Jim D.

Thanks for that. In browning the butter, do you cook it until there are little brown bits, and do you include the bits? I find it difficult to know when to stop--brown to black happens quickly.

Jeanne, all of those desserts sound wonderful, but I was intrigued by the pear tart. I have worked on getting adequate pear flavor into a bonbon with only modest success. Can you say more about what is in this tart?

Are you stirring fast? And what tool are you using? There is no need to stir madly (as some people assert). As long as the Type V crystals are being mixed in, a slower stir might be in order. And if you are using a whisk or something similar, try switching to a spatula or anything that doesn't incorporate air.

Previously I mentioned that the brand I bought at a local grocery is no longer carried, and I have forgotten the name. The one I purchased through Amazon was Judee's Dried Egg White, and even though it gets an Amazon rating of 4.5 out of 5, I threw it out as inedible. I hope I haven't just insulted the brand that you use in your smoothies. 😄

A followup to the attempt to create a "marjolaine" bonbon (second try, actually). This time I made nut meringues using pasteurized egg whites and a recipe I found for the nutty layers of the marjolaine cake. Piping the batter into the circles of a chablon did not work as the meringue batter stuck to the silicone form, so I moved to piping them directly onto a Silpat. This worked well, although some of them were a little misshapen, but I discovered, when assembling the bonbon, that the meringue cookies were quite forgiving when being trimmed. I baked these at 300F. I made dark chocolate shells, then piped in hazelnut praline ganache to fill the cavity about 1/3. Then I made almond praline gianduja and added that to the cavity using a confectionery funnel. I added one of the "marjolaine cookies" and pushed it into the gianduja. If the cavity was not quite full enough, I added more almond gianduja. The taste is what I was looking for (hazelnut, almond, crunchy layer), and buried in the gianduja, the cookie should stay relatively crisp, though the egg whites give it a pleasant softness as well. I should add that the meringue batter is easy to pipe and does not spread for the first Silpat. but it will not sit around for very long before getting more fluid. Next time I think I will beat the egg whites with sugar, then divide the batter into halves. I will add half the pulverized hazelnuts and almonds to one half of egg whites, pipe that, then "refresh" the other half of egg whites with a beater and add the remaining nut mixture for the second Silpat. I would be glad to give the recipe to anyone interested.

I have dealt with less-than-white white chocolate by adding Chef Rubber already-mixed white cocoa butter to it. It's just a guess, but perhaps you are right that adding a large amount of titanium dioxide directly to the chocolate interferes with tempering. Here is a previous post from Takomabaker that dealt with more or less the issue you have having. If you are mixing your own white cocoa butter, a common recommendation is to mix 100g plain cocoa butter and 10g powdered oil-soluble color (in your case, titanium dioxide). Most people use an immersion blender and then strain the result through very fine mesh or something similar.

It would be nice to think of the comments on my thin shells as a compliment, but alas, I realize that is the not the case. When I making shells, I now dump the contents into my new Mol d'Art melter. When the chocolate in the tempering machine gets low, I check the temp in the Mol d'Art and add that chocolate to the machine, which thins out the chocolate. So if I made these shells at the beginning of the whole process, the shells might have been thin because the chocolate was just starting to crystallize (be in temper). And if I made them after some Mol d'Art chocolate was added, the same thing would probably be true. I agree with keychris that overtempering is probably not the explanation since if that were the case, the photo of the shell would have shown something quite different. Thanks for the input from all who contributed.

@pastrygirl, I think you may be correct about the thinness of the shell. I'm not sure this photo will show it, but the shell is wonderfully thin--wonderful for taste appeal, not so wonderful for contracting and coming out of the shell.

I think it's clear that something additional in the mold design helps, such as the indentations I mentioned in the other one. The problem with the grooved mold is that it's quite difficult to decorate. I can't use the technique of painting various colors to get a marbled effect then airbrushing another color behind them because the painted colors run down into the grooves. Perhaps a dome with a single indentation running between one edge and the other would be enough to allow for release (without ensuing insanity). Here is a photo of the grooved dome (CW1091):

Gianduja was tempered (with EZtemper silk). I agree about the thinness of the shell being a possible factor. Of course, it's difficult to tell how thin it is until it's too late. I made a similar filling in a grooved dome, and with that, I made sure the shell was not thin--and I could tell because the grooves were no longer completely visible. Those bonbons fell out of the mold without issue. And no, I was not impatient. I tried to unmold after 15 minutes or more. Not a single bonbon fell out (that was got to be the worst feeling in the world). I tried an hour later, then froze them. Around 100 came out, the rest were as in the photo. I hate that CW dome!

No, it's a layered bonbon: bottom layer is salted caramel, then a few chopped toasted pecans, then a layer of pecan praline gianduja (pecan praline paste plus Orelys chocolate), then a pecan shortbread cookie (I call it "pecan pie"). I have made it several times, and this has never happened before. But I usually use a "grooved dome"--similar size but grooves in the bottom. It seems plain dome molds are more of a problem than when they have something in the bottom that makes them release better.

Thank you for that insight. It's difficult to make yourself stop in the middle of making shells and test for temper, but it appears to be necessary. Do you know of any discussion or any scientific papers about overtempering that deal with this problem? I have also noticed that sometimes shells, when they are cooling in the fridge, acquire a dusty look. Could this be a sign of overtempering? They usually come out of the mold without a problem, but it looks suspicious.

I lost about 20 bonbons from the condition shown above: the top part broke off from the bottom, which stayed firmly in the mold. It was a CW large dome, a mold that has given me much trouble over the years, but sometimes is fine. This is the worst "stuck in the mold" episode in a long time, but that doesn't keep it from being annoying and embarrassing. I suspect overtempered chocolate used for the shell (isn't overtempering one of the suspected causes of this problem?). I am not so new to this process that I will ask the question I want to ask: "What could have happened?" We will never know. But how can one tell chocolate is overtempered? I know it gets more viscous, but this was milk chocolate, and it's always viscous.

I can think of two possibilities. CW may have made it for a special order. Or there is another company, DecoRelief, that makes versions/copies/knockoffs (whichever term you prefer) of CW molds. I was looking for a cocoa pod a bit larger than the CW one I was looking at and found it through Renée Drolet at Chocolat Chocolat in Montreal. She would be a great resource for your search.

Just to confuse things further about the guitar: I have the 5mm base. It allows for cutting 25mm squares, which is almost exactly 1 inch.

A guitar is a great tool. The first time you use one and get perfect squares (or rectangles), you will wonder how you endured using a knife. As has been pointed out previously on eGullet, knives are triangular, and as such they are incapable of cutting "perpendicularly." But, although some use guitars to cut caramel, I would never do so. I broke a string once (on a gianduja I had let crystallize a little bit too long), and replacing it is a nightmare (to me, at least). As usual, on eGullet, there is a video, this one from @pastrygirl, showing how to perform this task. I do not have a vibrating table and manage without one. They are very expensive. I too use a Chocovision Delta and like it very much, but all tempering machines with bowls (unless the bowls are enormous) do not allow for dumping the chocolate so as to form shells. I've tried every trick I could think of, but the resulting mess was too much to stand. So my latest purchase is a Mol d'Art melting machine. Given how long it takes to adjust to a given temperature, I would never use it to temper chocolate, but I use it as a receptacle for dumping molds. The rectangular models are perfect for doing this. The chocolate accumulates, then you can empty the container back into the Delta for more work and, as a bonus, if the temperature of the chocolate is right, you compensate for overtempering problems in the Delta bowl. I would spend my money on an airbrush setup. If you have not decorated chocolates with cocoa butter and if you have an appreciative audience for your bonbons, these go over incredibly well. "Too pretty to eat" is the most common response--and that's even when you, the chocolatier, know they aren't as pretty as you meant them to be! If you go this route, there is a very long and informative thread on eG all about airbrushes, compressors, cocoa butter, etc. I have been very happy with a Grex airbrush. Another piece of equipment I would recommend is a dehydrator for melting chocolate overnight so as to shorten the time it takes for the Delta to melt the chocolate from scratch. I also use it for melting colored cocoa butter so as to have it ready. The dehydrator has improved my workflow incredibly. I can recommend one if you are interested. Good luck with this happy task of spending money!

I'm glad you brought that up. After an experience like pastrygirl's, I bought some sorbic acid to add to ganaches, but have not been able to find the correct amount to use.

There is a video showing the use of the PHMB to temper chocolate, but NOT using the paddle, just stirring. I suspect the use of the paddle may be contributing to your probable overtempering (as pastrygirl explained). Other tempering machines, such as the Chocovision ones, rotate the bowl constantly, but that is not as much movement as the KA provides. I didn't mean to suggest that the chocolate should be raised to 93F as the "working temperature." I said you should raise it well above that temp to melt it initially. Then you add additional unmelted chocolate to lower the temp, making sure there is unmelted seed as it gets to 93F, let the seed melt until the chocolate temp is around 89-90F, stir it for a few minutes, then test it. Dark chocolate should then be in temper. As you work with it, over time it becomes overtempered, and that is the time to raise the temp and/or add untempered chocolate. You mentioned that cooling down the chocolate takes time. Yes, that is a (yet another) problem. Adding unmelted chocolate speeds it up, but without a very expensive tempering machine (such as the Selmi), patience is required.

Another situation you must be concerned about is "over-tempering," the condition where too many Type V crystals have formed. You can tell from the viscosity of the chocolate and (probably) from its setting up too quickly on parchment. Over-tempering doesn't usually happen until you have been using the chocolate for a long time, but I've had it happen early. There are two remedies: (1) raise the temperature (being careful not to raise it above approximately 93F) and/or (2) add untempered chocolate (chocolate you have deliberately raised well above 93F and to which you have not added any seed--meaning that it will dilute Type V crystals in the chocolate in the bowl).

This is a puzzle. The Ghiradelli wafers appear to be real chocolate (as opposed to "coating chocolate"). From the spec sheet, they seem more like milk than dark chocolate (they contain 41-50% cacao, plus sugar, milk fat, and vanilla), but that does not matter a great deal in terms of tempering. I don't see any reason to heat the chocolate all the way to 120F, but again, that does not do any harm, just means the process of cooling down takes longer. You are using the seed method to temper, so there is no reason to lower the temp down to 85F, then warm it back up. The only issue that might apply is how much of the seed is completely melted as you get below 95F. If you have studied the science behind tempering, you know that you are seeking to eliminate all crystals in the chocolate by heating it up, then trying to obtain a predominance of Type V crystals by introducing already-tempered seed chocolate. But if all the seed is melting as the temp gets down to around 93F, then you probably don't have Type V crystals remaining. In other words, you must have some unmelted seed as the chocolate gets below 93F. When it is around 90F, you can fish out any unmelted seed (because there won't be much melting below 90F). Assuming it in fact dark chocolate, you can take it down to 89F, then test to see whether it is in temper. Webstaurant Store also carries Guittard, another reasonably priced chocolate; there is more variety to choose from in that brand. As for the differences between using the same product and doing the same thing as in the past but getting different results, welcome to the fickle world of chocolate. Room temperature and humidity can affect chocolate. Photos would definitely help diagnose the issue further.

You might try the proportions of the original recipe you posted but omit the cocoa butter, so: 100g of milk chocolate, 10g of honey, 50g of cream. That provides a ratio of 2:1 chocolate to liquefier. I start with chocolate from the bag (so, we assume, still in temper), melt the chocolate until there are a few pieces left, take it off the heat, then stir to melt all of it, which (unless you have overheated it by a lot over 90F/32C) should still be in temper. Meanwhile heat the cream and honey to 105F/40.5C. Use just a spatula to emulsify the chocolate and cream mixture. Sometimes an immersion blender can be too much. If I see bits of unmelted chocolate, I place the pot on heat for a few seconds. If the ganache still separates, add liquid (skim milk, liquor, even water, but NOT cream) a few drops at a time, still stirring. At the right point you should see that texture that successful ganache has; I describe it as like chocolate pudding, a bit spongy, glossy in appearance. I found this video on fixing broken ganache that might be of help.

Actually that ganache does not look curdled/broken/split to me. Here is an image of such a ganache: If I'm misinterpreting your photo, then the fix is to add warm liquid (skim milk, purée, liquor, water, NOT cream).

Good luck on your venture. As expensive as it may be, a humidity-controlled case is the way to go (IMHO). Especially if you decorate the chocolates with colored cocoa butter, they will lose their shine and have a matte look when humidity hits them. This does not affect the taste but certainly makes them less appealing to the eye (which is, of course, what you want for the sake of sales). I get around this issue in the shops where my chocolates are sold by, first, insisting they have refrigeration available and, second, by sealing each box in a plastic bag to protect from humidity (requiring an investment in an impulse sealer and appropriately sized bags). I suggest reading the various threads on shelf life on eGullet and obtaining one of the standard books on chocolate (two are mentioned in the post by Altay.Oro). It is a very important issue. If you can afford it, get an Aw (water activity) meter to test each filling. Otherwise you can get Jean-Pierre Wybauw's Fine Chocolates Gold, where he provides water activity readings for the recipes. If you don't wish to make either of these (not inexpensive) purchases, you can stick with caramel (and all its variations) and gianduja. My Aw readings for caramel are in the 0.55 neighborhood, meaning it is predicted to last 15-30 weeks (according to Melissa Coppel). My reading for hazelnut gianduja is around 0.60 (12-20 weeks according to Coppel, 15-30 weeks according to Wybauw--you can see that Aw readings are an estimate). When you get into ganache, however, the addition of cream and other perishable ingredients creates a different story altogether. On the other hand, if you stick with butter ganache, you will have a shelf life comparable to the safe numbers mentioned previously.

Some people do it that way, but most (as far as I have seen) spread some chocolate on top of the mold, apply a transfer sheet (with a design pre-printed on it) or plain guitar sheet, then spread the chocolate with a scraper. After the chocolate has crystallized, the acetate sheet can be removed easily. Unless one is an expert, this makes a mess, with chocolate flowing down the sides of the mold. And it is also difficult to remove the chocolate between the cavities with the scraper, but not doing so means they can be very difficult to get out of the mold. Perhaps you can detect that I speak from some unhappy experience. When it works, however, this technique produces an attractive bonbon, and a transfer sheet adds a nice design touch to the bottom of the bonbon--something I have learned, to my surprise, that customers notice and really like.

Those are really beautiful. If you don't mind telling, how do you get such subtlety when painting with cocoa butter? Mine is almost always too fluid to stay in place and runs all over the mold. And, in the case of the bonbon on the far right, the blue color had to be painted first to get the gradient effect.