Hyper-chocolatey brownie recipe
Alex Rast
chocolatey brownie you can make while still retaining proper texture and form.
This is really a decadent brownie - I very much doubt the average person can
escape feeling like a total sinner with any more consumption than a 1" * 2"
piece (nonetheless, I cut them in 3" * 3" squares - a good brownie should be a
good size, as well). Anyway, you won't believe how intense the chocolate
impact is from these, or how moist they still are. The texture I believe
perfectly splits the divide between cakey, chewy, and fudgy. One thing is
imperative. Use a high-quality brand of chocolate. DO NOT use Baker's
brand under even the most desperation of circumstances!!!! I can't
stress this enough. Baker's is WORTHLESS - easily the worst chocolate in
the world, indeed, I think that it's virtually insulting that they have
the temerity to label the junk that they sell "chocolate". Ghirardelli
is the minimum I'd recommend. Here's the recipe:
Brownies
14 oz. (1 3/4 cup) dark brown sugar
12 oz. unsweetened chocolate
9 oz. (1 1/8 cup) white bread flour
5 oz. (10 tbsp) unsalted butter
3 large eggs
1 vanilla bean
1/2 tsp salt
Preheat oven to 350 F. Thoroughly grease a 9" * 9" square pan and set in
the refrigerator. Break the chocolate into small pieces, melt carefully
in a double boiler, remove from heat, and set aside to cool. Slit the
vanilla bean lengthwise with a knife and scrape the insides in a large bowl
along with the sugar and the salt. Mix well, breaking up lumps in the sugar.
Cut the butter into small squares. Mix it in to the sugar (a wooden spoon
works great for this) until thoroughly blended, minimizing air addition (i.e.
do not cream). Stir in the chocolate and mix until fully blended. Add the
eggs, one by one, stirring each until it is fully incorporated before adding
the next. Blend in the flour slowly - this will take some effort: the mix
should have the consistency of firm cookie dough. Spread the mixture into the
pan and smooth with a knife. Bake at 350 F for 30 minutes. Cool completely and
cut into squares as large as you want when you are ready to serve.
Alex Rast
ar...@qwest.net
ar...@inficom.com
Chris Nelson
> ... DO NOT use Baker's
> brand under even the most desperation of circumstances!!!! I can't
> stress this enough. Baker's is WORTHLESS - easily the worst chocolate in
> the world, indeed, I think that it's virtually insulting that they have
> the temerity to label the junk that they sell "chocolate". Ghirardelli
Interesting. I've found Ghirardelli's chocolate candies to be so AWFUL
that I would never consider trying their baking chocolate.
Chris
--
As MIT is not "Massachusetts" neither is RPI "Rensselaer"
Rob Cartaino
"Chris Nelson" <ch...@pinebush.com> wrote in message
news:3A2428BA...@pinebush.com...
> Alex Rast wrote:
> > ... DO NOT use Baker's
> > brand under even the most desperation of circumstances!!!! I can't
> > stress this enough. Baker's is WORTHLESS - easily the worst chocolate in
> > the world, indeed, I think that it's virtually insulting that they have
> > the temerity to label the junk that they sell "chocolate". Ghirardelli
> > is the minimum I'd recommend. ...
>
> Interesting. I've found Ghirardelli's chocolate candies to be so AWFUL
> that I would never consider trying their baking chocolate.
It is my opinion that Ghiraldelli's chocolate is the best non-specialty
(i.e. can be found in a grocery store) chocolate readily available. It's
certainly better than trying to make something with Nestles, Hershey,
Bakers, or something like that. Of course, there are far superior chocolates
(and more expensive) available on-line or in gourmet shops.
Rob Cartaino
True Media, Inc.
Blanche Nonken
> It is my opinion that Ghiraldelli's chocolate is the best non-specialty
> (i.e. can be found in a grocery store) chocolate readily available. It's
> certainly better than trying to make something with Nestles, Hershey,
> Bakers, or something like that. Of course, there are far superior chocolates
> (and more expensive) available on-line or in gourmet shops.
I prefer Guittard, which is available in chip-format, 10 pound bags, at
Sam's Club. I do think they're tastier than Ghirardelli, and don't have
the butter oil which everyone seems to be putting in their retail
chocolate these days.
And, interestingly - someone mentioned earlier in this ng that chips
can't be tempered because of the lecithin. I have tempered Guittard on
a few occasions, quite successfully.
Rob Cartaino
prefer); not the Ghiraldelli. My apologies. And, yes, I get the 10lb. bag
from Sam's (lasts about a month for me <grin>).
"Blanche Nonken" <mombl...@bigfoot.com> wrote :
Alex Rast
comments follow.
In article <t28ebdh...@corp.supernews.com>, "Rob Cartaino"
<ro...@metrolink.net> wrote:
>"Chris Nelson" <ch...@pinebush.com> wrote in message
>news:3A2428BA...@pinebush.com...
>> Alex Rast wrote:
>> > ... DO NOT use Baker's
>> > brand under even the most desperation of circumstances!!!! I can't
>> > stress this enough. Baker's is WORTHLESS. <deletia> Ghirardelli
>> > is the minimum I'd recommend. ...
