Can anyone recommend a technique for chewy french baguette.

"Bob" > wrote in message =
and in =


> Can anyone recommend a technique for chewy french baguette.

You persist. It was generally perceived as a facetious question.

If you are serious, get some bubble gum. Or, for distinction, some
English Toffee.

(Bob) wrote in message >...
> Can anyone recommend a technique for chewy french baguette.


The simplest way to make a rather chewy bread is to use a really strong flour.
Then you can allow your teeth and gums to have work out that you crave for….
Use high gluten flour ..

On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 18:00:32 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote:

>> Can anyone recommend a technique for chewy french baguette.

>You persist. It was generally perceived as a facetious question.

>If you are serious, get some bubble gum. Or, for distinction, some
>English Toffee.

What kind of response is this?

Troll

On 08 Oct 2003 16:16:25 GMT, pamnone (Wcsjohn) wrote:

>>>> Can anyone recommend a technique for chewy french baguette.

>>>You persist. It was generally perceived as a facetious question.

>>>If you are serious, get some bubble gum. Or, for distinction, some
>>>English Toffee.

>>What kind of response is this?
>>Troll

>A dismissively flippant one which is all the original question deserves.

Why would you say that?

I believe that asking about the texture of bread is not flippant at
all. The store-bought french baguette I get is chewy - like a bagel.
That's the best way I know how to describe it. If you have a better
way of describing that texture, then why don't you clue us in on it.

In fact if you use the key phrase "chewy bread" in Google, you will
find many hits - I hardly doubt those articles were "flippant".

Or maybe the grammar of my original question was not understood as I
had intended it. I had intended to ask: "Can anyone recommend a
technique for making chewy french baguette bread?"

In my haste I left out the words "making" and "bread", and I also left
out the question mark. But that should not have generated stupid
responses like the ones in this thread.

If you can point out how the question is flippant I would sure like to
see it. Otherwise, you are just a troll.

Bob wrote:
> Can anyone recommend a technique for chewy french baguette.


By chewy I gather you mean the stretchy quality (which also includes a waxy
appearance) of french breads. As an example, by taking a slice of bread, you
can see the webby structure of the crumb.

You need to have a dough that is high in hydration. Take care not to squeeze
out the gases of the final dough. If the dough is overhandled, the bread
will not have the loose crumb structure, but a rather closed crumb. It just
won't be the same in taste or texture. Recipes with multi-fermentations
(sponge, sourdough starter, or old dough) IMO are a must to achieve those
characteristics so elusive. The basic baguette recipe on the King Arthur
Flour site is a good one to start with. Above all, practice alot.

If you look at Samartha's sourdough site (I don't have his URL but search
the r.f.s. archives), he's got plenty of image examples of that type of lean
bread.

"Ignoramus792" > wrote in message =
...

> I have dick killfiled to avoid wasting time reading his posts.

Good. Then I can speak freely on this subject, so as not to embarrass
the agressively ignorant dolt with the abysmal depth of his =
self-designated
ignorance.

For one thing, *Chewy French Baguette* is an oxymoron, notwithstanding
what may be dishonestly purveyed as such in American supermarkets.

To Roy: the French make their French bread with low gluten flour,
which is what the French have, and seem to like. Possibly the crusts=20
are soft for a few moments when the come out of the oven, but by the
time the loaves reach the home, they are definitely crunchy, and a few
hours later one risks an explosion of gritty crumbs if approaching such
a loaf with a knife with intention to cut. =20

For another thing, French baguettes are not sourdough, so discussion of
them is off topic at r.f.s.

"Bob" had apparently written:

> > If you can point out how the question is flippant I would sure like =
(you)
> > to.

I did not see the post that mentioned flippant. I would not have =
guessed
that "Bob" was smart enough to be flippant. I assumed that it was a =
feeble
attempt at a dumb joke. Does "Bob" think he is the only "Bob" on the=20
in the Internet? Or even at r.f.s.? How about it, you one-name =
noobies?
Are you arrogant or brain-dead? Why don't you give us more specific =
self
designations, maybe something way out, like Bob Jones or Bob Smith or=20
something like that to make yourself seem mildly unique.

Well, "How do you make french baguettes?" is not a much better post=20
than "How do you make chewy french baguettes". Anyway, this not=20
where people learn how to make French baguettes. It is for
sourdough, and there is plenty of stuff to read before you jump in with
one-line questions, and it is pretty easy to find.

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

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 18:17:58 GMT, "RLK" >
wrote:

>> Can anyone recommend a technique for chewy french baguette.

>The basic baguette recipe on the King Arthur
>Flour site is a good one to start with. Above all, practice alot.

I have tried the KA recipe on their online cooking school (not the one
in their recipe section) and it is as close as I can get to achieving
what I want. The dough almost feels like putty at the end of kneading.

I use the KA bread flour which is higher in gluten than regular flour
(14%). I then add 1 TBS of wheat gluten for each 2 cups of flour which
raises the gluten to the 17% level KA used to sell as "high gluten"
flour.

I have found that the KA recipe is best made in 150% size. That way
you do not have to let the final loaves rise too much to get a decent
size loaf on your bagette pan. I am looking for a final product with
the density of a bagel, and the final rise of the KA recipe causes the
bread to be too small for my baguette pan. I am using the Chicago
Metallic 3 loaf perforated baguette pan.

For those readers not familiar with that particular recipe, it is at

http://ww2.kingarthurflour.com/cgibi...49560659978068

on their cooking school page. This recipe is different from the one
listed in their recipes, and it is presented in great detail. It
appears quite unorthodox in the way the dough is formed. First they
have you mix the dough for 30 seconds in a bread machine and then let
it sit for 20 mintues. Then it is kneaded for 7 minutes in the machine
and allowed to rise for 2 hours with a punch down after 1 hour. Then
it is formed into logs and allowed to rest for 20 minutes, then formed
into baguettes and allowed to rest for 20-30 minutes.

If I follow that recipe exactly the amount of dough is insufficient to
make the 3 baguettes they claim it will make. It will only make 2
baguettes for my baguette pan, so I have to increase the ingredients
50% to make enough for 3 baguettes. Otherwise I have to let the dough
rise for 60 minutes on the pans and that makes the final product less
dense, which I do not care for in this recipe.

