I do not bake bread over the summer and all my starters were the worse
for wear (read that as covered with mold), so I decided to start
afresh. I had Carl's and Acme (From Kenneth) frozen in flakes, so I
wasn't going back to square one, just having a good old fashioned
revival meeting.

I had also acquired another packet from a Sourdough Jack cookbook
(this was the 1972 edition) and was going to see what happened there,
too.

I set up the following two days ago, all in similar tupper-ware type
containers.

Carl's with white, unbleached
Carl's with dark rye
Acme with white, unbleached
Sourdough Jack with white, unbleached
Sourdough Jack with dark rye
(controls as follows)
Plain white unbleached
Plain dark rye

Within 24 hours, both Carl's and the Acme showed a lot of activity ,
and the both SDJs showed some activity, but not gangbusters. Plain
flours were barely anything at all - a bubble or two.

Everything was refreshed at the 24 hr mark yesterday. This morning, I
went to refresh again, the plain flours were showing very little
activity, both Carl's and the Acme were a very healthy foam. The SDJ
with white flour had exploded and popped it's top and the SDJ with Rye
was about to escape. I don't know what happened overnight, but they
both went berserkers.

I've tossed the controls and will nurse along the rest of the goop,
the tried and true Carl's and Acme, and the SDJ - and am once again
amazed at the activity from a dried packet that is 35 years old.
Granted, the proof is in the baking and I'll let these babies
stabilize for at least another week before I bake with them, but the
countertop sure is fun this weekend.

Boron

On 3 Sep 2007, at 15:20, Boron Elgar wrote:

> ...and am once again
> amazed at the activity from a dried packet that is 35 years old.
> Granted, the proof is in the baking and I'll let these babies
> stabilize for at least another week before I bake with them, but the
> countertop sure is fun this weekend.
>
> Boron


Thanks Boron.

Jim

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...
> ... will nurse along the rest of the goop,
> the tried and true Carl's and Acme, and the SDJ - and am once again
> amazed at the activity from a dried packet that is 35 years old.

I'd bet the the "SDJ" turns out to be quite at least one of the others.

--
Dicky

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...
> ... will nurse along the rest of the goop,
> the tried and true Carl's and Acme, and the SDJ - and am once again
> amazed at the activity from a dried packet that is 35 years old.

I'd bet the the "SDJ" turns out to be quite like at least one of the others.

--
Dicky

On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 15:06:27 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote:

>
>"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...
>> ... will nurse along the rest of the goop,
>> the tried and true Carl's and Acme, and the SDJ - and am once again
>> amazed at the activity from a dried packet that is 35 years old.
>
>I'd bet the the "SDJ" turns out to be quite like at least one of the others.

And what would lead you to that conclusion?

Boron

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...
> On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 15:06:27 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
> >I'd bet the the "SDJ" turns out to be quite like at least one of the others.
>
> And what would lead you to that conclusion?

1. It is very difficult to rid your kitchen of all of the sourdough
residues lurking in nooks and crannies. Even if you had no other
cultures in process, that would consititute a huge source of potential
contamination. Yes, you had some negative controls, but it was
not clear if they related to the SDJ revival attempt, as that seemed
to activate relatively late.

2. The kind of spore formation that would preserve yeasts over
many years is unlikely in bread yeasts, as those are usually, if not
always, irregular in ploidy, and cannot therefore make it through
the reduction divisions requisite to spore formation.

3. The race to fame for latter-day SDJ revival has, as far as I know,
never resulted in the distribution, by a responsible distributor, to a
panel of judges competent to determine if the alleged revived SDJ was
in any way different from the usual suspects.

So chew a while on that, #5!

--
Dicky

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 15:45:04 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote:

>
>"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...
>> On Mon, 03 Sep 2007 15:06:27 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
>> >I'd bet the the "SDJ" turns out to be quite like at least one of the others.
>>
>> And what would lead you to that conclusion?
>
>1. It is very difficult to rid your kitchen of all of the sourdough
>residues lurking in nooks and crannies. Even if you had no other
>cultures in process, that would consititute a huge source of potential
>contamination.


Which is true in any case, not just this one, and certainly discussed
here often enough and were it so difficult to keep cultures separate,
we'd all only have and be able to keep one. I usually have 3-4
distinct cultures that I keep around.

Certainly there has been no sourdough baking in that kitchen since
May, so something may be around, but I don't know what. My own direct
practices minimize any cross contamination.

>not clear if they related to the SDJ revival attempt, as that seemed
>to activate relatively late.

I'm guessing that had something to do with the age, size and hardness
of the granules, which retained their visibility until about 36 hours
after initial exposure to flour and water. Once they dissolved, I am
guessing the moisture penetrated them and they took off. The control
and each of the tired and true resurrections each had different rates
of coming alive, with the control being dead last and almost minimal.
The few bubbles I saw might have been due to my own stirring.

