I just got some of this stuff based on some recommendations by Alex and
the web. Im not sure I understand why this stuff tastes so good but I
have a theory that I wanted to run by y'all. BTW, Happy New Year and
here's to hoping the new year is filled with just enough chocolate!!!

So all the package says (and its worth getting a bar just for the
packaging; its very cool) is "100% cocoa mass."

But the nutritional information says 53.2 gms of fat per 100 gms of
product. So if they put in 53.2 gms of cocoa butter (which as far as I
understand is pretty tasteless) then there can be only 46.8 gms of "taste."

I can't really describe how it tastes but it reminded me a lot of a very
"fatty" milk chocolate like Terra Nostra. I was very surprised that my
wife didn't like it as it reminded me so much of milk chocolate. Im not
saying it tastes like milk chocolate but rather that it tastes good
(good chocolate) and it has the consistency and mouth feel of milk
chocolate.

So unlike the Michel Cluziel 99% which really tastes like 99%, the Puro
and 100% from Domori taste like "butter" with some cocoa in it. Now my
theory is that you could call pure cocoa butter 100% cocoa "mass" but it
would have almost no taste. So in a way is Domori getting away with a
different interpretation of 100%?

The other reason Im questioning this is that to me even 72% Valhrona
tastes "darker" than either the Puro or 100%. Possibly even the 60 or so
Callebaut's taste "darker" but then I question what we all mean by
"dark." The point is that even though the 100% and Puro are 100% is that
they don't taste what I would call "dark." Whereas the MC 99% tastes
like the darkest of darks. So can someone explain what I'm tasting here?

k

p.s. if you only get one, I prefer the 100% to the Puro, but the
packaging on both is so cool that its worth getting both.