Jim D.

Alas, I don't have any clever ideas, just complete sympathy. It is a very difficult task, made more so by the fact that I hear the stern voice of Cook's Illustrated warning me that every second the ice cream is not in the freezer, it is getting more icy. I find it particularly difficult to retrieve the ice cream that sticks to the outer container and that gets especially hard (and has a slightly unpleasant texture compared to the rest of the batch). I haven't seen any warnings about what utensils can be used, so I use metal spoons and scrapers to get that off.

I must confess I didn't leave it longer than a few hours. My excuse: The top of the ganache is covered with a thick layer of Rice Krispies, pressed into the chocolate, so it seemed firmer than it was. By the time of the other two guitar attempts, I had learned to take a small knife and test the outside edges (where the slab is going to be trimmed off) to see just how firm the ganache is. Usually I wait a day. If it takes longer than that for a ganache to firm up, I consider it a recipe error (maybe a user error--but I wouldn't want to admit that). Notter's vanilla recipe calls for 495g of white chocolate + cocoa butter, with 310g of cream. That is not even close to a 2:1 ratio. It's a great ganache, but I will adjust the ratio next time.

It was a Wybauw recipe from his second volume (he calls it Orangina). It has a terrific flavor (unfortunately for my waistline, the edges left after a guitar cut are all too tempting). The second one that worked had two layers: Notter's pistachio plus his vanilla. Both were firm enough (just barely in the case of the vanilla) but not too firm. Interestingly the first ganache (the failure) was also Wybauw's, his recipe that includes Rice Krispies (if you can believe that). On reflection, I think I did not wait long enough for it to firm up.

To Edward and Pastrygirl: Thanks again for your assistance with use of the guitar. As you will see, I had success today (twice). I didn't realize what pleasure cutting a perfect cube could provide!

Thanks for those encouraging insights. The cleaning was so terrible today because the ganache was too soft--it got stuck even in places which the strings had not touched. But I will persevere.

Edward, Thanks for all those very helpful suggestions.

I recently splurged and bought a Dedy guitar (full size, single frame) and just completed my first attempt at cutting ganache. To summarize the experience succinctly: These are going to make fine truffles once I roll them and get them firm. In other words, it was a total failure. Since it would be a little awkward to ask to return a chocolate-covered guitar, I need to keep trying. So a few questions (I have read the entire thread to which I am adding this post): (1) As Ewald Notter suggests, the foot was not tempered chocolate, but was melted to around 115 F. or so. The idea is that it will not be as firm. I am terrified of breaking strings on the guitar, and even my "overtempered" foot seemed to take a lot of effort to cut through it. Is this normal? How fragile are the strings? For those who have broken some, what sort of ganache did it take to do so? (2) This is not the fault of the guitar but of the ganache recipe (even the recipes of world-famous chocolatiers are not foolproof). It looked and felt firm enough, but when the strings went through it, it squished out of shape (therefore the truffles). Again, my concern was that the strings might break; otherwise I would have paid more attention to the consistency. Can someone suggest a Greweling or Notter recipe that is known to work with a guitar? (3) Where should the slab be placed? Right against the raised edge (the edge at the "front" of the guitar)? In this thread Kerry Beal suggested, I think, that it is better to place it toward the "back" in order to get better leverage. (4) Cleaning the guitar is a pain. What do people use to remove ganache that gets lodged between the slots in the base? Any assistance will be greatly appreciated. If the situation doesn't improve, I will be back using my hot knife and ruler and will have a Dedy guitar for sale!

"Despite heat and humidity, I got lucky on the tempering...." I was intrigued by that statement. I live about 100 miles west of you and have been having terrible issues tempering lately (and we're supposed to be in the temperate Shenandoah Valley). Humidity is my best guess since the same bags of white and dark chocolate worked fine a month or so ago. Today I've got the AC going full blast, but still the dark choc. (Felchlin Maracaibo) thickened up within a very short time. I'm at my wit's end. Your chocolates for Vegas are beautiful, and the fillings sound very interesting. I had to look up "durian." It's a bit off-putting when Google says about a fruit: "Despite its fetid smell, it is highly esteemed for its flavor." So you found durian in Richmond? Jim

(1) About the coconut filling: What kind of chocolate do you use for molding? In the recipe for a similar filling, Jean-Pierre Wybauw (in his second ganache book) says: "Since the coconut fat, when coated with dark chocolate, can cause fatbloom within a relatively short period, it is recommended to coat this filling with milk chocolate." Peter Greweling (in Chocolates and Confections) may have insights useful to you in his discussion of "eutectics": "When coconut fat with a 33C/92F melting point is combined with cocoa butter, which melts at around 34C/94F, the resulting mixture melts well below the temperature of either of the component fats...." (p. 343)--thus providing the "meltaway" effect of a solid but quickly melting confection. Perhaps that is what you are getting when you mix cocoa butter (in the white chocolate) with the coconut fat. If that is the case, it is not clear whether adding cocoa butter would help your situation, though it might be worth experimenting. (2) About the cardamom ganache: I have used Wybauw's recipe (from the same book as above)--which sounds much the same as your recipe, including the use of invert sugar. It was very popular and lasted at least a month with no sign of spoilage. I've never heard that warning about mixing cardamom and cream. How soon did your filling go off?

Beautifully decorated. I look forward to seeing the results of your next experiments. If you don't mind telling, how did you get that mirror effect in the photograph? Are the pieces sitting on glass or ... ?

My impression from reading what others have said on eGullet is that they tend to use the phrase "best by" rather than "use by" on their products. That gives you a cushion. As I previously wrote in this thread, I became alarmed when some recipients of my chocolates told me how long they stretched out the eating process. As if to underline the issue, yesterday I got a thank-you note from a recipient, informing me that he had just finished the last piece. The problem is that because of an emergency situation, I had to ship the Easter batch on April 7, so that last piece was more than a month old--since, of course, I had to begin making the pieces well before April 7. There is nothing one can do about such situations, but knowing about them does give perspective on shelf life. And, as I said earlier, I am definitely including a "wrap tightly and refrigerate if you keep them longer than two weeks" statement with chocolates. What more can one do? Even corporations like Kraft can't make people put the mayo in the fridge.

Congratulations on this new step in your career. I recall your excitement from your recent popup and so am not surprised at this development. Shelf life is a topic I have been concerned about of late--especially once I learned how long some recipients of my chocolates keep them! Jean-Pierre Wybauw's third volume on ganaches deals with the subject at length. I include a guide with each box explaining what the fillings are--and an ever-more-restrictive "best by" statement and warning that if the confections are going to be kept longer than two weeks, they should be wrapped well and refrigerated (on the theory of better a little condensation than a funeral!). I have kept some chocolates for over a month and have never encountered mold, but others on eGullet have found mold, and the taste certainly suffers. Here are links to a few discussions on eGullet about shelf life, proper ganache formulation, preserving chocolates, etc.: http://forums.egullet.org/topic/147590-puréed-fruit-as-chocolate-filling-water-content/ http://forums.egullet.org/topic/63097-ganache-tips-techniques/ http://forums.egullet.org/topic/94070-shelf-stableshelf-life-of-truffles/ http://forums.egullet.org/topic/129934-shelf-life-of-homemade-confections/ http://forums.egullet.org/topic/114561-balancing-your-ganache-recipes-20/ You can find more discussion of the topic on www.thechocolatelife.com -- do a search under Forums. Jim Shelf life is a topic I have been thinking about quite a bit lately. The ultimate solution is to purchase an aW meter to test all your confections, but--as you probably know--those devices are quite expensive.

Sounds delicious. Could you explain a bit more what you mean by an "insert"? Is it something like an additional layer of custard between two cake layers?

Curls, We are on the same wave length: I too have a guitar at the top of my list (roughly same cost as aW meter). Sorry to hear about yuzu--that is my new favorite flavoring.

Even though I would love to have an aW meter, the cost is just too much (I think). It's an expensive piece of equipment just to find out if puréed apricots are going to kill those who eat my pralines. I get really concerned, though, when people tell me, in February, "Oh, I've still got some of your chocolates from Christmas; they are so delicious." I suspect your average tastebuds can't tell when a filling has deteriorated in flavor especially since they don't have the original for comparison. At this point I'm thinking Edward is right: "In the end I gave up, implemented a 3 week shelf life on bon-bons with cream ganaches." The issue for me is that the 3 weeks (or whatever period of time is selected) has to include making the ganache, assembling the bon-bon, and getting the product to the customer. I'm leaning toward a notice that says something like "These chocolates, which contain no preservatives, are best stored between 55 and 70 degrees F. and consumed within two weeks of receipt. For longer storage, they should be refrigerated, then brought to room temperature before consuming." Do you think that covers it?

One other issue with refrigerating chocolate: It easily pick up up odors from other foods and can be ruined that way. Someone recently brought me a filled chocolate from a new lunch spot in town. As this is not a "chocolatiering town," I was excited to give it a try. Any chocolate flavor was completely overwhelmed by the "refrigerator smell/taste." I don't know what produces the fridge odor, but it's pretty bad--and it happens even when there is no stinky food in the fridge. For summer storage of chocolate, I bought a wine refrigerator with a charcoal filter to help absorb moisture (I believe I got the idea from Keychris on this forum). I vacuum-seal the chocolate, and last summer it kept perfectly. It does acquire condensation when you remove the (sealed) bag, but the condensation is on the outside of the bag, not on the chocolate.

I recently ground Sunsweet brand apricots in a (very old) Cuisinart with no difficulty. It wasn't a totally smooth purée, but it was the texture I wanted. Admittedly Sunsweet apricots come in a fairly moist state.

Can someone recommend a reliable small measuring device for water activity in foods?

Curls and Edward: Thanks for the replies. I guess I am trying to understand why puréed fruit by itself would have a somewhat short shelf life. In the case of using commercial purées, instructions usually say to reduce them to remove some of the water. In the case I am describing (putting dried apricots in a food processor), there is considerably less water involved to start with. Is the fact that I would not be using any chocolate--with the sugar it contains--the main reason there would be an issue? I am looking for a 2-3 week shelf life. I have a lot of people who stretch out their boxes of chocolates by eating one a day, so I can't have any realistic expectation that they would refrigerate the apricot pieces or eat them first. I made a dipped piece recently decorated with a sliver of glacéed apricot, and the apricot piece remains fine after several weeks--though I must confess I'm not sure how obvious molded apricot would be.

I am interested in trying a layered praline with one layer being made just of puréed fruit (dried apricots, for example)--as opposed to pate de fruit, which is so sweet. A quick consideration would suggest that this purée would have a low water content and therefore a long shelf life, but I'm not certain. There would not be any of the traditional additives that decrease water activity--such as invert sugar or glucose--as they would add to the sweetness and defeat the goal of having a tart fruit layer to contrast with the other layer (some sort of chocolate). I could add brandy. Would adding a little cocoa butter help? I would be interested in anybody's knowledge--or opinions--on the water activity issue.

I know exactly what you mean. After one holiday, when I pushed myself to make 12 different fillings for chocolates and saw people's excitement about having such variety, I can't go back. Timing is the big issue when it's a one-person operation. The ideal of (1) casting the shells, (2) making the ganache, (3) filling the shells, (4) doing the bottoms, then (5) immediately getting the product to the customer, all within a couple of days, is just not feasible for one person, so some compromises have to be made. But I have to say your variety was amazing. I checked your profile and see that you work in Seattle. You do have a ready-made foodie audience--but also a lot of rain!

That's an amazing list. Did you do this by yourself? You are probably lying somewhere in total exhaustion right now. Was your popup in a regular shop or somewhere else, and how did people find out about it? I love the inclusion of grapefruit zest--it's always a surprise to people tasting it for the first time.

I think that is a very difficult calculation to make with any accuracy--depends on the size of the pieces, viscosity of the chocolate, etc. I usually fill a frame that is 7.5" x 7.5". That allows me to cut off 1/4" on each edge (because the edges are not usually completely flat). So, with 1" pieces, I have 49 pieces total. For that amount I put 1.5 lb. (680g) in my small tempering machine. After dipping, there is approximately 25% remaining in the bowl (you need extra to be able to dip the final pieces).

I too have tried many methods of vacuum-freezing finished chocolates without a lot of success. I use fairly sturdy boxes for my chocolates, and I thought I had succeeded once, but when I was preparing to give them away, I did a check, and the walls of one piece had collapsed. There must be very rigid plastic containers out there somewhere, but I would assume the vacuum would be around the box, not inside it, so I'm not sure how protected the chocolates would be. Right now I am placing the gift boxes filled with chocolates in a large plastic bag, sealing it (without using the vacuum feature), then refrigerating (no freezing). Then I bring them to room temp with the bag still sealed (so that condensation will happen on the outside of the bag), then cut open the bag. That way I can use the bag again. Without freezing, I don't think this would work for long-term storage, but I think it helps extend shelf life for fillings that might be a little questionable otherwise. My Weston vacuum sealer offers partial vacuuming, but it's an iffy proposition and depends on pushing the right button at just the right moment, so I've given up on that. I think the method you describe above should be helpful, a good compromise. Somewhere on this forum (I've just spent a long time searching, without success) there is a photo of a bag of individual chocolates (not in any container other than the freezer bag) that were vacuum-sealed, then frozen. The person reported success with this method. I think the vacuum would have to be fairly weak.

I use Notter's technique (precoating on just one side). There is disagreement about whether the precoat should be tempered or not. I make sure it is not still in temper and find that it cuts more cleanly that way. I don't think you notice this precoating layer at all once the ganache is dipped--it sort of disappears once the piece has been dipped. I also have combined a passion fruit layer and a vanilla layer, and people seem to like the combination.