Author Topic: Lightest, tastiest crust yet (Read 18710 times)

David · « **Reply #40 on:** January 26, 2007, 02:38:41 PM »

Looks like your oven may have been hotter than the pie you photographed in the previous batch Bill?The charring/spots/coloration of the first pic is just what i'm looking to consistently produce.I think that gives the perfect balance to the flavor IMO.Nice.
David

PizzaPolice · « **Reply #41 on:** January 26, 2007, 02:43:59 PM »

Now THAT is one happy oven! Nice pictures, Bill. I'm gonna try using much more wood next time and spread it out more. So far, I'm using only about two feet. Those blister freckles are what I'm looking for and it's apparent that only intense heat can cause them. Thanks.

scott r · « **Reply #42 on:** January 26, 2007, 02:55:52 PM »

intense heat and proper fermentation!

Bill/SFNM · « **Reply #43 on:** January 26, 2007, 04:30:09 PM »

Quote from: David on January 26, 2007, 02:38:41 PM

Looks like your oven may have been hotter than the pie you photographed in the previous batch Bill?The charring/spots/coloration of the first pic is just what i'm looking to consistently produce.I think that gives the perfect balance to the flavor IMO.Nice.
David

David, deck temp was about 1025F which is hotter than the previous batch. I would estimate that for the formulation of dough I use, the range of 975F - 1025F gives the best results. You're right about the charring and coloration. The black areas aren't bitter - just more intensely flavored.

Bill/SFNM

Bill/SFNM · « **Reply #44 on:** January 26, 2007, 04:33:47 PM »

Quote from: PizzaPolice on January 26, 2007, 02:43:59 PM

Now THAT is one happy oven! Nice pictures, Bill. I'm gonna try using much more wood next time and spread it out more. So far, I'm using only about two feet. Those blister freckles are what I'm looking for and it's apparent that only intense heat can cause them. Thanks.

Thanks, PizzaPolice. For this batch, I had the coals spread to both sides and the back of the oven. This produces a pretty intense heat. Raising the pie to the roof for a few seconds before removing it from the often also helps.

Bill/SFNM

scpizza · « **Reply #45 on:** January 27, 2007, 03:25:49 PM »

Quote from: Bill/SFNM on January 26, 2007, 02:27:50 PM

The advantage of taking good notes (especially if you're getting old!) is that it is easy to backtrack after disappointing results. Today I backed down the hydration and eliminated the sifting and was able to reproduce previous results that I enjoyed greatly.

Can you elaborate. Are you saying you got the same "best ever results" by eliminating all changes from before except higher oven heat? E.g., no room temp rise, no sifting, no high hydration?

Bill/SFNM · « **Reply #46 on:** January 27, 2007, 03:59:57 PM »

Sorry for the confusion - I have done a number of batches tweaking different factors that I didn't report on here since the results didn't merit comment. The latest batch:

6 balls X 300g each
Hydration including starter: 64%
Starter: 10% of total weight (Camaldoli - double fed)
Salt: 2.5%

No sifting.
Water in bowl first.
Salt dissolved in water
Starter mixed into water
75% of flour dumped into water
Above mixed with a wooden spoon until combined
Rest for 5 minutes
Start mixer and gradually shake in remaining 25% of flour
knead for about 10 minutes
Rest for 20 minutes
Turn on mixer for a few turns around the bowl
Bulk rise at room temp for 12 hours
Shape into balls and proof covered for 5 hours
Shape, top, and bake ~1025 for 50-55 seconds.

I still have some tweaking to see which direction is most promising. Higher hydrations which were facilitated by the sifting did not seem to be beneficial. I'm going to try backing the hydration down a bit just to see what happens. As has been discussed in other threads, it is clear that Caputo, as compared to other flours, is unforgiving of small variances. Much practice needed to understand the proper use of these ingredients and methods.

Bill/SFNM

scpizza · « **Reply #47 on:** January 27, 2007, 06:02:16 PM »

So comparing this to your old procedure it seems like you are attributing the better crust to 1. room temp rise and 2. hotter oven temp.

I've just begun my tests of extreme sifting. First two pictures below are of a fine mesh scientific sieve. Last picture has regular flour on the left, leftovers after sifting a batch of flour on the right. The leftovers are about 1% of the flour by weight and comprised of brown flakes (probably the bran of the wheat grain) and more numerous unknown yellowish bits.

Bill/SFNM · « **Reply #48 on:** January 27, 2007, 06:05:56 PM »

scpizza,

I think I see your problem. The currency goes into the dough after the flour.

Bill/SFNM

scpizza · « **Reply #49 on:** January 27, 2007, 06:12:48 PM »

Quote from: Bill/SFNM on January 27, 2007, 06:05:56 PM

I think I see your problem. The currency goes into the dough after the flour.

Ooof. You are right. And I was using singles instead of using twenties.

Bill/SFNM · « **Reply #50 on:** January 27, 2007, 07:06:04 PM »

Yeah, I've always wondered what the customary amount to tip the mixer is.

Bill/SFNM

abatardi · « **Reply #51 on:** January 28, 2007, 12:49:57 AM »

Bill,

When you do your bulk rise/ferment, do you fold the dough at any point during this or just let it go untouched? How much would you say it expands in volume during this time with 10% camoldoli? This is around the amount that I usually use as well.

