"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
...

> I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get pretty
> anal with their measuring.

Me, I use cans.



Boys love cans.

> I find it boring, but TWIAVBP. Me? I cook.

"Jersey Devil" mentioned a discarded commode used for culture storage.
No mention of measurements, though.

--
Dicky

Boron Elgar wrote:

> I bake recreationally, for the pleasure and creativity of it. I read,
> I experimented and I played around until I felt comfortable doing it.
> And I can honestly say I have never made a brick or loaf of bread that
> was not good eating. And I sure as shootin' don't bake for you.

No darlin' but you keep asserting that measuring stands in the way of
creativity. That's a pretty dated stereotype. Proficiency is a broader
dynamic than: "it feels right".

> I do not use cups or scales to make my doughs because I make them by
> feel.

That's nice but no big deal. I made dough for years like that. I even
thought that it was a superior way to work. But it's circular practice.
You can not do Hamelman's bread and see why he is so well respected,
you can only do your own.

> I don't really care what gets your rocks off in the kitchen
> once again I say that spending all one's time and effort in
> translating ounces to grams does not teach anything but to measure.

What is with you and Dusty? It's not about time. It takes no time. It's
like tying a shoe. Who thinks about tying a shoe? Does that knowledge
keep you from walking?

Scaling is not the devil's bargain. You measure, it gets you to a
specific place and you fine tune if necessary. But that fine tuning is
more for ego than conditions on the bench.

> I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get pretty
> anal with their measuring. I find it boring, but TWIAVBP. Me? I cook.

Ah... now we're back to ponds...

Will wrote:
> Boron Elgar wrote:
>
> > I bake recreationally, f......ench.
>
> > I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get pretty
> > anal with their measuring. I find it boring, but TWIAVBP. Me? I cook.
>
> Ah... now we're back to ponds...

Wow!, This is why I read rec.food.sourdough, it's better than the
telly. : -)

Don't read on if you don't like to think.

I love this idea of the 'artist' such a mid 20th century idea that you
should go back to the primeval and dispense with the modern. Well where
do you stop on that one? I'd put money on it being a misunderstanding
of buddhist thought, so in vogue in the sixties. It's Materialism that
is a source of problems not Materials. Getting rid of technology won't
improve your life if your mind is still so attached to hating that
technology.

There's a real swing on each post going from the rational to the down
right irrational. Funny, none of the 'scalers' have ever bashed the
'cuppers' in the past unless it's just in reply to some scale bashing,
but the 'cuppers', boy! you've got some serious stuff to deal with. You
seem to be investing so much emotion in your defence. While the
'scalers' .... oh! I can't use that pun again. : -)

Common guys you have to let it go and just accept that it doesn't make
you more special or skilled because you don't use scales. We just don't
care what you do. You say you're coming in on the defence of 'clueless
newbies' who are told they must have scales to do a good job. But what
about your repeated spouting of how great you are because you don't use
scales? Lets bury the hatchet once and for all and accept that, in
order to learn from text, scales are a very helpful tool. Cups are just
too large a measuring tool to be useful. By the way, I had to go out
and buy cups to follow a recipe book one day then I was frustrated by
the lack of my standard spoons so, of course, I had to buy a set of
those, I won't include the measuring jug. I just looked up some prices
and I'm pretty sure it's comparable to the cheaper scales.

I'd love it if we could really bury the hatchet and Dusty and Boron
agree to stop the unprovoked assertion, that some keep on saying, that
newbies have to have scales to do a good job. By the way, I think it's
only newbies that do this anyway. We are all in it together. The only
time I see an 'us and them' is when Boron, Dusty and his 'minions' do
their stuff. I feel a Beatles song coming on.

TG

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 21:21:34 -0600, "Mike Avery"
> wrote:

>On 4/21/06, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>
>> I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get pretty
>> anal with their measuring. I find it boring, but TWIAVBP. Me? I cook.
>
>
>Thursday night..... I baked 96 loaves. Last summer, I was doing somewhere
>between 120 and 150 loaves every Friday night for the farmers market on
>Saturday... by hand. No mixer. People lined up to buy them. You really
>can't say I don't bake.
>
>But, I did use scales. I just didn't, and don't, think I'll be experienced
>enough to guesstimate the amount of flour, water, starter, salt and what not
>to make the right quantities of bread for people who have already ordered
>it. Consistently. And on time..... without overruns or underruns.

Mike, you are doing professional baking. You have a specific product
to make and sell. That is not the home baking that is usually done
around here. It is a job, a money earner. A whole different animal.
>
>But, even for a hobbyist baker, a video can't teach you how a dough should
>feel. You need practice to get there. The learning curve can be shortened
>by taking classes and having a teacher say, "more water", "let the dough
>rest", "more salt", "use less salt next time, for now, add more flour and
>water", "knead it another 5 minutes", "it's overkneaded, let it rest for a
>while" or whatever. In the absence of that, I think that accurate
>measurements help people get there faster. If they never break their
>"bondage" to scales, I don't see a real problem with that.

I never said a video was the be-all and end-all. And it is great if
you can attend a class. I have, *after* I knew what I was doing and
they are not foolproof either, as I have been given advice at such
places such as adding sugar to the mix to "feed the yeast".

There are great videos and great classes and great friends and family,
too.


>You say you never made a bad loaf of bread. I can go along with that.
>However, can you make the same loaf of bread again? Consistently? Is that
>important to you? If not, that's OK, as you say, it's a large world out
>there.

