|
resources for beginners and yeast
I am wondering what resources-books/websites-you'd recommend for a
beginner. Something that educates me both about "how" to make sourdough, and also "why" I am making it like I am--both chemically, and historically. Also, I am confused about soured dough and yeast. Was soured dough originally a replacement for yeast, or were both used? Because in my recipe books I am surprised to see that the recipes call for both soured dough and yeast. Is this always the case? Thank you. |
resources for beginners and yeast
> wrote in message ups.com... > I am wondering what resources-books/websites-you'd recommend for a > beginner. Something that educates me both about "how" to make > sourdough, and also "why" I am making it like I am--both chemically, > and historically. Experience continues to prove that one does things like one's mom did. One continues to do that, no matter what. > Also, I am confused about soured dough and yeast. Was soured dough > originally a replacement for yeast, or were both used? Because in my > recipe books I am surprised to see that the recipes call for both > soured dough and yeast. Is this always the case? Not good to do that. Toss out the recipe books. Sourdough predates bakers' yeast by millenia. Here is a good place to start learning about sourdough: http://www.nyx.net/~dgreenw/sourdoughfaqs.html Not that it will do any good. As far as chemistry is concerned, there is an r.f.s. poster who discusses that from time to time, but nobody can guess what he is talking about. -- Dicky |
resources for beginners and yeast
Experience continues to prove that one does things like one's mom did.
One continues to do that, no matter what. I love my mom.... As far as chemistry is concerned, there is an r.f.s. poster who discusses that from time to time, but nobody can guess what he is talking about. I am a physicist, but I can read chemistry if I have to. |
resources for beginners and yeast
"r" > wrote in message ... > > Experience continues to prove that one does things like one's mom did. > > One continues to do that, no matter what. > > I love my mom.... Sure you do. Betcha she makes bread with bakers' yeast, even so-called "sourdough", that is, if she makes bread at all, 'cause she is probably buying at the supermarket. And so will you -- the irrational influence of moms cannot be underestimated. > I am a physicist, but I can read chemistry if I have to. Yeah, but can you do chemistry? Can you fluff up old sourdough for pancakes with sodium bicarbonate, and explain why that works? Can you deal equally well with Celsius and Fahrenheit. Can you calibrate your oven thermostat? Can you determine how much flour an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup holds. Here is a good test for the physicist in you: how many grams of water does an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup contain? Just checkin' up! -- Dicky |
resources for beginners and yeast
On Aug 11, 2:06 pm, wrote:
> I am wondering what resources-books/websites-you'd recommend for a > beginner. Something that educates me both about "how" to make > sourdough, and also "why" I am making it like I am--both chemically, > and historically. Here are two web-sites that will get you started. You will find dough calculators, starter and fermentation information, pictures... Mike's site "sourdoughhome" has some excellent video on mixing and shaping techniques. I highly recommend the stretch and fold technique, for example, in lieu of machine kneading. But that technique is only one of many nuggets in these two sites. Between them, you should be able to get 95% of the info you seek. They are better than most of the books out there. http://samartha.net/SD/ http://www.sourdoughhome.com/index.html > Also, I am confused about soured dough and yeast. Was soured dough > originally a replacement for yeast, or were both used? Because in my > recipe books I am surprised to see that the recipes call for both > soured dough and yeast. Is this always the case? Sourdough starter and grocery store yeast are both dough leavens. Sourdough is ancient. The commercial yeast has been popular for less than a hundred years. Many bakeries make breads using both. In my opinion, sourdough starter produces the best flavor... but that's not because sourdough is inherently better as a leavener. And it is also not true that the bread will be sour. The fermentation is slower though and as in cheese making, or wine making, slower production processes tend to develop more complex flavors. There is a book called "The Bread Builders" that has an excellent discussion on the chemistry of fermentation. You can probably find it at your library (or Google it). It also has information on oven building... which might not be directly applicable to your interest but will give good insight on the "tradition" of bread making. Bread is a curious window, as it were, on technology and culture. |
