2009.Aug.14

I feel like I found the mother load of information about enzymes, and as I was reading through the commercial report from an apparent enzyme manufacturer (PDF), I found these two paragraphs that may explain the increased stickiness (I may have gone overboard with my chosen emphasis):

Glutenin can be classed as a heterogenous mixture of proteins. It has a molecular weight of 100,000 to several million. It is a multiple chain protein with crosslinked intermolecular disulfide bonds. It has moderate adhesiveness and high elasticity….

Gliadin is considered a heterogeneous mixture of prolamines with a molecular weight of 25- 60,000. It is a single chain protein containing intramolecular disulfide bonds. It has high adhesiveness and low elasticity.

It would seem possible that the increased stickiness in my implementation of the above described autolyse process could be the result of a changed glutenin-gliadin ratio. The big problem with determining this is that I made so many changes at once, I’m not sure which change increased the stickiness. Along with the increased stickiness was more extensibility, as I understand the term versus elasticity. It could be a worthwhile step to backtrace to the prior flour mix with all purpose and high-gluten, but use the newer process, to help narrow the possibilities of whether the increased stickiness is due to the flour mixture, or to the autolyse step, or something else in the changed process.

The problem with making one change at a time in a recipe is that it takes so long to make significant progress from one set of conditions to another set, and there’s also a tendency to want to make smaller amounts of dough, one loaf or even less, which further increases the time investment. But it would also avoid the impulse to backtrack. I’m not sure if I want to do that right now, I’d prefer to keep figuring out how to exhaust the available dough sugars through longer fermentation times, and try to determine a practical method for predicting when that happens, perhaps time, temperature, and yeast quantity based.

It wasn’t long ago (first I had to learn and understand baker’s percentages, then I needed scales) that I tried a recipe for pizza dough that was considered “quick” to make (the link is the source, however what follows is a cut and paste from my spreadsheet where I laid out all the separate-page formulas column-by-column so I could quickly compare and study them, and I recall rearranging the ingredients’ order for spreadsheet organization purposes, so I didn’t need to scroll to see them all).

 

High-gluten Flour (14%)	100
Water	59
Oil	2
INSTANT Yeast (IDY)	1.5
Salt	1
Sugar	4
Non-fat Dry Milk	1

Its basic formula difference was that it had a high yeast amount and high added sugar, and a correspondingly short fermentation time. Since I didn’t have any heat-inactivated (enzyme) non-fat dry milk, indeed, any NFDM at all, that ingredient was skipped, though undoubtedly there are carbohydrates and proteins in milk. I interpreted the recipe’s written ingredient “sugar” as sucrose, there was nothing to indicate otherwise. My god, that pizza caused so much gas and indigestion I couldn’t believe it(!), and those after effects did remind me of a couple of restaurant pizzas I’d eaten over my lifetime. The next day, just to check, I made an identically topped pizza with a longer fermentation dough with a smaller yeast amount and no added “table sugar”. Result: No upset tummy.

What I figured happened was simplistic, and keep in mind this is just my guess: When the bread with topping is baked, the yeasts’ spores are not necessarily all inactivated, only the yeasts are reliably killed. Since it was a “fast rise” dough, along with the added sugar, the yeast did not have enough time in pre-baking fermentation to consume that extra sugar, no matter the precise sugar sub-name it is that the yeast feed directly upon (I think it’s maltose). After a number of steps including baking and eating, the food stays in the stomach for some time, then passes through the pyloric sphincter into the duodenum or small intestine. At about this time, my guess is some yeast spores germinated, and were present in enough numbers to restart fermentation, thus creating gas. The “fast rise” continued in the gut, and as I recall, it felt “fast” there too! My lesson to myself was to be exceedingly careful about added sugars in yeast-bread dough, particularly when combined with high-fat, high-melting point toppings such as cheese, which likely slow digestion in part by encapsulating some pockets of partially digested baked bread.

2009.Aug.15

I was searching for “straight dough“, I believe yesterday, and found the hold-over webpage from the pre-Over-Commercialization Internet days, days I sorely miss.

It confirms that the process I’ve developed and documented here is a hybrid technique, not straight dough and not sponge dough. That said, I’m explicitly not claiming I’m the sole developer. Bread has been around for millennia, it is said the Egyptians made varieties of bread, indeed, it seems one of the initial timeline points of “civilization” versus “pre-civilized” or the hunter-gatherer era. “Civilization” centered around agricultural propagation of food and particularly cereal crops, the beginning of mono-cropping. So, we’re talking about techniques that have been around for many, many years. Tools may have changed. Knowledge regarding why particular chemical processes are occurring may have improved. Fancy new automated factories may have been built with computerized machines reducing required labor. But bread as a product is old. Very old.

Why there is so much misinformation floating around about making it could be the basis of a few good rants.

One of the problems is that over the years terminology and technique changes, and that’s something to be aware of when reading older cookbooks. A case in point is another page about “1916 straight and sponge doughs,” apparently an Army manual for bakers published back in 1916. When reading through that, it is clear the term “prove” was used to identify more sub-stages of fermentation than it is today, where definitions have evolved somewhat according to the terminology used by a number of recently published bakers. Today, the usage of proving and proofing is understood as limited to the post-shaping and pre-baking period, in other words, the final rise before baking. Nevertheless, the term prove is a curious term that relates to yeast. Essentially rising dough at any stage of fermentation proves yeasts’ viability. One cannot say today, and expect to be fully understood, “I added yeast to my pre-fermentation water and flour mix and set it aside to proof, then I kneaded it some more and set it aside to proof again.” In the past it appears that statement would have been understood. It’s likely professionals would understand, or at least would question it, having read old recipes themselves, whereas beginners would be confused by reading newer recipe’s text in contrast to old recipe’s text, when proofing meant one thing, versus today when its meaning is more specific, at least among certified professionals who tend to be the authors of published baking books. It’s not clear, at least to me, that all these semantic evolutions have been improvements (besides just today’s oxymoronic usage of “pre-ferment”, already covered). For example, “Dough rising in bulk-fermentation is proof of yeasts’ viability, but dough rising in bulk-fermentation is not considered the proof stage.” Say what?

If the purpose of language is to communicate, it’s not clear that modern baking terminology has served the intent of clear communication, instead it appears to have increased confusion among those who most need it, those who are first learning.

To wax momentarily cynical, in the far, far distant future, or perhaps in the next few publishing cycles, the proof stage could perhaps be correctly referred to as post baking, where “heat inactivation” will be the new term used to describe today’s baking cycle in reference to killing the yeast, and something else, perhaps “flour hydration” will be used to describe today’s autolyse stage. Then, even more books can be sold to describe the “new” process with the new and improved terminology! After all, the final heat-inactivated product is the ultimate proof, is it not?

One curious newer technique is Oregon State University’s page description of “continuous mix“. It’s easy to visualize a tube in which water and-or flour flows and that at different length points ingredients are added. This process, particularly if the tube has vanes and blades or mixing technology incorporated in-between these add-another-ingredient points, reinforces the idea of ingredient order being of critical importance in dough processes.

Another page OSU has are some dough-temperature guidelines. I love this kind of technical stuff. And how about thier awesome word, “temperapature”! Whether it’s a dictionary-listed word, or not, it certainly carries accurate meaning! As in (my sentence, but used in the context their page seems to mean it), “The aperture of the cells is related to temperature.” Temperapature! Very cool.

2009.Aug.17

It occurred the term “proof” is also used in rating the alcoholic content of some beverages. There’s no reason to rehash that here, just use a search engine if you want to find out more. I’ve often wondered why I’ve never learned how to make beer or distilled spirits, though the odor of alcohol, specifically a beer odor, in some bread batches has been obvious.

The most recent batch of bread I made is nearly tasteless, however, that was not as true of the prior batches, including the one immediately proceeding it, though undoubtedly, since I’ve so far resisted the urge to experiment with bacillus (sourdough) due to not caring for sour bread, not as much “flavor” if sour flavor is the intent. So tracking the alcohol content by some measure, perhaps smell even though it is inexact, could be a good indicator.

For my next test, when I need to make more bread, which will be a little while yet, I’m going to alter some of the temperatures related to process, but keep the formula the same as the last batch. One change will be made in order to determine if the warmer water used in the autolyse stage is the source of the post-autolyse stickiness. So, at some point in the future, I will use cooler water when mixing the flour and water during the autolyse, and which will decrease the temperature of the post-mixing and pre-resting stage. I still will use a cooling process during the rest, due to years of experience with foods where I’ve noted a cooling cycle blends flavors. It’s my belief that a cooling cycle during autolyse rest probably helps the flour hydrate. I think of such a process as breathing in (cooling) and out-breath (heating), as with cooling there tends to be volume contraction and with heating, expansion. “Temperapature” as used by the author of the OSU page is perhaps a better, more accurate term to use (though I do wonder if it’s spelled the best way). Physically, I believe this volume expansion is found in the extreme when something is in its gaseous state, yet I’ve also found the flavor mixing that occurs when making chili as well as blue cheese dressing during an overnight cool down followed in the case of chili with a reheat, to perhaps be explained by the same phenomenon. It also appears as part of my process used in throughly seasoning cast iron pans, heat it up, brush oil, cool off. During cooling, things seem to contract slightly, whereas when heated, they expand. In the case of the pans, the cast iron seems to absorb a little oil during quick cooling, since cast iron pans are typically somewhat porous. An engineered bi-metallic thermometer is one use of this phenomenon in the case of two metals (which are solids) of differing temperature expansion rates. Varying the autolyse temperature through contraction of cool (refrigeration) and expansion of warmth (mixing) probably helps molecules to better align with each other.

In any case, I will be testing two different changes with my next loaves. The first is whether the warm water temperature used in the autolyse step is related at all to the post-autolyse rested dough’s increased stickiness. My wonderment has to do with whether the warm temperature water added to the flour tends to favor gliadin instead of glutenin, perhaps through some unknown-to-me enzymatic process. I also want to continue extending the fermentation stage, as it seems from the bulk-fermentation temperature readings that active fermentation is mostly occurring at greater than 63F degrees or thereabouts. I’m still undecided as to how best to go about that. One possibility is to keep the initial dough temperature of about 84F degrees the same, followed by a refrigerated bulk-fermentation for about 2-3 hours, then remove the dough to a room temperature environment for a few hours, then possibly return it to the refrigerator at some point, or perhaps letting it sit out the entire night, which is the cooler portion of the day-night cycle, or perhaps only leaving it out for another 3-6 hours, and then returning it to the refrigerator for about 3 hours minimum. A second possibility is to decrease the initial bulk-fermentation dough temperature, perhaps attempting to keep it at about 65 degrees or so (by allowing the cooling of the autolyse to be extended a little more), and keep the initial bulk-fermentation at room temperature for 6-9 hours, then refrigerating it for the remaining period to slow the yeast. Of those two, I tend to think the first is preferable due to wanting the yeast to get a good start in a warmer environment, however, the latter is more streamlined or simple with respect to process and temperature, hence my indecision.

The addition of yeast represents a division line of sorts in the process, so I’m hoping that making these two changes will still be somewhat scientific, in the sense I’m looking for two different things. 1. Whether the pre-yeast stickiness of autolysed dough is decreased with a cooler and different temperature process. 2. Whether extending the warmer fermentation time of bulk-fermentation increases the yeast numbers (which I can only determine indirectly).

The results of 1 should be obvious as soon as handling the post-autolyse and pre-fermentation (before yeast added) dough. The results of 2 will be noted in whether the increased time at warmer fermentation levels increases yeast numbers to a point that the odor of alcohol is more evident and also results in a higher proofing rise and in a larger cell structure in the final baked product.

I’ve read in a number of places that baker’s yeast doubling should occur in anywhere between 90 minutes and 4.5 hours (that’s a very wide variance), and according to theartisan.net, one group of researchers found no increased yeast numbers at all. I’m sure there are a huge number of different yeast strains, specific strains that aren’t typically disclosed on the packaging of baker’s yeast, so what’s important to me is the doubling rate of the yeast I’m currently using. The last time I found some that passed a viability test, I went back to the store and purchased several large packages with the same batch number, and I keep it in the refrigerator in the still vacuum-sealed packages, so I won’t be running out of this particular strain for some period of time, probably several more years (however, next time I do need to purchase some, it could be a different strain but packaged identically). Since my bulk-fermentation temperatures are not constant, it wouldn’t seem possible to determine the cycle length judged by how much the dough peak shifts by changing the initial inoculation amount, though if I go to a constant temperature fermentation period somewhere within the range of active yeast multiplication temperatures, that time-shift test would still seem possible, so perhaps it will be revisited in the future.

I was just reading through my brief spreadsheet notes, and saw that I’d recorded a higher stickiness post-fermentation with the latest batch. So it appears that decreased stickiness is also a test of sorts regarding the amount of fermentation that has occurred. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to try to make two changes at once because it appears both steps alter stickiness. I should decide on one, or the other. Since my generalized thrust is currently with altering the fermentation peak point, I should skip altering the autolyse temperatures for now.

In case anyone is wondering why I want to find out if autolyse temperatures are responsible for the increased dough stickiness, it’s actually quite simple. I’m wondering about proteolytic enzymes or proteases. These enzymes break down proteins. That beer-making diagram that I linked to as a commenter several years ago in my own Honey Wheat Berry post, and also linked to somewhere in this series of posts, is, if not memorized (it’s not), at least is indelibly impressed in my mind as a resource to refer to. The pH of the dough at this point is likely on the alkaline side of the proteolytic bounds, but I’ve seen different figures elsewhere for those bound points anyway. It’s impossible to know precisely what the miller and packager has put into any of the flours, but that is my thinking for why the temperature may be making the dough stickier (in this case). There could be other, simpler reasons for stickiness, such as too much water, but that doesn’t seem the case in this instance. It is something that I need to track down, the precise reason why these last two batches, with the new process, are stickier after autolyse. In order to do this, one must consider all the known possibilities first. Since I’ve been carefully tracking what I’ve done, I can go back and undo things one by one until the precise reason is found.

Perhaps what I need to do is make some very small dough amounts using different flour mixtures and processes, without the intent of following through and making a whole loaf, or combining them all together for one baking of a “surprise” loaf. Perhaps just a handful of flour each time, in proportion. Change processes singly, flours as well, and see which one causes the stickiness. This seems doable, and wouldn’t require the eating of a bunch of mistakes in larger amounts.

Here’s another expensive book with more information about proteases. This science report (PDF) says that alpha-amylase can also increase stickiness.

2009.Aug.19

So far I have two basic flour mixes, one of high-gluten mixed with all-purpoose flour, a second of high-gluten mixed with baker’s flour; each has a unique ratio to adjust the mixed-together protein to roughly equivalent levels, 12.14%, based upon the best information I have available. The high-gluten’s protien level is derived from the nutritional label, which may—likely does—have a rounding error, that protein level is 13%. The figure I’ve been using for All Purpose is 10.3%: while I don’t remember specifically, I believe I also calculated that from the nutritional label, but I also recall looking it up at the USDA Nutrient database lab. 10.3% was the best figure I was able to discern at the time. The Baker’s Flour figure of 11.8% was sourced from a manufacturer’s infosheet. Ultimately, I have little clue as to how accurate any of the figures are.

Lately it seems I’ve been making two loaves of bread at a time, instead of 4. So I can take the total flour weight of 2 loaves, and divide that weight by 4, and that gives me a gram figure, which I’ll temporarily call Test 1/4, which means the flour that exists in about 1/2 a typical loaf, or 1/4 of a 2-loaf batch. Since I have two basic flour mixes, I can use the 1/4 flour weight, and have two units each of one flour mix, and two units of the other flour mix. Each flour mix of each respective type can have a cold-water autolyse and a warm water autolyse, to test for stickiness. Then, when combining the Test 1/4 batches into loaves, I can mix the two cold-water autolysed flours together into one loaf, and the two warm-water autolysed flours into a second loaf. This combining of cold-autolysed Test 1/4s and separately warm-water autolysed Test 1/4s will mean I’ll have a third flour mix of three flours, a proportion which could be calculated, but I don’t believe calculating it is particularly important, what is important is that Both will have roughly the same flour mix of unknown proportions of three flours total (bakers, HG, and AP), separated by the temperature of the autolyse water. From there, instead of mixing the cold-autolyse & warm-autolysed Test 1/4s (which are doubled up) together in a larger bulk-fermentation, I can ferment them separately but identically, and bake them into two loaves. Besides any dough stickiness differences that may develop in some or all of the Test 1/4 batches, which may shed light on the nature of the stickiness related to either the flour mixes, the autolyse process, or the temperature treatment, it will also tell me of any differences that exist in the baked product based upon cold or warm-water autolysed doughs.

I thought momentarily of designing it so one baked loaf only used baker’s flour, and the other only high-gluten flour, split the same way into warm- and cold-water autolyse processes, but then when I baked the loaves they’d be of differing protein levels, so I discarded that idea as not quite as normalized a test. I guess this will be a diversion from altering the fermentation peak, but I guess this is what I’m being directed by my mind to do next. To try to answer two problems, both related to stickiness: whether the flour mix contributed to increased stickiness, or the warm-water autolyse, or perhaps some combination of each. If all dough batches are of roughly equivalent stickiness, I’ll probably have to conclude it’s related the autolyse process itself, something to do with hydrating all the flour first, and not related to either the flour mix or the autolyse water temperature (the latter seeming to eliminate enzymes as the possible/probable cause, since their activity is apparently related to temperature as well as pH).

