May I ask for help with two questions which I have when reading Chad Robertson's 'Bread Book' (ISBN-13 978-0399578847), please?
- In making the booster leaven [page 54] how much is '…a large amount of starter…''
- Is Lard 1,000g/25% correct on page 65?
Thanks in advance to anyone who has the book and is able to help… :-) !
You are looking for advice from someone who has made that bread and you've probably already done your research, so for what it's worth, the bot says:
In the most recent edition of Chad Robertson's work related to Tartine bread (including the "Bread Book" and revised editions), the booster leaven on page 54 clarifies that it calls for about one tablespoon of mature starter to be used in making approximately 400g of leaven, with half of that leaven (200g) used in the dough and the rest reserved to maintain the starter culture. This replaces the vague "large amount of starter" phrasing and emphasizes the importance of precise weights and process for the best outcome.
Regarding the lard measurement on page 65, there is no explicit correction or errata found in recent editions or related discussions to confirm or deny the 1,000g/25% figure. User reviews and comments note that some measurements may have typographical errors or may require interpretation depending on recipe scale, but no official errata for that specific metric were located.
Moe - very many thanks to you for taking the time and trouble to hunt down that very helpful reference.
I did put 'errata' etc for the ISBN into Google to see if there were additions or error-corrections; but came up with none.
Where did you actually find that, please, Moe: it'd be useful to know about and bookmark for future percentages?
I'm still not sure that I understand it: about 30 grammes (roughly a tablespoon) from the mature/existing starter (developed over the previous five days (Monday to Friday) to 200g of (fresh/new?) flour and water in the ratio 1:1? That is what's been being done over those last five days to create the 'booster'?
Hence his feeling that he can refer to something we ought to have become familiar with as 'a large mount'?
Then feed it the booster again on day 6 with another 30g from the same mature/existing starter?
Then feed the booster 1.5:1.5:1.2 as if it were its own entity before baking?
Letting everything that's left over after those 180g (30 + 30 + 120) have been used to feed/replenish the (existing/non-booster) starter going forward?
It's not clear, is it? I still think I may have it wrong.
Thanks for the lard reference; I'm vegan so wouldn't use lard - but I wanted to understand the principle of how 1,000 g of anything can be a bakers 25 percentage of 750g!
On the lard question: I would trust the percentages, but not the amounts. My source is that I make tortillas for a living. For a sonora style tortilla, 25% lard is about right. The following table that says 93g of lard is 25% has all the correct quantities to make a dozen tortillas.
Thanks fredsbread!
So 1,000 g is a misprint; it ought to be 25% of 750?
I don't use lard. Could I substitute plant-based butter?
None of the amounts in that table make sense. I'm not sure how it got misprinted so poorly. That section is supposed to be a demonstration of how you take an existing recipe and scale it to whatever size you need through baker's math. As I said, the following table has all the correct amounts (373g flour, 93g lard, 187g water, 56g leaven, 11g salt).
Any fat or oil would work, though obviously it would affect flavor. Something solid would be preferable, but not required.
Thanks, fredsbread!
That's restored my faith: I do understand the principles of bakers' percentages after all. Each aspect of what you write makes 100% (careful!) sense. Much appreciated :-)
Well here goes another - hmm what is a starter. And that's the real question. If all - and I mean all - are equal - all is the same. Change 1 thing - and you have something different. Back to the question I have - what is a starter. I'd even say there are as many "starters" are there are users. Basically - make what you like - you'll figure it out! Enjoy!
Point taken, @Davey1
Chad Robertson defines it as the 'base' (aka 'mother') from which the levain (or leaven) is taken/made/developed/hived off.
In some ways I find the process of deriving a levain with which to bake more intriguing and crucial than - as you imply - the many formulae (flour:water:existing 'starter') which can be considered to make it/them up and so be called 'starters'.
And that's before you count time as a factor.
That's what you're alluding to, isn't it?
Hence my OP: how and in which quantities (which really always ought to mean which proportions or percentages) do you extract flour and water + microorganisms and bacteria (CR also advises mixing with your hands in case they can contribute yeasts etc!) to make what gets inserted into the dough.
When I bake my first Country Loaf I want my levain to be as close as possible to the formula(e) which Tartine has found to be successful.
Here's the thing. People need to stop worrying about getting the details "right". In your case, you won't be able to duplicate Robertson's conditions exactly or even closely. Your starter will not have the same spectrum of organisms as Robertson's. Your water won't have the same mineral content as his. Your way of handling the dough will not be the same. Your flour probably won't be the same and even if it is the same brand and model, its water content won't be the same because of differences in humidity and warehouse storage conditions.
You may measure every drop of water and every sprinkling of flour, but the effective hydration can vary by several percentage points anyway. Your oven is never going to bake like his oven. Indeed, your oven won't bake the way you think it will even if you hang an oven thermometer in it and adjust the temperature setting based on it.
Get close? Sure, go for it. Just don't get trapped by seeking a perfect re-enactment. Your time and effort will be better spent learning to deal with the natural variations you are going to encounter, and learning how to read dough. Treat every recipe like this as a starting point.
TomP
Thanks, Tom. I understand. I'me very comfortable with learning to 'read the dough'. And getting as close as I can to get the best starting point. No harm in that, is there; you've got to start with certain quantities as percentages, haven't you? Otherwise no-one would bother to publish them, would they!
So what do you think is the best way to get to 'know the dough'?
Reading the dough is about learning when it has a suitable consistency, how it grows over time, when it near the limits of growth, when it is ready to be moved to the next stage. Things like that. It take time and attention, but will pay off after a while. For example, you might be following one of Chad's recipes but the dough seems too dry and tight, and you expected it to be loose and a little sticky. You can stick with the recipe as written and struggle or you can work in some more water. You expect the levain to be ready to use in 15 hours but in 10 hours it's obviously over-fermented already. You can use it anyway, or mix in a little more flour and water and wait another 4 hours. That kind of thing - being adaptable based on what is actually happening.
Mainly, don't worry about picky details: oh, no, I was supposed to feed the starter at 1:1:1 but it came out 1:1.2:1.05, I'll have to start all over again. No! Everything will be fine, just add a little flour, and maybe it will be ready in 5 hours instead of 4.
There are some breads that are very finicky, like pannetone, but that's not the usual case at all, and even there you have to make adjustments as you go.
Thanks again, tpassin!
I've had too many 'failures' (flatness, gummy, cakey etc) not to want - at least - to start with some percentages.
I do also enjoy trying to become sufficiently familiar with the attributes you kindly list (growth, timing, trusting my sense of consistency etc); and I can see the wisdom of following that approach.
Don't think - just do. Enjoy!
Mark, I can't quote the sources for that answer, since it was a bot and I did not notice what sources it used.
Chatbots don't know their sources either. Humans don't usually know their sources either - where did you learn, let's say, what a fried egg is? If you ask, they have to go on an internet search just like we would, but much faster. And sometimes those hits don't actually reflect what the Chatbot claims.
Moe and tpassin - that sort of explains why I couldn't find an errata page. I have contacted Ten Speed Press (an imprint of Random House).