Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Endothermic reactions
Re: Endothermic reactions
On 13 Mar, 13:33, "TG" <sourdough...@virgin,net > wrote:
> On 13 Mar, 10:12, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
>
> > why is developing dough earlier on a bad thing for flavour? ...
> > yours
> > andy forbes
>
> I don't think that it's about 'developing' that's the problem it
> oxidation of the dough that isn't good for flavour.
>
> Jim
hmmmm
good point - so you are looking for more alcohol(s) and less CO2? -
but surely most oxygen is added in initial mix, clinging to flour or
whatever. I wouldn't think much more oxygen is added once ingredients
are incorporated by hand kneading or my Artofex which tends not to
chop up dough in its action the same way as a KitchenAid for example.
on 'leavener' this http :// www .epicurious,com /cooking/how_to/food_dictionary/entry?id=3254
treats 'leaven' as the verb
though I know your use as noun is also 'good English' I think in
baking its easily confused with 'levain' (the French) and therefore
can carry certain French SD methods connotations that could be
confusing, in the King James Bible 'leaven' clearly means specifically
yeast, and 'leavening agent' I think of as usually referring to a non-
biological 'leavener' and so I think maybe 'leavener' as a generic
word to cover all things which do leavening may have some purpose
after all.
yours
andy forbes
(multiple re-posts deleted - sorry all -especially those receiving in
mail box)
On 13 Mar, 13:33, "TG" <sourdough...@virgin,net > wrote:
> On 13 Mar, 10:12, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
>
> > why is developing dough earlier on a bad thing for flavour? ...
> > yours
> > andy forbes
>
> I don't think that it's about 'developing' that's the problem it
> oxidation of the dough that isn't good for flavour.
>
> Jim
hmmmm
good point - so you are looking for more alcohol(s) and less CO2? -
but surely most oxygen is added in initial mix, clinging to flour or
whatever. I wouldn't think much more oxygen is added once ingredients
are incorporated by hand kneading or my Artofex which tends not to
chop up dough in its action the same way as a KitchenAid for example.
on 'leavener' this http :// www .epicurious,com /cooking/how_to/food_dictionary/entry?id=3254
treats 'leaven' as the verb
though I know your use as noun is also 'good English' I think in
baking its easily confused with 'levain' (the French) and therefore
can carry certain French SD methods connotations that could be
confusing, in the King James Bible 'leaven' clearly means specifically
yeast, and 'leavening agent' I think of as usually referring to a non-
biological 'leavener' and so I think maybe 'leavener' as a generic
word to cover all things which do leavening may have some purpose
after all.
yours
andy forbes
(multiple re-posts deleted - sorry all -especially those receiving in
mail box)
Re: Endothermic reactions
On 13 Mar, 15:50, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
> hmmmm
>
> good point - so you are looking for more alcohol(s) and less CO2?..
I'll let those with mixers answer that one.
>
> on 'leavener' this http :// www .epicurious,com /cooking/how_to/food_dictionary/entry?id=3254
> treats 'leaven' as the verb
>
> though I know your use as noun is ... 'good English'.
> andy forbes
Okay, I think a few might query your use of Biblical yeast Andy. As
for the rest, I think you're being a bit idealologicalistical.
You have to be careful not to confuse 'usage' with 'standard'. It
certainly isn't standard British English. If I can use fewer letters
to say the same thing that's good, but I still think to make a noun
into a noun by adding an ending is ugly if not bad English. I won't be
using it. I really am not an English scholar though so perhaps I
should keep shtum.
This made me laugh though.
http :// tinyurl,com /38w5mz
Jim
On 13 Mar, 15:50, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
> hmmmm
>
> good point - so you are looking for more alcohol(s) and less CO2?..
I'll let those with mixers answer that one.
>
> on 'leavener' this http :// www .epicurious,com /cooking/how_to/food_dictionary/entry?id=3254
> treats 'leaven' as the verb
>
> though I know your use as noun is ... 'good English'.
> andy forbes
Okay, I think a few might query your use of Biblical yeast Andy. As
for the rest, I think you're being a bit idealologicalistical.
You have to be careful not to confuse 'usage' with 'standard'. It
certainly isn't standard British English. If I can use fewer letters
to say the same thing that's good, but I still think to make a noun
into a noun by adding an ending is ugly if not bad English. I won't be
using it. I really am not an English scholar though so perhaps I
should keep shtum.
