at Tue, 13 Dec 2005 18:01:00 GMT in <1134496860.685904.10600
@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, (Chembake) wrote :

>>So does anyone have any good fondant or ganache recipes?
>
>Making fondant by hand cannot duplicate the quality of institutionally
>made item, so
>IMO I prefer to buy a pail of ready made fondant instead if I make a
>lots of fondant containing chocolate centers.
>Another option is to use the DryFond which makes a better textured
>product than using powdered sugar fondant alternative.

Although it must be said that making one's own fondant is instructive for
the same basic technique used to temper chocolate (at least the slab and
spatula method). Hand-making fondant is certainly labour-intensive so if
you want to minimise effort it would be better to buy it. There are 2
reasons to try making it at home: if you want to gain technique in making
fondant yourself, or if you have certain flavour and/or ingredient
specifications you can't find in something you can buy.

>Regarding Ganache, IMO it does not need the use of expensive good
>tasting chocolatew which is better consumed IMO as is, by
>eating.<grin>>.

IMHO ganache definitely benefits from using good-tasting chocolate, because
in a ganache the flavour of the chocolate really stands out and if you're
using one that doesn't taste good, it will be instantly apparent.

However, "good tasting" is not synonymous with "expensive". There are many
cheap chocolates that also taste good, e.g. Guittard Gourmet Bittersweet
and Ghirardelli Bittersweet. It's best, I think, to start with one of those
cheaper but still good-tasting chocolates while you get good at making the
ganache. Even when first starting out, though, I don't think it's a bad
idea to experiment with different brands at different price points, to get
an idea for what the range of flavours and handling characteristics are.

One vital point to understand about expensive chocolate is that more often
than not the difference is not in the basic taste but in how characteristic
it is. An expensive, varietal chocolate from a high-end manufacturer (think
Amedei Chuao or Domori Porcelana) is very specific in its flavour profile,
which means that although it might not taste any better than a cheaper but
still quality chocolate, you'll be able to identify signature
characteristics. Depending on what you want to achieve, this could be
either a plus or a minus. For instance, if your intent were to create a
truffle with good basic chocolate flavour, using something like Chuao might
disappoint because its signature taste would be so self-evident. But if you
wanted a truffle bursting with the sort of molasses/blueberry taste this
chocolate has, it would be a great choice. It's not going to be an
"average" taste though - which means that some people are likely to like it
more than others.

These same characteristics means that if you're making flavoured
chocolates, picking a good matching varietal can make or break your
chocolate. For instance, if you wanted a cinnamon chocolate, picking Domori
Porcelana as your chocolate base would be a disaster. The cinnamon would
completely overwhelm Porcelana's fine delicate flavour. But Domori Carenero
Superior would be a match made in heaven for the same piece, with a
powerful, assertive mix of fruit and spice that would really match the
cinnamon. Meanwhile, choosing a cheap and good, but less characteristic
chocolate like Guittard Gourmet Bittersweet would yield good results no
matter what the flavour choice, but they wouldn't be quite so inspired as a
well-matched varietal. This means that before using varietal chocolates for
confectionery, it's vital to taste and assess them carefully to understand
the flavour profile.

>If I make those filled ganache based chocolate confections.
>I would improve tastes by adding certain liqueurs/ or flavors to the
>formulations instead.

I disagree sharply on the idea that adding a liqueur is an effective
default strategy to improving flavour. At least to me, alcohol and
chocolate tend to clash, and so most liqueurs end up diminishing the
chocolate flavour, making it taste inevitably somewhat boozy, and not
really showing their own flavours that well either. With *careful* choice
some liqueurs can be introduced, but only in the case where the objective
is to highlight the liqueur itself, not as a background flavour enhancer.
Some chocolates, ganache in particular, are quite perishable and so some
commercial chocolatiers use the liqueurs as a preservative, which again I
think isn't warranted for most situtations. Better to have realistic
expiration dates.

