**** NOT cross-posted ****

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:06:20 GMT, Dick Adams > wrote:
> "drei" > wrote in message news:476935eb.
> ...
>
>> ... I want something that I know will last a very long time
>> without needing to be replaced, and am especially interested in
>> products that are safe to use with a steam pan. Does anyone
>> have any suggestions?
>
> OK, here's my suggestion. Forget the "stone" and the "steam"
> altogether.

I disagree completely. See below.

>
> The idea behind the so-called baking "stone" is to deliver heat
> quite rapidly to the doughloaf causing "oven push", which is a
> supplementary rise, after a rise which is not quite completed
> before the bake. The "stone" is a poor approximation to a hearth
> in a masonry oven (or a deck in a deck oven), since (1) it is
> typically quite thin and since (2) the superheated steam of the
> masonry or deck oven is not available in home ovens, save a
> modest amount of moisture from various nifty tricks (ice cubes,
> water pans, "spritzing", pressure cooker trick, etc.). The
> superheated steam is a big factor in conditioning the surface
> of the dough and cooking the loaves very rapidly.
>
> As was pointed out in this thread, the bread itself supplies a
> modest amount of moisture, serving to keep its surface pliable
> for oven rising, and, as has been previously discussed in other
> threads, closing the damper or oven exhaust (electric only) can
> effectively preserve some of the innate moisture. (With gas
> you'd need to turn it off while the oven is closed.)

I have electric so this is not a problem for me, but don't most gas
ovens have the flame located below and ouside the oven?

> So, my suggestion is this: take the rise, or most of it anyway,
> before starting the bake. Then you can forget the tricks that
> are intended to facilitate rising in the oven. Just take the rise
> before the dough goes into the oven. (Then you need to cut
> the top a bit earlier in the rise so as to avoid deflating the
> doughloaf, as it is quite fragile when fully risen.)
>
> A considerable disadvantage of using baking "stones" is that
> power or fuel is wasted by preheating the oven so as to get the
> "stone" hot. So my suggestion is to forget the preheating as
> well as the "stone". In the summer, if one does not use air
> conditioning, that might be the difference between having and
> not having home-baked bread in the summertime.
>
> There is a prevalent belief that the crust can be improved by
> having or introducing some moisture in the oven to start. I have
> not been able to demonstrate that to my own satisfaction. It

Then you have not tried hard enough. My experience is that baking with
adequate steam is easily the most important part of "artisan" style
technique. It is not just a matter of thickness or chewiness. Most of
the flavor of a great loaf comes from the crust. There is simply no
comparison between the flavor of my loaves baked with and without steam.
And yes, I have tried both! Given my equipment, generating adequate
steam is very easy, I just close the vent and spray the oven walls when
the loaves are first loaded. Open vent to dump steam after 10 minutes.

> seems most unlikely that steaming tricks are able to gel the
> dough surface in the way that the superheated steam of commercial
> and artisanal ovens does. That is where the thick, chewy crusts
> of commercial and artisanal breads comes from, and quite possibly
> the large holes in the crumb. Very few, if any, persons who
> recommend oven steaming tricks seem to have comparatively tested
> (with and without "steam") their "steaming" procedure.
>
> Here (not for the first time) are pictures of bread cooked on a
> tray rather than a stone, from a cold start:
>
> http://home.att.net/~dick.adams/EZSDLoaves/index.html

Well OK, if that is what you want, but I would not be satisfied with
that un-evenly browned crust. My crust is pretty much the same
thickness and color all the way around. As you can see in my "Steve W's
40/40/10":

http://samartha.net/SD/file-corner/g...ctures/BYDATE/

I still don't get the translucent crumb I am looking for but great crust
is not a problem for those willing to use a nice thick stone and
adequate steam.

>
> It ain't exactly the holey grail, but it's not too bad!
>
Agreed.

--
Steve W
s (dot) wal (at) verizon (dot) net

"Steve W" > wrote in message =
...

> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:06:20 GMT, Dick Adams=20
> > wrote:

> > OK, here's my suggestion. Forget the "stone" and the "steam" =20
> > altogether.

> I disagree completely. See below.

> ... don't most gas ovens have the flame located below and=20
> outside the oven?