Yes, I can. But having someone weigh out to grams does not always give
consistency, either, and that is what I am saying. I have read your
own stories about large-scale baking and gleaned that.

The variables encountered in any baking session go beyond the gram
scale.
>
>I'm reminded of a friend back in my photography days. He never checked the
>temperature on his developer. He never timed his development. Or how long
>he kept the film in the fixer. Or how long he washed the film to get rid of
>the fixer. And... his results were all over the place. Sometimes the film
>was OK, sometimes it just sucked rocks. He was more interested in art than
>technique. However, in the end, his total disdain for technique kept him
>from mastering his art. As a photography teacher told us, you have to have
>a balance between vision and technique. If either is too dominant, the
>result is not good. Too much vision without technique to back it up means
>the photographer doesn't have the skills to present his vision
>consistently. Too much technique means a sterile piece of work that has too
>little in it to communicate.... in other fields, we see a progression from
>the craftsman to the artisan to the artist.

I have done plenty of dark room work, but in B&W only. I started
burning and dodging 30 years ago and work in everything from digital
on the computer to a medium format Mamiya. When you buy your chems,
you know you are getting the exact same solutions each time and so
you are comfortable with your dilutions, but if you change your film,
chem brands, or buy different paper or use your friend's enlarger,
rather than you own,then you can start from scratch with a log of what
you do.

Not only that, but those chems COME with specific dilutions assigned
to them. Your developer, stop bath and fixer need to be checked, too,
you know. I use different brands/types of flour and yeast, 7 different
starters, buy some grains pre-ground, grind others myself. Do you
think they are all used with the same measurements and ratios?

>If your exercises make you happy, I'm happy for you; but, I tend to think
>that more emphasis on the underlying techniques would add richness to what
>you are doing.
>
>Mike


I never said that technique is unnecessary, just that over reliance on
the scale is. Big Diff. You imply I have no underlying technique,
which is an unfair and unkind assumption. I have been at this a long
time, Mike and I know what I am doing rather well. I don't do it for a
bakery and make 95 loaves at a time, but I never noticed this group
was limited to professionals. The home baker is NOT making 95 loaves
at a time.

Bakery bread making, by necessity, is DIFFERENT from home baking. And
yet, even in the artisan bakeries I have been in and watched for
hours, there is as much reliance on touch and feel as the scale.
Granted, that is only 3 places, and my other advisors are food
scientists in the development lab of a large baking supplier, but I am
not speaking from inexperience.

Boron

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:59:53 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote:

>
>"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
.. .
>
>> I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get pretty
>> anal with their measuring.
>
>Me, I use cans.

There ya go!
>

>
>Boys love cans.
>
>> I find it boring, but TWIAVBP. Me? I cook.
>
>"Jersey Devil" mentioned a discarded commode used for culture storage.
>No mention of measurements, though.


Certain parts of Jersey are exclusively commode storage. Along the
Turnpike up at the north end, mostly.

Boron

On 21 Apr 2006 22:03:41 -0700, "Will" >
wrote:

>Boron Elgar wrote:
>
>> I bake recreationally, for the pleasure and creativity of it. I read,
>> I experimented and I played around until I felt comfortable doing it.
>> And I can honestly say I have never made a brick or loaf of bread that
>> was not good eating. And I sure as shootin' don't bake for you.
>
>No darlin' but you keep asserting that measuring stands in the way of
>creativity. That's a pretty dated stereotype. Proficiency is a broader
>dynamic than: "it feels right".

No, sweetums, I do not, but over reliance on it does. Proficiency in
bread baking is all about it feeling right. Not in cake baking, but it
is in bread baking
>
>> I do not use cups or scales to make my doughs because I make them by
>> feel.
>
>That's nice but no big deal. I made dough for years like that. I even
>thought that it was a superior way to work. But it's circular practice.
>You can not do Hamelman's bread and see why he is so well respected,
>you can only do your own.

You think I cannot eye a recipe and work with it on my own? Nonsense.
>
>> I don't really care what gets your rocks off in the kitchen
>> once again I say that spending all one's time and effort in
>> translating ounces to grams does not teach anything but to measure.
>
>What is with you and Dusty? It's not about time. It takes no time. It's
>like tying a shoe. Who thinks about tying a shoe? Does that knowledge
>keep you from walking?

It is about time. It's boring time, too. It means I can look at a
recipe in cups and teaspoons or by weight and understand how to make
it, but that doesn't mean I have to spend all my time in minute
measurement conversions and exactitude.
>
>Scaling is not the devil's bargain. You measure, it gets you to a
>specific place and you fine tune if necessary. But that fine tuning is
>more for ego than conditions on the bench.

FINE TUNE. Hello, that is what I am saying. the fine tuning is what
gets you your bread, not all the exact measuring.
>
>> I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get pretty
>> anal with their measuring. I find it boring, but TWIAVBP. Me? I cook.
>
>Ah... now we're back to ponds...

Do you have warts?

Boron

Mike Avery wrote:
> On 4/21/06, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>
>> I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get pretty
>> anal with their measuring. I find it boring, but TWIAVBP. Me? I cook.
>
>
> Thursday night..... I baked 96 loaves. Last summer, I was doing somewhere
> between 120 and 150 loaves every Friday night for the farmers market on
> Saturday... by hand. No mixer. People lined up to buy them. You really
> can't say I don't bake.
>
> But, I did use scales. I just didn't, and don't, think I'll be
> experienced enough to guesstimate the amount of flour, water, starter,
> salt and what not to make the right quantities of bread for people who
> have already ordered
> it. Consistently. And on time..... without overruns or underruns.
>
> But, even for a hobbyist baker, a video can't teach you how a dough should
> feel. You need practice to get there. The learning curve can be
> shortened by taking classes and having a teacher say, "more water", "let
> the dough rest", "more salt", "use less salt next time, for now, add more
> flour and water", "knead it another 5 minutes", "it's overkneaded, let it
> rest for a
> while" or whatever. In the absence of that, I think that accurate
> measurements help people get there faster. If they never break their
> "bondage" to scales, I don't see a real problem with that.