2009.Aug.21

This is my next test. I’m not sure when I’ll be needing to bake it, but it provides somewhat of a graphic for August 19th’s idea, the one directly preceding. I decided not to backwards calculate the percentages of the final loaves’ flour mix, as it doesn’t seem all that important given what I’m trying to find out. Also, I routinely use the tilde symbol “~” to indicate approximately, as it reminds me of the math symbol for approximately equal to.

Note that I’ve increased the yeast % back to 0.64%, as I prefer the flavor of that bread given the current fermentation schedule. I’ll decrease it again when I return to changing the fermentation peak and the Peak:TotalTime ratio.

And here’s how I’ll combine them into two 827g flour-weight loaves to compare warm- versus cold-autolysed dough when baked:

The test is about relative stickiness in the dough post-autolyse and pre-bulk-fermentation in any of the 1/2-loaf batches, as well as any notable differences in the baked product of warm- versus cold-autolysed dough.

I will define cold-autolyse as I mean it for this singular test as using coldish water (I’ll derive a temp later) combined with the flour so that the mixed dough never exceeds 84F degrees until it begins baking. I’ll define warm autolyse as using at least as warm a water temperature as I used the last time for the autolyse, which was 105F, but I’m thinking of increasing that a little higher. At the point when this water is mixed into the flour, there is no yeast, so killing yeast isn’t a temperature concern at this point, but going too high can alter the starch’s structure too much, such as all the way to gelatinization temperature (also see gelatinization), which I want to avoid at this point of this test, as it will reportedly result in sticky bread crumb (read the referenced PDF. it is my intent to adopt this technique at some point in the future, but I have to build up to it in a way that allows me to consciously understand the interactions of the various ingredients with each other, as well as the effects of processes upon those ingredients. So, it’s several iterations away, presuming I don’t get sidetracked. Altering the fermentation peak comes first, then some poolish processes (which the fermentation peak relates to), then a small percentage of scalded flour. I also find myself thinking more about bacillus inclusion, but I can’t allow it to result in a “sour” flavor.). So a good point would be the upper bound point of the proteolytic enzyme box in the beer making diagram I’ve referred to in several places, but no higher. And I mean the water temperature, not the settled temperature of flour and water after combining the two. With the Warm-water autolyse batch particularly, it will need chilling that won’t be as necessary with the Cold-water autolyse batch, to equalize the temperatures in the two doughs. The objective with chilling the warm-water autolyse dough will be to bring it down in F temperature, so that after post-autolyse kneading, i.e. when mixing in the yeast, the doughs are of equal temperature, and will be at about 84F when both go into the refrigerated bulk-fermentation for 18 hours. This means once the yeast is added, the doughs will be treated, with respect to time, temperature and process, “about the same.”

2009.Aug.24

I mixed the dough today, will bake tomorrow. In the data table above, the 111F dough temp was a mistake, the temperature rise during kneading happened faster for some reason, and I didn’t stop soon enough. The NFM-warm immediately became sticky after adding the warm water and some short amount of blade-mixing. Continuing the mixing and before the autolyse rest, it didn’t want to drop down into the blades as I’ve explained the phenomenon in prior text. The NFM-warm was the only batch with that issue at this stage. After a couple of hours in rest, the OFM-warm increased its stickiness quite a bit. After mixing the two warms and the two colds together, adding the yeast, and raising them to fermentation temperature of 84F by machine kneading, the warm autolysed dough was so sticky it was very difficult to handle, it was very much like thick glue that wanted to stick to the fingers and bowls in thick layers. The cold autolysed dough was somewhat sticky, what I’d characterize as typical to moderate. Even though I’ve used the word moderate, it is somewhat stickier than the stickiness of the prior straight dough process, which leads me to the belief that autolyse itself increases stickiness somewhat.

I feel like I may need to repeat this (not sure if I want to), but with different flour mixes. I’d like to know, and have a repetition of, whether this warm/cold:sticky/less-sticky aspect remains when using only high gluten flour, or whether it is something that is only happening because of the baker’s flour. With this test, since the NFM-warm developed its stickiness almost immediately upon reaching temperature after adding the warm water, that same dough was mixed with the OFM-warm which didn’t have baker’s flour, and could have made that combined dough seem stickier than it otherwise would have been. Since I have no specialized machine for quantifying stickiness, I found the best test was handling during the process of rounding.

I’m wondering if the baker’s flour has an enzyme in it that the high-gluten doesn’t (even though the high-gluten says “enzymes” on the ingredient label). There are so many different kinds of baking enzymes, I guess it’s useful to know that enzymes of some kind have been added, but it would be nice to have more precision on labels. I suppose the flours could also be of slightly different wheat strains.

Another thing I noticed, particularly after the autolyse rest and during the process of kneading (to add temperature), as the dough temperature increased, stickiness also tended to increase a little, and this seemed true of all the dough.

I need to be sure to check the extensibility versus elasticity when panning the dough. In a prior batch using a warm autolyse, I seem to recall the dough seemed more extensible and less elastic. I expect to find this prior result re-confirmed, but it’s also a reason to retest using only the particular High-Gluten flour I’m using. The reason I say “particular”, is because it seems clear to me that there are significant differences between flour brands, that the U.S. laws don’t seem to require labeling of enzyme additions, that there are a number of different enzymes with somewhat similar effects but that act at different temperatures and pH ranges, and consequently, one flour is likely not the same as another flour with respect to these more subtle dough changes, and lacking that information does not allow a typical home baker to tailor a process for the particular enzymes that may have been added based solely upon what’s listed on the ingredient label. Consequently, changing the flour source, or even if the manufacturer or miller or distributor changes their formulas slightly in a way that is not reported on their own label, these changes could seem to greatly affect these more subtle temperature and time processes.

In any case, it will be interesting to find out if there’s any noticeable difference between the two baked loaves. If there are no notable differences, then my conclusion will be the cold-autolysed dough is easier to handle, and would seem to result in less dough loss (like what gets stuck to the fingers and gets washed down the drain). OTOH, if the warm autolysed dough is more extensible during panning and-or shaping stage, then the increased difficulty in handling may be a worthwhile tradeoff.

In this series of batches, due to the complexity involved in keeping small dough amounts separate, I was unable to record a number of the data points I’ve found are a good idea to record, tending to go more from memory. However, because these were fermented in dough balls of approximately half the weight of my temperature-fermentation test, and typical amounts fermented at once over many batches, I knew the fermentation-stage dough balls would cool off faster if placed immediately in the refrigerator, and would skew the peak:totalBulkFermentTime to a smaller number. Therefore, I left them at room temperature for 2 hours before placing them in the refrigerator. It’s my feeling that currently lacking a temperature controlled cold-fermentation box, that this is probably the simplest way to alter the peak:totalBulkFermentTime.

2009.Aug.25

While handling after adding salt and oil (per previously explained process), and during the multi-step process of panning, both warm and cold autolysed doughs seemed of roughly equal stickiness. Extensibility versus elasticity also seemed roughly equal, but more extensible than the straight dough process. The best home test I know of for extensibility is pizza dough shaping, and this style of sandwich loaf is vastly shape-different, requiring little extension. The warm-autolyse batch during rounding had the smoothest skin. Both doughs had a noticeable odor of beer or alcohol, so I probably overshot with my guess of 2 hours of room temp fermentation before refrigeration, but only slightly, though this is likely to give the bread a nice, if subtle, flavor.

Proofing was set at 86F (range of about 3F deg), and I guess (because I don’t yet know how long it will take) for 2.5-3 hours prior to baking, though possibly at the shorter end of the range due to the slightly longer room temp fermentation, and the fact that it’s a warm day here, already over 86F outside.

Proofing didn’t go as I expected, at 3 hours, it hadn’t risen as far as I thought it should, so I increased the proofing temperature to 96F, and at 3.5 hours began the oven warm up. At 4-hours the dough was poke tested, and it mostly sprung back, but it did leave a small dimple. It’s possible that the sugars were decreased due to the first 2 hours spent at room temperature during what would typically be called bulk fermentation. The baking procedure’s the same with pre-warm to 500F, bake at 500 for 5 minutes then reduce thermostat to 300F, steam for first 15 minutes (though 8 minutes is probably enough) and bake for 1.5 hours total. Both of these loaves had a bit less oven spring, possibly due to the increased proofing time, even though these loaves had the same amount of moisture that should become steam (so this may mean that yeast out-gassing activity is also important during the initial 3 minutes in the oven). It seems the warm autolyse dough rose a little bit higher than the cold-autolyse. I’m thinking a lighter crust color would confirm fewer sugars (Maillard reaction).

2009.Aug.26

Both crusts are definitely a lighter shade of some amount of brown or tan color versus other, better loaves I’ve made. I believe this is due to the increased fermentation temperature time, i.e., the two added hours of room temperature fermentation before refrigeration. I didn’t realize the dough was so close to the point of running out of broken starches for the yeast to feed upon. Additionally the warm autolyse seems a slightly darker shade of tan or brown versus the cold-autolysed loaf. Unfortunately, the sandwich-slice photos don’t show this as well as looking at the loaves themselves. The warm autolyse batch likely had extra enzyme activity, which created somewhat more sugars from “broken starches”, and likely explains the increased volume as well as a slightly darker shade of brown or tan versus the cold-autolysed loaf.

I cannot tell any difference in flavor between the two loaves but a dear friend that sampled them said the cold-autolyse was slightly more “sour”. I suppose the inverse of this is that the warm-autolyse was slightly sweeter. I noted with both loaves that the crust wasn’t as crisp like it is when it’s a darker color: it was tougher. The crumb is still tender.

This proofing problem has been happening throughout several of the batches, and I didn’t know where the issue was arising from. It’s good to feel like I’ve gotten to the bottom of it. Going for too long on the bulk-ferment (during yeast-active temperatures), exhausts the yeasts’ food supply, reducing food for the proof, which must limit the yeasts’ out-gassing.

This is not a simplistic shorter fermentation times are better observation, as the initial yeast inoculation amount contributes, as well as the time spent at various temperatures. Since I’ve been having this problem off and on throughout several of the batches, I believe one redundant way of dealing with this process issue is simply to add some yeast food, more broken starches, during the final kneading immediately preceding proof. A nice measured amount. This is a large problem as far as I’m concerned given its tendency to repeat, and dealing with the issue will have to take precedence over a high-gluten only warm versus cold autolyse test, which I consider a more subtle-process investigation.

What I will try first for the yeast food addition is a very small amount of scalded flour (PDF). I’m thinking of trying 1-2% of the total flour amount, though I believe the study said up to 6% is generally beneficial. I will add the scalded flour at the point when I mix the salt- and oil-added doughs together, which directly precedes shaping, panning, and proofing. If you read that study, they’re adding the scald for the purposes of extending the shelf life as an anti-staling ingredient and as a replacement for alpha-amylase. However, I’m basing my reason for trying it upon a different idea, that gelatination of the starch in flour breaks the starches down into smaller chemical structures (these two ideas seem to be different conceptual process reasons for what is essentially one underlying factor, the addition of broken starches). The reason I believe this will work is some obscure partial sentence I read in another science study:

the depolymerization of gelatinized starch into maltose and dextrins by a-amylase and the hydrolysis of these oligosaccharides into glucose by amyloglucosidase. . . . Gelatinized starch displays certain physicochemical properties resembling damaged starch. In particular, damaged and gelatinized starch are prone to enzymatic attack (Evers and Stevens 1985).” (PDF)

Another sentence from another source that seems to say the same thing, “The gelatinization dramatically increases the availability of starch for digestion by amylolytic enzymes.” Whether the amylolytic enzymes are working during the proof stage is unknown by me, my guess is they are (and results are suggesting that the beer diagram’s bounds are not as clearly defined when applied to bread dough processes as the bound points indicate), but the outcome of the process idea of adding gelatinized flour during the final kneading before shaping remains to be seen.

If it doesn’t work as expected, simply adding some malt or malt syrup of some kind would probably also work, but I prefer the idea of using the flour itself, it seems a more purist approach. It’s interesting that high-water temperatures are used to scald flour, combined with time at relatively high temperatures, and the warm autolyse is quite similar, but the temperatures are quite a bit lower. So perhaps we could say that the warm autolyse process is, or is quite similar to, a low-temperature scalded flour; or that scalded flour is a high-temperature flour-water autolyse process. It probably depends upon the definition of “scald” to make full sense, but I’m looking for the pattern or similarity of the two processes.

Adding food for the yeast is undoubtedly the reason why poolish process breads have flour added to them again after fermentation, besides just the moisture issue, as the new flour has some small percentage of damaged starch according to a number of experts. The same seems true of many biga recipes. Adding flour is apparently also done with sourdough cultures, though I have no experience with those (but I do read a lot). So it seems like the idea of adding broken starches by scalding a small amount of flour and adding it at the final kneading should work.

The process I’m using isn’t sponge since it uses 100% of the flour. Curiously, reserving 1% of the flour and some yet to be calculated amount of water from the autolyse amounts of flour and water reduces the autolysed flour to <100%, which later has yeast added, so then it seems it qualifies to be called a sponge. Ha. The sponge restriction still seems rather arbitrary to me, particularly since I’m thinking that what ingredients have been added, and in what order, is a preferable classification scheme.

2009.Sep.06

Upon further reflection and study, I’ve decided a 2% scalded flour level will be my next test. Hopek, Ziobro, and Achremowicz used three temperatures, given in degrees C, which I’ve converted to 167F as the initial water temperature, 140F as the mixed temperature, then mixture is maintained at 104F overnight. They used a 1:2 ratio of flour:water for the scald, so that means 200% baker’s percentage of water, however, my temperature calculations say that 243% water at 167F mixed with 74F degree flour, combined results in a 140F mixture. It’s possible my temperature calculations are off somewhat, but I’ll trust them for now. Additionally, I don’t know if a slow cooker will keep the mixture at 104F overnight. Another possibility is to put it in a vacuum bottle to slow the cooling process, however I’m thinking of simply putting the mix into a pre-warmed blender (pre-warmed so it doesn’t cool the mixture when added) and blended for some time period to speed the mixing and collisions of the enzymes with the remaining molecules. I also saw a patent online somewhere that said a microwave may be utilized to do this quickly. What is a monomer (mentioned in the patent)? “The glucose molecule is the monomer of starch.”

I’ve also noted that my bread is staling faster again. Upon defrosting a couple of slices several different times to make sandwiches, the staling or crystallization of the crumb began immediately, at least during hot and dry weather, a problem I never noted when the formula had vinegar added, so I presume that the pH of the dough hasn’t decreased much over the fermentation times currently being used. Therefor I intend to reintroduce the vinegar as a critical ingredient. I saw a web page online that said a mixture of 20:80 acetic:lactic acids generally results from sourdough, so that acid mix should probably be attempted at some point, but right now I have no lactic acid, though it is available at homebrewer suppliers, so for now it will be only 4% acetic acid (vinegar).

More and more I find myself thinking about exploring sourdough, as perhaps the exceedingly sour taste I dislike so much could be a result of formulas or processes that were designed to deliberately create extreme sour flavor. In any case, my readings have said in order to best modulate the growth action of wild yeast relative to the bacillus strains, a temperature controlled fermentation chamber is needed (27°C which favors wild yeast versus 33°C which favors the Lactobacillus), and right now I don’t have one of those dedicated solely as a fermentation chamber.

2009.Sep.13

I’m getting around to making the scalded flour loaves, this time both loaves should be identical. The 2% (normal percent of the total or “base” flour amount) scalded flour was added at the point after overnight refrigeration. First off, it was quite difficult to add the thin and watery paste to the dough, the best procedure seemed to be the blade mixer in a technique similar to adding the oil.

Another interesting effect that occurred was that the dough’s stickiness increased again, making it quite hard to handle. Once added, and rested in the refrigerator for a short time to aid the hydration (warming-cooling cycle), the dough felt ‘just like’ the baker’s flour pre-bulk fermentation stickiness, explored in a prior test. So I guess another possibility for the baker’s flour stickiness is that the miller, or packager, added some heat-treated flour. I don’t know if they’re required to disclose that on the label, or not, particularly if they processed the wheat according to some varying milling processes: it’s still “wheat”. With coffee beans, certain types of coffee grinders create more heat than others, so I suppose that is a possibility, the particular grinding method the miller used. In any case, this dough is so sticky it’s hard to handle once again.

It had been my intent to add this as a redundant technique to increase the damaged starch in the dough during the final proof, as insurance against poor bulk-fermentaion timing (and temperature) but the increased stickiness makes handling it much more difficult. Decreasing the moisture content slightly could help with this, but that also increases the difficulties associated with kneading. The increased stickiness at this point makes shaping and handling more difficult than it otherwise needs to be, so this may not have been the best idea, to include it post bulk-fermentation.

I also decided to re-include the vinegar, 2.35%, as the loaves without it had been staling a bit faster once again.

Making the scalded flour was also informative. I had thought to try the 160F water, in a flour ratio that settled the mixed temperature at 140F, but something happened, perhaps the mass of the measuring cups cooled the water too much, the final mix was only 117F, and afterward it was much like the consistency of a thin pancake batter. So, I thought to microwave it for a few seconds, much like the patent (linked above somewhere) said was a useful technique. After either 20 or 40 seconds, the temperature was 140F, but it’s consistency had changed massively, it had turned into a clearer, more opaque and thicker paste that reminded me somewhat of paper maché glue. So I think next time I’ll try starting with room temperature flour and water, mixed together, then simply use the microwave to bring it up to temperature. It seems very fast, and doesn’t seem to require a long, slow cooking like the scalded flour science report by Hopek, Ziobro, and Achremowicz, linked somewhere above, suggested.

