Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
New Improved Focaccia
37 views
Skip to first unread message
KingOfGlop
May 16, 2012, 3:27:31 PM5/16/12
to
New Improved Focaccia
I've often said that, false modesty aside, my Focaccia was hard to
improve and that a radical change of method and/or ingredient(s) would
be necessary to produce a better bread.
I just put the hydration up to 110% and loaded the dough with a
whopping 10% EVOO.
Makes 1 25 X 20 cm bread.
250 gm white bread flour.
1 sachet (7 gm) quick acting dried yeast - found it in the back of the
baking cupboard.
5 gm salt
275 gm hand hot water
25 gm EVOO
Dump all the ingredients except for the EVOO into your mixer's bowl
and beat with the padddle at Kenwood 3 for 5 minutes. Add the EVOO and
beat until the dough clears the bowl (15 - 35 min). Coat the dough in
a little more EVOO then onto the counter and perform 6 Stretch 'n'
Fold cycles. The oil helps in the first 2 cycles which can be a bit
tricky although the oil in the mix makes this a much more manageable
dough than a lean 110% hydration bread would be. Allow to rise to
double.
Put a generous glug of EVOO into a shallow roastin pan, put the dough
into it and gently dimple the dough to fit. Leave to double. Cheese
optional. Bake at 240C for 20 minutes.
Thin delicate crust, exquisite, elastic non-gummy , light crumb with
exemplary structure.
Pics of what was left of the loaf by the time I'd charged my camera at
http://i50.tinypic.com/b9euj9.jpg
http://i49.tinypic.com/addmc1.jpg
Love
John
Tim W
May 16, 2012, 7:13:11 PM5/16/12
to
call it. I might try this high hydration stuff myself one day.
Tim W
Motzarella
May 16, 2012, 10:20:40 PM5/16/12
to
"KingOfGlop" wrote in message
news:d500d372-fa67-4efc...@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
You are beginning to sound like a Jamie Oliver recipe with all that EVOO! A
glug here, a glug there! :)
Alan
Bertie Doe
May 17, 2012, 6:58:27 PM5/17/12
to
"KingOfGlop" wrote in message
news:d500d372-fa67-4efc...@5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
/
/I've often said that, false modesty aside, my Focaccia was hard to
/improve and that a radical change of method and/or ingredient(s) would
/be necessary to produce a better bread.
/
/I just put the hydration up to 110% and loaded the dough with a
/whopping 10% EVOO.
Last month I made your Walnut oil focaccia circa 2006 at 86% hydration. I'm
not sure I'm brave enough for 110%, although the pics make it look very
tempting.
KingOfGlop
May 18, 2012, 8:36:12 AM5/18/12
to
effort. Your maximum gain could be the ability to make a truly
stunning bread. I just don't see where bravery is necessary or even
desirable in this context. "Perspective" would be a useful word upon
which to muse at this point.
The Yorkshire Bread Fairy is in sour mood this treacherously bright
May morning.
Love
John
sf
Jun 25, 2012, 1:50:32 PM6/25/12
to
On Wed, 16 May 2012 12:27:31 -0700 (PDT), KingOfGlop <wcs...@aol.com>
wrote:
> 275 gm hand hot water
So I'm supposed to measure water on a scale the same way I'd measure
flour? I don't know what "hand hot water" means. Please explain in
simple terms that don't include the word "hydration", because I'm
completely lost every time somebody mentions it. 110% hydration means
wetter than water to me. TIA
--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.
wrote:
> 275 gm hand hot water
flour? I don't know what "hand hot water" means. Please explain in
simple terms that don't include the word "hydration", because I'm
completely lost every time somebody mentions it. 110% hydration means
wetter than water to me. TIA
--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.
