Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Sourdough (rec.food.sourdough) Discussing the hobby or craft of baking with sourdough. We are not just a recipe group, Our charter is to discuss the care, feeding, and breeding of yeasts and lactobacilli that make up sourdough cultures. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
It has been shown possible to make some kind of=20
bread from soured rye glop without kneading. My original inspiration came from=20 I simplified to=20 = et but got slapped down by the Pumpernickel Police because I thought I could call the resultant loaves by the name of Pumpernickel. Pumpernickel is=20 a bread that must be cooked for a very long time, and I did not do that. It is also one that is naturally and not artificially sweetened. Well, I had put maple syrup or some stupid thing in mine. The sweetness and the flavor of Pumpernickel are supposed to come from enzymatic processes which occur during long cooking at low temperature under moist conditions. We have learned that from Samartha. It must not contain anything but flour (rye), maybe "schrot", salt, and water. Do we have to go through a fancy multistage fermentation process for bread which is going to be baked in a pan (or form)? That is supposed to keep the starches from breaking down, so as to hold the bread together when the time comes for rising. Well, if the bread is going to rise in a pan, and not rise much, possibly not. =20 Recently I tried cooking rye glop a long time (40 hours) in a crock pot. The result was an=20 interesting (so I thought, anyway) failu http://www.prettycolors.com/bread%5F...e/CPPump1a.jpg The temperature may have been ~200=B0F. There are two settings -- I used the "low" one. An inner container was used. Water around it did not boil=20 away in 40 hours. It was more like a pudding than like bread. But=20 the color was very deep brown, much deeper than=20 that of a similar loaf which was baked in a hot oven=20 for 40 minutes (inset in photo). Now, here is what is left after 5 days: http://www.prettycolors.com/bread%5F...e/CPPump1b.jpg The crusts are gone -- we ate them first because=20 they could be picked up. The center, part of which is=20 shown in the photo, was pasty, like dough, and could=20 not be neatly cut. But now, after some drying and setting, it can be cut=20 like fudge. The interesting things (I think) are the color change=20 (compare the inset in the first photo with the 2nd=20 photo) and the flavor, which is pungent sweet-sour=20 with a taste somewhat like licorice candy. Another interesting thing is that we are eating it. =20 Though a bit difficult to get used to, it is not too bad. Like olives, one develops a taste for it. If I did not know it was bread, I would not be sure. As to whether it is a Maillard-facilitated phenomenon, I could not say. The Maillard reaction is very hard to understand. http://food.oregonstate.edu/color/maillard/ Anyway, I think I may be on the way to "Crock-pot Pumpernickel". As long as I remember the quote symbols the Pumpernickel Police must remain at bay. Maybe I will have to get into a multi-stage dough build, but=20 first I will try a thicker glop. Next time I find a store selling rye flour, I will continue. The only rye flour commonly available here in Eastern Massachusetts is Hodgkin Mill (whole grain rye flour). =20 What I used for the here-reported effort was probably=20 over a year old, which might account for part of the=20 pungency of flavor. (Do I know that whole grain flour gets rotten? Why yes I do. Sourdough gets rotten. So what? It is the game we play.) --=20 Dick Adams <firstname> dot <lastname>at bigfoot dot com |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
"Dick Adams" > wrote in message ... snip Next time I find a store selling rye flour, I will continue. The only rye flour commonly available here in Eastern Massachusetts is Hodgkin Mill (whole grain rye flour). What I used for the here-reported effort was probably over a year old, which might account for part of the pungency of flavor. snip-- Dick Adams <firstname> dot <lastname>at bigfoot dot com I have recently become very puzzled by the rye flour designations. I was trying a new bread and was told that I must have "dark rye flour." I already had organic whole rye flour from my food co-op and pumpernickle from King Arthur on hand. I ordered Bob's Red Mill dark rye flour from the food co-op and then later found dark rye flour in the bulk bins at a grocery store that I sometimes frequent. Bob's dark rye flour is finer grained and lighter in color than the grocery store dark rye. King Arthur pumpernickle is lighter in color and finer grained than Bob's dark rye. The co-op whole grain is darker than all, but the floury portion is much smoother than the others but does have 'bits' in it that I assume are a bran. I have tried to find out if there is a specific calibration or color or flour texture for rye, but it seems that it is pretty much up to the miller. Does anyone have any clarification on this? Or, in the long run, does it really make any difference what rye flour we use to make bread? Janet |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:37:08 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote: >Anyway, I think I may be on the way to "Crock-pot >Pumpernickel". As long as I remember the quote symbols >the Pumpernickel Police must remain at bay. You have nothing to worry about from them. Whether you quote the phrase Crock-pot Pumpernickel or not, the Pumpernickel Police are going to be too preoccupied with laugher to pay serious attention to it. I showed those pictures to my beagles and they told me that your Crock-pot Pumpernickel looks just like baked WalMart dogfood. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