>>
>> Interesting. I've found Ghirardelli's chocolate candies to be so AWFUL
>> that I would never consider trying their baking chocolate.
Unfortunately, that goes to show one truth about the chocolate industry that
would be far from self-evident if you didn't know. Namely, that it's very
difficult to judge the quality of the basic bulk *chocolate* a particular
company makes by the *chocolate confections* they, or others, make from it.
There are too many variables involved in chocolate candy to be able to judge
that based on candies. Anyway, yes, Ghirardelli-brand *candies* aren't
especially good. But their bulk chocolate is really quite good and a far cry
from the bottom of the barrel - Hershey's and Baker's.
>It is my opinion that Ghiraldelli's chocolate is the best non-specialty
>(i.e. can be found in a grocery store) chocolate readily available
I would concur whith this, at least in terms of the USA. The milk chocolate is
in fact world-class, and I can find but one milk chocolate anywhere better
than Ghirardelli's - Michel Cluizel Chocolat Grand Lait Cacao Pur Ile de Java
50%. The ones that do not top Ghirardelli for milk chocolate include such
prestige brands as Valrhona, Teuscher, and El Rey.
>Of course, there are far superior chocolates
>(and more expensive) available on-line or in gourmet shops.
Yes there are. There are also far more expensive, and far inferior, chocolates
available at the same stores. Furthermore, there are far cheaper and far
superior chocolates available as well through a variety of sources. The point
is that neither brand name nor price is an infalliably reliable guide to
quality. I give Valhrona and Michel Cluizel particularly high marks for
consistently good quality across the entire range of their chocolate, a real
rarity.
In article <3a2a459a...@news4.bellatlantic.net>, mombl...@bigfoot.com
(Blanche Nonken) wrote:
>I prefer Guittard, which is available in chip-format, 10 pound bags, at
>Sam's Club.
Guittard makes the best chocolate, bar none, for general eating in the world -
their bittersweet bulk couverture chocolate. This is heavenly stuff that even
Michel Cluizel can't touch. In every way Guittard's bittersweet conveys the
essence of chocolatiness. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for their
chocolate throughout the line. But do find and buy the bittersweet.
However, when it comes to chocolate *chips* (NOT recommended for the brownie
recipe, btw), Ghirardelli really does make the best, the black-bag "Double
Chocolate" chocolate chips. It's important to get the black bag ones. The
"regular" Ghirardelli chips, in the copper/gold bag, aren't as good and indeed
Guittard's chips are better than those, but not nearly as good as the
black-bag Ghirardelli.
>I do think they're tastier than Ghirardelli, and don't have
>the butter oil which everyone seems to be putting in their retail
>chocolate these days.
At least butter oil is better than partially hydrogenated vegetable fat.
However, I must concur that I think chocolate with butter oil isn't really
dark chocolate any more - it's sort of a mongrel hybrid between dark and milk
chocolate. The result is invariably the same - a chocolate with very smooth
texture, but weak flavor. It's a sad fact that study after study seems to show
that most people value texture over flavor in food, and this isn't just in
chocolate, it's in everything.
From my own very limited experience, it seems as though most people would
ideally have all their food have the texture of butter. I say, if that's
really what you want, why settle for substitutes? Eat butter itself, if that's
what you're looking for.
>And, interestingly - someone mentioned earlier in this ng that chips
>can't be tempered because of the lecithin. I have tempered Guittard on
>a few occasions, quite successfully.
Some chips don't temper well, not because of lecithin, but rather because they
have a low cocoa butter content. This is deliberate and appropriate for
chocolate chips in their intended application, namely as chips to put in
cookies. Guittard doesn't reduce the cocoa butter content appreciably, which
is one reason I don't consider them the ideal chocolate chip - the chips
flatten too much in baking. Meanwhile, I don't use chocolate chips as a
substitute for bulk chocolate - it's the wrong vehicle for the application. If
you need bulk couverture chocolate, that's what you should buy. Especially
when Guittard's bulk couverture bittersweet is the best chocolate in the
world.
Bringing all of this back to brownies, I mentioned that Ghirardelli
unsweetened was my recommended *minimum* level of quality. If you're
interested in doing better still, I recommend trying the following, listed in
ascending quality order. (Note that only a handful of top chocolate
manufacturers even produce unsweetened)
Guittard (they come in pastilles. A bit awkward to use)
Callebaut (really good. The best value in unsweetened chocolate. But hard to
find)
Michel Cluizel (the BEST. This is unbelievably good unsweetened chocolate. But
the price is so extreme that it's difficult to justify.)
Alex Rast
ar...@qwest.net
ar...@inficom.com
rhgans
<snipped for brevity>
>
> Guittard (they come in pastilles. A bit awkward to use)
> Callebaut (really good. The best value in unsweetened chocolate. But hard to
> find)
> Michel Cluizel (the BEST. This is unbelievably good unsweetened chocolate. But
> the price is so extreme that it's difficult to justify.)