I debated with myself how best to re-include the vinegar (4% acetic acid), as I wanted the main flour autolyse to occur at a natural pH level, so I let the scalded flour cool for a few hours, then added the vinegar to it, and brought it up to 140F again using the microwave. Then I let it cool some at room temperature and then refrigerated it overnight.

Anyway, here’s the formula. You’ll probably note the spreadsheet is growing:

The basic “recipe” or gram amounts I used are in the right-hand three-columns.

I still don’t have a good way to put the process, which appears to be at least as important as the ingredient formula, if not moreso, into table format (but I’m working on it). Basically, the process used this time is the same as the warm-autolyse used last time, as I wanted to insure I exhausted the damaged starches to the same level during bulk-fermentation. After the warm autolyse of the ingredients under the “Drier” column, and after a cooling for 1.5 hours, the yeast was added, then the bulk-fermentation began. It was extended like the last time, 2 hours at room temp before putting in refrigerator (the 2 hours at room temp seemed to be what exhausted the damaged starches resulting in a lighter colored crust in the prior NFM vs. OFM & warm vs. cold autolyse test). The next day the scalded flour was added, followed by 1/2 hour in the freezer, then 1/2 hour in the refrigerator. Next, the salt was added to 2/3 of the dough, and oil was added separately to 1/3 of the dough using the blade mixer, then those two were combined and kneaded using a spiral hook for 10 minutes. Division, rest, and panning followed, then the proof. However, this proofing time was a bit shorter, as it rose somewhat more and faster than the prior batch, thus it didn’t need quite as long a proof time. This proof was 1/2 hour shorter for a total of 3.5 hours from beginning of proof to beginning of bake (so this suggests to me that 2% scalded flour was perhaps a smaller amount than needed, as 3 hours should have been sufficient). The proof temperature was 86F for 2:20, then it was raised to 94F for 0:40 (I’m using a 75-watt halogen bulb, so it takes some time to increase. I might change that to a 150-watt bulb), then the loaves were removed from the oven-as-proofing chamber to room temperature while the oven was pre-heated to 500F.

Slicing surprise!

It’s what Barry Harmon would call a “flying crust” batch! Both slices are from the same loaf, but the second loaf, not pictured, didn’t have the flying crust at all. The tunnel is at least 1/2 the loaf’s length. Since both sets of doughs were treated the same, indeed being divided by weight for panning only after adding the s.flour, which itself was after bulk-fermentation, I don’t have a good understanding of how to create a flying crust on demand, except for the fact this is the first batch that had a remarkable one. I find myself wondering if there should have been more kneading after adding the scalded flour (s.flour), perhaps it didn’t get as evenly distributed throughout all the dough as it could have, perhaps hydration was somewhat uneven, but that’s just a guess. Or perhaps these types of huge tunnels are a possible symptom, a somewhat unpredictable one, of too many sugars left in the dough at the point when it’s baked.

Besides the crust being a more typical shade of brown or tan, one other characteristic worthy of note is that toasted slices developed a darker brown color than any prior batches in an equivalent time period, which is consistent with more “sugars” remaining in the final baked product.

The color of the loaves is normal, or darker brown (or browner tan?) than the last time. The crust is also much crisper, though possibly not quite as crisp as some prior batches. My general feeling before slicing and actually seeing the tunnel was that the 2% scalded flour added after bulk-fermentation didn’t entirely compensate for the over-extended bulk-fermentation; if it had, the 86F temperature proof would have been enough in 3 hours just like the “Wow” batch. That seems to be confirmed by the tunnel result.

Hopek, Ziobro, and Achremowicz in their scalded flour study (and by the way, they put the scalded flour into the dough pre-bulk-fermentation) say, with respect to the amount of damaged starch in wheat flour:

The number of such granules depends on the miling intensity and increases rapidly with increasing roll pressure, typical flour contains 5-9% damaged starch.

This could be a big difference between flours typically used for bread that, at least in the U.S., don’t have their “fineness” specified on the consumer label. I’ve read other, much lower claims, for the amount of damaged starch typically in wheat flours used for bread.

In thinking of the prior OFM versus NFM test, extreme stickiness seemed isolated to the warm autolysed Baker’s Flour. Perhaps the Baker’s Flour is a finer grind, and simply has more broken starches as a result? The only way I can think of to test that idea is to use sifting screens of different mesh sizes, but I don’t have any of those, just the typical wire strainer available at nearly any grocer which have rather large openings or spaces between wires.

It took me a little while to find at least some of the U.S. government regulations pertaining to wheat flour:

(a) Flour, white flour, wheat flour, plain flour, is the food prepared by grinding and bolting cleaned wheat, other than durum wheat and red durum wheat. To compensate for any natural deficiency of enzymes, malted wheat, malted wheat flour, malted barley flour, or any combination of two or more of these, may be used; but the quantity of malted barley flour so used is not more than 0.75 percent. Harmless preparations of α-amylase obtained from Aspergillus oryzae, alone or in a safe and suitable carrier, may be used. When tested for granulation as prescribed in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, not less than 98 percent of the flour passes through a cloth having openings not larger than those of woven wire cloth designated “212 µm (No. 70)” complying with the specifications for such cloth set forth in “Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists” (AOAC), 13th Ed. (1980), Table 1, “Nominal Dimensions of Standard Test Sieves (U.S.A. Standard Series),” under the heading “Definitions of Terms and Explanatory Notes,” which is incorporated by reference.

So it appears there likely is some legal wiggle room for millers on the fineness side, as long as most of it passes through a motorized #70 mesh in precisely 5 minutes (read section (c)(4)). Finer-ground flour would still pass through, but coarser-ground flour wouldn’t. While I haven’t read the entire page, that excerpted paragraph seems to imply that malted wheat can be used in quantities greater than 0.75%.

With 2% of scalded flour added, dough stickiness seems to be increased afterward. If the s.flour stickiness is due to a similar phenomenon to the Baker’s Flour stickiness, it seems reasonable to believe that after bulk-fermentation, it’s stickiness would be reduced (this would be consistent with reduced sugars that the yeast has consumed over time).

2009.Sep.14

Between the increased sugars, and the huge tunnel just under the top crust, it seems adding s.flour pre-proof and post-bulk fermentation is not optimal, it might be better to add it to pre-bulk-fermentation dough. That’s probably what I shall try next time. However, so far my best results seem achieved with a ~2700g dough ball at 84F immediately put into the refrigerator for bulk-fermentation. That seems to fix the total time available for yeast growth quite well. The length of time before dough reaches 63F or thereabouts (my data said it stopped rising, as dough cooled, somewhere between 65F-56.3F and 3-6 hours, so I estimate it was around 63F and probably at 3.5-4 hours), when this yeast strain seemed to stop much of its CO2 output, can be controlled either by the initial dough temperature (up to 105F or possibly a little higher won’t kill the yeast), or by the size of the dough ball itself. I’ve noted dough balls of half that weight cool much quicker. The idea of using time at room temperature for extending the yeasts’ growth curve before retarding also seems a valid technique, however, I’ve only explored extending it while the dough is at the warmer or initial temperature. Another possibility is to immediately refrigerate 84F dough for 3 hours, and when it reaches 65F, just before it stops rising, to remove it from the refrigerator for some time period to let the dough warm up somewhat, then put it back in the refrigerator at some point. This latter idea would extend the fermentation time while the dough is at the coolest portion of the yeasts’ CO2 output range.

2009.Sep.15

In thinking about the best point to add s.flour, it seems it would be best to perform at least one more test using the 2-hour extended bulk fermentation at room temperature followed by refrigeration. Were I to change back to the bulk-fermentation performed entirely in the refrigerator, and also moved the point in the process where the s.flour is added, it seems that would be two changes, and wouldn’t compare as well versus the most recent “flying crust” batch.

Some sundry and related reading, how to make maltose, and a reasonably nice diagram of the maltose molecule.

2009.10.06

It was time to make another couple of loaves. This time I closely followed the above process, including the flawed 2-hour room temperature bulk fermentation before refrigeration. The intentional change was to add the 2% (flour weight) scalded flour prior to bulk fermentation, instead of prior to the final proof.

This tunnel is much smaller than the last one, it is less then 2″ long, and is only evident in about 5 slices. The other loaf had no similar flaws.

I did note a problem with the proof at 86F. After 2 hours of proofing, the panned dough hadn’t risen much, so I turned the temperature up to 96F 20 minutes sooner than the last batch, and I brought it up to temperature immediately using 10 seconds of the oven’s flame. Later, after removing the proofed dough from the oven-as-proofing chamber at 3 hours, and after warming up the oven, when re-placing the risen loaves into the 500F oven for baking, I noted they had risen a lot more than expected during that 1/2 hour at room temperature. Typically the rise tends to stall at this stage. This has led me to wonder if an issue with the scalded flour, which may have large components of dextrins (whatever may be a molecular component of scalded flour and or damaged starch), isn’t only one where the yeast has trouble waking up from the refrigerated overnight temperatures but is also due to a gas-ouput stall due to a yeast change in food source. I’m sure I’ve read somewhere that during this change from that which is easily digestible, i.e., shorter damaged starches and sugars, to other less digestible foods, i.e., longer starches and sugars, that there is a short period where the outgassing stalls.

Yes, here’s the out-gassing chart, and it appears on a page with some informative yeast discussion. I presume the times would be different than the chart indicates, as each line is at a constant temperature, whereas in the technique I’m using, the dough is cold when it comes out of the refrigerator, so it takes some time to warm up.

This bread is a little lighter in crust color, and when toasting, didn’t develop as dark brown of a crumb like the prior batch, indicating to me that there were fewer free sugars remaining at the point when the yeast action stopped during the bake. This batch had a very strong sharp alcohol odor after overnight bulk refrigeration. After baking and sampling a couple of slices, it has a nice flavor, as well as very crisp crust.

This batch also had a nice total volume in spite of the sub-optimal extended bulk fermentation.

At this point I will drop the extra 2-hours at room temperature before refrigeration. Were I to continue using the scalded flour in this same process, I would probably choose to reduce it slightly to 1% or thereabouts, due to the yeast stall and timing issues. I will probably also make the decision that 96F is a preferable final proof temperature for similar types of sandwich breads.

However, I’m not done experimenting with scalded flour yet. The next step in the experimentation is to incorporate a long fermentation poolish at room temperature, before mixing the final dough for bulk fermentation. I plan to also incorporate at least some portion of the scalded flour into this poolish as an additional food source for the yeast. In thinking about this, it seems one point to add it would be after the first drop after the dough-rise peak. Another addition point or place-in-the-process would simply be to include it right at first.

A poolish is defined as a fermentation (often called a “pre-ferment” or simply preferment, but it’s kind of a misleading name as I’ve previously pointed out) of about 100% water. Since I want to continue using the autolyse with all the flour, there’s a bit of a math problem that limits the total amount of flour that may be subject to the poolish step, because the total water used is the limiter. So I have a bit of calculating to do.

One more site in the related sundry-reading category is wikipedia’s page about maltodextrins and this site about carbohydrates, even though the latter doesn’t directly mention dextrins. Those dovetail nicely with this short youtube video about how to make dextrins from corn starch using an oven. I find myself wondering if the same thing can be done with wheat flour, though the coloration issue would probably not be ideal. If the wheat flour can be “gelatinized” in a dry process, it would mathematically free up some water for use in another portion of the dough process. I’m thinking of trying it. Afterwards, a simple home test would be how much it thickens the same amount of water as I used in the scalded flour portion of the above two batches. I believe it’s also possible to buy this type of flour already premade, though I haven’t seen it at any of the stores where I typically shop.

2009.Oct.07

Before bagging the last batch in plastic overnight, which I use to soften the crust prior to slicing, the crust was arguably the crispest yet. The wikipedia page about dextrins claims that they are used as crispness enhancers in many foods, so it could be that scalded flour added to dough, fermented, and baked may have some greater percentage of dextrins.

http://www.rpi.edu/dept/bcbp/molbiochem/MBWeb/mb1/part2/sugar.htm
http://www.anslab.iastate.edu/Class/AnS518/Ans518_Class3.ppt
(page 17 has a nice graphic)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltotriose
http://www.elmhurst.edu/~chm/vchembook/547starch.html

This post is currently at 10078+ words, so it’s time to split it up again.

The continuation here was of text snipped from the bottom of that post, and is why the date of this post is later than some of the entries.

2009.Jul.27

Massive volume increase! Wow! This was the first dough I’ve made that passed the windowpane test without tearing before light was visible through the stretched dough.

I diverged from the scientific process of making only one change at a time, so some of the results cannot easily be traced to particular changes made. The following batch used a strictly-defined autolyse rest, and the fermentation was similar to a sponge as well as a biga, but it uses 100% of the formula’s flour, thus cannot be called either.

The major change made in this batch was one of process, or the order in which various ingredients were added. The following ingredient list or formula is not reflective of that order.

These loaves were scaled to have 827g of flour in each (the same as many of those above of 55% water), but the increase in volume can be noted by the slice’s changed x:y axes ratio in the photo below. These loaves are MUCH taller (compared to photos located in the earlier post). The protein ratio is about the same at 12.14%, but the crumb is much softer, more “squishy” and less springy.

The post-autolyse kneading failed in the food processor (first time this has ever happened), the dough was so sticky that it stuck to the plastic bowl’s upper sides, it didn’t want to drop down into the spinning blades, so the stand mixer was used to incorporate the instant dry yeast. However, after adding the yeast and following the refrigerated fermentation period, and the numerous chemical reactions that occur, the dough could once again be blade-mixed in the food processor, that’s the tool I used to later add the oil.

The biga-like primofermentation (defined below) was placed in the refrigerator for 18 hours. The next day salt was added to 2/3 of the fermented dough during stand-mixer kneading, then allowed to rest, while the oil was separately whipped into 1/3 of the dough using the food processor and metal cutting blade. Specifically, I poured the oil into the food processor, and added a golf-ball sized piece of dough, then blade-mixed it for a few seconds; then added another golf-ball sized piece of dough, and mixed it again for a few seconds; I kept repeating this until the dough started balling up in the food processor like it does when it’s kneading, then I added the rest of the unsalted dough, and blade-mixed for a few more seconds. It’s possible there’s a faster way to do this.

Once fully mixed, the oil-incorporated dough was added to the salted dough that was resting in the stand mixer, and another short kneading ensued to fully mix the the two together. Since I’ve noted that salt doesn’t typically dissolve in oil, and that oil and water don’t mix together well (unless there’s an emulsifier added, like egg yolks and-or lecithin: mayonnaise, for example) I wanted the salt added to hydrated dough that had no oil added, so the added oil would not first coat any of the salt grains, potentially isolating them from hydration. I’m not sure if hydration is the best word to use, as salt attracts moisture. Hopefully it carries meaning. In any case, I felt an oil barrier on a salt grain could restrict the particle’s access to free water existing in the dough matrix.

You’ll note that I’ve removed the vinegar from the formula. For a number of years I’ve used the vinegar to lower the pH of straight doughs mixed, risen, and baked on the same day, as I noted the baked loaves seemed to stay fresh a little longer when the vinegar was added. However, many sources say that with longer fermentation times, dough pH decreases naturally as a result of the CO2 production of yeast over time, and in fact, bubbling CO2 through water is one of the ways that alkaline water’s pH can be lowered. Theartisan.net has a chart of dough pH versus fermentation time. Unfortunately, I do not have the equipment or knowledge to quantify this pH change in my dough, it’s apparently more involved than just measuring dough pH, there are buffers in the dough and these must also be accounted for with some kind of special measuring chemicals, standard sodium hydroxide solution, and equipment. It’s not my intent to be a chemist, though for those so inclined, this could be quantified (hmm, the more I’m thinking about this, the more I’m realizing that being able to accurately measure dough pH would be quite useful).

The USDA Nutrient Data Laboratory had a database entry that said vinegar is about 94.78% water, so I multiplied the old vinegar amount by the vinegar water-percentage, then added that much to the formula’s water percentage, (strictly speaking, I should have done this on the normal percent instead of the baker’s percent [note to myself, the normal percent figure calculates to a baker's percent water content of 2.14, so 55+2.14=57.14]), to keep the dough moisture about the same as the prior batch’s 55% formulas.

I also changed the flour mix, as I’d been wanting to get away from using all purpose flour, which while it wasn’t specified on the label, may have been made from some percentage of soft wheat. However, the new flour mix (baker’s flour and high-gluten flour) was adjusted to have roughly the same protein level as the prior batches. The Baker’s Flour is said to be composed of a mix of hard red spring and hard red winter wheat according to a manufacturer’s specification sheet. Apparently, hard red spring tends to higher protein than hard red winter wheat.

The proofing process was also changed slightly to accommodate a different baking procedure. After 2.5 hours of proofing on a day so hot the proofing light never turned on (because the daytime temp was over 86F), I removed the panned and proofed dough from the oven, placed them elsewhere to continue their proof, and preheated the oven to 500F. At 2 hours, 50 minutes into the proofing time period, the pans of proofed dough were placed into the oven for baking.

The oven spring was about one and a half, maybe two inches, and occurred within the first 2 or 3 minutes. When zooming in on the crumb (click on photo for higher resolution), subjectively it appears there’s a lot less tunneling than in prior straight-dough batches.

