In trying to make jelly from unusual fruit combinations for which there is
no recipe to follow, I find it sometimes take a very long time for the
boiling juice to get up to 220 deg F. I wonder if that is related to the
sugar concentration. I'm reasoning that water won't go higher than it's
boiling temp at 212 deg F. So it must be the presence of sugar which
allows the temp to go higher than the boiling point of water. So the sugar
concentration has to be sufficient for it to do that. If it's taking a
long time to get from 212 to 220 def F the solution would be to add more
sugar. Does that sound right?

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

William R. Watt wrote:

> In trying to make jelly from unusual fruit combinations for which there is
> no recipe to follow, I find it sometimes take a very long time for the
> boiling juice to get up to 220 deg F. I wonder if that is related to the
> sugar concentration. I'm reasoning that water won't go higher than it's
> boiling temp at 212 deg F. So it must be the presence of sugar which
> allows the temp to go higher than the boiling point of water. So the sugar
> concentration has to be sufficient for it to do that. If it's taking a
> long time to get from 212 to 220 def F the solution would be to add more
> sugar. Does that sound right?
>

Either that, or increase the surface area and the heat (put the stuff in
a large wok on a high-output burner).

That's why recipes for jellies made with fruit with lower natural pectin
call for less sugar; you want to concentrate the juice by boiling away
more water before the sugar concentration drives the temperature to 220.
Fruit juices with lots of natural pectin get more sugar added because
they have sufficient pectin without concentrating the juice.

Bob

William R. Watt wrote:

> In trying to make jelly from unusual fruit combinations for which there is
> no recipe to follow, I find it sometimes take a very long time for the
> boiling juice to get up to 220 deg F. I wonder if that is related to the
> sugar concentration. I'm reasoning that water won't go higher than it's
> boiling temp at 212 deg F. So it must be the presence of sugar which
> allows the temp to go higher than the boiling point of water. So the sugar
> concentration has to be sufficient for it to do that. If it's taking a
> long time to get from 212 to 220 def F the solution would be to add more
> sugar. Does that sound right?
>

Either that, or increase the surface area and the heat (put the stuff in
a large wok on a high-output burner).

That's why recipes for jellies made with fruit with lower natural pectin
call for less sugar; you want to concentrate the juice by boiling away
more water before the sugar concentration drives the temperature to 220.
Fruit juices with lots of natural pectin get more sugar added because
they have sufficient pectin without concentrating the juice.

Bob

zxcvbob > wrote:

>William R. Watt wrote:
>
>> In trying to make jelly from unusual fruit combinations for which there is
>> no recipe to follow, I find it sometimes take a very long time for the
>> boiling juice to get up to 220 deg F. I wonder if that is related to the
>> sugar concentration. I'm reasoning that water won't go higher than it's
>> boiling temp at 212 deg F. So it must be the presence of sugar which
>> allows the temp to go higher than the boiling point of water. So the sugar
>> concentration has to be sufficient for it to do that. If it's taking a
>> long time to get from 212 to 220 def F the solution would be to add more
>> sugar. Does that sound right?
>>
>
>Either that, or increase the surface area and the heat (put the stuff in
>a large wok on a high-output burner).
>
>That's why recipes for jellies made with fruit with lower natural pectin
>call for less sugar; you want to concentrate the juice by boiling away
>more water before the sugar concentration drives the temperature to 220.
> Fruit juices with lots of natural pectin get more sugar added because
>they have sufficient pectin without concentrating the juice.
>
>Bob


That explains a passage in the Mehu Lisa instructions. Use the
alcohol method to determine the amount of pectin available. Then if
you end up with a single firm blob, then use sugar 1 to 1 with juice.
Then it describes the results with less pectin and says to use less
sugar.

I have never been able to get the test to work. If anyone here has
used it successfully, please describe the process in detail.


--
Susan N.