>
> Alex Rast
> ar...@qwest.net
> ar...@inficom.com
After all of this, I must ask the question. If lack of cocoa butter is a major
fault in chocolates, is it not possible to add additional cocoa butter during
the tempering process to get an ideal chocolate? Since I have no experience in
this area, inquiring minds want to know.
Rich Gans
--
Remove the pickle from my address to reply
Alex Rast
>Alex Rast wrote:
><snipped for brevity>
>>
>> Callebaut (really good. The best value in unsweetened chocolate. But hard to
>> find)
>> Michel Cluizel (the BEST. This is unbelievably good unsweetened chocolate.
>
>After all of this, I must ask the question. If lack of cocoa butter is a major
>fault in chocolates, is it not possible to add additional cocoa butter during
>the tempering process to get an ideal chocolate? Since I have no experience in
>this area, inquiring minds want to know.
Yes, and in fact professional confectioners do this routinely in order to
achieve the consistency they want. Now, none of the above chocolates have a
difficulty with that from a standpoint of tempering, but there are chocolates
that do.
Unfortunately, however, pure cocoa butter is very hard to find for the
ordinary home cook. Virtually all of it is sold through distribution to
professional/industrial customers. The reasons for this are probably that so
few non-professionals understand that differences in cocoa butter content can
affect the final product, of those still fewer are really that interested in
investing the extra effort to experiment with using cocoa butter at home, and
of those only a tiny fraction knows enough about the behavior and
characteristics of cocoa butter to produce a level of good results sufficient
to avoid being deterred to future efforts. Therefore, the demand is minuscule,
and with the price of cocoa butter being steep, it would become expensive
inventory gathering dust on supermarket shelves. You can find cocoa butter in
jars in the cosmetics section, usually, but I wouldn't feel safe using this as
it is not certified food-grade, and furthermore, is probably "shell butter" -
the lowest grade stuff.
If you're really interested, try
http://www.low-carb.com/low-carb/100purcocbut.html
http://sugarcraft.com/catalog/candies/candyfillings.htm
http://www.lorannoils.com/
I mentioned that I don't recommend chocolate chips as a substitute for bulk
couverture. Hypothetically, you could overcome the problem (generally, less
cocoa butter) through addition of more cocoa butter, but I still wouldn't
recommend doing so. After all, why buy a chocolate format purpose-formulated
for a specific application, then modifying it until it meets your intended
use, when there are already chocolates purpose-formulated for the application
you seek? Generally speaking your result stll won't be as good and you will
have spent more effort to get that worse result.
It seems an awful lot of people want to use chocolate chips instead of bulk
chocolate in their recipes. Is there a reason for this? I'd like to hear from
the chocolate-chip using people out there (that is, people who use chocolate
chips for things other than cookies) to find out why they want to use chips.
Alex Rast
ar...@qwest.net
ar...@inficom.com
Blanche Nonken
> It seems an awful lot of people want to use chocolate chips instead of bulk
> chocolate in their recipes. Is there a reason for this? I'd like to hear from
> the chocolate-chip using people out there (that is, people who use chocolate
> chips for things other than cookies) to find out why they want to use chips.
Ease of use, speed of melting. When you've got a kitchen counter to
work at with formica that can't handle the pounding of hacking good
couveture (or however it's spelled) like the steel and/or wooden tops
where I work, you do the best you can.
Storage is also a consideration. Chocolate chips can be poured into any
size or shape container for which there's room.
Versatility. Cakes, cookies, or just sprinkling on top of something hot
you took out of the oven. Sprinkle on, let it melt from the heat,
spread it around.
The biggest drawback I've experienced with using Guittard chips involve
the huge amount of surface area to mass. Aromatic compounds evaporate a
lot faster than if it was in a great block. The last pound is less
chocolatey than the first. Keeping it cool, dark, and packaged tightly
helps, but you lose something everytime you open the package.
Rob Cartaino
price, and (less so) the convenience. Sure, if I am preparing an elegant,
hi-quality dessert for people I am inviting or to my house, I can go out and
buy the proper chocolate from the gourmet shot or order it on-line. But if I
am making brownies for a pile of kids, the extra expense and effort does not
pay off (i.e. they'll never appreciate the difference).
"Alex Rast" <ar...@inficom.com> wrote:
> It seems an awful lot of people want to use chocolate chips instead of
bulk
> chocolate in their recipes. Is there a reason for this? I'd like to hear
from
> the chocolate-chip using people out there (that is, people who use
chocolate
> chips for things other than cookies) to find out why they want to use
chips.
>
> Alex Rast
> ar...@qwest.net
> ar...@inficom.com
Paige Oliver
> It seems an awful lot of people want to use chocolate chips instead of bulk
> chocolate in their recipes. Is there a reason for this? I'd like to hear from
> the chocolate-chip using people out there (that is, people who use chocolate
> chips for things other than cookies) to find out why they want to use chips.
>
> Alex Rast
> ar...@qwest.net
> ar...@inficom.com
Total availability. My local grocery doesn't sell bulk chocolate, so I have to make a
special trip to get it. I have bought chocolate bars in lieu of chips for baking,(can't
think of the brand right now) but often these bars are filled with hazelnut or raspberry
goo...not what I need in a baking chocolate. So I either travel or make do.
