Converting Favorite Recipes from Volume to Weight Measurements

[Norm Matthews]

http://www.foodily.com/

This link is one someone told me about yesterday. It will look up recipes on line for you then if you wish, it will convert them to metric. It is still volume (ml) but it may be helpful to some.

Well one of the recipes I looked up converted. Maybe all of them don't. Sorry, I'd delete this if I knew how.

Edited April 4, 2011 by Norm Matthews (log)

[vice]

Anybody converted no knead bread recipe?

I've been using these quantities for a few years (note that I still use a volume measurement for the yeast, as discussed by xxchef above):

500g bread flour

10g salt

0.25 tsp instant yeast

350-375g water (you'll soon discover your preferred hydration level)

[Jose Nieves]

3. In practice I still find myself reaching for the measuring spoons for very small measures so now all my recipes have dual measure/weight notations for dry ingredients under a tablespoon. It feels like cheating.

I would argue that it's not cheating at all! If you can get consistently accurate results for light-weight items using spoons, why not use them? The goal isn't weight purity but using weight as a means to improve quality and consistency when possible. When other means do that, well, let's use 'em!

A good example is the Calorie Count site that roygon mentioned.. 1 Tablespoon (.5oz) of sugar is 13g but 16oz of sugar are 454g. 454g divided 32 (.5oz x 32 = 16oz) gives me 14.19 and 13g times 32 gives me 416g.

[Jose Nieves]

I am the proud custodian of the old scale and I am going to think long and hard about who to pass it on to.

I'd be willing to build a grotto for it and swear to use it every day.. I'm about done with rebuilding a Stimpson Model 63 that will go into use ASAP.

[MelissaH]

Perhaps daunting for you, haresfur, when talking about certain recipes -- but perhaps another member has a recipe that nails the dish you find daunting! We'll never know if we don't try, after all! I'm secretly hoping that someone out there has converted Greenspan/Hermé's World Peace cookies...!

No need to convert, Chris. The original recipe from Paris Sweets, back when they were called Korova Cookies, is already by mass. The volume recipe is actually the conversion.

MelissaH

[Chris Amirault]

Oooh. Didn't realize that but, of course! Ratios?

[Norm Matthews]

" Jose Nieves

A good example is the Calorie Count site that roygon mentioned.. 1 Tablespoon (.5oz) of sugar is 13g but 16oz of sugar are 454g. 454g divided 32 (.5oz x 32 = 16oz) gives me 14.19 and 13g times 32 gives me 416g."

US weights and volume measurements use the same sounding terms. It can lead to errors like the one discovered above. A fluid ounce is volume, and ounce is by weight. 1 Tablespoon is .5 fluid ounces, both are volume measurements. That is why when you divide 416 grams (weight) by 32(volume) you get a different answer.

BTW, mass is also a volume statement, not weight.

[MelissaH]

I'm upstairs, book is downstairs. But if you visit Amazon, bring up Paris Sweets, and then search inside for Korova, you'll find the recipe in all its glory.

MelissaH

[vengroff]

" Jose Nieves

A good example is the Calorie Count site that roygon mentioned.. 1 Tablespoon (.5oz) of sugar is 13g but 16oz of sugar are 454g. 454g divided 32 (.5oz x 32 = 16oz) gives me 14.19 and 13g times 32 gives me 416g."

US weights and volume measurements use the same sounding terms. It can lead to errors like the one discovered above. A fluid ounce is volume, and ounce is by weight. 1 Tablespoon is .5 fluid ounces, both are volume measurements. That is why when you divide 416 grams (weight) by 32(volume) you get a different answer.

BTW, mass is also a volume statement, not weight.

Just to get things perfectly straight, mass is not volume. They are different.

Mass is the amount of matter in an object. Volume is how much space it occupies. The ratio of these two is density (= mass / volume). A marshmallow and a pebble might have the same mass, but the marshmallow has a much larger volume and lower density than the pebble.

Weight and mass are often confused because we typically use scales to measure both of them. But weight is not mass. Weight is the force exerted by the earth's gravity on an object. In a fixed gravity environment, weight is proportional to mass, which is why we can measure them using the same tool. If we took the marshmallow and the pebble to the moon, their mass would remain the same, but their weight would be lower than it is on earth.

