What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who claim they
can't bake???

Of course, the first thing that happens is a modification to the
recipe....

Might ba a factor... Ya think!

...fred

"kuvasz guy" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who claim they
> can't bake???
>
> Of course, the first thing that happens is a modification to the
> recipe....
>
> Might ba a factor... Ya think!
>
> ..fred
>
If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.
Most people think a pints a pound the world around.
A pint of flour is never a pound of flour. You can throw together biscuits
or pasta that way if you'd like, but little else.

kuvasz guy wrote:
> What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who claim they
> can't bake???

Perhaps they're not such perfectly fine cooks as they claim... one can
only imagine the crap those people cook... anyone should be able to
bake as well as they cook. In fact I think baking is easier, less time
consuming, less labor intensive, is more forgiving of errors, and
typically involves less expensive ingredients. People don't generally
throw away an under baked chocolate cake... it can be dead raw in the
center and still with a glass of milk or a scoop if ice cream every
last bit will get scoffed down and immensely enjoyed... tell em it's
sex in the middle. Just try pawning off undercooked Thanksgiving
turkey, ain't no amount of gravy gonna make that raw poultry
palatable. The only aspect of baking that's difficult is the
decorating... but do you really think it's gonna matter all that much
to your grand kids if your fresh made strawberry shortcake ain't
presented as fancy schmancy as from Guido Varrone's Bakery. You can
buy paper lace doilys too.

kuvasz guy wrote:
>
> What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who
> claim they can't bake???

You obviously aren't familiar with the low-carb,
low-gluten, raw food, blood type, cave man diet.
We don't use any food or food preparation
equipment not used by our ancient ancestors
prior to the development of white flour,
white sugar, white salt, and white pepper.
Obviously, the oven is out. We're still arguing
about fire. :-)

Sheldon wrote:

> Perhaps they're not such perfectly fine cooks as they claim... one can
> only imagine the crap those people cook... anyone should be able to
> bake as well as they cook. In fact I think baking is easier, less time
> consuming, less labor intensive, is more forgiving of errors, and
> typically involves less expensive ingredients.

<LOL> Spoken as only a crappy, careless baker could. Cookie
Katz thinks that baking is more forgiving of error than
other culinary components. Imagine that. Less
labor-intensive than a saute or a roast. Imagine that. Less
time-consuming to make a good loaf of bread than a whole
fried chicken. I wish I had known years ago.

Anyone should be able to sculpt as well as they paint. And
dance. And play the banjo.

> People don't generally
> throw away an under baked chocolate cake... it can be dead raw in the
> center and still with a glass of milk or a scoop if ice cream every
> last bit will get scoffed down and immensely enjoyed... tell em it's
> sex in the middle.

That's because it tastes good, has a good mouthfeel and
harbors no hazard. Moron.

> Just try pawning off undercooked Thanksgiving
> turkey, ain't no amount of gravy gonna make that raw poultry
> palatable.

Sounds like the voice of experience. One of the few times
I'd believe what he says.

> The only aspect of baking that's difficult is the decorating...

And, as if it needed further documentation, Shecky pees on
his shoes once more.

The guy who chars his meat loaf explains how to bake.
Because he's such a brilliant cook himself. Did I say
Brilliant? I meant shipboard Navy Galley.

Moronic blowhole putz.

Pastorio

> but do you really think it's gonna matter all that much
> to your grand kids if your fresh made strawberry shortcake ain't
> presented as fancy schmancy as from Guido Varrone's Bakery. You can
> buy paper lace doilys too.

"kuvasz guy" > wrote

> What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who claim they
> can't bake???

Can't is a strong word. I don't have a knack for baking. Some people
have the touch. I suppose if I was interested enough to practice a lot,
perhaps it would be easier for me.

As it is, something that comes out great one time, next time it won't and
you'll never figure out why, no matter how hard you try, can't get the
bread to come out right, and not resemble a misshapen bowling ball
in appearance and weight.

Maybe the butter wasn't warm enough ... cool enough? Did you over-
beat it? or ... was it humid that day?

Most cooking, I find, is not so temperamental.

nancy

Nancy Young wrote:
> "kuvasz guy" wrote
>
> > What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who claim they
> > can't bake???
>
> Can't is a strong word. I don't have a knack for baking. Some people
> have the touch. I suppose if I was interested enough to practice a lot,
> perhaps it would be easier for me.
>
> As it is, something that comes out great one time, next time it won't and
> you'll never figure out why, no matter how hard you try, can't get the
> bread to come out right, and not resemble a misshapen bowling ball
> in appearance and weight.
>
> Maybe the butter wasn't warm enough ... cool enough? Did you over-
> beat it? or ... was it humid that day?
>
> Most cooking, I find, is not so temperamental.