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.

zxcvbob > wrote:

>William R. Watt wrote:
>
>> In trying to make jelly from unusual fruit combinations for which there is
>> no recipe to follow, I find it sometimes take a very long time for the
>> boiling juice to get up to 220 deg F. I wonder if that is related to the
>> sugar concentration. I'm reasoning that water won't go higher than it's
>> boiling temp at 212 deg F. So it must be the presence of sugar which
>> allows the temp to go higher than the boiling point of water. So the sugar
>> concentration has to be sufficient for it to do that. If it's taking a
>> long time to get from 212 to 220 def F the solution would be to add more
>> sugar. Does that sound right?
>>
>
>Either that, or increase the surface area and the heat (put the stuff in
>a large wok on a high-output burner).
>
>That's why recipes for jellies made with fruit with lower natural pectin
>call for less sugar; you want to concentrate the juice by boiling away
>more water before the sugar concentration drives the temperature to 220.
> Fruit juices with lots of natural pectin get more sugar added because
>they have sufficient pectin without concentrating the juice.
>
>Bob


That explains a passage in the Mehu Lisa instructions. Use the
alcohol method to determine the amount of pectin available. Then if
you end up with a single firm blob, then use sugar 1 to 1 with juice.
Then it describes the results with less pectin and says to use less
sugar.

I have never been able to get the test to work. If anyone here has
used it successfully, please describe the process in detail.


--
Susan N.

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.

The Cook ) writes:

> I have never been able to get the test to work. If anyone here has
> used it successfully, please describe the process in detail.

I described how it works for me a while back. Basically I put about a tsp
of ethyl rubbing alcohol in a shot glass. When the juice comes to a boil
drip 2-3 drops in the shot glass. Jiggle the shot glass a bit. If there's
pectin you can see the granules in the shot glass. I read wait up to 30
seconds for the granules to form but it's never been that long. I take the
rear end of a spoon and try to slide the pectin up the side of the glass
out of the alcohol. If it comes out in one piece it's good to go. If it
doesn't a higher concentration of pectin is probably needed. I've seen all
kinds of results with the test, from very high pectin in rose hip and haw,
to none in cherry and mint.

I keep using the same alcohol. No need to dump it out after every test.
Just pick out what pectin you can so it doesn't confuse the next test.
When done testing for the day I pour teh alcohol back inot its container
through a tea strainer to remove any granules.

None of this stuff seems to be exact. I was listening to a "book on CD"
while making jelly. It said the "scientific" approach to cooking where
ingredients, tempertures, and so forth are given precisely was a fad
started in Boston by a famous cookbook writer in the 1800's when "science"
was becoming popular. Jumping on the band wagon. The narrator said people
have been having more problems with recipes ever since. I have two candy
thermometers, one metal and one glass, and they never agree. I can never
find the elusive 220 deg F. The spoon method for testing for set never
seems to agree with either thermometer.


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

The Cook ) writes:

> I have never been able to get the test to work. If anyone here has
> used it successfully, please describe the process in detail.

I described how it works for me a while back. Basically I put about a tsp
of ethyl rubbing alcohol in a shot glass. When the juice comes to a boil
drip 2-3 drops in the shot glass. Jiggle the shot glass a bit. If there's
pectin you can see the granules in the shot glass. I read wait up to 30
seconds for the granules to form but it's never been that long. I take the
rear end of a spoon and try to slide the pectin up the side of the glass
out of the alcohol. If it comes out in one piece it's good to go. If it
doesn't a higher concentration of pectin is probably needed. I've seen all
kinds of results with the test, from very high pectin in rose hip and haw,
to none in cherry and mint.

I keep using the same alcohol. No need to dump it out after every test.
Just pick out what pectin you can so it doesn't confuse the next test.
When done testing for the day I pour teh alcohol back inot its container
through a tea strainer to remove any granules.

None of this stuff seems to be exact. I was listening to a "book on CD"
while making jelly. It said the "scientific" approach to cooking where
ingredients, tempertures, and so forth are given precisely was a fad
started in Boston by a famous cookbook writer in the 1800's when "science"
was becoming popular. Jumping on the band wagon. The narrator said people
have been having more problems with recipes ever since. I have two candy
thermometers, one metal and one glass, and they never agree. I can never
find the elusive 220 deg F. The spoon method for testing for set never
seems to agree with either thermometer.


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

William R. Watt wrote:

> None of this stuff seems to be exact.

Actually it is, but not on a non-professional/non-commercial level, many
times.

> I was listening to a "book on CD" while making jelly. It said the
> "scientific" approach to cooking where ingredients, tempertures, and
> so forth are given precisely was a fad started in Boston by a famous
> cookbook writer in the 1800's when "science" was becoming popular.

They were off by a 100 years, unles they meant 1801 about scientific
methods. And Fanny Farmer was much past that.

> Jumping on the band wagon. The narrator said people have been having
> more problems with recipes ever since.

No, the problem was 'knob of butter' and "walnut-sized lump" and "weight
of an egg." Fanny Farmer standardized those measurements. Would you
prefer to process in a BWB for 10 minutes or "length of coffee break?"

B/

William R. Watt wrote:

> None of this stuff seems to be exact.

Actually it is, but not on a non-professional/non-commercial level, many
times.

> I was listening to a "book on CD" while making jelly. It said the
> "scientific" approach to cooking where ingredients, tempertures, and
> so forth are given precisely was a fad started in Boston by a famous
> cookbook writer in the 1800's when "science" was becoming popular.

They were off by a 100 years, unles they meant 1801 about scientific
methods. And Fanny Farmer was much past that.

> Jumping on the band wagon. The narrator said people have been having
> more problems with recipes ever since.

No, the problem was 'knob of butter' and "walnut-sized lump" and "weight
of an egg." Fanny Farmer standardized those measurements. Would you
prefer to process in a BWB for 10 minutes or "length of coffee break?"

B/

zxcvbob ) writes:

> That's why recipes for jellies made with fruit with lower natural pectin
> call for less sugar; you want to concentrate the juice by boiling away
> more water before the sugar concentration drives the temperature to 220.
> Fruit juices with lots of natural pectin get more sugar added because
> they have sufficient pectin without concentrating the juice.

that is what I am trying to determine. I'm trying for jelly with minimum
sugar and boiling time. The usual advice is for equal parts juice and
sugar by by volume but I've got jelly from two parts juice to one part
sugar. That's after a successful test for pectin. In one case I had to go
three parts juice to four parts sugar.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

zxcvbob ) writes:

> That's why recipes for jellies made with fruit with lower natural pectin
> call for less sugar; you want to concentrate the juice by boiling away
> more water before the sugar concentration drives the temperature to 220.
> Fruit juices with lots of natural pectin get more sugar added because
> they have sufficient pectin without concentrating the juice.

that is what I am trying to determine. I'm trying for jelly with minimum
sugar and boiling time. The usual advice is for equal parts juice and
sugar by by volume but I've got jelly from two parts juice to one part
sugar. That's after a successful test for pectin. In one case I had to go
three parts juice to four parts sugar.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

(William R. Watt) wrote:

>
>zxcvbob ) writes:
>
>> That's why recipes for jellies made with fruit with lower natural pectin
>> call for less sugar; you want to concentrate the juice by boiling away
>> more water before the sugar concentration drives the temperature to 220.
>> Fruit juices with lots of natural pectin get more sugar added because
>> they have sufficient pectin without concentrating the juice.
>
>that is what I am trying to determine. I'm trying for jelly with minimum
>sugar and boiling time. The usual advice is for equal parts juice and
>sugar by by volume but I've got jelly from two parts juice to one part
>sugar. That's after a successful test for pectin. In one case I had to go
>three parts juice to four parts sugar.


From the Mehu Lisa instruction book.

"To determine whether or not the juice you have has enough pectin to
gel properly, mix 1 Tablespoon juice with 1 Tablespoon grain alcohol.
The alcohol will bring the pectin together to form a jelly. If the
juice has a lot of pectin, a single mass or clot will form when poured
from the container. This indicates that you can use equal quantities
of sugar and juice to make jelly. If the clot collects in 2 or 3
masses, use 2/3 or 3/4 cup sugar to each cup of juice. If it collects
many small particles, use 1/2 cup sugar to each cup of juice. If no
clots or masses form, there is not enough pectin in the juice to make
a jelly and you should use a bottled liquid pectin or powdered pectin
to make jelly. Follow manufacturer's directions for jelly making."

