Jim D.

Frankly I don't think taking the ganache from freezer directly to heat will make a difference, but since I do have the time to plan in advance, I'm not willing to experiment and risk a problem. I was just following the analogy of what people advise when moving frozen (finished) chocolates from freezer to eating. About butter ganaches: I get the feeling (not more than that) that the emulsion is more fragile. As I wrote earlier, I did freeze and reheat Greweling's eggnog ganache. It became more liquid than I remembered, but in the end did firm up fine. But I thought there must be a reason when recipe writers say butter should be very soft (not melted) when it is added to ganache. The sight of a separated ganache is not pretty.

Thanks for those insights. I was wondering if there were not more thoughts on this issue, which those in business must at least think about quite often. From your use of "we" I am guessing you are in business. I followed the same plan--moving the ganache from the freezer to the fridge then to room temp. In heating it, mostly I didn't take it much above temps in the 80s F. I even had some leftover raspberry pate de fruit and some dulce de leche both of which reheated without any discernible issues. I think I will not freeze butter ganaches in the future as it is difficult to tell what is going to happen to butter once it melts. What are your thoughts on freezing bulk chocolate? I don't have an adequate storage space in the warm weather. Last year I bought a little wine fridge with a charcoal bag to absorb moisture, but I wasn't happy with that arrangement as there was definitely moisture collecting on the plastic in which the chocolate was wrapped. I didn't have any issues with the chocolate itself, but I am thinking of vacuum-packing it and freezing it next summer.

Stephanie, I hope that if you end up purchasing this guitar, you will post your reaction to it here. I for one would be very interested in knowing how you like it.

I'm leaving in the molds until I am ready to fill them. I think they would be too fragile to remove, and then you would have to deal with how to fill and cap them. I completely understand your mold supply issue; I experience the same thing.

I have forgotten who on this forum said it, but that person said he or she makes shells weeks in advance with no adverse effect. I keep them for perhaps two weeks at the most. I have never detected any difference. I'm glad to hear that freezing ganache works for you. From the beginning of my chocolate making, I could not bring myself to throw out (or eat) a delicious bit of ganache, so I froze the remnants. They have come in handy many times when I had a last-minute invitation to a dinner and was able to bring along some delicious sweets.

I have made 12 different ganaches for each of the last two charity events for which I have provided chocolates, and to make handling this work possible (I am doing this alone), I made the ganaches several weeks in advance, then vacuum-packed and froze them. A couple of weeks before the event, I make the shells; then the final week I thaw the ganaches, heat them enough to melt the chocolate, and pipe them into the shells. This system works well, and--for the most part--I detect no difference in the state of the fillings. I don't make fillings such as caramel in advance as I am not sure how they would fare under melting, and I decided against trying the system with butter ganaches. But I forgot that last decision recently and made Greweling's eggnog butter ganache in advance, and when I melted it, it got a little thinner than I remember it being when it was first made. Although it did eventually firm up just fine, I think I detected a little graininess to the texture. This has led me to question my early-ganache system, and so I am posting this issue to see if others have opinions on whether freezing ganaches in advance is a bad practice. I should add that I know making the ganache just before it is used would be preferable, but I can't think of a schedule that would allow me to get all the fillings done. The advantage of my system is that I can take my time making the ganaches and don't have to do all that measuring of tiny amounts of glucose, orange peel, peppermint oil, pectin, etc., in the face of a deadline. Having the time also means I can see whether the ganache is going to firm up sufficiently, and as there is always the possibility of failure with a ganache, I would have time to make it again. And a final consideration is shelf life: If I make the ganaches just before using them, it stretches the whole process out so much that I would be concerned with the chocolates made the first week. I know someone will say "just don't make so many different fillings." But that was not an option in these cases. I would appreciate any thoughts on this timing issue and related considerations. Jim

Minas, Your work is beautiful. Do I recall correctly that you are fairly new to experimenting with sweets? I am impressed. I have a question that is not directly related to the confections themselves: Your photography is extraordinary. I just got a so-called macro lens for my Nikon digital camera to take closeups of chocolates for creating a guide that I include with each box, but I do not get the clear results that you do. Most of mine are either not close enough or turn out blurry in spite of the camera's autofocus. Do you mind telling a little about how you take the photos and what lens you use? Jim

If anyone is interested in more discussion of the issue of eggs in ganache, there was another thread in which it was discussed.