"Bob" > wrote in message = ... > You have nothing to worry about from them. Whether you quote the > phrase Crock-pot Pumpernickel or not, the Pumpernickel Police are > going to be too preoccupied with laugher to pay serious attention to > it ( = ) How could you know(?), you are new! The Pumpernickel Police do not = laugh. They do not smile. They just do their job with utmost precision. > I showed those pictures to my beagles and they told me that your > Crock-pot Pumpernickel looks just like baked WalMart dogfood. What you need is a cat. Everything looks like dogfood to dogs. Even "Sooner dogs": http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DeFstb.65303$Ec1.3754869@bgtnsc05-n= ews.ops.worldnet.att.net --- DickA |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
"Dick Adams" wrote:
[...] > I simplified to > > but got slapped down by the Pumpernickel Police > because I thought I could call the resultant loaves > by the name of Pumpernickel. [...] Your problem was caused by your use of capital-P Pumpernickel instead of small-p pumpernickel. It's somewhat like the difference between 'Catholic sexual preferences' vs. 'catholic sexual preferences'. Capital-P Pumpernickel is reserved for pumpernickel made according to the One True Way, the rituals of which you did not follow. Please do not make the same mistake again. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
Dick Adams wrote:
<..> > Next time I find a store selling rye flour, I will continue. > The only rye flour commonly available here in Eastern > Massachusetts is Hodgkin Mill (whole grain rye flour). > What I used for the here-reported effort was probably > over a year old, which might account for part of the > pungency of flavor. The flour could smell moldy and/or taste rancid, if it gets over and your nose still works. You could try adding some coarsely broken rye to add some more structure and counteract the "mousse" effect, if that's what you want. What you are doing with your fine flour reminds me of "flour glue" - boil flour in water and it becomes glue. Maybe even full grain rye ends up as glue when you just boil it long enough. 40 hours seems a good starting point, maybe way into the point of disintegration. What other uses could be found for your rye mousse? Smearing it on the fence and repel squirrels and raccoons? If it works, you should get it patented and get rich. I think, the idea has potential but it should have a better, like sliceable structure after cooling down if intended for human consumption. For human deterrence of <insert your favorites>, the mousse effect could be kept, refined and disguised as chocolate mousse. Maybe light rye flour would work in that direction. Keep up the good dark rye spirit! ;-) Samartha -- remove -nospam from my email address, if there is one SD page is the http://samartha.net/SD/ |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
Richard Dickson wrote:
> Capital-P Pumpernickel is reserved for pumpernickel made according to > the One True Way, the rituals of which you did not follow. If he used coarse rye meal (I'm not clear on that), then what he was trying to make was in fact pumpernickel. What kind of container the bread is baked in is not what makes it pumpernickel... David |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:06:43 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote: >> You have nothing to worry about from them. Whether you quote the >> phrase Crock-pot Pumpernickel or not, the Pumpernickel Police are >> going to be too preoccupied with laugher to pay serious attention to >> it. >How could you know(?), you are new! I am not that new any more. >The Pumpernickel Police do not laugh. >They do not smile. They just do their job with utmost precision. I forgot - they don't have a sense of humor, unless it is at someone else's expense. >> I showed those pictures to my beagles and they told me that your >> Crock-pot Pumpernickel looks just like baked WalMart dogfood. >What you need is a cat. The dogs would just flatten it. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
