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 Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
Sam Sam is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 218
Default Converting Recipes

Kenneth wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 07:28:06 -0300, Mike Romain
> > wrote:
>
>
>> So just 'what' is 100% hydration?
>>

>
> Howdy,
>
> It is the proportion of water to flour.
>
> Weight of water / weight of flour = 1.00, or 100%.
>
> So, said another way, it means "equal weights of water and
> flour."
>
>

A bit more detailed the

http://samartha.net/SD/SourdoughGlossary.html

Sam

  #42 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
Doc Doc is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default Converting Recipes

On Mar 8, 7:42*pm, "Dick Adams" > wrote:
> "Doc" > wrote in ...
> > [ ... ]
> > If I want to increase the sourness further I retard the dough overnight at
> > about 55-60°F before baking and/or add/increase the amount of whole
> > grain flour in the mix.

>

Dick Adams said:
> So you must believe that cold incubation gives the souring bacteria
> the edge over the yeasties, who are simply blowing gas.
>
> I believe that the yeasties do their stuff and give way to the bacteria
> when their food is gone. *I even believe that the bacteria feast on
> the starving bacteria. *I believe that the sequence procedes slower
> in the cold.
>
> > it is not the pH, but the TTA that makes the loaf sour.

>
> Actually, I do not exactly know what sour is. *I guess it is safe to say
> that it is an opinion, a perception, a state of mind ...
>
> Hard to objectify when such a thing is a parameter.


Dick,
Always interested in your opinions.
They make me think.
I guess it is sort of Darwin in a dish, but I too don't know exactly
what is going on.
Certainly competition, but under some conditions synergy.
My starter today is probably not the same as when I originally got it,
but it seems stable and works for me.
There may an advantage for the LAB at low temp and you can find a temp
below which there is little observable yeast activity
But I am not convinced that the yeast has actually shut down.
The lower temperature definitely increases the solubility of CO2 so
that instead of "blowing gas" into bubbles, the gas is just absorbed
by the liquid.
There is some CO2 diffusion through the medium and probably some loss
at the surface.
Hard to say what the balance is.
At least one paper I found on multivariate sensitivities provided
interesting but not very useful curves on mutual dependencies.
So the science and the art go forward hand in hand.
I am still looking for the definitive experiment to prove that the
blisters on the surface of a retarded loaf are CO2.
Doc



  #43 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 70
Default Converting Recipes


"Doc" > wrote in message ...

> There may an advantage for the LAB at low temp and you can find a temp
> below which there is little observable yeast activity.


Irrespective of temperature, sometimes "Carlos" and I have observed a
condition, in growing up starter, where there seems to be souring without
much gassing. This presents as "puffiness", where the starter puffs up slightly,
and starts smelling acidy before characteristic active growth commences.

But continued culturing (feeding cycles) invariably restores normal starter
activity.

> The lower temperature definitely increases the solubility of CO2 so
> that instead of "blowing gas" into bubbles, the gas is just absorbed
> by the liquid.


Possibly, but if you are thinking that carbonic acid is involved in sourdough
sour, you have forgotten what happens to seltzer water when it gets warm,
not to mention what would happen to seltzer if it were baked.

> At least one paper I found on multivariate sensitivities provided
> interesting but not very useful curves on mutual dependencies.


You are beginning to sound like a Wall Street physicist.

> So the science and the art go forward hand in hand.


Maybe somewhere.

> I am still looking for the definitive experiment to prove that the
> blisters on the surface of a retarded loaf are CO2.


Persevere and prosper.





  #44 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,641
Default Converting Recipes

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:09:03 -0700 (PDT), Doc >
wrote:

>On Mar 8, 7:42*pm, "Dick Adams" > wrote:
>> "Doc" > wrote in ...
>> > [ ... ]
>> > If I want to increase the sourness further I retard the dough overnight at
>> > about 55-60°F before baking and/or add/increase the amount of whole
>> > grain flour in the mix.