Barry Harmon
Jun 25, 2012, 4:15:45 PM6/25/12
to
sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote in news:fr8hu7995erul3uil0ibvg8qam1ljfru7p@
4ax.com:
> On Wed, 16 May 2012 12:27:31 -0700 (PDT), KingOfGlop <wcs...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 275 gm hand hot water
>
> So I'm supposed to measure water on a scale the same way I'd measure
> flour? I don't know what "hand hot water" means. Please explain in
> simple terms that don't include the word "hydration", because I'm
> completely lost every time somebody mentions it. 110% hydration means
> wetter than water to me. TIA
>
Yes, most advanced and professional bakers (except Boron) measure water the
same way we measure flour, by weight.
Try this link for hydration. It may help. It may not.
http://artisanbreadbaking.com/school/hydration/
Barry
4ax.com:
> On Wed, 16 May 2012 12:27:31 -0700 (PDT), KingOfGlop <wcs...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 275 gm hand hot water
>
> So I'm supposed to measure water on a scale the same way I'd measure
> flour? I don't know what "hand hot water" means. Please explain in
> simple terms that don't include the word "hydration", because I'm
> completely lost every time somebody mentions it. 110% hydration means
> wetter than water to me. TIA
>
same way we measure flour, by weight.
Try this link for hydration. It may help. It may not.
http://artisanbreadbaking.com/school/hydration/
Barry
sf
Jun 26, 2012, 12:41:17 PM6/26/12
to
On 25 Jun 2012 20:15:45 GMT, Barry Harmon <john...@optonline.net>
wrote:
> sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote in news:fr8hu7995erul3uil0ibvg8qam1ljfru7p@
> 4ax.com:
>
> > On Wed, 16 May 2012 12:27:31 -0700 (PDT), KingOfGlop <wcs...@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 275 gm hand hot water
> >
> > So I'm supposed to measure water on a scale the same way I'd measure
> > flour? I don't know what "hand hot water" means. Please explain in
> > simple terms that don't include the word "hydration", because I'm
> > completely lost every time somebody mentions it. 110% hydration means
> > wetter than water to me. TIA
> >
>
> Yes, most advanced and professional bakers (except Boron) measure water the
> same way we measure flour, by weight.
Thanks, that certainly makes it easier for me because I have a scale
but I don't have a way to measure by ml unless I buy a set.
levels though. The best I'll ever do is estimate.
wrote:
> sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote in news:fr8hu7995erul3uil0ibvg8qam1ljfru7p@
> 4ax.com:
>
> > On Wed, 16 May 2012 12:27:31 -0700 (PDT), KingOfGlop <wcs...@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 275 gm hand hot water
> >
> > So I'm supposed to measure water on a scale the same way I'd measure
> > flour? I don't know what "hand hot water" means. Please explain in
> > simple terms that don't include the word "hydration", because I'm
> > completely lost every time somebody mentions it. 110% hydration means
> > wetter than water to me. TIA
> >
>
> Yes, most advanced and professional bakers (except Boron) measure water the
> same way we measure flour, by weight.
but I don't have a way to measure by ml unless I buy a set.
>
> Try this link for hydration. It may help. It may not.
>
> http://artisanbreadbaking.com/school/hydration/
>
It helped, thanks! I doubt I'll get into figuring out hydration
> Try this link for hydration. It may help. It may not.
>
> http://artisanbreadbaking.com/school/hydration/
>
levels though. The best I'll ever do is estimate.
Barry Harmon
Jun 26, 2012, 5:17:52 PM6/26/12
to
sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote in
news:2smju7h38ti8o0ams...@4ax.com:
You can use teaspoons and Tablespoons just as well as ml. 1 teaspoon is
5 ml and 1 Tablespoon is 15 ml.
As for figuring out hydration levels, Maybe what you should do is just
use a rule of thumb when examining a recipe, something like
55-57 is dry -- this will not be very sticky at all and the dough will
usually be very stiff. Bagels.
60-63 -- the dough will be slightly sticky and will easy to work.
French bread, Italian boules.