- Aaron

Bill/SFNM · « **Reply #52 on:** January 28, 2007, 01:44:45 AM »

Quote from: abatardi on January 28, 2007, 12:49:57 AM

Bill,

When you do your bulk rise/ferment, do you fold the dough at any point during this or just let it go untouched? How much would you say it expands in volume during this time with 10% camoldoli? This is around the amount that I usually use as well.

- Aaron

Aaron,

I do not touch the dough during the bulk rise/ferment. This batch just about tripled in volume; it usually doubles, but I fed the starter twice so I'm thinking of backing down the starter amount after I see what happens when I back down the hydration. I know marco uses much less starter and sees very little volume increase so I've been meaning for some time to explore that.

Bill/SFNM

abatardi · « **Reply #53 on:** January 28, 2007, 03:51:45 AM »

Okay cool. I usually fold it a couple times as I'm used to doing that with bread but I'll try not doing that once to see if I can see any difference.

One other thing... in your method when you say you put the remaining 25% of flour in gradually while the mixer is on, how long do you think it takes you to incorporate that? Trying to determine your overall mix/knead time.

Thanks,
Aaron

Bill/SFNM · « **Reply #54 on:** January 28, 2007, 08:24:09 AM »

Quote from: abatardi on January 28, 2007, 03:51:45 AM

One other thing... in your method when you say you put the remaining 25% of flour in gradually while the mixer is on, how long do you think it takes you to incorporate that? Trying to determine your overall mix/knead time.

Aaron,

A little less than a minute I guess.

Bill/SFNM

scpizza · « **Reply #55 on:** May 19, 2007, 10:16:15 AM »

Extreme sifting update:

I finally did a controlled A/B test comparing two batches of dough, one with unsifted flour dumped into the mixing bowl of water and the other with sifted flour painstakingly sifted into the mixing bowl of water using the above sieve.

Exact same recipe, hydration (64%), dough handling, rise temps and times. The results were very close between unsifted and sifted. If anything the sifted dough was wetter and more difficult to handle than the unsifted, which is the opposite of what might have been expected.

My conclusion: Sifting is a waste of time. Just dump in the flour.

Pete-zza · « **Reply #56 on:** May 19, 2007, 10:21:51 AM »

Quote from: scpizza on May 19, 2007, 10:16:15 AM

My conclusion: Sifting is a waste of time. Just dump in the flour.

scpizza,

My recollection is that you have a Santos mixer, which appears to be superior to just about any other mixer that might be used in a home setting. Is your conclusion as to that mixer only, or any mixer? Also, were your tests limited to 00 flours?

Peter

November · « **Reply #57 on:** May 19, 2007, 11:34:37 AM »

Quote from: scpizza on May 19, 2007, 10:16:15 AM

If anything the sifted dough was wetter and more difficult to handle than the unsifted

Which is fully what I would expect. It's wetter because at the end of mixing, there's more water in the dough. Water that is not immediately absorbed into the flour will evaporate more rapidly during mixing/kneeding. You should be able to detect a difference in weight at the end of mixing/kneeding. If you don't, the detection of one dough being wetter is a sensory illusion.

Hydration aside, there's no way I'm going to give up sifting because of the things I've found in my flour before. Every once in a while, even with a high quality flour like King Arthur's, I get pea-sized hard clumps of flour and bran. Depending on how hard the clumps are, I either throw them out or try to press them through the mesh.

- red.november

November · « **Reply #58 on:** May 19, 2007, 12:20:42 PM »

I thought I would offer an analogy for another aspect of the hydration difference between sifted and unsifted flour to help illustrate the physics involved. This analogy has nothing to do with absorption like above, but is actually just a contributing factor. Imagine one cylinder, approximately 20 cm in diameter, containing a thousand glass marbles measuring 2 cm in diameter. Imagine another cylinder, of the same diameter, containing a single glass sphere measuring 20 cm in diameter. Both of these cylinders contain the same mass and volume of glass, and the glass has zero absorption ability, however, the separation of the mass inherent with the thousand marbles gives it ten times more surface area. When you pour water into the two cylinders to cover the glass spheres, and allow the water to drain from the bottom, even though the glass hasn't absorbed any water, the cylinder with the thousand marbles is going to weigh slightly more because of water tension (surface adhesion) and in some cases, like plastic (or flour), electrostatic attraction. This is just one more way a fine particulate mass is able to hold on to more water.

- red.november

Pete-zza · « **Reply #59 on:** May 19, 2007, 12:43:56 PM »

November,

When I went to your mass-volume conversion calculator at http://tools.foodsim.com/, I noted that one cup of the Caputo Extra Blu flour, which is a 00 flour, when measured out by the textbook, weighs more than any of the other five flours you have listed in your tool that are measured the same way, including the King Arthur Sir Lancelot high-gluten flour. To me, that suggests that the Caputo Extra Blu flour is more finely milled than the other flours. Is it safe to say that on a relative basis the Extra Blu flour, whether sifted or unsifted, will become more fully hydrated than the other flours, based on the principle you described in your last post?

Peter