscuits. Somewhere
>over the years I lost the knack. Can't figure it out; nothing changed about
>my recipe or the method. What used to turn out meltingly soft and flaky now
>turns out, as you say, hockey pucks. Go figure.

G'day Jill,

It's the ingredients! Somebody has stolen a quantum of fat and/or
protein from the milk; and adulterated the butter with canola grease.
(Oh, and protein in flour is probably declining as well -- unless the
farmers are putting back a decent dollop of nitrogen these days.)

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
. ..
> Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
>> "Rich" >
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
>>> you're just cooking, eyeball it.
>>>
>>> --Rich
>>
>> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't
>> bake worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back.
>> Followed the recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with
>> hockey pucks.
>>
>> Michael
>
> I used to be able to make a mean batch of buttermilk biscuits. Somewhere
> over the years I lost the knack. Can't figure it out; nothing changed
> about
> my recipe or the method. What used to turn out meltingly soft and flaky
> now
> turns out, as you say, hockey pucks. Go figure.
>
> Jill
>
>

IIRC, Joy of Cooking has tips on avoiding these problems. Mine's not nearby,
or I'd play secretary for you and look it up.

On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:16:11 -0500, "jmcquown"
> wrote:

>Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
>> "Rich" >
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
>>> you're just cooking, eyeball it.
>>>
>>> --Rich
>>
>> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't
>> bake worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back.
>> Followed the recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with
>> hockey pucks.
>>
>> Michael
>
>I used to be able to make a mean batch of buttermilk biscuits. Somewhere
>over the years I lost the knack. Can't figure it out; nothing changed about
>my recipe or the method. What used to turn out meltingly soft and flaky now
>turns out, as you say, hockey pucks. Go figure.
>
>Jill
>
Are you using "southern" flour? I have also noticed that some of the
buttermilk is full fat. I don't know if either of these makes a real
difference or not.

Or maybe you just don't hold your mouth right when you are baking.
--
Susan N.

"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974

Phred wrote:
> In article >, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>> Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
>>> "Rich" >
>>> :
>>>
>>>> If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
>>>> you're just cooking, eyeball it.
>>> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't
>>> bake worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back.
>>> Followed the recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with
>>> hockey pucks.
>> I used to be able to make a mean batch of buttermilk biscuits. Somewhere
>> over the years I lost the knack. Can't figure it out; nothing changed about
>> my recipe or the method. What used to turn out meltingly soft and flaky now
>> turns out, as you say, hockey pucks. Go figure.
>
> G'day Jill,
>
> It's the ingredients! Somebody has stolen a quantum of fat and/or
> protein from the milk; and adulterated the butter with canola grease.
> (Oh, and protein in flour is probably declining as well -- unless the
> farmers are putting back a decent dollop of nitrogen these days.)
>
> Cheers, Phred.
>

I've heard that about the Buttermilk...My great grandma said they had
ruined it and stopped using buttermilk from the store - she started
using the substitute (milk and vinegar?)

Roberta (in VA)

The Cook wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:16:11 -0500, "jmcquown"
> > wrote:
>
>> Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:
>>> "Rich" >
>>> :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
>>>> you're just cooking, eyeball it.
>>>>
>>>> --Rich
>>>
>>> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't
>>> bake worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back.
>>> Followed the recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with
>>> hockey pucks.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>
>> I used to be able to make a mean batch of buttermilk biscuits.
>> Somewhere over the years I lost the knack. Can't figure it out;
>> nothing changed about my recipe or the method. What used to turn
>> out meltingly soft and flaky now turns out, as you say, hockey
>> pucks. Go figure.
>>
>> Jill
>>
> Are you using "southern" flour? I have also noticed that some of the
> buttermilk is full fat. I don't know if either of these makes a real
> difference or not.
>
It never made much of a difference what flour I used 25 years ago, but
normally I bought Martha White or Lily for making biscuits. I cannot
honestly say I paid much attention to the fat content in buttermilk back
then but I do notice these days it seems to be all non-fat which definitely
could have some affect.

> Or maybe you just don't hold your mouth right when you are baking.

LOL! This is one reason I don't bake anymore

Jill

"The Cook" > wrote in message
...

> Or maybe you just don't hold your mouth right when you are baking.
> Susan N.

Que? :-)

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:

> "Rich" >
> :
>
> >
> > If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
> > you're just cooking, eyeball it.

> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't
> bake worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back.
> Followed the recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with
> hockey pucks.

Is your baking powder in good shape? Have you used it in other things
successfully? Check its expiration date.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

"Michael "Dog3" Lonergan" > wrote in message
6.121...
> "Rich" >
> :
>
>>
>> If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
>> you're just cooking, eyeball it.
>>
>> --Rich
>
> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't bake
> worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back. Followed the
> recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with hockey pucks.
>

My biscuits turn out fine. I don't know what you're doing different.