With baking, like anything else one enters into with a negative
attitude, failure becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

General baking requires no more precision than general cooking. There
is no real point in measuring baking ingredients to the gram, no two
batches of flour are identical anyway, neither are many other baking
ingredients indentical, not any more than many cooking ingredients...
eggs are not identical, they don't taste the same, their color is
different, each weighs differently.... there will be no detectible
difference if you make that cake with three eggs or four eggs, no one,
NO ONE can tell. If you make a loaf of bread with 1 tsp of salt or 1
1/2 tsps of salt it won't matter, and no one can tell, human sensory
perception is just not nearly that good.

With confections preciseness counts, but with baking and cooking it
doesn't really matter, neither requires more precise measuring for
repeatability than the other.

The only reason people are not good at baking is because they simply
don't bake often enough to develop technique... if you bake bread every
week you'll do well on a constant basis, but if you only bake bread
like 2-3 times a year your results will be no bettrer than if you have
sex only 2-3 times a year.

Sheldon

Nancy Young wrote:
> "kuvasz guy" > wrote
>
> > What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who claim they
> > can't bake???
>
> Can't is a strong word. I don't have a knack for baking. Some people
> have the touch. I suppose if I was interested enough to practice a lot,
> perhaps it would be easier for me.
>
It's my fault for not being clear -- my point was that if a person
feels they are a poor baker, even though I know they aren't, why do
they often feel that modifying the recipe increases the odds for
success?

...fred

In article >,
"Nancy Young" > wrote:

> "kuvasz guy" > wrote
>
> > What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who claim they
> > can't bake???
>
> Can't is a strong word. I don't have a knack for baking. Some people
> have the touch. I suppose if I was interested enough to practice a lot,
> perhaps it would be easier for me.
>
> As it is, something that comes out great one time, next time it won't and
> you'll never figure out why, no matter how hard you try, can't get the
> bread to come out right, and not resemble a misshapen bowling ball
> in appearance and weight.
>
> Maybe the butter wasn't warm enough ... cool enough? Did you over-
> beat it? or ... was it humid that day?
>
> Most cooking, I find, is not so temperamental.
>
> nancy

As Chatty Cathy's cooking vs. baking question brought out on the RFC
website, they are two different things. People who have problems
following recipes make lousy bakers. That said, if you learn the rules
of baking you can figure out how to adapt.

The food science lab manual I used as an undergrad is a good reference
for baking and for cooking. It's called Dimensions of Food, and the
latest editions have been put together by my former colleague in Dallas,
Vicki Vaclavik.

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me

"Sheldon" > wrote

> Nancy Young wrote:

>> Maybe the butter wasn't warm enough ... cool enough? Did you over-
>> beat it? or ... was it humid that day?
>>
>> Most cooking, I find, is not so temperamental.
>
> With baking, like anything else one enters into with a negative
> attitude, failure becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Actually, I went into it with no idea there was any trick to it.
Experience beat me down.

> The only reason people are not good at baking is because they simply
> don't bake often enough to develop technique... if you bake bread every
> week you'll do well on a constant basis, but if you only bake bread
> like 2-3 times a year your results will be no bettrer than if you have
> sex only 2-3 times a year.

Heh, well, that's just it. I could see getting into bread baking. Good
enough to make *really* good bread? I don't think so. Cakes?
Really, I just don't usually need a cake, and I know this bakery?
Cookies, I like to make cookies. This guy I worked with told me
about my almond crescents, they were heavy because I overbeat the
butter. An Aha! moment. Lots to learn.

nancy

"Cindy Fuller" > wrote

> following recipes make lousy bakers. That said, if you learn the rules
> of baking you can figure out how to adapt.

Heh, perhaps that's it. I was never taught The Rules of Baking.
>
> The food science lab manual I used as an undergrad is a good reference
> for baking and for cooking. It's called Dimensions of Food, and the
> latest editions have been put together by my former colleague in Dallas,
> Vicki Vaclavik.

Sounds interesting. I'll look for it.