>If you look at Samartha's sourdough site (I don't have his URL but search
>the r.f.s. archives), he's got plenty of image examples of that type of lean
>bread.

Thanks for the reference, but my objective is not to make a better
sourdough (the KA recipe for poolish is quite adequate), but to make a
more elastic, higher density baguette. I figured that by asking the
sourdough experts here they might be able to help.

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 19:26:51 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote:

>For one thing, *Chewy French Baguette* is an oxymoron, notwithstanding
>what may be dishonestly purveyed as such in American supermarkets.

Then why is the lead sentence in an article about sourdough bread as
follows: http://www.joejaworski.com/bread1.htm

"If you're a bread lover, nothing beats the tangy taste and chewy
texture of true San Francisco French style sourdough bread."

You are just an irrelevant troll who does not know what he is talking
about. I figure you are about 13 years old trying desperately to
figure out what puberty is all about.

Let me offer a hint: Puberty is all about leaving your anal rententive
tendencies behind and becoming a man.

Acting like an asshole troll is just anal retentive behavior.

(Ooops. sorry! I did not recognize till now that this thread was cross =
posted.)

"Bob" > wrote in message =
...

> Acting like an asshole troll is just anal retentive behavior.

What makes you think it is just acting?

> I figure you are about 13 years old trying desperately to
> figure out what puberty is all about.

Actually, I am older.

> ... why (did Joe Jaworsky say) "If you're a bread lover,=20
> nothing beats the tangy taste and chewy texture of true San=20
> Francisco French style sourdough bread."

Because his was talking about San Francisco Sourdough French
Bread. He was not talking about French Baguettes. French
baguettes are made in France in a French way. San Francisco=20
Sourdough French Bread is a California thing. I have never seen
a San Francisco Sourdough French Baguette, but, if there were=20
one, I suppose it might be chewy. =20

Joe is probably a real good guy, but he is not part of this newsgroup
and has his own way of doing things. For instance, his choice to use
a pizza tile as a cookie tin is entirely unique. Having a web site does
not necessarily make one an expert. (Both a web site and lederhosen
is better.) (Web site, lederhosen, and talk funny -- you could be=20
governor one day.)

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

(Bob) wrote in message >...
> On 08 Oct 2003 16:16:25 GMT, pamnone (Wcsjohn) wrote:
>The store-bought french baguette I get is chewy - like a bagel.
>That's the best way I know how to describe it.

Duh….. I thought before that you want practice some mouth aerobics!<g>
And that was the reason for your insistence for a chewy bread..
The bakery bread(including French baguette)is usually made with bread
flour; that is the main reason for chewiness( higher protein content
flour) in contrast to the common home flour( all purpose flour).
Another reason is;The dough was mixed in an industrial type mixer(
heavy duty spiral mixer) that developed the dough extensively and that
will contribute to chewiness as well. In contrast I doubt if the home
mixer can duplicate the mixing energy input of that commercial mixers
..
A well developed dough will result in a more chewy bread than an under
mixed dough assuming the fermentation and proofing time are the same.
There are other reasons that cause chewiness in store brought French
bread:
1) In the traditional sense, the bread was made by the multi step
process such as the two stage sponge and dough or adding an old dough
etc, is the practiced by many bakers when making french bread.In
contrast their is textural difference from the baguette made by the
straight dough which is less chewy in comparison; although the
fermentation timing has something to do with it also.
2)If they employ the straight dough ( or direct process), I must have
to remind you that many of those store bought items are laden with
bread improvers that contain ingredient that strengthen the dough. If
the bread ingredient declaration includes emulsifiers E472e, enzymes(
that contains enzymatic dough toughener
xylanase/hemicellulase/pentosanase combination), and high amount of
ascorbic acid( also a dough strengthener) that will yield a tougher
dough that will be tolerant to rough dough handling and rapid
processing time that is common in the bakery. The result will be a
more chewy bread than what you made at home even if you using the same
recipe except without that institutional bread improver.
If you want to duplicate that store brought bread just think about
that information I related and try to adapt some of the ideas to your
home baking and see how it goes...
Good Luck!
Roy

Dick Adams wrote:

> For another thing, French baguettes are not sourdough, so discussion of
> them is off topic at r.f.s.

That would depend entirely on whether he meant good French baguettes or
bad French baguettes. I would give him the benefit of the doubt and
assume he wanted good ones. Chewiness can come from higher-gluten
flour, but it seems to me that the most important thing is that the
dough be well mixed. Generally, a slightly under-risen dough will be
chewier than a fully-risen dough.

David

Bob wrote:
<a bunch of shit>

Bob, I answered your question. Now please go away.

David

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 01:54:26 -0400, Feuer > wrote:

David wrote:
<a bunch of shit>

>Bob, I answered your question. Now please go away.

David, you are not intelligent enough to assess anything in written
form. For example you are completely incapable of complying with this
written statement:

Bugger off, worthless troll!

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 21:41:29 GMT, "RLK" >
wrote:

>The first thing I thought of is to omit the final rise. After it is formed
>and placed in the troughs, place it direct into the oven. This would make
>your crumb much denser. -Or- instead of a 40-minute rise, try a 20-minute
>rise and use your 150% quantity. It will rise in the oven, just not as much
>as before.

That's basically what I have done, namely, lessen the time of the
final rise. I am still experimenting with how long to let it rise. I
want a "chewy" and "dense" product, but not too "chewy" or "dense".

>Another thought is to mimic the texture of bagel dough by lowering the
>hydration ACK! ...sacre bleu, c'est une baguette mauvaise!

I tried that once and it was a disaster. I will mention, however, that
the dough I end up with using the KA technique is rather on the dry
side. But it is not as dry as you mention above.

>I happen to like my baguettes airy and try everything in my power to avoid
>the above

I also like the airy type of baguette but I wanted to be able to make
the kind of baguette that is sold in the grocery store. IOW, I am
curious as to the method, which I now believe I have found.

