Revisiting the Ridiculous.
I thought I'd share my reaction to revisiting a build process that seemed innocent enough when first encountered it, but now seems completely ridiculous:
The last time I rebuilt a starter from scratch was 2006, so I chose the old standby, Nancy Silverton's method, which worked well for me then.
I paid no attention to the amounts of flour needed for each feeding when creating the to-do spreadsheet; but, I'm now being confronted with just how ridiculous the amounts are now that I'm having to feed it three times a day.
After the third (8pm) feeding, I have an 7qt bowl that's almost 3/4 white starter!
I recommended her method on a forum (not TFL) some years ago. The replies were almost completely against using it. I thought the outcries were primarily against the "add raisins for capturing wild yeasts" nonsense (a part I skip/ignore), but I remember a few people complaining about the quantities involved–how wasteful they are.
Here's my to-do spreadsheet if you want to have a look: PDF.
The quantities in steps 10-13 are shocking! ;)
(Her breads are still second to none, IMO.)
OK, that is a funny picture! :-) If it takes off growing you'll need an extra bathtub or a 55 gal drum! LOL! Good luck with your new starter.
"Who needs a mud bath when you can have a sourdough bath. Why not feel as pampered as a warm loaf of bread? You deserve it*!"
*Introductory sessions starting at $99.95 per session. Lunch included.
The SD that I maintain was built using her technique, and works well to this day, but I totally agree the quantities were absurd. Years later, when I purchased Glezer's book and saw some of the small starter quantities used there, I revised my thinking.
I'm happy that SD "technology" continues to evolve. Speaking of the evolution of technology: given that yeast and LAB growth is most active within a certain temp range, I wonder if the new Brod & Taylor proofing box can contribute to faster, more consistent initial starter development using the current popular methods (Debra Wink, etc). Such a home proofing box makes temp control significantly easier...what do you think?
One part of me thinks that the better idea is to expose the starter to the vicissitudes of temperature, humidity, water source, and microbiology. Put it outside, use tap water, and let the fittest survive. That's how it's been done for ages; that's how my grandmother did it. In her words, "Make it stink then feed it until it stops stinking."
The other part of me–the part with experience–knows that once I get a strong, stable culture going, it needs little other than careful feeding to survive; so, why bother with "the school of hard knocks" when I know the babied version, the one that's kept in a pristine container in a warm closet and fed like its life depended on timed interval feedings, will develop faster and more predictably?
I really don't know the right answer.
I do know that cold is the Ambien (sleeping pill) of sourdough; so, this being fall/winter, I'm going to baby it with consistent feedings and warm temperatures until it comes to strength. If it was summer, I'd probably try the wood pale "make it stink" method, which has worked for me too, albeit no better or worse than the other. What I won't be doing ever again is using this much flour to get there.
.