65-68 -- dough will be sticky and almost fluid. You will have trouble
getting the dough to stay shaped as a boule.
70 and above -- definitely sticky, messy. Maybe difficult to for
without pans, couches, etc. Ciabatta, etc.
These are rough guidelines, and some will dispute them, but they are
pretty reliable.
remember that flour and water make paste, so youo are unlikely to get a
dough that isn't at least slightly sticky. If you do, it is probably
because you have coated the exterior with raw flour. WHen that flour
gets worked into the dough, the dough will be sticky again, although a
bit less, since there will be more flour in relation to the amount of
water.
I hope this helps you half as much as it may confuse you.
Barry
news:2smju7h38ti8o0ams...@4ax.com:
5 ml and 1 Tablespoon is 15 ml.
As for figuring out hydration levels, Maybe what you should do is just
use a rule of thumb when examining a recipe, something like
55-57 is dry -- this will not be very sticky at all and the dough will
usually be very stiff. Bagels.
60-63 -- the dough will be slightly sticky and will easy to work.
French bread, Italian boules.
65-68 -- dough will be sticky and almost fluid. You will have trouble
getting the dough to stay shaped as a boule.
70 and above -- definitely sticky, messy. Maybe difficult to for
without pans, couches, etc. Ciabatta, etc.
These are rough guidelines, and some will dispute them, but they are
pretty reliable.
remember that flour and water make paste, so youo are unlikely to get a
dough that isn't at least slightly sticky. If you do, it is probably
because you have coated the exterior with raw flour. WHen that flour
gets worked into the dough, the dough will be sticky again, although a
bit less, since there will be more flour in relation to the amount of
water.
I hope this helps you half as much as it may confuse you.
Barry
Adrian
Jun 27, 2012, 4:47:07 AM6/27/12
to
On 26.06.2012 18:41, sf wrote:
> Thanks, that certainly makes it easier for me because I have a scale
> but I don't have a way to measure by ml unless I buy a set.
Liquid water has a density of aprox. 1000 kg/m^3.
> Thanks, that certainly makes it easier for me because I have a scale
> but I don't have a way to measure by ml unless I buy a set.
So just use your scale: 1g of water is 1ml of water.
Dusty da baker
Jul 1, 2012, 8:59:54 PM7/1/12
to
Don't let 'em ride you too hard "sf". While most 'advanced and
professional' bakers (read: Commercial) do indeed use weight, it's not
because it's somehow better or more accurate. The only reason to use
weight is for the ease in making variable quantities (17 loaves today, 53
tomorrow, etc.). And for that, it's hard to beat. The rest is just
posturing for show. If you're making a single loaf or two, there's nothing
inherently wrong with using quantities like the rest of us do...(:-o)!
The most important part is that you enjoy what you're doing, and that
you're making good bread. If you do that, grams or cups isn't going to
make a wit of difference to you or those that eat it.
Later friends,
Dusty--now in Lake Stevens, WA.
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who
wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will
devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and
otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." - Voltaire
"Barry Harmon" wrote in message
news:XnsA07DA5345BD2Djo...@209.197.15.254...
professional' bakers (read: Commercial) do indeed use weight, it's not
because it's somehow better or more accurate. The only reason to use
weight is for the ease in making variable quantities (17 loaves today, 53
tomorrow, etc.). And for that, it's hard to beat. The rest is just
posturing for show. If you're making a single loaf or two, there's nothing
inherently wrong with using quantities like the rest of us do...(:-o)!
The most important part is that you enjoy what you're doing, and that
you're making good bread. If you do that, grams or cups isn't going to
make a wit of difference to you or those that eat it.
Later friends,
Dusty--now in Lake Stevens, WA.
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who
wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will
devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and
otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." - Voltaire
"Barry Harmon" wrote in message
news:XnsA07DA5345BD2Djo...@209.197.15.254...