Did you say you had Ellie Krieger (sp) in your class? I thought that
was so interesting. She seems awfully nice.

nancy

"Cindy Fuller" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>
>> "kuvasz guy" > wrote
>>
>> > What is it with people who are perfectly fine cooks who claim they
>> > can't bake???
>>
>> Can't is a strong word. I don't have a knack for baking. Some people
>> have the touch. I suppose if I was interested enough to practice a lot,
>> perhaps it would be easier for me.
>>
>> As it is, something that comes out great one time, next time it won't and
>> you'll never figure out why, no matter how hard you try, can't get the
>> bread to come out right, and not resemble a misshapen bowling ball
>> in appearance and weight.
>>
>> Maybe the butter wasn't warm enough ... cool enough? Did you over-
>> beat it? or ... was it humid that day?
>>
>> Most cooking, I find, is not so temperamental.
>>
>> nancy
>
> As Chatty Cathy's cooking vs. baking question brought out on the RFC
> website, they are two different things. People who have problems
> following recipes make lousy bakers. That said, if you learn the rules
> of baking you can figure out how to adapt.
>
> The food science lab manual I used as an undergrad is a good reference
> for baking and for cooking. It's called Dimensions of Food, and the
> latest editions have been put together by my former colleague in Dallas,
> Vicki Vaclavik.
>
> Cindy

There are rules of baking? So what are these rules?

Ms P

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 20:24:39 -0500, "Nancy Young" >
wrote:
>
>Heh, well, that's just it. I could see getting into bread baking. Good
>enough to make *really* good bread? I don't think so. Cakes?
>Really, I just don't usually need a cake, and I know this bakery?
>Cookies, I like to make cookies. This guy I worked with told me
>about my almond crescents, they were heavy because I overbeat the
>butter. An Aha! moment. Lots to learn.
>
Bread baking is one of those things that I needed to be shown too. I
didn't know a lot of the tricks. I didn't even know what a properly
kneeded dough should look and feel like.

Fortunately, I had a neighbor who made bread and was willing to make
it with me one time. That's all I needed and was able to pick up the
rest from cooking shows after that.

--
See return address to reply by email

In article >,
"Nancy Young" > wrote:

> "Cindy Fuller" > wrote
>
> > following recipes make lousy bakers. That said, if you learn the rules
> > of baking you can figure out how to adapt.
>
> Heh, perhaps that's it. I was never taught The Rules of Baking.
> >
> > The food science lab manual I used as an undergrad is a good reference
> > for baking and for cooking. It's called Dimensions of Food, and the
> > latest editions have been put together by my former colleague in Dallas,
> > Vicki Vaclavik.
>
> Sounds interesting. I'll look for it.

It might be on amazon,com, or in the Rutgers bookstore.
>
> Did you say you had Ellie Krieger (sp) in your class? I thought that
> was so interesting. She seems awfully nice.
>
> nancy

Yes, I did. And she was a good student. I never seem to be at home
when her show is on, so I haven't seen it yet.

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me

Muddle wrote:

> If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.
> Most people think a pints a pound the world around.
> A pint of flour is never a pound of flour. You can throw together biscuits
> or pasta that way if you'd like, but little else.
>
I've never heard anyone suggest to thinking such a thing...?

Goomba38 said...

> Muddle wrote:
>
>> If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.
>> Most people think a pints a pound the world around.
>> A pint of flour is never a pound of flour. You can throw together
>> biscuits or pasta that way if you'd like, but little else.
>>
> I've never heard anyone suggest to thinking such a thing...?


What Goomba38 said!

Andy

"Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> Goomba38 said...
>
> > Muddle wrote:
> >
> >> If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.
> >> Most people think a pints a pound the world around.
> >> A pint of flour is never a pound of flour. You can throw together
> >> biscuits or pasta that way if you'd like, but little else.
> >>
> > I've never heard anyone suggest to thinking such a thing...?
>
>
> What Goomba38 said!
>
> Andy

592,000 hits on goolge for the phrase, "a pint's a pound the world around"!
A pint is 16 ounces of volume, while a pound is 16 ounces of weight. The
popular rhyme "A pint's a pound, the world around" can help you remember
this, but keep in mind that they're not really equivalent, especially when
applied to anything other than water.

"Muddle" > wrote in message
et...
> If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.


Don't be silly. You don't have to weigh anything to bake. Baking is NOT
precise! Compare recipes from different sources for the same thing and
you'll find all kinds of variations. If you had to be precise there
wouldn't be dozens of variations for the same thing.