>but since you are specifically looking for a dense texture,
>give it a try. Do you think it might work?

It has worked much better than I thought it would. By not kneading the
dough much at all and by allowing it to go thru several rises, it
comes out about as close to what I want as I can get it.

I wanted to check with the experts here to see if there was something
I could do to improve on it. It appears that the technique used in
that KA online school recipe is the way to go, namely knead the bread
for only 7 minutes and then put it thru several long rises and punch
downs.

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 18:51:39 -0400, EJM > wrote:

>While our recipe for French style bread does not have the density of a
>bagel, it is quite elastic and chewy with a crispy crust and a lovely
>nutty flavour. The crumb has a golden colour that is quite shiny around
>the holes which are irregularly shaped.

>http://ejmtph.crosswinds.net/recipes...ead.html#boule

Sounds great - I am going to try that recipe. I just printed it out.
But I think I am going to use the KA technique for making the dough.

>I have not even come close to mastering the shaping
>technique for baguette.

The dough I make using the KA online school recipe for baguettes is
almost like silly putty when it was time to do the final shaping into
loaves. It was extremely elastic, so much so that I have to let it
rest between rollings as the loaves elongated. If I try to shape the
loaf all at one time, it will spring back to near original length. It
is like trying to make loaves out of soft rubber.

I have no problem shaping the loaves. It's a simple matter of rolling
the dough on the board with the palms of your hands, applying enough
pressure to squeeze the dough into longer shapes.

>However, the small boules do get this wonderful
>chewiness because I find it easier not to disturb the bubbles when
>making a boule.

I tried doing that but I was unsuccessful.

>You may notice that there is very little yeast used in the bread. I am
>constantly amazed that it actually rises but it does. I see that the KA
>recipe suggests using a lightly oiled bowl for the rising dough. This
>may be contributing to the noncrispiness. As far as I know, oil is never
>used in a baguette. The bowl that I use for rising dough is clean and
>dry when I put the dough in.

I will omit the oil next time. However it was a very slight amount -
just a film of oil.

>The dough rises on the counter (kitchen
>temperature is generally somewhere between 18C and 21C) and when the
>dough has risen sufficiently, it falls slowly but cleanly from the bowl.
>(No need for oil).

Once the dough I make gets to the high-elastic stage, it is not
sticky.

>The other difference is that I spray the risen loaves
>with room temperature water just before putting them in the well
>preheated oven. (Ice cubes thrown into the oven are not recommended -
>they bring the oven temperature down too far.)

I also spray the loaves with water but I do it after about 5-10
minutes into the 20-25 minute baking cycle.

>I do not have any mixing machines (mainly because we don't have one) so
>the instructions are for making the bread by hand. But I would think it
>would be fairly easy to adapt if you want to use a mixer. (There is
>something really satisfying about hand kneading that slack dough
>though!)

I like using the bread machine because I know I will get consistent
results. Perhaps if you have kneaded dough for a long time, you can be
consistent but I have never kneaded dough by hand, so I do not trust
myself.

There is nothing more aggravatating than to make one batch that is
perfect and never being able to duplicate it because the technique is
not consistent.

>Hope that helps and happy bread baking!

Yes it is helpful information. I look forward to tasting the bread in
that recipe.

On 08 Oct 2003 21:55:32 GMT, (Static I) wrote:

>I think you are attracting less than sympathetic responses, because you are
>striving for the exact opposite of what most of us undrestand as a baguette and
>are trying to achieve: a thin crisp crust and a chewy crumb.

The only "unattractive responses" are coming from boorish trolls. The
others on these forums have been quite accomodating and helpful.

Why you all tolerate these loutish morons is beyond me. It's really
very easy to run trolls off - just ignore them *completely* and they
will go somewhere else. The worst fate for a troll is to be ignored
completely.

With that in mind, I am going to ignore all further trollish matters.

>If you want a baguette that's more like a bagel, maybe adapting a Bagel
>Bread.would be more helpful than trying to make baguette dough into something
>quite different.

I tried that and the result was disastrous. I suppose I should have
never used the bagel analogy.

>Now, I've never had any of this, but here are some -
>
>http://www.just-recipes.net/bagel_bread.htm
>
>http://lowfatcooking.about.com/libra...es/blbagel.htm
>
>http://www.recipesource.com/ethnic/n...-wheat-bagel-b
>read-from1.html
>
> http://www.breadrecipe.com/az/BagelBread.asp

Thanks, but I think I am going to pass.

Bagel breads use adjuncts (eggs, milk, oil, sugar, etc) to achieve
their characteristic composition, and that ends up being a disaster
for making the kind of bread I want to make.

The dough that works best for me in this application has only flour,
water, salt and yeast in its recipe. The texture comes from the
preparation technique - in particular the sparse kneading and the
multiple long rises and punch downs.

Overworking the dough and not giving it enough time for the gluten to
develop causes it to come out like conventional dough, which is not
what I want in this application.

On 7 Oct 2003 15:18:28 -0700, (Roy Basan) wrote:

>The simplest way to make a rather chewy bread is to use a really strong flour.
>Use high gluten flour ..

I add wheat gluten to KA bread flour, which is high in gluten to begin
with. I add 1 TBS per 2 cups which raises the percentage from about
14% to 17%, the latter which is the same as KA's high gluten flour of
times past.

But that is not the only thing that contributes to the chewy texture.
It is the technique. I noticed on another thread that you mentioned:

"The dough was mixed in an industrial type mixer ( heavy duty spiral
mixer) that developed the dough extensively and that will contribute
to chewiness as well."

I have found just the opposite, namely that I can get a very elastic
dough (and therefore a very chewy bread) if I do not work the dough
much at all. The KA online school recipe calls for just 7 minutes
kneading in a bread machine. Also I have found that several rises and
resting periods contributes to the elastic texture.

Every recipe I have ever seen or tried called for overworking the
dough - and not one of them ever worked. Once I discovered the KA
recipe, I learned that the secret to elastic dough is not working the
dough much plus all those rises and rests.

"Bob" > wrote in message
...
> I also spray the loaves with water but I do it after about 5-10
> minutes into the 20-25 minute baking cycle.


