Or is it a batard? Only the French can tell.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugalh/...7594251518983/

I'm pleased with the improved crust by placing a stoneware vault over my
baking tiles (a la cloche).

This was a small baguette at 68% hydration kneaded to stretchy but not
windowpane. 340g with 20% start inoculation. Mixed, rested, kneaded,
rested, refrigerated overnight, shaped and risen over 8 hours, baked in
a 20-min preheated 450 F oven with tiles and "cloche" to 95 C internal temp.

IMNSHO it tasted every bit as good as the sourdough baguette I bought
from La Brea bakery in LA a week ago. Certainly had the same character,
although my start was made from scratch in New Mexico a month or two ago
and has had nothing to do with California. My crust wasn't as jawsore
chewy as La Brea's, but still much crisper and chewier than I've had in
the past. I think I'll up the oven temp a bit next time.

More pictures can be found with only a little exploration at the above link.

Hans Fugal wrote:
> This was a small baguette at 68% hydration

Correction, it was about 73% hydration

Hans Fugal wrote:
> Or is it a batard? Only the French can tell.
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugalh/...7594251518983/
>
> I'm pleased with the improved crust by placing a stoneware vault over my
> baking tiles (a la cloche).
>
> This was a small baguette at 68% hydration kneaded to stretchy but not
> windowpane. 340g with 20% start inoculation. Mixed, rested, kneaded,
> rested, refrigerated overnight, shaped and risen over 8 hours, baked in
> a 20-min preheated 450 F oven with tiles and "cloche" to 95 C internal temp.
>
> IMNSHO it tasted every bit as good as the sourdough baguette I bought
> from La Brea bakery in LA a week ago. Certainly had the same character,
> although my start was made from scratch in New Mexico a month or two ago
> and has had nothing to do with California. My crust wasn't as jawsore
> chewy as La Brea's, but still much crisper and chewier than I've had in
> the past. I think I'll up the oven temp a bit next time.
>
> More pictures can be found with only a little exploratio

Hans,

I looked at the pictures. For what it's worth, you might try that setup
with a cold oven start. I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but... cold
cloche starts work much better for me than hot ones.

You will not need steam, just well proofed dough going in. The dough
will provide plenty of moisture to the cloche as it heats and it will
stay moist enough to form a beautiful "glazed" look crust. I usually
bake covered for 20 minutes from a cold start, then uncover and finish
for another 15 minutes*. I set the oven to 450 F, a bit lower if the
dough is still strong, a bit higher if really well proofed and weaker.
Your crust density will be determined by how long you keep it covered.
Longer cloche time for a thick, chewy crust and less cloche time for a
thinner, crispy crust. But you can dial it in as you get used to the
process. The crumb will be extraordinary, the holes will be shiny.

* my doughs run ~1000 grams (big batard shaped cloches), you will need
a bit less total time.

Will wrote:

> I looked at the pictures. For what it's worth, you might try that setup
> with a cold oven start. I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but... cold
> cloche starts work much better for me than hot ones.


Thanks for the tip. I'll certainly give it a try. Why do you think a
cold start works better?

Hans Fugal wrote:
> Will wrote:
>
> > I looked at the pictures. For what it's worth, you might try that setup
> > with a cold oven start. I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but... cold
> > cloche starts work much better for me than hot ones.
>
>
> Thanks for the tip. I'll certainly give it a try. Why do you think a
> cold start works better?

The finished bread itself is a big data point <g>.

I think it has to do with buffering the dough from extreme heat long
enough for it to extract the last measure of fermentation. There is
some additional (amylase) enzymatic activity, right up to 155 F
internal. You may notice the finished crumb is more elastic. Also,
since the crust stays moist longer, the Maillard effect is more
pronounced.

According to Hamelman, steam delays the final fixing of the dough's
volume by delaying the crust set. In the cloche you take fuller
advantage of the delay. You can see the effects. The crumb reflects
light because the surface starch has more fully caramelized. I
speculate this happens because the loaf's cumulative heating is better
balanced: meaning less disparity from crust to core. You are balancing
the time-temperature dimension better. The interior is allowed to heat
longer before setting the crust.

An aside, having I looked at the pictures <g> ... if you are committed
to steam the best way I've found to get it is to heat water in a small
covered sauce-pot with a ~1/4" hole in the lid. (Buy an old beater at
Goodwill) When the water vapor is vigorously blowing through the hole,
place the pot on the oven floor for 2 or 3 minutes to condition the
oven before adding the dough . Add the dough and leave the pot in place
for about 5 minutes to delay the crust set. The pot will blow vapor the
whole time. Beats shocking superheated cookware. Gives very good vapor
dispersion in the oven cavity.

Will wrote:
> Hans Fugal wrote:
> > Will wrote:
> >
> > > I looked at the pictures. For what it's worth, you might try that setup
> > > with a cold oven start. I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but... cold
> > > cloche starts work much better for me than hot ones.
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the tip. I'll certainly give it a try. Why do you think a
> > cold start works better?
>
> The finished bread itself is a big data point <g>.

Yes, that's always a strong indicator. I know you're kidding, but I
wasn't doubting you just curious as to what you hypothesize as to
what's going on inside.