Barry Harmon
Jul 3, 2012, 9:09:15 AM7/3/12
to
"Dusty da baker" <Bake...@InnerLodge.com> wrote in
news:h5SdnXMsQPgWb23S...@supernews.com:
No, "the only reason to use weight" instead of volume for flour, etc.,
is not ease of making different quantities of bread. The real reason
for it is that it is the only way to measure flour accurately. A "cup
of flour" can weigh anywhere from 4 ounces to 7 ounces, depending on how
it is filled. If you are going to work your recipes in terms of
hydration, which is an excellent way to think about dough wetness, then
volume measure is worthless.
"Oh, Let me see, I need 6 cups of flour and 4 cups of water. That must
be 66% hydration, since 4 divided by 6 is .66."
Weight measure is especially useful when trying to solve problems, since
it assures that all the respondents are speaking the same language.
People starting out in bread baking seem to have an easier time making
good bread when they use weight, since by doing so they remove a
potential source of variation, and hence problems.
Finally, it is a good way to assure that today's French baguette will be
pretty much the same as the one made three days ago. This is a goal in
professional baking, but it is also a goal for the home baker.
Barry
news:h5SdnXMsQPgWb23S...@supernews.com:
is not ease of making different quantities of bread. The real reason
for it is that it is the only way to measure flour accurately. A "cup
of flour" can weigh anywhere from 4 ounces to 7 ounces, depending on how
it is filled. If you are going to work your recipes in terms of
hydration, which is an excellent way to think about dough wetness, then
volume measure is worthless.
"Oh, Let me see, I need 6 cups of flour and 4 cups of water. That must
be 66% hydration, since 4 divided by 6 is .66."
Weight measure is especially useful when trying to solve problems, since
it assures that all the respondents are speaking the same language.
People starting out in bread baking seem to have an easier time making
good bread when they use weight, since by doing so they remove a
potential source of variation, and hence problems.
Finally, it is a good way to assure that today's French baguette will be
pretty much the same as the one made three days ago. This is a goal in
professional baking, but it is also a goal for the home baker.
Barry
sf
Jul 7, 2012, 9:58:23 PM7/7/12
to
On 26 Jun 2012 21:17:52 GMT, Barry Harmon <john...@optonline.net>
Dumb-me didn't know that, thanks!
110% are they joking?
We had a family pizza party on July 3, which was my grandson's
birthday. I didn't measure anything, because I never do. The dough
was more than a bit sticky before it rose and felt perfect after. I
have no idea why, it just was. Normally I don't notice these things
or quickly forget about it if I do.... but I'm remembering it long
enough to ask if there's a simple explanation for that. TIA
A quick aside: although it felt good (not sticky, not dry), the dough
was too elastic to work well for pizza - I couldn't make it thin
enough. I pulled, I stretched and I rolled but nothing worked out.
I'm thinking that I didn't use enough oil. The crust was very tasty
and nobody complained, but I wish I could have made it thinner. Oh,
well - I'm entitled to a glitch every now and then. I just wish it
hadn't been a *birthday* dinner where pizza had been requested. :/
>
> As for figuring out hydration levels, Maybe what you should do is just
> use a rule of thumb when examining a recipe, something like
>
> 55-57 is dry -- this will not be very sticky at all and the dough will
> usually be very stiff. Bagels.
>
> 60-63 -- the dough will be slightly sticky and will easy to work.
> French bread, Italian boules.
>
> 65-68 -- dough will be sticky and almost fluid. You will have trouble
> getting the dough to stay shaped as a boule.
>
> 70 and above -- definitely sticky, messy. Maybe difficult to for
> without pans, couches, etc. Ciabatta, etc.
I like that, thanks - it helps! So, when I see a hydration level of
> As for figuring out hydration levels, Maybe what you should do is just
> use a rule of thumb when examining a recipe, something like
>
> 55-57 is dry -- this will not be very sticky at all and the dough will
> usually be very stiff. Bagels.