There is no point in doing this. The steamy air is required within the
first 10-12 minutes of baking. Anything after that adversely effects the
browning of the crust.
Janet

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 08:12:42 -0600, "Janet Bostwick"
> wrote:

>
>"Bob" > wrote in message
...
>> I also spray the loaves with water but I do it after about 5-10
>> minutes into the 20-25 minute baking cycle.
>
>
>There is no point in doing this. The steamy air is required within the
>first 10-12 minutes of baking. Anything after that adversely effects the
>browning of the crust.

While I don't doubt your wisdom on this matter, I have sprayed the
loaves at the onset of baking and seem to get basically the same
results when I spray in the 5-10 minute window. You yourself just said
that I could go as long as 10-12 minutes, which is what I have been
doing.

But just to play it safe I will spray the loaves when I put them in.
That KA recipe recommended spaying at the beginning - that's why I
tried it.

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 12:52:30 -0400, EJM > wrote:

>Once again, I am replying only to a.b.r. as this is offtopic for
>militant sourdough newsgroup.

But I want them involved because this is a baguette recipe and
sourdough is know for its "chewy" quality.

Also, as a matter of etiquette, I initiated this thread, so in
principle I am the only one who is permitted to trim newsgroups.

Now back to our regularly schedule programming.

>I tried to get back to look at the mixing techniques for the KA recipe
>you mentioned you were using but got bounced to KA's main page. I cannot
>remember if you make baguette #1 or baguette#2.

As I mentioned that recipe is not on the regular recipe site but on
the online school site.

http://ww2.kingarthurflour.com/cgibi...49560659978068

>However, please do try
>using the technique I outlined in "rusticbread.html#boule" for the
>initial rise of the dough. It was only when I started doing that method
>that the final crumb was so elastic.

Then based on your recommendation I will give it a try.

>Note that at no point is oil used
>even in the smallest amounts. (I gather that by definition, a French
>baguette can contain only the following ingredients: wheat flour, water,
>yeast, salt.)

Yes, that is my understanding too, but you should see all the recipes
out there (bread books and Internet) which advocate the use of
adjuncts. They are also the ones which advocate "de-glutenizing" the
dough by beating it half to death.

>Too much pressure may make the crumb too uniform. (I believe this is why
>I have failed with baguettes) Personally, I am aiming for some large
>bubbles in the final crumb. I find that when I make boules, I can easily
>cradle them in my hands and shape them without over-disturbing the
>bubbles.

Can't you let the final loaf rise for a long time, say a couple hours?
That should build up some large bubbles.

I may start a thread where I ask how you make Schlotsky's style bubble
bread.

>>I also spray the loaves with water but I do it after about 5-10
>>minutes into the 20-25 minute baking cycle.

>As has been mentioned already, the steam is supposed to be at the
>beginning of the baking.

Yes, I found that out in that KA recipe, and another poster also
mentioned it. I got the (bad) habit of spraying 10 minutes into the
baking cycle from those recipes I spoke of above - the ones where they
do not know how to make baguettes.

>Aside from the fact that adding steam later on
>may inhibit the crustiness of the bread, you don't want to lose oven
>heat unnecessarily. Apparently, every time you open your oven door, you
>lose about 50F. This is why I preheat to the highest temperature my oven
>will go to (500F) (with a broiling pan of water on the bottommost shelf)
>and turn it down when the bread goes in. I do not open the oven again
>until about half way through the baking to turn the bread around to
>allow for uneven heat in the oven.

I have decided to spray the dough just as it goes into the oven. I
tried that when I followed the KA recipe and it worked OK. But it was
essentially the same as spraying at 10 min, other than to open the
door during the baking as you point out.

"Bob" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 12:52:30 -0400, EJM > wrote:
>
> >Once again, I am replying only to a.b.r. as this is offtopic for
> >militant sourdough newsgroup.
>
> But I want them involved because this is a baguette recipe and
> sourdough is know for its "chewy" quality.
>
> Also, as a matter of etiquette, I initiated this thread, so in
> principle I am the only one who is permitted to trim newsgroups.
>
> Now back to our regularly schedule programming.
>
> >I tried to get back to look at the mixing techniques for the KA recipe
> >you mentioned you were using but got bounced to KA's main page. I cannot
> >remember if you make baguette #1 or baguette#2.
>
> As I mentioned that recipe is not on the regular recipe site but on
> the online school site.
>
>
http://ww2.kingarthurflour.com/cgibi...49560659978068
>
> >However, please do try
> >using the technique I outlined in "rusticbread.html#boule" for the
> >initial rise of the dough. It was only when I started doing that method
> >that the final crumb was so elastic.
>
> Then based on your recommendation I will give it a try.
>
> >Note that at no point is oil used
> >even in the smallest amounts. (I gather that by definition, a French
> >baguette can contain only the following ingredients: wheat flour, water,
> >yeast, salt.)
>
> Yes, that is my understanding too, but you should see all the recipes
> out there (bread books and Internet) which advocate the use of
> adjuncts. They are also the ones which advocate "de-glutenizing" the
> dough by beating it half to death.
>
> >Too much pressure may make the crumb too uniform. (I believe this is why
> >I have failed with baguettes) Personally, I am aiming for some large
> >bubbles in the final crumb. I find that when I make boules, I can easily
> >cradle them in my hands and shape them without over-disturbing the
> >bubbles.
>
> Can't you let the final loaf rise for a long time, say a couple hours?
> That should build up some large bubbles.
>
> I may start a thread where I ask how you make Schlotsky's style bubble
> bread.
>
> >>I also spray the loaves with water but I do it after about 5-10
> >>minutes into the 20-25 minute baking cycle.
>
> >As has been mentioned already, the steam is supposed to be at the
> >beginning of the baking.
>
> Yes, I found that out in that KA recipe, and another poster also
> mentioned it. I got the (bad) habit of spraying 10 minutes into the
> baking cycle from those recipes I spoke of above - the ones where they
> do not know how to make baguettes.
>
> >Aside from the fact that adding steam later on
> >may inhibit the crustiness of the bread, you don't want to lose oven
> >heat unnecessarily. Apparently, every time you open your oven door, you
> >lose about 50F. This is why I preheat to the highest temperature my oven
> >will go to (500F) (with a broiling pan of water on the bottommost shelf)
> >and turn it down when the bread goes in. I do not open the oven again
> >until about half way through the baking to turn the bread around to
> >allow for uneven heat in the oven.
>
> I have decided to spray the dough just as it goes into the oven. I
> tried that when I followed the KA recipe and it worked OK. But it was
> essentially the same as spraying at 10 min, other than to open the
> door during the baking as you point out.
>
Bob,
It sounds as though you are at the beginning of your bread discovery
journey. Initially it is very easy to learn to make a loaf of bread. After
that it gets harder. That's when you want a particular texture, color,
taste or style. Complex mechanical and chemical processes begin as soon as
you add water to flour. It takes a while to discover how to use them to our
advantage. Most of us will tell you that in the beginning we probably were
not asking the right question or addressing the right issue to fix a
problem. It takes awhile to make enough sense of what is going on to figure
out why we get the results we do. So please be patient while we question
you. I'm sure the KA online class is good and that you followed directions.
However, the devil is in the interpretation and nuances of the directions
and that comes with making lots of bread and closely observing each step of
the process. For a first step I recommend that you go out and buy a loaf of
the bread that you admire. Bring it home, heft it in the hand--how does if
feel size to weight comparison. Run your hand over the outside of the loaf
to understand the texture of the crust. Smell the crust--go ahead put your
nose right on the loaf. Slice the loaf, run your fingers over the crumb,
smell it, hold it to the light and look at the cell structure. Taste the
bread. Take notes. The next time you make a loaf of bread, go through the
same steps and compare your loaf to the admired one. Pick out one item of
dissatisfaction with your loaf and work on that until you get it right.
Trust me, the flavor, the crust, the chewiness and so forth are unlikely to
be directly related to one another in a simple fashion where one fix will
fix everything.