"Samartha Deva" >=20 wrote in message ... > You could try adding some coarsely broken rye to add some more=20 > structure and counteract the "mousse" effect, if that's what you=20 > want. Just yesterday I learned that my nearby bakery supplier (Savage=20 in Waltham) has "rye chops" in 25 and 50 pound sacks. Heather may=20 be interested in that. I have bemoaned the situation that whole=20 rye is health food (at health-food prices) in eastern=20 Massachusetts. I should be able to process such things (assuming=20 they are not some kind of a vegetarian delight like tofu turkey)=20 to flour and everything in-between. And quite likely the "chops"=20 will preserve more like whole grain than like whole-grain flour. > What you are doing with your fine flour reminds me of "flour=20 > glue" - boil flour in water and it becomes glue. That would be white flour. Nobody wants to use ugly-looking=20 boiled rye flour as glue. Anyway, rye flour becomes glue simply=20 by adding water, as anybody who has ever attempted to clean=20 vessels used to make rye dough has sadly learned. > What other uses could be found for your rye mousse? Smearing it=20 > on the fence and repel squirrels and raccoons? How about a "dirty bomb"? Can you guess who will get it? (Maybe=20 one for "Cindy", too -- OT, no email address, one-name nOObie!)=20 (Takes a while to track down these idiots, but can be done.) > If it works, you should get it patented and get rich. My needs are modest: A loaf, a jug, and thee beside me singing in=20 the wilderness. And now these clarion notes proceed via the=20 mystical miasma, conveyed on the backs of electrons. Wealth needs=20 no longer be an objective. > I think, the idea has potential but it should have a better,=20 > like sliceable structure after cooling down if intended for human=20 > consumption.=20 It was a shot in the dark. But it seems to have demonstrated=20 that a long, slow cook in a crock pot can considerably darken, and=20 considerably enhance the flavor of, a dense all-rye bread from a=20 loose, non-kneaded rye "dough". It is sufficient encouragement=20 to proceed. > Keep up the good dark rye spirit! ;-) See me now, walking on the dark side with Samartha! --=20 Dick Adams <firstname> dot <lastname>at bigfoot dot com |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:13:08 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote: >And now these clarion notes proceed via the >mystical miasma, conveyed on the backs of electrons. Actually the information is carried by the electromagnetic field supported by those electrons. In an alternating current, which is what electromagnetic waves amounts to, the electrons sit in one place and wiggle back and forth. It's the electromagnetic wave that propagates. That's why electric transmission wires are stranded. The 60 Hz alternating electomagnetic field can penetrate a conductor only so far (called the "skin effect" ) and therefore the metal inside the wire is wasted. So engineers had to devise a way to increase the surface area, and multi-strand wire was the solution. HTH >See me now, walking on the dark side with Samartha! You poor wretched fellow. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
"Bob" > wrote in message = ... On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:13:08 GMT, "Dick Adams" > wrote: > [ ... ] > > And now these clarion notes proceed via the > > mystical miasma, conveyed on the backs of electrons. > Actually the information is carried by the electromagnetic=20 > field supported by those electrons. < [ ... ] It would appear that, in those cloistered towers of theoretical=20 physics, you ("Bob") have never heard of poetic license. Frankly, "Bob", what nobody here can understand is why a=20 person such as yourself, who has allegedly "Published Original=20 Research In Solid State Physics, Quantum Mechanics, ..." is=20 not able to master digital photography to the extent of getting=20 an image of your alleged very-holey bread onto the Internet. Even your friend Igno is starting to doubt you. --- DickA |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
On 21 Nov 2003 17:34:48 GMT, Ignoramus15351
> wrote: >have you baked any good bread yet? well leavened, good tasting >sourdough bread? Yes, and I have posted comments about my experiments. I made good sourdough from the natural starter, the Mister Baker's starter and the KA starter. I still have two other starters given me by posters, but I am hesitant to try them until I have learned enough that I do not waste them. The last loaf was the best I ever made - it was made with my natural starter #2 ( I threw out #1). Part of the success was due to hitting just the right level of hydration. I want a slack dough but I want it stiff enough that it will retain its shape after the last rising. I do not know the exact hydration figure because I did not weight the ingredients. But based on the volume of flour and water in the last dough, I estimate the hydration level around 70%. I used KA bread flour so this hydration might not be correct for AP flour. I also knead the dough in a way that promotes high glutenization, which helps with stiffness. I use a manual technique to adjust hydration. Essentially I add flour to over-hydrated thick soupy sponge to get a dough that passes the glass tumbler test. The reason for working from the slack side is so I can observe the dough stiffening up. If I worked from the water side, I would have to go past the point I want so I would know that I am at the boundary. Then I would have to add some flour back. Working from the flour side, I add a little and knead it. I then test it with a glass and if the dough sticks, I add some more flour. Ad nauseam. I am going to experiment with a paper towel test next time. I will take a small patch of ordinary paper towel and press it into the dough. If I can take it off without it clinging to the dough, I will have a measure of the hydration. I am expecting this test to be more sensitive than a glass. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