Edited April 5, 2011 by vengroff (log)

[Norm Matthews]

" Jose Nieves

A good example is the Calorie Count site that roygon mentioned.. 1 Tablespoon (.5oz) of sugar is 13g but 16oz of sugar are 454g. 454g divided 32 (.5oz x 32 = 16oz) gives me 14.19 and 13g times 32 gives me 416g."

US weights and volume measurements use the same sounding terms. It can lead to errors like the one discovered above. A fluid ounce is volume, and ounce is by weight. 1 Tablespoon is .5 fluid ounces, both are volume measurements. That is why when you divide 416 grams (weight) by 32(volume) you get a different answer.

BTW, mass is also a volume statement, not weight.

Just to get things perfectly straight, mass is not volume. They are different.

Mass is the amount of matter in an object. Volume is how much space it occupies. The ratio of these two is density (= mass / volume). A marshmallow and a pebble might have the same mass, but the marshmallow has a much larger volume and lower density than the pebble.

Weight and mass are often confused because we typically use scales to measure both of them. But weight is not mass. Weight is the force exerted by the earth's gravity on an object. In a fixed gravity environment, weight is proportional to mass, which is why we can measure them using the same tool. If we took the marshmallow and the pebble to the moon, their mass would remain the same, but their weight would be lower than it is on earth.

You are right. I was wrong on that account.

[haresfur]

Ok, I'm in. I'm still puzzled about compiling here rather than individual forums or recipeGullet, but here is my conversion with tweak of Chris' pimento dram recipe from my post. The conversion was done by weighing dry ingredients and rounding to nice numbers. Liquids were converted to mL.

375 ml Inner Circle Green

375 ml Captain Morgan Dark

50 g 1/2 c allspice berries, crushed

0.4 g 6 black pepper berries, crushed

1 g 10 cloves, crushed

14 g 2 cinnamon sticks, broken

7 g 1 nutmegs, crushed

Infuse with Inner Circle for 1 week

add Captain Morgan and infuse for 2 more weeks

Strain through metal strainer and coffee filter.

Add to simple syrup made with 300 ml water and 340 g raw sugar. Bottle.

[Norm Matthews]

It would be nice if everyone could post the original recipe alongside the converted one because a recipe in grams and ml takes away the opportunity for many -if not most- people to try the recipe when they don't have the proper equipment to measure in such a manner.

[Chris Amirault]

Ok, I'm in. I'm still puzzled about compiling here rather than individual forums or recipeGullet[.]

Let's post in both appropriate topics and here. That way, Society members will get the chance to see it over there in context and also discuss the different ways that, say, recipes like this one differ from other sorts.

These are also excellent candidates for inclusion in WikiGullet, of course!

[angevin]

Norm, you'll get no disagreement around here! Having said that, I'd rather start with a recipe from Dorie Greenspan or a Society member and tweak that, and I'd rather use weights than volume for accuracy and scalability.

Anyone get out the scale this weekend?

I use a scale at work every weekeday; on weekends I want freedom!!

You guys have at it, though - great idea if your goal is precision and consistency and of course it all depends on what you're making. As for startch-based recipes like bread, spaeztle and pie crust, a lot of what determines the correct weight will depend on the moisture content of the flour and the humidity in the air. So going by volume and adjusting as needed is no worse than using the scale.

We now return to your regularly scheduled program...

[Chris Amirault]

You guys have at it, though - great idea if your goal is precision and consistency and of course it all depends on what you're making. As for startch-based recipes like bread, spaeztle and pie crust, a lot of what determines the correct weight will depend on the moisture content of the flour and the humidity in the air. So going by volume and adjusting as needed is no worse than using the scale.

Is this really true, though? I have heard this argument so many times but it seems untenable to me. For example, every conversation I've ever had with baking professors takes for granted that you use precise measurements based on weight, which suggests that variations in the moisture content of flour change the weight very, very little.

Even if there is some variability based on moisture, it seems specious to me to claim that measuring flour by volume "is no worse than using the scale" if you're "adjusting as needed." Which means what exactly?

[angevin]

You guys have at it, though - great idea if your goal is precision and consistency and of course it all depends on what you're making. As for startch-based recipes like bread, spaeztle and pie crust, a lot of what determines the correct weight will depend on the moisture content of the flour and the humidity in the air. So going by volume and adjusting as needed is no worse than using the scale.

Is this really true, though? I have heard this argument so many times but it seems untenable to me. For example, every conversation I've ever had with baking professors takes for granted that you use precise measurements based on weight, which suggests that variations in the moisture content of flour change the weight very, very little.

Even if there is some variability based on moisture, it seems specious to me to claim that measuring flour by volume "is no worse than using the scale" if you're "adjusting as needed." Which means what exactly?

So, you're implying that the variation is due to imprecise measuring methods, and people are just assuming it's due to humidity, etc.? Possible. I do know that when we make noodles in our manufacturing plant, the ratio of water to flour varies significantly from day to day. So much so that it takes an experienced noodle-maker on the equipment to minimize yield loss. (The sooner you get it up-and-running and steady state the better). But of course we're talking about a scale-up in the thousands of pounds, which would magnify the difference.

[angevin]

I suppose we'll have our answer after you have a decent amount of experience using the scale. After a year, let us know if you had to adjust and how often.

[xxchef]

Made these today and thought I'd share...

BMR "Everything" Bagels

Yield: 12 Bagels

Ingredients

12 Grams Dry Yeast

70 Grams Non-diastatic Malt Powder

24 Grams Sugar

1 pint Warm Water

720 Grams Bread Flour

16 Grams Salt

As Needed (about 300 grams total) Topping: Your choice combination of: Sea Salt, Poppy Seeds, Sesame Seeds, Onion, Garlic, Carraway, Etc.

For Water Bath

3 Quarts Water

50 Grams Non-diastatic Malt Powder

24 Grams Sugar

Method

1. Combine the yeast, malt and sugar in a mixer bowl
   
2. Add the warm water, mix, and let the yeast proof for a few minutes.
   
3. Add the flour and the salt then knead the dough till smooth.
   
4. Shape the dough into a ball place it in a lightly greased bowl covered with lightly greased plastic wrap, and allow it to rise till doubled in bulk, 1 to 1-1/2 hours.
   
5. When the dough has risen, release the air and transfer it to a clean work surface.
   
6. Put the water into a 4-5" deep pot about 10" in diameter -- the water should be about 3 inches deep -- and add the malt and sugar. Bring the water mix to a boil while shaping the bagels.
   
7. Scale the dough at about 3.5 oz (100 grams, .22 lb) which should make about 12 pieces. Roll te prices into balls.
   
8. Working with one piece of dough at a time, shape it into a ball, poke a hole through the center with your index finger, and twirl; the dough will form a ring.
   
9. As you get 3 or 4 bagels ready, boil them immediately for chewiest bagels, or let them rise a bit (see notes). Keep the water bath at a simmer. Dont crowd the bagels in the water. Simmer them for about 30 seconds on each side, then drain briefly.
   
10. While still hot and moist, dip the bagels top and bottoms, in topping mix, then move them to a parchment-lined sheetpan, liberally sprinkled with corn meal.
    
11. Bake the bagels in a preheated 425°F oven for about 20 minutes, or until they are a deep golden brown.
    

NOTES :

Second rise or not?

Boiling the bagels immediately after shaping will produce chewy, dense bagels. Letting the bagels rest and rise for 30 minutes or so after shaping, will yeild a lighter, puffier bagel. Be advised that rising the bagels before boiling will make them more fragile and more difficult to handle (they will want to deflate in the water bath).

What's with the "Non-diastatic Malt Powder"?

Malt Powder improves the flavor of the bagels a good taste and, more importantly, when used in the water bath it gives them a shiny crust. Non-diastatic malt powder is made from sprouted barley kernels which have been roasted (to intensify their natural sweetness), ground, filtered in water (to remove husks and bran), then dehydrated. The resulting powder, has a characteristic sweet caramel taste and aroma. Regular (diastatic) malt retains enzymes which gives yeast a boost - a desireable characteristic in some applications, but not for bagels. Non-Diastatic Malt is much more stable here. Too much Diastatic Malt might cause the bagles to collapse or even start breaking a part in the simmering water.

[Norm Matthews]

It makes a great deal of difference if you happen to be using a different brand of flour than the person who wrote it. Humidity does not make a significant difference but flour does. Professional bakers use weight to measure flour for accuracy but they buy the same flour every day and in large quantities. Home bakers will have a different situation. Some flour, even if they are all purpose flours will have different protein content. You can't tell by reading the label because they all round off and don't give a true idea.

Here are some hypothetical examples. What if you are using a tried and true white bread recipe that someone provided you and you measure all the ingredients exactly to within .01 of a gram. If you use Martha White All Purpose and the original used Gold Medal AP flour, you are going to have a sticky mess when the other flour will have given you a good dough.

What if you knead the bread for three minutes and the original person kneaded for six? What if you both knead for the same period of time but your way does not maximize the development of a smooth and elastic surface as well? Whose is going to rise higher? What if the room in which you let the bread rise is cooler than the original? What if you yeast is not as fresh and as active? What if your oven thermostat is not accurate and you are baking the bread hotter than you think you are?

Then there is the issue of converting recipes. Use the amount that works for you. Don't go to some site and see how much flour is supposed to weigh and substitute that for cups. That is just changing one approximation for another.

Here are a random sample of sites that tell you how much a cup of all purpose flour weighs.

http://www.veg-world.com/articles/cups.htm

Flour (all-purpose, white,self-raising, etc) 4 oz 110g

http://www.erikthered.com/flwm.html

1C =113g

http://www.preparedpantry.com/how-to-measure-flour-convert-cups-ounces.aspx

1C = 4.25 oz ( 1oz = 28.35g so 28.35x 4.25= 120.49)

http://allrecipes.com//HowTo/baking-ingredient-conversions/Detail.aspx

1C.=4.5 oz= 127.58

[Shel_B]

As noted elsewhere over the past couple of days, I am going to try my hand at baking bread. Having read a bit about the subject, it seems that many people feel better results can be had by weighing the flour rather than using volume measurements such as cups.

I came across this conversion chart today and I'm wondering if the conversions shown are accurate enough to use when getting started on this new project. Any comments on the conversion figures? Any suggestions WRT measuring flour? Thanks!

http://www.preparedpantry.com/how-to-measure-flour-convert-cups-ounces.aspx

Edited January 3, 2014 by Shel_B (log)

[liuzhou]

Have you read the eG Kitchen-Scale Manifesto?

It pretty much explains why your question is really impossible to answer. To quote, "The amount of flour in a cup can vary as much as 25% depending on how it is packed."

Use weight rather than cups for precision. Metric is probably better, too.

[minas6907]

Agreed with the above. There can never be a perfectly consistant answer since it will vary if its packed tightly or sifted when measuring in volume. The guideline I use is from the book Food for Fifty. Generally 4 cups flour equals 1lb.

[Shel_B]

Have you read the eG Kitchen-Scale Manifesto?

It pretty much explains why your question is really impossible to answer. To quote, "The amount of flour in a cup can vary as much as 25% depending on how it is packed."

Use weight rather than cups for precision. Metric is probably better, too.

I understand that cups can be packed differently. I've experienced it myself. If one is to use weights, there must be some standard or reasonable approximation to convert a cup measurement to weight. Most US recipes use cup measurements, so how do I, as you suggest, "use weight rather than cups for precision" when the recipe calls for cups?

[liuzhou]

Most US recipes use cup measurements, so how do I, as you suggest, "use weight rather than cups for precision" when the recipe calls for cups?

The manifesto goes into conversion in great detail.

[Anna N]

Have you read the eG Kitchen-Scale Manifesto?

It pretty much explains why your question is really impossible to answer. To quote, "The amount of flour in a cup can vary as much as 25% depending on how it is packed."

Use weight rather than cups for precision. Metric is probably better, too.

I understand that cups can be packed differently. I've experienced it myself. If one is to use weights, there must be some standard or reasonable approximation to convert a cup measurement to weight. Most US recipes use cup measurements, so how do I, as you suggest, "use weight rather than cups for precision" when the recipe calls for cups?

I am not being facetious but, as one who initially struggled with bread, find yourself a recipe that uses weights to begin with. There are thousands out there and it eliminates one variable as you try to perfect your bread. Once you are familiar with the whole process and know how the dough should feel and when it is properly proofed and baked then you can worry about coverting volume to weight.