It’s my current belief the larger holes nearer the bottom than the top the were likely caused by the changed baking procedure, which involved preheating the oven to 500F, inserting the panned and proofed dough, baking with steam for the first 15 min, keeping the oven at 500F for 5 minutes, then reducing the oven’s thermostat to 300F for the remainder of the baking period. It seems this higher initial temperature created steam internally in the baking dough at a faster rate, which was contained by some of the lower CO2 bubble walls and caused them to expand. In other words, the higher oven temperature heated up the stainless steel pans faster, thereby creating more steam over a shorter time period that, at least for a short time, remained internal to the baking dough. However, it’s just a guess, and some of the prior loaves using a different baking process also had larger holes, even if some weren’t as spherical, which suggests the answer is elsewhere.

Barry Harmon says that holes in the crumb are a characteristic of yeast-leavened breads. He also writes about a “flying crust” problem. If that flying crust is on the outer ring of a pizza crust, I’ll prefer it every time.

Another set of yeast issues to work out appeared. During the refrigeration period, I noted the dough peaked at about 5-6 hours into the refrigeration process (I mentioned above I needed to “tune” the yeast amounts), instead of at 18 hours. There are various strategies to remedy this, among them are decreasing the added yeast and-or decreasing the temperature of the dough and-or adding some salt to this fermentation stage of the process. While I did not track the internal temperature of the dough during this observation, I have noted in the past that the dough’s temperature was always warmer than the refrigerator temperature, apparently the activity of the various processes it’s undergoing add heat. Before placing the dough in the refrigerator, I raised the almost-a-biga’s temperature to 83-84F (by machine kneading). My reason for doing this is I want the yeast to be activated and actively multiplying (68-78F degree range from information I’ve seen), however, this undoubtedly keeps the dough’s temperature higher for at least some portion of the refrigeration process. I needed to go to sleep, and didn’t want to bake it until the following day, so there it remained.

I may, or may not, make a flow chart, but until then, this is the process I used for the best batch so far:

Water and flour mixed until all flour was moistened —> Autolyse (I used about a 4-hour autolyse period that included a cool down of about 90F dough to 60F [freezer was used some of the time, refrigerator wasn't cooling it fast enough]) —> add yeast and knead until 84F —> Refrigerate for 18 hours —> Knead salt into 2/3 (approximately) of the dough, then rest —> Whip oil into 1/3 (approximately) of the dough with metal blade food processor —> Put oil whipped dough into stand mixer with salted dough, and knead until well mixed —> Divide and scale dough for pans, then round each piece, let it rest for up to 20 minutes —> Prepare pans with organic palm oil shortening, a thin but very even coating, including pan lip —> Roll dough into cylinders, oil each cylinder with fully refined peanut oil, placing each into the prepared pans —> Proof for 2 hours, 50 minutes at 86F —> Put in oven preheated to 500F, with steam having been pumped into it for at least a couple of minutes prior —> Bake at 500F for 5 minutes, reduce oven thermostat to 300F —> Turn off steam at 15 minutes into baking process —> remove from oven at 1 hr 30 minutes, check that internal temperature is at least 200F —> let cool on cooling rack for several hours —> bag in plastic until following day without eating any (I can’t do this yet, still trying though) —> slice following morning and re-bag in two separately sealed plastic bags to freeze —> Place in freezer, being careful not to let anything weigh down on top of them, or press on their sides, until they’re fully frozen.

An interesting thing occurred when I sliced the few pieces I wanted to eat right away, the crust, while crisp, was much more tender, and it was possible to slice through without cracking and flaking using the freshly-sharpened non-serrated knife. I reckon it’s the flour mix, but like I said, I can only guess, since I made so many changes at once. It’s also clear from this baking result that process is critical to outcome.

2009.Aug.1

Autolyse flow chart

Fermentation flow chart

The image above has evolved through several versions. As of 2009.Aug.10, I’ve decided to call it the more generalized term Fermentation and stop at that. Trying to further define it at this point simply gets into pre-conceived weeds, so to say.

At one point, I called it Primoferment, short for Primary Fermentation, but then found that other baking authors had semantically or logistically connected primary fermentation to bulk fermentation. Originally, I called it “Sponge flow chart”, and used the term pre-ferment in the lower block. I still believe it’s a sponge, because it doesn’t have salt, oil, or other ingredients yet, but some notable baking authors claim a sponge can only be less than 100% of the flour (I guess 100% of the flour is like a sponge asymptote).

A number of baking authors say “pre-ferment” has a similar 100% flour restriction, therefore what I’m doing is not a pre-ferment. Anyway, the term “pre-ferment” doesn’t make a lot of sense to me, because once yeast has been added to wheat flour and water, fermentation begins. The prefix “pre” generally means before, so pre-ferment would seem to mean before fermentation, but adding the yeast begins fermentation, so it makes little sense to call a step after adding yeast the pre-ferment, regardless of the percent of the total flour amount. I’m going to need to train myself to avoid using the term, as it appears inherently contradictory, and as such is confusing. At best the term seems an oxymoron.

The bottom line is that I believe the above flow chart is a sponge, due to the hierarchy of ingredients and the order all ingredients are eventually added to dough. It seems there are different logical ways of organizing the various steps, and to some degree, this creates inflexibility.

I’m also going to start tracking the odor of alcohol as a subjective data point, it may be that relates to the bread’s final baked flavor. Don’t worry, the alcohol boils out during baking when it reaches about 172F degrees.

When looking at only the two flow charts (directly above), it’s very easy to see a progression of ingredients that could extend beyond the second flow chart, to a third, even a fourth. It would make some sense for specific, named stages of pre-bake yeast-dough to follow such a progression of ingredients, similar to that progression as seen from autolyse to ferment. Perhaps that was one of Calvel’s messages to bakers. Perhaps another message is not how many separate rests interspersed by kneadings there are, but simply the order that ingredients are mixed (kneaded) into the dough.

One aspect that seems to differentiate the autolyse (as a rest) from the others is that its a dead mixture (containing no added yeasts or bacteria, in reality its probably hard to work only with sterile flour and sterile water and-or not accidentally inoculate the dough. I also presume that trying to sterilize the flour would likely affect enzymes and possibly its other chemical structures, including any wild yeasts, spores, and bacteria that may exist naturally on or in a wheat grain or flour product). Once yeast has been added, the mix is no longer dead, life has been added to it. Autolyse no longer seems as logical a term for a process once life is thriving.

With my most recent batch, I logistically nested the dough from the autolyse into the “water” and “flour” primary fermentation ingredients (light green). Another way of stating this is that after the autolyse, I added yeast and kneaded to incorporate only the yeast into the dough, thus transforming the autolysed dough into one that would ferment.

Both poolish and biga are sponge pre-ferments, but they’re terms that are slightly more specific with respect to added water and moisture level. Since my latest batch was ~57% moisture, that lies within the 50-60% water guidelines that I’ve seen that define the term biga, therefore I called it biga-like. Any biga is also a sponge, and so is a poolish, as I understand the terms. However, since mine uses 100% of the formula’s flour, according to some recently-published baking authors, I cannot call it either sponge or biga. Nor is it straight dough, as the order of the ingredients added to the flour, with the multiple rests and mixings, surely excludes that as well.

Wikipedia says a biga can be as low as 45% water, and theartisan.net, 42%, however, as a practical matter with the flours I’ve worked with, getting under 50% and having it fully hydrate is questionable. I did try a series of tests of “cracker” pizza doughs that had somewhere near 42% hydration, but the flour after mixing, and I mean vigorous cutter-blade mixing as well, remained mealy, and would only stick together if pressed together. During that time was when I noted that it was near the 50% water level that allowed a dough’s gluten to fully develop, however, I didn’t try a series of experiments dialing it in at 1% increments, so my figure is approximate. Another factor that I haven’t yet explored is that those levels I tried were with straight dough formulations. Clearly, the autolyse rest changes hydration significantly, as evidenced by the vastly increased stickiness of a ~57% water-level dough subject to it. So, perhaps it is possible to obtain lower hydration levels in any flour using Calvel’s autolyse technique. More things to explore….

I happened across a very interesting related paragraph the other day in a book originally published sometime in the 1940s, re-published at chestofbooks.com, the title is “Experimental Cookery From The Chemical And Physical Standpoint”, by Belle Lowe:

Distribution of water in dough. Alsberg in “Starch and Flour Quality” states that in bread dough about 50 per cent of the water is bound moisture or water of hydration incapable of serving as a solvent for other substances. The starch holds approximately half of this bound water, the gluten the remainder. Starch at room temperature can absorb about 30 per cent of its weight of water, whereas gluten may absorb 200 per cent of its weight. But starch constitutes so great a percentage of the flour that as a result the quantity of water it binds is nearly as great as that bound by gluten. The remaining 50 per cent of the water in bread dough, which may serve as a solvent for other substances and form steam, cannot be separated readily from the dough by mechanical means. It is held in the interstices of the dough by surface and mechanical forces.

It seems to me that if the purpose is to grow and multiply yeast, having free water available for them “in the interstices” would be somewhat helpful, though it’s just a guess, as I’m no microbiologist. It’s my belief, since I’m trying to multiply yeast, that fully hydrating the flour is important, particularly since I’m using dry yeast that needs moisture, presumably “non-bound” or free water, to hydrate. While I still occasionally look, I have been unable to find those little foil-wrapped cubes of cake yeast in the local stores’ refrigerator section that I recall finding some 40-years ago. The instant dry yeast seems to work okay, and it’s my understanding that baker’s yeast, in its various forms, can be substituted for each other.

The other notable thing I see in that paragraph is that as a wheat flour’s protein content rises relative to its starch content, it should require a higher hydration because the gluten (protein) is said to absorb so much more water than starch. Perhaps this relates to baker’s and recipe author’s frequent use of the phrase, “develop the gluten.”

In the case of my most recent loaves, 100% of the flour was processed through the primoferment step, as well, 100% went through the autolyse.

That said, if theartisan.net’s strict biga guide is authoritative, then my dough used too much water to qualify to be called biga, nor were my temperatures in their given biga ranges. However, even their own references elsewhere on their site state that a biga can be of 60% hydration. I refer specifically to their referenced Indirect Method #1 formula for “Pane Casereccio”, the formula for a 16-2/3% biga dough. I say 16-2/3% because the biga comprises only 100 flour grams of a 600 flour gram formula.

And since we’ve now brought the divergent terms “direct” and “indirect” into the discussion, it appears to me that:
Direct dough = Straight dough
Indirect dough = Sponge dough

Perhaps the formulas using very low biga-hydration levels are using low-protein flours. I believe I also read somewhere that flours manufactured in different places are dehydrated to different levels. If true, then a flour that has a higher inherent moisture content should require less added moisture to “develop the gluten”, than a drier but otherwise equivalent flour with a lower inherent moisture level. I would also presume that storage humidity, as well as ambient weather conditions, could affect this, including those in the home.

I also had a few melancholy remembrances during the last few days. I was about 13, maybe younger, and sitting at the kitchen table reading through a large cookbook. When it started discussing sponge methods, sourdough was mentioned. This pattern repeated through several other cookbooks over the course of some period of years, so I learned way back then that sponge methods were only meant for sourdough, and since I didn’t care for sourdough’s flavor, why would I ever waste my time learning to make sponge dough or using sponge methods. I’m sure glad that myth has finally been put to rest.

2009.Aug.2

Just some sundry reading, Bread, The Staff of Life. After reading that I was reminded about the squishy and non-springy nature of this most recent batch. I’m certain that that aspect of the batch was not an improvement, and my plan is to increase the protein ratio to a higher level. However, that is not my primary concern at this point, tuning the yeast amount and fermentation temperatures are much higher on the priority list.

2009.Aug.3

The initial temperature of the primoferment before placing in the refrigerator for the retarded fermentation probably gives a great deal of control over the time intervals required for the rising dough to peak, besides just the initial seed or inoculation amount of yeast.

As I’ve been looking around for the math equations, I’ve increasingly been reminded of my capacitor solutions post and the project it describes.

I’ve noted that not one of my cookbooks has simplistic equations to calculate the dough peaks, and even more more to the point, to calculate shifting the peak to a sooner or later time interval which may involve temperature more than initial yeast inoculation. One of the books does have simple formulas for dough temperature (mixing flour of a temperature with water of another temperature to calculate mixed temperature), protein ratios, and some other things, so I find the absence of a simple equation for bakers to model yeast curious. So, if you’re a mathematician, or perhaps a molecular biologist, consider hooking up with a bread baking artisan/author, and devise a simple temperature and yeast growth formula so that us home bakers can plug some numbers into our spreadsheets so we can accurately shift the time our fermenting-dough peaks occur by changing the seed yeast amount and-or by changing the fermentation temperature.

The most comprehensive set of formulas I can find: sourdough yeast and bacilli culture mathematically modeled.

However, I feel that currently attempting to understand those will require more time-investment and lack-of-joy than I desire (just following the references to other studies is time consuming, then often they’re not publicly available anyway, so then one goes on a “hunting” trip to libraries and such looking… can potentially be a big waste of time).

Here are a few other links regarding yeast-growth modeling.

http://www.pizzamaking.com/forum/index.php/topic,5028.msg42572.html
(this pizzamaking.com reference isn’t yeast-growth modeling per se, but it’s interesting nontheless that a pizza baker modeled a dough formula)

http://blowers.chee.arizona.edu/cooking/kinetics/bread.html

However, this has the most simplistic formulas, scroll around the page some: http://regentsprep.org/REgents/math/ALGEBRA/AE7/ExpDecayL.htm

These last ones probably won’t work very well, but because they are so very simple, trying them isn’t a huge time investment. The doubling formula doesn’t take account of temperature, which is a major failing.

[This section is to continue adding links as I find them that relate to yeast-growth modeling, regardless of the date I find them]
http://archives.math.utk.edu/ICTCM/VOL18/W013/paper.pdf
This model seems to incorporate a bound point, and includes a simple graph.
[/end.link.section]

So I decided, in order to avoid going down this particular math rabbit hole right now, losing any joy the bread baking has been giving and instead having a month or two long math refresher cram session and lots-of-work, to instead simply cut the initial yeast amount in half, and make another batch, keeping the temperatures as constant as I can keep them. By selecting a yeast amount that is exactly half the value as that used in the last batch, then observing any increase in the time to the new batch’s retarded-fermentation dough peak, I should get a rough idea of the time interval required for yeast numbers to “double” under those conditions by observing the height of the peak, as well as the time intervals that have passed until the peak occurs.

This may give me some insight into whether it’s possible to shift the dough peak to something other than a 5-6 hour time-interval point, or whether yeast wants to follow a more time-fixed growth curve, particularly in the event the dough peak doesn’t time-shift much at all. It’s possible that the height of the peak will change more than any time-interval shift. In that case, my guess will be that it’s better to modulate the dough’s initial temperature going into the refrigerated fermentation, to decrease it some to slow growth versus changing the initial yeast added.

2009.Aug.4

I haven’t yet flow charted the the proof, and may not. It is my understanding that the yeast consumes a very limited amount of food composed of broken starch chains that comprise at most 1-2% of the total flour weight. It seems to me that with too many fermentations (that have kneadings or foldings between), the yeast will eventually consume all the available broken starches, at least with a lean dough that has no added sugar. Therefore, it seems there would be a point at which even viable yeast would fail to thrive. I also understand this can result in a pale colored crust, as it’s these same sugars that are responsible for what is called the Maillard reaction which results in the crust color. Diastatic malts seem to typically be used for this, to increase the yeasts’ food supply. Apparently the difference between malt powder and diastatic malt powder is that with the former, the enzymes and such have been inactivated, but in the latter, they remain active. I’ve also seen some references to malt syrups used in baking, but whether they are diastatic, or not, is often unknown.

Most of the flours I’ve purchased over the years state they have some malted barley added (the High Gluten flour I use does not state this on the packaging, but it does say enzymes), so if one uses a flour without such an addition, the importance of adding these yeast foods probably increases, and in the event those aren’t added, likely so does the yeasts tendency to consume its available food supply faster, as it seems its total food supply would be decreased.

Here’s an interesting page about making your own diastatic malt at home. A similar page. We used to buy some breads years ago at a particular market that also had its own bakery, most of their breads were whole grains of various kinds, some of which had the word “sprouted” in their name. One day they stopped making their one-of-a-kind Sprouted Triticale bread. That was a sad day.

Anyway, the bottom line of my current thinking is that the more fermentation rest periods there are (with the very important disclaimer of 100% of the flour), the more yeast food (simple sugars of some name, might be maltose) has been consumed by the growing until-the-bake—or—run-out-of-food yeast, particularly in a lean dough. It seems the advantage of the enzymes is that they seem to make the needed simple sugars from the more complex starch chains (undoubtedly an oversimplification). Another set of explorations could investigate the effect of food-starved yeast on the final proof, besides just a lack of color in the crust. My guess is that it wouldn’t rise as much, and be denser and chewier.

