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 |
|
|||
|
|||
Is it Dead?
Howdy. First time poster here. I watched Alone in the Wilderness on PBS a
few too many times and decided to try some sourdough. I got some of Carl's awhile back and followed the directions very well. (I think) I got it going good and thought it time to discard half due to the quantity. I dried some for future use hoping to keep the original from straying into some Seattle variety. I added more flour and water to the starter that I had going. Nothing happened after that. It's been 3 days of stiring on occassion. Temps in the mid 70's. Smells sour and tastes really, really sour. No rise or any bubbles at all. I then started some of the dried that I had saved and it has done nothing at all either. Is it dead? Can it be saved? I would have tried from scratch but the point of trying Carl's was the historical factor. Thanks for any help Richard P.S. I crash computers and kill house plants too if that helps with the diagnosis. |
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:23:23 GMT, "Richard"
> wrote: >Howdy. First time poster here. I watched Alone in the Wilderness on PBS a >few too many times and decided to try some sourdough. I got some of Carl's >awhile back and followed the directions very well. (I think) I got it going >good and thought it time to discard half due to the quantity. I dried some >for future use hoping to keep the original from straying into some Seattle >variety. > >I added more flour and water to the starter that I had going. Nothing >happened after that. It's been 3 days of stiring on occassion. Temps in the >mid 70's. Smells sour and tastes really, really sour. No rise or any bubbles >at all. > >I then started some of the dried that I had saved and it has done nothing at >all either. > >Is it dead? Can it be saved? I would have tried from scratch but the point >of trying Carl's was the historical factor. > >Thanks for any help >Richard > >P.S. I crash computers and kill house plants too if that helps with the >diagnosis. > Hi Richard, The fact that it smells and tastes sour causes this question: Had you been watching it over parts of those three days? That is, might it have risen up, then fallen back without your having noticed? That might explain your situation... All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:23:23 GMT, "Richard"
> wrote: >Howdy. First time poster here. I watched Alone in the Wilderness on PBS a >few too many times and decided to try some sourdough. I got some of Carl's >awhile back and followed the directions very well. (I think) I got it going >good and thought it time to discard half due to the quantity. I dried some >for future use hoping to keep the original from straying into some Seattle >variety. > >I added more flour and water to the starter that I had going. Nothing >happened after that. It's been 3 days of stiring on occassion. Temps in the >mid 70's. Smells sour and tastes really, really sour. No rise or any bubbles >at all. > >I then started some of the dried that I had saved and it has done nothing at >all either. > >Is it dead? Can it be saved? I would have tried from scratch but the point >of trying Carl's was the historical factor. > >Thanks for any help >Richard > >P.S. I crash computers and kill house plants too if that helps with the >diagnosis. > Hi Richard, The fact that it smells and tastes sour causes this question: Had you been watching it over parts of those three days? That is, might it have risen up, then fallen back without your having noticed? That might explain your situation... All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, with
the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. Richard "Kenneth" > wrote in message ... > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:23:23 GMT, "Richard" > > wrote: > > >Howdy. First time poster here. I watched Alone in the Wilderness on PBS a > >few too many times and decided to try some sourdough. I got some of Carl's > >awhile back and followed the directions very well. (I think) I got it going > >good and thought it time to discard half due to the quantity. I dried some > >for future use hoping to keep the original from straying into some Seattle > >variety. > > > >I added more flour and water to the starter that I had going. Nothing > >happened after that. It's been 3 days of stiring on occassion. Temps in the > >mid 70's. Smells sour and tastes really, really sour. No rise or any bubbles > >at all. > > > >I then started some of the dried that I had saved and it has done nothing at > >all either. > > > >Is it dead? Can it be saved? I would have tried from scratch but the point > >of trying Carl's was the historical factor. > > > >Thanks for any help > >Richard > > > >P.S. I crash computers and kill house plants too if that helps with the > >diagnosis. > > > > Hi Richard, > > The fact that it smells and tastes sour causes this > question: > > Had you been watching it over parts of those three days? > That is, might it have risen up, then fallen back without > your having noticed? > > That might explain your situation... > > All the best, > > -- > Kenneth > > If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, with
the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. Richard "Kenneth" > wrote in message ... > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:23:23 GMT, "Richard" > > wrote: > > >Howdy. First time poster here. I watched Alone in the Wilderness on PBS a > >few too many times and decided to try some sourdough. I got some of Carl's > >awhile back and followed the directions very well. (I think) I got it going > >good and thought it time to discard half due to the quantity. I dried some > >for future use hoping to keep the original from straying into some Seattle > >variety. > > > >I added more flour and water to the starter that I had going. Nothing > >happened after that. It's been 3 days of stiring on occassion. Temps in the > >mid 70's. Smells sour and tastes really, really sour. No rise or any bubbles > >at all. > > > >I then started some of the dried that I had saved and it has done nothing at > >all either. > > > >Is it dead? Can it be saved? I would have tried from scratch but the point > >of trying Carl's was the historical factor. > > > >Thanks for any help > >Richard > > > >P.S. I crash computers and kill house plants too if that helps with the > >diagnosis. > > > > Hi Richard, > > The fact that it smells and tastes sour causes this > question: > > Had you been watching it over parts of those three days? > That is, might it have risen up, then fallen back without > your having noticed? > > That might explain your situation... > > All the best, > > -- > Kenneth > > If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