>
> 60-63 -- the dough will be slightly sticky and will easy to work.
> French bread, Italian boules.
>
> 65-68 -- dough will be sticky and almost fluid. You will have trouble
> getting the dough to stay shaped as a boule.
>
> 70 and above -- definitely sticky, messy. Maybe difficult to for
> without pans, couches, etc. Ciabatta, etc.
110% are they joking?
>
> These are rough guidelines, and some will dispute them, but they are
> pretty reliable.
>
> remember that flour and water make paste, so youo are unlikely to get a
> dough that isn't at least slightly sticky. If you do, it is probably
> because you have coated the exterior with raw flour. WHen that flour
> gets worked into the dough, the dough will be sticky again, although a
> bit less, since there will be more flour in relation to the amount of
> water.
>
> I hope this helps you half as much as it may confuse you.
>
Actually I feel a little of both, so I guess you did your "job". :)
> These are rough guidelines, and some will dispute them, but they are
> pretty reliable.
>
> remember that flour and water make paste, so youo are unlikely to get a
> dough that isn't at least slightly sticky. If you do, it is probably
> because you have coated the exterior with raw flour. WHen that flour
> gets worked into the dough, the dough will be sticky again, although a
> bit less, since there will be more flour in relation to the amount of
> water.
>
> I hope this helps you half as much as it may confuse you.
>
We had a family pizza party on July 3, which was my grandson's
birthday. I didn't measure anything, because I never do. The dough
was more than a bit sticky before it rose and felt perfect after. I
have no idea why, it just was. Normally I don't notice these things
or quickly forget about it if I do.... but I'm remembering it long
enough to ask if there's a simple explanation for that. TIA
A quick aside: although it felt good (not sticky, not dry), the dough
was too elastic to work well for pizza - I couldn't make it thin
enough. I pulled, I stretched and I rolled but nothing worked out.
I'm thinking that I didn't use enough oil. The crust was very tasty
and nobody complained, but I wish I could have made it thinner. Oh,
well - I'm entitled to a glitch every now and then. I just wish it
hadn't been a *birthday* dinner where pizza had been requested. :/
sf
Jul 7, 2012, 10:02:30 PM7/7/12
to
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:47:07 +0200, Adrian <ad...@sags-per-mail.de>
wrote:
I didn't know, thanks! I can do that. :)
wrote:
sf
Jul 8, 2012, 12:11:03 AM7/8/12
to
On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 17:59:54 -0700, "Dusty da baker"
<Bake...@InnerLodge.com> wrote:
> Don't let 'em ride you too hard "sf". While most 'advanced and
> professional' bakers (read: Commercial) do indeed use weight, it's not
> because it's somehow better or more accurate. The only reason to use
> weight is for the ease in making variable quantities (17 loaves today, 53
> tomorrow, etc.). And for that, it's hard to beat. The rest is just
> posturing for show. If you're making a single loaf or two, there's nothing
> inherently wrong with using quantities like the rest of us do...(:-o)!
Thanks for the words of encouragement Dusty. I don't bake for money
<Bake...@InnerLodge.com> wrote:
> Don't let 'em ride you too hard "sf". While most 'advanced and
> professional' bakers (read: Commercial) do indeed use weight, it's not
> because it's somehow better or more accurate. The only reason to use
> weight is for the ease in making variable quantities (17 loaves today, 53
> tomorrow, etc.). And for that, it's hard to beat. The rest is just
> posturing for show. If you're making a single loaf or two, there's nothing
> inherently wrong with using quantities like the rest of us do...(:-o)!
and never have, plus math/science were subjects I didn't volunteer for
in school and have actively avoided as an adult.
>
> The most important part is that you enjoy what you're doing, and that
> you're making good bread. If you do that, grams or cups isn't going to
> make a wit of difference to you or those that eat it.