Ms P

"ms_peacock" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Muddle" > wrote in message
> et...
> > If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.
>
>
> Don't be silly. You don't have to weigh anything to bake. Baking is NOT
> precise! Compare recipes from different sources for the same thing and
> you'll find all kinds of variations. If you had to be precise there
> wouldn't be dozens of variations for the same thing.
>
>
> Ms P
>
>
Ask anyone who actually bakes for a living! The only time they don't weigh
flour etc. is when the recipe they use calls for a 5 lb. bag which has
already been weighed. If you want to make a consistent product you have to
weigh the ingredients.
It's the reason your banana nut bread comes out perfect one year and sags in
the middle the next, while using the same recipe, oven, temp and time
settings.
Take two small bags of flour and dump one unsifted into a container, then
sift the other into a container and you'll see the difference. Other
factors can be the moisture content in the flour or the banana's moisture
content or the size of the banana etc.
I'm a male and took Home EC for males called Singles Living, because I was
going to college and even I learned that fact over 30 years ago.

ms_peacock wrote:

> Don't be silly. You don't have to weigh anything to bake. Baking is NOT
> precise! Compare recipes from different sources for the same thing and
> you'll find all kinds of variations. If you had to be precise there
> wouldn't be dozens of variations for the same thing.


Yes and no. In a professional bakery, ingredients are weighed. It
would be foolish to try to get a volume measure on 30 pounds of flour
and 20 pounds of sugar. If they did measure in quarts or gallons, they
would expect the quality of the product to be poor.


At a home kitchen (in the U.S.) most of us measure in cups and get good
results. After a few tries with the same recipe, you get good at
knowing what the batter or dough should look and feel like. You adjust
the amount of flour or liquid ingredients accordingly. That's certainly
imprecise.


(I made the banana cake recipe from Silver Palate cookbook last week,
didn't weigh my ingredients, and was pleased with the results-- though
it didn't taste strongly of banana. I had extra cream cheese frosting
and have been putting in on all manner of cookies and desserts.)


--Lia

Muddle wrote:
> "Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> > Goomba38 said...
> >
> > > Muddle wrote:
> > >
> > >> If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.
> > >> Most people think a pints a pound the world around.
> > >> A pint of flour is never a pound of flour. You can throw together
> > >> biscuits or pasta that way if you'd like, but little else.
> > >>
> > > I've never heard anyone suggest to thinking such a thing...?
> >
> >
> > What Goomba38 said!
> >
> > Andy
>
> 592,000 hits on goolge for the phrase, "a pint's a pound the world around"!
> A pint is 16 ounces of volume, while a pound is 16 ounces of weight. The
> popular rhyme "A pint's a pound, the world around" can help you remember
> this, but keep in mind that they're not really equivalent, especially when
> applied to anything other than water.

Also depends in which country, a pint in the US is less than a pint in
Canada.

Anyways, professional bakers do too weigh dry ingredients, and measure
wet ingredients by volume, ie. a gallon of fresh whole eggs
(professional bakers do not count eggs). But most times they don't
weigh or measure anything, or hardly anything... their recipes are
based on full package size, ie. 50lb sack of flour... typically a
commercial bakery recipe will call for multiple 50lb sacks of flour...
therefore the sugar will be in multiples of say 5lb sacks. shortening
in multiple #10 cans, and so on... most commercial recipes use the
entire container... it's no coinsidence that many basic ingredients are
packaged in stardardized sizes (especially canned goods)...
professional cooks and bakers instituted those amounts. Which is why
home cooks/bakers have so much trouble with measuring, their recipes
use *******ized quantities which are difficult to eyeball....
professionals don't use measuring cups/spoons, they don't even have any
in their kitchens. Professional cooks and bakers when they do measure
use the cans their ingredients come in, ie. a 6oz tomato paste can can
be used to scale both six ounces and three ounces... when the can is
tipped until the ingredient just touch the upper inner bottom and the
lower outer top then that is a half can or 3 ounces.... and so on with
8oz cans and other sizes. Bakers especially do not measure to minute
amounts, that's why many recipes call for "bench flour", professionals
always hold back some of each dry ingredient... they intuitively know
that they can always add more but can't take any out. And for small
quantites, like salt, baking powder, spices, they use their hands...
how do you think the bra cup size was instituted... it's not highly
accurate, does anyone really care that it's a C and1/2! hehehe

