Sourdough Ciabatta

2 days to make

Lean rustic sourdough

Yield 2 Ciabatta.

STARTER

50 gm sourdough culture, refreshed and active - I keep mine at 150% hydration
so 50 gm is an easy quantity for calculating flour and water weights. I use Ed
Wood's San Francisco Sourdough Culture.
25 gm Rye flour
205 gm white, 12% protein white flour
370 gm water at 45C (can be lower, not much higher though.)

Whisk all the ingredients to a thick batter, in your mixer bowl and leave,
loosely covered, in a warm place, overnight.

These quantities in my kitchen, give a batter temperature of about 27C which is
cooled rapidly, by the stainless steel bowl I use, to 25C. By the next day, the
starter should be frothy, very bubbly, and sour-smelling. (A polite way of
putting it. Actually, it smells like the Black Lagooon<g>)

DOUGH

The starter
50 gm wholewheat "bread" flour.
200 gm white flour as above
10 gm salt


Mix all the ingredients, with the hook, on low to combine and then turn the
mixer up to medium and mix until the dough clears the bottom of the bowl, this
sourdough version does that a LOT quicker than the commercial version I make.5
- 10 minutes should be enough. Dough temperature was 20C.

Tip out onto a well floured counter and give the dough 6 Stretch 'n' Fold
cycles at 10 minute intervals, using flour as necessary. Leave to double, cut
into 2 strips and stretch and fold into rough squares. Proof to about 1 1/2
times or 2 if you're feeling confident, seam up, on a heavily floured surface.
Invert, stretch to Ciabatta shape and bake immediately, no recovery, at max
turned down straight away to 220C. 15-20 minutes, internal temp at least 95C.
Stones, no steam.

First rise took 2 hours, second rise just under 3 but times will, I suspect,
vary.

The hydration is high but the dough is extremely elastic after the stretch and
fold cycles and is surprisingly resistant to deflation.

And, if you were to say "That's just your standard Ciabatta with extra stretch
and fold cycles and sourdough intead of commercial yeast", I'd be forced to
agree.

John

p.s. The bread was delicious BTW, some of the best I have ever baked. Which is,
after all, why we do it, to make bread that's a pleasure to eat.

John

John,

Thank you for sharing your recipe.
I tried your stretch fold technique on a yeasted ciabatta and it does make the
dough more extensible and easier to handle. I suspect that after 3 or 4 s/f
cycles the dough is not nearly as high in hydration as intended. A lot of
flour is thrown about to keep the sticky mess from adhering to the board.

The photos you shared look pretty good. What brand name white flour do you use
if I may ask?

Thanks,
Ed Bechtel

>
>John,
>
>Thank you for sharing your recipe.
>I tried your stretch fold technique on a yeasted ciabatta and it does make
>the
>dough more extensible and easier to handle. I suspect that after 3 or 4 s/f
>cycles the dough is not nearly as high in hydration as intended. A lot of
>flour is thrown about to keep the sticky mess from adhering to the board.
>
>The photos you shared look pretty good. What brand name white flour do you
>use
>if I may ask?
>
>Thanks,
>Ed Bechtel
>
You may ask and I'll answer but I don't think it'll be much use to you<g>

My flour is bought, in 16 kilo sacks, from Wessex Mill, in England, near
Oxford. However, my Ciabatta recipes have been made with lots of flours and any
"bread" flour with 12%+ protein should be fine.

John

On 24 Jun 2004 05:36:38 GMT, ojunk (Ed Bechtel)
wrote:

>I suspect that after 3 or 4 s/f
>cycles the dough is not nearly as high in hydration as intended. A lot of
>flour is thrown about to keep the sticky mess from adhering to the board.

Yes, I took a crack at this recipe in the past 48 hours. Having read
your post, I weighed the "sugar shaker" I use for dusting flour before
and after; something on the order of 65 to 70 grams of flour "went
somewhere." That would still point to a hydration near the
mid-seventies.

By my usual standards, the dough was extremely slack and sticky, but
that was probably exacerbated by my use of the 10% protein GP flour I
had handy (Ceresota Unbleached). I need to track down a local source
of KA or Wheat Montana.

