OK, when melting chocolate or using a double boiler for just about
anything else, there is always the admonition to set the top pan *above*
the water level in the bottom pan. Why can't that top pan touch the
boiling (or simmering or hot or whatever temp) water? Is it going to
be THAT much hotter on the meltable if it does?

Thenkyew.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
"Maligning an individual says more about you than the one you malign."

http://web.mac.com/barbschaller; blahblahblog - Peanutless Peanut
Brittle and Nancy's Hungarian Short Ribs 11-30-2006

http://jamlady.eboard.com

One time on Usenet, Melba's Jammin' > said:

> OK, when melting chocolate or using a double boiler for just about
> anything else, there is always the admonition to set the top pan *above*
> the water level in the bottom pan. Why can't that top pan touch the
> boiling (or simmering or hot or whatever temp) water? Is it going to
> be THAT much hotter on the meltable if it does?

Yes, it is. You don't want the upper pan as hot as the water, just
as hot as the heat coming off of the water. Chocolate is very easy
to burn...

--
Jani in WA

Hi,

Chocolate is a delicate thing to melt. It is pretty unlikely that the
chocolate will get hot enough to burn in a double boiler, as can happen
in a microwave (did that once).

It is more important to not let the water get into the chocolate. When
water gets into melted chocolate, especially small amounts, the
chocolate will bind to the water. It is the same thing that happens
when you drop small amounts of water into sugar. Some sugar clumps
around the water.

Using the least amount of water necessary makes it easier to control
where water goes when boiling.

Andy

Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> OK, when melting chocolate or using a double boiler for just about
> anything else, there is always the admonition to set the top pan *above*
> the water level in the bottom pan. Why can't that top pan touch the
> boiling (or simmering or hot or whatever temp) water? Is it going to
> be THAT much hotter on the meltable if it does?
>
> Thenkyew.
> --
> -Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
> "Maligning an individual says more about you than the one you malign."
>
> http://web.mac.com/barbschaller; blahblahblog - Peanutless Peanut
> Brittle and Nancy's Hungarian Short Ribs 11-30-2006
>
> http://jamlady.eboard.com

amh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Chocolate is a delicate thing to melt. It is pretty unlikely that the
> chocolate will get hot enough to burn in a double boiler, as can happen
> in a microwave (did that once).
>
> It is more important to not let the water get into the chocolate. When
> water gets into melted chocolate, especially small amounts, the
> chocolate will bind to the water. It is the same thing that happens
> when you drop small amounts of water into sugar. Some sugar clumps
> around the water.
>
> Using the least amount of water necessary makes it easier to control
> where water goes when boiling.
>
> Andy
>
> Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> > OK, when melting chocolate or using a double boiler for just about
> > anything else, there is always the admonition to set the top pan *above*
> > the water level in the bottom pan. Why can't that top pan touch the
> > boiling (or simmering or hot or whatever temp) water? Is it going to
> > be THAT much hotter on the meltable if it does?
> >
> > Thenkyew.
> > --
> > -Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
> > "Maligning an individual says more about you than the one you malign."
> >
> > http://web.mac.com/barbschaller; blahblahblog - Peanutless Peanut
> > Brittle and Nancy's Hungarian Short Ribs 11-30-2006
> >
> > http://jamlady.eboard.com
I don't think the chocolate binds to the water- water makes chocolate
seize. And yes, the pan can touch the water, but keep stirring- take
chocolate out of water bath when it is about 75%melted, and stir until
melted- you don't want the temperature much over 100

Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> OK, when melting chocolate or using a double boiler for just about
> anything else, there is always the admonition to set the top pan *above*
> the water level in the bottom pan. Why can't that top pan touch the
> boiling (or simmering or hot or whatever temp) water? Is it going to
> be THAT much hotter on the meltable if it does?
>
> Thenkyew.

No, I think it is because it keeps the steam lower. Even steam, and
water drops can ruin an entire batch of chocolate.

Goomba38 wrote:
> Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> > OK, when melting chocolate or using a double boiler for just about
> > anything else, there is always the admonition to set the top pan *above*
> > the water level in the bottom pan. Why can't that top pan touch the
> > boiling (or simmering or hot or whatever temp) water? Is it going to
> > be THAT much hotter on the meltable if it does?
> >
> > Thenkyew.
>
> No, I think it is because it keeps the steam lower. Even steam, and
> water drops can ruin an entire batch of chocolate.
You are right about the steam...The water shouldn't be hot enough to be
putting out a lot of steam, tho

Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> OK, when melting chocolate or using a double boiler for just about
> anything else, there is always the admonition to set the top pan *above*
> the water level in the bottom pan. Why can't that top pan touch the
> boiling (or simmering or hot or whatever temp) water? Is it going to
> be THAT much hotter on the meltable if it does?

Yes. The water vapor (it's not steam if you can see it)
won't be as "hot" as boiling water. The temperature is the
same, but the amount of energy available at any given moment
to the bottom of the boiler is less because it's a vapor;
it's mixed with air so the transfer occurs with a much less
dense medium. And you want it simmering, not boiling. In
fact, when I do chocolate this way, I bring the water to a
boil with the top section in place and then I take it off
the heat. Dump in the shaved chocolate and stir right from
the git-go. I usually just plop a big stainless bowl on top
of a big saucepan and treat it like a DB.

So, yes, you want it not to touch. You don't want part of
the chocolate at 190F and the rest at 86F. You don't want it
to feel hot to the touch. It'll harden dull and granular if
it is too hot. Ideally, about 120F is the hottest chocolate
should ever be unless it's mixed with other stuff that
minimizes the damage to the chocolate.

Don't get any water in the melting chocolate. I assume you
know that already.

Happy candy...

Pastorio

In article >,
"Bob (this one)" > wrote:
> Don't get any water in the melting chocolate. I assume you
> know that already.

I soitanly did. :-) I've worked with the stuff before (though not, I'm
pretty sure, real chocolate) and am aware of the seizure. :-)

Thanks, Row-behr-to.

> Happy candy...

We'll see. Stay tuned.
>
> Pastorio
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
"Maligning an individual says more about you than the one you malign."

http://web.mac.com/barbschaller; blahblahblog - Peanutless Peanut
Brittle and Nancy's Hungarian Short Ribs 11-30-2006

http://jamlady.eboard.com

"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
...
> OK, when melting chocolate or using a double boiler for just about
> anything else, there is always the admonition to set the top pan *above*
> the water level in the bottom pan. Why can't that top pan touch the
> boiling (or simmering or hot or whatever temp) water? Is it going to
> be THAT much hotter on the meltable if it does?
>
> Thenkyew.
> --
> -Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
> "Maligning an individual says more about you than the one you malign."
>
> http://web.mac.com/barbschaller; blahblahblog - Peanutless Peanut
> Brittle and Nancy's Hungarian Short Ribs 11-30-2006
>
> http://jamlady.eboard.com

In a word, yes. The water, even at a simmer, could burn the bottom of the chocolate,
which would be a waste of God's most perfect creation. And it should be at a simmer,
not boiling at all.

kimberly