Jim D.

As pastrygirl said, you can either make a softer gianduja (a higher ratio of peanut butter to chocolate) or use cream and chocolate to make a ganache and add peanut butter. I think the gianduja will give a more intense peanut butter flavor, but the ganache will probably come closer to the texture you want. I would try a small amount of each to see which you prefer. Once you find out (keeping a record of your ingredient weights), it is easy to scale the recipe up to the quantity you need. As for adding butter or cocoa butter, butter will add a little firmness but not a lot, but although cocoa butter will at first thin the mixture, it will end up making it considerably more firm. Many ganache recipes call for adding cocoa butter because it adds firmness without contributing (much) flavor. I don't think that is what you want.

Thanks, Kerry, for the information. When you say the "technology is used currently in industry," could you give some examples? Are you, for example, referring to something like mass-produced chocolates?

Ruth, Does the machine hold the (almost-but-not-quite-melted) cocoa butter at the right temp forever--or at least as long it stays inside the machine? Any harm done by removing a little "silk" and then returning the container to the machine? I'm thinking of situations where a user works on many different projects (lining molds with chocolate, making ganaches, closing molds, dipping chocolates) and might wish to keep the cocoa butter ready over a period of many days. As was pointed out in another thread, this is very much like Mycryo, but by the time one brings the chocolate down to the right temp, the Mycryo is rather difficult to dissolve--I often have to use an immersion blender to get those last grains of cocoa butter to melt. And speaking of Mycryo, why didn't Callebaut think of this? Jim

Chris, Perhaps someone on eGullet with a smartphone will record the seminar and then send it to you. I would, but I don't have a smartphone. Jim

I received an e-mail from Decagon, maker of the Pawkit (which some on eGullet own) as well as other water activity meters, about a free online seminar the company is offering, and I thought other eGullet members might be interested. I checked with Decagon, and it is open not only to those in business but also to hobbyists (when registering, the latter can enter "self-employed" or "hobbyist" in the Organization field). Decagon also said that the seminar is not specific to a particular water activity instrument but focuses on how water activity can be used as a tool for product formulation and quality control. Here are the details: Water Activity for Candy & Confectionery Products Most candy has a well defined "moisture sweet spot"—an ideal range where texture properties are perfect. And surprisingly small changes in water activity correlate with big differences in a candy product’s texture. Attend this seminar and learn: The relationship between texture and water activity in a wide variety of candy productsHow to identify a candy product's "moisture sweet spot"How to use water activity to maintain consistency and quality in your product Presenter: Dr. Brady Carter, Senior Research Scientist, Decagon Devices Date: June 9, 2015 9-10 AM PDT.Those interested can register at this link. Click here for the terms under which this event is listed in eG Forums.

Somewhere on this forum I have a post discussing the issue of whether to make ganaches ahead of time or not. At that time I said I was making all the ganaches, then vacuum-sealing and freezing them, and melting them again when ready to fill shells. Incidentally, I could be wrong, but I don't see that melting the ganaches adds a lot of air if one stirs gently. Now I wish I could erase that post. Although the system worked very well for workflow and chocolates were ready to distribute in a shorter time, gradually I discovered that the ganaches (especially those made with white chocolate) tended to separate and/or become grainy in texture. They just were not of the same quality as freshly made ones--or so it seemed to me. Therefore I reverted to what I think is the method most chocolatiers follow, namely, making the ganaches "on demand." But with experience I have reduced the amount of time the whole process takes. I should add that I am working on a small scale (unlike what it sounds that you are about to do)--I make 12 different fillings, with about 40-50 pieces of each. From decorating the molds to boxing the finished product now takes me 10 days. I do not worry at all about leaving the empty shells in a cool place for even as much as several days. I spend a day or two decorating, then mold all the shells (dark, milk, white) over a two-day period. After that, I begin making ganaches, about three a day. Of course the slabbed and dipped items take longer, especially if they have more than one layer. I leave a day toward the end for any necessary redoing of molds or fillings, then a day for photographing the individual pieces and boxing them. I should add that I don't kill myself (almost, but not quite), so I don't work 8 hours a day--this is still a hobby for me. All things considered, I am happier with this method than with making the fillings in advance, but I am concerned with shelf life more than I was before. I have read what Wybauw has to say about this issue and have bought a water activity meter to be sure ganaches are at least starting off with a decent shelf life. Of course, in the final analysis, one can't control how long those who get the chocolates take to eat them or how they store them. Actually I still have some that I made for Easter, and although the fillings are beginning to decline in quality, they still appear--as of last night--safe to eat. I'm not sure this information will translate to your more commercial situation.

I too recently made the Greweling pistachio marzipan (I love his name for the recipe, "Pistachio Homage"). I think pistachios naturally have a kind of flat taste, so I was not surprised at the final taste. Maybe a little salt would be helpful? Or perhaps some sweetener? I too was concerned for the survival of my Cuisinart. I was about to give up when, all at once, the marzipan came together and looked the way it is supposed to look. I like the piece, but--maybe this is heresy--I'm not sure it is good enough to justify the amount of work involved. It does look great. I had never peeled pistachios before, and it made a huge difference in the appearance.

I looked through this old thread for some mention of Rose Levy Beranbaum's Praline Brioche Cake but did not find any. If anyone has made this cake, I would appreciate suggestions about the brioche part. Although the finished cake is delicious and always looks more or less OK, I have never had complete success with the brioche. Whether I bake it as she directs as a single layer in a springform pan or in two cake pans, it always rises, tests done, then after being removed from the oven, falls. Inevitably I have to trim it rather severely to get a nice cylinder that can be frosted. In the most recent effort with this cake, it was on an unexpectedly warm day and the brioche rose more than the double that Rose mentions. For the second rise just before baking, the brioche rose just as it was supposed to, and during the baking it rose and browned beautifully, tested done with a skewer, then promptly fell into a mess on the counter--a great sinkhole in the middle. I was able to rescue it by trimming the edges (and by cheating a little with extra frosting here and there). Could the first over-rise have been the issue? This cake is so good that it is worth trying to solve the problem. By the way, I have altered it a bit by either slicing a single layer in two or using two layers and then spreading some apricot jam--a great combination with the hazelnut buttercream and toasted hazelnuts around the outside. Any brioche help would be appreciated.

Ruben, I am anxious to try your lemon curd ice cream but am reluctant until I solve the problem with the Cuisinart of having a substantial amount of the base freeze on the side of the bowl. It is very difficult to remove this frozen edge, and its texture is not pleasant--which makes the effort you put into keeping the ice cream smooth and not icy close to pointless. I tried your suggestion of pushing the plastic blade/mixer/dasher against the side of the bowl, but this interfered with the rotation of the bowl--to an alarming degree (the motor sounded "stressed"). With my efforts at making ice cream so far, I have just waited for the frozen part to melt a bit and then used an immersion blender to mix it into the rest of the product; this is clearly counteracting the whole point of making the process as fast as possible. Any other ideas? Jim

I can tell you that new Pawkits (with a supply of testing cups plus shipping across the U.S.) are about $2,000.

I think I hate you. Everything done wrong, and perfect nougat results. I'm afraid you cannot be the poster boy for this forum, where meticulousness is the name of the game.

gfron1, I would be interested in knowing to what temperature you cooked the syrup for that nougat. I had a mess the last time I made nougat. My thermometer read the correct temp (in Notter's recipe, 311F.), but the nougat never firmed up enough to cut. Yours looks perfect.

I use E. Guittard Orinoco for most of my milk chocolate work (ganaches, molding, and dipping) and really like it. It's also invariably (so far) easy to work with--it does not get overly viscous even in extended use. In the milk chocolate field, I got some Valrhona Jivara and their newer Bahibe as well as some Felchlin Maracaibo Criolait and did a taste test that included Orinoco. The Orinoco and Maracaibo came out on top, with Jivara third, and Bahibe a distant fourth--and the E. Guittard is the least expensive of the group. On the other hand, I did not care for Guittard's Soie Blanche white chocolate.

Recently I brought up the subject of the taste of coconut oil (there is one kind that tastes strongly of coconut and another that does not). You might be interested in that discussion (especially replies 12 and 13).

Matthew, Thanks for your kind words. I will certainly try the roasting method for rhubarb, just as soon as it appears in our farmers' market. I appreciate the suggestion. Jim

A photo of chocolates I made for Easter (with the recipe sources where applicable): Row 1: Layers of Mexican vanilla (Notter) and cardamom coffee (Wybauw), molded in dark chocolate. Layers of pistachio gianduja and pistachio marzipan (Greweling), dipped in dark chocolate. Layers of blackberry jelly and orange-infused dark chocolate (Notter), molded in dark chocolate. Kalamansi, molded in white chocolate. Rhubarb and strawberry (Kerry Beal of eGullet), molded in white chocolate. Row 2: Cherry and toasted almond (Greweling), molded in dark chocolate. Banana and passion fruit caramel (Wybauw), molded in milk chocolate. Three layers of gianduja (white, milk, dark) (Greweling), dipped in dark chocolate. Layers of crispy gianduja and black currant (Wybauw), dipped in milk chocolate. Milk and dark chocolate infused with Earl Grey tea (Greweling), molded in milk chocolate. Row 3: Caramelized pineapple (Wybauw), molded in milk chocolate. Apricot, molded in white chocolate. A few comments: I was so looking forward to trying my new Mexican vanilla beans, but alas, the flavor is not much different from "regular" vanilla. This adds to the observation that what most people think of as Mexican vanilla extract (and buy so inexpensively in Mexico) is not truly vanilla at all. With this ganache I learned (once again) that cardamom is a very powerful flavor, and it's all too easy to overdo it. Greweling's pistachio "homage" (wonderful word!) is a major undertaking. First, there is the peeling of the pistachios (something I didn't even know could be done). Then I thought my old Cuisinart was going to give up the ghost when I was mixing the marzipan, but it held up, and all at once the marzipan comes together with the right texture. And then there is the last moment when you are directed to "affix [a pistachio] with a very small dot of chocolate." Nerves of steel recommended. The tall octagon-shaped piece (with blackberry and orange-flavored dark chocolate) did not come cleanly out of the mold. Since other pieces using the same batch of dark chocolate unmolded without a hitch, I am thinking something was wrong with the temperature of the colored cocoa butter. The kalamansi piece was my first use of this fruit. It's interesting, very close to yuzu in flavor, would probably pair well with other flavors. I keep trying with rhubarb, but it's very faint, especially in combination with strawberry. I found the purchased rhubarb purée quite weak in flavor, so this time I had made my own, but still there was little flavor. Kerry Beal (from whose recipe this is derived) must know something about rhubarb that I don't! The cherry and toasted almond filling is a winner. Greweling slabs it, but it works fine with piping--as long as the cherries and almonds are chopped finely enough. The piece with layers of white, milk, and dark gianduja is delicious, but again, like the pistachio, a lot of work. The look of the three layers is great, but I think next time I would make just two layers--for the simple reason that a three-layer piece with a decoration on top barely fits into the boxes I use. The black currant and gianduja combination remains a favorite. It's amazing what the addition of a little feuilletine does for texture. The apricot filling, which is an idea of mine based on many other apricot recipes, is delicious, but the texture is a bit odd. It never really sets up as most ganaches do. I have checked the Aw, and it's no worse than regular ganaches. The apricot flavor comes from dried apricots cooked in apricot purée, then blitzed in a food processor, plus apricot brandy and some French "apricot essence" recommended by Rose Levy Beranbaum. It's still a work in progress, but worth the effort.

Gfron, Beautiful pieces. I love the color scheme. Where did you find that interesting mold?

Not sure exactly what you have in mind, but Ewald Notter has a molded chocolate with a raspberry layer. First you fill the shell about 1/3 with what he calls a coulis, then the rest of the way with an orange-infused dark chocolate. For the coulis, you heat raspberry purée with some sugar, then add pectin and more sugar, whisk like mad, then you cool so that it won't melt the chocolate shell and pipe it into the shell. It's delicious, and you can make it as thick or thin as you wish. I find that cooking it only a little, until it just begins to thicken, is best as it continues to thicken as it cools. In addition, if it gets too thick to pipe, you can (contrary to what some pectin people say) thin it out with a little hot water.

Gfron1: If you haven't piped all the hazelnut praline, you could add cocoa butter to the part that hasn't been piped. If you have piped all of it, I would think the spray of cocoa butter is about all you can do. In fact I have had Greweling's recipe not set up (and have since revised the amount of chocolate and cocoa butter upward to take care of the issue), and everyone loved the softness of the filling. I would go with it. That stuff is too expensive to waste! As for the other question, I suppose you could make a hard-crack caramel and grind it with the nut paste, but, of course, you are never going to get it completely smooth. Theoretically making a softer caramel should work, but getting the texture right could be an issue--you might end up where you are at the moment. A simpler solution: L'Epicerie in New York has Cacao Barry's hazelnut praline paste for sale and ships reasonably quickly. Jim

If the book is one of Wybauw's, he says somewhere that it is OK to omit the sorbitol. It helps lower water activity (and thus helps extend shelf life), and Wybauw believes it improves the texture of the ganache.

I hope that when the final plans are posted, they will include a schedule of events (at least a tentative one) and the subjects of the Saturday demo(s). That will help people make their plans.

The best prices I have found are at Sarah's Sweet Fountains: currently the Mini-Rev is $358, the Rev 2 is $815--and shipping is included. If you think you may be doing more than just dabbling in chocolate and if you can afford it, I strongly recommend the Rev 2 over the Mini-Rev. The two machines have the same capacity (1.5 lbs.), but with the Rev 2 you can control the temperature more closely (you can read further comments from me in this thread). An alternative, of course, is to temper by hand; for me, the hard part of this procedure is keeping the chocolate in temper while you are using it.

Is this correct? Previously you had said the dinner would be on Saturday night. Just checking to be sure.

Chocomom, That comment does help, but what is "oil pulling"?

I am thinking of trying Peter Greweling's meltaways (various flavors) but am confused by the coconut oil required. I have a jar (originating from the Philippines and sold under the Carrington Farms name) labeled "Pure, Unrefined, Cold Pressed Coconut Oil, 100% Organic Extra Virgin." The label also says that the oil melts above 75 F.; thus I would assume, from Sebastian's posts, that I have the second type, the one he says that confectioners use. But the jar I have says nothing about being partially hydrogenated, indeed stressing that it is "pure coconut oil." In addition, the contents are firm at room temperature, about the consistency of Crisco or perhaps a bit more firm. My main concern is that this coconut oil has a very pronounced coconut flavor; in fact, I use it to contribute that flavor to a piña colada ganache that I make. Did I just happen to get a strongly flavored coconut oil or are they all like that? If I want a blander-tasting one (I don't think the taste of coconut mixed with mint or peanut butter is what I am looking for in a meltaway), does anyone have any suggestions for a brand? If I can help it, I prefer not to purchase jar after jar seeking one that is more deodorized.