--
邢 唷��
Bert Malkus
a serious dialog I offer my two cents. As a hobbyist I have developed the following
preferences (One word of caution, I tend not to favor sweetness in either truffles or
mousse and as a consequence do not normally use semisweet chocolate):
Bittersweet chocolate: For truffle centers and baking Guittard bittersweet works best.
I enjoy both its rich flavor and ease with which I can incorporate cream, butter and
various nuts and flavorings. It make the best chocolate bark. I have found Guittard
bittersweet difficult to work with as a coating chocolate. In my hands it is too
viscous and could use thinning with cocoa butter, that is the final coating is too
thick. Fortunately Guittard also produces an Etienne line of pastilles and the dark
variety while labeled semisweet has a wonderful intense chocolate flavor. The Etienne
semisweet is my choice of couverture for enrobing truffles, forming thin coats with
superb mouth feel. For eating and special bittersweet truffles I prefer El Rey Gran
Saman. I particularly enjoy the aromatic intensity. This chocolate is perhaps too
strongly flavored for every day eating but as an occasional treat it's my favorite.
Milk chocolate. Again my favorite eating brand is El Rey Coaba. That intense flavor
lingers longer on the palette than any other milk chocolate. I will have to try Michel
Cuizel milk chocolate. I use Vahlrona Jivara for enrobing also for its low viscosity,
i.e.. thin coats and luscious mouth feel. I use Guittard Dutch Milk Chocolate for
centers by default. While too sweet for my tastes, I haven't found an economical
substitute.
White chocolate. My favorite eating is El Rey Icoa. I use Guittard High Sierra for
truffle centers and Guittard Etienne "Cocoa Butter" for enrobing. I am most pleased
with the final product.
One comment on unsweetened chocolate. I am so unsatisfied by store brand unsweetened
chocolate that I don't use it. For every three ounce of unsweetened chocolate in a
recipe I delete one tablespoon of sugar and use four ounces of Guittard Bittersweet
chocolate.
stinky_civet
best chocolate recipes I have had the pleasure to make and taste. It
lives up to all your descriptions.
I used Ghirardelli, as it is the highest quality unsweetened chocolate
I can get without ordering it online. I plan to order some of the
chocolates you have recommended in past posts and give these a try this
Christmas along with some truffles. Truffles are one of my holiday
staples and I keep improving them with recommendations from folks like
you who truly know their chocolate.
Thank you for the recipe and for all of your extremely helpful and
informative posts.
Nicole
In article <RoKU5.3579$Mn5.7...@news.uswest.net>,
ar...@inficom.com (Alex Rast) wrote:
> After some experimentation, I have arrived at what I think is the
most
> chocolatey brownie you can make while still retaining proper texture
and form.
> This is really a decadent brownie - I very much doubt the average
person can
> escape feeling like a total sinner with any more consumption than a
1" * 2"
> piece (nonetheless, I cut them in 3" * 3" squares - a good brownie
should be a
> good size, as well). Anyway, you won't believe how intense the
chocolate
> impact is from these, or how moist they still are. The texture I
believe
> perfectly splits the divide between cakey, chewy, and fudgy. One
thing is
> imperative. Use a high-quality brand of chocolate. DO NOT use Baker's
> brand under even the most desperation of circumstances!!!! I can't
> stress this enough. Baker's is WORTHLESS - easily the worst chocolate
in
> the world, indeed, I think that it's virtually insulting that they
have
> the temerity to label the junk that they sell "chocolate".
Ghirardelli
> is the minimum I'd recommend. Here's the recipe:
> <snip>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Alex Rast
and suggestions. I feel I have really learned something about the landscape
and preferences of chocolate lovers from all of this. I can't resist a few
comments on some of the posts - I'm collecting them all here to avoid
overloading the postings. I'm snipping large amounts of original text, as
customary, and noting so with ellipsis (...)
In article <3A26D1BF...@yale.edu>, Bert Malkus <herbert...@yale.edu>
wrote:
>.... As a hobbyist I have developed the
> following
>preferences...
>
>Bittersweet chocolate: For truffle centers and baking Guittard bittersweet
> works best.
Right on. I agree 100%. I also think it's the best for straight eating.
> I have found Guittard bittersweet difficult to work with as a coating
> chocolate...
It loses temper fast, so you have to work quickly. The best way is to temper
large quantities if using for coating. Then about halfway through, quit and
use the rest for baking or some other application where you're going to remelt
it anyway.
> Fortunately Guittard also produces an Etienne line.... The
> Etienne semisweet is my choice of couverture for enrobing truffles...
Michel Cluizel's 72% is somewhat more fluid, and a little less acid than the
Etienne. Do give it a try if you get the chance for enrobing.
> For eating and special bittersweet truffles I prefer El Rey
> Gran Saman... perhaps too strongly flavored for every day eating...
*Tell* me about it. I reckon this is the most intense 70% bittersweet out
there. But I think the low cocoa butter makes it a poor choice for straight
eating (too rough). Where it comes into its own is in chilled desserts (ice
cream especially, where the lower fat prevents the dessert from becoming
greasy and meanwhile the strength of flavor offsets the fact that chocolate
impact tends to diminish with lower (especially subfreezing) temperatures.
