paulraphael
-
Posts
5,072 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by paulraphael
-
-
-
That's interesting about the short vs. long chain inulins. None of the scientific sources I've looked at mention this overtly, nor do the places selling it in the US (it's one of these annoying ingredients that's sold as a fitness supplement, a health food, and sometimes also a culinary ingredient. So half the people selling it won't even understand your questions.
My information seems to be on the short chain variety, which may be more common here. What adds to the complexity is that (according to one study) perceived sweetness drops radically with low dilutions. So what has 35% sucrose equivalent at high concentrations may only have 10% SE at low concentrations. I imagine that with standard usage being below 4%, even the sweet variety is behaving more like 10% SE.
Also thanks again for the tip to search Italian sites. Searching for "Inulin Sorbet" turns up next to nothing. "Inulini Sorbeti" goes on for pages!
-
1
-
-
Thanks Teo, I'll check out those links.
That advice about Inulin not impacting sweetness might be reasonable, even if it's not technically quite accurate. My understanding is that inulin is generally used at concentrations between 4% and 7%, so at roughly a third the sweetness of sucrose, its impact on sweetness can be pretty safely ignored. At least if you're trying to keep things simple.
I agree with the whole professional secret thing. I'm glad that in most parts of the culinary world that's disappearing. I suspect that since recipes legally aren't intellectual property (and since you'll never be able to keep your former employees quiet) secrets are too hard to keep. So the real way to get credit for your brilliant ideas is to shout them from the rooftops: publish them. Then everyone will know when someone's ripping you off. The internet has accelerated this shift in thinking. But this idea has caught on more quickly some places than others.
Edited to add:
The Bordas article says that there's more than one type of inulin, and they have significantly different properties. This could explain quite a bit of the contradictory information.
-
4 hours ago, teonzo said:
Have you considered inulin? Around here many professionals are starting to use it. It adds body without impacting sweetness or calories, being a non digestible fiber.
Teo
Yes, I've been reading research about it, and am starting to do some experiments. It does impact sweetness somewhat; it has about 35% the sweetness of sucrose. It also impacts freezing point depression (about 65% that of sucrose). So it's on the same spectrum as maltodextrin and dried glucose syrup. Its magic may be that it works in lower concentrations; somewhere between a sugar and a gum.
I'm especially interested in experimenting with inulin in sorbets. There's practically nothing written about it. Do you see an pros doing this?
-
1
-
-
I've been finding that some flavors need more sweetness than others. Unsurprisingly, bitter flavors like cocoa need extra sweetness to compensate. But I'm also finding that fruit flavors don't taste quite right at my usual low sweetness level.
It's a kind of balancing act ... similar to getting salt levels right in order to to pop flavors into focus.
-
1
-
-
If it's meat that's going to be cooked, it doesn't make a big difference; you probably won't be able to tell how artful the knife strokes were.
If you're carving a roast, or if you just want maximum prep karma, then it's hard to go wrong sashimi-style knife strokes. Long blades are better than short. Sharp knives are better than dull (obviously) although for red meat and poultry you'll benefit from a less polished edge than you would for sashimi. The delicate flesh of fish will cut best (by far) with an edge polished on a 6000 to 10000 grit water stone. For poultry or red meat, a toothier edge will generally serve you better; like from a 1000 to 2000 grit stone, and possibly maintained on a steel. Both kinds of edge will cut meat like butter when fresh off the stones, but the toothier one will continue to cut meat well after many hours of use. and it can be banged back into shape several times before revisiting the stones.
The cutting technique is to start with a short forward thrust that breaks the surface. This should end with the back edge of the blade over the back edge of the meat. Then complete the cut with a long, crescent-shaped drawing cut. At the end of the stroke, the front of the blade (just behind the tip) should be in contact with the cutting board, and should follow through all the way. It should cut clean through, and by this point, there will be very little blade surface area in contact with the meat, so nothing will stick to the knife.
If you can't make the cut in one stroke, don't saw. It's the sawing motion that rips up the meat. Instead, remove all downward pressure, and move the knife forward again without cutting. Then repeat the crescent-shaped drawing motion. This way, all the cutting is one direction, and the cut will be clean and uniform.