I understand what you're saying because I'm a "fly by the seat of your
> The most important part is that you enjoy what you're doing, and that
> you're making good bread. If you do that, grams or cups isn't going to
> make a wit of difference to you or those that eat it.
pants" type bread baker... but I'm trying earnestly to "get it". I
will never be the "measure everything and know the exact proportions"
type but I'm good at estimating (when I'm in practice), so I'll be
able to do it eventually. What I need to do is start with a measured
amount of flour/water and work backwards from there so I can develop
an eye for it.
cshenk
Jul 9, 2012, 4:26:48 PM7/9/12
to
sf wrote in alt.bread.recipes:
Hi SF! Fancy meeting you here!
Dusty is right. There's lots of ways to do it. Because of back
issues, I use a breadmachine. That works for me. I don't turn out
'works of art' but i do turn out bread that is much better than the
store stuff.
One thing we found out and we checked here a few years ago and it was
pretty close across coutries, price savings is normally 2/3 or a bit
more per loaf if you make you own. It doesn't even matter what type
such as fancy additives of special flours. If you catch a good sale on
flour or a good bulk price, it can be as little as 20cents on the
dollar to make you own.
--
Dusty is right. There's lots of ways to do it. Because of back
issues, I use a breadmachine. That works for me. I don't turn out
'works of art' but i do turn out bread that is much better than the
store stuff.
One thing we found out and we checked here a few years ago and it was
pretty close across coutries, price savings is normally 2/3 or a bit
more per loaf if you make you own. It doesn't even matter what type
such as fancy additives of special flours. If you catch a good sale on
flour or a good bulk price, it can be as little as 20cents on the
dollar to make you own.
--
KingOfGlop
Jul 12, 2012, 9:07:20 AM7/12/12
to
When I post recipes I use weight measurements because they give my readers the best chance of success.
Accuracy is nowhere near as important as consistency and repeatability.
The most severe test of a baker's skill is to produce 2 batches of any bread with generically close but not identical sets of ingredients and make the two batches indistinguishable.
A scale that, for example, shows 500 gm, when the actual weight on the pan is 510 gm is fine as long as it ALWAYS makes the same error.
And I'm sorry, American frontiers persons but cups are pants.
Love
John
Accuracy is nowhere near as important as consistency and repeatability.
The most severe test of a baker's skill is to produce 2 batches of any bread with generically close but not identical sets of ingredients and make the two batches indistinguishable.
A scale that, for example, shows 500 gm, when the actual weight on the pan is 510 gm is fine as long as it ALWAYS makes the same error.
And I'm sorry, American frontiers persons but cups are pants.
Love
John
Ophelia
Jul 16, 2012, 3:07:43 PM7/16/12
to
"Barry Harmon" <john...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0855CE44DBC3jo...@209.197.15.254...
>
> No, "the only reason to use weight" instead of volume for flour, etc.,
> is not ease of making different quantities of bread. The real reason
> for it is that it is the only way to measure flour accurately. A "cup
> of flour" can weigh anywhere from 4 ounces to 7 ounces, depending on how
> it is filled. If you are going to work your recipes in terms of
> hydration, which is an excellent way to think about dough wetness, then
> volume measure is worthless.
>
> "Oh, Let me see, I need 6 cups of flour and 4 cups of water. That must
> be 66% hydration, since 4 divided by 6 is .66."
>
> Weight measure is especially useful when trying to solve problems, since
> it assures that all the respondents are speaking the same language.
>
> People starting out in bread baking seem to have an easier time making
> good bread when they use weight, since by doing so they remove a
> potential source of variation, and hence problems.
>
> Finally, it is a good way to assure that today's French baguette will be
> pretty much the same as the one made three days ago. This is a goal in
> professional baking, but it is also a goal for the home baker.
I totally agree!
> No, "the only reason to use weight" instead of volume for flour, etc.,
> is not ease of making different quantities of bread. The real reason
> for it is that it is the only way to measure flour accurately. A "cup
> of flour" can weigh anywhere from 4 ounces to 7 ounces, depending on how
> it is filled. If you are going to work your recipes in terms of
> hydration, which is an excellent way to think about dough wetness, then
> volume measure is worthless.