resources for beginners and yeast
Mike Romain wrote:
> > SD starter is not really consistent with rise times. Mine can take as > little as 45 minutes some days and up to 4 or more hours others. I > think it depends on how 'lively' I make my starer before using (and the > weather), so going with a 3 or 4 stage grow over 24 hours before use > gets it just a foaming away which makes for a 'fast' rise. I find that (my) starter(s), when run in a more controlled environment (temperature, hydration, time), run like clockwork. Since I am doing the DM-3 process, I find the resulting starter having the same quality every time. There may be nuances I am missing, but the rise times are the same and the final product as well. I made a couple of pictures to help a friend: http://tinyurl.com/yry9fh (will stay a limited time there) That's 40/60 rye/wheat, 68 % hydration, intended 2 + 2 h rising, real 2:45 + 1:55 h. I may have the dough development better down, but from a starter/dough fermentation time perspective, nothing noticeable has changed for me during the 4+ years I am using the DM-3 now. Based on that, I would think that your variations are caused by your handling and not on the starter itself - and you say yourself that it all depends how "lively" you make your starter - you _making_, not the starter being "not really consistent". Don't blame the holey starter;-) Samartha |
resources for beginners and yeast
Mike Romain wrote:
> SD starter is not really consistent with rise times. Mine can take as > little as 45 minutes some days and up to 4 or more hours others. I > think it depends on how 'lively' I make my starer before using (and the > weather), ... It would only be inconsistent if the same variable didn't produce the same rise time. B/ |
resources for beginners and yeast
On Aug 12, 9:48 am, Mike Romain > wrote:
> SD starter is not really consistent with rise times. Mine can take as > little as 45 minutes some days and up to 4 or more hours others. That would make me absolutely nuts... do you hang out and watch it? My starter is much more respectful. :-) |
resources for beginners and yeast
On 12 Aug 2007, at 17:24, Brian Mailman wrote:
> Mike Romain wrote: > >> SD starter is not really consistent with rise times. Mine can >> take as >> little as 45 minutes some days and up to 4 or more hours others. I >> think it depends on how 'lively' I make my starer before using >> (and the >> weather), ... > > It would only be inconsistent if the same variable didn't produce the > same rise time. > > B/ Lol, exactly Brian, Mine is totally reliable, I can get exactly the same bread no matter what the weather, but then having spent time to listen to the experts, taken good notes and taken into account the temperature that day might have something to do with that. Going blind does tend to produce a few surprises. : -) Jim |
resources for beginners and yeast
Sam wrote:
> > Based on that, I would think that your variations are caused by your > handling and not on the starter itself - and you say yourself that it > all depends how "lively" you make your starter - you _making_, not the > starter being "not really consistent". > > Don't blame the holey starter;-) > > Samartha > > Could easily be my handling and environment, I don't 'weigh' out ingredients and don't always have the same amount of starter saved to start over with or even the same kind of water. I think the unpredictability is part of the fun of making SD bread. My kitchen varies from 70 to well over 100 degrees during the/each day and the humidity here can be 100% some days with 40% normal these days. It varies hourly here in the bottom of the Great Lakes Basin. Some days I feed my starter when it comes out of the fridge a cup of flour and a little over a half cup of water and it starts growing in an hour or