2009.Aug.06

I was just grocery shopping, and also reading labels once again, a habit of mine, and I saw that a similar flour with a higher protein ratio, labeled as “Bread Flour”, also contained ascorbic acid. The “Baker’s Flour” didn’t claim any ascorbic acid. Ascorbic acid is used as a dough conditioner, and current references seem to say it interferes with alpha amylase enzymes, while ascorbic acid’s inhibitory effect on beta amylase has been known for a number of decades. While it’s just a guess, with straight dough formulas such as those of a typical bread machine, ascorbic acid inhibition of amylase wouldn’t seem to matter as much. However, with longer dough development processes such as sponge doughs, amylase enzymes would seem critical to breaking down longer starch chains into simpler sugars that yeast can feed upon over longer time periods. Whether these enzymes are active or not at the lower fermentation temperatures typically used during bulk-fermentation and proofing, or whether they are only active at the higher temperatures found typically during the bake cycle, or whether the amounts of added ascorbic acid are sufficient to significantly affect these enzymatic processes are unknown by me. These two flours are from one manufacturer, whom I haven’t named, nevertheless, they seem important things to look for on the product labels, depending upon one’s intended usage.

I’m feeling like I’m going down the baker’s rabbit hole, without even getting into math.

2009.Aug.8

I’m still reading and searching for information about amylase, and trying to determine whether it is active at the lower temperatures typically used during bulk-fermentation and proofing, as well as wanting to know if it is active at typical refrigerator temperatures. The following page is about industrial enzymes added to bread, but their first sentence, at least to me, implies that amylase enzymes are active at temperatures typically used in bread-dough fermentation, i.e., “Maximises the fermentation process…” The temperatures aren’t specified, and beer-making guidelines say that the optimum temperature for amylase activity is higher than fermentation temperatures (temperatures at which yeast lives), the linked image appears on this page. It’s a little hard to reconcile the two, unless the wort mashing guidelines are idealized to optimum points but that the given enzyme activity also occurs outside the image’s given temperature and pH bounds.

One of the curious processes when using a poolish, is that dry flour is typically added between the poolish stage and bulk fermentation or later proof, adding more broken starch chains, effectively supplying fresh food for the yeast. However, if one wishes to autolyse that dry flour first, autolyse with only water at non-yeast modified pH levels, then the percentage amount of poolish used must decrease in the final dough (by the amount of water added to the flour for the autolyse process, water which once used there is not available to have used it in greater percentage amounts in the poolish). By definition, a poolish is of 100% hydration, or equal weights of flour and water. This is one of the reasons why I wanted to try the biga (whether biga or pseudo-biga) first.

One thing I need to be aware of when altering the yeast amounts to tune when the dough peak occurs is that I may begin to alter “older dough” into “newer dough”, which may alter flavor. My prior batch had the peak occur at 5-6 hours, which means the dough continued fermenting for another 12-hours, so the ratio of 6:18 (18 derived from 12+6, or the total retarded bulk-fermentation time) may be important. The last batch I made had a ‘very light’ scent of alcohol at the end of bulk-fermentation. Some of the prior batches, before I practiced more care with temperature and time, had stronger alcohol smells at similar process points. So, if the dough peak is altered, I need to also specifically note any odor changes, as it may be the dough’s alcohol that slightly alters the baked bread’s flavor. This may be something worthwhile to note on the flow charts, besides just the current data points which are mostly time and temperature. I’m sure the pros probably have a test of some kind they can perform to provide a precise alcohol content datapoint; I’ll have to be satisfied with the subjective smell test for now.

So, two new datapoints to add to fermentation flow charts. The ratio of the dough peak to the total fermentation time, and the subjective smell test. The data points might be irrelevant, and they might not be, the only way for me to know is to track the information then perform the highly subjective taste test.

I think I’ll go back and alter at least one of those flow charts above to include these data points, and while I’m at it I’ll delete the silly term pre-ferment.

2009.Aug.9

For some reason, the use of the term pre-ferment by so many other published bakers has stuck in my mind as a misuse of the root words, particularly the prefix. This morning, it occurred to use the term “primary” as a word in the phrase “primary fermentation” instead. I’m sure I’ve seen the term used elsewhere in this context. However, it’s tempting to turn “primary” into the shortened prefix “pri”, unfortunately, I cannot find “pri” listed as a prefix in any English-only dictionary (but I haven’t yet checked OED). I’ll probably go back and change my usages of the term “pre-ferment” to “primary ferment” or “primary fermentation.” Maybe someday “pri” will be considered a valid English prefix, if so, then I can shorten it to pri-ferment; further, pre-ferment and pri-ferment might or could be homonyms.

Someone asked WikiAnswers what the prefix meaning “first” is, the answer given is “primo-”. So, “primo-fermentation”? But I’m not going to take WikiAnswers as authoritative, I still need to check OED. My little unabridged dictionary doesn’t list “primo” as a valid prefix, nor does a define:primo Google search turn it up as a valid English prefix, though the unabridged dictionary I commonly use does have the word-fragment “primo” preceding other words when not using the hyphen, such as primogenitor, and indeed it seems to mean “first.” So, maybe primofermentation and primoferment fits better, but today, that doesn’t seem to be a “recognized” word. Perhaps I’ll start using it anyway. Yes. I will “coin” the word primoferment and the variant primofermentation, as well as plurals with an added “s” at the end. I will define it thusly: First and-or Primary Fermentation. When used in reference to baking bread, as I have used it, it specifically allows any flour amount, either less than, equal to, or greater than 100% of the flour (if a single batch of primoferment was for multiple specific and different formulas, and the total primoferment was divided to make each one, it could have a larger amount of flour than 100% of any given specific formula).

The purpose for my use of this word is that in the case of the term “sponge”, as well as “pre-ferment”, the explicit meanings as used by published bakers evidently excludes using 100% of the flour. Thus, I will use the term primoferment to mean the first fermentation, regardless of the percentage of the final dough’s flour amount. A primoferment could also be a sponge, or even the oxymoronic preferment, as those terms have apparently come to be defined by bakers. While I’ve never made a sourdough culture due to personal taste preferences that I learned of when a child, if such a culture is or was the first fermentation, the term primofermentation could also apply to that.

I’ve just discovered that the bi-metallic refrigerator thermometer that I’ve been using in my “warm” refrigerator is now defective (I believe it worked fine when it was new). Putting it into a non-defrosting chest freezer with a newer, fluid-based refrigerator/freezer thermometer (AKA “bulb” thermometer, but inside some kind of plastic and metal case) shows that its error is huge: Fluid-thermometer reads -15F, while bi-metallic reads 42F. So, while I was believing that my dough retarder (it’s a spare fridge, an old keg cooler I found rusty in a backyard back in the 1980s — it needed a minor repair, a start capacitor for the compressor–I love it because it doesn’t have a defroster-heat cycle, thus it uses very little power) was warm, evidently my thermometer was misreporting the temperature. I do know the old keg cooler doesn’t freeze water, so it’s above 32F. I moved the fluid-based thermometer into it, and it seems to read 38F. I guess it’s time to buy more refrigerator thermometers, and I hope to get the fluid type (maybe they’ll last longer). So all that prior data where I believed my retarder was warm at about 45 or thereabouts is wrong, based upon the reporting of a defective thermometer.

But before doing any of that, I’m getting low on baked bread…

2009.Aug.10

This is a test of halving the added yeast. The process is about the same as the prior “Wow!” batch above. When I say, “about the same”, I mean as precisely the same as I’m humanely able to duplicate it. I’m trying to find out if and how much the dough peak time-shifts with a refrigerated bulk-fermentation process, due to so many claims on others’ sites that reducing the yeast amount shifts the dough peak to a longer time interval.

The following observations were made on the same day as baking (very fresh).

Crumb Texture: The cell sizes are smaller, and overall, because the proof didn’t rise as high in the pan (reduced absolute yeast numbers is my guess), the bread is more dense. It isn’t as “squishy” though it’s still soft, (softer than the straight-dough series of 55% water and about same size and total weight), but the crumb springs back after squeezing (similar squeeze to what happens when eating a sandwich). Not a very heavy squeeze, but a compression of a slightly thick slice to about 1/8″.

This bread is almost tasteless. Reminds me slightly of factory made hamburger or hotdog buns, shape excepted, though this is probably springier, and crust is thicker. Tasteless quality persists with toast. This size does allow 4 slices to fit in the toaster oven simultaneously. Two differences with prior batch: Reduced yeast numbers, and probably related, absence of alcohol odor.

I’ve updated the most recent dough formula to be more specific with regards to the water I use, and have used in the past. Chlorine in the water may act to inhibit yeast growth, and I understand dissolved minerals such as calcium raise pH.

Next comes the retarded dough-peak data, it peaks at roughly the same time as the prior batches where the initial temperature was 84F and the total dough-ball weight was about 2600g, though the height of the peak is about 2 inches less. The row that says ‘”s to top’ means the inches to the top of the pan, the number decreases as the dough rises higher.

The problem with shifting the dough peak is that the dough is cooling off within 6 hours to a temperature below yeast multiplication levels, given the 84F initial dough temp when placing it there. So the answer appears that the dough peak does not time-shift significantly with this type of changing-temperature process. The reduced height of the peak could be considered a type of shift, but it doesn’t appear as a time shift. My guess is that the total yeast numbers are reduced throughout the entire yeast active temperatures. Since there wasn’t increased time at active temperatures, yeast didn’t multiply to greater numbers needed to rise dough higher, and effect other dough chemical changes, such as decreased stickiness (stickiness that first showed up with the autolyse process, but that disappeared relatively more after other batches’ retarded bulk-fermentation, batches when yeast numbers would seem higher).

The major out-gassing of the yeast seems to stop or slow somewhere between 65 – 56.3F, as my non-calibrated black digital probe reports. I can think of three possible ways to extend the fermentation peak given the apparent problem: Do some of the fermentation outside the 38F cooler, say, 6 hours or so, then place it in the cooler for the remaining 12 hours; raise the dough temperature some (I estimate it needs to be raised to about 100F for a 12:18 Peak:Totaltime, which is kind of a high dough temperature, though it might make an interesting test to sample the effects of a partial higher-temperature fermentation on autolysed dough) before placing in fridge; or a combination of the two. Oh, another possibility is to connect the thermostat used for the proofing light to the fridge, then set the temperature higher than 38 (it’s trivial wiring, but I would prefer a process that uses a typical refrigerator temperature, though being able to retard to any desired stable temperature is possibly/probably the best solution.)

My current guess is that the dough peak would shift as a point-in-fermentation time provided that fermentation temperatures were constant and of a level that was between yeast activity temperatures. My understanding is that those temperatures would typically be between 68 – 105F to possibly a little higher, though the rising data of this latest batch also shows activity at lower temperatures including 65F and a bit lower. This is why being able to set the retarder’s or refrigerator’s temperature somewhat higher than 38F would be preferable. Since my non-calibrated temperature probe indicated that yeast activity (outgassing) slowed to a stop somewhere between 65 – 56.3F, setting a fermentation temperature at those levels (whatever the actual temp is, my black digital probe has an unknown amount of error, possibly 5 degrees high or slightly more) would provide the slowest dough rise and associated yeast multiplication. If I could set the retarder to 65F, it seems it would be a slow, steady rise, and if I could set it to 64F, then 63F on a different batch, and keep lowering the temperature over successive batches, I could probably find the lowest temperature point where this particular yeast strain appears to go into dormancy. As a related issue, I recall reading somewhere that yeast lagers (a beer type) are typically cold fermented (I don’t recall the precise temperature). Ales are fermented at warmer temperatures than lagers.

To do the freeze test, I filled a drinking glass that was tall enough for the stainless probes to be completely submerged, filled the glass with crushed ice, then placed the black and green thermometers in the ice with their probes touching the bottom (both have probes of roughly equal length), then filled the glass with water up to the bottom of the thermometers’ plastic circuit-containers or the point where the stainless probe is fully submerged, the same as the level of crushed ice. Then I placed it all in the freezer for 20 minutes. Then I removed the glass and thermometers from the freezer to take temperature readings. When looking at the data, it seems to me that the thermometers’ circuit-cases, when they warm up in room-temperature air, increase the reading, though I’d like to have confirmation of that, such as with an accurate bulb thermometer. I have trouble believing that a fully filled glass of ice with some icewater is as high as 38F, the ice should have been more melted at that point, but I don’t have a calibrated bulb thermometer to test it against. What I’m saying is the temperature measurement may not be well isolated to the probe itself, never mind only the tip of the probe. So, next time I measure bulk dough rising temperature, I will use the green digital thermometer, and leave it in the dough while the dough is in the refrigerator, that may get the plastic circuit case closer to the same temperature (upon a reread, this also runs the risk of skewing the temperature reading to the low side, if the probe is not well temperature isolated and the center of the dough is warmer than the surrounding air, such as in a refrigerator).

The reason I’ve preferred using the black digital thermometer was that when pressing its on-off button to turn it on, it had the last used F or C setting saved, so all I had to do was turn it on and wait for the reading to stabilize. With the green thermometer, it always defaults to C (centigrade) when turned on, meaning I have to press two buttons to use it. First, turn it on by pressing one button, and press the other C-F button to change it to F.

I prefer thinking of baking-related temperatures in Fahrenheit because the oven’s thermostat knob is scaled only in Fahrenheit, so it makes more sense for me to think in relative terms to Fahrenheit. If the oven knob had both scales printed on it, I doubt if I’d care which scale I used.

I’ve noticed when I make one loaf and refrigerate the dough, it rises less than when I make two loaves. Two loaves worth of risen dough, about 2600g, fully fills the large pan and lid I use in the retarder when the dough has expanded to the point it typically falls (the “peak”). This point may be between 4 and 6 times its starting volume. Anyway, as the mass placed in the pan increases, it seems to take longer to cool off, so the dough rises a little more because it’s at a higher temperature for a bit longer time, keeping the yeast active for longer. So, another strategy would be to get a larger pan (expensive, particularly for stainless steel, personally I wouldn’t want to use aluminum due to dough acids that form – certain food-grade plastics would probably be okay, if the dough can be removed without adding oil to its surfaces), and make four loaves at a time, refrigerating all the dough starting as a single rounded ball.

When I wrote “food-grade plastics” in the paragraph above, it flashed into my mind that yet another tactic would be to insulate the rising container, so that the heat transfers out of the dough slower. Plastic alone insulates more than stainless steel. So it seems there are a lot of strategies that could increase the current 4:18 – 6:18 peak ratio.

This dough was stickier than the prior batch when it came out of the retarder, I presume because the reduced yeast numbers didn’t effect as many dough changes in the first 4-6 hours when the yeast was active and before cold put them into dormancy.

No alcohol odor after fermentation was noticed. One possibility for this is that due to frequent temperature checking, the fermentation pan kept having its lid taken off, then replaced. I forgot to specifically sniff-test this post-fermentation dough. With some prior batches, alcohol odor was obvious without intentional sniff or smell test. However, my belief is that yeast numbers weren’t yet high enough during temperature-active bulk-fermentation periods to produce a higher level of dough alcohol that would have been of obvious odor.

2009.Aug.12

One more piece of data that I haven’t been explicitly tracking, and which certainly seems important, is the total time in fermentation. In other words, the clock time and date when yeast is added to the flour and water, and the clock time and date when the shaped and proofed dough is placed into the oven for baking, which shortly thereafter kills the yeast (said to be 140F). For the purposes of consistency from batch to batch, this total fermentation time seems quite important, though the varying temperatures tend to alter the yeast growth as well. Most of the interim fermentation steps already have an associated time and temperature, so tracking the total time also seems important as a double check that process was repeated accurately.

Additionally, I still need to develop a shorter and more concise method of conveying all the process steps, the time and temperature in each. The flow charts are okay-to-superior for understanding the general process, but they’re text-based objects, not data cells that can easily be altered with a glance and a keystroke or two.

It’s my understanding, from reading, that the large bread factories have gotten to the stage of near total flour-to-bread automation, which, whatever the weaknesses of their final product, at the very least provides a high level of batch-to-batch consistency, something which is hard to characterize as anything other than a definite strength.

2009.Aug.24 SNIP

The entries that were here have been moved into a new post with the title Part 2: Experimenting with Bread Dough Process. This snip, like the prior one, is due to difficulties updating when the post length exceeds some length amount. I started having trouble with this post when it contained about ~12,000 words. Apparently I will need to plan to have multiple posts, rather than one long one which was the original plan, and when the posts start reaching the 8K-10K word level, to start looking for a break point.

Unfortunately, study and reading can take one only so far, sometimes you have to actually do it to learn more. So, after getting a scale to weigh ingredients, a vast improvement in the consistency of batch-to-batch results occurred, but then more questions arose.

I decided to increase the moisture of the white bread recipe that I use for toast and sandwich slices from 51% to 53%, where the water weight is expressed as percentage of flour weight, and further, this percentage doesn’t include all the water, as vinegar presumably is mostly water. Some may prefer to conceive of this 51–53% change as a 53.35–55.35%, or imprecisely by rounding to zero decimals, 53–55% change. The recipe is given below for further analysis. For a number of years I have put some amount of vinegar in my breads because I’ve noted the bread takes longer to stale when it has this ingredient added, or restating, gives it a longer shelf life, and I’ve never been able to taste it, so I see no downside to doing so.

As it happens, I ended up rising and baking this batch on a rainy and somewhat colder day, the rise took longer (around 5 hours) than it typically does on a warmer day (3.5-4 hours). I’m not sure how much of this change is related to the dough’s moisture change. (We get so little rain in Southern California, I decided to take an umbrella for a walk while I waited the extra time. Thank you Gaia, I love your rain!)

I prefer the french-bread taste of sandwich-style white bread made from dough that has aged in the refrigerator overnight, this isn’t done so much for the yeast to have a slower rise (though that is an effect), it is said to break down some of the carbohydrates differently, and the results are both tasted in an altered flavor, and seen as a slightly different color of crust in the baked product.