Janet

Bob wrote:
>
> Also, as a matter of etiquette, I initiated this thread, so in
> principle I am the only one who is permitted to trim newsgroups.

Can you please point to a cite for this assertion?

B/

(Bob) wrote in message >...

>
> I add wheat gluten to KA bread flour, which is high in gluten to begin
> with. I add 1 TBS per 2 cups which raises the percentage from about
> 14% to 17%, the latter which is the same as KA's high gluten flour of
> times past.
I do not see the point of adding gluten to a 13% protein flour if you
are making normal bread.
And if you increase the protein content of flour you are making it
difficult to develop the gluten fully and maximize its benefits.And
with such a well developed really high protein flour with nothing to
carry out(such as grains and other gritty ,heavy materials) but itself
what will be the value of such bread except as a high protein bread
that is likely very chewy.
The limited mixing ( you employ)anyway will enable you to attain some
considerable dough development as there are more gluten protein
present to bind the flour starch and form thicker gluten membrane
..Hence ensures good leavening gas retention even, with minimal
kneading and other dough manipulation procedures.

> I have found just the opposite, namely that I can get a very elastic
> dough (and therefore a very chewy bread) if I do not work the dough
> much at all. The KA online school recipe calls for just 7 minutes
> kneading in a bread machine. Also I have found that several rises and
> resting periods contributes to the elastic texture.
Once I discovered the KA
> recipe, I learned that the secret to elastic dough is not working the
> dough much plus all those rises and rests.
Secrets of King arthur? Is it about where they hid the Excalibur
sword<g>....
So if you know some of the secrets of attaining a chewy dough why
bother to frantically ask more about it, if you already know the
answer from your experience?
But The fact is that technique is not original and cannot be only
attributed to King Arthur website but was already used centuries ago
in Europe when the mixing machines were still primitive( as well as
manual dough mixing) as compared to now.
And even now in France mixing a french bread dough the mixers being
used there by country bakers are the gentle fork type agitator that
kneads the dough slowly with a rotating mixing bowl that does not
develope the gluten extensively as the other mixers used in other
bakeries.There are many french bakers in the country who only
mixes the dough nearly half developed but let it undergo an autolysis
and succesive knockback and resting period and still get a good bread.

> Every recipe I have ever seen or tried called for overworking the
> dough - and not one of them ever worked.
Overworking the dough?With normal bread flour and if you knead by
hand?.If you understand the mixing endpoint you do not overdevelop the
dough;but if you do not know the stages of dough development and the
changes of dough appearance and feel.But just gauging by
perception,then maybe by the time your arms feel tired and you get
sores in your armpit and you stop catching your breath; you will think
that you overdeveloped the dough and you think its enough then.
But it seldom happen that kneading the dough by hand you will reach
the point of dough overdevelopment.It is more common occurence that
the kneaded dough approaches to the optimum developed dough if you
knead it well.
However if you use a good mixer and(supposing) you are using a medium
gluten flour like all purpose you can easily overdevelop the dough.But
if you use the higher protein flour (you prepared) it will take some
time to get it properly developed and the dough will become very warm
and that will affect the bread quality..
Which in the end, you will conclude that overmixing is really bad for
the dough.That is true if its really overmixed well it.But...
I do not agree with your experience that extensive mixing does not
toughen the eating quality of the product.As long as you use the
normal bread flour,the dough temperature is controlled the resulting
bread will be really chewy.
It also conforms with industrial baking experience where all the
variables are controlled( timing that covers from mixing,knockback,
fermentation and proofing).If the mixer operator accidentally
undermixed the dough(or due to sudden mixer defect) it produces an
inferior , weak structured bread with poor masticating quality.

But what you did is technically correct..
Less mixing but extensive rises and rest and that will fulfill the
same purpose in gluten development as proper mixing .

And even bakers in poor countries who cannot afford to buy mixers are
employing the same technique in their daily breadmaking..
And even in the home if I make bread (manually), while doing other
chores at the same period of time I usually do it occasionally.
Roy

On 9 Oct 2003 17:07:47 -0700, (Roy Basan) wrote:

>> I add wheat gluten to KA bread flour, which is high in gluten to begin
>> with. I add 1 TBS per 2 cups which raises the percentage from about
>> 14% to 17%, the latter which is the same as KA's high gluten flour of
>> times past.

