I've made this recipe many times. The layers didn't rise as much as they should have - but I made sure they weren't undercooked before I took them out.. That is, they passed the toothpick test, even though they seemed a bit sticky later on, when we were eating it.

Since I assume that baking soda doesn't lose its potency that easily (even though it was not in a tightly sealed container), what else could be the reason? Should I have simmered the milk/butter/chocolate mixture longer, until it thickened more, before mixing in the flour? Could the cheap brand of bittersweet chocolate have had anything to do with it?

BTW, I ALWAYS sift the dry ingredients before mixing them in.

Thanks.


Lenona.

On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 12:05:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

> I've made this recipe many times. The layers didn't rise as much as they should have - but I made sure they weren't undercooked before I took them out. That is, they passed the toothpick test, even though they seemed a bit sticky later on, when we were eating it.
>
> Since I assume that baking soda doesn't lose its potency that easily (even though it was not in a tightly sealed container), what else could be the reason? Should I have simmered the milk/butter/chocolate mixture longer, until it thickened more, before mixing in the flour? Could the cheap brand of bittersweet chocolate have had anything to do with it?
>
> BTW, I ALWAYS sift the dry ingredients before mixing them in.
>
> Thanks.
>
If everything else is up to date, it's your baking soda. Once was
enough for me. No reason for your baking to go wrong just because
something that cost less than $1 is old. That's why I label mine on
the day I open it - use it for every cleaning purpose that comes up
and replace it after a year.

--

sf

On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 12:46:40 PM UTC-7, sf wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 12:05:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
> > I've made this recipe many times. The layers didn't rise as much as they should have - but I made sure they weren't undercooked before I took them out. That is, they passed the toothpick test, even though they seemed a bit sticky later on, when we were eating it.
> >
> > Since I assume that baking soda doesn't lose its potency that easily (even though it was not in a tightly sealed container), what else could be the reason? Should I have simmered the milk/butter/chocolate mixture longer, until it thickened more, before mixing in the flour? Could the cheap brand of bittersweet chocolate have had anything to do with it?
> >
> > BTW, I ALWAYS sift the dry ingredients before mixing them in.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> If everything else is up to date, it's your baking soda. Once was
> enough for me. No reason for your baking to go wrong just because
> something that cost less than $1 is old. That's why I label mine on
> the day I open it - use it for every cleaning purpose that comes up
> and replace it after a year.
>
> --
>
> sf

what she said.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 12:05:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
> > I've made this recipe many times. The layers didn't rise as much as they
> > should have - but I made sure they weren't undercooked before I took them
> > out. That is, they passed the toothpick test, even though they seemed a bit
> > sticky later on, when we were eating it.
> >
> > Since I assume that baking soda doesn't lose its potency that easily (even
> > though it was not in a tightly sealed container), what else could be the
> > reason? Should I have simmered the milk/butter/chocolate mixture longer,
> > until it thickened more, before mixing in the flour? Could the cheap brand
> > of bittersweet chocolate have had anything to do with it?
> >
> > BTW, I ALWAYS sift the dry ingredients before mixing them in.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> If everything else is up to date, it's your baking soda. Once was
> enough for me. No reason for your baking to go wrong just because
> something that cost less than $1 is old. That's why I label mine on
> the day I open it - use it for every cleaning purpose that comes up
> and replace it after a year.

Are you guys confusing baking *powder*, which does wear out, with baking
*soda*, which should not?

There are easy ways to test baking powder for potency; google around.

Isaac

"isw" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 12:05:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>>
>> > I've made this recipe many times. The layers didn't rise as much as
>> > they
>> > should have - but I made sure they weren't undercooked before I took
>> > them
>> > out. That is, they passed the toothpick test, even though they seemed a
>> > bit
>> > sticky later on, when we were eating it.
>> >
>> > Since I assume that baking soda doesn't lose its potency that easily
>> > (even
>> > though it was not in a tightly sealed container), what else could be
>> > the
>> > reason? Should I have simmered the milk/butter/chocolate mixture
>> > longer,
>> > until it thickened more, before mixing in the flour? Could the cheap
>> > brand
>> > of bittersweet chocolate have had anything to do with it?
>> >
>> > BTW, I ALWAYS sift the dry ingredients before mixing them in.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> If everything else is up to date, it's your baking soda. Once was
>> enough for me. No reason for your baking to go wrong just because
>> something that cost less than $1 is old. That's why I label mine on
>> the day I open it - use it for every cleaning purpose that comes up
>> and replace it after a year.
>
> Are you guys confusing baking *powder*, which does wear out, with baking
> *soda*, which should not?
>
> There are easy ways to test baking powder for potency; google around.
>
> Isaac

Both will get bad.