I rise the refrigerator-temperature dough in the pans it will be baked in, in the same room temperature oven in which it will later be baked. Because the oven is not humidified without the addition of heat, the weighed and pre-shaped dough pieces, before they’re put in the pans, are smeared with oil, and so too are the pans. This prevents a skin from forming during the rise in the absence of a humidified and temperature-controlled rising chamber, as well as providing a release agent for easing the removal of the baked loaves from their pans.

It seems one trick is to be patient with the rise, however, with this 53% moisture dough, I was quite surprised with how much it rose during the initial portion of baking, sometimes referred to as oven spring.

For each loaf, the dough weighed approximately 1300-1400 grams (which is 1.3-1.4 kilograms), this provides a nicely-sized sandwich slice that really is larger than a typical soda cracker! It takes 1 hour, 35 minutes of baking to reach 199F internal temperature, in a thermostat-reported 300F degree oven, and this includes our oven’s warm-up time. Higher baking temperatures seem to result in a crust that is too dark and thick for my sandwich-slice preferences, at least when baking these rather large loaves.

With respect to 51% moisture dough, the crumb of the baked product has fairly regular or consistently-sized holes, but at 53%, it appears that it’s beginning to get those odd, irregular holes some like so much. The photo that follows is of sliced bread from 53% moisture dough. I’m not at all certain whether I like these larger holes for sandwich slices, who wants a peanut butter and honey or jelly sandwich dripping all over their fingers? In any case it’s sometimes fun trying slightly different things, so long as the bread is still edible (one downside of making multiple loaves at the same time is that when something goes seriously wrong, it can be a lot of waste).

You probably didn’t notice the steam injector at the bottom of the oven. This really is a huge improvement to the equipment to bake bread.

The other end connects to a slightly modified pressure cooker that sits on the stove, it’s what produces the steam for the injection. Since we have a gas oven, I was able to find an existing hole to route the pipe into the oven, rather than needing to drill one. Drilling may have required a specialized bit, such as diamond coated, to get through any ceramic, porcelain, or possibly enameled surface without damage. What is pictured is made from 3/8″ copper refrigeration pipe, but do not presume the 90-degree elbow and T coupler are soldered! I brazed them with, I believe, 95% copper rod! I didn’t think the low-temperature melting-point of solder would be good for use in a hot oven. Further, one connection remains a slip fit so the oven’s panels can still be disassembled, should the need arise. It probably would have been prettier had I sand blasted the nozzle after brazing to remove the heat discoloration, then polished it, but it’s perfectly functional as it is.

I found the following page when researching steam injection for bread baking several years ago, probably around the same time I published the other bread recipe: home oven steam injector. I thought this author’s design was brilliant, so I implemented a slight variation of it in my oven!

Adding steam during the first portion of baking delays a skin from forming, allowing more freedom to the yeast to provide additional rise before the yeasts’ production of C02 begins to fall as temperature increases. Once a crust (a.k.a. “skin”) begins to form, it seems likely that oven spring would be hindered or held back to some degree or another, until it develops enough internal pressure that it cracks the skin.

I’d also guess that the humidity of an electric oven, when using steam injection, would likely be higher than a gas oven, as a gas oven is typically vented, and has a resulting convection or air circulation from the bottom where dry, heated air enters, to the top where it vents outward. So, I’m using a rather large pressure cooker, to hopefully increase the amount of moisture during the time that the steam is applied.

The other important thing I’ve learned for sandwich slices is not to use a serrated knife to cut bread that will be frozen afterward. It seems to leave a rougher surface that interlocks with adjoining frozen slices, making separation in the frozen state somewhat harder than if the slices are made with a razor-sharp straight-edge blade.

After discovering this, I reshaped the edge of a slightly longer than 12″ serrated knife, said to be for roasts, to a straight edge. It has only one side beveled and sharpened, the other side is essentially flat. The one flat side seems to help achieve a straighter slice versus a knife that is sharpened on both sides. Unfortunately, since the edge isn’t bisymmetrical, it’s not equally as useful to both right- and left-handed folks. In spite of being a high-carbon stainless-steel alloy of some kind, it still needs sharpening with each batch of 4 loaves sliced. It’s amazing how fast soft bread can slightly dull its edge.

The cooled loaf is easier to slice if it is placed in a plastic bag overnight, as this softens the crust.

I’d venture a guess that kitchens of the future will require a computer workstation, as working with paper and baker’s percentages sans a spreadsheet seems less than ideal.

These spreadsheets have a slightly higher functionality that make it easy to scale to large or small recipe amounts: An ODS (Openoffice.org) spreadsheet, and an XLS (Excel) spreadsheet.

Short and important note about bread flours. There are a lot of confusions for home bakers in regards to flour names, as flour mills are said to use a completely different flour grading system, and nomenclature or names, for their products versus the names cited for retail purchasers. This seems to result in some amount of variety in the characteristics of homebaked breads depending upon the precise flours used. There’s further information about this if you look around for it. So, you may need to experiment with the flours you have available in your area until you find something that works well enough for you.

3/9/2009:

I just made another batch, and confirmed the 53% moisture dough still has these slightly larger and more irregular hole sizes. However, I may have learned something else about Baker’s percentages relating to why bakers track the flour as 100%.

I designed a different spreadsheet that keeps the total dough weight placed in each pan constant, even though the weight of the water increases the total dough weight versus a lower water percentage dough (I’m not sure that’s phrased well). This spreadsheet automatically decreases the flour weight as a result, keeping the total dough weight placed in the pan constant to the 51% formula. I’m not publishing this spreadsheet at this time, as I’m not sure my formulas are as simplified as they could be, and I currently have two different calculation routines (I guess they’re essentially algorithms) that give the same answer as a double check, so it’s a more complicated spreadsheet to know how to use.

The total batch’s flour weight was reduced to 3397.33 grams by the calculations.

I tried this flour-weight reduction manipulation to keep total pan dough weight constant because I felt that with the increased hole sizes of the 53% bread, the baked volume of the loaves and size of the resulting slices was slightly larger than I wanted or was used to (they no longer fit in the toaster quite as well).

Anyway, I found the same baking time resulted in an increased and final internal bread temperature of 201F degrees, instead of the 199F that I’ve received repeatedly over at least 7-8 batches.

So, my tentative hypothesis is that a fixed amount of flour in each fixed size pan results in a consistent and final baked internal temperature assuming a fixed baking time and oven temperature, and it’s corollary, that a varying weight of flour in each fixed size pan results in a higher or lower final baked internal temperature assuming a fixed baking time and oven temperature.

If this is true, then an increase from 53% to 55% moisture, using the constant total weight formulas, should result in loaves that after baking for 1:35 minutes using the same rising and baking procedures, should further result in a final bread internal temperature of higher than 201F degrees, perhaps 203 degrees or thereabouts. Perhaps I should test that out with a 1 loaf batch of dough only, and see if these irregular sized holes in the crumb continue to increase along with the dough’s moisture increase.

It may also be possible to predict final baked-loaf temperatures with different baking times, possibly by basing a formula upon some kind of ratio between flour weight and total pan weight, presuming a fixed and consistent baking temperature. This may relate somehow to the somewhat unusual and greater than 100% total percentage.

I would think that having a consistent baking time to a particular final internal temperature would be useful to bakers, regardless of the number of fixed-size pans they’re dividing the total mixed dough into.

2009.04.08

I’ve been continuing to experiment, particularly trying to see if increasing the water content to 55% results in still larger holes.

Results were mixed until I slightly increased the yeast and salt amounts, then it appears the answer is yes. To verify this, I reduced the yeast and salt back to the old measure. Unfortunately, I made a two mistakes. First, after mixing, I left the dough too long before putting it in the refrigerator, then secondly, on baking day something came up that required attention, and I wasn’t able to be near the oven until it was too late in the day to begin, so the dough sat in the 40F (somewhat warmish) fridge an extra day. I’m not certain I fully liked the results, but larger holes were definitely apparent.

Here are the results visually, and this time the image was made with a scanner instead of a camera. The colors seem more yellow than the bread actually appears, probably something to do with a computer color-profile setting.

You can see that during the baking, the top fell slightly, which is possibly due to letting it rise a little too long. So possibly a third mistake was made. This mistake laden batch rose much faster than I expected. I ran some errands during the rise, and when I got home there should have been plenty of time left to the beginning of the baking process, but there wasn’t! Because of the faster rise, coupled with the decreased yeast versus the prior loaf (not documented here, just mentioned), I presume there must have been yeast growth or multiplication of some kind, though that’s just a guess.

I noticed two things that seemed to have changed that I don’t care for. When slicing the bread, there was a slightly different odor, more vinegary is how I would describe it, and that would be consistent with aging of dough tending toward more acidic. If I wanted to explore this further, it might be worthwhile eliminating the recipe’s added vinegar. Also, there was the barest hint of a sharpness, perhaps subtle sourness, to its taste. I’ve never been a fan of sour breads, even though many love that flavor. I’m not sure if this slightly off flavor was solely due to acidity, or if I’m tasting the beginnings of a wild-yeast growth. The crumb also seemed a little less tender. So I have to try this precise recipe once again, but with only one day of refrigeration time, and with more care about not having extra time from initial mixing of the dough to the time it’s put in the refrigerator.

BTW, I’m currently only baking one loaf at a time, because I’m trying all these minute variations. During one set of tests, I mixed the dough with ice-temperature water, and immediately refrigerated it, trying to keep it as cold as possible until the next day’s rise. Another batch, I used room temp water, and allowed the mixing to increase its warmth more than usual (by mixing for longer), then refrigerated it after setting at room temperature for exactly 1 hour. The latter method resulted in a lighter, more airy crumb. So something desirable is happening during the slow cooling off process that occurs during the first four-to-six hours in the refrigerator, coupled with the slow warm up process during the rise after placing in the pans.

Oh, and at 55% water percentage, and a constant pan dough weight, the bread now almost reaches 203F degrees after baking for 1 hour and 35 minutes.

I’m believing my favorite so far is the 53% + 2.35% formula, but it’s still kind of fun, and a learning process, to see how slightly changing the values in the recipe and even processes change the end product. Evidently, for years, I’ve made my pizza doughs slightly too dry!

I’ve also been experimenting with different oils used for pan release agents, and have been surprised to find they are not all the same. Fully refined oils seem to work better than more virgin oils, as the latter seem to leave more crust on the pan after removal, and generally are more frustrating during the bread removal process. I’m guessing this is due to impurities in the oil that give it particular characteristics. The best oil I’ve found so far for pan release is fully refined peanut oil. Fully refined soybean oil, while it provides a nice release, tends to leave a yellowish sediment on the pan that after several baking cycles seems to build up and is somewhat hard to remove. However, I just obtained some 100% Organic Palm Oil, which is not hydrogenated, and which is quite easy to smear on the inside of the pan, which I then follow up with a saturated-with-same paper towel to leave only a very thin coating on the pan’s surface. The package label actually calls it “shortening”, but it’s still hard to find, not one grocer in our little town had any. Anyway I was really happy with the results as far as releasing the bread from the pan was concerned, and it doesn’t seem to be building up on the stainless-steel pan’s surface, which is preferable. Palm oil reportedly has a high smoke point, something around 450F degrees, I believe, so it’s a good match for the peanut oil, which I still smear on the dough before placing in the pan, to prevent a skin from forming during the rise.

2009.05.23

I was mixing up another batch, when I realized I never placed the pictures or improvements for the last batch. The photos are dated April 23, so it appears we eat about 4 loaves every month. I slightly increased the yeast amount for this batch.

With this particular batch, as well as the last one, I encountered an old problem with the process: erratic rising results, the dough rose much more than it should have in the time allotted before placing it in the fridge. Anyway, here are the results of this mistake:

In spite of worrying that either peanut butter or jelly would squeeze through these holes, it’s not that much of a problem due to compromise! When using this bread for grilled cheese sandwiches, the outer grilled surfaces turn out much crisper than it has with any prior formula, and toast is divine. So I guess I’m deciding I like the holes this size for an all-purpose white bread.

This particular batch (last month’s) surprised me when it rose far too much before placing it in the refrigerator, so I reread some references that I’ve read in the past, before I had actually started using baker’s percentages, or even knew what they were, that at the time were somewhat confusing. This time through the text made a lot more sense, due to much more baker’s percentage familiarity. The text (link below) reminded me that I wasn’t keeping track of the temperature of the air, the dough or flour, or the water used for the dough. While I don’t really like needing to track another set of data points, I’ve found somewhat different rising results at different times, and this has been a matter of curiosity and consternation. As soon as I would start assigning a set time amount for a part of the process, it would go as expected for a time or two, then it would fail miserably (well, not miserably, it was still edible). I believe I found the main source of the problem: we have a copper 3/8″ water line that travels through the attic from the garage, where the water filtration system is located, to the kitchen sink.

Today, as I was weighing the water, I also took its temperature, and found that it was in excess of 80F degrees, far too warm given that mixing the dough adds heat. I’m guessing that last month, since the daytime weather was reasonably warm, the bread dough temperature must have reached 90-100F degrees after mixing, which would have accelerated rise times.

When the drinking water line was installed, cutting the slab to put the pipe underground was considered only for the briefest of moments, but that would have insured that any water in the pipe would be at ground temperature, usually a stable value around 57F or so. Alternatively, putting the entire unit under the sink poses a problem with filter replacements and maintenance, so I put the line in the attic. During warm summer days when the sun is directly overhead, the water that is not flowing in the attic line gets quite warm, hot even.

So today I used a few ice cubes, weighed with the water for the total weighed amount, and got the water to 66F degrees when the added ice cubes were completely melted. I’ll need to rethink this process, but it worked well enough this time (I may just use chilled water that’s very cold, and microwave it until it reaches the desired temperature). After mixing, the dough was 81F degrees, which is right in my target range for yeast multiplication (as opposed to warmer temps for maximum CO2 production). I use a far-too-small food-processor using the blade for final mixing (for these four loaves it’s 8 “food processor” batches), and it’s known that this type of blade kneading adds dough heat quickly. Outside air temperatures were 70F according to the thermometer, and inside air temperatures were 76 or thereabouts.

The dough that’s rising right now (in the refrigerator, it takes time for it to cool) and made at these temperatures is not rising fast, but slow once again, much the same as it tended to do during the winter, when the water running through that supply pipe doesn’t get nearly as hot (I’ve known this for a long time, I don’t know why it never occurred to me as important for bread dough, duh). I may decide to move the drinking water storage tank to under the sink, but until I actually do that, simply being aware of the water temperature added to the flour should be sufficient to be able to adjust it to a reasonable value.

Apparently, what started my interest in bakers percentages was John Correls’s site about how to make pizza dough. He tells us of a temperature formula used in the industry. He tracks the flour temperature, the air temperature, and the water temperature, algebraically manipulating the formula to solve for water temperature of the current batch.

Another site with similar dough-temperature information.

So, I have a few more data points to track, and since there’s always some inaccuracy in any single set of measurements, for now my desired dough temperature will be around 80F degrees, probably 78F, or so, for this slow-rise refrigerator dough, never more as that moves into a faster fermentation range which I wish to avoid until the final pan rise or proof then bake. Since I’m trying for a little yeast multiplication before refrigeration and cool down, I probably want the dough at least 68F, so this gives a range of 68-78 to play around with. It’s important to realize that there’s additional heat added by kneading.

It looks like this is another good science-based cookbook. It’s a bit pricey.

My notes indicate I’ve already tried one batch in this series of recipes using very cold water (as cold as ice would make it), and I didn’t care for it as well as this method. My notes indicate it didn’t rise as well as a comparison batch made with room temp water (all other processes were the same, overnight refrigeration, etc.). I presume this is because the yeast didn’t have a chance to begin to multiply before the cool down of refrigeration. I’ve generally tried to minimize the initial yeast amount added to avoid a “yeasty” flavor, though I may have minimized it too much. That is one of the reasons I increased the yeast percentage slightly (and salt, to keep salt:yeast constant), I probably erroneously believed it may have been responsible for the erratic results.

I have about 8 feet of bookshelf space devoted to cookbooks, collected during the 1980s-present and only one, published recently, has anything about baker’s percentages. I’m thinking it may be time to have a book burning.

2009.05.24

I used the same baker’s percentage recipe as last month. This morning I divided the dough, oiled the pans, and proofed. It’s baking as I write this, but I wanted to get a few short thoughts down. This time proofing took 3 hours from the time the pans with cold dough were placed in the cool oven, which is approximately how I remember it when making this during the winter. Actually, prior proof times I believe were 3.5 hours, so this is a little faster. I did keep the oven light on the entire proofing time, some day I’m going to need to measure the difference in temperature between light on and light off. Room temperature was 74F. The dough rose a little higher in the pan than I wanted, so it seems I need to cut the yeast and salt back down to the older, lower percentages (why use more if it’s not needed?). It appears that awareness of the temperature of water added to the dry ingredients, and how it relates to the final dough temperature before refrigeration, has tentatively helped to resolve this curious little repeatability and timing problem I’ve been experiencing. I wonder how many of my prior tries, and any conclusions I may have made as a result, were tainted by a varying water temperature and failure to track the dough temperature, which mostly likely allowed the pre-refrigeration dough to go well into fermentation temperatures.