two and the next feeds continue to be 'fast'. Some days it doesn't do anything for 4 or more hours and consecutive feeds will be slower rises too. I gave up trying to hurry it, I just make white bread if needed in a hurry, and even give it an extra feed if it comes faster than I need it, so I 'am' getting more 'stable' effects but still. I think the unpredictability is part of the fun of making SD bread. Your above results were even off in 'expected rises'. I also find that the water I use makes a difference in rise times with tap water taking a 'long' time some days. (high chlorine content) Bottled plain spring water seems best. Just tried 'ozonized' spring water my wife brought home and it was 'really' slow. Enh, just went and read the label on it and they stuck 1 mg of chlorine per liter in it, figures... Still learning for sure... Mike |
resources for beginners and yeast
Brian Mailman wrote:
> Mike Romain wrote: > >> SD starter is not really consistent with rise times. Mine can take as >> little as 45 minutes some days and up to 4 or more hours others. I >> think it depends on how 'lively' I make my starer before using (and >> the weather), ... > > It would only be inconsistent if the same variable didn't produce the > same rise time. > > B/ My variables aren't the same from batch to batch for sure. I should better have said, 'my results with SD starter' vary. Sometimes it can be consistent if I am baking regular and the starter stays in a crock on the counter, but put the stuff in the fridge for a while or use different water even and... Mike |
resources for beginners and yeast
Will wrote:
> On Aug 12, 9:48 am, Mike Romain > wrote: > >> SD starter is not really consistent with rise times. Mine can take as >> little as 45 minutes some days and up to 4 or more hours others. > > That would make me absolutely nuts... do you hang out and watch it? > > My starter is much more respectful. :-) > Worse than watching toast.... At least I know at the first feeding when 'that' batch is going to be ready because a fast one goes sponge fast from the first feed out of the fridge and the slow one starts slow and stays that way for at least 4 feeds it would seem. I just had a real slow one so I made white bread. Strange one too, it didn't bubble much for a day and a half, then exploded all over the counter last night. LOL! My rye SD starter was slower than usual a few days ago too. I found out that the 'pure spring' water I thought I was using is ozonized and has 1 mg of Chlorine per liter/quart of water in it. Mike |
resources for beginners and yeast
Mike Romain wrote:
> Brian Mailman wrote: >> Mike Romain wrote: >> >>> SD starter is not really consistent with rise times. Mine can take as >>> little as 45 minutes some days and up to 4 or more hours others. I >>> think it depends on how 'lively' I make my starer before using (and >>> the weather), ... >> >> It would only be inconsistent if the same variable didn't produce the >> same rise time. > > My variables aren't the same from batch to batch for sure. > > I should better have said, 'my results with SD starter' vary. My point is is that the variations are consistent. B/ |
resources for beginners and yeast
> wrote in message ups.com... > I am wondering what resources-books/websites-you'd recommend for a > beginner. ... I think she is gone now. (I think she is a she.) (We used to think that about Samartha, but were wrong because of misreading an "r" for an "n". Good he's changing to Sam.) It was a very ambitious idea to try to interest her in Detmold 3-stage to start. Deep in my heart I continue to hope that such things can come to be possible. She has a type of name that suggests that she could be subverted to such a thing. I would have suggested to start with the Lumpy Muffins thing: http://lumpymuffins.home.comcast.net...h/NoWaste.html or Sam's Wu Wei thing: http://samartha.net/SD/images/BYDATE...-05/index.html but admittedly I am a person of weak faith. Probably too late now. -- Dicky |
resources for beginners and yeast
Dick Adams wrote:
> > wrote in message ups.com... > >> I am wondering what resources-books/websites-you'd recommend for a >> beginner. ... >> > > I think she is gone now. (I think she is a she.) (We used to think that > about Samartha, but were wrong because of misreading an "r" for an "n". > Good he's changing to Sam.) > > It was a very ambitious idea to try to interest her in Detmold 3-stage to > start. Tell you what - If I had started with the DM-3 right from scratch, it would have saved me a lot of time to make the breads I am doing now. But - all this other tinkering around exposed me to other quirks which I would never have seen otherwise. > Deep in my heart I continue to hope that such things can come to > be possible. Fulfilling one of your hearts desi 1 - container 2 - aquarium heater 94 F, 34 C, 250 W 3 - fountain pump 4 - digital thermometer 5 - digital scale What does that total up to? 1 - $8, 2 - $ 30, 3 - $ 10, 4 - $ 20, 5 - $ 30 So - you are actually a hell of a lucky guy - for spending less than 100 bucks, one can fulfill one of your heart's desires. Looks kinda cheap, does your lady know about this - your cheapo heart's desires? > She has a type of name that suggests that she could be > subverted to such a thing. > > I would have suggested to start with the Lumpy Muffins thing: > http://lumpymuffins.home.comcast.net...h/NoWaste.html > or Sam's Wu Wei thing: > http://samartha.net/SD/images/BYDATE...-05/index.html > but admittedly I am a person of weak faith. Probably too late now. > > I think hat's really good. All this faith stuff - isn't that about believing something without solid proof? So - all that would be not knowing for sure. With sourdough (and Wu-Wei) it's very little believing - actually none. That's solid experience. If the bread tastes great, you know it (or your wife tells you). If it does not rise - you don't have believe that it's not rising, you know it, when you see it - or not, in this case. No question of faith or believing. Actually the less, the better in this case - saves you a lot of trouble. As for suggesting to a "noobie" the DM-3. I am trying to help somebody to get started and - I hear: "that's not how a starter should look like, I put more water in so it looks right". That's faith and believing. Faith that this is right and believing it will work and solve the problem of lack of rise and sourness. No such thing with the DM-3 - how it "should" look never comes up. It is done as prescribed and works. I am all for suggesting to "noobies" the DM-3. If temp cannot be completely controlled, at least, the hydrations and fermentation times can be met or approximated. It gives great exposure to different hydration looks of a starter and the factors which influence starter growth and quality. That's definitely a great progress over the "triple three times", the "wait until it has peaked, then use it", "wait until it gets active, then use it" or the "it feels right, now I make bread" methods I have used. So - Sam |
resources for beginners and yeast
On 13 Aug 2007, at 05:50, Sam wrote:
> ... > All this faith stuff - isn't that about believing something without > solid proof? Only in some forms of Christianity. Hence the need for the phrase 'blind faith'. To the rest of the world it's about knowing someone or something to be reliable from past, personal experience. Like knowing the bridge you're about to cross won't fall when you get to the middle because you or someone you trust has done it a hundred times or you've seen the structural test. 'Blind faith' would be like crossing a bridge you or no one you know has experience of just because it makes you feel better believing it to be safe. Blind faith would be like signing away $200,000 on an apartment you've never seen based solely on the guy selling it to you having a nice face and a charming way about him. That's crazy. Faith is understanding that the practices you are doing lead to happiness because of previous experience and that reason and experience tell you that happiness and hatred are mutually exclusive. If I want to be happy it makes no sense to practice hatred I can use reason and logic to give me faith that the teacher is giving good teaching. > So - all that would be not knowing for sure. > With sourdough (and Wu-Wei) it's very little believing - actually > none. > That's solid experience. > If the bread tastes great, you know it (or your wife tells you). So you need faith in your wife's and in your own judgement. > If it > does not rise - you don't have [to] believe that it's not rising, > you know > it, Actually you still have to have faith, faith in the true perception of the previous mind, the mind that experienced the state of the dough at that