Sheldon

"Julia Altshuler" > wrote in message
. ..
> ms_peacock wrote:
>
> > Don't be silly. You don't have to weigh anything to bake. Baking is
NOT
> > precise! Compare recipes from different sources for the same thing and
> > you'll find all kinds of variations. If you had to be precise there
> > wouldn't be dozens of variations for the same thing.
>
>
> Yes and no. In a professional bakery, ingredients are weighed. It
> would be foolish to try to get a volume measure on 30 pounds of flour
> and 20 pounds of sugar. If they did measure in quarts or gallons, they
> would expect the quality of the product to be poor.
>
>
> At a home kitchen (in the U.S.) most of us measure in cups and get good
> results. After a few tries with the same recipe, you get good at
> knowing what the batter or dough should look and feel like. You adjust
> the amount of flour or liquid ingredients accordingly. That's certainly
> imprecise.
>
>
> (I made the banana cake recipe from Silver Palate cookbook last week,
> didn't weigh my ingredients, and was pleased with the results-- though
> it didn't taste strongly of banana. I had extra cream cheese frosting
> and have been putting in on all manner of cookies and desserts.)
>
>
> --Lia
>

"though it didn't taste strongly of banana" Freeze your bananas before
baking with them. The result is an over ripe banana which has more flavor
and is not rotten. The outer skin turns black when frozen.

"Muddle" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "ms_peacock" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Muddle" > wrote in message
>> et...
>> > If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.
>>
>>
>> Don't be silly. You don't have to weigh anything to bake. Baking is NOT
>> precise! Compare recipes from different sources for the same thing and
>> you'll find all kinds of variations. If you had to be precise there
>> wouldn't be dozens of variations for the same thing.
>>
>>
>> Ms P
>>
>>
> Ask anyone who actually bakes for a living!

It's true. My mother was a superb baker, and the one thing she
told me she attributed her success to was careful measuring.

Muddle wrote:

> "though it didn't taste strongly of banana" Freeze your bananas before
> baking with them. The result is an over ripe banana which has more flavor
> and is not rotten. The outer skin turns black when frozen.


Hmm. Interesting idea. How do I thaw the bananas for baking?
Microwave? Leave overnight in the fridge? I'd been thinking that some
sort of banana oil extract was in order. Then I realized that all I
wanted was a good cake, and I got that. No one needed to know it was
supposed to taste of banana.


--Lia

"Muddle" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "ms_peacock" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Muddle" > wrote in message
>> et...
>> > If your going to bake you have to weigh the ingredients.
>>
>>
>> Don't be silly. You don't have to weigh anything to bake. Baking is NOT
>> precise! Compare recipes from different sources for the same thing and
>> you'll find all kinds of variations. If you had to be precise there
>> wouldn't be dozens of variations for the same thing.
>>
>>
>> Ms P
>>
>>
> Ask anyone who actually bakes for a living! The only time they don't
> weigh
> flour etc. is when the recipe they use calls for a 5 lb. bag which has
> already been weighed. If you want to make a consistent product you have
> to
> weigh the ingredients.
> It's the reason your banana nut bread comes out perfect one year and sags
> in
> the middle the next, while using the same recipe, oven, temp and time
> settings.
> Take two small bags of flour and dump one unsifted into a container, then
> sift the other into a container and you'll see the difference. Other
> factors can be the moisture content in the flour or the banana's moisture
> content or the size of the banana etc.
> I'm a male and took Home EC for males called Singles Living, because I was
> going to college and even I learned that fact over 30 years ago.
>

So. We weren't talking about a bakery either. *I* can bake just fine
without weighing anything. People baking at home do not *have* to weigh
anything nor do they have to be all that precise to have good results.

I'm a female and have been baking since I was 16 and have never weighed a
damn thing.

Ms P

"ms_peacock" > wrote
> I'm a female and have been baking since I was 16 and have never weighed a
> damn thing.
>

OH, now I get you. You weren't saying you don't have to measure, just that
you don't have to WEIGH.

Of course you don't!

Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Muddle wrote:
>
> > "though it didn't taste strongly of banana" Freeze your bananas before
> > baking with them. The result is an over ripe banana which has more flavor
> > and is not rotten. The outer skin turns black when frozen.
>
>
> Hmm. Interesting idea. How do I thaw the bananas for baking?
> Microwave? Leave overnight in the fridge? I'd been thinking that some
> sort of banana oil extract was in order. Then I realized that all I
> wanted was a good cake, and I got that. No one needed to know it was
> supposed to taste of banana.

Freezing won't make bananas riper, in fact freezing will keep bananas
from ripening further. If you're going to be using bananas in a few
days and they are becoming too ripe too quickly then place in the
fridge, unpeeled... then they won't need to be thawed. But frozen
bananas are good too... peel, dip in chocolate and roll in chopped nuts
if you like, or leave plain and then wrap in waxed paper twisting both
ends like a giant hard candy. Frozen bananas will keep for many
months. They are eaten frozen,like an ice cream bar, but contain far
fewer calories, contain practically no fat and no salt.... frozen
bananas make a great healthful snack... and a stash of frozen bananas
are very handy for when making smoothies.