It’s done baking, it’s cooled, and here’s an image of one slice:

As you can see, the holes appear a little smaller. It’s also soft, light, tender, and springy, as well the odor of the bread is more “normal”. I’m much happier with this batch. I’ll need to see how it works out as toast and when using it for grilled cheese sandwiches. I’ll also need to think on this for a few days, or wait for inspiration, to see which way further experimentation might go. I think I’d like to reduce the total mass in each pan, perhaps about 40 grams, and to let it rise for the full 3.5 hours as I typically did during winter.

It would also be a good idea to get confirmation that ~95F degree dough, with all other procedures the same, repeats the results of the prior batches that I considered “mistakes” written about above. It should have larger holes, all other things the same, if my hypothesis about the water temperature being too hot from attic heat was correct.

May 25, 2009: Toast from this last batch is nice and crisp, and so are grilled cheese sandwiches.

I’m coming to the slow and melancholy realization that I’ll have to make a whole series of tests again of 51%, 53%, 55% (all +2.35% vinegar), to compare against each other, this time holding the dough temperature, as measured immediately following blade kneading, at a constant value.

2009.05.26

I’ve added some calculations to the spreadsheet to track dough temperature, and decided to test it out on a batch with 100F degree dough, using the same ingredient percentages as the last one above. Measuring that kneaded dough with a thermometer, the calculations accurately predicted temperature to about 1F degree accuracy. It appears that the blade kneading method I’m using adds about 11F degrees to the total. Tomorrow, I’ll bake this batch, and also find out if the bread is similar to the “mistakes” written about above. The water temperature used was 123F degrees. Once mixed, I put it in the refrigerator, and it took “about” 2-3 hours (I didn’t set a timer) before the dough temperature decreased to 68F. So, this should be a good test of overly fermented dough.

Another interesting thing I noted about the calculations, providing they are accurate, was that if I want dough temperature to be as low as 68F degrees right after blade kneading, the water temperature needs to be 26.9F (ice), so that’s not possible to do only by lowering the water temperature (the salt could be added to the water, that should lower its freezing temperature some, but I’ve found that inhibits the yeast quite a lot), additional interventions would seem required, interventions such as refrigerating the flour ahead of time.

2009.05.27

During the molding stage, I note that this dough is not as relaxed as the 78F dough was (that was easy to mold and pan), and didn’t need additional time to relax (I believe this is called autolysis [note of 2009.06.27: Glissen says autolyse rest is performed at an early dough stage when ingredients added are limited to only water and flour (Professional Baking, 5th Edition, pg. 136), Reinhart seems to say the same thing (Bread Baker's Apprentice, pg. 58)]). I’ve noticed this before with some of the batches. So perhaps this is one symptom of over-fermented dough. Otherwise, the ingredient formulas are as much the same as I can make them. This batch took 4 hours to proof before I turned on the oven, but I did not proof it with the oven light on. I did measure the light on-off temperature difference, and it jumped about 8.5°F higher after 20 minutes or so with the 40-watt incandescent bulb on.

The crumb does have larger more irregular holes than the 78°F batch, but they aren’t as large as the “mistake-laden” batches. As I’ve been pondering over this, I wonder if I’ve consistently used the same punchdown process, which has been a fast blade kneading. It’s possible that I did not, but I think it’s unlikely, I believe I would have remembered. Going from memory and rereading what I wrote above, the mistake laden batches required more proofing time, sometimes as long as 5 hours. The picture directly above took 4 hours, versus the batch with the light on that took 3 hours.

The need to track the dough temperature has had a positive impact on my spreadsheet for baker’s percentages, I’ve added a module for that, and I’m also realizing I need to pay more strict attention to times for the various processes, in order to have more consistent results. If I’ve made mistakes, which some batches above surely prove, and I’m unable to completely replicate those mistake results, then it seems I’m not tracking enough information about each batch.

How to incorporate those into the spreadsheet as a set of data points is going to require further thought and experience. I believe I’m going to need a better method of controlling the oven proofing temperature than simply having the light on or off, and that even seems like an inefficient way to add heat, the oven bulb seems mostly designed to add light. The oven’s existing thermostat isn’t accurate enough to control just-above-room temperatures well or within +/- 1°ForC.

2009.05.29

[diversion] I won’t need any bread for a month or so, and ran across this wonderful description of how to make croissants from Pilmico (*.Doc). Those instructions provide a nice interplay or complement to the SFBI newsletter webpage, particularly the Spring 2005 (PDF) issue, where croissants are discussed.

While playing around with the oven today, I noted that its cold temperature was below room temperature, so I’m thinking the problems with the mistake laden batches are related to too low of a proofing or fermentation temperature, and that would explain the long times for rise that I was experiencing during some of the winter months. In the old days, a gas oven would have had a pilot light that would have provided some minor warmth, though it wouldn’t have been particularly controllable (the pilot was always lit, keeping the gas-valve thermocouple warm and ready to turn on). U.S. or California natural gas ovens these days use a sparking mechanism to light the burner, so there’s no residual warmth from a pilot light. I suppose I could put a votive type candle in there during the rise, but maybe there’s a better way, though there’s probably not a less expensive one. I don’t know if that would impart any undesirable flavors to the bread.

2009.06.03

Regarding raising the oven proofing temperatures to an optimal fermentation range: Another idea is to use different wattage light bulbs, depending upon the degree of temperature increase needed on the day when fermenting. This isn’t a bad idea, and is relatively cheap, but the oven already has a 40watt bulb, and that’s the highest wattage “appliance-type” bulb I can find. Perhaps any kind of incandescent bulb would work?

If I didn’t mind rewiring the oven slightly (I do mind, don’t want to modify the basic mechanism, UL approval, etc.), then a very high wattage bulb could possibly be installed, and a dimmer switch wired into it, so that one could modulate the light output of the bulb, and this would presumably modify the bulb’s related heat output. Like I said, not a bad idea, but it would need to be adjusted each and every time the oven was used for proofing and fermentation depending upon room temperature and the amount of temperature rise needed. It takes at least 20-40 minutes for the oven’s temperature rise and to stabilize once the light is on, so this requires checking the oven temperatures, with possible readjustment, followed by another wait, etc. There would still be the problem of using a light bulb to create heat, instead of something designed specifically to add heat, so presumably it would be somewhat inefficient for the purposes of adding heat instead of light. In this design, there would be no feedback from the oven regarding the inside temperature, so this method would always need manual adjustment and oven temperature checks. It’s also possible the wiring of the oven’s light-bulb socket is not of sufficient wire gauge to support a higher wattage bulb.

There are bulbs that are available that make no visible light, for example, some are made to make heat for keeping aquariums and reptiles and such warm, and they’ve available in what seem to be reasonable wattages. However, if the desire is to use the existing light bulb socket for one of these bulbs, possibly with a dimming circuit attached to modulate the power (downward) to it, then once the baking cycle begins, if light is desired, a bulb change would need to be made. Since I want a light occasionally during the actual baking, it seems like this would be somewhat inconvenient. Since the bulb socket is at the top back wall to the left (a bit hard to reach), the bulb itself also wouldn’t be pointed in the proper direction to warm the bottom center of the oven, presumably the best place for heat to be applied, since heat rises. This still would not provide any oven temperature feedback to the added dimmer control, meaning that any adjustment for temperature purposes would be manual. However, this would provide more flexible control of a higher wattage bulb, if for instance a non-available wattage, such as 47 or 38 or some other odd number of watts were optimally needed on that particular day.

So, perhaps I want a temperature controller that is entirely independent of any of the oven manufacturer’s circuitry. Ideally, it would have a digital readout of the current inside-the-oven temperature, and provide automatic on off switching of some kind based upon feedback from a temperature sensor. Then a ceramic infrared heater of a low wattage, perhaps like that used to provide heat to small animals could be placed underneath the baking chamber, where the gas burners are located, and this heat emitter or emitters could be pointed so they would warm the underside of the oven floor near the oven intake vents. Another option would be to string a heating wire directly below the vents. Any of these could be wired to automatically switch on to raise temperature and back off again when the controller’s set temperature is reached. I’m guessing this should be relatively power efficient compared to a manually operated light bulb, and as temperature accurate as the specifications of the HVAC controller allows, which seems to be +/- 1° for some that aren’t terribly expensive. In the event that the chosen heating element exceeds the power-supply capacity of the controller, then a relay will be needed between the two.

2009.06.04

Still thinking about making a temperature controlled fermentation chamber in the oven. Another option, when thinking of the relay, would be to find an electric oven’s lower heating element, and install that. This might be cheaper if a used but working oven can be obtained. However, once again I get into the problem of modifying an existing oven by such needed things as drilling holes, installing new wiring, etc. Along a similar line of thought, a somewhat standardized electric stove burner could be used, they’re often available at better hardware stores.

I guess I’m undecided as to the best way to go about this. It may be that a high wattage appliance light bulb installed in the oven, preferably halogen as they’re known to create quite a bit of heat as byproduct, and using a dimmer dial like would be used in a wall switch for a room light, would provide the necessary control modulation, and not be too expensive. However, halogen bulbs, so far as I know, don’t come in a design that screws into an existing socket.

I like the digital-thermostat operated idea best, as it would require the least amount of manual temperature evaluation and adjustment with each use, and seems very accurate. However, what type of heating element to use, something that is low cost and highly available in a generic sense, requires further thought. Our particular gas oven has a front mounted kick-plate that is removable (retained by springs), and there’s a space of about 6 inches in height from its metal floor to the gas burner. In many older ovens I’ve seen, this space typically would have been used for a broiler, but our model doesn’t have the drawer and broiler pans and such, just the kick-plate that opens into dead or unused space. This seems like a good place to put a low power electric heating element, as it wouldn’t require any drilling as might be required to install an element in the oven itself. A simple ceramic infrared heater bulb could easily be placed in this area, something below 120 watts total should allow this design to be operated directly by the controller, instead of needing a relay, but these bulb types run $20-$40 each. With the controller operating a relay, whose secondary circuit supplies the heating element’s power, then much higher wattage elements could be considered, such as a replacement electric stove coil, or an element from an electric oven itself. Oh, an electric water heater element might also be considered. However, these would have the very real possibility of getting far too hot, if, for example, the relay stuck in the on position (probably unlikely, but possible). So, while it may be slightly more costly, it seems like the ceramic infrared bulb of up to 120 watts is the safest, as well as least complicated in a wiring sense, way to go, and this bulb could be placed in the “missing broiler” space beneath the oven’s burner, which itself is below the baking chamber, and not require any permanent modifications to the inside of the oven. The controller’s temperature sensor can be placed within or fed down the oven’s existing exhaust vent, and may be removed when the oven is used for baking. In this way, the entire system that adds small amounts of heat for bread dough proofing and fermentation could be more like an attachment that is added when it’s needed (similar in concept to setting up the pressure cooker to apply steam at the beginning of baking), instead of being a permanent installation. If, at some point in the future, I decide to build or obtain a separate chamber or cabinet solely for proofing and fermentation of dough and whatnot, since this circuitry would not be permanently installed in the oven, it could easily be moved to the dedicated proofing cabinet.

For some reason, this is the solution I seem to be favoring. If one bulb in the oven’s lower chamber isn’t enough to get the baking chamber’s proofing temperature to 95°F (optimum yeast CO2 production temperature), then a second ceramic bulb could be added.

If I’m reading the specs correctly, the Johnson Controls A419ABC-1C controller seems to have enough capacity (15 non-inductive amps) in its built-in relay to support a small electric burner. It’s weakness seems to be that the temperature sensor probably/possibly cannot be permanently installed in the oven (doesn’t seem designed to take baking temperatures, though the metal portion of the probe is said to be stainless steel), it may need to be removed when baking. I believe this controller will do nicely, or at least nicely enough for my purposes.

2009.06.07

I went to the hardware store, they had outdoor halogen fixtures for less than half the cost of a ceramic reptile bulb, this fixture uses a single 118mm double ended halogen bulb, and which is available in 100, 150, 300, and 500-watt wattages. These bulbs put off quite a lot of heat, and it’s instant heat rather than the reported 8 minute warm up time of no-light ceramic infrared bulbs, so the halogen should be a good enough choice with the switched controller. Using a 100-watt bulb that was continuously on in the “missing broiler” space under the oven, the baking chamber reached 104F after 2 hours, which represents about a 30 degree increase over room temperature in what calculates to about 33 gallons of cubic space being warmed. Setting the dimmer to control the temperature is both difficult and iterative, so it seems the electronic controller switching the light on and off automatically based upon temperature feedback will probably work a lot better. The halogen fixture has a nice reflector built in to the metal & glass outdoor case, it only had one piece of plastic or rubber to seal the glass to the case, which I removed, then I pointed it up toward the burner, and it warms the baking chamber’s floor nicely.

For the time being, the entire unit will be removed when baking. Were I to decide to leave it in place during baking, I’d want interlocking ceramic beads installed over the power supply wiring, which itself would be replaced with 800+F approved wiring insulation.

I can see that in the future sometime, I’ll probably want to build a dedicated proofing chamber versus using the oven, but right now there isn’t space for one, so this will have to do.

2009.06.09

I’m finding that turning the light on for an initial time period and an hourly maintenance on-period is fairly satisfactory. For example, if room temp is 74F, and I want proofing at 78, turning the halogen bulb on for 10-15 minutes initially, turning it off, then every hour a 5 minute on cycle or thereabouts, seems to keep the oven temp about where I want it within about 2 degrees of accuracy. (Had I known this, it may have been sufficient to do this manual procedure with the regular oven’s light socket and a higher wattage bulb, but it may not be wired with sufficient gauge wire to support a 100 watt bulb. I just checked, and sure enough, the manual says no more than a 40 watt bulb, in fact, it says only a 40 watt bulb.)

I’ve also found that the oven continues to warm up a little over 1 degree after shutting the halogen bulb off with respect to the initial on cycle, this seems due to the heat on the floor of the oven continuing to dissipate into the chamber.

I originally wanted to find out what happened to bread dough at several different moisture levels, and so far, it seems that experiment has been somewhat of a failure. However, I’ve apparently learned a lot of other things:

• To calculate and measure dough temperature
• The need for more accurate temperature control during proofing
• Better pan release methods
• Baker’s and normal percentages, and use of grams and two scales (one more accurate for small amounts), which allows one to compare recipe-to-recipe patterns, which are obscured by U.S. Customary volume measures and conversion convolutions

Hopefully, with better temperature awareness and control, rising times will be much more accurate.

Now when I look at a recipe, I find myself wanting to convert it to percentages of some kind to see what is different about it and its various ratios versus another recipe. However, converting a volume-based recipe to weights, then to percents, takes a bit of study time, even if one is using approximate estimations instead of actual weights.

I recently obtained a copy of Professional Baking by Gisslen, 5th Edition, and was overjoyed that all the recipes are given in percentages, as well as weights in both ounces and grams, but the former, percentages, are what allows the similar and dissimilar patterns between recipes to be obvious. Reading though this book is fascinating, so many questions I’ve had over the years are being answered in the first chapters, before the recipes themselves.

2009.07.08

I decided to give it another try, after giving some thought to the discovered issues. This time I would make three loaves with different water percentages on the same day, refrigerating, fermenting, and proofing them all at the same time in the same chambers (refrigerator, oven-for-proofing, and oven-for-baking) in order to insure all timings and temperatures were more consistent between batches.

Scaling:

The Protein level of the flour ratio used above is about 12.1%. I haven’t a clue what the glutenin/gliadin ratio is.

All the figures in the yellow area are given in grams.

With this set of batches, due to the scaling of the smaller yeast amounts involved in making one loaf of dough at a time, I moved to a balance that has 1/100g accuracy for weighing the yeast and the salt (even though the salt grams are slightly above 10). For the vinegar and oil, I used an electronic scale with an accuracy of 1/10th gram, and for the other ingredients, generally anything above 100g, I used a 1g accuracy scale. This scheme should keep any weighing errors at or below 1%, provided that there are no single recipe ingredients of less than 1 gram in any desired scaling. It’s also a good idea to round the numbers when using this method, it can be done automatically in a spreadsheet by formatting the cell to the desired number of digits, and that could be tailored to the accuracy of each scale used for each ingredient, but I haven’t done that in the table above, instead I just round the figure myself when weighing some ingredient, though this is likely more error prone.

Here’s a summary that shows how the error percentage increases on a 1-gram accuracy scale when values of less than 100 grams are weighed on it:

While I don’t have one, I have seen (online) relatively inexpensive 1/1000th gram accuracy scales. I actually don’t like using the balance, as it gives little warning when you’re getting close to the desired weight, so I’d use the 1/10th gram e-scale to get close, then I’d put it on the balance to finish.

Mixing: In the Straight Dough mixing method, basically everything is mixed together at once, and is kneaded only one time. So I guess this recipe’s method is now a kind of modified Straight Dough (not the process others call Modified Straight Dough), since it currently has an overnight retarded fermentation, and two kneadings. I want to make more changes to the logic of this, such as adding the salt after the overnight refrigeration, and changing when and how I add the oil. I will probably divide up the yeast, or use less of it as some future point-in-time, as the amount is not yet “tuned” to the overnight fermentation. Anyway, more changes planned.

The initial attraction of the Straight Dough method was simplicity — er, let me rephrase that, I initially devised this mixing method for simplicity (patterned after a bread machine method), then later learned that others called the method Straight Dough.

The target temperature of this set of batches, after removal from the food processor, was 84F. I used ice-cold water, room temp flour (about 73F) and kept blade mixing until dough temperature was 83-84F.