Richard wrote:
> That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? Regards, Dusty -- Remove STORE to reply |
|
|||
|
|||
Richard wrote:
> That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? Regards, Dusty -- Remove STORE to reply |
|
|||
|
|||
After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 cup
water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. "Dusty" > wrote in message ... > Richard wrote: > > That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, > > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on > > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. > Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? > > > Regards, > Dusty > -- > Remove STORE to reply > > |
|
|||
|
|||
After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 cup
water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. "Dusty" > wrote in message ... > Richard wrote: > > That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, > > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on > > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. > Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? > > > Regards, > Dusty > -- > Remove STORE to reply > > |
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:56:42 GMT, "Richard"
> wrote: > >"Dusty" > wrote in message ... >> Richard wrote: >> > That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, >> > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on >> > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. >> Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? >> >> >> Regards, >> Dusty >> -- >> Remove STORE to reply >> >> > >After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 cup >water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. [Edited to correct top-posting] Hi Richard, I am confused... Is it the dried, or the moist starter that you are trying to grow? Thanks, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
Right now I'm trying to get both going.
I had Carl's going good, I think. Took half out and dried it. Added the water and flour to what was going. Nothing happened. I then tried starting the dried stuff I made. No activity that I can tell. Now neither is doing anything. "Kenneth" > wrote in message ... > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:56:42 GMT, "Richard" > > wrote: > > > > >"Dusty" > wrote in message > ... > >> Richard wrote: > >> > That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, > >> > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on > >> > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. > >> Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> Dusty > >> -- > >> Remove STORE to reply > >> > >> > > > >After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 cup > >water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. > > [Edited to correct top-posting] > > Hi Richard, > > I am confused... > > Is it the dried, or the moist starter that you are trying to > grow? > > Thanks, > > -- > Kenneth > > If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
Right now I'm trying to get both going.
I had Carl's going good, I think. Took half out and dried it. Added the water and flour to what was going. Nothing happened. I then tried starting the dried stuff I made. No activity that I can tell. Now neither is doing anything. "Kenneth" > wrote in message ... > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:56:42 GMT, "Richard" > > wrote: > > > > >"Dusty" > wrote in message > ... > >> Richard wrote: > >> > That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, > >> > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on > >> > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. > >> Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> Dusty > >> -- > >> Remove STORE to reply > >> > >> > > > >After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 cup > >water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. > > [Edited to correct top-posting] > > Hi Richard, > > I am confused... > > Is it the dried, or the moist starter that you are trying to > grow? > > Thanks, > > -- > Kenneth > > If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:11:12 GMT, "Richard"
> wrote: > > >"Kenneth" > wrote in message .. . >> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:56:42 GMT, "Richard" >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >"Dusty" > wrote in message >> ... >> >> Richard wrote: >> >> > That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, >> >> > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on >> >> > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. >> >> Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? >> >> >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Dusty >> >> -- >> >> Remove STORE to reply >> >> >> >> >> > >> >After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 cup >> >water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. >> >> [Edited to correct top-posting] >> >> Hi Richard, >> >> I am confused... >> >> Is it the dried, or the moist starter that you are trying to >> grow? >> >> Thanks, >> >> -- >> Kenneth >> >> If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." > >Right now I'm trying to get both going. > >I had Carl's going good, I think. Took half out and dried it. Added the >water and flour to what was going. Nothing happened. > >I then tried starting the dried stuff I made. No activity that I can tell. > >Now neither is doing anything. Hi Richard, (I would appreciate it if you would stop the top-posting. It makes it nearly impossible to follow the thread.) Now, about the starter: You are providing so little information as to make a meaningful response difficult. For example, when you say "nothing happened" it would help to know the temperature, the time you waited etc. Also, the source of the water might be important. If, for example, it was chlorinated, it might have killed off (or weakened, and thus slowed) the culture. So, tell us more, and folks will try to assist. All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
"Kenneth" > wrote in message ... > On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:11:12 GMT, "Richard" > > wrote: > > > > > > >"Kenneth" > wrote in message > .. . > >> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:56:42 GMT, "Richard" > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > > >> >"Dusty" > wrote in message > >> ... > >> >> Richard wrote: > >> >> > That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, > >> >> > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on > >> >> > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. > >> >> Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Regards, > >> >> Dusty > >> >> -- > >> >> Remove STORE to reply > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> >After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 cup > >> >water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. > >> > >> [Edited to correct top-posting] > >> > >> Hi Richard, > >> > >> I am confused... > >> > >> Is it the dried, or the moist starter that you are trying to > >> grow? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> -- > >> Kenneth > >> > >> If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." > > > > >Right now I'm trying to get both going. > > > >I had Carl's going good, I think. Took half out and dried it. Added the > >water and flour to what was going. Nothing happened. > > > >I then tried starting the dried stuff I made. No activity that I can tell. > > > >Now neither is doing anything. > > Hi Richard, > > (I would appreciate it if you would stop the top-posting. It > makes it nearly impossible to follow the thread.) > > Now, about the starter: > > You are providing so little information as to make a > meaningful response difficult. > > For example, when you say "nothing happened" it would help > to know the temperature, the time you waited etc. > > Also, the source of the water might be important. If, for > example, it was chlorinated, it might have killed off (or > weakened, and thus slowed) the culture. > > So, tell us more, and folks will try to assist. > > All the best, > > > > -- > Kenneth > > If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." Sorry Kenneth. I'll try to not let that happen again. Nothing like scrolling thru a dozen posts to get to the last. So be it. New here so can always learn something. Temp of what? Water, air or my fever? Water was the baby bottle kinda method. Did not feel warm. My air temps have been between 70-75 degrees heated with a wood stove. I've waited 3 days. I used Crystal Springs bottled water and supposedly organic unbleached flour from a health nut friend. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Kenneth" > wrote in message ... > On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:11:12 GMT, "Richard" > > wrote: > > > > > > >"Kenneth" > wrote in message > .. . > >> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 22:56:42 GMT, "Richard" > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > > >> >"Dusty" > wrote in message > >> ... > >> >> Richard wrote: > >> >> > That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, > >> >> > with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on > >> >> > it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. > >> >> Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Regards, > >> >> Dusty > >> >> -- > >> >> Remove STORE to reply > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> >After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 cup > >> >water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. > >> > >> [Edited to correct top-posting] > >> > >> Hi Richard, > >> > >> I am confused... > >> > >> Is it the dried, or the moist starter that you are trying to > >> grow? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> -- > >> Kenneth > >> > >> If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." > > > > >Right now I'm trying to get both going. > > > >I had Carl's going good, I think. Took half out and dried it. Added the > >water and flour to what was going. Nothing happened. > > > >I then tried starting the dried stuff I made. No activity that I can tell. > > > >Now neither is doing anything. > > Hi Richard, > > (I would appreciate it if you would stop the top-posting. It > makes it nearly impossible to follow the thread.) > > Now, about the starter: > > You are providing so little information as to make a > meaningful response difficult. > > For example, when you say "nothing happened" it would help > to know the temperature, the time you waited etc. > > Also, the source of the water might be important. If, for > example, it was chlorinated, it might have killed off (or > weakened, and thus slowed) the culture. > > So, tell us more, and folks will try to assist. > > All the best, > > > > -- > Kenneth > > If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." Sorry Kenneth. I'll try to not let that happen again. Nothing like scrolling thru a dozen posts to get to the last. So be it. New here so can always learn something. Temp of what? Water, air or my fever? Water was the baby bottle kinda method. Did not feel warm. My air temps have been between 70-75 degrees heated with a wood stove. I've waited 3 days. I used Crystal Springs bottled water and supposedly organic unbleached flour from a health nut friend. |
|
|||
|
|||
At 01:23 PM 1/17/2005, Richard wrote:
>[...] >I added more flour and water to the starter that I had going. Nothing >happened after that. It's been 3 days of stiring on occassion. Temps in the >mid 70's. Smells sour and tastes really, really sour. No rise or any bubbles >at all. That's where the problem seems to be. If you determined that it tastes "really" sour, you have it oversoured and this blocks every activity. You can wait as long as you want - until it starts smelling putrid again and mold grows (after more than a week or so, depending if you have liquid on top which delays this), nothing will move. With white flour (as opposed to full grain flours), this can go very fast and seems to be the major problem of failing here. The way out of it (posted several times before) is to split it up and go both ways: a - it is oversoured and needs to be thinned - 1 : 10 old to addition, teaspoon to 1/2 cup and if it still gets noticeable sour within 24 hours, do the same thing again with a feeding in between. b - it is too weak to show activity - keep on feeding on a regular basis, every 12 hours - reduce to 1/2, then double. By the amounts I mean flour and water, same amount by weight. If you can't do weight, go by volume approximately, but reduce water because 1 cup of water weights more than 1 cup of flour. When I grew the Carls - you can see on my web site (samartha.net/SD/ -> Carls I) that I was surprised myself, although with a different medium: scalded flour which may or may not compare to regular flour, how quietly and quickly it went sour. >I then started some of the dried that I had saved and it has done nothing at >all either. Probably the same problem. If you do the same thing again and it shows the same result - well... >Is it dead? Can it be saved? I would have tried from scratch but the point >of trying Carl's was the historical factor. Since you stated above that it is sour, you have activity. Souring is the main component to show that you are on track. Apparently too much and neither top- nor bottom posting will change that. >Thanks for any help >Richard > >P.S. I crash computers and kill house plants too if that helps with the >diagnosis. Just keep top posting, it makes it much easier to follow - maybe blows some minds. Oh well, you converted ;( To follow this thread, I had to scroll down 3+ times to get to the next "essence" - quite an annoyance - and none of it bringing up the sourness you bring up in your first post (as it seems, maybe I overlooked it with all the scrolling and requoting). So, just keep at it - you got a sourdough starter going, it just needs some fine-tuning. Samartha === remove "-nospam" when replying, and it's in my email address |
|
|||
|
|||
Kenneth wrote:
> (I would appreciate it if you would stop the top-posting. It > makes it nearly impossible to follow the thread.) On the contrary, obsessive bottom posting is a far worse offense, especially when coupled with a failure to trim text that isn't needed. Why should someone have to scroll through 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and more quoted posts to get to the new text? If someone is a part of a conversation, as you clearly are, you should be aware of what others are responding to. If not, there are archives of the messages that one can refer to, or even to the other messages that arrived in the same package. I think trimming tails to enough to give the gist of the conversation and then replying is far superior to mindlessly replying to an entire message which already has too many quotes, and doing so at the bottom of that message. Have mercy on your readers Kenneth! Mike -- Mike Avery ICQ: 16241692 AOL IM: MAvery81230 Phone: 970-642-0280 * Spam is for lusers who can't get business any other way * |
|
|||
|
|||
Samartha wrote:
> By the amounts I mean flour and water, same amount by weight. If you > can't do weight, go by volume approximately, but reduce water because 1 > cup of water weights more than 1 cup of flour. I find that 1 part of water by volume to 1 1/2 parts of flour by volume is a tolerably close approximation of 1 part water by weight to 1 part of flour by weight. Of course, the fundamental issue with measuring by volume is that it is inconsistent when measuring solids - a 50% variation between cups of flour is not unheard of. Of course, Samartha knows this, I was commenting for Richard's benefit. Mike -- Mike Avery ICQ: 16241692 AOL IM: MAvery81230 * Spam is for lusers who can't get business any other way * |
|
|||
|
|||
Richard wrote:
> "Kenneth" > wrote in message > ... >> Hi Richard, >> >> (I would appreciate it if you would stop the top-posting. It >> makes it nearly impossible to follow the thread.) > Sorry Kenneth. I'll try to not let that happen again. Nothing like scrolling > thru a dozen posts to get to the last. So be it. New here so can always > learn something. No need to scroll through a dozen posts. Trim appropriately and reply to what's relevant as I've done. Here's a quick tutorial on posting from the group news.newusers.questions: http://member.newsguy.com/~schramm/nquote.html B/ |
|
|||
|
|||
"Brian Mailman" > wrote in message ... > No need to scroll through a dozen posts. Trim appropriately and reply > to what's relevant as I've done. Here's a quick tutorial on posting > from the group news.newusers.questions: > > http://member.newsguy.com/~schramm/nquote.html > > B/ Thanks. It's nothing like replying to email at work. Richard |
|
|||
|
|||
"Brian Mailman" > wrote in message ... > No need to scroll through a dozen posts. Trim appropriately and reply > to what's relevant as I've done. Here's a quick tutorial on posting > from the group news.newusers.questions: > > http://member.newsguy.com/~schramm/nquote.html > > B/ Thanks. It's nothing like replying to email at work. Richard |
|
|||
|
|||
This one messed me up completly as to top or bottom posting. So neither.
Sorry. Samartha, I'll try what you have suggested. Thank you. I have lots of inavtive stock to play with. Also I visited your site earlier in the day but found the spam defense somewhat confusing. Not wanting to give you my email in case you want to use it for spam I just viewed the tn's. What does visiting a website and viewing images have to do with spam? Thanks again for the help. Fingers Crossed. Richard |
|
|||
|
|||
This one messed me up completly as to top or bottom posting. So neither.
Sorry. Samartha, I'll try what you have suggested. Thank you. I have lots of inavtive stock to play with. Also I visited your site earlier in the day but found the spam defense somewhat confusing. Not wanting to give you my email in case you want to use it for spam I just viewed the tn's. What does visiting a website and viewing images have to do with spam? Thanks again for the help. Fingers Crossed. Richard |
|
|||
|
|||
Richard wrote:
> "Brian Mailman" > wrote in message > ... > >> No need to scroll through a dozen posts. Trim appropriately and reply >> to what's relevant as I've done. Here's a quick tutorial on posting >> from the group news.newusers.questions: >> >> http://member.newsguy.com/~schramm/nquote.html > Thanks. It's nothing like replying to email at work. At work, they're lazy. B/ |
|
|||
|
|||
"Richard" > wrote > I then started some of the dried that I had saved and it has done nothing at > all either. > Thanks for any help > Richard Richard, When you first start reactivating dried starter take a tabelspoon of flour and a tabelspoon of water and mix it together. Crumble a little of the dried starter in the flour and water mixture and let it set for a few hours. The bubbles from the starter may be too small to be seen, but you will know it is actuve if some hooch (liquid) forms on top. Pour the hooch off and mix in another tablespoon of water and another tablespoon of flour. If you keep doing this the bubbles will get large enough to see and the flour water mixture will expand. Now all you have to do is decide at what consistancy you want to keep your starter. Some keep it stiff like a ball of dough, others keep it thin like pancake mix. Thin mixes eat up the flour faster than thick mixes. Thin mixes combine with new flour and water faster than thick ones. If you use the thick mixture you can just take a little of your bread dough and save it for your starter every time you bake bread. Some interesting flavors are made by using this method. Ernie |
|
|||
|
|||
"Richard" > wrote > I then started some of the dried that I had saved and it has done nothing at > all either. > Thanks for any help > Richard Richard, When you first start reactivating dried starter take a tabelspoon of flour and a tabelspoon of water and mix it together. Crumble a little of the dried starter in the flour and water mixture and let it set for a few hours. The bubbles from the starter may be too small to be seen, but you will know it is actuve if some hooch (liquid) forms on top. Pour the hooch off and mix in another tablespoon of water and another tablespoon of flour. If you keep doing this the bubbles will get large enough to see and the flour water mixture will expand. Now all you have to do is decide at what consistancy you want to keep your starter. Some keep it stiff like a ball of dough, others keep it thin like pancake mix. Thin mixes eat up the flour faster than thick mixes. Thin mixes combine with new flour and water faster than thick ones. If you use the thick mixture you can just take a little of your bread dough and save it for your starter every time you bake bread. Some interesting flavors are made by using this method. Ernie |
|
|||
|
|||
At 08:55 PM 1/17/2005, you wrote:
>This one messed me up completly as to top or bottom posting. So neither. >Sorry. Hey - just be yourself! Lots of subtle manipulators (also named suckers) lurk everywhere. >Samartha, I'll try what you have suggested. Thank you. I have lots of >inavtive stock to play with. Yes, but keep it in the fridge, dying of critters can be/is in progress otherwise. >Also I visited your site earlier in the day but found the spam defense >somewhat confusing. Not wanting to give you my email in case you want to use >it for spam I just viewed the tn's. What does visiting a website and viewing >images have to do with spam? Well, send me your email address (using the instruction on the bottom verbatim) or use the address on the UUPS image - I am never using anything for spam - I despise spammers; if anyone comes across my way and I know it - no guarantee for anything. I use recyclable email addresses. I will mail you back what to do. Time + zone and browser type helps. I have my reasons for this - believe me. Got burned. Samartha === remove "-nospam" when replying, and it's in my email address |
|
|||
|
|||
Hello, Richard and all;
Richard wrote: > After removing for drying I had approx. a 1/2 cup left. I added a 1/2 > cup water and 1/2 cup flour. Stirred in and covered. > > "Dusty" > wrote in message > ... >> Richard wrote: >>> That may have happened in the night but as you can probably imagine, >>> with the excitement of doing this I pretty much kept an eagle eye on >>> it. It just seems to have never taken of after replenishing. >> Which poses the question: how or what did you replenish it with? Okay. Got it. First off; just let the "you've gotta top post!", "you've gotta bottom post, or "you've gotta middle post" fairies kiss your ass. If they're too simple minded to follow your note, blow 'em off. I was a (small) part of the group that set up this thing we call the internet today, and there was NEVER a discussion of bottom or top posting! It was always completely arbitrary, and up to the poster. Somebody made up that "rule" well after this thing was launched. If they're too simple minded to follow what you're saying, they're probably not worth listening to. So, you go guy! Post as you see fit. Screw or ignore the self-righteous *******s if they can't follow it! Second; what I was looking for was did you use "plain" water, or did you use tap water. And, if so, did you "settle" it. While chlorine may evaporate, chloramines won't. And they WILL kill your critters. If you didn't use bottled, well, or spring water, that may bear looking at. Also, what kind of flour did you use? Third; it will take your culture several days to be ready for drying. Usually I wait until well after my culture has generated hooch. I use at least 48 hours of "working" before I take a sample to dry. You can't reliably get something to bubble and then dry it straight away. I mean, you can, but it's not clear that you'll get something worthwhile... However, the whole process is not as fragile or precise as many on this list would have you believe. There's a lot of latitude in what you do and when. But, above all, enjoy doing this. The grinches that insist that only starter or dough carefully weighted and measured to six decimal places can make bread, are your basic self-serving prima-Donna's and not worth that much attention. Enjoy the experience my friend, Dusty Bleher San Jose, Ca. -- Remove STORE to reply |
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 02:36:06 GMT, "Richard"
> wrote: >Sorry Kenneth. I'll try to not let that happen again. Nothing like scrolling >thru a dozen posts to get to the last. So be it. New here so can always >learn something. > >Temp of what? Water, air or my fever? > >Water was the baby bottle kinda method. Did not feel warm. My air temps have >been between 70-75 degrees heated with a wood stove. >I've waited 3 days. I used Crystal Springs bottled water and supposedly >organic unbleached flour from a health nut friend. > Hi Richard, No apology needed... I thank you for your kindness. It is hard to know what's going on with the starter: The water (no chlorine) thing sounds right. And the temperatures are certainly appropriate. (Sometimes folks start with what they describe as "warm" water but it turns out to have been hot enough to sterilize everything.) When you say you have waited "three days" is that three days during which you have added frequent feedings? If so, that could be the hitch: It might be that things are cooler (slower) than you believe and you are feeding the mixture before it has a chance to get to a stage at which the fermentation is fully visible. With all that, here's my suggestion: (You may need one more item) If you are not already using one, get some sort of cylindrical container. Typically, round-bottomed cylindrical freezer containers work well. Mix up some starter, and put it in. Put in enough that it is, say, an inch up the sides when flattened. Then, mark its height on the outside (use a rubber band, marker, tape or some such). Don't "mark" it with you memory <g>. Put it aside where it will be warm, but below 110F, and wait. I suggest all this because often folks use round-bottomed bowls. In such, it is all but impossible to accurately estimate growth in volume. With the cylinder, accurate estimates are very easy. Keep us posted, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:26:24 -0800, Brian Mailman
> wrote: >Richard wrote: > >>SNIP<< > >> Sorry Kenneth. I'll try to not let that happen again. Nothing like scrolling >> thru a dozen posts to get to the last. So be it. New here so can always >> learn something. > >No need to scroll through a dozen posts. Trim appropriately and reply >to what's relevant as I've done. Here's a quick tutorial on posting >from the group news.newusers.questions: > >http://member.newsguy.com/~schramm/nquote.html > >B/ Very sincere thanks Brian! All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:26:24 -0800, Brian Mailman
> wrote: >Richard wrote: > >>SNIP<< > >> Sorry Kenneth. I'll try to not let that happen again. Nothing like scrolling >> thru a dozen posts to get to the last. So be it. New here so can always >> learn something. > >No need to scroll through a dozen posts. Trim appropriately and reply >to what's relevant as I've done. Here's a quick tutorial on posting >from the group news.newusers.questions: > >http://member.newsguy.com/~schramm/nquote.html > >B/ Very sincere thanks Brian! All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:59:14 -0700, Mike Avery
> wrote: >Kenneth wrote: > >> (I would appreciate it if you would stop the top-posting. It >> makes it nearly impossible to follow the thread.) > >On the contrary, obsessive bottom posting is a far worse offense, >especially when coupled with a failure to trim text that isn't needed. > >Why should someone have to scroll through 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and more >quoted posts to get to the new text? If someone is a part of a >conversation, as you clearly are, you should be aware of what others are >responding to. If not, there are archives of the messages that one can >refer to, or even to the other messages that arrived in the same package. > >I think trimming tails to enough to give the gist of the conversation >and then replying is far superior to mindlessly replying to an entire >message which already has too many quotes, and doing so at the bottom of >that message. > >Have mercy on your readers Kenneth! >Mike > > >-- >Mike Avery > ICQ: 16241692 > AOL IM: MAvery81230 > Phone: 970-642-0280 > > * Spam is for lusers who can't get business any other way * Hi Mike, Before logging on this morning, I checked my email. There, I had a note from you, and responded privately because I assumed that to be what you wanted. Now, I see you also posted your message here, and so, I offer the response that I sent to you via email: Hi Mike, With regard to the top-posting: With respect, I disagree (and so, of course, do the vast majority of people who have for years, and still do, read Usenet.) With regard to the trimming, well that's another matter: Years ago when bandwidth was costly, you would have had a good case. Today, that is no longer true. Hitting the End key brings any of us to the most recent contribution to the message. In our current situation, there is really no bandwidth cost issue. But finally and most importantly, Usenet is a threaded medium and we were all taught to read top to bottom. I am sure that you have seen the many humorous attempts to remind people of this simple fact. My favorite I suppose is: A: Top-Posting Q: What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? So, again with respect, for those of us who are actually trying to communicate, I believe that the norm of posting at the end of the thread makes far more sense. All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:59:14 -0700, Mike Avery
> wrote: >Kenneth wrote: > >> (I would appreciate it if you would stop the top-posting. It >> makes it nearly impossible to follow the thread.) > >On the contrary, obsessive bottom posting is a far worse offense, >especially when coupled with a failure to trim text that isn't needed. > >Why should someone have to scroll through 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and more >quoted posts to get to the new text? If someone is a part of a >conversation, as you clearly are, you should be aware of what others are >responding to. If not, there are archives of the messages that one can >refer to, or even to the other messages that arrived in the same package. > >I think trimming tails to enough to give the gist of the conversation >and then replying is far superior to mindlessly replying to an entire >message which already has too many quotes, and doing so at the bottom of >that message. > >Have mercy on your readers Kenneth! >Mike > > >-- >Mike Avery > ICQ: 16241692 > AOL IM: MAvery81230 > Phone: 970-642-0280 > > * Spam is for lusers who can't get business any other way * Hi Mike, Before logging on this morning, I checked my email. There, I had a note from you, and responded privately because I assumed that to be what you wanted. Now, I see you also posted your message here, and so, I offer the response that I sent to you via email: Hi Mike, With regard to the top-posting: With respect, I disagree (and so, of course, do the vast majority of people who have for years, and still do, read Usenet.) With regard to the trimming, well that's another matter: Years ago when bandwidth was costly, you would have had a good case. Today, that is no longer true. Hitting the End key brings any of us to the most recent contribution to the message. In our current situation, there is really no bandwidth cost issue. But finally and most importantly, Usenet is a threaded medium and we were all taught to read top to bottom. I am sure that you have seen the many humorous attempts to remind people of this simple fact. My favorite I suppose is: A: Top-Posting Q: What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? So, again with respect, for those of us who are actually trying to communicate, I believe that the norm of posting at the end of the thread makes far more sense. All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 06:53:23 -0500, Kenneth
> wrote: >It is hard to know what's going on with the starter: Hi again Richard, Two additions: When I wrote the above, I forgot that you had earlier said that your starter tasted sour. Samartha remembered that. Of course his suggestions are correct in response. He knows a ton about all of this, so I would suggest that you follow his thoughts. That is not to say that my cylinder thought is off, it is just to say that it is very likely that your starter is active, but you are examining it after it has risen, fallen, and soured. All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 06:53:23 -0500, Kenneth
> wrote: >It is hard to know what's going on with the starter: Hi again Richard, Two additions: When I wrote the above, I forgot that you had earlier said that your starter tasted sour. Samartha remembered that. Of course his suggestions are correct in response. He knows a ton about all of this, so I would suggest that you follow his thoughts. That is not to say that my cylinder thought is off, it is just to say that it is very likely that your starter is active, but you are examining it after it has risen, fallen, and soured. All the best, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 19:57:31 -0700, Samartha
> wrote: >At 01:23 PM 1/17/2005, Richard wrote: >>SNIP<< >>[...] >>I added more flour and water to the starter that I had going. Nothing >>happened after that. It's been 3 days of stiring on occassion. Temps in the >>mid 70's. Smells sour and tastes really, really sour. No rise or any bubbles >>at all. > >That's where the problem seems to be. If you determined that it tastes >"really" sour, you have it oversoured and this blocks every activity. You >can wait as long as you want - until it starts smelling putrid again and >mold grows (after more than a week or so, depending if you have liquid on >top which delays this), nothing will move. > >>SNIP<< > >>Is it dead? Can it be saved? I would have tried from scratch but the point >>of trying Carl's was the historical factor. > >Since you stated above that it is sour, you have activity. Souring is the >main component to show that you are on track. Apparently too much and >neither top- nor bottom posting will change that. >>SNIP<< > >Just keep top posting, it makes it much easier to follow - maybe blows some >minds. Oh well, you converted ;( Hi Samartha, It brought a smile to note that prior to advocating top-posting, you placed your interesting responses to Richard *after* his comments and questions. Thanks for doing that and warm regards, -- Kenneth If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS." |
|
|||
|
|||
This thread is dead.
Carl's endures. Send another SASE. 'Bye now. |
|
|||
|
|||
"Samartha" > wrote in message news:mailman.1106017091.19871.rec.food.sourdough@w ww.mountainbitwarrior.com. ... > > The way out of it (posted several times before) is to split it up and go > both ways: > > a - it is oversoured and needs to be thinned - 1 : 10 old to addition, > teaspoon to 1/2 cup and if it still gets noticeable sour within 24 hours, > do the same thing again with a feeding in between. > > b - it is too weak to show activity - keep on feeding on a regular basis, > every 12 hours - reduce to 1/2, then double. > So I tried both ways The House is cooler today, 68-70. (a) Seems to have some bubbles and is rising up. Not much sour smell. Has more of the pasty smell like when I first started it. I wonder how close this is to Carl's. (b) Is doing nothing at this time so I'm still working with it. My guess is that it worked faster than I kept up with it? So now my goal will be to get it to the point where I can dry some for the future and then make some breadsticks and sourdough pancakes. All the reading I've done makes this sound like rocket science. I have to wonder how the Klondikers and Oregon Trailers ever make out. Thanks for the help and suggestions. Richard |
|
|||
|
|||
Richard wrote:
> (a) Seems to have some bubbles and is rising up. Not much sour smell. Has > more of the pasty smell like when I first started it. I wonder how close > this is to Carl's. Sounds like (a) was the way to go then. Although after all this time I wonder also if you just haven't caught your local wild strains. > My guess is that it worked faster than I kept up with it? Possibly. > So now my goal will be to get it to the point where I can dry some for the > future and then make some breadsticks and sourdough pancakes. Always a wise thing to do in my opinion when working with a "new" starter. Keep feeding/replenishing-reserving-using-feeding.... > All the reading I've done makes this sound like rocket science. Ut is and it isn't. Depends on what level you wish to work on--produce good bread for home use or imitate a commercial artisanal baker. > I have to wonder how the Klondikers and Oregon Trailers ever make out. They were probably too busy working their sites to worry about any of it. B/ |
|
|||
|
|||
Hi Richard.
After careful consideration and taken into account possibly getting egged on again by some bottom post tight-ass fanactic, top post mode has been found adequate for this response. So - as it seems, you got more activity with case "a" which would indicate unnoticed oversouring. Now, if you see some activity and it decreases in any way, feed again. My idea - without seeing it would be to triple the flour content, possibly reducing it before to keep the total volume down. Once you see activity rising again after a couple of hours, you may have something more solid, give it some time to really get going, then feed it once more, let it start and put it in the fridge or make bread. Now, another way to measure activity besides trying to see tiny bubbles is to tightly close the container with saran wrap and recognize gas development = activity by the cover bulging out. You can then let the gas out, close it again and watch if it still "blows". The idea here is to get a culture going from a relatively low germ count (or out of balance = quick oversouring) and convert it into a more balanced, active culture with high germ count. Once you have that, it makes sense to dry it for preservation. With your case "b" products, I don't think, it would be prudent. For you getting the "sour smell", could it be that at that point it is already very advanced and oversoured? If this appears to be the case, earlier refreshments could be a good thing to do. Since it got sour fairly quickly, I think you can be pretty sure you got the Carl's going and not some other "growth". Maybe looking at the growthcurve could be give some more insights? http://samartha.net/SD/SourdoughDefinition.html#GC I don't think it is rocket science but it can give some insights into how organisms work. Since we (science, humanity) know now a lot more than 100 years ago about all this, it can appear more complicated, but it does not have to be. Hope it all goes well, Samartha At 07:32 PM 1/18/2005, you wrote: >"Samartha" > wrote in message >news:mailman.1106017091.19871.rec.food.sourdough@ www.mountainbitwarrior.com. >.. > > > > The way out of it (posted several times before) is to split it up and go > > both ways: > > > > a - it is oversoured and needs to be thinned - 1 : 10 old to addition, > > teaspoon to 1/2 cup and if it still gets noticeable sour within 24 hours, > > do the same thing again with a feeding in between. > > > > b - it is too weak to show activity - keep on feeding on a regular basis, > > every 12 hours - reduce to 1/2, then double. > > > >So I tried both ways >The House is cooler today, 68-70. > >(a) Seems to have some bubbles and is rising up. Not much sour smell. Has >more of the pasty smell like when I first started it. I wonder how close >this is to Carl's. > >(b) Is doing nothing at this time so I'm still working with it. > >My guess is that it worked faster than I kept up with it? >So now my goal will be to get it to the point where I can dry some for the >future and then make some breadsticks and sourdough pancakes. > >All the reading I've done makes this sound like rocket science. I have to >wonder how the Klondikers and Oregon Trailers ever make out. > >Thanks for the help and suggestions. > >Richard remove "-nospam" when replying, and it's in my email address |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Dead BBQ | Barbecue | |||
Walking Dead dead spread? | General Cooking | |||
Day of the Dead | General Cooking | |||
It is dead, then | Barbecue | |||
Better Be Red Than Dead | General Cooking |