Sheldon

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "ms_peacock" > wrote
>> I'm a female and have been baking since I was 16 and have never weighed a
>> damn thing.
>>
>
> OH, now I get you. You weren't saying you don't have to measure, just that
> you don't have to WEIGH.
>
> Of course you don't!

You definitely don't have to weigh ingredients and measurements don't have
to be precise either. Recipes for baked goods didn't start having exact
measurements until cookbooks started becoming common around the beginning of
the 1900s. Before then people used what ever was handy to measure with. If
you'll read really old cookbooks the measurements will be things like a
"teacup" or a "knob of butter."

Ms P

Oh pshaw, on Mon 13 Nov 2006 01:07:43p, Julia Altshuler meant to say...

> ms_peacock wrote:
>
>> You definitely don't have to weigh ingredients and measurements don't
>> have to be precise either. Recipes for baked goods didn't start having
>> exact measurements until cookbooks started becoming common around the
>> beginning of the 1900s. Before then people used what ever was handy to
>> measure with. If you'll read really old cookbooks the measurements
>> will be things like a "teacup" or a "knob of butter."
>
>
> On the other hand, we don't know how those early recipes came out. It
> is possible that a number of those cakes were runny on the inside or too
> dry. Maybe a sauce came out perfectly one time and a disaster the next.
>
>
> I'd like to draw a distinction between measuring precisely with a
> kitchen scale or measuring cups and measuring by eye and feel. Those
> can be precise too. Someone who is experienced at making a particular
> recipe might not bother getting out a scale to weigh a pound of flour or
> might not bother dirtying a measuring spoon for a teaspoon of cinnamon,
> but they might be using exactly a pound or a teaspoon because the amount
> "just looked right." In other words, there's not necessarily a
> distinction at all. Using scales, cups and "what looks right" can all
> amount to the same thing.

That's absolutely true. I watched my grandmother make cakes and breads
many times without using any instrument of measure, and her results were
absolutely always wonderful. I measure precisely for baking cakes, but
rarely for breads, pies, or pastries. I rarely ever end up with anything
that isn't as good as I expect.

--
Wayne Boatwright @¿@¬
_____________________

ms_peacock wrote:

> You definitely don't have to weigh ingredients and measurements don't have
> to be precise either. Recipes for baked goods didn't start having exact
> measurements until cookbooks started becoming common around the beginning of
> the 1900s. Before then people used what ever was handy to measure with. If
> you'll read really old cookbooks the measurements will be things like a
> "teacup" or a "knob of butter."


On the other hand, we don't know how those early recipes came out. It
is possible that a number of those cakes were runny on the inside or too
dry. Maybe a sauce came out perfectly one time and a disaster the next.


I'd like to draw a distinction between measuring precisely with a
kitchen scale or measuring cups and measuring by eye and feel. Those
can be precise too. Someone who is experienced at making a particular
recipe might not bother getting out a scale to weigh a pound of flour or
might not bother dirtying a measuring spoon for a teaspoon of cinnamon,
but they might be using exactly a pound or a teaspoon because the amount
"just looked right." In other words, there's not necessarily a
distinction at all. Using scales, cups and "what looks right" can all
amount to the same thing.


--Lia

Julia Altshuler wrote:

> Hmm. Interesting idea. How do I thaw the bananas for baking?
> Microwave? Leave overnight in the fridge? I'd been thinking that some
> sort of banana oil extract was in order. Then I realized that all I
> wanted was a good cake, and I got that. No one needed to know it was
> supposed to taste of banana.

I don't freeze them, I just use the ones that have been sitting around
too long and are dark and very ripe. I also almost always toss in more
banana than the recipe calls for. I have never made a bad batch of
banana bread!