Below yes, but, chez moi, the burner exhaust passes through=20
the oven interior.

> ... you have not tried hard enough. =20

You are not giving me credit enough. Please see for instance:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DFBMv8.33991$Rw2.2561012@bgtnsc05-n=
ews.ops.worldnet.att.net

> My experience is that baking with adequate steam is easily=20
> the most important part of "artisan" style technique.

I think that the quick way to bake artisanal bread is to start=20
with an artisanal oven. In a home oven, you simply cannot easily=20
get the same quality of steam as is possible with a masonry or=20
deck oven. =20

> It is not just a matter of thickness or chewiness. Most of the=20
> flavor of a great loaf comes from the crust.

It seems to me that the flavor from the crust depends on the=20
heat, not on the humidity. =20

> There is simply no comparison between the flavor of my loaves=20
> baked with and without steam. And yes, I have tried both!

There is a good spot to link some comparative graphics, unless=20
your comment has to do with loaf flavor only and not on crust quality.

> Given my equipment, generating adequate steam is very easy, I just=20
> close the vent and spray the oven walls when the loaves are first=20
> loaded. Open vent to dump steam after 10 minutes.

Probably works better in your electric- than in my gas oven. But you=20
just ain't gonna get that artisanal steam.

(This would be a good time for Kenneth to step forward and offer
his experience. Originally an advocate of the pressure-cooker=20
steaming trick, he switched to a Bongard deck oven recently.)=20

> My crust is pretty much the same thickness and color all the way=20
> around. As you can see in my "Steve W's 40/40/10":

> =
http://samartha.net/SD/file-corner/g...ctures/BYDATE=
/

Yep -- there's the "with steam" but where's the "without steam"? (If
you are just talking about flavor, no purpose to show a picture, =
inasmuch
as a picture has no taste.)

BTW, the crusts in my photo were quite evenly brown, except for coups. =20
You apparently misinterpreted some shadows.

--=20
Dick Adams
<firstname> dot <lastname>at bigfoot dot com

Dick Adams wrote:
>
> "Samartha Deva" > wrote in message ...
>
> > Maybe ductaping the vent could do something.
>
> I am sure you could think of something better than that.
>
Well, thinking - there could be no end to anything.. but with this,
suggestions welcome, I don't know what is on your mind with this, what
should be different.

Somebody suggested to put some steel wool into the vent but apparently
did not know my setup. It's just a small grid on the panel where all the
steam escapes. For me it looks best for now.

That's the vent with the duct tape opened:

http://samartha.net/SD/images/BYDATE...PA041190-S.JPG

I tried it today do see how it goes and it is a _huge_ difference.

Before, I had a bowl with water always boiling at the bottom and I did
the same thing again.

Now, with the vent taped, everything is different - couple of points:

- before, there was a difference in heat rear/front and I rotated the
loafs so they brown even. Not necessary any more.

- before, I ran it on max till about 9 minutes after putting the loafs
in or they would turn black. Now it looks I can run it on max all the
time without burning the loafs.

- baking time is reduced

- slashes open wider and it appears to be more rise

Basically, I have to relearn this oven again. It just seems as if there
is much more oomph behind.

Anyone claiming that steam does not make a difference - yeah, sure...

Samartha

--
remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one

"Samartha Deva" > wrote in message =
...

> I don't know what is on your mind with this (duct taping the vent), =
what
> should be different.

Duct tape craps up the stove surface. I propose a jig which holds =
something
soft and resilient against the vent. A fiberglass pad, for instance, or =
possibly
silicone (RTV) molded to fit the surface. I have used a wetted piece of =

padded cloth (from a mattress cover) as described in the following:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DFBMv8.33991$Rw2.2561012@bgtnsc05-n=
ews.ops.worldnet.att.net

I had been doing that for quite a time, before Mrs. Adams shut me down
on account of perceived hazard. For instance, see:

=
..net

Right now I am happy with the EZ loaves I am producing without "steam"
or "stone". =20

http://home.att.net/~dick.adams/EZSDLoaves/index.html

But you, of course, would not like those because they contain no rye
and are much too easy to make.