>>

>Dick Adams said:
>> So you must believe that cold incubation gives the souring bacteria
>> the edge over the yeasties, who are simply blowing gas.
>>
>> I believe that the yeasties do their stuff and give way to the bacteria
>> when their food is gone. *I even believe that the bacteria feast on
>> the starving bacteria. *I believe that the sequence procedes slower
>> in the cold.
>>
>> > it is not the pH, but the TTA that makes the loaf sour.

>>
>> Actually, I do not exactly know what sour is. *I guess it is safe to say
>> that it is an opinion, a perception, a state of mind ...
>>
>> Hard to objectify when such a thing is a parameter.

>
>Dick,
>Always interested in your opinions.
>They make me think.
>I guess it is sort of Darwin in a dish, but I too don't know exactly
>what is going on.
>Certainly competition, but under some conditions synergy.
>My starter today is probably not the same as when I originally got it,
>but it seems stable and works for me.
>There may an advantage for the LAB at low temp and you can find a temp
>below which there is little observable yeast activity
>But I am not convinced that the yeast has actually shut down.
>The lower temperature definitely increases the solubility of CO2 so
>that instead of "blowing gas" into bubbles, the gas is just absorbed
>by the liquid.
>There is some CO2 diffusion through the medium and probably some loss
>at the surface.
>Hard to say what the balance is.
>At least one paper I found on multivariate sensitivities provided
>interesting but not very useful curves on mutual dependencies.
>So the science and the art go forward hand in hand.
>I am still looking for the definitive experiment to prove that the
>blisters on the surface of a retarded loaf are CO2.
>Doc
>
>

Google has this book on tap:

Technology of Breadmaking
By Stanley P. Cauvain, Linda S. Young

You might find a bit about it in there.

Boron
  #45 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 70
Default Converting Recipes


"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message ...
> On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:09:03 -0700 (PDT), Doc >
> wrote:


> > [ ... ]


> >At least one paper I found on multivariate sensitivities provided
> >interesting but not very useful curves on mutual dependencies.
> >So the science and the art go forward hand in hand.
> >I am still looking for the definitive experiment to prove that the
> >blisters on the surface of a retarded loaf are CO2.
> >
> >

> Google has this book on tap:
>
> Technology of Breadmaking
> By Stanley P. Cauvain, Linda S. Young
>
> You might find a bit about it in there.


One might find out a bit about exactly what in that book, and exactly
where in that book? (It is a big book!)

Were we talking about multivariate sensitivities or mutual
dependencies or retarded blisters or what?

(I understand there is quite a bit about bread in the Bible,
as well.)

Kee-riminently, this is really gettin' complicated around here!

(What ever happened to flour, water, salt and leaven, mix it
up and bake it?)

--
Dicky



  #46 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Converting Recipes

On Mar 11, 11:05*am, "Dick Adams" > wrote:
....
> Kee-riminently, this is really gettin' complicated around here!
>
> (What ever happened to flour, water, salt and leaven, mix it
> up and bake it?)
>
> --
> Dicky


It seems to me people will generally fall into two camps: one is
content to know that the ingredients will do what is expected of them
if treated in a proper (practiced) manner; the other has to know "why"
at a cellular level.

I straddle the line between the two, mostly because other things
occupy my time such that I must rely on my contentedness to temper my
thirst for this particular scientific knowledge. That gets me thinking
about parallels between religion and science in general, and how
science slowly chips away at the mystique surrounding our existence.
But as people have pointed out on this list, knowing exactly why
water, flour, salt, and leaven make bread does not necessarily bring
with it an understanding of what makes bread...well, bread,
historically or otherwise. Conversely, practicing the art doesn't mean
you must avoid the science.

Either way, as long as I am filled with good bread and good beer, not
much else matters.

Matt
  #47 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 70
Default Converting Recipes


"Matt Fitz" > wrote in message ...
> It seems to me people will generally fall into two camps: one is
> content to know that the ingredients will do what is expected of them
> if treated in a proper (practiced) manner; the other has to know "why"
> at a cellular level(*).