In any event, the bread was very satisfying, I think the smidgeon of
whole grain flours adds a nice touch to both color and flavor. My
wife who is not a big sourdough fan was quite pleased with it too.

<http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dwthomas_asylum/ciabatta.gif>
<http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dwthomas_asylum/Ciabslic.jpg>

Thanks to John for sharing the recipe.

DaveT (loyal lurker, infrequent poster)

>
>On 24 Jun 2004 05:36:38 GMT, ojunk (Ed Bechtel)
>wrote:
>
>>I suspect that after 3 or 4 s/f
>>cycles the dough is not nearly as high in hydration as intended. A lot of
>>flour is thrown about to keep the sticky mess from adhering to the board.
>
>Yes, I took a crack at this recipe in the past 48 hours. Having read
>your post, I weighed the "sugar shaker" I use for dusting flour before
>and after; something on the order of 65 to 70 grams of flour "went
>somewhere." That would still point to a hydration near the
>mid-seventies.

I did the same thing when developing the recipe and got much the same figures.

>
>By my usual standards, the dough was extremely slack and sticky, but
>that was probably exacerbated by my use of the 10% protein GP flour I
>had handy (Ceresota Unbleached). I need to track down a local source
>of KA or Wheat Montana.
>
I used 10% protein flour in one batch, during testing and my results were very
similar, excellent bread, just a little less holey than the higher protein
flour.

>In any event, the bread was very satisfying, I think the smidgeon of
>whole grain flours adds a nice touch to both color and flavor. My
>wife who is not a big sourdough fan was quite pleased with it too.

5% rye, 10% wholewheat, 85% white is the best combination of flavour with
lightness and volume that I've yet found. For everyday bread it is a very good
start point.

>
><http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dwthomas_asylum/ciabatta.gif>
><http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dwthomas_asylum/Ciabslic.jpg>

Nice shape, thinner crust than mine, good looking bread. How was the oven
spring?

It may be my monitor but the loaves look a little pale - did you use flash? -
how long did you bake? Is there no end to my questions?<G>

>
>Thanks to John for sharing the recipe.
>
> DaveT (loyal lurker, infrequent poster)

My pleasure, thank you for your feedback, it is always valued.

John

On 26 Jun 2004 09:51:58 GMT, pamnone (Wcsjohn) wrote:

>Nice shape, thinner crust than mine, good looking bread.

Thanks.

>How was the oven spring?

There was some oven spring (20%?), but not a lot. Of course, when I
think oven spring, I think of a yeast bread I do that's loaded with
egg -- that can nearly double during the bake!

The oven is a not-real-big electric in which I have a man-made
"stone" about 14.5 x 15.5 x 3/4" (37x39x2cm). I preheated to 500 F
(260C), but not as long as I probably should have, then cut it to 425
F (218 C) when I put the bread in.
>
>It may be my monitor but the loaves look a little pale - did you use flash? -
>how long did you bake?

They were in about 20 minutes. Probably would have been OK to go a
little longer, but they seemed just about optimum, there was a little
moistness that was a hit in the household. I flipped the loaves
upside down on parchment for the trip to the oven after they had been
rising on a board heavily dusted with flour. Thanks to that, the
final top sides are remarkably well covered with flour. (I also think
my Wheat Montana whole wheat flour is lighter than some whole wheat
I've used -- whatever that could mean.)

The loaf shot was flash, the slice shot was under a tungsten worklight
setup I use for other photo work; wanted to try and show the texture
better than on-camera flash.

>Is there no end to my questions?<G>

If ya don't ask, ya'll never know! :-)

There were several things converged here that were outside my normal
working methods, so there could be many differences in our results
that could be attributed to my ignorance. Anyway, the results will
encourage me to do some further adventuring.

Thanks again,

DaveT

>>It may be my monitor but the loaves look a little pale - did you use flash?
>-
>>how long did you bake?
>
>They were in about 20 minutes. Probably would have been OK to go a
>little longer, but they seemed just about optimum, there was a little
>moistness that was a hit in the household.