Consider this: damp dough placed in the oven produces its own=20
humidity, more or less depending on the amount of dough, the size
of the oven, and the rate at which the oven atmosphere is swept by=20
convention.

No doubt, closing the vent (damper) is a simpler matter with electricity
than it is with gas.

I do not think that passive retention of oven humidity compares with the
kind of steam Kenneth, for instance, would get if he chose to use the
steam available in his Bongard oven.

When I was doing the hot-frying-pan steaming trick*, I could actually =
see
the edges on the "slashes" melting away and rounding up. Crusts seemed
relatively thicker, and chewier (though any moist crust is chewy to some =

extend). Maybe one day soon, when Mrs. Adams is away, I will be able
to develop some means to demonstrate that pictorially.

* thru the mist, with the oven vent closed

---
DickA

Dick Adams wrote:
>
> "Samartha Deva" > wrote in message ...
>
> > I don't know what is on your mind with this (duct taping the vent), what
> > should be different.
>
> Duct tape craps up the stove surface.

Well, no problem on my stove, it cleans off without a trace. For
checking it out it's fine. Later I can always implement a voice operated
hydraulic setup when I find the time. For now, a roll of duct tape has
moved into a kitchen drawer.

> I propose a jig which holds something
> soft and resilient against the vent.

Sheesh - you got a spoiled stove, haven't you?

<-->
> I had been doing that for quite a time, before Mrs. Adams shut me down
> on account of perceived hazard.

At least you can talk to the newsgroup about it. May I assume that she
does not read it?

> But you, of course, would not like those because they contain no rye
> and are much too easy to make.

I wonder what makes you do such a statement.

Anyway, by your words, actually, I don't care what grain is used, as
long as I get the result I want and the effort necessary to get it to
produce it - well, I am working on optimizations but right now, what I
am doing is the best I can do.

So - your assumption (as I interpret it) that

a - the grain name is of importance
b - the complexity is of importance

are the main reasons for me doing it is totally missing the point.

If there is another grain than rye as organic and full grain producing
the same product cheaper, quicker and maybe better overall, I'd use it
in no time and the same goes for the complexity. But since I don't know
any better, I stick with the current state.

FYI, the breads currently in my bread box a

a - 100 % white
b - 90 white, 10 % full grain wheat
c - 100 white, SF style 8 + 8 rise
d - pumpkin sesame seed rye mix
e - pumpernickel

The number of wheat breads is unusual, normally, there is one in there.

What moves fastest is the rye mix in different varieties (flax seed,
sunflower seed, different rye/wheat/full grain mixtures etc.), because I
just like it much better. The white bread or anything else without rye
is dryer and less tasty bringing up sawdust associations. Toasting it
helps.

The higher the white flour content of breads is, the more they feel
empty lacking nutrition.

I tried buying and recently bought a bread at Breadworks because I was
curious. It was their multigrain bread, with a very dark crust and I
thought this would be a really dark rye - it was not, just the crust was
dark. Price was about $ 5.- for 675 g (1 1/2 lb.). The bread was good
but did not compare to my breads - too dry (dusty). It was a sourdough
bread but it may be that they used yeast to rise it.

I may have said this before that the LB's in sissy-bakingpan non sour
white breads have pink miniskirts. If somebody is into it - doesn't
scratch me. My LB's have Lederhosen!

Samartha




-
remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one

Samartha Deva wrote:

> ...I may have said this before that the LB's in sissy-bakingpan non sour
> white breads have pink miniskirts....

Here they don't. I got out my microscope and looked. Not a skirt of any description.

> ...If somebody is into it - doesn't
> scratch me. My LB's have Lederhosen!...

Well, I suppose that little leather trousers would add an element of earthiness to the bread.

Regards,

Charles
--
Charles Perry
Reply to:

** A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand **

"Samartha Deva" > wrote in message =
...

> ... I may have said this before that the LB's in sissy-bakingpan non =
sour
> white breads have pink miniskirts. ...

If some one is trying to make chewy SF SD French bread, the white flour
is part of the game. You should try to be more tolerant, and less =
abusive of
our lactobacteria, and of cross-dressers in general.

> > But you, of course, would not like those because they contain no rye
> > and are much too easy to make.

> I wonder what makes you do such a statement.