Do you think knowing why is at the root of it, or just the determination
to wrap and mystify oneself with jargon?

> ... practicing the art doesn't mean you must avoid the science.


Science? Oh, really? What science, exactly?

Well, there is some bread science, but not much of it has appeared
around here recently, except maybe for a nonspecific reference to an
archaic book, and occasional presumptive naming of sourdough
microorganisms.

> Either way, as long as I am filled with good bread and good beer, not
> much else matters.


Sojourn into the science of nutrition may be beneficial if the carbohydrates
have not already claimed their victory.

--
Dicky

__________________________________________
*Knowing why at a cellular level is useful for understanding how a
single compound cell can grow up into to the huge malevolent,
environmentally-destructive individual that each of us has become.
But perhaps the cellular level is a bit deep for bread.

  #48 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 988
Default Converting Recipes

Matt Fitz wrote:
> On Mar 11, 11:05 am, "Dick Adams" > wrote:
> ....
>> Kee-riminently, this is really gettin' complicated around here!
>>
>> (What ever happened to flour, water, salt and leaven, mix it
>> up and bake it?)
>>

> It seems to me people will generally fall into two camps: one is
> content to know that the ingredients will do what is expected of them
> if treated in a proper (practiced) manner; the other has to know "why"
> at a cellular level.
>
> I straddle the line between the two, mostly because other things
> occupy my time such that I must rely on my contentedness to temper my
> thirst for this particular scientific knowledge. That gets me thinking
> about parallels between religion and science in general,....


It makes me think about why I put two socks in the dryer and only one
comes out.

B/
  #49 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 70
Default Converting Recipes


"Brian Mailman" > wrote in message m...
> It makes me think about why I put two socks in the dryer and only one
> comes out.


Now you are going to have to loose a foot, at least, to even things up.
  #50 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
Doc Doc is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default Converting Recipes

On Mar 10, 10:11*pm, "Dick Adams" > wrote:
>
> Possibly, but if you are thinking that carbonic acid is involved in sourdough
> sour, you have forgotten what happens to seltzer water when it gets warm,
> not to mention what would happen to seltzer if it were baked.
>

Well while carbonic acid is not the agent that brings you the sour in
sourdough, to some extent it is involved in sourdough. I think it is
carbonic acid in equilibrium (or not) with gaseous CO2 that inflates
the bread. And when I bake bread I get something similar to what I
might get if I baked seltzer in a relatively gas-tight foam (sort of)
- the CO2 comes out of solution as the temperature rises, inflates the
foam, and escapes. I hadn't thought of it that way, but it might
actually be a good model. See - you make me think.

Cheers,
Doc


  #51 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
Doc Doc is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 89
Default Converting Recipes

On Mar 12, 6:18*am, Matt Fitz > wrote:
> It seems to me people will generally fall into two camps: one is
> content to know that the ingredients will do what is expected of them
> if treated in a proper (practiced) manner; the other has to know "why"
> at a cellular level.


So where to you classifiy this:
http://www.thefreshloaf.com/node/109...olution-part-2

  #52 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Converting Recipes

On Mar 13, 12:56*am, Doc > wrote:
> On Mar 12, 6:18*am, Matt Fitz > wrote:
>
> > It seems to me people will generally fall into two camps: one is
> > content to know that the ingredients will do what is expected of them
> > if treated in a proper (practiced) manner; the other has to know "why"
> > at a cellular level.

>
> So where to you classifiy this:http://www.thefreshloaf.com/node/109...olution-part-2


I'll file that under TMI. It certainly looks like science, but I was
only able to make it about three paragraphs before I nodded off.
Starting my own culture from scratch was so easy I would never imagine
someone would need to go to that extent to deconstruct the process.
Perhaps she was using white flour.
Matt
  #53 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Converting Recipes

On Mar 12, 11:33*am, "Dick Adams" > wrote:
> "Matt Fitz" > wrote in ...


> > Either way, as long as I am filled with good bread and good beer, not
> > much else matters.

