|
Post by jamescary on Apr 20, 2008 18:04:18 GMT -5
I've been reading that a lot of the big guys perform a 2-step conche process. A long "dry conch" followed by the addition of some cocoa butter and lecithin (if recipe calls for it) into the machine which moves the process to the second "liquid conch" step.
Is this something worth trying in the home making process? Will the melanger be able to handle less cocoa butter and no lecithin?
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Apr 21, 2008 9:40:41 GMT -5
You could try a countertop kitchenaid type mixer, with something to heat the bowl (hairdryer? warming blanket? Heat tape with a vari-istor?). Probably have to be careful of the loading you put on the mixer so as not to break the gears (they're probably nylon or plastic for most 'residential' use mixers)
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Apr 21, 2008 12:01:23 GMT -5
Also, it seems that dry conching occurs right after roll refining in the industrial setting. At that point the chocolate is pretty solid because of the increased particle surface area and because of the short refine time (no time for the fat to become liquid?).
I guess what I don't understand about 'dry conching' is what is the advantage to performing the conching step while the chocolate is solid? Is it just because the chocolate has not been slowly and evenly heated?
|
|
|
Post by Alan on Apr 21, 2008 12:56:22 GMT -5
Also, it seems that dry conching occurs right after roll refining in the industrial setting. At that point the chocolate is pretty solid because of the increased particle surface area and because of the short refine time (no time for the fat to become liquid?). I guess what I don't understand about 'dry conching' is what is the advantage to performing the conching step while the chocolate is solid? Is it just because the chocolate has not been slowly and evenly heated? James, In the case of dry conching, since the surface area of the chocolate mass is extremely large compared to liquid chocolate, and since the particles of cacao are not entirely coated with fat, the idea is that moisture and volatile flavor compounds are removed much more readily.
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Apr 21, 2008 15:09:08 GMT -5
Is the liquor usually pressed first? I guess I just don't understand how it could be solid if there is liquid fat in it. Is it like butter vs cream -- water in a fat emulsion vs fat in a water emulsion? But in this case it's fat in a cocoa solid emulsion? Then after so much churning it switches.
I guess part of my confusion is that the liquor in the Santha is usually pretty liquid (but then again I add some butter pre-Santha grind). So, I'm wondering if it is possible to refine the particles to a point where they have the same large surface area and still be solid in the Santha?
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Apr 22, 2008 6:14:17 GMT -5
it's solid because cocoa butter's solid at room temperature and below. the rolls from refining are water cooled, so the paste goes into the refiner fluid, and comes off solid (well, usually).
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Apr 22, 2008 13:13:11 GMT -5
In reading this thread I'm trying to understand why you would want to try and duplicate a commercial process with a micro sized melangeur?
Quite often at a commercial scale there are reasons for doing things that are completely unrelated to the quality of the final output. The reasons could be due to scale, due to efficiency or output of the particular machine, due to time, or any of the factors listed above.
Having completely destroyed my Santha and having built "FrankenSantha" I can tell you that trying to create any type of liquor with the Santha is extremely hard on it.
I don't mean to sound cynical here, but truthfully, when the day's done, you have one machine that crushes and stirs, and works in a completely different dynamic than a commercial machine. Different methodologies need to be applied.
To substantiate this, I roast beans in a commercial oven and also roast beans on a test basis in my home. The two perform the same function, but in completely different ways, at completely different temperatures, and for completely different periods of time. I use the home oven to test samples and create the taste I'm looking for and then make adjustments necessary to do it at a larger scale in a piece of equipmetn that essentially performs the same function.
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Apr 22, 2008 13:29:44 GMT -5
Commercial processes have been developed to create and enhance the overall profile of the chocolate. There's nothing wrong with trying to duplicate it and if it can't be done to understand what the purpose of that process is. Sebastian and Choco-Luvah have been helpful in explaining the process and its outcome. There is an interesting difference to what has been the accepted home process and the commercial process and that is in the commercial process butter is added at a later stage in conching. I am trying to understand the point of this. I found this article on the internet the other day: www.britanniafood.com/download/?mode=dynamic&id=21Of particular note in this paper: So, if this is the case, it seems like an important task that may be worth duplicating. Just like roasting. If that means another process may be needed for the home, so be it. But, I see no reason not to consider things because our tools happen to be different. The commercial guys have been doing this a lot longer and with a lot more knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Apr 22, 2008 13:35:46 GMT -5
Certainly, commercially, the process has most likely been developed for efficiency, but I would think that it always has quality as a target.
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Apr 22, 2008 14:10:48 GMT -5
James;
In the commercial chocolate world, quality is FAR from the ultimate target. When you're dealing in millions of dollars of product per day, and making pennies per pound of output, the bottom line is the target.
Just taste a Hershey's chocolate bar and explain to me where "quality" plays in the equation. Hershey's is notoriously known in the industry for buying beans as cheap as they can get, and not caring about the quality. I have it on good advice that they often buy beans that other chocolate companies won't touch, in order to keep their numbers down and their volumes up. It's easy to mask a crappy product with lots of sugar, flavoured milk, and other ingredients.
Among the industries I've been privy to do business, the one thing I'm finding is that in this industry there is a clear and distinct break between a quality producer and a volume producer. They are not one and the same.
|
|
|
Post by jamescary on Apr 22, 2008 22:01:30 GMT -5
brad; Thank you. I will take that under advisement. --- Let's say I want to reproduce dry conching (not because of Hershey's and their crazy $5 billion business [not that I'm advocating them either]), what do you guys think if I separated the refining into 2 steps? The cocoa mass in one step and the sugar along with some cocoa butter in another step. This way the cocoa mass is refined to the proper particle size, then heated to draw off the moisture and volatiles, then the butter is introduced to start the liquid conch. The sugar [edit]refining[/edit] is split into 2 parts because if it is all added with the cocoa mass, it may be too thick for the Santha to handle and since we're adding butter to the liquid conch step, we can use this to help "grease the gears" so to speak for the sugar to be refined in a separate other step. Then the refined masses are brought together during conching. I'll give it a try. Not sure how soon. I have several pounds of chocolate that need to find a home before I'm allowed to make another.
|
|