"Alex Rast" > wrote in message
...
> at Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:07:35 GMT in <H_vEd.6677$6b.2134@trndny07>,
> (Janet Puistonen) wrote :
>
>>This weekend I talked to someone demo-ing a "chocolate fountain." They
>>were using Merckens "Falls" chocolate, which they seemed to think was
>>not "coating" but the real thing. I have my doubts, since it apparently
>>cost about $2 per lb. It would appear that the chocolate used for these
>>things is thinned with something--and at that price, I doubt it is cocoa
>>butter.
>>Anyone have any info on this? (BTW, it was VERY sweet.)
>
> Merckens makes both pure chocolate and compound chocolate coating. I have
> not heard of a pure chocolate by Merckens with the name "Falls". Actually,
> Merckens is somewhat more well-known for their compound coatings, so
> there's at least a reasonable possibility that this is what it was. The
> $2/lb price tag is much more in line with the compound coating prices from
> Merckens than the pure chocolates, which are around $4.00/lb.
That was my thinking, also.
> Chocolate with a *very* high cocoa butter content could be used in
> fountains, and there are companies who produce chocolates with cocoa
> butter
> contents that are very high indeed. Guittard's Coucher Du Soleil is 44%
> and
> Chocovic's Maragda has 42%. These turn very fluid when melted and the
> prices aren't outrageous, either.
>
> I haven't gotten exact tech specs on Amedei's Chuao, but it turned even
> more fluid than Coucher Du Soleil on melting (the fluidity was
> astonishing,
> extreme even in comparison to Cluizel's Noir Infini which is over 50%
> cocoa
> butter) which makes me think it too probably has an extreme cocoa butter
> content. The price, however, *is* outrageous, although it would make for
> an
> unimaginably luxurious chocolate fountain. You could probably increase
> sales to the point of frenzy when people tried this one.
>
One would think so, but judging by the taste of the people who were
enthralled by the Merckens fountain, I wonder if they would notice the
difference.
> (remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)