>
> Sojourn into the science of nutrition may be beneficial if the carbohydrates
> have not already claimed their victory.


I am fortunate to lead an active life, and the majority of my diet -
outside of beer and bread - is vegetable and fruit. Meat and cheese
are still on the menu, but my wife is a vegan so at home they are
scarcely found.

>
> --
> Dicky
>
> __________________________________________
> *Knowing why at a cellular level is useful for understanding how a
> single compound cell can grow up into to the huge malevolent,
> environmentally-destructive individual that each of us has become.
> ...


I will think of this every time I feed my starter or watch a ball of
dough rise.

Matt
  #54 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 988
Default Converting Recipes

Dick Adams wrote:
> "Brian Mailman" > wrote in message
> m...
>> It makes me think about why I put two socks in the dryer and only
>> one comes out.

>
> Now you are going to have to loose a foot, at least, to even things
> up.


Or I could go out to the backyard and pick one off the sock tree. I'm
sure someone has a theoretical scientific explanation on why such things
exist.

B/
  #55 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
Sam Sam is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 218
Default Converting Recipes

Brian Mailman wrote:
> Or I could go out to the backyard and pick one off the sock tree. I'm
> sure someone has a theoretical scientific explanation on why such things
> exist.
>


No experience is all, just smoke the right stuff and you will see your
tree.

The molebulogists on this forum may not yet have gotten it yet how this
works and how great it is to get out of your head, see the starter grow,
knead the dough, see it rise and get brown....


Sam



  #56 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default Converting Recipes

Mike Romain wrote:
> Sam wrote:
>> Mike Romain wrote:
>>> Is there a simple explanation for bakers %?
>>>
>>>

>> My guess, if you haven't gotten it by now - probably not for you.
>>
>> Sam
>>
>>

> Humor me and maybe educate others please. I haven't paid too much
> attention to it because any exact measurement bread recipes have not
> worked for me. Maybe it's time to try something new....
>
> Mike


The best way I've found to explain baker's percentage is that it's a
ratio. 100% hydration means 1:1. 50% hydration means 1:2 (water to
flour). Yes, the percent sign is a misnomer. Yes, some bakers who don't
understand math very well must have come up with the percent sign. Oh
well - as a system it works well, because flour is your core ingredient.
  #57 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 638
Default Converting Recipes

On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 13:59:12 -0600, Hans Fugal
> wrote:

>
>The best way I've found to explain baker's percentage is that it's a
>ratio. 100% hydration means 1:1. 50% hydration means 1:2 (water to
>flour). Yes, the percent sign is a misnomer.


Hi Hans,

The percent sign is not a misnomer in any way...

It means "hundredths" and nothing more (or less...)

Indeed, people often assume that a percent sign means
hundredths of the total, but that is not always correct.

Once folks understand that it is convenient to consider the
other ingredients as a proportion of the total flour, there
should be little confusion.

All the best,
--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
  #58 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.sourdough
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default Converting Recipes

Kenneth wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 13:59:12 -0600, Hans Fugal
> > wrote:
>
>> The best way I've found to explain baker's percentage is that it's a
>> ratio. 100% hydration means 1:1. 50% hydration means 1:2 (water to
>> flour). Yes, the percent sign is a misnomer.

>
> Hi Hans,
>
> The percent sign is not a misnomer in any way...
>
> It means "hundredths" and nothing more (or less...)
>
> Indeed, people often assume that a percent sign means
> hundredths of the total, but that is not always correct.


An interesting tidbit. Thanks
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Converting to metric piedmont General Cooking 67 30-05-2010 06:12 PM
converting a starter eclipsme Sourdough 0 06-01-2010 05:03 PM
Saffron -- converting threads to powdered in recipes Chris Metzler General Cooking 7 17-06-2007 08:24 AM
converting recipes to Accuchef Jerry and Carol Schull General Cooking 3 29-09-2006 07:05 AM
Converting Recipe???? nancy Sourdough 20 29-08-2006 11:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"