This made me laugh though.
http :// tinyurl,com /38w5mz
Jim
Re: Endothermic reactions
> You have to be careful not to confuse 'usage' with 'standard'. It
> certainly isn't standard British English. If I can use fewer letters
> to say the same thing that's good, but I still think to make a noun
> into a noun by adding an ending is ugly if not bad English.
but what in your book is the verb which the noun 'leaven' does? OK so
'leaven' in King James Bible is clearly both verb and noun but even
'standard English' moves on ...
laters
atty
> You have to be careful not to confuse 'usage' with 'standard'. It
> certainly isn't standard British English. If I can use fewer letters
> to say the same thing that's good, but I still think to make a noun
> into a noun by adding an ending is ugly if not bad English.
but what in your book is the verb which the noun 'leaven' does? OK so
'leaven' in King James Bible is clearly both verb and noun but even
'standard English' moves on ...
laters
atty
Re: Endothermic reactions
On 14 Mar, 01:20, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
...
> but what ...is the verb that the noun ... does?
Sorry Andy you aren't making any sense.
JIm
On 14 Mar, 01:20, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
...
> but what ...is the verb that the noun ... does?
Sorry Andy you aren't making any sense.
JIm
Re: Endothermic reactions
On Mar 13, 2:21 am, "Will" <waller.will...@gmail,com > wrote:
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. Artofex design is meant to be gentlest action of
any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf loads in
wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit much
manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
On Mar 13, 2:21 am, "Will" <waller.will...@gmail,com > wrote:
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. Artofex design is meant to be gentlest action of
any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf loads in
wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit much
manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
Re: Endothermic reactions
On Mar 13, 2:21 am, "Will" <waller.will...@gmail,com > wrote:
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. Artofex design is meant to be gentlest action of
any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf loads in
wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit much
manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
On Mar 13, 2:21 am, "Will" <waller.will...@gmail,com > wrote:
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. Artofex design is meant to be gentlest action of
any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf loads in
wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit much
manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
Re: Endothermic reactions
(apologies again if this is double posted, http :// groups.google,com
seems to be giving some false positives as to whether a post is
succesful - anybody else?)
On Mar 13, 2:21 am, "Will" <waller.will...@gmail,com > wrote:
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. Artofex design is meant to be gentlest action of
any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf loads in
wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit much
manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
(apologies again if this is double posted, http :// groups.google,com
seems to be giving some false positives as to whether a post is
succesful - anybody else?)
On Mar 13, 2:21 am, "Will" <waller.will...@gmail,com > wrote:
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. Artofex design is meant to be gentlest action of
any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf loads in
wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit much
manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
Re: Endothermic reactions
(apologies again if this is double posted, http :// groups.google,com
seems to be giving some false positives as to whether a post is
succesful - anybody else?)
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. However Artofex design is meant to be gentlest
action of any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf
loads in wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit
much manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
(apologies again if this is double posted, http :// groups.google,com
seems to be giving some false positives as to whether a post is
succesful - anybody else?)
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. However Artofex design is meant to be gentlest
action of any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf
loads in wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit
much manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
Re: Endothermic reactions
(apologies again if this is double posted, http :// groups.google,com
seems to be giving some false positives as to whether a post is
successful - anybody else?)
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavour
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, ageing the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. However Artofex design is meant to be gentlest
action of any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf
loads in wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit
much manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
(apologies again if this is double posted, http :// groups.google,com
seems to be giving some false positives as to whether a post is
successful - anybody else?)
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavour
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, ageing the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. However Artofex design is meant to be gentlest
action of any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf
loads in wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit
much manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
Re: Endothermic reactions
(apologies again if this is double posted, http :// groups.google,com
seems to be giving some false positives as to whether a post is
successful - anybody else?)
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. However Artofex design is meant to be gentlest
action of any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf
loads in wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit
much manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
(apologies again if this is double posted, http :// groups.google,com
seems to be giving some false positives as to whether a post is
successful - anybody else?)
> Outside of the protein stuff... it seems to me that there are flavor
> issues that have little to do with dough elasticity/extensibility. In
> my bread practice, aging the dough makes the bread taste better.