>Milk chocolate. Again my favorite eating brand is El Rey Coaba. ...
>I use Vahlrona Jivara for enrobing also .... I use Guittard Dutch Milk
>Chocolate for centers by default.... I haven't found an economical
>substitute.
I think Caoba needs refinement. It's too rough around the edges in flavor and
texture. Jivara is excellent, if horrifically expensive. Guittard is pretty
run-of-the-mill. But none of these 3 are as good in any case as Ghirardelli
milk chocolate, which has by far the strongest chocolate impact of all,
barring only Michel Cluizel's 50% milk chocolate. So use Ghirardelli as your
"economical substitute", and you're actually going to improve things over all
milk chocolates but MC 50%.
>White chocolate. My favorite eating is El Rey Icoa....
This is the BEST. Use Icoa for all white chocolate creations. Accept no
substitutes.
>One comment on unsweetened chocolate. I am so unsatisfied by store brand
> unsweetened chocolate that I don't use it.
This sounds as though you've only seen Baker's in the store. It is not the
only brand of unsweetened available. See my previous post for recommendations.
All of the brands I recommend will give you good results.
(Blanche Nonken) wrote:
>ar...@inficom.com (Alex Rast) wrote:
>>It seems an awful lot of people want to use chocolate chips instead of
>>bulk chocolate in their recipes. Is there a reason for this?...
>Ease of use, speed of melting....
>Storage...
>Versatility. Cakes, cookies, or just sprinkling on top of something hot
>you took out of the oven. Sprinkle on, let it melt from the heat,
>spread it around.
On the ease-of-use issue, a better bet is to get one of the quality "eating"
bars that there is always some store in your area carrying. Generally these
are thin enough to snap with your hands quickly into fast-melting chunks.
Valrhona, El Rey, Michel Cluizel, and Ghirardelli all make bars like this.
Usually these have cocoa butter content close to couverture.
Storage: there are 2 answers. Guittard and Michel Cluizel make pastille-form
couverture, which has the right kind of conformation for fitting any jar, but
is true couverture for enrobing or baking. You wouldn't want to use it for
chips, though. The better answer, though, is straight out of Boynton's
*Chocolate, the Consuming Passion* - "The most conscientious individuals will
see to it that storage is not a problem." In other words, you will use all the
chocolate up before you need to consider storage concerns. I recommend this
anyway because even dark chocolate decays over time and is better when fresh.
Versatility: Yes, chips are a great "condiment". They're just not a good
*base* chocolate to use as the foundation of your chocolate confections.
> "Rob Cartaino" <ro...@metrolink.net> wrote:
>.... But if I
>am making brownies for a pile of kids, the extra expense and effort does not
>pay off (i.e. they'll never appreciate the difference).
I *VERY MUCH* doubt they won't appreciate the difference, based on personal
experience. Actually, kids are usually the people from whom you can hide the
least. I brought a pile of Easter eggs made from Guittard Bittersweet up to my
sister's house for Easter, along with a bunch of my own chocolate confections.
You should have seen *all* the kids in the neighborhood go WILD. They were
dancing around the room. They ate all the stuff I brought, to the exclusive
preference of all the other available chocolate. All of them made comments
like "I just LOVE your chocolate." Now, I am the "chocolate man" in that
neighborhood - kind of like the ice cream man. Whenever I go up there, the
kids always rush to my car, and the first question when I arrive is "Where's
the chocolate." Kids DO notice the difference. Really the only distinction is
that they will *accept* lesser chocolate, not that they can't tell good from
bad.
<stinky...@my-deja.com> wrote:
..
> I plan to order some of the
>chocolates you have recommended in past posts and give these a try this
>Christmas along with some truffles. Truffles are one of my holiday
>staples and I keep improving them with recommendations from folks like
>you who truly know their chocolate.
You will be very happy with your results with truffles using Guittard
Bittersweet. I have a long post on making truffles - you can probably look up
on DejaNews with little difficulty. Or I can repost if lots of people here
want it.
Blanche Nonken
> The better answer, though, is straight out of Boynton's
> *Chocolate, the Consuming Passion* - "The most conscientious individuals will
> see to it that storage is not a problem." In other words, you will use all the
> chocolate up before you need to consider storage concerns.
Um.
I'll pass this on to the spouse. And the kids. They'll help to see
that we have *no* problems with storage. The "Click-Clack" containers,
if stored in a cool, dark place, are a good choice.
The end of this month is the annual fundraiser for BiUnity's Death Bi
Chocolate Bake Sale and Open Mic Cafe. I'm the chocolate coordinator.
I guess this means I'll just have to buy a *fresh* bag and use it up.
Darn. Gosh. Whatever will I do with 10 pounds of chocolate?
And as far as the pastilles go, I'll talk to my boss about ordering some
through work. It sounds like a good compromise. Thanks!
Blanche Nonken
> Kids DO notice the difference. Really the only distinction is
> that they will *accept* lesser chocolate, not that they can't tell good from
> bad.