>
>2. The kind of spore formation that would preserve yeasts over
>many years is unlikely in bread yeasts, as those are usually, if not
>always, irregular in ploidy, and cannot therefore make it through
>the reduction divisions requisite to spore formation.

And yet, surprisingly, I have brought back 3 packets of this stuff at
various times. The cultures have all had a similar smell (of the puke
sort, that is retained all the time - no other culture I have or have
had smells anything at all like it), and the first two were certainly
similar to each other in performance and remained similar to each
other and different from other cultures around. So far, the 3rd
culture has the same puke smell. I cannot vouch yet for performance.
>
>3. The race to fame for latter-day SDJ revival has, as far as I know,
>never resulted in the distribution, by a responsible distributor, to a
>panel of judges competent to determine if the alleged revived SDJ was
>in any way different from the usual suspects.

Well, duh, honey. You're retired, go have yourself some fun. I
haven't had it under a microscope, but I could recognize it
blindfolded by its smell, just as I can Carl's, the Acme, my La Brea
and several other cultures I've purchased, been given or created. And
if any of them were put to use making the same dough and having the
same rise times under the same conditions, I could tell them apart by
that behavior, too. None of that makes me a chemist, just someone
sensitive to the behaviors of the cultures she owns and uses
frequently.

So far as I know, no one else has tried to revive the stuff and posted
here or anywhere else. Until someone else does, that makes me only one
to be able to talk about the culture. Go play with it yourself if you
like and then get back to me.

Boron

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...
> On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 15:45:04 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
> wrote:

> [ ... ]

> > 3. The race to fame for latter-day SDJ revival has, as far as I know,
> >never resulted in the distribution, by a responsible distributor, to a
> >panel of judges competent to determine if the alleged revived SDJ was
> >in any way different from the usual suspects.

> Well, duh, honey. You're retired, go have yourself some fun....
> So far as I know, no one else has tried to revive the stuff and posted
> here or anywhere else. Until someone else does, that makes me only one
> to be able to talk about the culture.

Well, duh, #5, you've got a short memory. Don't you remember ol' Phil
from New Mexico. Try a little searching at Googlegroups.

> Go play with it yourself if you like and then get back to me.

Go play with what myself? Nobody, including you, ever sent any of it
to me. Phil said he though he did, but he was wrong about that.

Reports mention odor of sour milk and of acetone. Barf I think is new
in that context. But barf smell is very typical of a sort of bacteria that
flares up once and then dies out for good.

--
Dicky

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:15:49 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote:

>
>"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...
>> On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 15:45:04 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
>> wrote:
>
>> [ ... ]
>
>> > 3. The race to fame for latter-day SDJ revival has, as far as I know,
>> >never resulted in the distribution, by a responsible distributor, to a
>> >panel of judges competent to determine if the alleged revived SDJ was
>> >in any way different from the usual suspects.
>
>> Well, duh, honey. You're retired, go have yourself some fun....
>> So far as I know, no one else has tried to revive the stuff and posted
>> here or anywhere else. Until someone else does, that makes me only one
>> to be able to talk about the culture.
>
>Well, duh, #5, you've got a short memory. Don't you remember ol' Phil
>from New Mexico. Try a little searching at Googlegroups.

There was Gordon in Indiana, but he never followed through with
discussion or long term use..

You know I only drop into this boys' club once in while to tweak your
nose and remind you to **** off, so don't take it to heart. You claim
to have proof, old man, You provide it - I am not going to go looking
for it.

>> Go play with it yourself if you like and then get back to me.
>
>Go play with what myself? Nobody, including you, ever sent any of it
>to me. Phil said he though he did, but he was wrong about that.

Hell will freeze over first.
>
>Reports mention odor of sour milk and of acetone. Barf I think is new
>in that context. But barf smell is very typical of a sort of bacteria that
>flares up once and then dies out for good.

Then my report differs. There is no acetone smell now, nor was there
with the other SDJs and the puke smell remained for months - that is,
as long as I had the SDJs as a starter. I've done this 3 times and all
you do is sit in a corner and whine.

Go on and keep whining, but those pukey-smelling SDJs produced these,
which I posted here before, and they produced a lot more like them,
but since you are not able to google well, just click.

http://i2.tinypic.com/ra2des.jpg

http://i2.tinypic.com/ra2cdv.jpg

http://i2.tinypic.com/s6qc6r.jpg

Boron

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message news
> On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 18:15:49 GMT, "Dick Adams" > wrote:
> >"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...

> >> Well, duh, honey. You're retired, go have yourself some fun....
> >> So far as I know, no one else has tried to revive the stuff and posted
> >> here or anywhere else. Until someone else does, that makes me only one
> >> to be able to talk about the culture.