"Ignoramus15351" > wrote,=20 presumably to "Bob", in message ... > have you baked any good bread yet? well leavened, good tasting sourdough bread? Just remind old "Bob" that a picture is worth 1000 words. Igno, I thought you would be interested in this: Do you know what an Ignoranus is? A stupid person who is also an asshole. http://www.e-borneo.com/ab/posts/26202.html Why don't you come back with something that looks like a name, and quit decorating our newsgroup with ostensible stupidity? --=20 Dick Adams <firstname> dot <lastname>at bigfoot dot com |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:47:25 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote: >Frankly, "Bob", what nobody here can understand is why a=20 >person such as yourself, who has allegedly "Published Original=20 >Research In Solid State Physics, Quantum Mechanics, ..." It's not "allegedly" - it's for real. But who cares anymore. It was a long time ago. >is not able to master digital photography There's a very good reason. After years of being an early adopter, I have become tired of being someone else's beta test site. So now I wait until the technology is sufficiently mature before I invest. Although digital photography has been around a while, it is still not mature enough for me. For example, the shutter latency is still too long. And the prices are way too high. All I have to do is be a bit more patient and I can capture the best for the least. Anyway, who has time to indulge in photography when he is spending all his spare time making sourdough? >to the extent of getting=20 >an image of your alleged very-holey bread onto the Internet. I do not believe I ever said it was "very-holey", only that it had better hole formation than I had achieved before. If I did use such an expression, then it was meant to contrast the earlier situation where my bread was very dense, deliberately so to promote chewiness. Now I can have a crumb with some nice little holes and it is chewy too. As I tried to tell you, the picture on that "carls friends" website is an exact match. >Even your friend Igno is starting to doubt you. I believe someone with a name similar to that plonked me a while back. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
Dick Adams wrote:
> Just yesterday I learned that my nearby bakery supplier (Savage > in Waltham) has "rye chops" in 25 and 50 pound sacks. Heather may > be interested in that. Hi Dick! Thank you for the resource, and for thinking of me. As soon as I make it through that 5 gallon bucket of rye berries I have sitting in my kitchen I will check them out! : -) > See me now, walking on the dark side with Samartha! Don't forget to drop bread crumbs behind you so you so you can find your way back! Heather _amaryllisATyahooDOTcom |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
"Bob" > wrote in message = ... > Although digital photography has been around a while, it is still not > mature enough for me. Digital cameras still cost more than film cameras, but film cameras are good too. Some one pointed out that one-use cameras can be processed to digital images which are ready for the Internet.=20 > As I tried to tell you, the picture on that "carls friends" website is > an exact match. You referred to = http://home.att.net/~carlsfriends/jo...5Fdetails.html I have spoken with Joan about those pictures, and I can tell you this: Those pictures were taken with a cheap webcam -- that one was an Intel Pocket PC Camera. Those were selling for $50 several years ago. They have a very nice featu Using the PC as a viewer, they can be focused = down to several inches. Color rendition is not too good, but the = pictures are good enough for web presentation. There are probably better and cheaper ones today. They don't have a flash, but they don't need much light, = either. Usually they connect via a USB cable. (Joan has better cameras now, but I doubt they take much better web pictures.) The "Carlos" pictures at the CarlsFriends web site are taken with such a = camera. Very-good-quality digital cameras, with video viewfinders, are now = available for $100 or less. The photos I have posted recently are taken with a = 1.3 Megapixel digicam. For web pictures, a big Megapixel capability is not = a requirement. But a close-up focusing range is very desirable for bread photos, particularly for showing the crumb structure in slices. =20 I don't suppose you are too interested in all that, but some one else = may be. Anyway, from what can be seen at you web site, it does appear that you = or=20 some one in you family can take pictures for the Web. So one is = incredulous about your continued excuses. --=20 Dick Adams <firstname> dot <lastname>at bigfoot dot com |
|
|||
|
|||
"Crock-pot pumpernickel"
