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.)

I think it's thinned also- but I'm not sure with what. I saw a fountain a
few months ago and tried it- the chocolate was okay, but on the sweet side.
It reminded me of candy floss- fun, yummy, but not satisfying. then a few
months ago, I ha=tried another one at teh NYC Chocolate show- they claimed
they were using Valrhona. Again, it tasted like it was thinned with
something.
"Janet Puistonen" > wrote in message
news:H_vEd.6677$6b.2134@trndny07...
> 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.)
>
>

Chocolate can be extended) or thinned) with cocoa butter compatible
extender( CBE) which is slightly cheaper than cocoa butter. It can be
detected by an apparent waxy feeling on the palate which becomes more
distinct as the amount of CBE is increased.
Meanwhile....
If what you noticed as thinning is a real one( more fluid), then the
chocolate may contain significant amount of PGPR( but only to less
than half a percent due to its potency) .
That will promote better flowability of the chocolate due to the
modification of Casson's plastic viscosity and yield value.
Cocoa butter and cocoa butter equivalent fats are too expensive to thin
a chocolate in comparison. due to the much higher dosage needed than
the PGPR.
Roy

"Roy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Chocolate can be extended) or thinned) with cocoa butter compatible
> extender( CBE) which is slightly cheaper than cocoa butter. It can be
> detected by an apparent waxy feeling on the palate which becomes more
> distinct as the amount of CBE is increased.
> Meanwhile....
> If what you noticed as thinning is a real one( more fluid), then the
> chocolate may contain significant amount of PGPR( but only to less
> than half a percent due to its potency) .
> That will promote better flowability of the chocolate due to the
> modification of Casson's plastic viscosity and yield value.
> Cocoa butter and cocoa butter equivalent fats are too expensive to thin
> a chocolate in comparison. due to the much higher dosage needed than
> the PGPR.
> Roy
>

Very interesting, Roy. Sounds like that's probably what they were using. But
what exactly *is* PGPR?

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.

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.

--
Alex Rast

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

"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)

For those of you wondering what it is caterers use to dilute their
chocolate for the chocolate fountains, prepare to be GROSSED OUT! Most
caterers don't want to spend the money on good chocolate, so they will
use 4-6 CUPS of vegetable oil! Most of them will not use cocoa butter
because it is expensive...so they use the cheapest thing
possible...oil!

So if you don't want to be dipping your strawberry in vegetable oil, or
fake chocolate, here's a tip:

Most chocolates are too think to run in the fountain, and have to be
thinned with something. So if you have a choice, insist that they do
not use vegetable oil! A wonderful chocolate that is 100% pure and is
actually a special designed recipe for the chocolate fountain that
doesn't require any thinning or additions is Sephra Premium Fondue
Chocolate. They import their special fountain Fondue chocolate directly
from Belgium, and believe it or not it is very affordable. To find out
more about Sephra Premium Fondue Chocolate you can visit their website:
http://www.sephrafountains.com or http://www.sephrachocolate.com

Does anyone know of another chocolate that doesn't need any thinning
agent to use in the fountain besides the Sephra Chocolate?