Mike is right on target. We have people in this group who bake for different
purposes. If you're going to bake on a large scale or in varying
quantities, I don't see any way to get predictable results without
measuring. But even measuring won't get you all the way there. One class
with an experienced baker can teach you more than baking a hundred loaves
with the "stumble along" method. But if you're baking strictly for your own
pleasure, then rigorous measuring and strict techniques may not be needed.
Just don't kid youself that the consistency of results would be greater if
you did observe strict measuring and adherence to technique. The other
illusion here is that buying all the right equipment will make you a good
baker. We live in a consumerist society. People like to buy "stuff" and
show it off. And if that excites you, by all means do it. Just know that
bakers with very crude equipment can turn out excellent bread. The most
essential equipment is the baker's mind. To borrow a phrase from "Cool Hand
Luke": "You got to get your mind right."

To follow the photography metaphor. At one time I worked in a camera store.
We had an endless flow of rich customers who would spend $2000 on a Nikon
so they could take crappy pictures. They wouldn't take the time to go to a
photography school or read a few books on technique.

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
...
> "Dick Adams" > wrote in message
> news:ZSh2g.386$Ze.290@trndny06...

> >Me, I use cans.

> There ya go!

>

..worldnet.att.net

Hey #5, when you use the > symbol, for quoting, right up tight
with a quoted link, ergo with no space twist, common newsreaders
no longer represent the link as clickable.

Not that this most recent generation of Usenet dilettantes has the vaguest
notion about what a link is for.

If they did, they would not requote whole posts, even threads, with
each of their comments as they would know, for instance, that clicking
on a news ID would (with common newsreaders) would display the
subject post in its tedious entirety.

They could also, in some isolated cases, learn that replacing "news:" in
the news ID with the string http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=
creates a link which retrieves a news post from the Google archives,
as illustrated:



should one know that a link is for clicking upon.

--
Dicky

"Jim" > wrote in message
...

> To follow the photography metaphor. At one time I worked in a camera
> store. We had an endless flow of rich customers who would spend
> $2000 on a Nikon so they could take crappy pictures. They wouldn't
> take the time to go to a photography school or read a few books on
> technique.

Now they have digicams, up to 10 Megapixels, maybe more ... way
bigger than my screen.

All come with picture editors. Just like newsreader programs come
with text editors.

So what???!

--
Dicky

Boron Elgar wrote:
> On 21 Apr 2006 22:03:41 -0700, "Will" >
> wrote:
>
> >Boron Elgar wrote:....
> It is about time. It's boring time, too. It means I can look at a
> recipe in cups and teaspoons or by weight and understand how to make
> it, but that doesn't mean I have to spend all my time in minute
> measurement conversions and exactitude.
> >

What is it with you two?

Who does; unless you're doing what Mike does with yeast? You're bashing
the 'scalers' for something we don't do. That's in your head or you're
using it to smokescreen again. Why can't you just accept that measuring
is about repeating and accuracy. There's not many of us that swap and
change supplies every time we bake. I sometimes buy two different
brands of flour and sometimes buy high protein flour, but I don't
change my formula. I get a slightly different result with the high
protein flour but I don't with the two different brands. But not the
point.

I can't see how you've got a leg to stand on with this or the face to
keep pounding it out. You're just making yourselves look stupid.

Will
> >Scaling is not the devil's bargain. You measure, it gets you to a
> >specific place and you fine tune if necessary. But that fine tuning is
> >more for ego than conditions on the bench.
Boron
> FINE TUNE. Hello, that is what I am saying. the fine tuning is what
> gets you your bread, not all the exact measuring.
>
Huh? Now you really are making yourself look stupid. Forgive me Boron
isn't that a contradiction?

How are you expecting inexperienced bakers to fine tune if they are
going to use 155g or 240g measuring implements to do that. I had to
ignore the huge variation in flour volumes there and plum for an
average, another point.

Surely if you are going to fine tune you need to use something capable
of fine tuning. ie small scale measurements, something on the same
scale as your 'fine'. I'll accept happily that ounces will do. I'll
even accept that if you always baking using cups then a recipe posted
in cups will mean something to you. Speaking from my experience, when I
used to bake using cups, I think in terms of 1 cup of starter and 5
cups or flour, 2 cups of water. 'How does it relate to that?' If it
doesn't easily relate to that I have to convert to grams but then were
in the realms of guess work, because my 155g of flour / 1 cup is not
the same as other peoples cups.

Now I'm going to accept that this hypothetical newby here is going to
use the same flour week in, week out.

Boron you advocate measuring by eye. How's the newby going to fine tune
without measuring by some kind of external scale?

Dusty, you advocate, (Sorry Dusty for this bit because you do pay lip
service to pros and cons) measuring by cups. How easy is going to be
for the newby to fine tune using 155g/240g scaled measures?

When I want to fine tune my cup of coffee. I use a teaspoon to measure
out the coffee. Just an analogy. When I go to work, teaspoons having a
half life of just a few weeks, are often thin on the ground, so I use a
dessert spoon, I have to really think about what I'm doing if I want a
good cup of coffee.