The information from Bob about concentrating the juice, your
description about doing the test and this information about the amount
of sugar certainly give me a much better understanding of what is
happening. Add the information from the BBB to use 1/4 not so ripe
fruit and 3/4 ripe fruit and my jams and jellies will turn out
perfect. :-)

Thanks for everyone's help.

--
Susan N.

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.

(William R. Watt) wrote:

>

>
>None of this stuff seems to be exact. I was listening to a "book on CD"
>while making jelly. It said the "scientific" approach to cooking where
>ingredients, tempertures, and so forth are given precisely was a fad
>started in Boston by a famous cookbook writer in the 1800's when "science"
>was becoming popular. Jumping on the band wagon. The narrator said people
>have been having more problems with recipes ever since. I have two candy
>thermometers, one metal and one glass, and they never agree. I can never
>find the elusive 220 deg F. The spoon method for testing for set never
>seems to agree with either thermometer.

I think that people are having more problems with recipes is because
so many younger people do not understand the basics of cooking. My
son with into a friend's home and they were going to fix something to
eat. He came home and said that there were none of the basic staples
that anyone who cooks would have. If the parents never do more than
open boxes and can, how will the children understand stir, toss, fold,
etc.
--
Susan N.

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.

(William R. Watt) wrote:

>

>
>None of this stuff seems to be exact. I was listening to a "book on CD"
>while making jelly. It said the "scientific" approach to cooking where
>ingredients, tempertures, and so forth are given precisely was a fad
>started in Boston by a famous cookbook writer in the 1800's when "science"
>was becoming popular. Jumping on the band wagon. The narrator said people
>have been having more problems with recipes ever since. I have two candy
>thermometers, one metal and one glass, and they never agree. I can never
>find the elusive 220 deg F. The spoon method for testing for set never
>seems to agree with either thermometer.

I think that people are having more problems with recipes is because
so many younger people do not understand the basics of cooking. My
son with into a friend's home and they were going to fix something to
eat. He came home and said that there were none of the basic staples
that anyone who cooks would have. If the parents never do more than
open boxes and can, how will the children understand stir, toss, fold,
etc.
--
Susan N.

There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.

William R. Watt ) writes:
> ...If it's taking a
> long time to get from 212 to 220 def F the solution would be to add more
> sugar. Does that sound right?

Had good results with this today. Had a batch of elderberry and a batch of
black cherry which had not jelled so got them out to reboil. In each case
added 1 more cup sugar and let boil for a couple minutes. Then added 1/2
cup more sugar. Finaly 1/4 cup more sugar.

In the elderberry case the effect of adding the 1/2 cup was quite
dramatic, the temp rose, the juice stated to boil over, but it did not
reach 220 deg or pass teh spoon test. The final 1/4 cup passed the spoon
test. Although the temp was not up to 220 it jelled at room temp.

In the black cherry case there was no dramatic effect. The temp went to
220 deg but never passed the spoon test. In the 'fridge but not jelled yet.

I get three indicators for set -
1. the heat has to be turned down lower and lower to keep the juice from
boiling over.
2. the candy thermometer reads above 215 deg F. (accuracy of device not known)
3. juice drips off spoon at two places, often last drop jells.
and 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

William R. Watt ) writes:
> ...If it's taking a
> long time to get from 212 to 220 def F the solution would be to add more
> sugar. Does that sound right?

Had good results with this today. Had a batch of elderberry and a batch of
black cherry which had not jelled so got them out to reboil. In each case
added 1 more cup sugar and let boil for a couple minutes. Then added 1/2
cup more sugar. Finaly 1/4 cup more sugar.

In the elderberry case the effect of adding the 1/2 cup was quite
dramatic, the temp rose, the juice stated to boil over, but it did not
reach 220 deg or pass teh spoon test. The final 1/4 cup passed the spoon
test. Although the temp was not up to 220 it jelled at room temp.

In the black cherry case there was no dramatic effect. The temp went to
220 deg but never passed the spoon test. In the 'fridge but not jelled yet.

I get three indicators for set -
1. the heat has to be turned down lower and lower to keep the juice from
boiling over.
2. the candy thermometer reads above 215 deg F. (accuracy of device not known)
3. juice drips off spoon at two places, often last drop jells.
and 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned