Baker's best vs. Scharfenberger

[phaelon56]

I'll answer my own question in one word: YES!

I made brownies for the first time quite recently (I don't do much baking). The recipe called for bittersweet chocolate but I'd inadvertantly purchased unsweetened (Baker's Best brand). Adding a bit more sugar solved the issue of unsweetened vs. bittersweet. And the brownies were the some of the best I'd ever had - rich, moist, almost fudge-like yet not undercooked. My girlfriend and a few co-workers who tried them all agreed. But we all tried them with no A/B reference point readily available.

Several days later I stumbled on this thread: Unsweetened Chocolate,

There was a variety of perspective on the above referenced thread. "scott123" said"

I wouldn't feed baker's unsweetened chocolate to my worst enemy. It is that vile *shuddering* Bitter, chalky, and harsh.

and

Bake something, anything, with Baker's Chocolate and then make the same thing with unsweetened Scharffenberger or Callebaut. Not only will the latter be superior, but the difference will not be subtle.

Member "chocophile" seemed to agree but placed more importance on the context

Ah, yes. Garbage in, Garbage out. It does make a difference with chocolate but, sadly, only to some people in some situations.

Don't believe me? Try this test for the average consumer walking into your place of business. If it's a restaurant and you're making dessert, you have to try this test after a full meal, not standalone.

Make a recipe, any recipe that calls for unsweetened chocolate -- twice. The only difference is in the brand of unsweetened chocolate. For this test, it should be a baked good with flour. Serve the two different desserts and ask the diners a) if there is any difference between the two; b) if there is a difference what the difference is; c) which one they prefer. (You have to work to not to give away the answer you want with your body language or other subtle clues.)

Point is, the average person (not non-smoking pastry chef with trained palate) usually can't tell the difference after a couple of drinks, coffee, and the average restaurant meal replete with salt and fat. Also, many people will actually prefer the taste that is familiar to them and some of the most familiar chocolate flavors are Nestle, Hershey, and Baker's - not Callebaut, Cocoa Barry, Schokinag, Belcolade, Cocoa Noel, etc.

Sooo.... I just had to see for myself. I made two pans of brownies yesterday - absolutely identical except for one being made with Baker's Best (on the left in picture) and the other with Scharfenberger unsweetened (on the right).

They were baked side by side for the same duration of time. One difference became immediately evident upon removal from the oven - the SB pan had a lighter color and a smoother surface texture. As they were cooling my guest non-highly-discerning taster (i.e. my girlfriend) and I both inhaled the vapors at different points in time. The SB had a smoother and more delicate aromatic character - and an effect on the nasal passages that was akin to smellign a fine liqeur. The BB had a rougher fragrance that had an almost bitter edge (I know bitter iis not a smell but that's the nose-feel we experienced).

After cooling the real comparison commenced. The results were a bit surprising to me but were a real epiphany for my GF. In the relative context of a true A/B comparison I had expected the SB to be markedly better (as it should be - it was priced at 85 cents per ounce vs. the 31 cents per ounce of the BB - with 8 oz required for a pan of brownies).

There was a moderately difference in texture - the SB had a smoother less granular mouthfeel. But the difference in flavor profile was profound and truly like a night and day comparison. The aromatic almost liquer-like characteristic we'd both noted came through in the flavor. The BB was very unsubtle and blunt in its chocolate flavor and had some bitter undertones - relative to the SB.

The SB, on the other hand, had a smoother and more delicate flavor that was somehow more chocolatey at the same time. My GF, who is often amused if not puzzled by my analytic approach to certain foods and beverages, really "got it" on this one.

Granted... there is still the matter of context. She now admits that if we make brownies for ourselves or other adult friends to share - we'll go the route of a high quality chocolate and be done with it. But for her two teen-age boys - who will scarf down an entire pan of brownies in an evening - she'll still look for a packaged mix on sale

[fiftydollars]

Very interesting.

I have used Baker's, especially the unsweetened, many times because it's cheap, available, and usually just what the recipe called for. Maybe I'll have to rethink this a bit.

[gfron1]

Owen,

I'm concerned about the "controls" on your experiment. Please send the SB brownies to me for further analysis. You can send the BB brownies to the teenage boys.

Yours in scientific pursuit,

Rob

[phaelon56]

Very interesting.

I have used Baker's, especially the unsweetened, many times because it's cheap, available, and usually just what the recipe called for. Maybe I'll have to rethink this a bit.

←

The Unsweetened Chocolate thread reference above has some commentary implying that Nestle's, Ghiradelli and a few other lower end brands might have an edge on baker's in that price range (interestingly - at my local Wegman's those two brands were 20% cheaper than Baker's).

I also find it interesting that context is so significant - at least for an inexperienced chocolate taster like me. If you were to hand me a brownie at my desk after lunch and it was the first or only such thing I ate that day - I'd likely pronounce it as very good. For me it was in the context of a direct comparison to a higher quality chocolate that the flaws of Baker's became more self-evident.

But with experience comes the ability to discern more acutely. Five or ten years ago I coudl tell the difference between a really good cup of coffee and a bad one but today I can detect an enormous spectrum of qualitative differences in between those two extremes (and it's because I've tasted lots and lots of different coffees in the intervening years).

[plattetude]

Odd. I thought Ghirardelli was more on par with Scharffenberger in terms of price, and certainly not *cheaper* than Bakers.

That said, what becomes even more interesting than comparing high end to low end baking chocolate is comparing two premium chocolates -- say Scharffenberger vs. Valrhona. (By the bye, Ghirardelli is definitely a major step up from Bakers, IMHO.) Very definitely discernable differences, and very definitely worth paying the premium for chocolate-rich baked goods.

Christopher

[phaelon56]

I thought Ghirardelli was more on par with Scharffenberger in terms of price, and certainly not *cheaper* than Bakers.

Oops - I just checked some online info and discovered that I had a size mix-up.

The Ghirardelli unsweetened in Wegman's baking goods department was $2.19 but that was a 4 oz bar and the comparable Scharfenberger was $8.49 for a 9.7 oz bar. That leaves the Ghirardelli squarely in the middle on the price scale.

I really wanted to do some "triangle" tests - where the test subjects try three samples and have to decide not only which two are the same and whcih is different but also which they like best and why. it was pointless with the BB and SB trial because they were so markedly different - even in color and texture not to mention taste.

I think in a few weeks I may do a Baker's Best, Nestle's and Ghirardelli comparison.

At some point I'll compare premium brands but with my present budget I can't justify $25 or $30 in ingredients for a weekend brownie test - at least not unitl I have a party or some other occcasion on which they'll get consumed by an appreciative crowd.

[Desiderio]

Very interesting.I found myself experimenting with brownies on the weekends, trying to find a recipe I really like.But the chocolate usage its very interesting.I usually use bittersweet chocolate ,as I never have unsweetened chocolate handy.

I might have to do some ordering here soon for different unsweetened chocolates and do a test ( ahhhhh more borwnies )

Thank you for reporting.

[phaelon56]

I neglected to mention... the recipe I used was the first of three fomr a re3cnet article in our local paper that discussed the ways in which brownies have evolved towards higher chocolate content in recent years.

I tried the first recipe - reputed to have been discovered by a noted pastry chef who doubled his recipe one day but forgot to double the flour. And loved the results.

The second recipe was some sort of French style brownies from a book by Dorie Greenspan and recipe #3 calls for dropping the pan of brownies direct into an ice bath when they leave the oven. The rapid temperature change is said to cause a sort of contraction in which the brownies become much denser. More experimentation is called for... you know... in the interest of scientific pursuit

[jgarner53]

the recipe I used was the first of three fomr a re3cnet article in our local paper that discussed the ways in which brownies have evolved towards higher chocolate content in recent years.

This is very true. A few years ago I was hunting around for my favorite brownie recipe and doing lots of testing. I went to my grandmother's 1950 Betty Crocker cookbook (great cookies in there) and really didn't like the brownie recipe in there at all because of the quantity of chocolate.

Ultimately, I made three batches: that one, a batch from Alice Medrich's Bittersweet, and my favorite, Alton Brown's cocoa brownies and sent them off to my husband's work with input forms. Surprisingly, results came back almost evenly split among the three! So I decided to stick with my personal favorite and haven't looked back (it uses all cocoa powder and no solid chocolate, but I use good Cacao Berry cocoa powder, and they're very dark and rich).

Then you also have the cakey/fudgey dichotomy. Some people prefer their brownies more cakey.

And, imo, simply underbaking to achieve a fudgey center does not count.

[aguynamedrobert]

It's amazing how much difference in chocolates there are in the marketplace these days. Many people think because Bakers Chocolate has been around a while that it is good chocolate but really it is just a chocolate that gives a big bold chocolate flavor without all the nuances that true high quality chocolate has. I am glad to see companies like Scharffen Berger, Guittard, Valrhona, and a few more appearing in fine food stores....those are all companies that make the best chocolate that can be made.

Thanks for the study...I love to see these side by side things so thanks for taking the time to share it with us! I would love to see a side by side with the companies mentioned above

Have a great day everybody...

[phaelon56]

And - despite the presence of steamed mlk and espresso - a cafe mocha (aka mocha latte) can move from a sweet and pleasant drink to a transcendent marriage of chocolate and coffee essence if both great espresso and great chocolate are used.

Typical chain cafes and many independents either use a fairly generic liquid chocolate or in some cases use Ghirardelli powder (pre-sweetened). But in my neck-o-the-woods we're lucky enough to have two cafes - Carriage House in Ithaca and Cafe Kubal in Syracuse - who both use Valrhona and their own specific mix of sweetener.

The results are outstanding. Although I usually prefer a tradtional machiatto (1 to 1 milk to espresso or even less milk) or a traditional cappuccino (3 or 4 to 1 milk to espresso) I've been treating myself to the occasional mocha lately and loving it.

[K8memphis]

Owen et al, I am so glad you recorded this taste experiment for eveyone. Because whenever someone bad mouths something so basic as Baker's chocolate it sets my teeth on edge. There's no doubt other greater chocolates but Baker's is not radioactive pond scum.

So once again, I am very glad you did this because you piqued my interest with your nice tone and balance. I heard Marcel Desaulniers say that he uses Baker's choco in his stuff. So I always thought shoot if it's good enough for the Death By Chocolate guy it's good enough for me.

So all that to say, I just copped some Ghiradelli, some Scharffenberger and I keep Baker's in stock. Dang that Scharffen B was nine bucks for 9.7 ounces. The Ghirardelli was just over two bucks for 4 ounces. And Baker's is same price as Ghirardelli but for 8 oz.

I can't rush into any taste testing. I need to lure some victi..I mean some dinner guests over to share the calories with. Cellulite knows no strangers. But when I do, I will resurrect this thread and post my findings.

I might get get some Callebaut in the meantime...what's that other one? like vichychoise or something?? Vahlrona vahlrona.

To be continued...

[merstar]

Owen et al, I am so glad you recorded this taste experiment for eveyone. Because whenever someone bad mouths something so basic as Baker's chocolate it sets my teeth on edge. There's no doubt other greater chocolates but Baker's is not radioactive pond scum.

←

I totally agree. I've used Baker's unsweetened for brownies many times, plus for a few other things, and they've turned out fine. The brownies have not been quite as creamy as with certain higher end chocolates, but still very good.

[phaelon56]

I totally agree. I've used Baker's unsweetened for brownies many times, plus for a few other things, and they've turned out fine. The brownies have not been quite as creamy as with certain higher end chocolates, but still very good.

←

Good point. Believe me - the pan of brownies I made before the A/B test were terrific and people loved them (including me). But I was pleasantly surprised to see that a relatively undiscerning budding chocophile like me and a very non-discerning taster like my GF could both taste a really distinct difference. I'm sure I'll use Baker's again but for a special dessert of which I'll eat limited portions... I think it's worth it to spring for the good stuff.

I have some of the BB and SB brownies in the freezer. I think next I'll do a Ghirardelli and Nestle's bake-off... compare them and then freeze a few of each. The final showdown will be among those four. It will be a grueling task no doubt but I think I owe it to eGullet to make a sacrifice like that in the name of science.

[merstar]

I'm looking forward to your taste test results. Have fun with all those brownies!