There isn't any argument. I don't measure my self in tons because I'm
not on that scale, I use kilos. I don't measure out my flour and water
in kilos because they're not on that scale, I use grams.


Your argument Born seams to be hung around using different materials.
But the vast majority of us use the same materials week in week out.
Maybe if you're Samartha going to Brazil you have to do some
adjustments. But isn't that the case regardless of what method you use
to put stuff in a bowl? Only experience is going to help you here. Not
scales, not cups, not your eye.

This whole thing seems to be a debate between reason and prejudice.

Can we just take a step back for a moment and remember what this debate
is all about. (I'll ignore Dusty hijacking the post 'Cold starts' : -)
) It's about these imaginary people telling newbies that they HAVE to
use scales to make good bread. No one is saying that. I don't know of
anyone who has said that.

I accept, as do all the those who have come in on this debate on the
side of using mass, that for some measuring by eye suits and by cups
suits others.

Now Boron, Dusty and Dan w you have to accept, and stop feeling so
superior, that measuring by mass suits a lot of other people.

TG

Dick Adams wrote:

> "Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get pretty
>> anal with their measuring.
>
> Me, I use cans.
>
>
>
> Boys love cans.

When you're done measuring you can tie a string between them and use
them for the internet.

B/

Boron Elgar wrote:

> Bakery bread making, by necessity, is DIFFERENT from home baking. And
> yet, even in the artisan bakeries I have been in and watched for
> hours, there is as much reliance on touch and feel as the scale.

I remember seeing my grandfather "measure" out tsibblekuchen (onion
rolls) by reaching into a vat of dough and grabbing and shaping... all
of them uniform.

Boron Elgar wrote:

> Proficiency in bread baking is all about it feeling right.

Arraagh!!! You can make dough WITHOUT levain and it will feel right.

What about understanding the fermentation process? Lactate, acetate,
ethanol, and CO2 are the major metabolic end products. What goes on
beneath the hood? Does the smell at the end of a proof mean anything?
Is is acetic acid? Why should you care?

I really liked your reference to TWIAVBP (the world is a very big
place). A piece of dough is a very big place. Touch means you've
assessed the water balance and gluten development.

> ... the fine tuning is what gets you your bread, not all the exact measuring.

Arraagh!!! (again). Fine tuning is your ego giving reassuring feedback.
Exact measuring is your stalking horse. What gets bread is underneath
the hood. What all of those microbes and grain enzymes are doing.

> Do you have warts?

Of course I do. Some I can even see.

Jim wrote:

> Mike is right on target.

See the "rec?" That's one of the Usenet "Big 8" hierarchies. Stands
for "recreation." Not in the sci.* hierarchy, for "science" or
"scientific," and not outside the Big 8 in "biz.*"

B/

B/

Brian Mailman wrote:

> Jim wrote:
>
>> Mike is right on target.
>
> See the "rec?" That's one of the Usenet "Big 8" hierarchies. Stands
> for "recreation." Not in the sci.* hierarchy, for "science" or
> "scientific," and not outside the Big 8 in "biz.*"

Wow! There must be a point in that somewhere. If only I could give it the
nanosecond of thought it truly deserves.

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 08:37:54 -0700, Brian Mailman
> wrote:

>Boron Elgar wrote:
>
>> Bakery bread making, by necessity, is DIFFERENT from home baking. And
>> yet, even in the artisan bakeries I have been in and watched for
>> hours, there is as much reliance on touch and feel as the scale.
>
>I remember seeing my grandfather "measure" out tsibblekuchen (onion
>rolls) by reaching into a vat of dough and grabbing and shaping... all
>of them uniform.

It is hard to get decent onion rolls today. I haven't had anything
similar to what I used to get from the Jewish bakeries when I was
growing up.

Did your grandfather make a bread called simply "bulke"?
It was two round loaves baked side by side, so they touched, and
attached at the top by a strip of flattened dough. We kids used to
fight over that crispy, crusty strip.

Boron

Someone wrote

>> ... the fine tuning is what gets you your bread, not all the exact
>> measuring.


Does this make sense? How "fine tuned" can you get using cups and pinches
and spoons? I just felt that was an odd statement, as it is pretty certain
(unless you are some kind of robot) that from one bake too the next
unmeasured quantities are going to differ. Anyways, I have myself been SO
guilty of denying the merits of scales and exact measuring in the past, and
now use them just about every time, except if I add up my ingredients wrong
as I am adding to the bowl and mess up the recipe, at which point I am very
glad I went for so long by feel.

hutchndi

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:26:50 -0400, "hutchndi" >
wrote:

>
>Someone wrote
>
>>> ... the fine tuning is what gets you your bread, not all the exact
>>> measuring.
>
>
>Does this make sense? How "fine tuned" can you get using cups and pinches
>and spoons? I just felt that was an odd statement, as it is pretty certain
>(unless you are some kind of robot) that from one bake too the next
>unmeasured quantities are going to differ. Anyways, I have myself been SO
>guilty of denying the merits of scales and exact measuring in the past, and
>now use them just about every time, except if I add up my ingredients wrong
>as I am adding to the bowl and mess up the recipe, at which point I am very
>glad I went for so long by feel.
>
>hutchndi
>


Again, I must remind you that people have been baking for a long time
and making very good breads of all sorts without the use of scales. If
it makes you happy, enjoy.