5oz (150g) All Purpose flour
2 1/2c Whole wheat flour
2 1/2c Cake flour
1/2 teaspoon (level) baking soda
3 teaspoons (level) baking powder
1 teaspoon (level) salt

1/4c vegetable shortening (lard is better, but I seldom have any)
2 tablespoons very cold butter, cut into 1/4" cubes

1c buttermilk
1/4c heavy cream

Put the dry ingredients into the bowl of your food processor and pulse a
couple of times to mix. Add the shortening and pulse three or four times.
The flour should look mealy now. Transfer to a mixing bowl. Stir the butter
cubes into the flour briefly. Soak your hands in a bowl of ice water for a
full two minutes. Dry your hands thoroughly. Using just your cold
fingertips, squeeze the butter cubes into thin flattened flakes in the
flour. Work quickly. Make a well in the center of the flour, and pour in the
buttermilk and half of the cream. Gently fold and stir the dry into the wet
with a fork, being careful to get the dry stuff up off the bottom of the
bowl. Preheat oven to 400f. Gently form a ball, and slightly flatten it onto
a sheet of waxed paper or parchment. Wrap it, and refrigerate for 15
minutes, no more. Roll the dough on a floured countertop to slightly over
3/4". Cut into biscuits with a sharp biscuit cutter, pushing straight down.
NO twisting! Place the biscuits on a sheet pan spaced about an inch apart.
No need to grease the pan; they won't stick. When you've cut as many
biscuits as possible, gently gather the scrap dough into a ball, and roll it
out again to cut more biscuits. These won't be quite as pretty or as tender
as the first cut, but they'll still be good. With a pastry brush, paint the
tops of the biscuits with the rest of the cream, being careful not to let
any drip down the sides. Bake for 15 minutes, or until golden brown.

--Rich

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:

> "Rich" >
> :
>
>>If you're measuring leavening for baked goods, level carefully. If
>>you're just cooking, eyeball it.
>>
>>--Rich
>
> I know you are responding to Mike but I can't help myself. I can't bake
> worth a damned. I made scratch biscuits a few weeks back. Followed the
> recipe exactly. Instead of biscuits I wound up with hockey pucks.

Actually good biscuits do take a bit of technique. Most
important to gently bring the dough together and avoid
overmixing. Too much mixing/kneading will definitely give
you hockey pucks.

--
Reg

On 12 Jun 2006 04:10:52 -0700, "Mike" > wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
>teaspoon.
>
>But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
>indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
>teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only
>
>Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
>provder.

I've always just used a rounded or heaped teaspoon (I dunk it into the
stuff and use whatever comes out and how heaping it is depends on how
well the substance stacks)... but I'm lazy and I eyeball everything so
it ALL ends up out of proportion to whatever the original recipe said.

On 12 Jun 2006 04:10:52 -0700, Mike wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
> teaspoon.
>
> But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
> indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
> teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only
>
> Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
> provder.
>
Cooking is not brain surgery even though it is science. If you're an
experienced cook, you'd know which type you prefer in a recipe. If
you're not an experienced cook, begin with level. You may even want
to go in the other direction and subtract to a "scant" teaspoon the
next time you make that recipe.
--

Ham and eggs.
A day's work for a chicken, a lifetime commitment for a pig.

"Mike" > wrote in news:1150110652.255651.114030
@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

> Hi,
>
> I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
> teaspoon.
>
> But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
> indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
> teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only
>
> Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
> provder.
>

Geez, it is a recipe not a formula. Experiment.



--

Charles
The significant problems we face cannot be solved
at the same level of thinking we were at when we
created them. Albert Einstein

Mike wrote:
> I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
> teaspoon.
>
> But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
> indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
> teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only
>
> Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
> provder.

If it's tea, it's moderately heaping; basically the amount a
table-style teaspoon will hold when dipped in the caddy in a nonchalant
manner. That's why the teaspoon is the size it is. So it will do
that. Because that's the amount of tea determined over a few billion
pots to be the optimal amount for a cup. Likely using the "one for
each cup plus one for the pot" rule.

Otherwise, a teaspoon is 1/6th of a fluid ounce in volume, dry or wet,
and you need a measuring spoon, and it's level. A tablespoon is 1/2
floz, and isn't used for tea.

--Blair

Blair P. Houghton wrote:
> Mike wrote:
> > I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
> > teaspoon.
> >
> > But if in a form that could be LEVEL, ROUNDED, or HEAPING, if not so
> > indicated, then what is it? I'm referring to recipes that call for a
> > teaspoon of , say, peanut butter, example .only
> >
> > Thanks....I think I know the answer...no forethough by the recipe
> > provder.
>
> If it's tea, it's moderately heaping; basically the amount a
> table-style teaspoon will hold when dipped in the caddy in a nonchalant
> manner. That's why the teaspoon is the size it is. So it will do
> that. Because that's the amount of tea determined over a few billion
> pots to be the optimal amount for a cup. Likely using the "one for
> each cup plus one for the pot" rule.
>
> Otherwise, a teaspoon is 1/6th of a fluid ounce in volume, dry or wet,
> and you need a measuring spoon, and it's level. A tablespoon is 1/2
> floz, and isn't used for tea.