On Fri, 03 Jun 2016 20:47:57 -0700, isw > wrote:

> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 12:05:04 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
> >
> > > I've made this recipe many times. The layers didn't rise as much as they
> > > should have - but I made sure they weren't undercooked before I took them
> > > out. That is, they passed the toothpick test, even though they seemed a bit
> > > sticky later on, when we were eating it.
> > >
> > > Since I assume that baking soda doesn't lose its potency that easily (even
> > > though it was not in a tightly sealed container), what else could be the
> > > reason? Should I have simmered the milk/butter/chocolate mixture longer,
> > > until it thickened more, before mixing in the flour? Could the cheap brand
> > > of bittersweet chocolate have had anything to do with it?
> > >
> > > BTW, I ALWAYS sift the dry ingredients before mixing them in.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > If everything else is up to date, it's your baking soda. Once was
> > enough for me. No reason for your baking to go wrong just because
> > something that cost less than $1 is old. That's why I label mine on
> > the day I open it - use it for every cleaning purpose that comes up
> > and replace it after a year.
>
> Are you guys confusing baking *powder*, which does wear out, with baking
> *soda*, which should not?
>
> There are easy ways to test baking powder for potency; google around.
>

I am not confusing the two.

--

sf

On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 2:02:20 AM UTC-4, sf wrote:

> >
> > Are you guys confusing baking *powder*, which does wear out, with baking
> > *soda*, which should not?
> >
> > There are easy ways to test baking powder for potency; google around.
> >
>
> I am not confusing the two.


I didn't either. I know enough to keep baking powder sealed and in the freezer, but I thought I didn't have to be that careful with baking soda - and yes, that's all the recipe calls for.


Lenona.

On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 09:35:14 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

> On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 2:02:20 AM UTC-4, sf wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Are you guys confusing baking *powder*, which does wear out, with baking
> > > *soda*, which should not?
> > >
> > > There are easy ways to test baking powder for potency; google around.
> > >
> >
> > I am not confusing the two.
>
>
> I didn't either. I know enough to keep baking powder sealed and in the freezer, but I thought I didn't have to be that careful with baking soda - and yes, that's all the recipe calls for.
>
>
I didn't think I needed to worry about baking soda either, until it
failed on me... and I've paid attention to it ever since. It's less
than $1 to replace, so it's no big deal to buy a new one yearly.


--

sf

On 6/4/2016 11:35 AM, wrote:
> On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 2:02:20 AM UTC-4, sf wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Are you guys confusing baking *powder*, which does wear out, with baking
>>> *soda*, which should not?
>>>
>>> There are easy ways to test baking powder for potency; google around.
>>>
>>
>> I am not confusing the two.
>
>
> I didn't either. I know enough to keep baking powder sealed and in the freezer, but I thought I didn't have to be that careful with baking soda - and yes, that's all the recipe calls for.
>
>
> Lenona.
>
I had a cake fail a few years ago and when I looked at the ingredients
the only thing that looked like it *could* have been the culprit was the
baking soda that had expired many years earlier. I bought fresh and
remade the cake and it rose beautifully. Anecdotal, of course, but in
my experience baking soda can eventually lose its oooomph.

On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 12:41:38 PM UTC-5, dejamos wrote:
> On 6/4/2016 11:35 AM, wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 2:02:20 AM UTC-4, sf wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>> Are you guys confusing baking *powder*, which does wear out, with baking
> >>> *soda*, which should not?
> >>>
> >>> There are easy ways to test baking powder for potency; google around.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I am not confusing the two.
> >
> >
> > I didn't either. I know enough to keep baking powder sealed and in the freezer, but I thought I didn't have to be that careful with baking soda - and yes, that's all the recipe calls for.
> >
> >
> > Lenona.
> >
> I had a cake fail a few years ago and when I looked at the ingredients
> the only thing that looked like it *could* have been the culprit was the
> baking soda that had expired many years earlier. I bought fresh and
> remade the cake and it rose beautifully. Anecdotal, of course, but in
> my experience baking soda can eventually lose its oooomph.

Baking soda's "oomph" is it's alkalinity!

John Kuthe...

On 6/4/2016 1:41 PM, dejamos wrote:
> On 6/4/2016 11:35 AM, wrote:

>> I didn't either. I know enough to keep baking powder sealed and in the
>> freezer, but I thought I didn't have to be that careful with baking
>> soda - and yes, that's all the recipe calls for.