-
3
-
1
-
-
On 5/24/2019 at 7:11 PM, JoNorvelleWalker said:
Good results. Only complaint is that I was getting ready for work and I accidentally spun a few* minutes too long. The overrun is higher than I would like. For the 750 g of cream called for in the recipe I used:
90 g sugar
20 g trehalose
salt 0.2 g
locust bean gum 1 g
lambda carrageenan 0.1 g
Polysorbate 80 0.055 g (was trying for 0.05)
glycerol monostearate 0.25 g
Lebovitz called for 150 g of sugar. Far too sweet for my taste. I substituted 90 g sugar and 20 g of trehalose.
*6
Yeah, every home recipe I've seen (and most pro recipes) are way too sweet. I usually go for a sucrose-equivalent sweetness (POD) of around 120g/1000g.
Trehalose has roughly 40% the sweetness of sugar (possibly less at low dilutions), so you had the equivalent of 98g sucrose / 750g, or a POD of 130.
Sucrose and dextrose in combination also give lots of independent control over sweetness and freezing point.
-
15 hours ago, btbyrd said:
Modernist Pantry sells a powdered glucose with a DE of 95+. I don't know if that's what you're looking for though. Modernist Pantry also sells N -Zorbit in retail quantities, if that's the type of maltodextrin you're looking for.
I found this, but unfortunately DE 95 powdered glucose is for all practical purposes dextrose powder, which I have plenty of sources for.
I ended up buying this on Amazon, which is the right stuff but seems like a terrible deal.
-
1
-
-
I'm looking for someone who sells retail quantities with reasonable shipping prices. Most importantly, I'm looking for products that report DE numbers. Almost everything I see is mystery ingredients.
In a perfect world, I'd be looking for very low-DE values.
Thanks!
-
14 hours ago, JoNorvelleWalker said:
Minus 11.0 C, which required another spoon.
That's helpful. I think I've been overestimating the hardening power of nut oils. Which means the suggested recipe I posted above will be too soft. If you have any more of this left, I'd be curious to know how it is at -9C.
-
The whole color/flavor thing could have its own topic. I've always recoiled from colored ice creams, but just read something by a pastry chef on the degree to which people need the color to experience flavor. It had never crossed my mind.
-
8 hours ago, eugenep said:
I read about the Bobo online and cross checked it here on Egullet and I think I read your post so I wanted to try the Bobo.
I got mine at Chung Shing Meats, 19 Catherine St, in Chi-town.
I didn't see any label to identify it as White or Black plume. The birds were 3.80 lb to over 4lbs in size.
You think a seller of the Black plume would make a difference and where should I buy that?
The owners of Chung Shing Meats should upgrade their facilities. The chicken might be alright but the place didn't have a clean look to it so I think that's the biggest reason for not going for another one unless there's a Black plume seller nearby?
I just wrote to Bo Bo to ask for a list of retailers. I used to get them from my old butcher on the lower east side but he's long gone.
My understanding is that the birds they call "white plume" are conventional chickens that are just raised well. The black plume ones are the heritage hybrids and are completely different. They call the breed "barred-silver cross," if I remember correctly. No idea what that means.
I'd love to try a poulet rouge birds. Does anyone have a source in NYC? And a price?
-
1
-
-
The best I've had is Bo Bo. Specifically their black plume chickens. I don't imagine these are the best you can find at all costs (who knows what that would be ...) but I find they strike a great balance between quality and affordability. The black plumes are a hybrid between heritage breeds and modern chickens. They mature slowly enough to develop real flavor, but no so slowly as to be priced like a delicacy. They're also humanely raised and very well fed, and always sold with the head on (so you examine the eyes for freshness). Last I checked they were below $5/lb, but this was a while back. They have scrawny breasts (but ones that actually taste good) and burly legs.
Mostly I buy Murrays or Bell & Evans, since they're at my local store. I consider these the entry level of chicken that actually tastes like chicken. But they're not remarkable in any way. These brands are well-raised, but actually use the same breed that's raised by Purdue and every other supermarket brand ... ones bred to grow to 4lbs in 6 weeks on 8lbs of feed ... or something close to that. Flavor isn't a real priority. At least the good brands don't actually taste bad. Even the very expensive all-organic, fully buzzword-compliant birds at places like Whole Foods tend to be this same breed (cornishX hybrids). At specialty markets and farmers' markets I often see the pure heritage breeds. I'm sure they're amazing, but I have yet to indulge (not counting the gobsmackingly pricey Amish farm heritage turkeys I've splurged on for thksgiving.