pervious moment, you can't 'know' a previous moment, any previous moment is merely a construction of your mind, a memory, you need faith in your own mind in order to get out of bed in the morning, faith that you did have a floor there the night before when you got in and faith that you did actually see a floor there a moment ago when you looked down and faith that your toe is actually feeling a floor there when you decide to put your weight on it. You don't 'know' for sure at all. It's all faith. > when you see it - or not, in this case. No question of faith or > believing. Actually the less, the better in this case - saves you a > lot > of trouble. ... Unless you have direct perception of the said things. Direct perception being bypassing all the confusion of the emotions and projections of the ordinary mind like seeing a snake when in fact it's a coiled rope or seeing a cat rather than a bag caught by the wind. Movement of any kind is an illusion, a construction of the mind so you must have faith in the past perception of the previous mind moment in combination with the next mind moment to 'see' any rise in the dough. It is all about faith. If you ever misunderstood anything or tipped over a crack in the pavement you can be sure or have faith that you don't have direct perception. Jim |
resources for beginners and yeast
"Jim" > wrote in message news:mailman.2.1187009320.30441.rec.food.sourdough @mail.otherwhen.com... > On 13 Aug 2007, at 05:50, Sam wrote: > >... All this faith stuff - isn't that about believing something without > > solid proof? > > Only in some forms of Christianity. Hence the need for the phrase > 'blind faith'. To the rest of the world it's about knowing someone or > something to be reliable from past, personal experience ... > (etc., etc., etc., ...) > {bla, bla, blooper, blabla ...) (extensive!) Hey, Jim, maybe it is time for you to start a Church or a Cult??! For those who do not know it, I have been discussing my faith on my blog http://www.prettycolors.com/dickya/blosxom.cgi. Look there for inspiration. Comments and complaints to dick dot adams at att dot net, NOT to r.f.s. (this newsgroup), please. -- Dicky |
resources for beginners and yeast
Jim wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2007, at 17:24, Brian Mailman wrote: > >> Mike Romain wrote: >> >>> SD starter is not really consistent with rise times. Mine can take as >>> little as 45 minutes some days and up to 4 or more hours others. I >>> think it depends on how 'lively' I make my starer before using (and the >>> weather), ... >> >> It would only be inconsistent if the same variable didn't produce the >> same rise time. >> >> B/ > > Lol, exactly Brian, Mine is totally reliable, I can get exactly the same > bread no matter what the weather, but then having spent time to listen > to the experts, taken good notes and taken into account the temperature > that day might have something to do with that. Going blind does tend to produce a few surprises. : -) Well Jim, it sure produces a few surprise answers to posts, 'that's' for sure.... ;-) I was talking about 'rise times', NOT the 'same bread' or some variant. The weather here yesterday at 1:00 PM was 31C and 43% humidity. By 3:00 or so it was 20C and 89% humidity. My bread still turned out nice, although it was a long rise.... Mike |
resources for beginners and yeast
On 13 Aug 2007, at 14:46, Dick Adams wrote:
> Hey, Jim, maybe it is time for you to start a Church or a Cult??! There's only two small problems there Dick, 1. I don't believe in god. 2, I don't believe that any one person can own the understanding of reality. If it's there to be understood then anyone with the inclination, a little brainpower and enough time can discover it for themself. Oh, 3. I don't need the money. : -) Jim |
resources for beginners and yeast
On 13 Aug 2007, at 17:13, Mike Romain wrote:
> Going blind does tend to produce a few surprises. : -) > > Well Jim, it sure produces a few surprise answers to posts, > 'that's' for > sure.... ;-) > > I was talking about 'rise times', NOT the 'same bread' or some > variant. > > The weather here yesterday at 1:00 PM was 31C and 43% humidity. By > 3:00 > or so it was 20C and 89% humidity. > > My bread still turned out nice, although it was a long rise.... > > Mike : -) Good to hear it. Jim |
resources for beginners and yeast
> I love my mom....