> I had a cake fail a few years ago and when I looked at the ingredients
> the only thing that looked like it *could* have been the culprit was the
> baking soda that had expired many years earlier. I bought fresh and
> remade the cake and it rose beautifully. Anecdotal, of course, but in
> my experience baking soda can eventually lose its oooomph.

I bought a book that arrived just this morning. Informative and
entertaining, it's The Food Lab by Kenji Lopez-Alt. I looked it
up, baking soda is good for 8 months to a year.

Baking powder, 6 months to a year, depending on humidity.

nancy

On 6/4/2016 1:01 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 6/4/2016 1:41 PM, dejamos wrote:
>> On 6/4/2016 11:35 AM, wrote:
>
>>> I didn't either. I know enough to keep baking powder sealed and in the
>>> freezer, but I thought I didn't have to be that careful with baking
>>> soda - and yes, that's all the recipe calls for.
>
>> I had a cake fail a few years ago and when I looked at the ingredients
>> the only thing that looked like it *could* have been the culprit was the
>> baking soda that had expired many years earlier. I bought fresh and
>> remade the cake and it rose beautifully. Anecdotal, of course, but in
>> my experience baking soda can eventually lose its oooomph.
>
> I bought a book that arrived just this morning. Informative and
> entertaining, it's The Food Lab by Kenji Lopez-Alt. I looked it
> up, baking soda is good for 8 months to a year.
>
> Baking powder, 6 months to a year, depending on humidity.
>
> nancy
>
>
Interesting that the times are so close. I have successfully used both
baking soda and baking powder that was older than a year, but that
particular box had expired over 3 or 4 years earlier, IIRC.

There probably is some loss of effectiveness after a year or so, but
nothing that I have ever noticed. I always kept a closer watch on how
old the baking powder was than the baking soda; it's good to know that I
should be keeping an eye on both.

I keep both in the freezer these days and refill small jars that I keep
in my cupboard.

On 6/4/2016 3:40 PM, dejamos wrote:
> On 6/4/2016 1:01 PM, Nancy Young wrote:

>> I bought a book that arrived just this morning. Informative and
>> entertaining, it's The Food Lab by Kenji Lopez-Alt. I looked it
>> up, baking soda is good for 8 months to a year.
>>
>> Baking powder, 6 months to a year, depending on humidity.

> Interesting that the times are so close. I have successfully used both
> baking soda and baking powder that was older than a year, but that
> particular box had expired over 3 or 4 years earlier, IIRC.
>
> There probably is some loss of effectiveness after a year or so, but
> nothing that I have ever noticed. I always kept a closer watch on how
> old the baking powder was than the baking soda; it's good to know that I
> should be keeping an eye on both.

I have seen cake failures attributed to old baking powder and soda,
it's a lot of work to not replace those cheap ingredients before
going to the effort to make this nice dessert.

> I keep both in the freezer these days and refill small jars that I keep
> in my cupboard.

Probably a good idea. I'm sure the effectiveness doesn't
drop off suddenly on the 6 month plus 1 day, but the gradual
ineffectiveness could diminish the results, plus who knows
how old this stuff is when you buy it.

nancy

On 6/4/2016 3:03 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 6/4/2016 3:40 PM, dejamos wrote:
>> On 6/4/2016 1:01 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>
>>> I bought a book that arrived just this morning. Informative and
>>> entertaining, it's The Food Lab by Kenji Lopez-Alt. I looked it
>>> up, baking soda is good for 8 months to a year.
>>>

:snip:

> I have seen cake failures attributed to old baking powder and soda,
> it's a lot of work to not replace those cheap ingredients before
> going to the effort to make this nice dessert.
>
>> I keep both in the freezer these days and refill small jars that I keep
>> in my cupboard.
>
> Probably a good idea. I'm sure the effectiveness doesn't
> drop off suddenly on the 6 month plus 1 day, but the gradual
> ineffectiveness could diminish the results, plus who knows
> how old this stuff is when you buy it.
>
> nancy
>
I agree, those two ingredients are so inexpensive that it makes no sense
not to replace them if there is any doubt as to their freshness.

BTW, The Food Lab looks like a great book. I have added it to my want
list.

On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 3:46:40 PM UTC-4, sf wrote:
> That's why I label mine on
> the day I open it - use it for every cleaning purpose that comes up
> and replace it after a year.

I was amazed to see at least a dozen different books for sale online about the many uses of baking soda!

I already use it for tooth brushing (it's a lot cheaper than toothpaste - plus, toothpaste tubes are not biodegradable). Plus drain cleaning and freezer odor removal.

And, if anyone's interested, there are at least two popular books called "Kitchen Science" (not to be confused with those books that have "kitchen" and "chemistry" in the titles - most of those are aimed at children).

Lenona.
Lenona.