-
1
-
-
Do you have any idea what temperature the ice cream was when you were scooping it? If it was a normal consistency at normal serving temperatures, then I need to take another look at my data on pistachio oil.
I use spreadsheets that I've been building for my own purposes. The last few weeks I've been up to my neck in polynomial regression equations and correspondence with Ice Cream PhDs.
Here's your project looks like ...
-
4
-
-
Has no one mentioned financiers? I've never made a proper financier, but the batter is just about the most versatile and delicious quickbread concoction there is. Financier batter can be used for anything from petits fours to mini muffins to best non-pound cake pound cake you've ever had. You just need almond flour and egg whites and the usual stuff from your pantry.
-
1
-
-
I ran your formula through my software and got:
Total Fat: 20.4%
Milk Fat: 10.4%
Total Solids: 47.1%
Solids Nonfat: 26.6%
Milk Solids Nonfat: 4.8%
Stabilizer/Water: 0.41%
POD: 135 / 1000g
PAC: 157 / 1000g
Absolute PAC: 394 / 1000g
Rel. Hardness @ -14°C: 92
A few thoughts …
Total fat is really high, because of the combined cream and nut butter content. This mutes flavor release; the best thing to do about it is to shift the ratio of fats toward nut oil. Total solids is higher than what’s ideal, but there isn’t much to be done about that.
Stabilizer content is high.
The emulsifier values seem flipped. Polysorbate works in much smaller quantities that GMS. Did you arrive at those numbers experimentally? If not, I’d suggest reversing them.
Sweetness is fairly high, at POD 135, but freezing point depression is low. Combined with the hardening power of the pistachio oils, I’d expect this to be very hard to scoop unless its allowed to warm up quite a bit (my tools only give a rough estimate here, but they suggest it will hard as a brick at -14°C,
Here’s a suggestion:
321g Whole Milk
141g Heavy Cream 36%
174g Pistachio Paste
174g Pistachio Paste
103g Dextrose
17g Fructose
1g Locust bean gum
0.1g carrageenan
0.25g GSM
0.05g Polysorbate 80
2.0g Salt
764g Total
Analysis:
Total Fat: 20.6%
Milk Fat: 8%
Total Solids: 51.3%
Solids Nonfat: 30.8%
Milk Solids Nonfat: 4.3%
Stabilizer/Water: 0.31%
POD: 136 / 1000g
PAC: 322 / 1000g
Absolute PAC: 763 / 1000g
Rel. Hardness @ -14°C: 80
Re: vanilla ... I usually go with around 0.25% the water weight of the formula. For emulsifiers I use around 2g soy lecithin per 1000g formula. Mono/diglycerides are usually used at around 0.1-0.2%. Polysorbat 80 is usually .02-.04%. My understanding is that the glycerides will have the most impact on increasing overrun; the sorbitan esters will have the strongest effect on fat coalescence. But I haven't experimented with these; lecithin has worked fine for me.
-
They're all ugly if you're a carrot.
-
2
-
5
-
-
Nut flavors are challenging if you're looking for intense flavors, without the texture turning to peanut butter. My general model is along these lines:
-no eggs
-add ~2g soy lecithin/kg for emulsification/de-emulsification
-no more than 10% milk fat (total fat will still be high from the the nut paste)
-pay close attention to total solids. Aim or somewhere between 37% and 42%. The nut paste is essentially 100% solids, so you'll add less than the usual amount of skim milk powder, or maybe none at all. The exact right level of solids will depend on preference with a given nut paste. Too little and you'll have ice problems and thin body, too much and it will be like eating peanut butter.
-ideally, customize a stabilizer blend. High on the locust bean gum, to reduce ice crystals. Low on the guar (it tends to add body and chew ... you won't need help here. No xanthan. It forms a gel with lBG.
-
15 hours ago, Chimayo Joe said:
That would be like Cajun napalm.
That sounds like a cocktail.
-
-
On 5/9/2019 at 2:32 PM, DiggingDogFarm said:
I wonder how popular their previous commercial unit was?
Apparently popular enough to warrant a new one.
I was intrigued by that one too. In their blog post introducing the new one, they say the old one was a flop. I believe it was just the Anova lab circulator. You could find it on lab equipment sites, but I never saw it marketed to cooks or sold on kitchen sites.
My only guess is that people want something more compact. This looks more like the original PolyScience ... not something you stick in a drawer when you're done.
-
27 minutes ago, dscheidt said:
The anovas I have tested (two of the BT ones, one of the piece of shit mini thing) all drew slightly more than their claimed heater output the entire time the heater is running; the excess is in line with what it draws when the heater isn't on. In a big container, starting with cold tap water, and going to a high temperature, that can be a couple hours. Once they get close they cycle the heater on-off, no intermediate power setting.
Interesting! I didn't think PIDs worked that way.
Is the POS mini thing the nano? What do you hate? I've never seen one but always thought it would be nice as a 2nd one and for travel.
-
42 minutes ago, rotuts said:
I Ive used a 30 Qt cooler and a 36 qt cooler with the bluetooth Anova, starting w hot tap water
Yeah, I'd guess that with a covered cooler any circulator could easily manage 100L.
-
3 minutes ago, jimb0 said:
Ah, I missed that, thanks; I couldn't find it anywhere on their site. Presumably it's cheaper? When we're talking about its wattage, do we mean total, or strictly the heater.
Not 100% sure, but usually with this kind of thing, it's some engineering number that reflects the maximum number of watts the thing can draw from the wall for some length of time. Which means the real world max output of the heater would lower. This would be the same for other circulators, as well as kettles, toasters, microwaves, etc.
I always start with hot water from the tap, and for large batches I use a cooler, so power output is my lowest priority with circulators. Not sure I'd notice the difference between 800 and 1200 watts. At a restaurant where they've got 30 quart Cambros, with people opening the lid all the time, it might be a different story.
-
2
-
US source for atomized glucose and maltodextrin?
in Kitchen Consumer
Posted
I think you're right that it's folly to try to accurately model something as complex and full of emergent properties as ice cream. But I find it's quite possible to produce useful models. For example, if my model tells me that a certain change in sugar balance is going to increase sweetness by 10% ... but the actual effect is an increase of 12% ... this may still be useful to me, even if it's not strictly accurate. It probably gets me closer than an educated guess would have, and so it saves me a round (or two or three) of trial and error. If, on the other hand, the sweetness went in the opposite direction, or if it went up by 80% ... then you could argue that the model is worse than nothing.
As it happens, over the last few months I've been building models to help formulate ice creams and sorbets . Usually my experience resembles the first example. It gets me really close. Occasionally, it's way off. This is educational; it helps me fix the model.
Predicting sweetness has been pretty easy. While research shows wide variances in perceived sweetness across different concentrations and temperatures, it turns out that in ice creams we're not working with such wide ranges. And differences in sweetness of plus or minus a few % don't seem all that significant. I haven't found fat content to affect sweetness much. Acid content makes a big difference in other foods, but the range of acidities in ice creams is fairly low.
Bitterness is another story. Ingredients like cocoa powder have a significant impact. There's a pretty simple solution; assign these ingredients a negative PAC value. Sounds a bit simplistic, but it really works!
Freezing point depression is just chemistry and math. It turns out the math is about five times as hard as I'd imagined (i've had to consult with dairy PhDs on two continents to get my models working right) but once it's done it's done.
Modeling the effects of hardening fats is more difficult, because as far as I can tell no one's done it before. I've started with some wild guesses and gradually am refining them (in another thread, Jo told me her pistachio ice cream wasn't doing what my model suggested. Valuable information. I realized I was overestimating the saturated fats in nut oils compared with cocoa butter).
Your questions about enzymes and inulin are interesting. I found one study that explored the breakdown of inulin, but in response to ph and storage time. They found that after 2 weeks in storage, strawberry sorbet does exhibit breakdown of inulin into mono- and disaccharides. But not sooner.
Otherwise, all I've been able to find is examples of fruits and inulin playing happily together, including commercial pineapple sorbets that use inulin. It's possible that the enzymes are deactivated by cooking. But it's also quite possible that these enzymes are just proteolytic and so don't bother polysaccharides.
Clearly, "more research is warranted," to quote every scientist ever. But it seems pastry chefs have been using the stuff in combination with commercial stabilizers and every variety of fruit for some time now, and no one's complaining about weirdness. They seem to like it.