A follow-up:
They do. If I could do this without knowing they'd just end up in the
trash as "unsafe" candies, I'd make my own chocolate coated pretzels and
give *those* out at Halloween.
I suppose I could bag 'em with my address and phone number on 'em so
that parents will be able to ask about how I made 'em. Or, they could
sue me for making their kids sick. <sigh> I hate paranoia, and the
conditions which led to it.
And I'm really, really strange - I *like* Hershey's milk chocolate.
Chocolate bars. Kisses. The slightly cheddary taste, the texture - I
*love* this. Yum.
stinky_civet
Christmas truffles and would love to see your suggestions.
Thanks,
Nicole
In article <coKV5.3576$nj7.7...@news.uswest.net>,
ar...@qwest.net (Alex Rast) wrote:
> ...You will be very happy with your results with truffles using
Guittard
> Bittersweet. I have a long post on making truffles - you can probably
look up
> on DejaNews with little difficulty. Or I can repost if lots of people
here
> want it.
>
Scott
---------
to respond, change "spamless.invalid" to "optonline.net"
Alex Rast
>What is the best bittersweet chocolate for *brownies*?
As per my post don't use bittersweet chocolate for brownies. Use unsweetened.
Now, to recap, with unsweetened, if you want the very best, without regard to
price, use Michel Cluizel. If you want the best that you can reasonably make,
use Callebaut, if you can find it. If you want the best that you can make
without investing any effort in tracking down difficult-to-find chocolates,
use Ghirardelli.
Alex Rast
ar...@qwest.net
ar...@inficom.com
Ginny Sher
Ginny Sher
Jean B.
Alex,
I meant to ask your relative ranking of Scharffen Berger. I
bought some of their unsweetened chocolate but haven't yet
tried it. Dare I say that I love their "eating" chocolate
and am still looking for the ultimate use for some of their
nibs?
Jean B.
wrl
CHOCOLATE:
The word "chocolate" comes from the Aztec xocolatl , meaning "bitter water."
Indeed, the unsweetened drink the Aztecs made of pounded cocoa beans and
spices was probably extremely bitter. Bitterness notwithstanding, the Aztec
king Montezuma so believed that chocolate was an aphrodisiac that he
purportedly drank 50 golden goblets of it each day. Chocolate comes from the
tropical cocoa bean, Theobroma ("food of the gods") cacao. After the beans
are removed from their pods they're fermented, dried, roasted and cracked,
separating the nibs (which contain an average of 54 percent cocoa butter)
from the shells. The nibs are ground to extract some of the COCOA BUTTER (a
natural vegetable fat), leaving a thick, dark brown paste called chocolate
liquor. Next, the chocolate liquor receives an initial refining. If
additional cocoa butter is extracted from the chocolate liquor, the solid
result is ground to produce unsweetened COCOA POWDER. If other ingredients
are added (such as milk powder, sugar, etc.), the chocolate is refined
again. The final step for most chocolate is conching, a process by which
huge machines with rotating blades slowly blend the heated chocolate liquor,
ridding it of residual moisture and volatile acids. The conching continues
for 12 to 72 hours (depending on the type and quality of chocolate) while
small amounts of cocoa butter and sometimes LECITHIN are added to give
chocolate its voluptuously smooth texture. Unadulterated chocolate is
marketed as unsweetened chocolate, also called baking or bitter chocolate.
U.S. standards require that unsweetened chocolate contain between 50 and 58
percent cocoa butter. The addition of sugar, lecithin and vanilla (or
vanillin) creates, depending on the amount of sugar added, bittersweet,
semisweet or sweet chocolate. Bittersweet chocolate must contain at least 35
percent chocolate liquor; semisweet and sweet can contain from 15 to 35
percent. Adding dry milk to sweetened chocolate creates milk chocolate,
which must contain at least 12 percent milk solids and 10 percent chocolate
liquor. Though bittersweet, semisweet and sweet chocolate may often be used
interchangeably in some recipes with little textural change, milk
chocolate - because of the milk protein - cannot. Liquid chocolate,
developed especially for baking, is found on the supermarket shelf alongside
other chocolates. It's unsweetened, comes in individual 1-ounce packages,
and is convenient because it requires no melting. However, because it's made
with vegetable oil rather than cocoa butter, it doesn't deliver either the
same texture or flavor as regular unsweetened chocolate. Couverture is a
term describing professional-quality coating chocolate that is extremely
glossy. It usually contains a minimum of 32 percent cocoa butter, which
enables it to form a much thinner shell than ordinary CONFECTIONERY COATING.