>I do not see the point of adding gluten to a 13% protein flour if you
>are making normal bread.

I am not trying to make "normal" bread.

>And if you increase the protein content of flour you are making it
>difficult to develop the gluten fully and maximize its benefits.

Then why did KA offer a 17% bread once?

>And with such a well developed really high protein flour with nothing to
>carry out(such as grains and other gritty ,heavy materials) but itself
>what will be the value of such bread except as a high protein bread
>that is likely very chewy.

Which is the subject of this thread.

>The limited mixing ( you employ)anyway will enable you to attain some
>considerable dough development as there are more gluten protein
>present to bind the flour starch and form thicker gluten membrane
>.Hence ensures good leavening gas retention even, with minimal
>kneading and other dough manipulation procedures.

I do not know the science behind it, but the technique works the way I
want it to work. I end up with a very elastic dough which translates
into a chewy bread.

>So if you know some of the secrets of attaining a chewy dough why
>bother to frantically ask more about it,

How could you possibly interpret my original post as "frantic"? <jeez>

What's with you guys - are you snorting the stuff you bake with?

>if you already know the
>answer from your experience?

As I pointed out in an earlier post, I opened this thread to learn
more. This is the first time I have used such a "radical" technique so
I wanted to consult with the experts to see what they thought.

>But The fact is that technique is not original and cannot be only
>attributed to King Arthur website but was already used centuries ago
>in Europe when the mixing machines were still primitive( as well as
>manual dough mixing) as compared to now.

I never claimed it originated with KA. But I can tell you that of all
the websites and all the bread books I have seen, every one of them
except KA advised beating the living crap out of the dough - even for
breads they claimed were chewy.

This KA recipe is the only one I had found earlier on the web for
chewy baguette that results in truly chewy baguette. The recipe that
another poster presented the other day comes very close to the same
essential technique, so now I know there are at least 2 recipes
advocating this technique.

I think it's a conspiracy of the bread machine makers - if people
could make such delicious bread with only 7 minutes of machine
kneading, then there is every likelihood many would say screw the
expense and bother of a machine and just knead it by hand. So every
recipe you see tells you to knead the bread for an hour.

>I do not agree with your experience that extensive mixing does not
>toughen the eating quality of the product.As long as you use the
>normal bread flour,the dough temperature is controlled the resulting
>bread will be really chewy.

I tried all purpose flour and long kneading times and the bread was
not chewy. But that is likely the result of my particular bread
machine on the dough cycle.

This is the only technique that works for me, and now that I have seen
another instance of it, I am going to use it exclusively for my chewy
baguette recipe.

>But what you did is technically correct..
>Less mixing but extensive rises and rest and that will fulfill the
>same purpose in gluten development as proper mixing .

And it is a lot easier.

For those of you on <rec.food.sourdough> I found a technique for
making starter where the guy makes a small batch and gives it a day to
start then he adds a second small amount and gives it a day to develop
and then he does it a third time. He claims it takes all these
separate starts to get a really sour taste. I am on day two now
staging for a Sunday bakeoff.

My point is that I not only want to make a chewy baguette, but I want
to make a chewy sourdough baguette. I can't eat white bread that is
not sourdough - it tastes flat to me no matter what I put in it. Only
sourdough has the kind of taste I associate with this kind of bread.

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 12:47:29 -0600, "Janet Bostwick"
> wrote:

>It sounds as though you are at the beginning of your bread discovery
>journey. Initially it is very easy to learn to make a loaf of bread. After
>that it gets harder. That's when you want a particular texture, color,
>taste or style. Complex mechanical and chemical processes begin as soon as
>you add water to flour. It takes a while to discover how to use them to our
>advantage. Most of us will tell you that in the beginning we probably were
>not asking the right question or addressing the right issue to fix a
>problem.

My problem was that all the recipes I had seen in bread books and on
the Internet were not working. I then wrote KA and the respondent
steered me to their online cooking school where I discovered this
technique - the first that ever worked.

That recipe EJM posted for boules is very close to this recipe, so now
I feel that I have found the recipe I want to use exclusively for
chewy baguette - which is the only bread I really care for in
sourdough.

>For a first step I recommend that you go out and buy a loaf of
>the bread that you admire. Bring it home, heft it in the hand--how does if
>feel size to weight comparison. Run your hand over the outside of the loaf
>to understand the texture of the crust. Smell the crust--go ahead put your
>nose right on the loaf. Slice the loaf, run your fingers over the crumb,
>smell it, hold it to the light and look at the cell structure. Taste the
>bread. Take notes. The next time you make a loaf of bread, go through the
>same steps and compare your loaf to the admired one. Pick out one item of
>dissatisfaction with your loaf and work on that until you get it right.
>Trust me, the flavor, the crust, the chewiness and so forth are unlikely to
>be directly related to one another in a simple fashion where one fix will
>fix everything.

That's what I basically have done. I have bought baguettes from the
local groceries which are amazingly good. I wanted to tackle the chewy
issue first before I get into egg wash glazes and other things. Now
that I feel I have the chewy issue behind me I am working on the
texture issue - I want a more dense bread and I think I will achieve
it by not letting the final rise go too long. That means I have to
make more dough because the amount I currently make requires a long
rise to build up sufficient size. After that I want to work on the
crust, first the water spray technique and then the egg wash
technique.

As I have pointed out earlier this is not just a chewy baguette, it is
a chewy sourdough baguette. Therefore I have a whole new set of issues
that relate to the taste of the final product. I have a feeling I am
taking on a big chore trying to perfect all these matters, but that is
why I like making my own bread, even if it's always sourdough
baguettes.

Maybe I should have titled this thread "chewy sourdough baguette" but
I figured the term "chewy French baguette" would connote sourdough. In
any event, I now have two things to try out Sunday when I make my next
batch:

1. New sourdough starter technique.

2. Crumb density.

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 11:53:54 -0700, Brian Mailman
> wrote:

>> Also, as a matter of etiquette, I initiated this thread, so in
>> principle I am the only one who is permitted to trim newsgroups.

