Malt powder
Hi, I have questions concerning malt powder in bread. I've read a lot on malt powder, and it all seems to say the same thing: two kinds, diastatic and non-diastatic, diastatic gives yeast a boost, non- is mostly for sweetening, too much malt makes bread sticky/gummy. However, I have been unable to find answers to the following:
Can and should I use both types in yeasted bread?
Where a recipe calls for sugar, should I replace it with diastatic or non-? Will there be any negative effects from replacing e.g. 50g of sugar in a 500g flour bread recipe with only 5g of malt powder?
0.5-1% of flour is the correct amount according to a few sources, but of which type, the diastatic, or the non-?
In what situations should you use diastatic vs non-? The most common answer here is "follow the recipe", but I'm not baking with recipes I find online, I'm using my own and I'm trying to incorporate malt powder into them as I like the taste.
Thanks!
I went through the same confusion too and I think you answered your own question in your last sentence.
You are experimenting and that is the best way to find out what works for you in your home and your bread. If I were you I would experiment using both types of malt and varying degrees taking note of changes you taste in your breads. If using 5% gives you the results you like but 6% goes too far then you have found what works for you.
I would experiment using both types of malt too. It may take time but you will end up knowing for yourself what gives you the type of bread you are seeking. Remember, most recipes/formulas are what people have come up with over the ages that suit their tastes etc. Bits of information gathered from various sources until they come up with something new in their own kitchens.
Good Luck,
Janet
P.S. I am not a professional baker. Just a 'raggedy home baker', as a member here likes to refer to herself, who does a lot of experimenting based off of information I find here and in books or on line.
Diastatic malt contains active enzymes (mostly diastase and protease). Diastase breaks down the ruptured starch granules in flour into maltose, which can then be utilized by yeast and other microorganisms. Protease breaks down gluten, which makes the dough less stiff and more extensible. Diastatic malt at a level of 1% will usually produce the desired effect.
The enzymes in non-diastatic malt have be deactivated through heat treatment, although some protease may still be present in non-diastatic malt syrup. It is added to bread dough for flavor only. Non-diastatic malt syrup can be used at a level of 6% in whole wheat bread to provide added color and flavor.
Bob
of white flour if it is home milled. Most flour bought retail has already been malted and you can tell by reading the ingredient list..... sometimes. Whole flour already has enough diastatic malt in it. I use red non diastatic malt for flavor mostly, love that roasted taste, and color. I don't usually go over 3% for breads that are 40% or less whole grain and up it to 6% as Bob says, gradually as the whole grain % increases. Some say that a teaspoon of diastatic white malt is like adding a 1/4 C of sugar to the mix?
Like Janet says it is just trial and error based on the flour you are using and what you like your bread to look and taste like.
Thanks everyone, the percentages definitely help a lot as a guide. I was hoping for different answers than experiment, although I think I knew I had to already; I don't bake all that often and we're only 2 in the house so bread lasts longer than I'd like and experimenting takes a long time especially as I don't always make the same bread!
I'm not sure whether I'm using white or red diastatic malt, I bought the KAF product? The flour I buy here doesn't have malt added; I don't live in the US and buy flour from the UK generally.
The powder from KAF is white malt. Red malt has a distinct red color. I make my own by buying malted grains from a local brew shop. I then grind the grain in my mill or a coffee grinder.
When I began to experiment with loaves I had to go outside of the home to pawn off all of the excess bread I was creating. I now have quite a few people I bake for and it all started with those early experiments. You would be surprised by how welcome a freshly baked loaf of bread is when offered to someone as a gift. :)
I don't want to hijack the thread, but reading the entries here leaves me with a question. Zoebaba wrote: "Diastatic malt (with active enzymes) not only boosts yeast action, but will also change the crumb. You may want this if you're after a softer crumb."
The only places I have seen diastatic specified in a formula have been in bagel recipes. Both Hamelman and Reinhart specify it. I'm wondering why that would be, if it's true that using diastatic malt will create a softer crumb -- something you don't want in a bagel.
I was under the impression that non-diastatic malt is the type used for bagels?
If you add malt to the boiling water, it will be non-diastatic, even if it began otherwise. The amylase enzymes are denatured at temps much below the boiling point of water.
Diastatic malt is added to bagel dough because the bulk ferment mostly happens in the refrigerator. There will be only twenty or thirty minutes between mixing/kneading and moving to the fridge. Then, in the morning, it's out of the cold and into the boiling water, then to the oven. There are only a few minutes, at most when the yeast will have a chance to do a secondary ferment, or proof. So, the little beasties need all the help they can get.
cheers,
gary
Thanks, that makes some sense. In both formulas I mentioned, ferment is in the refrigerator, although in both cases it's not a bulk ferment (bagels are formed, then refrigerated). That probably makes diastatic malt even more useful.