Couverture is usually only found in specialty candy-making shops. White
chocolate is not true chocolate because it contains no chocolate liquor and,
likewise, very little chocolate flavor. Instead, it's usually a mixture of
sugar, cocoa butter, milk solids, lecithin and vanilla. Read the label: if
cocoa butter isn't mentioned, the product is confectionery (or summer)
coating, not white chocolate. Beware of products labeled artificial
chocolate or chocolate-flavored . They are, just as the label states, not
the real thing and both flavor and texture confirm that fact. Chocolate
comes in many forms, from 1-ounce squares to 1/2-inch chunks to chips
ranging in size from 1/2 to 1/8 inch in diameter. Many chocolate chunks and
chips come in flavors including milk, semisweet, mint-flavored and white
chocolate. Chocolate should be stored, tightly wrapped, in a cool (60° to
70°F), dry place. If stored at warm temperatures, chocolate will develop a
pale gray "bloom" (surface streaks and blotches), caused when the cocoa
butter rises to the surface. In damp conditions, chocolate can form tiny
gray sugar crystals on the surface. In either case, the chocolate can still
be used, with flavor and texture affected only slightly. Under ideal
conditions, dark chocolate can be stored 10 years. However, because of the
milk solids in both milk chocolate and white chocolate, they shouldn't be
stored for longer than 9 months. Because all chocolate scorches easily -
which completely ruins the flavor - it should be melted slowly over low
heat. One method is to place the chocolate in the top of a double boiler
over simmering water. Remove the top of the pan from the heat when the
chocolate is a little more than halfway melted and stir until completely
smooth. Another method is to place the chocolate in a microwave-safe bowl
and, in a 650- to 700-watt microwave oven, heat at 50 percent power. Four
ounces of chocolate will take about 3 minutes, but the timing will vary
depending on the oven and the type and amount of chocolate. Though chocolate
can be melted with liquid (at least 1/4 cup liquid per 6 ounces chocolate),
a single drop of moisture in melted chocolate will cause it to SEIZE (clump
and harden). This problem can sometimes be corrected if vegetable oil is
immediately stirred into the chocolate at a ratio of about 1 tablespoon oil
to 6 ounces chocolate. Slowly remelt the mixture and stir until once again
smooth
<mal...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:cJsX5.2651$i32....@news.uswest.net...
> On Wed, 06 Dec 2000 14:14:49 GMT, ginn...@mediaone.net (Ginny Sher)
> gave this insight:
>
> :What is the difference between bittersweet and semi sweet chocolate?
> :
> :Ginny Sher
>
> I would guess that bittersweet has less sugar.
>
> Is there a "plain" chocolate, with no sugar???? (For baking, of
> course.)
>
> Alan
jen...@my-deja.com
someone who loves chocolate, but I will need to watch I don't make
these too often as I will end the size of a house.
Alex Rast
>Alex Rast wrote:
>>
>> In article <Heimdall-B2E92E...@news-server.optonline.net>, Scott
> <Heim...@spamless.invalid> wrote:
>> >What is the best bittersweet chocolate for *brownies*?
>>
>> Now, to recap, with unsweetened, if you want the very best, without regard to
>Alex,
>
>I meant to ask your relative ranking of Scharffen Berger. I
Not very good. In general, Scharffen Berger isn't particularly high on my
scale, because they have a definite sharp bitterness to their flavor. Now, by
no means is it bad, and they're better than most other chocolates you'll find,
but not as good as Ghirardelli or Callebaut, either for brownies or for
eating. I found their chocolate gave a rather dry texture to the brownies,
which makes me suspect their unsweetened is low on cocoa butter. In addition,
the chocolate flavor was Scharffen Berger typical - that is, very "bright" and
sharp. The batch was disappointing relative to the results I got with
Ghirardelli or Callebaut. In addition, they sell it in rather inconvenient 9.7
oz sizes, too little for the brownie recipe I posted, and too big to make it
convenient to buy 2 for brownies. By that point it becomes so expensive you
might as well give in and get Michel Cluizel, which will turn your brownies
into a magical experience you won't soon forget.
>bought some of their unsweetened chocolate but haven't yet
>tried it.
..
>and am still looking for the ultimate use for some of their
>nibs?
Heat 10 tbsp honey to slightly above lukewarm in the top of a double boiler.
Stir in 10 oz nibs. Cook at extremely low heat for several (about 6 is good)
hours. Eat.
Alex Rast
ar...@qwest.net
ar...@inficom.com
Jean B.
Alex,
Thanks for your reply. You have obviously done extensive
comparisons of chocolate, and I didn't want to reinvent the
wheel. I'll try some of the chocolates you recommend and
see if I concur.
Thanks again,
Jean B.
ArtFish
Arthur
<jen...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:90qpnd$fh5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
stinky_civet
difference types of pans make and slightly different baking times,
along with different grades of chocolate. All in the name of science,
of course... :-)
In article <90qpnd$fh5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
stinky_civet
recipe.
In article <iNTZ5.103793$751.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>,
Doug Weller
> If you go back to the very first post in this thread, that is the
> recipe.
>
Doug
--
Doug Weller member of moderation panel sci.archaeology.moderated
Submissions to: sci-archaeol...@medieval.org
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.demon.co.uk
Co-owner UK-Schools mailing list: email me for details
LindaVE
I believe this is the recipe you want
@@@@@
Hyper-chocolatey brownie
Brownies
14 oz. (1 3/4 cup) dark brown sugar
12 oz. unsweetened chocolate
9 oz. (1 1/8 cup) white bread flour
5 oz. (10 tbsp) unsalted butter
3 large eggs
1 vanilla bean
1/2 tsp salt
Preheat oven to 350 F. Thoroughly grease a 9" * 9"
square pan and set in
the refrigerator. Break the chocolate into small
pieces, melt carefully
in a double boiler, remove from heat, and set
aside to cool. Slit the
vanilla bean lengthwise with a knife and scrape
the insides in a large bowl
along with the sugar and the salt. Mix well,
breaking up lumps in the sugar.