Sure you do. Betcha she makes bread with bakers' yeast, even so-called "sourdough", that is, if she makes bread at all, 'cause she is probably buying at the supermarket. And so will you -- the irrational influence of moms cannot be underestimated. I LOVE MY MOM! But I do not blindly follow her example. I doubt mom ever made sourdough. > I am a physicist, but I can read chemistry if I have to. Yeah, but can you do chemistry? Can you fluff up old sourdough for pancakes with sodium bicarbonate, and explain why that works? Yes Can you deal equally well with Celsius and Fahrenheit.? Yes Can you calibrate your oven thermostat? Yes. Can you determine how much flour an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup holds. Yes, but why bother. It is so much easier to just weigh the stuff. Here is a good test for the physicist in you: how many grams of water does an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup contain? Gee, I feel like I am back in school! Since I am a smart-a** physicist, I will ask -- at what temperature? Nice to meet another crumudgeon, Ice |
resources for beginners and yeast
"Ice" > wrote in message om... > > ... Can you determine how much flour an 8-fluid-ounce > > measuring cup holds. > Yes, but why bother. It is so much easier to just weigh the stuff. Trust me. For a few loaves it is easier to scoop than weigh. Well, unless you get flour in little dinky bags. Weighing can make you feel important and impress onlookers. > > Here is a good test for the physicist in you: how many grams of > > water does an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup contain? > ... Since I am a smart-a** physicist, I will ask -- at what temperature? What temperature do you suppose, smart-a**? Suppose you were 10°F. away from that -- how much difference would it make? -- Dicky |
resources for beginners and yeast
Dick Adams wrote:
>>> Here is a good test for the physicist in you: how many grams of >>> water does an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup contain? > >> ... Since I am a smart-a** physicist, I will ask -- at what temperature? I'm curious to see how this pans out. From all I've found, it depends upon who you ask! Dave |
resources for beginners and yeast
On 14 Aug 2007, at 04:25, Dick Adams wrote:
> ... Weighing can make you > feel important and impress onlookers. They'd have to be pretty thick Dicky to be impressed by pushing a button and reading a number. Maybe you're hanging out with the wrong crowd. Jim |
resources for beginners and yeast
On 14 Aug 2007, at 04:46, Dave Bell wrote:
>>>> Here is a good test for the physicist in you: how many grams of >>>> water does an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup contain? >> >>> ... Since I am a smart-a** physicist, I will ask -- at what >>> temperature? > > I'm curious to see how this pans out. > From all I've found, it depends upon who you ask! > > Dave Which bit Dave? The weight of pure, simple H2O at a given temperature and place isn't up for debate, it is what it is, especially if we're counting molecules. Jim |
resources for beginners and yeast
What temperature do you suppose, smart-a**? Suppose you were 10°F. away from that -- how much difference would it make? Not much, but it got me out of doing the work for a while! When you answer that question, I have two others <grin> Ice |
resources for beginners and yeast
> Yes, but why bother. It is so much easier to just weigh the stuff.
Trust me. For a few loaves it is easier to scoop than weigh. Well, unless you get flour in little dinky bags. Weighing can make you feel important and impress onlookers. I don't know you well enough to trust you. I never make more than a few loaves, and since I live alone there are no onlookers to impress, other than myself, and I do not impress that easily. I do what works for me. And I am at heart lazy, so I do what takes the least amount of effort. |
resources for beginners and yeast
Ice wrote:
> What temperature do you suppose, smart-a**? Suppose you were > 10°F. away from that -- how much difference would it make? > could be 400 % http://samartha.net/SD/docs/DW-post1-4n.html#060 > Not much, ... > > sure... > When you answer that question, I have two others <grin> > Ice > > |
resources for beginners and yeast
Jim wrote:
> On 14 Aug 2007, at 04:46, Dave Bell wrote: > >>>>> Here is a good test for the physicist in you: how many grams of >>>>> water does an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup contain? >>> >>>> ... Since I am a smart-a** physicist, I will ask -- at what >>>> temperature? >> >> I'm curious to see how this pans out. >> From all I've found, it depends upon who you ask! >> >> Dave > > > Which bit Dave? The weight of pure, simple H2O at a given temperature > and place isn't up for debate, it is what it is, especially if we're > counting molecules. > > Jim The bit about volume of a "fluid ounce" ! One would suppose 8 ounces * 28.35 grams, or 226.8 grams. Conversion lists cite anywhere from 227 to 240 grams, far beyond temperature dependencies. Even at 4 C, water isn't *that* dense! Dave |
resources for beginners and yeast
Dave Bell wrote:
> Dick Adams wrote: > >>>> Here is a good test for the physicist in you: how many grams of >>>> water does an 8-fluid-ounce measuring cup contain? >> >>> ... Since I am a smart-a** physicist, I will ask -- at what temperature? > > I'm curious to see how this pans out. It batter be good. B/ |
resources for beginners and yeast
On 14 Aug 2007, at 17:26, Dave Bell wrote:
> The bit about volume of a "fluid ounce" ! > One would suppose 8 ounces * 28.35 grams, or 226.8 grams. > Conversion lists cite anywhere from 227 to 240 grams, far beyond > temperature dependencies. Even at 4 C, water isn't *that* dense! > > Dave > _________ Hi Dave, Ah, well then that's just plain crazy talk or tells you the people writing had a very shaky hand or really bad scale. lol. I recently looked at the cup that I use for scooping, I can't believe I never bothered before, it says 250 ml for a full cup, mum has a measuring cup she got in a bread machine some kind but not to bright person bought her once. It says 220 ml. Go figure. Jim |
resources for beginners and yeast
> The bit about volume of a "fluid ounce" !