Adding other flavours is fine when you want that other flavour to be the
dominant note. However, when you want the chocolate to be the dominant
note, it's not warranted. For instance, some people add coffee in order to
"perk up" an otherwise uninspired chocolate flavour. If the idea is to have
a chocolatey flavour, IMHO that's better done by using a better chocolate,
rather than by resorting to enhancement agents. But again, if the piece
were intended to be a coffee chocolate, or a mocha chocolate, then of
course using coffee would be perfectly in order.

> I would rather spend the money on procuring refined hazelnut paste (
>as homemade paste is rather gritty ( 600-1000microns and cannnot
>attain the desired particle range of 20-40 microns on that nut paste
>processed through a three roll or even by a Macintye refiner conche.

Definitely worth the trouble to get the refined paste. There are no units
suitable for an in-home application that can do even a halfway decent job
at grinding nuts. I think it's a bit frustrating in this age of every
conceivable kitchen gadget that you can't buy a halfway decent grinder,
although I'm guessing that the reason for this is that the market is
microscopic.

>>>Got any tips for making them come out the best possible?

With ganache, there are some things you should know.

Just to revisit the basics, ganache is in its basic form chocolate combined
with hot cream and stirred into a smooth paste. There are 3 basic ratios of
chocolate to cream: 2:1 (firm ganache - good for truffles and chocolate
centres), 1:1 (soft ganache - good frosting/filling) and 1:2 (pouring
ganache - excellent sauce). Some chocolatiers have an intermediate ratio,
3:2, for their chocolate pieces, which makes for a very soft centre. It's
more difficult to work with, though.

I find it best to grate the chocolate using a box grater. You can't do this
with bar chocolate (i.e. tablets of eating proportions), so you need to get
either a bloc or break-up from the same. This is more economical anyway, so
I recommend doing so.

With bars, chips, discs, and other formats the only practical method is to
chop the chocolate very finely. It isn't quite as foolproof as the grating
method, in that the result sometimes isn't as smooth, but it takes much
less time, if that's a consideration.

I don't melt the chocolate before adding the cream. Everybody I've seen has
found that this method is too prone to problems and is highly sensitive.
The risk of getting broken ganache out of that method is high. It's better
to pour hot cream over your grated or chopped chocolate. As long as you've
got it fine enough, the heat of the cream will easily melt the chocolate.

Darker chocolate can take a hotter cream - very near boiling, but milk
chocolate and especially white chocolate requires a lower temperature.

I fold the chocolate into the cream using a spatula. This minimises the
amount of motion necessary to get it incorporated and produces the
smoothest results.

For 2:1 ganache, get the highest-fat cream you can find. I use 40% cream in
general, supplemented by 46% British double cream. For 1:1 you can relax
this restriction (36% "whipping cream" should be OK) and 1:2 will work
acceptably even with single cream or half-and-half, useful if you want a
very runny sauce.

See some of my earlier posts for a lengthy discussion of how to get various
flavours into ganache, including infusion methods, paste methods, and
direct addition methods.

>In your case I would recommend to understand the recipe and its
>procedures before you even think of doing it yourself.< grin>.

There is a risk of assuming that with the "magical" recipe you can produce
superb results effortlessly. Generally speaking this is not the case, and
even more crucially, the very best results typically demand the highest
level of skill and technique, while recipes that are closer to foolproof
are also closer to average in terms of result.

>A lot of beginners are deluded into thinking that expensive
>ingredients will result in excellent product which is not absolutely
>true.;

That being said the number of beginners who are frustrated with their
results after multiple attempts is large, and often it's traceable to
starting with a poor initial recipe or really low-quality ingredients. It
does little good to try to refine technique if the basic recipe itself is
way off base, because then even with the greatest amount of skill in the
world you will get nowhere. Similarly if you go bottom-of-the-barrel on
ingredient choices (think Baker's) the effect of these may mask
improvements in skill, or worse still, create unnecessary workarounds or
"tricks" in order to boost the flavour and/or handling properties which the
beginner then naively applies to all his creations, never understanding
that it's something that only works or is indeed necessary because he was
using less-than-quality ingredients.

--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)