* Exported from MasterCook *

Banana Nut Bread

Recipe By :MindiAnn Butler, Wuerzburg Germany American Red Cross
Serving Size : 1 Preparation Time :0:00
Categories : Breads

Amount Measure Ingredient -- Preparation Method
-------- ------------ --------------------------------
2 cups flour
1 teaspoon baking soda
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/2 cup shortening
1 cup sugar
2 eggs, well beaten
1 teaspoon lemon juice
1 1/2 cups mashed bananas
1/2 cup broken nuts (pecans or walnuts)

Preheat oven to 350 degrees
Sift together flour, soda, salt. Set aside.
In large bowl cream shortening and sugar. Add eggs an beat well.
Add lemon juice and bananas. Slowly add flour mixture in to banana
mixture until all is blended smooth.
Stir in nuts and blend well.
Bake in greased loaf pan for 1 hour

Goomba38 wrote:

> Julia Altshuler wrote:
>
> > Hmm. Interesting idea. How do I thaw the bananas for baking?
> > Microwave? Leave overnight in the fridge? I'd been thinking that some
> > sort of banana oil extract was in order. Then I realized that all I
> > wanted was a good cake, and I got that. No one needed to know it was
> > supposed to taste of banana.
>
> I don't freeze them, I just use the ones that have been sitting around
> too long and are dark and very ripe.


They really don't need to be "thawed" as such, their texture is pretty soft.
I'll run them under warm water for a moment to make peeling a bit easier,
that's all that is needed. I use mine primarily for smoothies, I just break
them in half and chuck them in the blender, nothing could be easier...

For a cake you might leave them out to soften for a few minutes so's they'll
be easy to mix, that's all that would be needed...

--
Best
Greg

"Sheldon" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Julia Altshuler wrote:
> > Muddle wrote:
> >
> > > "though it didn't taste strongly of banana" Freeze your bananas
before
> > > baking with them. The result is an over ripe banana which has more
flavor
> > > and is not rotten. The outer skin turns black when frozen.
> >
> >
> > Hmm. Interesting idea. How do I thaw the bananas for baking?
> > Microwave? Leave overnight in the fridge? I'd been thinking that some
> > sort of banana oil extract was in order. Then I realized that all I
> > wanted was a good cake, and I got that. No one needed to know it was
> > supposed to taste of banana.
>
> Freezing won't make bananas riper, in fact freezing will keep bananas
> from ripening further. If you're going to be using bananas in a few
> days and they are becoming too ripe too quickly then place in the
> fridge, unpeeled... then they won't need to be thawed. But frozen
> bananas are good too... peel, dip in chocolate and roll in chopped nuts
> if you like, or leave plain and then wrap in waxed paper twisting both
> ends like a giant hard candy. Frozen bananas will keep for many
> months. They are eaten frozen,like an ice cream bar, but contain far
> fewer calories, contain practically no fat and no salt.... frozen
> bananas make a great healthful snack... and a stash of frozen bananas
> are very handy for when making smoothies.
>
> Sheldon
>
Technically they might not be ripe, however the exterior skin turns black
and the texture and taste after thawing is that of an extremely ripe banana
without the bruises normally associated with one. I've two bunches in my
freezer right now, as I use them to make deserts for the holidays.

Sheldon wrote:

....more amateur bullshit.

> Anyways, professional bakers do too weigh dry ingredients, and measure
> wet ingredients by volume, ie. a gallon of fresh whole eggs
> (professional bakers do not count eggs).

Professional bakers weigh *everything* - all dry ingredients
and all wet ingredients, including water.

> But most times they don't
> weigh or measure anything, or hardly anything... their recipes are
> based on full package size, ie. 50lb sack of flour... typically a
> commercial bakery recipe will call for multiple 50lb sacks of flour...
> therefore the sugar will be in multiples of say 5lb sacks. shortening
> in multiple #10 cans, and so on... most commercial recipes use the
> entire container...

Shecky has said this before and was just as full of crap as
ever. Here are many foodservice recipes. Notice that they
don't use "the entire container" like he thinks. Even when
he was the pride of the US Navy cooking in a galley, they
didn't use "the entire container." I have the cookbook he
used back then, and it's not designed to use "the entire
container." Military cookbooks are designed for portion
numbers, so recipes will be for 50 or 100. There's no intent
to use "the entire container."

Here's a professional baker's site.
<http://www.progressivebaker.com/formulas/index.shtm>

This is a bad email graphic representation of a professional
recipe. It's "American Harvest Bread," the first one in the
list on the web page above - check it out on the page to
see how they look for real. Note how there's not even a hint
of "the entire container" of anything. Ingredients are
carried out to two decimal places. Hey, Shecky, bite on this
"entire container."