Now that's a classic example of varying taste, all the recipients of my bread
prefer the crumb cooked until moisture is gone, so I would, naturally, bake to
a higher internal temperature and generate a deeper colour. "Chacun a son gout"
as the French say.<g>

>I flipped the loaves
>upside down on parchment for the trip to the oven after they had been
>rising on a board heavily dusted with flour. Thanks to that, the
>final top sides are remarkably well covered with flour. (I also think
>my Wheat Montana whole wheat flour is lighter than some whole wheat
>I've used -- whatever that could mean.)
>
>The loaf shot was flash, the slice shot was under a tungsten worklight
>setup I use for other photo work; wanted to try and show the texture
>better than on-camera flash.
>
Agreed. I have never managed to show crumb detail well, using on-camera flash.
The multiple reflecting cells of an open textured crumb just bounce the light
around and wash out detail.

>
>There were several things converged here that were outside my normal
>working methods, so there could be many differences in our results
>that could be attributed to my ignorance. Anyway, the results will
>encourage me to do some furtherI don't hold a monopoly on baking expertise and
knowledge. A recipe can never be more than a starting point , especially given
the inevitable differences between ingredients in our 2 countries.

>Thanks again,
>
>DaveT
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

On 26 Jun 2004 09:51:58 GMT, pamnone (Wcsjohn) wrote:

>Nice shape, thinner crust than mine, good looking bread. How was the oven
>spring?

Hi John,

Would you be striving for more spring... or less...?

Thanks,

--
Kenneth

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

>>Nice shape, thinner crust than mine, good looking bread. How was the oven
>>spring?
>
>Hi John,
>
>Would you be striving for more spring... or less...?
>
>Thanks,
>
>--
>Kenneth
>
Well, since the prebake stretch appears to deflate the proofed loaves
disastrously, you could say "all the oven spring you can get", this recipe
relies on oven spring totally.

John

On 27 Jun 2004 15:20:36 GMT, pamnone (Wcsjohn) wrote:

>>>Nice shape, thinner crust than mine, good looking bread. How was the oven
>>>spring?
>>
>>Hi John,
>>
>>Would you be striving for more spring... or less...?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>--
>>Kenneth
>>
>Well, since the prebake stretch appears to deflate the proofed loaves
>disastrously, you could say "all the oven spring you can get", this recipe
>relies on oven spring totally.
>
>John

Hi John,

I need to get more sleep... I zoned out that this was a ciabatta.

All the best,

--
Kenneth

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

stretch to Ciabatta shape and bake immediately, no recovery, at max
> turned down straight away to 220C. 15-20 minutes, internal temp at least 95C.
> Stones, no steam.

I'm sure this will start some kind of war, but what is the shape of
good Ciabatta traditionally supposed to be? At a great bakery in my
town, their Ciabatta is much more of a flattened rectangle than the
shape of your loaves (although yours look great in "loaf" form).

Is the flattened rectangle "look" the result of a super high
hydration, a lazy baker, or both? I've seen it made both ways but the
way you did it looks much more interesting than the rectangle.

Phil

On 28 Jun 2004 13:28:22 -0700, (Phil) wrote:

>Is the flattened rectangle "look" the result of a super high
>hydration, a lazy baker, or both?

Hey Phil,

That's the traditional shape... It is reminiscent of a "shoe."

HTH,

--
Kenneth

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

>
>stretch to Ciabatta shape and bake immediately, no recovery, at max
>> turned down straight away to 220C. 15-20 minutes, internal temp at least
>95C.
>> Stones, no steam.
>
>I'm sure this will start some kind of war, but what is the shape of
>good Ciabatta traditionally supposed to be? At a great bakery in my
>town, their Ciabatta is much more of a flattened rectangle than the
>shape of your loaves (although yours look great in "loaf" form).
>
>Is the flattened rectangle "look" the result of a super high
>hydration, a lazy baker, or both? I've seen it made both ways but the
>way you did it looks much more interesting than the rectangle.
>
>Phil
>
I must admit that I'm not certain about this but I think the flattened
rectangles are not given the prebake stretch that produces the shape I make and
prefer (On purely aesthetic grounds, I hasten to add<g>). I also find that the
stretching is reliable in a way that moving very wobbly loaves directly into
the oven is not. If a loaf collapses as the result of a stretch it will spring
in the oven, if it collapses as a result of clumsy handling (such as mine<g>)
it, often, does not.

John