>
> "Oh, Let me see, I need 6 cups of flour and 4 cups of water. That must
> be 66% hydration, since 4 divided by 6 is .66."
>
> Weight measure is especially useful when trying to solve problems, since
> it assures that all the respondents are speaking the same language.
>
> People starting out in bread baking seem to have an easier time making
> good bread when they use weight, since by doing so they remove a
> potential source of variation, and hence problems.
>
> Finally, it is a good way to assure that today's French baguette will be
> pretty much the same as the one made three days ago. This is a goal in
> professional baking, but it is also a goal for the home baker.
--
--
http://www.shop.helpforheroes.org.uk/
sf
Jul 25, 2012, 1:39:49 AM7/25/12
to
On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 15:26:48 -0500, "cshenk" <csh...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> Hi SF! Fancy meeting you here!
>
> Dusty is right. There's lots of ways to do it. Because of back
> issues, I use a breadmachine. That works for me. I don't turn out
> 'works of art' but i do turn out bread that is much better than the
> store stuff.
>
> One thing we found out and we checked here a few years ago and it was
> pretty close across coutries, price savings is normally 2/3 or a bit
> more per loaf if you make you own. It doesn't even matter what type
> such as fancy additives of special flours. If you catch a good sale on
> flour or a good bulk price, it can be as little as 20cents on the
> dollar to make you own.
>
Hi Carol! The problem with making my own bread is hubby (who is
>
> Hi SF! Fancy meeting you here!
>
> Dusty is right. There's lots of ways to do it. Because of back
> issues, I use a breadmachine. That works for me. I don't turn out
> 'works of art' but i do turn out bread that is much better than the
> store stuff.
>
> One thing we found out and we checked here a few years ago and it was
> pretty close across coutries, price savings is normally 2/3 or a bit
> more per loaf if you make you own. It doesn't even matter what type
> such as fancy additives of special flours. If you catch a good sale on
> flour or a good bulk price, it can be as little as 20cents on the
> dollar to make you own.
>
officially beyond pre-diabetic now but not taking medication and low
carbing to control his issues) will eat an entire loaf of home made
bread in 24 hours... so I can't do it very often.
I made the Oatmeal bread recipe on the King Arthur bag of bread flour
today. I didn't have any KA flour left, but I had organic flour
(which was most likely an even higher quality based on where I bought
it) that I'd bought in bulk to use.
I have a question about "doneness". I took it out of the oven at 196+
according to my digital thermometer, but I don't think it was quite
"done". According to a comment in a thread I read, maybe I should
have let it cook longer... but I am unfamiliar with the term "lean"
and have no idea where the recipe I used falls on the scale.
Recipe:
http://www.kingarthurflour.com/recipes/oatmeal-toasting-and-sandwich-bread-recipe
Thread:
http://www.thefreshloaf.com/node/25262/internal-temps-bread-not-exactly-advanced
Finished Product:
http://oi46.tinypic.com/2ccw2mu.jpg
I was distracted with pizza making when I took it out of the oven, so
the bread stayed in the pan way too long and the sides/bottom were
soggy from bathing in steam; but that doesn't explain why the bottom
of the loaf looks the way it does. Did I not let it rise long enough
before I put it in the oven to cook? Any ideas?
--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.
sf
Jul 25, 2012, 1:49:59 AM7/25/12
to
On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 06:07:20 -0700 (PDT), KingOfGlop <wcs...@aol.com>
wrote:
> And I'm sorry, American frontiers persons but cups are pants.