>Can you please point to a cite for this assertion?

No.

On 10 Oct 2003 14:08:31 GMT, pamnone (Wcsjohn) wrote:


>Have you tried long, 24 - 48 hours, room temperature preferments with minimal
>commercial yeast, high hydration (100%+) and a small (ca. 5 - 10 % of starter
>flour) rye in the preferment? It smells exceedingly ripe after 48 hours but the
>pH is low enough to give a pleasant tang and help with gluten development.

I have not tried rye flour in the starter mainly because I cannot find
it. I have done 24-48 hour RT ferments and they come out good. The KA
recipe claims that the starter is best when it is at its most active.
I am not in agreement, as I have found that the longer I let the
starter ferment, even if it is in the refrigerator several days after
the initial 24 hour RT ferment, it tastes better.

One thing I am going to do this time is make about 1cup more starter
than I need so I can reculture the next starter from it. That ought to
make it really "ripe", as you call it.

The KA recipe calls for a ratio of 2:1 for the flour that goes in the
main dough vs. the flour that goes into the starter. They claim it is
the classic ratio.

From the KA recipe:

"One last note: Notice the 'symmetry' of the ingredient amounts: equal
amounts of flour and water (by weight) in the poolish, and in the
dough, the same amount of water again, and double the amount of
flour. This is the 'classic' French formula for a baguette. "

Also notice that they are talking about "sourdough" as though it is
synonymous with "French". Hence the subject of this thread, when I
really meant "Chewy Sourdough Baguette". It's for that reason I
included <rec.food.sourdough> which you all keep trimming off.

I have usually done 1 cup flour in the starter and 3 cups in the main
batch, so I will be trying more starter this next time based on KA's
recommendation.

Overall I will be making 3 baguettes from a total of 5 5/8 cups of
flour. That's 1.5 times the KA recipe. I am doing that to cut back on
the final rise in hopes of increasing crumb density. It's just an
experiment - I may return to the official KA recipe if the baguettes
come out too dense.

[NOT CROSSPOSTED]

"Bob" > wrote in message news:3f869a23.51770151@news-

> ... As I pointed out in an earlier post, I opened this thread to learn =
more ...=20

Oh my gosh, why did we assume you opened it to bombard two newsgroups
with your abundant absurd soliliquies and innumerable irrelevant =
conversations?

> ... I am not trying to make "normal" bread.

Maybe you thought a.b.r. was for abnormal bread recipes? Here at r.f.s =
we
do normal sourdough, except Samartha sometimes.

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

On 10 Oct 2003 16:01:52 GMT, pamnone (Wcsjohn) wrote:

>I would urge you to redouble your efforts to find rye flour - the sourness and
>depth of flavour of the long preferment is greatly enhanced by the inclusion of
>rye.

What exactly would I be looking for?

>They may claim what they like, I find a flour ratio of 1:1 between starter and
>dough gives more flavourful results and a more elastic crumb.

Then I will add that to my list of experiments.

>The reason people trim off rec.food.sourdough is that few of us are even
>remotely interested in crossing swords with the small but vocal faction of
>hairshirt fundamentalist "Two strains good, one strain bad" sourdough fanatics
>who inhabit the nether regions of that list.

Oh, one of those cultural wars, eh. I thought they were only supposed
to involve religion or politics - certainly not bread making.

I think that sourdough baguette is a common ground between the two
waring factions. Also, I do not believe the correct definition of
"sourdough" requires a wild yeast, although I must admit ignorance on
that matter.

I can tell you this much - Hell will freeze over before I sit a bowl
of flour-water in the backyard in Houston, Texas - even out on the
county line where I live. Lord only knows what kind of petroleum
derivative I would end up with.

But I do leave the lid off the bowl when I make my starter at rfoom
temperature and use as little store-bought yeast as I can. Perhaps I
am capturing some wild yeasts that way, which I suppose would make me
in the middle of this debate.

Bob wrote:
>
> On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 11:53:54 -0700, Brian Mailman
> > wrote:
>
> >> Also, as a matter of etiquette, I initiated this thread, so in
> >> principle I am the only one who is permitted to trim newsgroups.
>
> >Can you please point to a cite for this assertion?
>
> No.

That's certainly a mature and well-reasoned reaction.

I don't see anything like that in any of the netiquette FAQs, and
there's nothing in in the news.newuser.questions links either.

Unless you can show this is true, you're simply full of it.

B/

"Bob" > wrote in message
...
>
> I think that sourdough baguette is a common ground between the two
> waring factions. Also, I do not believe the correct definition of
> "sourdough" requires a wild yeast, although I must admit ignorance on
> that matter.
>
> I can tell you this much - Hell will freeze over before I sit a bowl
> of flour-water in the backyard in Houston, Texas - even out on the
> county line where I live. Lord only knows what kind of petroleum
> derivative I would end up with.
Bob,
The chances of "catching" a wild yeast that is floating by in the air is
extremely small. The wild yeast pre-exist in the flour itself.. However,
there are numerous proven cultures available for sale on the 'net under
sourdough--even one that is available for free(you must send an
self-addressed, stamped envelope). This free starter is extremely reliable.
Janet

On 10 Oct 2003 18:10:48 GMT, pamnone (Wcsjohn) wrote:

>>What exactly would I be looking for?

>I am not being sarcastic when I say you're looking for a bag with the words
>"Rye Flour".

OK, then I will look for that. I have not bothered to study the flour
section of the groceries I frequent, so I will have to look more
closely.

How much rye flour do I use per cup of KA bread flour?

>>Then I will add that to my list of experiments.

>Again, I am not sarcastic, though I will admit to a touch of irony, when I say
>that your list is lengthening. Ars longa. Vita brevis.

Each item on the list is independent of the others, so there should
not be any conflict. In the case of a ratio of 1:1 all I have to do is
make about a cup more starter which is no big deal since I am making
it in stages anyway.

If I find that rye flour at the store this afternoon, can I add it to
the next stage of starter preparation. As I mentioned earlier, I am
using a technique whereby by I make the final starter from a
succession of smaller steps on a 24 hour basis. I am on step 2 at this
time, and I have a couple more steps to go, so if I add rye flour now
I would be adding it at the middle of the process.

