Post by Alan on Feb 7, 2006 9:35:25 GMT -5
Dear all,
Okay, I guess that "tempering Dark Chocolate like a pro" may not be the best title for this thread as pros probably don't have the manpower to temper all of their chocolate using marble slabs and double boilers like we do, and so use $10,000 machines, etc. However, what I mean, of course, is "tempering Dark Chocolate perfectly."
Now, I know that ultimately we desire to gain a feel for when the chocolate has reached the correct state of cooling strictly by the feel of working with it. However, I am one of those people that finds knowing the details to be extremely useful in learning a "feel" for something. So, after reading everything about tempering in Mr. Minifie's book:
www.amazon.com/gp/product/083421301X/ref=ord_cart_shr/104-6466460-9719921?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance&n=283155
I would like to run some things by fellow-alchemists who are far more experienced than I at tempering chocolate; I have had mixed results.
What I gather is that temperature, seed-crystal incorporation, and gradual cooling are all very important.
Regarding temperature, Mr. Minifie cites experiments that help clarify the temperatures that one must cool the chocolate to in order to create the strongest and most stable beta crystals. In his view, after heating to 120, one should very gradually cool the chocolate to 83-84 while constantly mixing the chocolate so that all seed crystals formed will have as much access to the chocolate as possible. These first seed crystals will be catalysts for more seed crystals, and will improve the temper.
After the chocolate has been cooled to 83-84, Minifie notes that it may be molded at that temperature. However, if the chocolate is too viscous, as he states that one may raise the temperature up to 90 (at the highest) in order to decrease viscosity. He states that the stable beta crystals will still exist at that temperature, and that the weak beta crystals will all be destroyed.
This all sounds well and good, but I have a few questions about some of this:
1) He states that the chocolate should be cooled very slowly, while being mixed, down to the 83-84 range. It seems to me that this slow cooling is one of the things that allows so many stable beta crystals to form within the 84-88 degree range at which they predominate. If this is the case, then what impact does marble cooling have on the chocolate as the temperature is brought down at a significant rate? I would think that this should change the dynamics of the tempering to some extent.
2) If stable beta crystals are formed between 84 and 88, then why take it down to 83? It seems that stopping at 84 would be preferable. Additionally, it seems that re-heating to 90, as Mr. Minifie suggests, should be avoided if at all possible since this is 2 degrees above the point at which stable beta crystals begin to melt. Wouldn't it be better, if the chocolate is not too viscous, to simply mold as soon as the chocolate hits 88?
3) Taking both of these former questions into consideration, wouldn't the following method be best:
Process:
1) Heat to 120
2) Let chocolate cool to 95, while stirring intermittently
3) Dump 2/3 of the chocolate onto the marble and work until it cools to 84, making sure to mix it well while cooling it.
4) Reheat the chocolate very slowly over a double-boiler, mixing extremely well, until it attains 88 degrees.
5) Mold the Chocolate immediately, taking it back up to 88 if it begins to become too viscous before you are finished.
The temperature range used is one at which the most stable beta crystals are formed, and to compensate for the relative lack of slow cooling, the chocolate is slowly heated from 84 to 88, which still shouldn't take that much time relative to the rest of the process.
The only drawbacks that I can think of for this process are that:
a) Any weaker beta particles that were created wouldn't be destroyed as effectively as they would be if the chocolate were reheated to 90. However, stable beta particles also wouldn't be destroyed, so it seems to me that this should really be a non-issue; especially since the chocolate is only cooled to 84 and so most crystals formed will be stabel beta anyway. Am I incorrect?
b) The chocolate at 88 may still be a bit too viscous to mold in some cases, though will probably be fine. However, if this is the case, then 89 or 90 may be used with the understanding that one is trading decreased viscosity for loss of stable beta.
That all said, I reiterate that I know that one should pay attention to the feel of the chocolate, etc., but it also occurs to me that the feel will depend to some degree on the amount of lecithin, cocoa butter and sugar in the mix, and so different formulations will have different appearances and feels. This being the case, this temperature information seems quite important to me.
I would greatly appreciate any clarifications, corrections, or other observations about what I have written above, as I will be trying out this method tomorrow evening.
With great appreciation for all help,
Alan
P.S. the title of the thread is chosen with the understanding that "Milk Chocolate," with its added dry milk and milk fat, must be treated slightly differently temperature-wise.
Okay, I guess that "tempering Dark Chocolate like a pro" may not be the best title for this thread as pros probably don't have the manpower to temper all of their chocolate using marble slabs and double boilers like we do, and so use $10,000 machines, etc. However, what I mean, of course, is "tempering Dark Chocolate perfectly."
Now, I know that ultimately we desire to gain a feel for when the chocolate has reached the correct state of cooling strictly by the feel of working with it. However, I am one of those people that finds knowing the details to be extremely useful in learning a "feel" for something. So, after reading everything about tempering in Mr. Minifie's book:
www.amazon.com/gp/product/083421301X/ref=ord_cart_shr/104-6466460-9719921?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance&n=283155
I would like to run some things by fellow-alchemists who are far more experienced than I at tempering chocolate; I have had mixed results.
What I gather is that temperature, seed-crystal incorporation, and gradual cooling are all very important.
Regarding temperature, Mr. Minifie cites experiments that help clarify the temperatures that one must cool the chocolate to in order to create the strongest and most stable beta crystals. In his view, after heating to 120, one should very gradually cool the chocolate to 83-84 while constantly mixing the chocolate so that all seed crystals formed will have as much access to the chocolate as possible. These first seed crystals will be catalysts for more seed crystals, and will improve the temper.
After the chocolate has been cooled to 83-84, Minifie notes that it may be molded at that temperature. However, if the chocolate is too viscous, as he states that one may raise the temperature up to 90 (at the highest) in order to decrease viscosity. He states that the stable beta crystals will still exist at that temperature, and that the weak beta crystals will all be destroyed.
This all sounds well and good, but I have a few questions about some of this:
1) He states that the chocolate should be cooled very slowly, while being mixed, down to the 83-84 range. It seems to me that this slow cooling is one of the things that allows so many stable beta crystals to form within the 84-88 degree range at which they predominate. If this is the case, then what impact does marble cooling have on the chocolate as the temperature is brought down at a significant rate? I would think that this should change the dynamics of the tempering to some extent.
2) If stable beta crystals are formed between 84 and 88, then why take it down to 83? It seems that stopping at 84 would be preferable. Additionally, it seems that re-heating to 90, as Mr. Minifie suggests, should be avoided if at all possible since this is 2 degrees above the point at which stable beta crystals begin to melt. Wouldn't it be better, if the chocolate is not too viscous, to simply mold as soon as the chocolate hits 88?
3) Taking both of these former questions into consideration, wouldn't the following method be best:
Process:
1) Heat to 120
2) Let chocolate cool to 95, while stirring intermittently
3) Dump 2/3 of the chocolate onto the marble and work until it cools to 84, making sure to mix it well while cooling it.
4) Reheat the chocolate very slowly over a double-boiler, mixing extremely well, until it attains 88 degrees.
5) Mold the Chocolate immediately, taking it back up to 88 if it begins to become too viscous before you are finished.
The temperature range used is one at which the most stable beta crystals are formed, and to compensate for the relative lack of slow cooling, the chocolate is slowly heated from 84 to 88, which still shouldn't take that much time relative to the rest of the process.
The only drawbacks that I can think of for this process are that:
a) Any weaker beta particles that were created wouldn't be destroyed as effectively as they would be if the chocolate were reheated to 90. However, stable beta particles also wouldn't be destroyed, so it seems to me that this should really be a non-issue; especially since the chocolate is only cooled to 84 and so most crystals formed will be stabel beta anyway. Am I incorrect?
b) The chocolate at 88 may still be a bit too viscous to mold in some cases, though will probably be fine. However, if this is the case, then 89 or 90 may be used with the understanding that one is trading decreased viscosity for loss of stable beta.
That all said, I reiterate that I know that one should pay attention to the feel of the chocolate, etc., but it also occurs to me that the feel will depend to some degree on the amount of lecithin, cocoa butter and sugar in the mix, and so different formulations will have different appearances and feels. This being the case, this temperature information seems quite important to me.
I would greatly appreciate any clarifications, corrections, or other observations about what I have written above, as I will be trying out this method tomorrow evening.
With great appreciation for all help,
Alan
P.S. the title of the thread is chosen with the understanding that "Milk Chocolate," with its added dry milk and milk fat, must be treated slightly differently temperature-wise.