Jim D.

I am having some success in working on an app that will analyze my ganache recipes. Gathering the data on ingredients was the difficult part. The video from Chocolate Academy Online was very helpful in providing, for example, the makeup of glucose syrup and cream (% of sugar and water). Information on chocolates can sometimes be deduced from nutrition or ingredient labels, or when available, from manufacturers' spec sheets. I am concentrating on the four categories that the video as well as the Morato information originally posted on eGullet and some from Melissa Coppel emphasize: water, sugar, cocoa butter, other fats. I am at this point ignoring other solids that might be in a ganache (cacao solids, spices, etc.), as they do not seem to be so determinative of whether a ganache is balanced or not. I had to guess at the composition of many ingredients I use, fruit purées being a prime example. Many contain 10% sugar, so that much is known. But the rest is not all water as there are fruit solids as well. Dried fruits present a similar problem: Obviously there is some water in them (highly variable) and solids (the fruit), but there is also some sugar, again varying greatly from fruit to fruit, even depending perhaps on how long the fruit has been in storage. So I just did my best to guess at those. My first recipe to be run through the app is Greweling's absinthe (Green Faeries, he calls it). It came out close to the recommended percentages, except that it was a little high in water--which corresponds to my experience that it remains a soft ganache. I derived the percentage guidelines from a combination of Chocolate Academy Online, Melissa Coppel, and Ramon Morato (interestingly, Greweling does not speak in terms of percentages but speaks more broadly about increasing/decreasing fat or liquefiers when dealing with ganache problems). Next I will look at an Andrew Shotts recipe that often produces a broken ganache and see if I can figure out what the issue is (aside from operator error, of course!).

@TexasMBA02, what I do with infusions (and it's simply what Greweling says to do), is weigh the coffee beans and the cream, heat them, strain out the coffee, put the (cleaned) original pot on a scale, zero out the scale, pour in the strained cream, and add milk to equal the original amount called for. Glad to hear that the recipe turned out better in your recent attempt. The subject of white chocolates has received much discussion on eGullet over the years. After trying a lot of them, I have settled on Valrhona's Opalys. It is very difficult to use for making chocolate shells, but the taste justifies (for me) the extra effort. And it is great for making ganaches, has a clean dairy taste and (this next observation is based on absolutely no evidence whatever aside from my impressions) almost a citrus-like note. The next best, in my opinion, is Cacao Barry's Zéphyr, which is somewhat easier to work with and costs a little less. I don't know where you get your chocolate, but if you have a supplier, sometimes they will provide small samples, but since you say you are a home cook, there is always Chocosphere, which sells 1kilo bags of many chocolates, including Opalys and Zéphyr.

@TexasMBA02, This is a relatively minor side point to the goal of making an acceptable (for your purposes) coffee ganache, but most recipes call for replacing the cream lost by infusion with something else to get it back to the original amount. Does your recipe call for that? The "something else" varies, with Peter Greweling (Chocolates and Confections) calling for milk instead of cream so as to maintain the amount of fat called for in his recipe. Other authors are not so careful and say just to replace it with more cream, and I have had coffee ganaches break as a result because coffee grounds absorb so much liquid. This would not solve your issue with the ganache being too fluid (in fact, adding milk instead of cream would make it more fluid). My opinion is that the slight differences in percent of fat in cream (as you know, U.S. manufacturers often do not state the fat percentage on heavy cream containers) and the variation in brand of chocolate would not create the problem you are having. I would try Teo's earlier advice and remelt and add more white chocolate. Usually recipes call for a higher percentage of white chocolate to liquefier than for dark or milk chocolate. And as for the chocolate you are using, there may be better-tasting (and less expensive) white chocolate out there, but I don't think anyone would question the quality of Valrhona.

What you say is true--about not analyzing every recipe--but I have to start somewhere. So I am beginning with Greweling's absinthe recipe. It contains just the basics. And in practice I do develop new recipes by starting with known, working ones--unless, of course, it is an entirely new idea with no precedent in my repertoire.

@teonzo, You stated that "All the cocoa in white chocolate is given by cocoa butter, so you just need to look for that number." In the case of Opalys, which is labeled 33%, I found a chocolate seller that provides a spec sheet for this chocolate. The relevant numbers are 33% cocoa butter but 44% fat. Would the discrepancy be that of the 32% milk listed, some of that is fat? This would make sense as the ingredient list on the Opalys bag includes "whole milk powder."

I would just add that Aw isn't everything. I am thinking of ganaches that separate because (presumably) they have too much fat vs. water. Their Aw reading might be fine, but they are still unusable without doctoring. I would like to avoid that unpleasant turn of events. I looked again at the video I watched earlier today from Chocolate Academy Online, and indeed Russ Thayer does say the chocolatier needs to know the percentages of the various ingredients in everything in the ganache. Perhaps it is telling that when he goes into detail, he deals only with the basics, such as fat, cocoa butter, water, sugar. Surely it is not possible to know the makeup of every ingredient. The spreadsheet on balancing ganaches that appeared on eGullet some years ago does list specific ingredients for a particular recipe (my favorite is "bold mint liqueur"--whatever that is). I wonder if those who have Ganache Solution or similar programs could say what those apps do about "exotic" ingredients.

Thanks for that. As for Opalys, the formulas calculating balances in ganaches request amount of sugar and amount of milk solids. How could those be calculated (there could be many other ingredients, such as vanilla)? And yes, the U.S. does require an ingredient and nutrition list on every product, but the nutrition list doesn't provide all that the balancing formulas want to know. As I have thought more about balancing, it occurred to me there are so many ingredients that can be in ganache that knowing the information about all of them would be nearly impossible. Take banana as an example. How much of it is water, how much is solid matter, what percentage of sugar does it contain? With purchased purées, the manufacturer will state how much is sugar, but again, how much is water, how much is solid material? Or if you make your own fruit purée, how would you ever calculate how much is water and how much is solid material?

Among my "corona time" activities is taking another stab at understanding the balancing of ganache. I came across some (free) Instagram videos from Chocolate Academy Online. Russ Thayer's presentation on the balancing question is very clear and helpful. The one issue I keep bumping up against, however, is how to find the specs of chocolates (percentages of fat, sugar, etc.). This is not something chocolate manufacturers routinely supply. Valrhona's Opalys is the white chocolate I use most often in making ganache, so I looked at a bag of Opalys and also went to the Valrhona site. Actually for some of their chocolates (such as the newer Biskelia) they list the percentages we are looking for, but that info is not in the Opalys material. Quite often it is possible to find the percent of fat, but it's not often expressed explicitly for cocoa butter, which is what is needed. As is well known, the percentage by which people often refer to chocolate ("it's a 70% dark") isn't very useful, except in a general way. I also use Felchlin's dark and milk for ganache, and again could not find the detailed information needed. In the case of milk chocolate, we need a breakdown of how much dairy solids and cacao solids are there. Thayer has the advantage that he is using a Cacao Barry product and also happens to be working for a Callebaut company's online academy. So how does one find the specs on a particular chocolate?

My 2HP California Air Tools compressor has a storage capacity of 4.6 gallons (17 liters). The same company's 1HP model has the same storage capacity, but obviously would not have the same power in spraying. The capacity of mine is far below what Teo recommends. My experience has been that it never runs out of air when I am using the Grex airbrush (which, with its larger nozzle, requires more power than most airbrushes--a good thing because Grex sold this compressor under its own label). When I used an HVLP spray gun, however, the compressor never stopped delivering air but was running almost constantly, which is not good for compressors, as I understand it. I just checked online and found a 100-liter compressor costing about $300--which supports Teo's argument that you can get a lot more storage for not much more money because that is what I paid for my compressor. But the 100-liter one is heavier if that is an issue.

Simple suggestion: Do an eGullet search for "cleaning molds." You will get all the possibilities with people supporting every one of them--from doing nothing between uses to cleaning them with alcohol.

@Cloudbase, I do not know anything helpful about spraying for the velvet effect or spraying glaze. Krea Swiss makes several spray guns, with the two relevant to you being the multiSpray (which specifically mentions glazes) and the hotChoc (which does say "It can also be used for working with different materials/temperatures than those recommended such as glazes or other low viscosity materials. Performance and results then will vary.") I think you would need to get in touch with someone at Krea Swiss and ask your questions. As I said in my earlier post, it is my "impression" that spraying cocoa butter alone would prove difficult because of the volume of the container, but I do not know how the siphoning works on the hotChoc--e.g., is there something that draws the liquid out of the container (as in a siphon-type airbrush) or is it just the power of the hotChoc that forces the substance out? Again, only someone who has one and uses it for cocoa butter or an expert at Krea can answer that. But if operates like a siphon airbrush, when you get near the bottom of the attached bottle of cocoa butter, the brush stops spraying reliably. I should also add that I can't imagine cleaning colored cocoa butter out of the hotChoc. A couple of years ago on this forum, @keychris wrote the following about the hotChoc: "I've seen a KreahotCHOC in action, IMHO it's for spraying cakes. We tried it on moulds and it just was spraying far too much. I definitely wouldn't buy it if you wanted to do moulds, unless someone else on here says they've managed to make it work. We only tried for less than half an hour though!" Perhaps he will see this and respond if he has additional information. Theo obviously knows a lot about compressors. I would just add that his advice about not having to replace a too-small compressor with another one in a few years is wise. Only you can decide whether you wish to start with something that will work for making velvet and also for airbrushing chocolate molds, or begin with velvet requirements only and think about chocolates later. If you are going to get in touch with Krea, you might ask if they have users you could contact for reviews; I think there are reviews of Krea products online (though if these "reviews" come from Krea, that is not exactly what you are looking for).

I bought the Iwata airbrush used by Andrey to try to duplicate his air-blowing techniques. The model I have does not have interchangeable cups and comes with only a small one. I think you would find this unsatisfactory as time goes on. As for the compressor you mention, it is only 1/4 HP. That is very far from the 2 HP I mentioned. That is the mistake I made in buying a small-HP compressor to go with my Paasche airbrush. It might do for a while, but in my case it could not cope with cocoa butter for a long time. If you just want to find out whether you will really get into airbrushing cocoa butter, then the combination of the two products you mention will help you answer that question, but it is more or less the path I took, and I eventually wanted to trade up. If you do what you are thinking of, you might even find a less expensive airbrush to get started, a Badger, for instance--it's the airbrush I bought as my first one. All that being said, it is significant that Andrey produces all those beautiful effects of his with an Iwata with a small cup--but then he is producing one mold at a time!

First, about the Krebs sprayers: You would need to have the HotChoc model. Krea Swiss (the company's current name) says with the proper nozzle it can spray cocoa butter, but my impression is that the container is so large that you would go broke filling it with enough cocoa butter, but I have no direct knowledge about it. I think one crucial consideration is whether you plan to make chocolates on a significant scale as part of the bakery's offerings or are you pursuing this as more of a hobby? If the latter, then you probably don't want the Fuji. I think you may have misinterpreted the postings on the Fuji. I would guess not more than a half-dozen regular posters on eGullet have a Fuji (I am one of those who does). Most use an airbrush or a spray gun (that is, an HVLP gun ordinarily used for paint). Most regular users of the Fuji (such as @Chocolot) make significant numbers of chocolates at a time. It might be what you end up with, but if expense is a concern, the Fuji is a major investment initially--and it uses a lot of cocoa butter in spraying--so I wouldn't think you would start with it. I use my Fuji for things like Christmas production, but for smaller batches, I use my airbrush. I (and some others on the forum) have a Grex Tritium airbrush with a California Air Tools 2HP compressor (if you do a search on eGullet, you will find lots of posts on this airbrush and setup). The airbrush and the parts and hoses plus compressor cost around $800. The Grex is by far the best airbrush I have used out of a total of three over the years, but obviously it's not cheap. If you are approaching this project as a hobby and don't think you will go beyond that, then you might look at the Paasche airbrushes, which are much less expensive, or the Iwata ones. Get a compressor with high enough HP from the beginning to save yourself more expense as time goes on (I speak from experience). To save yourself from insanity, you will also need a way to keep the airbrush and cocoa butter warm. I have an Avantco dehydrator ($170), and I really like it, not just for airbrushing but for melting chocolate overnight to speed up tempering. Others use yoghurt makers or heating pads, etc. Good luck with your exploration. Feel free to ask any other questions you may have.

Andrey Dubovik strikes again! When I took his "pralinarium" online course, I asked him about some of his advanced designs that had appeared since the work covered in the course. He didn't answer my question because, he said, those designs might be in a future course. Well, the future has arrived. He has announced a "super-pralinarium" course, which appears to cover much of his recent work (photo of one design below--he calls this "tree branches," most on eGullet refer to it as "dendrite"). Photos from each week of the course are available on the site. I spent some time browsing through the contents, and he takes several classes to work on the blowing of colored cocoa butter with an airbrush to make a design in a mold--a technique that proved to be a Waterloo for some of us in the original course. The cost for the "super" course (as of currency exchange rates today) is $761, a little more than the previous course, and the first offering of the course is April 27, 2020.

They are all beautiful. I can only imagine the amount of time it took. I especially like the third egg in the top row and the second one in the bottom row. Having tried that blended effect, I know how difficult it is to achieve (I gave it a try but without much success--I painted one color in the egg, but before I could add a second one, the first had crystallized). A good friend of mine moved to your location, and I have been urging her to seek out your chocolates. I will send her the photos of your Easter assortment to show her what she is missing.

My chocolate assortment for Easter 2020: In the red heart in the middle: cherry pâte de fruit & almond gianduja. Then clockwise, starting from the top: banana & passion fruit caramel; coconut cream; raspberry & kalamansi ganache molded in Ruby chocolate; pecan & chocolate shortbread crunch; black currant ganache & hazelnut gianduja; dark chocolate ganache with orange, cinnamon & habañero pepper; maple walnut ganache; lemon cheesecake with graham cracker crust.

I agree. You have to be willing to sacrifice your enameled cast iron pot if you heat it to the recommended high temp for the bread. I know from experience.

@spennie, I found another video that shows clearly the difference between the two CakeSafe models. I must say about the cocoa butter model that the video is quite convincing: the person in the video (who is apparently the co-owner of CakeSafe and wife of the founder) airbrushes (using a Grex) directly into the disposable filter, and no cocoa butter gets through the various filters to come out at the back. The fan is loud, and she explains that it is 2-3 times more powerful than the one in the non-cocoa butter model. It's significant that she uses just one fan box (you can purchase between 1 and 4 for more usable area), and it seems quite adequate for a chocolate mold. Now I'm looking for some reviews that come from someone other than the owners of the company!

You might want to look at this Youtube video, which shows the model I believe you purchased. In the video there is a powerful air stream from the fan and no color gets through through the filter(s). Of course, the man is, I assume, spraying just color, no cocoa butter, but that is what this "artisan" model is supposed to do. I am not surprised that it does not work so well with thicker cocoa butter, but am puzzled that yours does not do a better job than you described.

Thanks for the report. Are you going to return the unit you have? I noticed that the website states that the cocoa-butter version is for airbrushes only, "Not for use with high volume automotive spray guns." Although I use my airbrush much of the time, I would not want to have something that excluded the Fuji--and it sounds as if it might. It seems to me that with the higher-power version (for cocoa butter) there are a couple of issues (besides the one I just mentioned): Is it really safe not to exhaust outdoors? Is it true that filters alone remove cocoa butter from the air and eliminate backspray? What does this device accomplish that a typical paint spray booth does not? I must say that the chocolatier in the video is very convincing and seems completely sincere, but we all know to be wary of "sponsored ads." Unfortunately the CakeSafe unit is not sold on Amazon, thus no reviews.

Thanks for the insights. The filters are $1 each (the company also sells a roll of the material, which would no doubt be less expensive). The chocolatier in the video said she replaces the pre-filter about 4 times a day depending on the color (red produces more overspray, yellow less). Clearly, as you imply, this pre-filter is the key to this booth and what sets it apart. If you can judge from the noise made by the fans, I think they are quite strong. The booth in the video consists of two stacked units, so two fans.

Thanks for your response and for being willing to ask around. And thanks for the tip about the pricing. They are now offering a discount of 15% with the code "INTHISTOGETHER" (I guess something good is coming from the coronavirus).

I have done more research on spray booths, specifically those that would fit on a table. Paasche has a couple of models that get mostly good reviews; only the larger one has a fan with a rather high cfm, which is the figure that counts because it is what draws the sprayed material out of the booth. The brand that seems to appeal to model painters willing to pay for quality is Pace, and again, only the largest model (36" wide) has a really powerful fan; Pace booths get some very positive reviews. Nearly all booths (and booths that one might construct from scratch) are designed for model painting and aim at getting fumes out of the air. I am not at all sure this is the same thing that concerns sprayers of cocoa butter as it is not fumes we worry about but the cocoa butter particles themselves. Another issue with the painters' spray booths is that they are usually designed with a sloping "roof" where the filter is, and that slope might make spraying chocolate molds very awkward. But all the setups of chocolatiers I saw in Las Vegas had this basic approach (though their chambers were larger)--use a powerful fan to draw the cocoa butter out of the booth. So, as so often happens in a web search, I was led to a rather different way of looking at spray booths, these being specifically designed for confectioners, and in that rather specific area, one brand seems to be the principal one: CakeSafe. As is obvious from the name, it is aimed at cake bakeries, but it has two basic models, one for spraying airbrush color, the other specifically for spraying cocoa butter. The latter is, of course, what a chocolatier would need. Here is a photo of the least expensive model: What is dramatically different about these booths is that they are not vented to the outside. I immediately questioned that, but the manufacturer's material insists it is not needed. The device consists of a plastic box with several layers of filters and a powerful fan behind them. The company makes the point that exhausting cocoa butter is not the goal; rather, it is capturing it so that it doesn't fly out into the air (and into the lungs). So the "pre-filter" is a piece of filter material that goes in front of the other filters and captures the overspray. Obviously it needs to be replaced rather often. The fan is there to create a vacuum-like effect to pull the cocoa butter toward the filters. The website features a very convincing video from a chocolatier for David Ramirez Chocolates in Orlando who shows off her spotless white chef's jacket after a period of airbrushing a chocolate mold. The downside to the CakeSafe booths is their prices, which start at $710 with a hefty 650 cfm fan. The one in the video is $1,450. Welcome to the world of pricing for special confectionery items. I believe the booth works because this much seems clear from the video, but it is a price tag that keeps a possible customer from saying, "I'll just get one and give it a try and see if it works" (the idea of cleaning and shipping a used booth for a refund is daunting). The CakeSafe deviates so far from the norm (of sucking cocoa butter overspray out of the room and pulling it outdoors), that it makes one question the whole idea, but then again, the norm is spray booths built for spraying paint. I wondered if @JeanneCake might have heard of the CakeSafe spray booths in her bakery or elsewhere. I would welcome any comments from others with spray booth experience.

In spite of the current uncertainty in the world, I pressed on with my plans for Easter chocolates. Below are the eggs. The fillings (clockwise from top) are all simple, mostly traditional ones: (1) strawberry pâte de fruit & strawberry cream, (2) dark caramel with sea salt, (3) coffee ganache with Kahlúa & rum buttercream, (4) crispy hazelnut gianduja.

Thanks for your good suggestions (as usual). How do you know so much about so many things? Rhetorical question. As for the quote above, when I was investigating installing a range vent during my kitchen renovation, I came upon the term "makeup air." It's just what you are discussing. Some localities even have laws requiring a certain amount of makeup air brought into the house to balance what is sucked out by an exhaust fan. I am, however, working in an old house, with many, many cracks, and the basement is even more "ventilated." Do you mean the "in vent" needs some sort of power to bring in air or is it just a passive vent to the outside? If it's the latter, then I (unintentionally) have plenty of those in the basement. In any videos I have seen of spraying booths, I have not seen one that has such a vent or mentions it.