Gordon Hayes wrote:

> Would it be beneficial to maintain your starter at a hydration level that
> matches the majority of breads you bake? My thinking is that you would not
> have to make adjustments to your non-sourdough recipes' flour/water ratio.

I do this, not for the reason you give, but because it:

(a) may[*] result in, or at least make it easier to obtain, a less sour
taste; this is "beneficial" by my standards but not necessarily by yours;

(b) slows down fermentation relative to higher hydrations, again
"beneficial" for me because I'm not able to monitor and look after my
starter on a 24x7 basis;

(c) maintains the starter automatically during bread building; this
maximizes the generational turnover (and hence evolution) of the
starter, whilst minimizing the risk of overaging the starter without
having to run two builds in parallel;

(d) keeps the starter in a bread-like environment, which may have
important evolutionary effects.

I think (d), which may also be a contributor to (a) [*the other factor
involved is smaller refreshments], is the most interesting reason. I
have precious little evidence to support it, because I only keep one
active starter. It does seem to be a lot healthier, and to produce
better tasting bread, than a year ago, but that's not a controlled
experiment. However, think about what happens if you maintain your
starter at high hydration. It evolves entirely in that environment,
perhaps also at fridge temperature, for years and years. Then, at the
very end of its life, it is called upon to raise bread at a lower
hydration and higher temperature. Might it not be shocked, or in some
other way suboptimal? It's a conjecture.

Of course, there are disadvantages to this approach. In addition to
those advantages for me that may be disadvantages for you, two others
spring to mind:

(i) if you don't want to "contaminate" your starter, you are limited in
what you can add to your bread; for instance, I have just made some
bagel dough without my usual (for yeasted bagels) malt-substitute,
because I couldn't be bothered to pull back the next starter early;

(ii) your starter is at risk every time you make bread; of course, you
could easily remedy this by reserving a "backup" piece.

Incidentally, it is quite easy to build on a firm starter if you first
add all the new water, let it mix a little bit, then add the flour and
immediately incorporate it to the point of no dry flour. What you want
to avoid is lumps of dryish flour in the dough, or a marbled dough of
old and new phases. It seems that minimizing the "phase range" at any
given point during mixing helps to achieve that. (So, you don't add the
new water to the new flour: these are the extremes of the "phase range".)

Thanks for your question! Writing this reply clarified my own thinking.

Greg

--
To get my e-mail address, remove a dot and replace a dot with a dash.