Boron

On 4/22/06, Boron Elgar > wrote:

> >If your exercises make you happy, I'm happy for you; but, I tend to think
> >that more emphasis on the underlying techniques would add richness to
> what
> >you are doing.
>
>
> I never said that technique is unnecessary, just that over reliance on
> the scale is. Big Diff. You imply I have no underlying technique,
> which is an unfair and unkind assumption. I have been at this a long
> time, Mike and I know what I am doing rather well. I don't do it for a
> bakery and make 95 loaves at a time, but I never noticed this group
> was limited to professionals. The home baker is NOT making 95 loaves
> at a time.


And I never suggested that weighing is the be all and end all of technique.
However, it does help a baker. Whether one is a beginner trying to master a
craft without guidance, or whether one is an experiened baker trying to
repeat a recipe, weighing helps.

In a note, you commented on the futlity of converting ounces to grams.
However, that is something I only do once. If I find a recipe that looks
interesting, I'll dig out my cups and measuring spoons and weigh as I go.
Once I have the weights for the recipe, I never convert again. If I find
adjustments are needed, I make them in grams. Ounces, whether a measure of
weight or volume, are things I just don't use. As mentioned, I can be happy
with decimal pounds or grams. Both scale well.

And scaling can be a good thing. When you are asked by an organization or a
friend to bake 20 loaves of your famous and delightful bread, whatcha gonna
do? It's easier to do if you have a scalable recipe to work from. And
before I started baking commercially, that happened often enough to be an
issue.... as it will to most bakers who have a circle of local friends.

Bakery bread making, by necessity, is DIFFERENT from home baking.


No, there is no necessity there. If you talk to the German contributors to
the list, and European contributors in general, you'll find almost all of
them do their baking through weight measurements. There was a long,
anguished, thread from an English poster in alt.bread.recipes (I think)
about, "what's a sodding cup?"

Looking at German cookbooks, aimed at hobbyists, as well as sacks of flour
from Germany (thanks again Samartha), all the measurements - aimed at
hobbyists - are given in units of weight, grams in particular.

It is, simply, the best and most reliable way of communicating a recipe.

One of the German cookbooks showed a German housewife using a floor-mounted
mixer that looks like it would have been at home in a bakery. If you have a
large family, a good sized mixer can be a good thing, as can a wood fired
oven in the backyard.

And yet, even in the artisan bakeries I have been in and watched for
> hours, there is as much reliance on touch and feel as the scale.


Absolutely. Scales are only there to get you into the ballpark, quickly.
When you have consistent sources of ingredients, the feeling is largely
pro-forma, but not to be ignored. When I teach baking classes, I spend a
fair amount of time talking about the feel of dough. Most hobbyists use too
much flour, making far too stiff a dough. Feeling the dough, and guiding
students in feeling their dough, is the fastest way of getting them
on-track. And the hardest thing to communicate through books or electronic
print media. Measuring ingredients, by weight, is a good way to get
beginners in the ballpark. Cups are not, not that you use them either.


Granted, that is only 3 places, and my other advisors are food
> scientists in the development lab of a large baking supplier, but I am
> not speaking from inexperience.


I DO wonder what they say when they find you don't measure.

Mike

On 4/22/06, Boron Elgar > wrote:

> Again, I must remind you that people have been baking for a long time
> and making very good breads of all sorts without the use of scales. If
> it makes you happy, enjoy.
>
>
Given that scales have been around since Biblical times, and before, I am
not sure how much credence to give that. My mother was raised in Germany,
and in her home ec. classes, they weighed. This was pre- WWII. And it was
pretty clear that weighing had been the order of things for many, many
years.

Sure, everyone knows a grandma or two that never measures. Just a pinch of
this and a dab of that..... but I dare say that is the exception to the
rule, and that those grandma's weren't always that good a cook. My wife
mentions an old neighbor who would bring over donuts made that way out of a
genuine desire to share. My mother-in-law would thank the lady, telling
her, "Oh, these donuts never last long in this house!", and then quietly
throw the inedible tough little greaseballs away .. outside... so the smell
wouldn't linger in the house. My MIL liked donuts, and liked her
neighbor... but not her neighbor's donuts.

Mike

Mike Avery wrote:

> Sure, everyone knows a grandma or two that never measures.

Fellow I was apprenticed to for several years, the first executive chef
of Trader Vic's (he actually invented "Polynesian" cuisine,) and EC for
Jimmy's of Beverly Hills for many years, as well as creator of the
vertical poultry roaster had a conversation with me one day about this
one day.

He'd told me my measurements on something was off and I commented that
he never measured. I will translate from the Franglish, after my ears
stopped ringing from the immediate cuffing I recieved... "Residue of a
whore's mattress, I ALWAYS measure. ALWAYS." "No, I don't see you
measure and I watch." "Because I don't use the cups, the spoons? What
kind of a chef are you, that you need that? Can't you see, can't you
feel, can't you smell? How you going to feed the people after WWIII and
none of that is left? EHH? Don't you know how big your hand is? Don't
you know how fast something pours? EHHH?"

Then he poured salt into his cupped hand and told me it was two
teaspoons. I got a teaspoon... and just a bit scant.

So there's measuring. And there's measuring.

> Just a pinch of this and a dab of that..... but I dare say that is the
> exception to the rule, and that those grandma's weren't always that
> good a cook. My wife mentions an old neighbor..

So one case makes the rule?

And please don't insult my grandma, who could also sew a princess dress
for my mother without a pattern as well as drive an 18-wheeler.