Can I add it now or should I wait until I make the next batch of
starter and begin with rye flour then?

If I do wait, should I start from scratch again or can I put rye flour
into the cup of starter I plan to retain from this batch for the next
starter batch?

If I do use some starter from a previous batch, do I need to
innoculate it with more rye flour each time I make a new batch of
starter?

>Personally I always thought a "sourdough" was a stable symbiosis between a
>yeast strain and a Lactobacillus. And I have always thought the term "wild"
>unnecessarily dramatic.

Does that mean you consider dough made from commercial yeast to be
sourdough if it is made according to the procedure that meets the
condition above?

>Leaving the lid off the bowl allows more oxygen to reach the starter which
>promotes the oxidation reactions that produce organic acids hence loweing the
>pH of the mix.

Is that good or bad for my starter?

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:06:39 -0600, "Janet Bostwick"
> wrote:

>The chances of "catching" a wild yeast that is floating by in the air is
>extremely small.

You don't live in Houston. Everything known to man, and even more than
that, floats in the air around here. I live next to the county line
where my backyard opens into a vast wooded area. There must be some
wild thing or two floating around in that air.

> The wild yeast pre-exist in the flour itself.. However,
>there are numerous proven cultures available for sale on the 'net under
>sourdough--even one that is available for free(you must send an
>self-addressed, stamped envelope). This free starter is extremely reliable.

Could you furnish that URL? If you do not want to publish it here,
could you send it to me privately. I can set up a one-time email
address for you to use and then kill it when you have contacted me.
That way the email robots will farm a worthless address.

On 10 Oct 2003 19:18:19 GMT, Ignoramus19432
> wrote:

>I also recommend buying starter if you are interested in reliably
>baking good tasting bread. If you live in Chicagoland I can pour you
>some starter for free.

Thank you for the offer, but I live on the opposite end of the central
US - in Houston.

What is your impression of the techniques on this website:
http://www.joejaworski.com/bread3.htm

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 17:14:55 GMT, (Bob) wrote:

>But I do leave the lid off the bowl when I make my starter at rfoom
>temperature and use as little store-bought yeast as I can. Perhaps I
>am capturing some wild yeasts that way, which I suppose would make me
>in the middle of this debate.

Howdy,

The critters are (principally) in the flour rather than in the air...

HTH,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

Bob wrote:

> What is your impression of the techniques on this website:
> http://www.joejaworski.com/bread3.htm

Total baloney - he does not sterilize the flour he is using to "catch".

Any regular participant on this forum (r.f.s) knows this by now and
newcomers are encouraged to get familiar with the basics, i. e. germ
counts of colony building units in grain products and use common sense.

I am not sure what you get from cross posting your stuff?

I find that the choice of your words provokes certain responses you then
are able to critizise as whatever you chose it to see and you seem to be
getting something out of it.

(If you would have provided a usable spam secure email address, I would
have backchanneled you about this)

Samartha

--
remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one
SD page is the http://samartha.net/SD/

Bob wrote:

> Does that mean you consider dough made from commercial yeast to be
> sourdough if it is made according to the procedure that meets the
> condition above?

No, you idiot. So that you will stop being so annoying, I strongly
suggest that you read the entire FAQ for this newsgroup before you
continue to post. Reading FAQs before posting _is_ standard netiquette.

David

(Bob) wrote in message >...
> On 9 Oct 2003 17:07:47 -0700, (Roy Basan) wrote:
>
> >> I add wheat gluten to KA bread flour, which is high in gluten to begin
> >> with. I add 1 TBS per 2 cups which raises the percentage from about
> >> 14% to 17%, the latter which is the same as KA's high gluten flour of
> >> times past.
>
> >I do not see the point of adding gluten to a 13% protein flour if you
> >are making normal bread.
>
> I am not trying to make "normal" bread.
Not normal?I hope your bread is not a mongoloid or something .....as
I would be keen to know more about it.
>
> Then why did KA offer a 17% bread once?

I suppose they want tough dough to dip the end of the Excalibur
sword and have the consumers pull it out?<g>..
..But ...
It is funny and insensible proposition.... to encourage folks to
make normal bread with extra strong flour?


> How could you possibly interpret my original post as "frantic"? <jeez>
You posted your question twice for emphasis....

> What's with you guys - are you snorting the stuff you bake with?

That is normal ..If we make bread with our hands and vigoruos kneading
or when adding flour quickly and the flour dust swirll around we
occasionally have the flour stuck to our face.
that is not the same as snorting (cocaine?) which I presume you are,
as you are only the one who thinks in that way, from so many posters
in this NG.or some time....<joke>.

> I never claimed it originated with KA. But I can tell you that of all
> the websites and all the bread books I have seen, every one of them
> except KA advised beating the living crap out of the dough - even for
> breads they claimed were chewy.

So you are loyal to king Arthur t Are you one of his knights of the
round table?<g>.

>
> I think it's a conspiracy of the bread machine makers - if people
> could make such delicious bread with only 7 minutes of machine
> kneading, then there is every likelihood many would say screw the
> expense and bother of a machine and just knead it by hand. So every
> recipe you see tells you to knead the bread for an hour.

Knead bread dough for an hour?
That is acceptable f you use a 30-50 kilo flour and make into a dough
manually (in a trough) you will finish in that time period; but if
you handle just a few cups and attain such span of kneading time;that
is uncommon.
.....unless he or she is a masochist.
>
>
> This is the only technique that works for me, and now that I have seen
> another instance of it, I am going to use it exclusively for my chewy
> baguette recipe.
>
Well the baguetter then should have a name Bob cut on the dough skin
before you baker instead of the normal diagonal slashesg.

Please do not take everything seriously Bob...Bakers should have fun
while doing baking...
Wishing you an entertaining baguette baking!
Roy

It is: http://home.att.net/~carlsfriends/ Read the "How to get..." =
section. Just a stamped self-addressed envelope . . . . . .

"> Could you furnish that URL? If you do not want to publish it here,