Formula provided by The Bread Bakers Guild of America
Ingredients
Std Weight (oz) Metric Wt. Baker's %
Grain Soaker
Rye Chops 7.21 oz .202 kg 23%
Cracked Wheat 7.21 oz .202 kg 23%
Polenta 3.96 oz .111 kg 13%
Water 12.93 oz .362 kg 41%
Total 1 lb 15.31 oz .877 kg

Cranberry Soaker
Dried Cranberries 10.11 oz .283 kg 84%
Orange Juice 1.93 oz .054 kg 16%
Total 12.04 oz .337 kg

White Levain
Bread Flour 13.71 oz .384 kg 100%
Water 6.86 oz .192 kg 50%
Stiff Levain 1.43 oz .040 kg 10.5%
Total 1 lb 6 oz .616 kg

Final Dough
Bread Flour 3.4 lbs 1.534 kg 87.8%
Medium Rye Flour 7.61 oz/div> .213 kg 12.2%
Water 2.8 lbs 1.257 kg 72%
Salt 2.07 oz .058 kg 3.3%
Yeast .43 oz .012 kg 0.7%
Honey 1.82 oz .051 kg 2.9%
Orange Juice 2.68 oz .075 kg 4.3%
Wild Rice,Cooked 1 lb .475 kg 27.2%
Cranberry Soaker 12.04 oz .337 kg 19.3%
Grain Soaker 1.9 lbs .877 kg 50.2%
White Levain 1.9 lbs .878 kg 50.3%
Total 12 lbs 10.65 oz 5.767 kg

Recipes written with percentages mean that scaling them is a
simple matter. Total flour weight is always given as 100% -
in this recipe, it's the combination of bread flour and
medium rye flour. Everything else is given as a percentage,
by weight, of the weight of the flour. Very simple
arithmetic - divide the weight of any other thing by the
total weight of flours and there it is. *Everything* else
including water, eggs, honey, juices or anything else.
There's no formulating "by eye" in a professional baking
operation.

This means that if you wanted to double or halve the recipe,
as long as you keep the percentages constant, it's the same
recipe. No guesswork, no estimating, no "eyeball" involved.

And see how he goes on even when he hasn't the foggiest
notion what he's burbling about...?

> it's no coinsidence that many basic ingredients are
> packaged in stardardized sizes (especially canned goods)...
> professional cooks and bakers instituted those amounts.

Oh, bullshit. Cans, bottles, jars, boxes, etc. were designed
by package makers. Check out John Sexton's role in can
sizes. Here's a chart of "standardized" can sizes. Notice
how precisely they fit all the recipes you know...
<http://gourmetsleuth.com/cansizesequivalents.htm> Moron...
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_can>

<LOL> So kitchen people designed these can sizes?
<http://www.cancentral.com/standard.cfmhttp://www.cancentral.com/standard.cfm>
Moron.

> Which is why
> home cooks/bakers have so much trouble with measuring, their recipes
> use *******ized quantities which are difficult to eyeball....
> professionals don't use measuring cups/spoons, they don't even have any
> in their kitchens. Professional cooks and bakers when they do measure
> use the cans their ingredients come in, ie. a 6oz tomato paste can can
> be used to scale both six ounces and three ounces... when the can is
> tipped until the ingredient just touch the upper inner bottom and the
> lower outer top then that is a half can or 3 ounces.... and so on with
> 8oz cans and other sizes.

Blah, blah, blah... Check what Cookie Katz says against a
recipe that a professional would use - above - and see how
reliable his pronouncements are.

I can't begin to imagine what kind of professional bakery he
fantasizes about that uses 6-ounce cans of anything. Wet
ingredients used in professional bakeries come in 5-gallon
pails, and on up to 55 gallon drums. Some seriously big
operations get tankers.

> Bakers especially do not measure to minute
> amounts, that's why many recipes call for "bench flour", professionals
> always hold back some of each dry ingredient... they intuitively know
> that they can always add more but can't take any out. And for small
> quantites, like salt, baking powder, spices, they use their hands...

Notice how, above, they exactly *don't* "use their hands"
but a very accurate scale. Moron Shecky has not the remotest
idea of how critical professional kitchens are about
formulations, nor about the sheer volume of materials that
flow through in any given day. 6-ounce cans, indeed. But
what to expect from a senile ex-Navy cook?

We used to bake 70 dozen rolls a day. 20 to 30 pies a day.
20 dozen biscuits a day. 200 to 300 cookies a day. 40
baguettes. 30 loaves of signature sandwich breads. 15 to 30
cakes a day. 50 bread bowls for soups and chili. And other
custom baked goods for banquets and catering events. While I
have no doubt that it could all fit into Sheldon's mouth at
once, it's more than he's baked in his entire amateur cook's
life.

Pastorio