B/

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 17:59:17 -0600, "Mike Avery"
> wrote:

>On 4/22/06, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>
>> Again, I must remind you that people have been baking for a long time
>> and making very good breads of all sorts without the use of scales. If
>> it makes you happy, enjoy.
>>
>>
>Given that scales have been around since Biblical times, and before, I am
>not sure how much credence to give that.

And in every hut and cave and log cabin? Yeah, right....

>My mother was raised in Germany,
>and in her home ec. classes, they weighed. This was pre- WWII. And it was
>pretty clear that weighing had been the order of things for many, many
>years.

I never weighed anything in any home ec class. And I assure you ,
that was a long, long, long time AFTER WWII. I ain't your mamma, Mikey
and I sure as hell did not grow up in Germany before the war. Most of
my family had fled by then.
>
>Sure, everyone knows a grandma or two that never measures. Just a pinch of
>this and a dab of that..... but I dare say that is the exception to the
>rule, and that those grandma's weren't always that good a cook.

Is this supposed to be deliberately mean-spirited towards me (and I am
no one's grandmother) or what exactly are you implying?

> My wife
>mentions an old neighbor who would bring over donuts made that way out of a
>genuine desire to share. My mother-in-law would thank the lady, telling
>her, "Oh, these donuts never last long in this house!", and then quietly
>throw the inedible tough little greaseballs away .. outside... so the smell
>wouldn't linger in the house. My MIL liked donuts, and liked her
>neighbor... but not her neighbor's donuts.
>
And why not translate this into something relevant why you're at it?
Are you trying to say that those who do not measure cannot bake
anything at all? That they cannot make donuts? That they should not
visit your MIL?

This is a sourdough group. I make a lot of sourdoughs. They are all
lean breads. I do not measure for them. I have no need to. I have
posted pictures of my breads here and many surely look as fine as
anything on your web pages, so you needn't go so far out of your way
to be insulting.

As Brian has mentioned, not all chefs measure, either. Your insistence
on thinking that cooking and baking without scalar measurement is
doomed to fail is not only incorrect, but rather ignorant and
pigheaded, too.

As I mentioned several posts ago, you need to make 95 loaves of the
same thing every day, go on and measure. But there is no measurement
needed for the 4 loaves I made today and that were begun last night
with their pre-ferments.

Truly, the repeated and snide remarks implying that what I bake is of
poor quality just because I do not measure by scale is, well,
bullshit.

Boron

Boron Elgar wrote:

> Truly, the repeated and snide remarks implying that what I bake is of
> poor quality just because I do not measure by scale is, well,
> bullshit.

You should have quit while you were ahead. Mike never said your baking
was poor.
You perceived the insult. It is as imaginary as your expressed
technique.

You haven't got a freaking clue, Boron. So far I've read a lot of shit
about how boring everyone else's ideas are, that they consume time,
that they have little or no value. You haven't responded intelligently
to any post in this thread. You asked me if I had warts. And you're
yelling at Mike???

There are a lot of lazy people who take shortcuts and tell themselves
they are smarter than the average bear. You are one of them.

i got some good advise from a good person in this ng when i first started
posting- something to the effect of : sometimes it's best to let a thread
die, for the good of the group.

just one noobie's opinion

dan w


"Will" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Boron Elgar wrote:
>
> > Truly, the repeated and snide remarks implying that what I bake is of
> > poor quality just because I do not measure by scale is, well,
> > bullshit.
>
> You should have quit while you were ahead. Mike never said your baking
> was poor.
> You perceived the insult. It is as imaginary as your expressed
> technique.
>
> You haven't got a freaking clue, Boron. So far I've read a lot of shit
> about how boring everyone else's ideas are, that they consume time,
> that they have little or no value. You haven't responded intelligently
> to any post in this thread. You asked me if I had warts. And you're
> yelling at Mike???
>
> There are a lot of lazy people who take shortcuts and tell themselves
> they are smarter than the average bear. You are one of them.
>

On 22 Apr 2006 19:25:07 -0700, "Will" >
wrote:

>
>Boron Elgar wrote:
>
>> Truly, the repeated and snide remarks implying that what I bake is of
>> poor quality just because I do not measure by scale is, well,
>> bullshit.
>
>You should have quit while you were ahead. Mike never said your baking
>was poor.
>You perceived the insult. It is as imaginary as your expressed
>technique.
>
>You haven't got a freaking clue, Boron.

I have been posting here since 2001 and baking bread for decades
before that. Can you tell me what "clues" I do not have?

> So far I've read a lot of shit
>about how boring everyone else's ideas are, that they consume time,
>that they have little or no value. You haven't responded intelligently
>to any post in this thread. You asked me if I had warts. And you're
>yelling at Mike???

Boring? Consume time? Little or no value? I think you should go back
over my posts and find citations where those things are said. I am
delighted to defend my opinions, but not particularly intrigued by
defending ones that you claim I make but are not mine.

How does one "yell" on Usenet?
>
>There are a lot of lazy people who take shortcuts and tell themselves
>they are smarter than the average bear. You are one of them.

What "shortcuts" do I take? Where did I claim to superior knowledge?
Would you care to provide citations for that, too? If you're going to
bitch & whine, try doing it about things I have said, rather than your
imaginings.

I will repeat what I initially said - that over dependence on scales
and measurements has the potential to lead a novice to overlook the
valuable lessons of touch, taste and feel of the dough and that
sourdough breads can be made successfully without any measuring at
all. Taking that stance has caused several of the overly testicular
around here to make sexist and ageist remarks, denigrate my bread
baking experience, deny the possibility of my competence and insist
that my baking efforts must produce the equivalent of grease ball
donuts.

Get a grip, man. Your way of making bread is not the only methodology
that works. I hate to burst your bubble, but that is fact.

I spend my workdays with the demanding exactitude of statistics and
spreadsheets. Damn if I am going to spend my weekend baking with them.
And since I am successful at the breadmaking, a success that is
considered an impossibility by several bread jocks here, doesn't mean
what I say is not truthful or meaningful. or that I will let myself
get pushed around by the likes of you. I said nothing to go after
anyone here until the insults came flying my way. I have no intentions
of allowing anyone to do that without returning fire.

I don't post here for your pleasure, nor do I bake for your pleasure.
Now - you boys go back to playing with your toys.

Boron Elgar
---------------------------
"Are we going to measure or are we going to cook?" Mimi Sheraton.

Boron Elgar wrote:

Boring? Consume time? Little or no value? I think you should go back
over my posts and find citations where those things are said. I am
delighted to defend my opinions....

Here's a sample...

o Do you think baking was invented recently?

o I don't really care what gets your rocks off in the kitchen.

o I hate to sound sexist, but a lot of the boys around here get
pretty
anal with their measuring. I find it boring.

o It is about time. It's boring time, too. It means I can look at a
recipe in cups and teaspoons or by weight and understand how to make
it, but that doesn't mean I have to spend all my time in minute
measurement conversions and exactitude.

o Do you have warts?

o I never weighed anything in any home ec class. And I assure you
,
that was a long, long, long time AFTER WWII. I ain't your mamma...

I think the last comment says it all. Never weighed anything... but
know all about it.
The rest of it is gratuitous insulting.

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:47:16 -0400, Boron Elgar
> wrote:

>Again, I must remind you that people have been baking for a long time
>and making very good breads of all sorts

Howdy,

Whether or not with careful weighing, what makes you believe
that the breads of the past were "very good?"

Thanks,
--
Kenneth

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

Will wrote:
> Boron Elgar wrote:
>
> > Truly, the repeated and snide remarks implying that what I bake is of
> > poor quality just because I do not measure by scale is, well,
> > bullshit.
>
> You should have quit while you were ahead. Mike never said your baking
> was poor.
> You perceived the insult. It is as imaginary as your expressed
> technique.
>
> You haven't got a freaking clue, Boron. So far I've read a lot of shit
> about how boring everyone else's ideas are, that they consume time,
> that they have little or no value. You haven't responded intelligently
> to any post in this thread. You asked me if I had warts. And you're
> yelling at Mike???
>
> There are a lot of lazy people who take shortcuts and tell themselves
> they are smarter than the average bear. You are one of them.

Will, Thank you so much for telling it like it is. You've been very
balanced throughout this as has Mike. Bravo. It looks to me like Boron
is trying to turn this into an anti-semitic row. ( More smokescreening)
Well speaking from my maternal Jewish side. ******** is it.

TG

L, not -L wrote:
...
>
> My grandmother was born,.. The only scales to be found in her kitchen were on a fish, yet
> she made excellent baked goods, ...

Mike is not saying that if you don't use scales your baking is rubbish.
Only that not using scales or cups doesn't make you some top chef to
bowed down to as all knowing master. Gees can't some of you see past an
analogy without grabbing on to bits that suit your sufferance.

> Of course she spent much of her life cooking for field hands and made baked
> goods of one (maybe even two or three) sort or another for 2 meals a day.
> She didn't need the crutch that my lack of experience (at least when
> compared to her) benefits from. I use a scale for sourdough baking but for
> other baked goods I am experienced, and confident, enough to do it without a
> net.


Great good for you. Now make those baked goods for an extra family of
five. I hardly think that most of us that use scales though see them as
a net. More like the trapeze. Another good analogy would be a raft to
get you from one side of the river to the other. Some of you can swim
well but if there's a good tool to do the job why not use it. We don't
all have to aspire to being cave men to be proficient. And what is it
with this 'What are you going to do after the WWIII?" I don't think
I'll be worried about baking sourdough during the nuclear winter. lol.
Gees.

The whole point if this debate is that some think that people who use
scales insist that everyone who doesn't use them can't bake. Mike is
NOT saying that.

If I say the sky is not black it does not mean that sky must therefore
be white. You need to see context.

TG

dan w wrote:
> i got some good advise from a good person in this ng when i first started
> posting- something to the effect of : sometimes it's best to let a thread
> die, for the good of the group.
>
> just one noobie's opinion
>
> dan w
>
>
> "Will" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Boron Elgar wrote:
> >
> > > Truly, the repeated and snide remarks implying that what I bake is of
> > > poor quality just because I do not measure by scale is, well,
> > > bullshit.
> >
> > You should have quit while you were ahead. Mike never said your baking
> > was poor.
> > You perceived the insult. It is as imaginary as your expressed
> > technique.
> >
> > You haven't got a freaking clue, Boron. So far I've read a lot of shit
> > about how boring everyone else's ideas are, that they consume time,
> > that they have little or no value. You haven't responded intelligently
> > to any post in this thread. You asked me if I had warts. And you're
> > yelling at Mike???
> >
> > There are a lot of lazy people who take shortcuts and tell themselves
> > they are smarter than the average bear. You are one of them.

You do have some point. It's just that Boron won't admit she's wrong
because she's basing her argument on what makes her feel comfortable,
but disguising it as something tangible. She's lost before she starts.
She can't win. It's like trying to debate that New York is East without
setting up any criteria. It isn't east for me. We've happily defined
the bounds of the debate but Boron refuse to accept it and continues to
defend the absoluteness of her side something she can't win with.