> One would suppose 8 ounces * 28.35 grams, or 226.8 grams. > Conversion lists cite anywhere from 227 to 240 grams, far beyond > temperature dependencies. Even at 4 C, water isn't *that* dense! I get the following: 1 fl oz = 29.5735 ml 8 fl oz = 236.5880 ml density of water at 20°C = 0.9982 g / ml mass of 8 fl oz = 236.1621 g density of water at 30°C = 0.9957 g / ml mass of 8 fl oz at 30 °C = 235.5707 g Both of those values are outside the range you mention The difference in 10°C in this range is 0.5914 g Ice |
resources for beginners and yeast
"Ice" > wrote in message om... > density of water at 20°C = 0.9982 g / ml > density of water at 30°C = 0.9957 g / ml So, for water, the error of volume measurement at 30°C is ~(0.9982-0.9957)/.9982 or 0.25%? Dont'ya know how that kind of erroneousness petrifies me? Jeez!! -- Dicky |
resources for beginners and yeast
Dick Adams wrote:
> "Ice" > wrote in message om... > >> density of water at 20°C = 0.9982 g / ml >> density of water at 30°C = 0.9957 g / ml >> > > So, for water, the error of volume measurement at 30°C is > ~(0.9982-0.9957)/.9982 or 0.25%? > > Oh shit! I'll have to revamp my whole procedure and probably upgrade my computer to manage all the calculations in time. If somebody opens a window - oh man... will it ever end with this sourdough business? Bummer! Sam |
resources for beginners and yeast
On Aug 15, 4:45 pm, Sam > wrote:
> Dick Adams wrote: > > "Ice" > wrote in messagenews:IpudnfPQac4Wu17bnZ2dnUVZ_oytnZ2d@rocki sland.com... > > >> density of water at 20°C = 0.9982 g / ml > >> density of water at 30°C = 0.9957 g / ml > > > So, for water, the error of volume measurement at 30°C is > > ~(0.9982-0.9957)/.9982 or 0.25%? > > Oh shit! I'll have to revamp my whole procedure and probably upgrade my > computer to manage all the calculations in time. > If somebody opens a window - oh man... will it ever end with this > sourdough business? > > Bummer! > > Sam The computer will be cheap... it's the new scale that will break you. |
resources for beginners and yeast
Will wrote:
> On Aug 15, 4:45 pm, Sam > wrote: >> Dick Adams wrote: >>> "Ice" > wrote in messagenews:IpudnfPQac4Wu17bnZ2dnUVZ_oytnZ2d@rocki sland.com... >>>> density of water at 20°C = 0.9982 g / ml >>>> density of water at 30°C = 0.9957 g / ml >>> So, for water, the error of volume measurement at 30°C is >>> ~(0.9982-0.9957)/.9982 or 0.25%? >> Oh shit! I'll have to revamp my whole procedure and probably upgrade my >> computer to manage all the calculations in time. >> If somebody opens a window - oh man... will it ever end with this >> sourdough business? >> >> Bummer! >> >> Sam > > The computer will be cheap... it's the new scale that will break you. > I feel sorry for the people that have made Sourdough for thousands of years. What 'did' they do before the days of computers, digital scales and electrically powered constant temperature and humidity boxes to 'grow' their bread?? ;-) Mike |
resources for beginners and yeast
Mike Romain wrote:
>> > > I feel sorry for the people that have made Sourdough for thousands of years. > > why? They are gone with the wind.... and who knows, how often they made soured bread - or could afford making it.... > What 'did' they do before the days of computers, digital scales and > electrically powered constant temperature and humidity boxes to 'grow' > their bread?? > I know two bits from maybe 100 years ago, what "they" did on one place: The wood for the oven to make bread was specially selected. The time to make the sourdough was dependent on the weather - not when thunderstorms were coming