I wonder why you wonder. You are quite strongly committed to rye breads
and compared to white (wheat) breads, those are relatively difficult to =
make
right, inasmuch as rye is deficient in gluten precursors, but has =
instead sticky=20
ugly starchy stuff that clings to your fingers like doggie dirt, and =
holds the
dough together only subject to the performance of certain rites =
resembling
voodoo sorcery.

---
DickA

Dick Adams wrote:
>
> "Samartha Deva" > wrote in message ...
>
> > ... I may have said this before that the LB's in sissy-bakingpan non sour
> > white breads have pink miniskirts. ...
>
> If some one is trying to make chewy SF SD French bread, the white flour
> is part of the game.

True - but say, is that what you are touting with this:

http://home.att.net/~dick.adams/EZSDLoaves/index.html

pointing the

http://home.att.net/~carlsfriends/di...bread_rev.html

?

The loafs look good, but is the crumb "chewy" with the fermentation of 4
- 8 hours you indicate?

The picture description says crumb is "light". I am just curious and I
really don't want to get into the SF/French bread naming issue.

> You should try to be more tolerant, and less abusive of
> our lactobacteria, and of cross-dressers in general.

What do you mean with "our" - I got mine and you got yours and I really
doubt that yours have Lederhosen.

The one's I got from Charles Perry are strictly used on wheat flour -
mostly white, some whole grain.

That's hardly abusive. If I would put them on rye, it could be called
abuse but since I am not doing it, you don't have a case.

> > > But you, of course, would not like those because they contain no rye
> > > and are much too easy to make.
>
> > I wonder what makes you do such a statement.
>
> I wonder why you wonder.

Looks you did not get my point and I will not repeat my argument.

> You are quite strongly committed to rye breads
> and compared to white (wheat) breads, those are relatively difficult to make
> right,

I can say the same thing about white wheat (ww) breads: To make it
"right" i. e. reproducing a certain desired bread type at will
repeatably with considering kneading and dough/gluten development is
relatively difficult.

To get the holey grail of white bread (large irregular hole, chewy
crumb...) you really need to tinker to get it right. Not much different
than with rye, or any other leavened sourdough bread for that matter.

One thing is true, but you did not bring it up - the time to grow a
starter for rye is longer. I think I can work ww very well with a 2
stage starter process.

> inasmuch as rye is deficient in gluten precursors, but has instead sticky
> ugly starchy stuff

What you call ugly and deficient can be a blessing. The sticky stuff -
pentosans - absorb a lot more water than wheat gluten and make the crumb
moist and elastic. Something you cannot get with ww. So, relatively
seen, ww is deficient in at least that aspect.

> that clings to your fingers like doggie dirt,

Well, that's an interesting association in your head. I am not surprised
that you are unable to deal with rye.

Besides, when wetting your hands in cold water, nothing sticks. With
that I really enjoy playing with rye loafs. They can be shaped in a way
which is totally incomprehensible with ww breads and very forgiving if
you mess up.

> and holds the
> dough together only subject to the performance of certain rites resembling
> voodoo sorcery.

That applies to all sourdough baking, as subjectively claimed by Roy
Basan.

Besides all of that, I have a gut

http://www.sciencenews.org/20030531/bob9.asp

feeling that the sugars, starches and fibers in rye breads are far more
complex than in ww breads and make the human gut micro folks extremely
happy contributing very much to well-being of their host.

This is somewhat supported by evidence found in a research "Selective
Stimulation of Bifidobacteria in the Human Colon by Oligofructose and
Inulin" by Glenn R. Gibson, Emily R. Beatty, Xin Wang and John H Cummins
published 1995 in Gastroenterology Vol. 108:975-982, where "....The
present study has shown that a small alteration in diet, namely the
substitution of 15 g/day sucrose by 15 g/day Oligofructose or inulin,
can lead to significant changes in the balance of the constituent
microflora in the large intestine. ...".

I also cut out a section of text about this context the

http://samartha.net/SD/docs/Rye-txt01.html

There is more to rye than your floccinaucinihilipilification tries to
instill.

Samartha

--
remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one

"Samartha Deva" > wrote in message =
...

> http://home.att.net/~dick.adams/EZSDLoaves/index.html

> The loafs look good, but is the crumb "chewy" with the fermentation of =
4
> - 8 hours you indicate?

> The picture description says crumb is "light".=20

Light crumb. Chewy crust. Chewy crumb takes more messing around
than I am doing these days. Chewy crumb is associated with=20
traditional SF SD, along with the big holes, which I am not getting
with these loafs*. Chewy crumb is denser than light crumb.

> I really doubt that yours have Lederhosen.

I have got lederhosen hanging by the door. I use them whenever
I perform in the neighborhood on my Alpenhorn.

> Looks you did not get my point and I will not repeat my argument.

Good. Avoid tedium, I say.

> One thing is true, but you did not bring it up - the time to grow a
> starter for rye is longer.=20

I presume that is because you are doing the right thing, thus taking the
trouble to manage the build at suitably low pH (high acidity) for the=20
purpose of inhibiting amylase activity. That is not a primary concern =
with
glutinous doughs. Rather, the pH, with very little effort, stays in the =

range where acid inhibition of yeast function is not a serious problem.

> What you call ugly and deficient can be a blessing. The sticky stuff -
> pentosans - absorb a lot more water than wheat gluten and make the =
crumb
> moist and elastic. Something you cannot get with ww. So, relatively
> seen, ww is deficient in at least that aspect.

I agree. When it comes to doughmucking, there is no substitute for rye
dough.

> certain rites resembling voodoo sorcery (apply) to all sourdough=20
> baking, as subjectively claimed by Roy Basan.

Roy is a master of creative subjectivity.

> I have a gut feeling that the sugars, starches and fibers in rye =
breads
> are far more complex than in ww breads and make the human gut=20
> micro folks extremely happy contributing very much to well-being=20
> of their host.

Possibly contributing to retention...

> There is more to rye than your floccinaucinihilipilification tries to
> instill.

Floccinaucinihilipilification??! Yes, quite right! I am the master of
that. Thank you for noticing.

---
DickA

____________
* P.S. to nitpickers: Samartha and me take "loafs" to be the plural of=20
"loaf". That is our preference. So try to have a little respect.

Samartha Deva wrote:

> ...The one's I got from Charles Perry are strictly used on wheat flour -
> mostly white, some whole grain....
>
> ...That's hardly abusive. If I would put them on rye, it could be called
> abuse but since I am not doing it, you don't have a case...

Well, I have no plan to get in the "whose bread, flour, or starter is better" type of discussions, but I will point
out, strictly for the benefit of newer readers, that basic sourdough white bread is generaly eaiser to master than
the whole grain breads. An often stated opinion that I share is that it is a good idea for newcommers to master one
recipe first and then move on to whatever other area of sourdough baking that holds their interest.

I reccomend without reservation the panbread recipe as a good starting loaf that is certanly good enough to stay with
as a standard. I have tested that recipe extensively and find it to be very robust. Robust in the sense that many
brands of flour and many variations in terms of mixing and timing will still yeild an acceptable loaf of bread. It
takes real effort to seriously screw it up.

Again for newer folk, if you are going to make a lot of rye bread, it does make sense to keep a seperate rye
starter. However, if rye is an occaisional thing, it is certainly possible to use Carl's or other white flour
starter. It just take a feeding or two to acclimate Carl's to rye flour. Here is how I make that transition.

I take one tablespoon of rye flour and one teaspoon or less of Carl's starter with enough water to make a batter.
When that bubbles up, I add 1/4 cup of rye and enough water. When that mix peaks out, I start over with one teaspoon
of the now rye starter. ( if it is very vigorous you might skip the start over step and just continue on) Then just
build to the amount of rye start you wish to keep or use.

Converting a white flour starter to rye saves several steps and time over making a rye sour from scratch. This is
not too difficult a procedure for the occaisional rye user since most rye involves building a start in steps anyway
and saves the trouble of keeping two styles of start on hand. It is not necessary to convert the start to rye if the
amount of rye is less than about 1/3 to 1/2 of the flour.

A start with the name of Carl should not be too uncomfortable wearing lederhosen. Call it Karl if it suits you.

Regards,

Charles

--
Charles Perry
Reply to:

** A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand **

Charles Perry wrote:
<- starter religion conversion instructions ->

> A start with the name of Carl should not be too uncomfortable wearing lederhosen. Call it Karl if it suits you.

Naah - I think every starter should grow in it's environment it was born
from or grown into.

When I ordered the Austrian SD from SDint (? years ago?) and it came in,
it was white! They are having white SD starters in Austria? Gimme a
break! Well, he cultured it on white flour - major disappointment....
That starter powder is still sitting somewhere, untouched.

This is unverified, but I have a hunch that it is a one way street from
rye to wheat.

If you grow a rye starter from a wheat starter, I think it's lossy.

I did it once, grew a white from a rye starter, then changed it back to
rye and compared. There was a big difference in taste with the starter
converted back being the looser.

It may have been that I did not wait long enough for the starter
converted back to develop itself better - so what's the guideline for
the converted starter to get established?

Somewhere there is the info that it takes 20 days of continuous
refreshments for a starter to get established.

If you want to make good bread, it's not worth putzing around with
moving starters.

If you putz around and the bread turns out good - what the heck, enjoy
it anyway.

Samartha

--
remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one

Samartha Deva wrote:

> Charles Perry wrote:
> <- starter religion conversion instructions ->

For the starter agnostics, from a starter objectivist.

> ...Naah - I think every starter should grow in it's environment it was born
> from or grown into....
> ...This is unverified, but I have a hunch that it is a one way street from
> rye to wheat.

Well, if you convert Carl's to rye and grow it on rye for a while, I am not sure it will still be Carl's if you
convert it back to white wheat flour. And, that rye starter grown on white flour may be different if it is converted
back to rye, but each will setttle down to a workable starter. I don't advocate switching back and forth.

> I did it once, grew a white from a rye starter, then changed it back to
> rye and compared. There was a big difference in taste with the starter
> converted back being the looser.
>
> It may have been that I did not wait long enough for the starter
> converted back to develop itself better - so what's the guideline for
> the converted starter to get established?

If you are going to seriously explore rye bread, you should keep a seperate rye starter. If you just want to make a
rye loaf once in a while, the results from Carl's will be plenty good enough. It is a time saver from starting a new
rye sour.

If by established, you mean stable, my guide would be that all things being equal, continued refreshment with the
flour of choice would produce no detectable changes in the results of using the starter. I have no idea how long that
would take, either for a converted starter or a new one. I suspect that there might not be much difference. It
doesn't matter.

My point was that you can make a rye bread by converting Carl's with little difficulty. I have no intent to convert
the starter religous or argue the dogma. I like rye. It was my first intro to sourdough. I encourage people to try
rye. It does not have to be difficult.

To make some basic rye or wheat bread is easy. It is only when we try to specifically control some aspect of the
process or result that things rapidly become complex. Rye seems to get more complex or at least more difficult to
control. Ticker enjoys some of more exotic discussions, but sometimes they frighten me and almost shake my firm
belief in the Bread Faeries. It is easy to forget that this whole sourdough bread process was invented by stone age
people none of whom had a college degree.

Regards,

Charles

--
Charles Perry
Reply to:

** A balanced diet is a cookie in each hand **

"Charles Perry" > wrote in message =
...

> [ ... ]

> It is easy to forget that this whole sourdough bread process=20
> was invented by stone age people none of whom had a college=20
> degree.

Not so long as some of them are still among us.

And, I suppose, that if a larger proportion of the "heat" (i.e. heat
transfer) is radiant then the steam effect becomes less relevant. ?

--
Regards,
David
That all-softening overpowering knell
The tocsin of the soul - the dinner bell.
--Lord Byron
"What would life be without arithmetic, but a scene of horrors?"
-Rev. Sydney Smith, letter to young lady, 22 July 1835


-----------------------------------------------------------
David Auerbach
Department of Philosophy & Religion
NCSU
Box 8103
Raleigh, 27695-8103
-----------------------------------------------------------

> wrote in message =
...

> And, I suppose, that if a larger proportion of the "heat" (i.e. heat
> transfer) is radiant then the steam effect becomes less relevant. ?

Why do you suppose that?

In what context do you propose that supposition?