TG

Boron Elgar wrote:
> "Are we going to measure or are we going to cook?" Mimi Sheraton.

Who's she? Who made her referee. I don't give a stuff what she says.
Shall I quote from the Bible or the Dharma? Maybe I should quote Delia
Smith or Reinhart.

Boron. You have some very valid points which none of us are refuting.
Why you feel the need to bring in sex or race or religion to stir up
the brew is beyond me. I couldn't give a monkeys what is or isn't
hanging off you body. What has that got to do with what people say or
how they bake?

TG

Kenneth wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:47:16 -0400, Boron Elgar
> > wrote:
>
> >Again, I must remind you that people have been baking for a long time
> >and making very good breads of all sorts
>
> Howdy,
>
> Whether or not with careful weighing, what makes you believe
> that the breads of the past were "very good?"
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Kenneth

Hi Kenneth.

Exactly it's just another example of a nostalgic view that what
happened in times of yore was so much better.

I doubt the Israelites in Egypt would agree with that or those driven
mad from ergot poisoning, or perhaps if your family are dying from
plague you have more important things to worry about than should I use
cups, scales or just throw some flour and water together and see what
happens, oh just wait, one of my pocks is about to burst. : -)

TG

L, not -L wrote:
> On 23-Apr-2006, "TG" > wrote:
>
> > And what is it
> > with this 'What are you going to do after the WWIII?" I don't think
> > I'll be worried about baking sourdough during the nuclear winter. lol.
> > Gees.
>
> What!!
>
> Who mentioned WWIII - perhaps you should reread my earlier message after
> you've had you coffee. Its only mention of WW anything was a quote about
> someone using scales around the time of WW II.
>
> Or was your reference to WW III an oblique analogy.
> --
> To email, replace Cujo with Juno

Hey, it isn't all about you. : -) Why not try following the whole
thread before jumping in? There's a lot of people reading here. I know
you didn't say anything about WWIII. : -)

TG

On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:30:41 -0400, Kenneth
> wrote:

>On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:47:16 -0400, Boron Elgar
> wrote:
>
>>Again, I must remind you that people have been baking for a long time
>>and making very good breads of all sorts
>
>Howdy,
>
>Whether or not with careful weighing, what makes you believe
>that the breads of the past were "very good?"
>
>Thanks,


Some have been given to the R&D lab at a baking company for critique
by those who run the place. They are the ones who send me bricks of
fresh yeast once in awhile. And I get requests to bake occasions
co-workers and family.

I assume none of that will be sufficient for the likes of those who
have been nipping at my heels in rfs..

What makes any home baker here assume their breads are "very good"?

Shame on you Kenneth.

Boron

Boron Elgar wrote:

>
>
> What makes any home baker here assume their breads are "very good"?
>


Well, the cat won't eat any of it but I can tell by the way she sniffs
and tosses her head as she stalks off that some is quite a bit better
than others.

Charles

On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:07:06 GMT, Charles Perry >
wrote:

>Boron Elgar wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> What makes any home baker here assume their breads are "very good"?
>>
>
>
>Well, the cat won't eat any of it but I can tell by the way she sniffs
>and tosses her head as she stalks off that some is quite a bit better
>than others.
>
>Charles


Ah, but Charles, you and I both know that your cat is the sole feline
contributor to Epicurious.

Boron

Boron Elgar wrote:

> As Brian has mentioned, not all chefs measure, either.

What I meant was, not all chefs measure *that way* (i.e., with
mechanical assistance).

B/

On Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:25:35 -0700, Brian Mailman
> wrote:

>Boron Elgar wrote:
>
>> As Brian has mentioned, not all chefs measure, either.
>
>What I meant was, not all chefs measure *that way* (i.e., with
>mechanical assistance).
>
>B/

Understood. There is no other way to use the hands alone. One
estimates based on experience.

Boron

Boron Elgar wrote:
> One estimates based on experience.
>
> Boron

That's the point of all this though isn't it Boron. What if you don't
have that experience?

I rest my case.

TG

"Boron Elgar" > wrote in message
...

> I spend my workdays with the demanding exactitude of statistics and
> spreadsheets. Damn if I am going to spend my weekend baking with them.
> And since I am successful at the breadmaking, a success that is
> considered an impossibility by several bread jocks here, doesn't mean
> what I say is not truthful or meaningful. or that I will let myself
> get pushed around by the likes of you.
>
> I don't post here for your pleasure, nor do I bake for your pleasure.
> Now - you boys go back to playing with your toys.
>

When I started with bread I was doing AutoCad drafting in a cubicle
surrounded by formulas and books. Extremely restrictive exacting tedious
work. Learning AutoCad was very restrictive also, until I got very good with
it, where the freedom came into play where it was a delight to work with. It
would have been even better if I enjoyed the same freedom with math, but it
was always a weakness of mine. So all the calculations left me very stressed
by the end of each day, (these were formula for pipe restrictions in nuclear
power plants by the way), and breadbaking by feel was a glorious release, I
can definitely relate to your statement. I only baked this way for a year
and my breads by that time I felt were quite good, and I probably would have
continued to get better, but I got tired of eating (more than) occasional
misshaps, and my breads not coming out like others described recipes. So
Boron, I am definitely not putting you down for not using the scales, but
some are more successful than others using what would appear to be the same
methods, and while my success rate seems to be rising using more accurate
measurments, kudos to you for keeping the faith. Myself, I have decubiclized
my worklife, and my breadbaking is actually less stressful too ; )

hutchndi