> Therefore developing gluten early is a bad thing. So I do not knead. I
> mix and let the dough rest for 16 hours. Then I proof and bake.
> Depending on how the dough "feels" after the rest, I will add stretch
> and folds in (or not), before the final proof.
Does gluten development block flavour development? Never heard or
thought of that one before. Certainly agree that the longer one leaves
any kneading, the less work needed, until its just same as shaping
loaf.
> I am not sure what I would do if I had an Artofex mixer. I would
> probably invite the neighbors over more often... we could watch it
> <g>. It seems to me that Artofexing would be perfect for all manner of
> faster yeast driven breads... and pretty good for making
> shortbreads... But it is not so clear how it would help with SD. SD
> still needs to age which means its gluten development is better
> retarded to coincide with the longer development cycle and so on.
>
ha
you have me there. However Artofex design is meant to be gentlest
action of any mixer. When weather gets better and I am baking 8 loaf
loads in wood-fired oven then obviously just initial mixing is a bit
much manually - but at moment when I am baking 2 x 1.1 Kilo loaf at a
time ... I admit its tough not to use Artofex even when not needed -
its got to be only mixer one can imagine watching for pleasure of its
motion, now if it was steam driven as well ...
yours
andy forbes
Re: Endothermic reactions
On 12 Mar, 23:20, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
> finally can I observe that 'old hands' on this mailing lists seem
> great at jumping in and advising newbies to sourdough, but less open
> to new ideas and enquiries themselves, seemingly jumping to conclusion
> other authors with some experience or knowledge are in an antagonistic
> and contradictory mode to themselves when benefit of doubt might
> reveal otherwise (and I am not blameless, its common in email dialogue
> after all)
>
> leavener v. alternate leavener v. sourdough doughs for comparison of
> gluten development
>
> yours
> Andy Forbes- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hi Andy,
What you should understand about human nature is that when someone
repeatedly uses bad English when attempting to sound learned,
> leavener v. alternate leavener ...
it's hard for others to take them seriously about stuff they've just
Googled.
I do find this interesting Andy, but I don't have enough time at the
moment to invest in a subject that is, lets face it, purely academic
and as I said you aren't inspiring me to get interested either, you
haven't even taken my hints about using 'nouned' nouns. (I realise the
word exists on the net but not in my dictionary). We all make typos
and this is rec.food so, so what, but you're trying to be academic, it
just looks wrong. Well, the up side is you'll get the sympathy vote
now. lol
I do appreciate your efforts and will read the articles you've linked
to when I have time.
Thanks
Jim
On 12 Mar, 23:20, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
> finally can I observe that 'old hands' on this mailing lists seem
> great at jumping in and advising newbies to sourdough, but less open
> to new ideas and enquiries themselves, seemingly jumping to conclusion
> other authors with some experience or knowledge are in an antagonistic
> and contradictory mode to themselves when benefit of doubt might
> reveal otherwise (and I am not blameless, its common in email dialogue
> after all)
>
> leavener v. alternate leavener v. sourdough doughs for comparison of
> gluten development
>
> yours
> Andy Forbes- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hi Andy,
What you should understand about human nature is that when someone
repeatedly uses bad English when attempting to sound learned,
> leavener v. alternate leavener ...
it's hard for others to take them seriously about stuff they've just
Googled.
I do find this interesting Andy, but I don't have enough time at the
moment to invest in a subject that is, lets face it, purely academic
and as I said you aren't inspiring me to get interested either, you
haven't even taken my hints about using 'nouned' nouns. (I realise the
word exists on the net but not in my dictionary). We all make typos
and this is rec.food so, so what, but you're trying to be academic, it
just looks wrong. Well, the up side is you'll get the sympathy vote
now. lol
I do appreciate your efforts and will read the articles you've linked
to when I have time.
Thanks
Jim
Re: Endothermic reactions
On 13 Mar, 09:40, "TG" <sourdough...@virgin,net > wrote:
..
> Thanks
> Jim
Oh, Good grief, looks like there's been only a delay not a block.
There's going to be about five attempts to reply. Sorry about that.
Looks like I had more time today than I was letting on. lol
Jim
On 13 Mar, 09:40, "TG" <sourdough...@virgin,net > wrote:
..
> Thanks
> Jim
Oh, Good grief, looks like there's been only a delay not a block.
There's going to be about five attempts to reply. Sorry about that.
Looks like I had more time today than I was letting on. lol
Jim
Re: Endothermic reactions
> moment to invest in a subject that is, lets face it, purely academic
hi Jim
sorry my English is not up to your standards
just remind you that no doubt the discovery of yeast by Pasteur was
once upon a time judged of purely academic interest by most
I am also reminded of a professional baker friend of mine who though
otherwise a great baker (making possibly best commercial ciabatta
available in London, by rotten dough method) refused to attempt
sourdough because he had been taught at bakery college that any other
yeast in his bakery than baker's yeast was dangerous. I strongly
suspect if he had tried sourdough he would not have gone bankrupt and
lost his bakery and home above (which has now been demolished) - he
might even be well off instead of unemployed ...
yours
Andy Forbes
ps
sorry if I have repeatedly posted another message today - result of a
problem with big delay of message showing up at
http :// groups.google,com /group/rec.food.sourdough/browse thread/thread/02405247e2be6d13/?hl=en#
- I'll try to be more patient
> moment to invest in a subject that is, lets face it, purely academic
hi Jim
sorry my English is not up to your standards
just remind you that no doubt the discovery of yeast by Pasteur was
once upon a time judged of purely academic interest by most
I am also reminded of a professional baker friend of mine who though
otherwise a great baker (making possibly best commercial ciabatta
available in London, by rotten dough method) refused to attempt
sourdough because he had been taught at bakery college that any other
yeast in his bakery than baker's yeast was dangerous. I strongly
suspect if he had tried sourdough he would not have gone bankrupt and
lost his bakery and home above (which has now been demolished) - he
might even be well off instead of unemployed ...
yours
Andy Forbes
ps
sorry if I have repeatedly posted another message today - result of a
problem with big delay of message showing up at
http :// groups.google,com /group/rec.food.sourdough/browse thread/thread/02405247e2be6d13/?hl=en#
- I'll try to be more patient
Re: Endothermic reactions
On 13 Mar, 13:30, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
> > moment to invest in a subject that is, lets face it, purely academic
>
> hi Jim
>
> sorry my English is not up to your standards
..(which has now been demolished) - he
> might even be well off instead of unemployed ...
..
> sorry if I have repeatedly posted another message today - result of a
> problem with big delay of message showing up at http :// groups.google,com /group/rec.food.sourdough/browse_thread/threa...
> - I'll try to be more patient
>
> yours
> Andy Forbes
lol, you're not the only one Andy.
You can go to :
http :// groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.food.sourdough
and remove them for posterity if you like by clicking on 'more
options'.
Remember Andy, it's all dialog, good or bad. : -)
Jim
On 13 Mar, 13:30, "atty" <a...@area3,net > wrote:
> > moment to invest in a subject that is, lets face it, purely academic
>
> hi Jim
>
> sorry my English is not up to your standards
..(which has now been demolished) - he
> might even be well off instead of unemployed ...
..
> sorry if I have repeatedly posted another message today - result of a
> problem with big delay of message showing up at http :// groups.google,com /group/rec.food.sourdough/browse_thread/threa...
> - I'll try to be more patient
>
> yours
> Andy Forbes
lol, you're not the only one Andy.
You can go to :
http :// groups.google.co.uk/group/rec.food.sourdough
and remove them for posterity if you like by clicking on 'more
options'.
Remember Andy, it's all dialog, good or bad. : -)
Jim
Re: Endothermic reactions
atty wrote:
>> moment to invest in a subject that is, lets face it, purely
>> academic
>
> hi Jim
>
> sorry my English is not up to your standards
>
> just remind you that no doubt the discovery of yeast by Pasteur was
> once upon a time judged of purely academic interest by most
Not so. Pasteur was hired by vintners to find out why sometimes they
made wine, and sometimes vinegar. A practical application, not
"academic interest."
B/
atty wrote:
>> moment to invest in a subject that is, lets face it, purely
>> academic
>
> hi Jim
>
> sorry my English is not up to your standards
>
> just remind you that no doubt the discovery of yeast by Pasteur was
> once upon a time judged of purely academic interest by most
Not so. Pasteur was hired by vintners to find out why sometimes they
made wine, and sometimes vinegar. A practical application, not
"academic interest."
B/