Cut the butter into small squares. Mix it in to
the sugar (a wooden spoon
works great for this) until thoroughly blended,
minimizing air addition (i.e.
do not cream). Stir in the chocolate and mix until
fully blended. Add the
eggs, one by one, stirring each until it is fully
incorporated before adding
the next. Blend in the flour slowly - this will
take some effort: the mix
should have the consistency of firm cookie dough.
Spread the mixture into the
pan and smooth with a knife. Bake at 350 F for 30
minutes. Cool completely and
cut into squares as large as you want when you are
ready to serve.
--
齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻,虜,齯滌`偕爻內
躬偕爻,虜,齯�Linda Van Ess
ArtFish <art...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:iNTZ5.103793$751.2...@typhoon.ne.mediaone.
net...
: please post the recipe
:
:
Jean B.
after considerable experimentation, and it is his prose as
well. If I were him, I'd be a bit annoyed to find that no
effort had been made to mention that this is his recipe!
Jean B.
Doug Weller
says...
> I believe this is the recipe you want
> @@@@@
> Hyper-chocolatey brownie
>
LindaVE
everyone. When I combined and decoded a file to
txt. the headers disappear and his name was
connected to the next message I had so I believed
that message belong to him. I corrected it on my
document and I thank you for pointing it out to
me.
Jean B. <jb...@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message
news:3A394C22...@ma.ultranet.com...
: >
: This is Alex Rast's recipe, which I think he
Doug Weller
says...
> Then you need to improve your search skills - entering "Hyper-chocolatey
> brownie recipe" gives Message-ID: <RoKU5.3579$Mn5.7...@news.uswest.net>, which
> then gives the following (converted to MasterCook format, plain text posted
> elsewhere):
>
Just what we need, flames. I got the thread, but not the first post. I don't
know why.
Doug Weller
says...
> Doug Weller <dwe...@ramtops.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >anon...@enteract.com
> >says...
> >> Then you need to improve your search skills - entering "Hyper-chocolatey
> >> brownie recipe" gives Message-ID: <RoKU5.3579$Mn5.7...@news.uswest.net>, which
> >> then gives the following (converted to MasterCook format, plain text posted
> >> elsewhere):
>
> >Just what we need, flames. I got the thread, but not the first post. I don't
> >know why.
>
> interested in knowing WHY so your next search is more useful?
> And you're welcome for the recipe.
>
I'm interested in knowing why my search didn't bring up the start of the thread,
since it brought up the thread. Can you explain that?
I'm glad for the recipe, although someone else had already posted it. An
explanation of my search failure rather than restating what I knew, that my
search had failed, doesn't help. I can't duplicate my problem, but I note that
the thread for my last message in this thread shows only my message on Deja.
Doug Weller
says...
> Interesting that you can't duplicate it. Same terms? Same method of
> searching? Even if you can get one message int he thread, you frequently get
> into the entire thread structure and get to the head of stream.
>
Yes. What was frustrating was that most of the thread was there!
I used hyper-chocolatey, I know that, can't remember if I used more.
And why when I clicked on one of my most recent post to find the thread there
was nothing in the thread but my post is completely beyond me. Maybe Gravity
did something stupid to the references line.
Doug Weller
says...
> Hmmm . . . I see what you mean. Your headers include the References: header,
> so I don't understand what the problem is. Wait a minute - it may because your
> references likely point to my posts, which deja doesn't know, so they can't
> thread our conversation properly. It's likely that anyone who uses the X-No
> Archive: header breaks up the thread in deja. Sorry.
>
Ah -- sounds logical, thanks for the explanation, that's something I hadn't
thought about.
Ginny Sher
>Alex Rast
>ar...@qwest.net
>ar...@inficom.com
After reading someone's recent post about your brownie recipe, I
decided I *HAVE* to try it myself. So, off to the market I went to
get a good quality unsweetened chocolate.
I found Baker's and Scharffen Berger. I passed on the Baker's per
your comments, but I just can't quite bring myself to spend $18 for
the two bars of Scharffen Berger I would need to buy to make this
recipe.
Is there some OTHER brand that would be acceptable and that would be
slightly more affordable? Also, does anyone know a website where one
can purchase chocolate at hopefully lower prices than I saw for SB
($9 for a 9 oz bar).
Ginny Sher
zxcvbob
http://www.kingarthurflour.com/cgibin/htmlos/22287.5.4782012882411108835
http://www.kingarthurflour.com/cgibin/htmlos/22287.5.6368460699611108835
http://www.kingarthurflour.com/cgibin/htmlos/22287.5.7541400049311108835
Regards,
Bob
--
"I put instant coffee into a microwave oven: I almost went back in
time."
--Steven Wright