I too just made Greweling's eggnog ganache for the first time and like it a lot. There was a previous thread on eggnog ganache and attempts to get not just the nutmeggy flavor but the eggy flavor of eggnog as well. Kerry spoke of using Bird's custard (which does not actually contain any eggs), and someone else spoke of using a custard powder (which I assume would have dried eggs). I don't know whether Jenjcook's eggnog (the liquid stuff she used instead of rum) contains any eggs or not, but, as Kerry pointed out in that previous thread, shelf life would be an issue if there are eggs involved. I might eat it myself, but would not serve it to others. I just looked up dried eggs online, and since dangerous substances are killed in the drying process, they are allegedly safe. Their taste may be a different issue; I don't know. About butter ganaches in general, they do have an incredible texture; with all that butter, how could they not? I do find there is sometimes an issue with flavoring. Greweling prefers jams (as in the Raspberry Bites), and so the finished product can be quite sweet. I would prefer using raspberry purée, but then proportions of liquid to butter can become an issue. I know all this because of much experimentation (without success) to achieve a pear-flavored butter ganache. Jim

Oops, just realized there was already a thread on the topic of summer storage of chocolate on eG: summer storage And I thought I had read every word that that had ever been written on chocolate on eGullet! According to what people said there, my vacuum-packed chocolate should have been OK. I'll know in a couple of days when I try to temper some more of that white chocolate. Jim

If it helps, the ingredients in Coco Lopez are: COCONUT MILK, SUGAR, WATER, POLYSORBATE 60, SORBITAN MONOSTEARATE, SALT, PROPYLENE GLYCOL ALGINATE, MONO AND DIGLYCERIDES (EMULSIFIERS), CITRIC ACID, GUAR GUM, LOCUST BEAN GUM. Don't have any idea how much water. If one goes by the usual proportions in a cream ganache, the truffle recipe is way off (as Curls suggested earlier). Of course you want truffle centers to be rather firm if they are to be rolled. I've still got some cream of coconut, so when my current project is over (a charity event two weeks from today), I'll do some experimenting. Contributing to the argument that the chocolate may have had moisture in it is the fact that I had to get through a Virginia summer with more chocolate on hand than I should have had. I asked around for suggestions on what to do. Keychris of this forum said she uses a wine fridge. So I got one with some charcoal to help absorb the moisture. I vacuum-sealed all the chocolate, and the room where the fridge was located was also air-conditioned at the hottest times of the day. But I noticed when I took the white out to make the truffles that somehow dampness had gotten through those layers to the chocolate. I am stymied as to what to do in hot weather. I think I read from Clay Gordon of The Chocolate Life that freezing it is a possibility.

Kerry, But many recipes for white chocolate ganache call for bringing cream to the boil, then pouring it over (unmelted) white choc., and that (usually) works. There is certainly water in cream.

What I referred to as "cream of coconut" is actually called "canned coconut cream" in the recipe, so I think the author meant something like Coco Lopez, and that is what I used. Since I was so careful in melting the chocolate + coconut cream mixture this time, I'm thinking that the problem stems from using real white chocolate. When I have some time, I plan to try melting some white choc. by itself, then slowly adding canned coconut cream and see if it turns out any better. The finished product is delicious. I have read of others who had a similar experience with trying to melt white chocolate--it became almost like a dough rather than melting. Unfortunately the explanations have not been all that helpful. I melt and temper white chocolate a lot when making other ganaches and filling molds, and have not had a problem.

That might be, except that last year I used Callebaut, and more or less the same thing happened. I formed the mixture into spheres today. It took considerable pressure and warm hands, but they look OK. It's kind of a shaggy mixture anyway because of the coconut and nuts. So I think it's going to turn out, but I will think twice before I make it again--I will definitely try a small amount first. I'm convinced that the coating chocolate I used the first time is making the difference--it is more tolerant of being insulted by throwing other ingredients into it without much thought. Perhaps some regular cream would make a difference; the cream of coconut must have quite a bit of water in it. And I think I would melt (and temper) the chocolate by itself, then start adding other ingredients.

Thanks for the reply. You are supposed to melt the chocolate and cream of coconut together, then stir in the sour cream. Seizure is a possibility, though it did come together (for a while) when I put it in the food processor, and later used a mixer. But why doesn't chocolate seize when you pour hot cream over it? The choc. was some Ivoire I had left from another project, but mostly Opalys. I think you are right about how to do it--and it's the idea I had but abandoned--to melt the chocolate alone, then proceed with the additions. The ingredients are 10 oz. white chocolate, 2 T. cream of coconut, 2 T. sour cream, 1/2 c. chopped toasted macadamias, 1/4 c. toasted coconut, 1T. dark rum, and 1 t. lime peel (I use a little extra as it cuts the sweetness). You could dip them in white chocolate or just roll them in powdered sugar or coconut or macadamias to keep it simple. The author of the article in Bon Appétit is Sarah Tenaglia.

The January 1987 issue of Bon Appétit had an article on truffles. That was the year of my parents' 50th anniversary, so I made hundreds from the interesting recipes offered in that issue. The "Island Truffles" were especially tasty: white chocolate, toasted macadamias, toasted coconut, rum, cream of coconut, sour cream, and lime zest. They were dipped in white chocolate to finish them. Nothing was said about tempering any chocolate, and I knew nothing about such things in those days. Those truffles came out perfectly (sometimes ignorance is indeed bliss). Last year I was asked to make some truffles for a high school reunion, so I pulled out that issue of Bon Appétit and made those truffles again. This time was not successful (at least not at first). The recipe calls for melting the chocolate with the cream of coconut. I did that, and the whole thing separated horribly. After trying many methods of salvaging the ganache, I put it in a food processor, and it came together successfully. Now, one year later, I am making those truffles again for a big event. Today I was very careful in melting the chocolate (I am dealing with 40 oz.). It refused to melt for a ridiculously long time, but I was determined not to make my (assumed) error of moving too rapidly. Finally I got it softened (not melted), but when I added the sour cream, it separated just like last year. This time the food processor trick did not work. You can imagine my panic--with 40 oz. of Valrhona at stake, not to mention my sanity. I chilled the mess, then used a hand-held mixer. That seems to have worked. It doesn't look great, but inside a truffle, who will know? Now I want to understand what happened. I have a couple of clues: In the 1987 effort, I knew nothing about chocolate. I am fairly sure the white chocolate I used was what I would now know as "coating chocolate"--I think the brand was Peter's. So my first question is whether the fat used in that kind of chocolate would have made a difference. I know whatever the fat was, it's not as temperamental as cocoa butter. Second question: I wonder if mixing the real chocolate (last year it was Callebaut, this year it is Valrhona) with the cream of coconut does something to the chocolate that eventually causes it to separate. Perhaps I should melt the chocolate first, then start adding the other ingredients. On the other hand, in a typical ganache, one doesn't usually add the cream to the chocolate when the cream is unheated, but such a mixture would eventually emulsify with enough stirring. (Both my cream of coconut and sour cream were at room temp.) This is far from a typical ganache, so I am at a loss as to what to do. Maybe a fake chocolate is what is required? Any ideas would be most welcome. Jim

Another great plain cake, with one of Maida Heatter's typically understated titles, is "The Best Damn Lemon Cake" (in her New Book of Great Desserts, pp. 113-114). She says it is "still wonderful after several days." I am not able to attest to the truth of that assertion. Jim

I am just an amateur, but do have a few thoughts on your basic question of how to proceed toward your goal: I second what others have said about taking a hands-on class. I have learned what I know mostly from reading and then trying to make (on my own) what I read about. But I did take a hands-on class years ago, and I still remember the details of that valuable experience. Every time I make puff pastry, for example, I recall what the dough looked and felt like in the class, and it helps much more than even the most detailed description in words. (On another note, every time I make sugar syrup, I recall how the instructor tried to get the students to stick their fingers into the syrup to test it--moistening them first--and how I never attempted that pastry chef's trick.) In addition, there are some useful resources on this forum. If you do a search for "basic pastry techniques," you will get (currently) about 3 pages of ideas. One of the most useful search results--and one that resembles the questions you are asking--is one on essential recipes a pastry chef should know. Good luck in your adventure.

If you wouldn't mind revealing secrets, I am very interested in your peach buttercream. I can't tell you how long I spent trying to develop a peach filling for chocolates that really tasted like peaches. They were always completely bland and overwhelmed by the chocolate surrounding them. How did you do it?

Kerry, It was a simple mint filling molded in dark chocolate.

I have had a lot of mysterious experiences in chocolate-making, but I think I have now encountered one of the oddest. It has been hot and humid where I live, but when I prepared to make a few chocolates for a gift, I turned the AC to a cooler-than-usual temperature and began the process. The pieces looked great, but when I unmolded them, about half of the 15 pieces came out without a serious problem, whereas the others stuck and came out damaged in various ways. A few had cracks in the shells, but most of the unsuccessful ones had that familiar grayish look of chocolate that is no longer in temper--they were too ugly to take as a gift. I put the rejects aside as a consolation for the unsuccessful chocolatier, and--regardless of appearance--they were delicious. Today, three days later, I went to eat the remaining ones, and--lo and behold--they now look perfect! All that gray is gone. I wouldn't say they are actually perfect because I just left them out on the counter and so they are a little soft and no longer have the snap of tempered chocolate, but they do in fact look quite presentable, even have a shine. I would certainly feel confident to take them as a gift. Maybe I have hit upon an easy solution for unsuccessful chocolates--just let them sit around for a while! I like to try to understand what happens when things go wrong in making chocolates, but haven't a clue as to the explanation this time. Any ideas? I have to mention one triumph when the chocolates I took were passed around: One guest, obviously not all that familiar with tempered chocolates, innocently asked how they came to have such a glossy appearance. I couldn't have fed her a better line if I had thought about it for days! Of course I didn't mention the ones that were sitting at home.

That's how I was doing it, or at least trying to do it. I'm making some more this week, so I'll keep at it. I am going to thin out the chocolate with a little cocoa butter to see if that helps as the couverture I am using now is more viscous than I am used to.

I am resurrecting this topic to ask a question about using the acetate method to close molded chocolates. In Lior's photos in the thread, after the acetate sheet is removed, the mold is virtually clear of all excess chocolate. I sometimes achieve this result, but most of the time, there is a thin film of chocolate between the cavities. This means that when I unmold the chocolates, each has some thin chocolate around it, which I must trim off. This is no big deal, given that I make small quantities at a time, but it would be nice to get the technique right. Yesterday I really scraped as hard as I could--to the point at which little pieces of the acetate were coming off. Can anyone who uses this method offer any suggestions for improving my technique? A couple of thoughts that occurred to me: Perhaps the layer of chocolate is a little too thick and gets firm so quickly that it forms a layer sitting on top of the mold that cannot readily be removed? Perhaps I need to thin out the chocolate with cocoa butter (the couverture I am currently using is a little on the viscous side)? Aside from "user error," the acetate method produces beautiful bottoms on chocolates.

Kerry, I should have known we would be hearing from you--complete with research and pictures. You are amazing. Thanks for the ideas. Jim

I mentioned earlier that I had some "acrylic" sheets on order, but I meant to say "acetate." I didn't know if any tape would stick to them, so am glad to know that masking tape will work. At least I will have an option to using chocolate as glue.