up. That was told by a guy who asked his father who was a boy and watched how they made bread. The father himself never made bread in that village. And - you know all the other stuff which is now different from earlier days? I have a book about a 700 year old bakery which gives some information. In the Roman empire, mill and bakers were one enterprise. In Christian medieval times this was split up. Bread quality, size/weight were big issues - bakers cheating and caught underwent a baker's baptize - locked into a basked and lowered several times into water or liquid manure. Dishonesty was an issue - millers were often dishonest. Sayings: The good thing is that the sacks in a mill cannot speak. A stork never builds his nest on a miller's house because he is afraid that the miller steals his eggs. A 794 document mentions bread made from beans, semolina, buckwheat and mainly oats. Assumed is that flat breads of that type were the main bread of common folks. During frequent famines, it is reported, breads were made from horse chestnuts, leaves and grasses..... 11th century a monk in St. Gallen monastory Switzerland - Ekkehart IV recorded in his ""Benedictiones ad mensas" (blessing over diverse foods and drinks): bread cake, moon-shaped bread, boiled bread, roasted bread - sprinkled with salt, egg-bread, yeast-raised bread, sourdough-raised bread, oblaten, unsoured bread, spelt bread, wheat bread, rye bread, barley bread, oat bread, newly baked bread, cold and warm bread, under smoldering ash baked bread. Baking wagon (1656) http://www.metmuseum.org/Works_of_Ar...item= 27%2E59 In villages, they had one baking house - Picture - Return from baking house (1860): http://www.kunstkopie.de/a/sonderman...-backhaus.html nuff..... not much about ergot and health consequences coming from that in that book.... Sam |
resources for beginners and yeast
On Aug 15, 5:33 pm, Mike Romain > wrote:
> Will wrote: > > On Aug 15, 4:45 pm, Sam > wrote: > >> Dick Adams wrote: > >>> "Ice" > wrote in messagenews:IpudnfPQac4Wu17bnZ2dnUVZ_oytnZ2d@rocki sland.com... > >>>> density of water at 20°C = 0.9982 g / ml > >>>> density of water at 30°C = 0.9957 g / ml > >>> So, for water, the error of volume measurement at 30°C is > >>> ~(0.9982-0.9957)/.9982 or 0.25%? > >> Oh shit! I'll have to revamp my whole procedure and probably upgrade my > >> computer to manage all the calculations in time. > >> If somebody opens a window - oh man... will it ever end with this > >> sourdough business? > > >> Bummer! > > >> Sam > > > The computer will be cheap... it's the new scale that will break you. > > I feel sorry for the people that have made Sourdough for thousands of years. > > What 'did' they do before the days of computers, digital scales and > electrically powered constant temperature and humidity boxes to 'grow' > their bread?? > > ;-) > > Mike They probably ate a lot of flat bread. Which is pretty good stuff actually. |
resources for beginners and yeast
Will wrote:
> On Aug 15, 5:33 pm, Mike Romain > wrote: >> What 'did' they do before the days of computers, digital scales and >> electrically powered constant temperature and humidity boxes to 'grow' >> their bread?? > They probably ate a lot of flat bread. Which is pretty good stuff > actually. I don't think the flat bread issue was because of lack of being able to produce sourdough without the items mentioned above (see "49ers" and "Yukon"). Many parts of the world, and particularly northern/central Europe, the main grains grown weren't particularly glutenous. B/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter