|
Post by Brad on Jun 10, 2008 13:24:02 GMT -5
Alan;
Thanks for your contribution.
Brad.
|
|
|
Post by chocogeek on Jun 11, 2008 1:15:12 GMT -5
Thanks everyone, Alan and Brad, for the effort to sort this out - bitterness vs. astringency and the impact of the husk on flavor, and the impact of conching on driving out acids. I'm a newbie to this and am trying to find my way - some of the more subtle terms can be confusing. This forum is a wealth of information in that regard.
I agree that bitterness is different from acidic and astringency. Bitterness takes over the taste buds and 'blocks' them making the tongue feel rough and incapable of tasting much else. This is probably the protein binding going on, interfering with taste receptors.
Acidic is like citrus or vinegar. I think this is what conching will drive out along with heat and oxidation.
Astringent - I am not sure where to place this and may have confused it with acidic, but I think astringent 'stings' a bit more and is more volatile, like alcohol. You wouldn't confuse alcohol with acidic / citrus.
The bitterness that I tasted in the husk would probably not be driven out with conching or by heat - just my experience with cooking speaking here. The type of bitterness I am referring to that I tasted in the husk was the type of flavor that you can't get rid of by 'cooking' it off, like I said, tastes like grape seeds. So I think taking care to winnow out the husk or eliminating it from entering the finished product by some other means (Champion juicer screen) would be wise.
The time spent conching out the acids would have to depend on heat, and aeration to oxidize and drive out the acids, and would also depend on the amount of acids in the roasted bean, which would be a factor of the raw bean and the roast profile. In short, your equipment, the bean and roast and what the end flavor you are trying to archive.
I have read somewhere that sugar particles bind with acids in chocolate and therefore sugar should be added near the end of conching when the acids are lower, but I don't have any experience with testing that assertion. I would be interested to hear if anyone else does.
I have been conching for 3 days or 70+ hours and have had good results, but it may be covering up for roasts that are not right on the money. I have also noticed the reduction of acids after the bars have been molded up and stored for some time. 3-4 weeks of 'curing' or 'aging' helps mellow out the flavor.
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Jun 11, 2008 13:27:45 GMT -5
Glad I could help.
In all honesty, I can't see there ever really being a consensus on "astringency" and it's use. It's a nebulous term at best. All we can really do is share our opinions, and what we as individuals call it.
In the end, it's our personal tastes of our products that really matters regardless of the term (bitterness, acidic, astringent, yucky, etc.)
In your last post you referred to the conching time, and the 'rest" time of the chocolate.
I agree that letting it rest sometimes does in fact help with the flavour profile.
I'm not sure about the conching covering up the roasting errors though. I've totaly screwed a few roasts, and regardless what I've tried, there seems to be no going back. It tastes bad and that's it (I give those batches to people I don't like BAAAA HA HA HA HA!)
I've also refined for that long in the Santha (just to see), and have ended up with an incredibly smooth, good tasting chocolate. However I usually don't notice much of a difference after about 40 hours or so.
However, it's all about personal taste, right?
Have a great day.
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Jun 12, 2008 10:43:34 GMT -5
Here's a great way to evaluate astringency - get some caffeine from a chemical supply company, make a water solution of it and see how it feels on your tongue - it's sort of that pulling sensation that sucks the moisture off your palate. Knowing that you may find it hard to order caffeine from a chemical supply company, get some nice green tea and let it steep for a while - astringency's more a feel than a flavor, so anything high in astringent compounds (alkaloids, polyphenols, flavanols, etc) can be used to look at this. Many wine making stores/brew houses also sell polyphenols (grape extracts) to add to wine to fortify their body - this would also be a good way to experience astringency.
|
|
|
Post by chocogeek on Jun 13, 2008 0:53:11 GMT -5
So maybe there *is* a consensus on "astringency". It might be good to avoid the more generic term "bitter" as, well, too generic. I agree with Alan, Brad and Sebatian that astringency is a physical/textural sensation. Call it the "pucker factor". Makes me want to scrub my tongue.
Still not quite sure if the husk is always astringent and how much it depends on the bean / fermentation. I taste-tested some raw Madagascar just a few minutes ago and the Madagascar does not have the astringency or acidic content that the Ivory Coast or Dominican beans do (all from John). I chewed up / tasted first the raw Madagascar bean and then the husk and no comparison to the other varieties. So maybe the husk is not that important a factor, any more so than the bean itself. Could that be due to fermentation? Has anyone processed finished batched of the Madagascar? Was it less acidic?
A tasting log or wiki might be useful to compare notes. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Jun 13, 2008 9:50:40 GMT -5
Trying to get consensus on flavor evaluation absent a trained panel is akin to pouring water uphill it's incredibly difficult. Sense taste is a sensory experience that we try to define in words, the only real was to approach this is to have a set of standards that you work with every day, tasting and defining to develop a shared lexicon of words so that when 'bitter' is used, you can all relate it back to the same reference. Major companies struggle with this even with a lot of time and effort put into training sensory panels, so don't underestimate it's difficulty Not to say it can't be done, and many of you are obviously very descriptive writers with a very sensitive palate, and i enjoy reading your taste descriptors. Trying to get everyone to *mean* the same thing when a descriptor is used, however, is very difficult. I read somewhere that web 2.0 may incorporate what's essentially a printer that prints flavors - ie, visit a web site about roses, and you can smell the varieties in the comfort of your computer room. Having such a beast would make sensory consensus over long distances easier
|
|
|
Post by hallotp on Jun 18, 2008 11:19:28 GMT -5
Brad. You are right that I should have made a kinder, gentler post. I think I was just rubbed the wrong way by the reply that you made to Johns post, since he has largely been responsible for so many people venturing into chocolate making. I'm just kind of allergic to arrogance I guess. As a flavor characteristic, an astringent can have a bitter characteristic (think witch hazel), but more importantly for chocolate making, they can develop from different factors. Your second definition was more appropriate.
I appreciate that you have done 3 yrs of research - although before you said it was 2. In any case, good for you. I have been running my business for nearly 4 years now, primarily wholesale. I recently opened a retail location as well. I sell both a 2oz bar that we make from the bean, as well as tasting chocolates made from a variety of beans in my shop.
Does any of that matter? Perhaps we should just meet on the playground after school. You take yourself way too seriously. Hal
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Jun 18, 2008 15:03:43 GMT -5
Hal
Thanks for your post, and congratulations on your retail location.
It sounds as though we're doing some things in parallel.
Where is it located? Do you have a website?
You're right in your observation that I do take some things seriously. I own and manage several different ventures, and have been involved heavily in the Internet business for many years (I took one of my internet companies public back in 2001). When it comes to the printed word - especially in a public forum where anyone can read it and often too quickly form an opinion - I am very aware of, and have unfortunately experienced the damage that a few misinterpreted printed phrases can make to a business.
For the most part I'm treating my journey into the chocolate world as something fun. I don't need it to make money to pay the bills, so am in fact having a great time. People love the chocolate I've been making, and are now willing to pay for it, which is definitely nice!
...And I must give credit to John Nanci as well, because this forum and some of the information I've gleaned from it over the past few years have played a big part in this new adventure.
Having said all of that, I'd be happy to meet you on the playground, but would rather meet at lunch time to share some of our chocolate!!! By the time school's done it'll be all gone.
Thanks again for the clarification Hal. I'd like to know more about your business. Maybe sometime we can even share some bean sources. Good sources are hard to come by, and as long as we're not next door to each other, why not share, right?
Best Regards, Brad.
|
|
|
Post by hallotp on Jun 19, 2008 23:34:51 GMT -5
Well Met Brad. One of the things that I most enjoy about this process is the sense of pioneering that comes from people who are trying to redefine an industry which was previously only the domain of the big guys. Free exchange of knowledge and resources is what makes that possible, and it contributes to a great community. I would be happy to discuss sources with you. In fact, I will be bringing back some organic trinitario from Costa Rica next month and if it turns out to be of good quality, I will let everyone know. Good luck Hal
|
|