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 04:53:31 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote: >So one is incredulous about your continued excuses. What excuses? Someone suggested a scanner, and I told them I could not do that. Then you recommended a digital camera, and I told you I am not interested at this time in making that kind of investment - certainly not to post a picture of bread. You are now recommending another approach, which I suppose I could implement, but why? I am not trying to prove anything. Why should I take out the time and spend the money to post a picture of bread? Nobody but you and one other person seems interested. Don't you trust me when I tell you that the bread I made is essentially the same as the photo I referenced on CarlFriends website? If you don't trust me, then I surely do not want to waste my time. |
|
|||
|
|||
OT Digital Cameras WAS: "Crock-pot pumpernickel"
Dick Adams wrote:
>But a close-up focusing range is very desirable for bread > photos, particularly for showing the crumb structure in slices. Yes, I agree, a good macro range is what you want to look for, moreso than digital zoom. The camera I took my crumb photo (http://www.fearn.ws/bread/bread4.jpg) with has a 4 cm macro. A very good camera comparison site is: http://www.dpreview.com/ They list current models and also older models. They review in great detail, and have a camera comparison tool that helps greatly in narrowing what sort of camera you wish to buy. Do that first, then look around for a used camera of the same make / model or earlier line model and you can save a bundle of money. I am not affiliated with this site in any way. I have used it in the past to figure out which cameras to buy for work. Heather _amaryllisATyahooDOTcom |
|
|||
|
|||
OT Digital Cameras WAS: "Crock-pot pumpernickel"
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 13:20:13 GMT, HeatherInSwampscott
> wrote: >Dick Adams wrote: > >>But a close-up focusing range is very desirable for bread >> photos, particularly for showing the crumb structure in slices. > >Yes, I agree, a good macro range is what you want to look for, moreso >than digital zoom. The camera I took my crumb photo >(http://www.fearn.ws/bread/bread4.jpg) with has a 4 cm macro. A very >good camera comparison site is: http://www.dpreview.com/ > >They list current models and also older models. They review in great >detail, and have a camera comparison tool that helps greatly in >narrowing what sort of camera you wish to buy. Do that first, then look >around for a used camera of the same make / model or earlier line model >and you can save a bundle of money. > >I am not affiliated with this site in any way. I have used it in the >past to figure out which cameras to buy for work. > >Heather >_amaryllisATyahooDOTcom You guys are going to talk me into buying a camera, and I don't really have a need for one. Next year my daughter is going to be married and we were planning on buying a quality camera then. I hate to spend money now when I can wait 8 months and get better quality for less price. Maybe if I can find a cheap used one, it will get me into the game. Then I can email Adams all the pics he wants. > |
|
|||
|
|||
OT Digital Cameras
"Bob" > wrote in message = ... > [ ... ] > Maybe if I can find a cheap used one, it will get me into the > game. Maybe you can find one in a dumpster? =20 > Then I can email Adams all the pics he wants. I don't want you to send me pictures. Jeez, I was just=20 trying to help you gain a flyspeck of credibility. Don't you remember when you promised (?): "I never thought to scan the bread directly. I will do that this evening and post the image on my website."=20 http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...ws-server.hou= ston.rr.com But ever since you have been waffling, hiding behind the skirts=20 of your wife, and more recently those of Joan Ross, not to=20 mention your sundry other niggardly obfuscative devices. Consider this web page:=20 http://www.cookingwithcrack.com/bread/sequence2/ It was offered by Rob Gardner who posted at r.f.s. last year,=20 and in 1999. Why can't you be more like Rob, "Bob"? (Well, everything but the "crack" ... ) --- DickA |
|
|||
|
|||
OT Digital Cameras
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:46:56 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote: >> Maybe if I can find a cheap used one, it will get me into the >> game. >Maybe you can find one in a dumpster? =20 Actually that is not cost effective. >I was just trying to help you gain a flyspeck of credibility. I am as credible as I am ever going to get. I do not need any help becoming more credible. If people don't accept what I say, then they are irrelevant. >But ever since you have been waffling, hiding behind the skirts=20 >of your wife, and more recently those of Joan Ross, not to=20 >mention your sundry other niggardly obfuscative devices. You are going off the deep end. >Why can't you be more like Rob, "Bob"? All I did was make a comment about the texture of bread, not intending it to go anywhere. Now you have made it into some kind of obsession. <JEEZ> |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Pumpernickel | Sourdough | |||
Pumpernickel | Sourdough | |||
Pumpernickel | Sourdough | |||
Pumpernickel | Recipes | |||
Pumpernickel | Sourdough |