- Joined
- Mar 24, 2015
- Messages
- 209
- Reaction score
- 29
I have been experimenting with different types of sourdough...
The idea was that I would do 2 almost identical loaves side by side and subject them to the same process. It didn't quite go to plan when I got side tracked when pulling out the flour necessary for the initial experiment.
I made up a spelt sourdough loaf in a 1lb loaf tin first. (This is where I went wrong - I got side tracked!)
Then I made up a 100% chapatti flour sourdough loaf using 500g of flour. (This works out as needing a 2lb loaf tin.)
Then I realised that I didn't have enough sourdough culture left to make another 500g loaf and I wanted them in the same tins so that I could compare them more easily. So I had to do a quick rescue and add more flour and water to culture and leave it covered but on the dehydrator which I was using as an incubator (I know there is another word but I can't think of it for the life of me)... so 4 hours later I made up another loaf that was 375g chapatti flour and 125g strong wholemeal bread flour.
The idea was that I was comparing a 100% non strong bread flour sourdough with a 75%:25% non-strong:strong bread flour... and it should have been identical quantities of the same sourdough culture.
I cooked both loaves, but by this time it was clear that the end result was the exact reverse of what I was expecting.
If I understand this strong verses normal flour thing correctly, the culture should have been more active and produced bigger bubbles in the loaf with the strong flour in it, but what actually happened was that the sourdough culture was considerably more active in the 100% chapatti flour version and produced bigger bubbles and hence a slightly lighter dough than in the 75% version which actually has a better top to it...
I'm confused. Does anyone know what is meant to have happened?
I think the culture that was added to and left for a further 4 hours wasn't as ready as it could have been and therefore produced a better loaf than the really active version before I ran out, but I'm not sure. Both loaves are fine and have risen really well with no un-risen soggy bottoms, so that is not a problem, it is just that the strong flour version responded the way I expected the non-strong flour version to respond!
The idea was that I would do 2 almost identical loaves side by side and subject them to the same process. It didn't quite go to plan when I got side tracked when pulling out the flour necessary for the initial experiment.
I made up a spelt sourdough loaf in a 1lb loaf tin first. (This is where I went wrong - I got side tracked!)
Then I made up a 100% chapatti flour sourdough loaf using 500g of flour. (This works out as needing a 2lb loaf tin.)
Then I realised that I didn't have enough sourdough culture left to make another 500g loaf and I wanted them in the same tins so that I could compare them more easily. So I had to do a quick rescue and add more flour and water to culture and leave it covered but on the dehydrator which I was using as an incubator (I know there is another word but I can't think of it for the life of me)... so 4 hours later I made up another loaf that was 375g chapatti flour and 125g strong wholemeal bread flour.
The idea was that I was comparing a 100% non strong bread flour sourdough with a 75%:25% non-strong:strong bread flour... and it should have been identical quantities of the same sourdough culture.
I cooked both loaves, but by this time it was clear that the end result was the exact reverse of what I was expecting.
If I understand this strong verses normal flour thing correctly, the culture should have been more active and produced bigger bubbles in the loaf with the strong flour in it, but what actually happened was that the sourdough culture was considerably more active in the 100% chapatti flour version and produced bigger bubbles and hence a slightly lighter dough than in the 75% version which actually has a better top to it...
I'm confused. Does anyone know what is meant to have happened?
I think the culture that was added to and left for a further 4 hours wasn't as ready as it could have been and therefore produced a better loaf than the really active version before I ran out, but I'm not sure. Both loaves are fine and have risen really well with no un-risen soggy bottoms, so that is not a problem, it is just that the strong flour version responded the way I expected the non-strong flour version to respond!