>
> Love
>
> John
We love you too, John but I've watched far too many Food Shows that
supposedly use weights or whatever you call your system... that don't
follow the dictates. Everything is just as estimated; as are our
American measurements. I can understand that using weight is crucial
with commercial baking because of the shear volume, but it just
doesn't seem to matter in home quantities. Not saying I don't have a
scale or that I don't use the one I have (I have it so I can make
European recipes)... just saying there isn't a huge difference when
working with small quantities - aka: home baking.
wrote:
> And I'm sorry, American frontiers persons but cups are pants.
>
> Love
>
> John
supposedly use weights or whatever you call your system... that don't
follow the dictates. Everything is just as estimated; as are our
American measurements. I can understand that using weight is crucial
with commercial baking because of the shear volume, but it just
doesn't seem to matter in home quantities. Not saying I don't have a
scale or that I don't use the one I have (I have it so I can make
European recipes)... just saying there isn't a huge difference when
working with small quantities - aka: home baking.
graham
Jul 25, 2012, 9:34:42 AM7/25/12
to
"sf" <s...@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:ul1v08h05mt90rtjr...@4ax.com...
the mistake of using metric cups instead of US cups once with disastrous
results. You will never be able to reproduce a cake, pastry or bread recipe
exactly if you use cups. Accuracy is just as important with domestic-sized
recipes as it is with commercial versions.
Graham
Janet Bostwick
Jul 25, 2012, 9:39:10 AM7/25/12
to
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 22:39:49 -0700, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
snip
You should shoot for 200 -205. If it is browning too much on top, put
foil over it. Lean means flour, water, salt and yeast or sourdough
starter -- no milk, no butter or oil, etc. Bread with milk or fat is
called an enriched bread.
Janet
snip
>
>I have a question about "doneness". I took it out of the oven at 196+
>according to my digital thermometer, but I don't think it was quite
>"done". According to a comment in a thread I read, maybe I should
>have let it cook longer... but I am unfamiliar with the term "lean"
>and have no idea where the recipe I used falls on the scale.
snip
>I have a question about "doneness". I took it out of the oven at 196+
>according to my digital thermometer, but I don't think it was quite
>"done". According to a comment in a thread I read, maybe I should
>have let it cook longer... but I am unfamiliar with the term "lean"
>and have no idea where the recipe I used falls on the scale.
You should shoot for 200 -205. If it is browning too much on top, put
foil over it. Lean means flour, water, salt and yeast or sourdough
starter -- no milk, no butter or oil, etc. Bread with milk or fat is
called an enriched bread.
Janet
sf
Jul 25, 2012, 5:11:53 PM7/25/12
to
have solved the problem at the bottom or was that due to another
issue? It was resting on tiles that had been heated to 450-500, so I
don't think lack of bottom heat was the problem. TIA
Janet Bostwick
Jul 25, 2012, 7:24:43 PM7/25/12
to
are dealing with a heavier bread dough due to the oatmeal. The
characteristics will be different than with an ordinary all white
loaf.
Others here may have a different response, but I think that leaving it
in the pan after baking contributed to the damp bottom. The bread
steams for a while after baking and that's why we put it on a rack to
cool. I don't know what caused the problem with the crumb in the
bottom of your loaf. You have gas holes at the top of your loaf, but
you should ideally see bubbles streaming upward from the bottom of the
loaf toward the top. The yeast doesn't care whether it is at the top
or the bottom of the loaf, so something happened to thwart the
expansion of gas at the bottom. You said that the pan was placed on
tiles that were heated to 450-500. How long did you preheat the oven
with tiles to get the tiles to that heat? It should have been
somewhere between 30-45 minutes to get the tiles hot all the way
through. My feeling is that the bottom of the loaf wasn't hot enough
to spur bubble growth. If the tiles were not fully heated the cold
dough and pan would cool down the tiles even more and the tiles would
direct bottom oven heat away from the loaf. Does that make sense?
Maybe someone else could give some additional thought here?
My personal approach is that I only use the baking stone when I am
making free form loaves without bread tins or pans. It's one or the
other with me.
Janet
0 new messages