> >Well, duh, #5, you've got a short memory. Don't you remember ol' Phil
> >from New Mexico. Try a little searching at Googlegroups.

> There was Gordon in Indiana, but he never followed through with
> discussion or long term use..

I saw that: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.f...f06e6bb1a10?hl
Here is a thread including the poster named Phil (NM) I mentioned:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.f...9ea85a 139bc4

You yourself posted to than one, hon! Can't you remember? Well, it
was a while back.

> You know I only drop into this boys' club once in while to tweak your
> nose and remind you to **** off, so don't take it to heart. You claim
> to have proof, old man, You provide it - I am not going to go looking
> for it.

I did not claim any proof. I simply raised some reasonable doubts.

> >> Go play with it yourself if you like and then get back to me.

> > Go play with what myself? Nobody, including you, ever sent any of it
> > to me. Phil said he though he did, but he was wrong about that.

> Hell will freeze over first.

First, before what?

I guess you mean before you send me or anyone else a sample of your
alleged SDJ revival for some unbiased tests?

(I did check my records to find that Phil did send me a sample of his revived
SDJ, but I think I revived it without a control and that it did not seem unlike
my ususual cultures.) (Bad! Don't tell me, I know better now!)

> http://i2.tinypic.com/ra2des.jpg; http://i2.tinypic.com/ra2cdv.jpg; http://i2.tinypic.com/s6qc6r.jpg

Good pics!

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 01:24:10 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote:

>
>"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message news

>> There was Gordon in Indiana, but he never followed through with
>> discussion or long term use..
>
>I saw that: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.f...f06e6bb1a10?hl
>Here is a thread including the poster named Phil (NM) I mentioned:
>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.f...9ea85a 139bc4
>
>You yourself posted to than one, hon! Can't you remember? Well, it
>was a while back.

Maybe your memory should serve you better & you can dig deeper into
Phil's postings...his previous ones about the topic refer to
something called "Yukon Jack." I have no idea if that is the what I
have been using, nor do you.
>
>> You know I only drop into this boys' club once in while to tweak your
>> nose and remind you to **** off, so don't take it to heart. You claim
>> to have proof, old man, You provide it - I am not going to go looking
>> for it.
>
>I did not claim any proof. I simply raised some reasonable doubts.

Aren't any doubts. Phil himself reports different results from
different people. What my results are is what I have posted. I do not
need anyone here to verify them for me.

Additionally, the publication dates of the books span from 1959 to
1971 and perhaps onward, as far as I can see. I have no idea of the
year's packet or packets he used or anyone else used if they found
any. I've had two totally different packets of the 3 books I have
received.

>I guess you mean before you send me or anyone else a sample of your
>alleged SDJ revival for some unbiased tests?

I send folks my starters all the time, and by golly, I get starters
FROM them, too.

You, OTOH, I wouldn't give the time of day, because you're unpleasant
to so many.
>
>(I did check my records to find that Phil did send me a sample of his revived
>SDJ, but I think I revived it without a control and that it did not seem unlike
>my ususual cultures.) (Bad! Don't tell me, I know better now!)

You seemed pleased....Phil posted

"Dick already reported success with the loaves he baked from his
noodle.... Be interesting to hear how you fared... and the other folks
who got a noodle too.... "

So, Phil seems to have sent around what he had, and at least one other
poster mentions it being just dandy months later. I don't see any
reason why you'd need to be the expert on this
>
>> http://i2.tinypic.com/ra2des.jpg; http://i2.tinypic.com/ra2cdv.jpg; http://i2.tinypic.com/s6qc6r.jpg
>
>Good pics!

Yeah, I've earned money from it.

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...

> ... Phil seems to have sent around what he had, and at least one other
> poster mentions it being just dandy months later. I don't see any
> reason why you'd need to be the expert on this.

Well, #5, I am not trying to become an expert, but I do mean to
point out that, in your post:

you said:

> So far as I know, no one else has tried to revive the stuff and posted
> here or anywhere else. Until someone else does, that makes me only one
> to be able to talk about the culture.

The case of Phil was presented as an exception to your generality
(" no one ... "), effectively invalidating your claim as "only one to be
able to talk about the culture". (<sdj> as a search word brought up more
historic talk about the Sourdough Jack cultu http://tinyurl.com/2x3z3k.)

> I send folks my starters all the time, and by golly, I get starters
> FROM them, too.

I guess it sounds kind of evil to suggest that a kitchen, where many examples
of sourdough culture have resided over the years, is not a good place to
attempt experiments requiring microbiological sterility. But I do feel that
it is not an entirely inappropriate suggestion.

> Aren't any doubts. Phil himself reports different results from
> different people. What my results are is what I have posted. I do not
> need anyone here to verify them for me.

OK. Bye #5.

--
Dicky