This mixing or kneading heat-rise happens faster than you might think when using this particular tool. Cutter-mixers, or fast food processors with either the metal blade or dough kneader attached, are known to add heat quickly to dough. While this can be a problem at times, it can also be useful at other times. Cutter-Mixers are known to be one of the fastest dough kneading methods.

Retarded Fermentation: 17-18 hours at 45F. Each mixture, due to the different formulas, was kept in a separate covered pan. (I would have called it “Retarded bulk fermentation” if I had mixed all the dough together, and at a later stage, divided it up for panning.)

Second Kneading, or punching: This time: 1 minute stand mixer, relatively slow speed, spiral hook.

Increase next time, try 2-3 minutes.

During the overnight refrigeration, even though the dough was placed in a covered pan with moistened lid for container humidity, the top surface of the dough always developed a dryer skin on it, and the bottom, where the dough touched the pan, was wetter. One drawback of the overnight retard is that it’s not possible to flip the dough over several times. So right now I feel the need for a more thorough kneading at this point, this set of dough batches didn’t blend this somewhat dryer skin with the moister portions as well as in the past (when I’ve used the blade mixer instead), that is the reason for a desired mixing-time increase.

Another tactic I could try would be to separate the skin from the rest of the dough, and blade mix only it, then place that dough portion into the stand mixer with the rest of the dough, but I want to try a longer stand mixer knead first to keep simplicity of process intact.

I’ve tried the plastic bag method some years ago, but had problems getting most of the dough back out of the bag, and promised myself I would never use it again (as I recall, getting the dough out was quite frustrating due to time consumption and being a sticky mess). It might work okay if one has the type of spray oil that has liquid lecithin added, and it’s applied to the bag before putting the dough in it, but that also would change the oil content of the dough some unknown amount, I would think.

Rounding and Benching: Round each dough piece then let it rest, about 20 minutes.

Makeup and Panning: Shape into torpedos or cylinders the same length as baking pans.

For pan release, I smeared pans with a thin coating of organic palm shortening. Then I oiled each torpedo or cylinder shaped dough piece with fully refined peanut oil, making sure to coat all surfaces, then placed that dough piece in its pan, flattening, stretching, and leveling as much as the dough would allow, then repeating the dough oiling and panning for each additional dough cylinder.

Proofing: Total of 3 hours @ 84F.

After the first 30 minutes, flatten and stretch dough to conform better to pan shape, if needed. Dough typically still feels cold to the touch at this point-in-time, though it is warming up, and doesn’t appear to have risen much, if any.

Improvement Note: With this set of batches, the oven’s initial proofing temperature was 72F, rather cold from overnight no doubt, and it took about 40 minutes or more to get up to 84F. In the future implement a process that prewarms the proofing chamber. Once implemented, proofing times should be reduced some unknown amount.

Baking: 1:35 minutes @ 300F. Because I have steam available, I generally use it for the first 15 minutes, but I don’t think it’s essential for this particular recipe’s process.

Cooling: Remove from pans, place on racks in a room-temperature location. Takes about 4 hours.

Pre-Storing to soften crust: Plastic bag overnight to soften crust for hand slicing with non-serrated bread knife next day.

Slicing: Slice bread the following day, after the crust has softened, due to equipment limitations.

Storing: Use two plastic bags, remove excess air from inside first bag, then close end up, repeat with second bag, then place in freezer.

50% (baker’s percentage) water:

55% (baker’s percentage) water:

60% (baker’s percentage) water:

My observations:

I was surprised at the large hole size in the 50% water batch, and I note those holes are nearly in the middle of the loaf. The 55% water batch seems to have a larger number of holes about the same size as the 50% loaf’s large holes, but the 55%’s batch seem to be migrating toward the top of the loaf, presumably this is happening during the proof period prior to baking. The 60% water batch clearly has even more large holes, and this migration towards the top of the loaf is more evident. The V-or U-shaped top is not a data outlier, I didn’t document a 65% water batch I made last week, and it looked much the same.

The loaf with the largest volume seems to be the 55% batch, but this seems due to the 60% batch’s fall that occurred during baking. I can no longer say this is due to overproofing (or would ruling that out be stupid?), as all the loaves had the same times and temperatures for all processes alloted to them, except for the retard and the fact that I couldn’t mix all the batches simultaneously. There’s about 1-hour difference in an approximate 18-hour retard between the loaves, with the 60% loaf having had the shortest retard, perhaps 17-hours, all in a 45F (warmish) refrigerator.

We know from making ciabatta that a high water content dough should not, solely because of its high water content, fall during the bake, in fact it seems to rise quite a bit after putting it into an already hot oven, preferably on a hot stone, or perhaps even better, a 1″ thick piece of steel with the oven burner directly beneath. This has me wondering about differences between ciabatta and this bread. While I suppose there probably is a ciabatta recipe based upon a straight dough mixing process, all the two loaves of it I’ve ever made were both based upon a poolish preferment. So, I guess I can think of four possibilities: my flour mix is not optimal for a 60% hydration dough, perhaps the gluten is causing too much elasticity; my low oven baking temperature, and warming of the oven up from the oven-as-proofing chamber with the panned dough remaining inside (which takes some time) changes the baked outcome (not putting proofed dough into an already hot oven), or the poolish method is effecting some enzymatic breakdowns of the dough that helps the crumb structure in some way that is lacking in the straight dough process; or, right in the face, too long of a proof period for a high-hydration dough, which perhaps needs a higher percentage oven spring versus proofing rise and less time for the pre-bake CO2 bubbles to migrate upward before baking expands then sets them. Perhaps it’s a combination of all four, or it could be something else entirely.

It is intriguing trying to puzzle this out. Some of these results seem to confirm some of the other results I had above.

I had already planned on changing my flour mix, as I’ve recently found some 11.8% protein flour that is said to be wholley milled from either hard red spring or hard red winter wheat, and I’m guessing the later due to the low-protein number. While it is relatively inexpensive, it is also bleached and contains a small amount of added malted barley (I’d love to find an unbleached hard wheat flour without additives, but local availability versus price is one hindrance). It makes a nice-enough Ciabatta, at least compared to this high-gluten/all-purpose flour mix.

With both the High Gluten flour I’ve purchased for years, and any one of a number of All Purpose flours, getting specifications such as wheat type, that go beyond the minimum required for the nutritional label, seems difficult if not impossible at times. This new-to-me flour at least has a manufacturer’s spec sheet with some of the desired information.

I’ve also been trying to logic out (flow chart above seems to help me) the various processes related to mixing, and finding information on their precise effects relative to each other is difficult, so I’m just going to keep plugging along with making variations of this basic recipe and bread style, changing minor things along the way, depending upon local availability of ingredients, so I can come to my own conclusions about various effects. In some of my searches, Google’s been resulting in a number of high-priced books under the Food and Technology classification, that appear to have bits and pieces of the puzzle, but it’s hard to justify spending $250-$1000 each on any single books. Curiously, even some of the within-a-reasonable-driving-distance university libraries don’t seem to have copies of some of them, and the under-funded public library(?), not a chance.

The straight dough process I’ve been using lacks a strictly-defined autolyse period, so there’s another possible mixing method investigation, one that would appear to be a simplistic addition versus some of the more complex steps required of some of the fancier-named preferments.

In looking very closely at the photographs, zoomed in, it appears that the 55% water-level batch has the most translucent cell walls, perhaps indicating that they’re very thin and ready to start popping, or tunneling. The 50% water blend seems to have thicker walls, more opaque, even though there are a few large holes. However, it appears to me that the holes in the 60% water batch have popped and a larger number or percentage of them (subjective observation) seem to be in the beginning process of making tunnels from hole to hole. So, what does this mean?

Could it be a bread making axiom that higher water percentage yeast doughs require shorter proofing times, all other factors equal?

I guess I have my next test. Try a repeat of the 60% dough with a shorter proof period for confirmation.

As an aside, If you ever decide to buy an e-scale for cooking, my observation is that an auto-off time of 30 seconds is far too fast to be practically useful for cooking purposes (don’t ask me how I know this). Currently, my 1/10g accuracy scale (the one that I actually use) with 500g total capacity has an auto-off time of 3 minutes, and that is certainly enough time to weigh ingredients, but it also raises the scale’s non-lithium battery consumption.

2009.07.23

I tried another 60% batch, doubling the totals given above to make two loaves of equal weight. The only intentional change of process was a shortening of the proof period to 1:20 (hr:min). Results were mixed.

Looking closely at the photos seems to show small holes that have some minor tunneling, and larger holes that don’t. My feelings about this result are that shorter proof times are probably part of the answer, but not the entire answer. This batch had a poor mouth-feel to it, it was noticeably tougher, particularly when toasted, and you can see the volume is greatly reduced (the bread was denser). One thing that is intriguing is the shape of the holes, they seem to be more uniformly spherical.

So far the best results using this particular mixing process seem to have occurred with 53-55% water + 2.35% vinegar. For now I’m abandoning further experimentation with this formula at 60% hydration, as I’m desiring to experiment with mixing process and incorporating a poolish. On both occasions I’ve made ciabatta, a poolish (100% water) was used, and in my notes I wrote, “Every time I make a bread with poolish, I’m pleased with the result.”

[Snip. The text that previously was located below this point has been moved into a new post that is titled Experimenting With Bread Dough Process. The snip became necessary due to some kind of Edit and Save problem that started occurring at some point early in August 2009, and shortening the post length seemed to solve the problem, at least for now. Hopefully in the future post length won't be required to be less than 180 characters. :-) ]

I’ve tried popping it on the stove with oil, in hot-air machines, in ready-to-pop prepackaged microwave bags, and in a reusable microwave cooker specifically designed to pop dried corn kernels. This latter method is how I make popcorn now, and I don’t use any oil in the container during popping, though the container’s instructions indicated it was permissible to add oil if desired.

I’ve tried various oil toppings, including butter-flavored oils said to be specifically for popcorn, and still was disappointed, it never tasted like what they sold at the theatre. Popping the kernals using an oilless method led to the problem of getting salt to stick to the popcorn, and clearly, the theatre popcorn seemed to have a butter flavor. Cooking popcorn in butter never worked for me, the temperatures involved burned the butter. So, after using the oilless microwave method, I’d drizzle a small amount of gently melted butter on the popcorn after it was popped and stir it thoroughly. After this I’d sprinkle it with table salt to taste, stirring the pocorn several more times. It didn’t taste like theatre-quality popcorn, but it was the closest I’d found.

The other day, browsing one market’s eclectic products, I happened across some Flavacol. At first I was confused as to what precisely was in the carton, but after reading the label and noting the price, I purchased some to satisfy my decades long quest of homemade theatre-grade popcorn.

An Internet search lead me to various popcorn supplies, caramel, kettle, and cheese corn, various flavors of glaze pop, and some savory shake flavors. Finding a retailer that stocks them at a reasonable price is the challenge, the store where I bought the above-pictured product sold only this one type of flavored salt on the popcorn aisle. After making a batch of popcorn and sprinkling some Flavocol on as a final step, then tasting it, I believe it’s likely one secret of movie theatres’ popcorn! It seems to need less butter for a butter flavor when using Flavocol: ‘artificial butter flavoring’ and ‘real butter’ don’t have quite the same flavor.

I also learned from the Internet search that it’s not much of a secret anymore. Hydrogenated coconut oil with artificial butter flavoring is typically used to pop the kernals, and there’s an artificial-butter-flavored topping available that is composed largely of hydrogenated soybean oil, both of which include beta-carotene for coloring, according to their respective ingredient labels.

A search for the label ingredient “artificial butter flavoring” is revealing, it seems one should not deliberately concentrate and inhale it, some workers in popcorn production plants appear to have had lung problems.

Added on 2/16/06:

For my future reference, I’m adding a link or two regarding various cooking oils’ critical temperatures, otherwise known as the ‘smoke point:’ http://www.cookingforengineers.com/article.php?id=50 http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cookbook:Smoke_Point

Coconut oil is high in saturated fat, and so is butter. For those of us who try to improve the health of our diets, any type of hydrogenated oil should probably be avoided.

It might be interesting to try popping corn using an extra light and highly refined olive oil, or some other less flavorful oil (with a high smoke point) as a method of further reducing the real butter added. Avocado oil would be interesting to try because it seems to have the highest smoke point, but I wonder about its cost and availability. Peanut oil might be good to try except for the people who are allergic to it. Fully refined soybean oil (the non-hydrogenated variety) is another.

edited on 2/22/2008

First I looked through a variety of different cookbooks, and devised a hybrid model of 3-4 separated-by-book recipes, to get me started (since I’m not a “pro” baker, and only have easy access to “consumer” type cookbooks). It helps to have some familiarity with generalized cooking and baking principals to find recipes that might be similar. The sources for these recipes aren’t as important as using multiple sources and noting the patterns between the ingredients, particularly the ratio patterns.

I looked for the commonalities in these recipes, and discarded the differences, from both an inter- and intra-recipe basis. For example, I might start with six recipes, then I may discard, say, two complete ones if they don’t share the same basic model the other four possess. This process would also be practiced on the individual ingredients within each recipe, if all four recipes don’t have the ingredient, it’s generally discarded. The remaining ingredient differences tend to indicate a ‘range’ of values that may be ‘typical’. This results in a basic dough model that is different from any particular consumer-level recipe.

I also looked at the ingredients listed on the trademarked label for hints as to relative amounts to use: ingredient labels list predominate ingredients first. Later stages of recipe refinement included comparing the color to the trademarked brand (this adjusted the whole-wheat:bread-flour ratio), then comparing the taste and adjusting other ingredients accordingly. With this particular recipe, when I was adjusting the sweetness there was a small range of honey amounts that matched the branded product closely, but I chose the richer one because I could discern the flavor of honey: at slightly leaner levels or ratios I could not.

This makes this recipe somewhat different from the packaged product, where only sweetness, and not a honey flavor, was noted or perceived.

I bake this in a 2-lb bread machine on the setting for large basic loaf, normal crust. I do not use the setting for whole wheat bread. The large yeast amount of this recipe provides the proper volume of rise for the pre-programmed and or pre-set rise time of my particular machine; a different manufacturer’s machine might require an adjustment to the amount of yeast.

I’ve also baked this recipe in a regular oven and if so, I reduce the measure of active dry yeast to 2 1/2 teaspoons and the salt to 3/4 teaspoon and allow for a longer rise time before baking. I’ve found a relationship between yeast amount and the flavor that salt adds: with lower yeast amounts, less salt is required (for my taste). Various cookbooks also claim that salt tends to inhibit yeast.

Therefore, in the recipe below there are two sets under the sub-heading “Yeast and Salt”: these two sets indicate a range of measure that I’ve used under different conditions that work well, but use only one set or some value in between. Do not add both sets (unless you really do need that much yeast and salt, you probably won’t). If you make this bread and believe it either didn’t rise enough or rose too much (rose and fell) and you cannot change the amount of time for the rise, as well you’ve confirmed that your yeast is active, then adjust the yeast amount upward (for faster rise) or downward (for slower rise) and also adjust the salt.

For a 2-lb bread machine
Or make by hand and bake in oven
Measured in U.S. customary units

Grains to precook:

• 5/8 cup cracked wheat (uncooked, dry measure)
• 1 1/2 cups water

Liquids:

• 1/4 cup water
• 3/8 cup honey
• 2 tablespoons refined vegetable oil (I use soybean, non-hydrogenated)
• 1 tablespoon vinegar

Dry Ingredients:

• 3 cups white bread flour
• 3/8 cup whole wheat flour
• 2 tablespoons vital wheat gluten
• Yeast and Salt (see text above, use only one set below)
• • set for my particular bread machine
  • • 1 1/2 tablespoons dry, granulated yeast (not instant yeast)
    • 1 1/2 teaspoons salt
  • set for oven baking with increased rise time
  • • 2 1/2 teaspoons dry, granulated yeast (not instant yeast)
    • 3/4 teaspoon salt

The cooked grains provide most of the moisture for the dough. I put the water and cracked wheat berries in a small pan and quickly bring it to a full boil, then immediately turn off the heat and cover it with the pan’s lid and let it cool for about 3-4 hours or until it’s room temperature. I don’t want it to boil for any length of time; as more steam escapes the pan the moisture of the soon-to-be-mixed dough will be reduced; the less moisture the cooked grains have within them, the drier the final dough.

The liquid should be completely absorbed once it’s cool. If you try to add this to the other ingredients before it has cooled, it affects the rise and can kill the yeast if it’s too hot.

When I’m in a hurry, after the grains absorb the moisture, about 40 minutes, I’ll place the covered pan in ice water being careful not to allow more water into the pan. Because yeast is sensitive to temperature, chilling the grains too much then mixing with the other ingredients results in colder dough that needs a longer period of time to rise, and this quick cool method can chill it more than desired.

A precooked grain variation is 3/8 cup cracked wheat to 1/4 cup whole red wheat berries, with the same amount of water added.

With respect to the dough, I place the whisked liquid ingredients in the machine first, then the precooked and cooled cracked wheat, then the stirred dry ingredients. The machine is set for basic bread, normal crust.

When it’s done baking, I let it cool completely, several hours, before placing it in a plastic bag. If it’s not fully cooled, any remaining warmth will condense moisture on the inside of the bag.

The vinegar seems to extend the shelf-life of the loaf.

Source recipes, all were printed and published on paper:
Joy of Cooking
“Breads” volume of well-known cookbook series
Vegetarian Epicure
Blue Ribbon Recipes
Country Living Magazine
Bread machine booklet

Addendum