That's just plain stupid. The Chinese have been doing lots of tea for
many years and they don't have teaspoons... in fact historically
tableware is a relatively new concept, only over the past few hundred
years, and most peoples still use no teaspoons... folks have been
suckin' up tea for thousands. Anyone read Pearl S. Buck would know
that the Chinese measure tea for a cup or a pot by the pinch... larger
the pot more pinches. Any real tea drinker knows not all teas occupy
the same volume by weight, so each type of tea needs to be interpolated
individually by the individual user. Blair, shut the **** up you
teaspoon brained pinheaded dumb *******.

Sheldon

Mike wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I understand fully that a teaspoon of something in liquid form is a
> teaspoon.

You can make a "heaping teaspoon" of liquid if you're not careful.
Water or vanilla etc. etc. has that elasticity or whatever you call
it. It will hover above the spoon. A teaspoon of any solid or powder
can be 100% accurate if levelled off correctly. Many people use the
little measuring cups, the ones we all have in the cupboard connected
together, for measuring liquids. This is wrong. Especially for
baking....savory cooking you can get away with it. Use a pyrex
measuring cup for liquids and the "connected together smaller ones" for
the solids/powdery things.

Sheldon wrote:
> Blair P. Houghton wrote:
> > If it's tea, it's moderately heaping; basically the amount a
> > table-style teaspoon will hold when dipped in the caddy in a nonchalant
> > manner. That's why the teaspoon is the size it is. So it will do
> > that. Because that's the amount of tea determined over a few billion
> > pots to be the optimal amount for a cup. Likely using the "one for
> > each cup plus one for the pot" rule.
>
> That's just plain stupid. The Chinese have been doing lots of tea for
> many years and they don't have teaspoons...

You've been posting your thoughts for many years and you don't have any
brain...

Here's where you logic breaks down, Sheldon.

THE PEOPLE WHO INVENTED THE TEASPOON WEREN'T CHINESE.

THE CHINESE DON'T TALK ABOUT "ONE TEASPOON PER CUP PLUS ONE FOR THE
POT"

THE CHINESE HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS THREAD

> in fact historically
> tableware is a relatively new concept,

Only to medieval corpses like you.

> only over the past few hundred
> years, and most peoples still use no teaspoons...

What does this have to do with why teaspoons are the right size for a
spoonful of dried tea leaves?

> folks have been
> suckin' up tea for thousands. Anyone read Pearl S. Buck would know
> that the Chinese measure tea for a cup or a pot by the pinch... larger
> the pot more pinches.

Because anyone who reads Pearl S. Buck knows the difference between
imagery and stoichiometry, except you, everyone else who reads Pearl S.
Buck isn't confused into thinking that this changes the size of the
teaspoon.

The British upper class, not given to handling food with their fingers,
invented a utensil to handle the job.

> Any real tea drinker

Hi. I'm Blair. I've posted infinitely more articles to
rec.food.drink.tea than you have, and have about $100 worth of premium
black and white teas in my cupboard right now. Mostly single-estate
darjeelings. You want to throw down on this topic? I didn't think so,
google-boy.

> knows not all teas occupy
> the same volume by weight, so each type of tea needs to be interpolated
> individually by the individual user.

Whithered, rolled, oxidized, whole-leaf camilla sinensis - black tea -
from India, as cultivated and delivered by the British East India
Company for the last 400 years, is all approximately the same density,
especially in those varieties popular among the sort of people who
could buy tea by the kilo and would invent a spoon to facilitate
transferring the proper quantity from caddy to pot. Any real tea
drinker knows that.

The Queen doesn't drink the dust you buy in bags, sheldumb, so don't
start whining about broken leaves to pretend you have a response.

> Blair, shut the **** up you
> teaspoon brained pinheaded dumb *******.

I tried to teach you why a teaspoon is the size it is, and you taught
us all that you never will learn because you never have.

--Blair

P.S. The Chinese, by the way, are partial to unoxidized (green) teas
and pu-erh (teas pressed into bricks or nests then dried and fermented
in caves for decades; a chisel or screwdriver helps break off pieces
for brewing), though they do drink black tea. They make tea self-serve
style using tiny pots (yi-xing are reputedly the best) or
brew-and-drink cups called gaiwan. A gaiwan has a lid that is used to
retain heat, and to keep the leaves in as the liquor is sipped. They
eyeball the quantity they use because they aren't constantly making
communal pots and have better control over proportion, and brewing and
drinking time. "Gong-fu" is the skill/sense of knowing just how much
tea to use, just how hot the water should be, just how long to presoak,
whether to discard the presoak, how long to steep before sipping, how
often to sip, when to sip more at the peak of the flavor for the steep,
when to discard and re-steep, and how many steeps the variety and
vintage of leaf can take. It's utterly personal, and neither a
teaspoon nor a book nor a stone monkey's ass like Sheldon can tell
anyone how to do it better.