> I think it has to do with buffering the dough from extreme heat long
> enough for it to extract the last measure of fermentation. There is
> some additional (amylase) enzymatic activity, right up to 155 F
> internal. You may notice the finished crumb is more elastic. Also,
> since the crust stays moist longer, the Maillard effect is more
> pronounced.
>
> According to Hamelman, steam delays the final fixing of the dough's
> volume by delaying the crust set. In the cloche you take fuller
> advantage of the delay. You can see the effects. The crumb reflects
> light because the surface starch has more fully caramelized. I
> speculate this happens because the loaf's cumulative heating is better
> balanced: meaning less disparity from crust to core. You are balancing
> the time-temperature dimension better. The interior is allowed to heat
> longer before setting the crust.

Thanks, that's some great info/conjecture. I'll be trying a few loaves
both ways over the next couple weeks.

> An aside, having I looked at the pictures <g> ... if you are committed
> to steam the best way I've found to get it is to heat water in a small
> covered sauce-pot with a ~1/4" hole in the lid. (Buy an old beater at
> Goodwill) When the water vapor is vigorously blowing through the hole,
> place the pot on the oven floor for 2 or 3 minutes to condition the
> oven before adding the dough . Add the dough and leave the pot in place
> for about 5 minutes to delay the crust set. The pot will blow vapor the
> whole time. Beats shocking superheated cookware. Gives very good vapor
> dispersion in the oven cavity.

Oh no, I'm not committed to steam. My one attempt at adding steam to
the oven resulted in a broken pyrex casserole dish (I should have known
better). I'm going to let the cloche take care of the steam for me.
I've baked twice with it now and I can see a marked improvement in the
crust.

Thanks

Hans Fugal wrote:

> I'm not committed to steam.

It's useful though. I use my sauce-pot method for the second round of
bread. I can't stand to let a fully charged oven go to waste. So after
the cloches, batch #2 (proved in bannetons) is inverted onto personal
pizza pans and is conditioned with the sauce-pot.

Will wrote:
> Hans Fugal wrote:
>
> > I'm not committed to steam.
>
> It's useful though. I use my sauce-pot method for the second round of
> bread. I can't stand to let a fully charged oven go to waste. So after
> the cloches, batch #2 (proved in bannetons) is inverted onto personal
> pizza pans and is conditioned with the sauce-pot.

Forgot to add... I got the idea from Kenneth. He used to employ a
pressure cooker vented from the range top into the oven via copper tube
down the vent. I was concerned about condensation on the way down so
decided to vent directly using a very small pot. The small lid hole
creates a strong pressure differential and disperses the "steam" quite
effectively.

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 20:07:36 -0600, Hans Fugal >
wrote:

>Or is it a batard? Only the French can tell.

Yep, definitely a btard. The cross section is larger than a
baguette, and the photo of it on the oven door next to the gloves
confirms it. Well done!

Hi Will,

> The finished bread itself is a big data point <g>.

I tried the cold-start today and the result was not encouraging. However
I can't rule out other variables that I inadvertently changed. In
particular, I had a much drier dough and it was slightly overproofed.
The result was extremely pale. I'm not sure whether it's only
psychological but you feel like you're eating dried paste. I'll be
trying it both ways a few more times but right now my two whole data
points tell me to preheat.

I wonder also whether my 9x13x4 lid isn't a bit too big to get hot
enough with a cold start by the time this 450g loaf was done inside.

fn 26 Aug 2006 11:47:00 -0700, "Will"
> wrote:

>
>Will wrote:
>> Hans Fugal wrote:
>>
>> > I'm not committed to steam.
>>
>> It's useful though. I use my sauce-pot method for the second round of
>> bread. I can't stand to let a fully charged oven go to waste. So after
>> the cloches, batch #2 (proved in bannetons) is inverted onto personal
>> pizza pans and is conditioned with the sauce-pot.
>
>Forgot to add... I got the idea from Kenneth. He used to employ a
>pressure cooker vented from the range top into the oven via copper tube
>down the vent. I was concerned about condensation on the way down so
>decided to vent directly using a very small pot. The small lid hole
>creates a strong pressure differential and disperses the "steam" quite
>effectively.

Hi Will,

I will add that I arranged things as I did because I wanted
to avoid having the heat energy of the oven go into the
boiling of water. I wanted it to go into the bread.

That can only happen if the generation of steam occurs
outside the oven itself.

All the best,
--
Kenneth

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

Kenneth wrote:

> Hi Will,
>
> I will add that I arranged things as I did because I wanted
> to avoid having the heat energy of the oven go into the
> boiling of water. I wanted it to go into the bread.
>
> That can only happen if the generation of steam occurs
> outside the oven itself.

Kenneth,

The energy drain is insignificant. It's a very small enameled cast iron
sauce pot, the size of a butter warmer. It's covered so the water vapor
streams in via a strong plume, exactly like a pressure cooker sans
regulator weight. The pot goes in boiling hot, not cold, and so carries
a good deal of energy with it. This energy, to your point, was created
outside the oven. The water itself: about ~3 ounces worth... is a small
isolated mass.

My rack thermometer does not indicate any loss beyond what is
unavoidable when you open the door to add the dough.

I think the real issue here avoiding large scale evaporation. Most
techniques call for heating a large pan and tossing a cup of water on
it. You get steam for about 1 second, then the water boils off. Might
as well make bagels <g>.