Hi all,
I've been using Carl's starter here in Ireland very happily for almost
a year... However, although I'm still making OK bread, I've noticed
the character of my loaves has changed significantly over that time,
and not for the better, even though I'm still using the same
ingredients and method. The crust has lost some of the amazing crunchy-
chewy quality, and although my dough still rises beautifully on the
first prove, it isn't nearly as lively or consistent in the bake.

I was reading up on the good old web trying to figure out why this
might be, and came across the following statement:

"(an imported starter) will eventually lose its potency and flavor.
Why? Because ... a mail order San Francisco sourdough starter ...
contains lactic acid bacteria that aren't adapted to living in
climates that aren't their own. Eventually they'll be out-competed by
whatever local lactic acid bacteria that happen to live on your end of
the block"

The suggestion being that my starter is in fact no longer pure Carl's,
but some hybrid colony of local squatters who gradually evicted Carl's
bacteria without me noticing.

I was just wondering, do people agree with this statement - that long
term use of a non-native starter is doomed to eventual failure. Should
I make up a fresh starter from Carl's original magic powder every so
often to keep the true Carl character in my bread?

Or can anyone suggest other reasons why my bread isn't as good as it
used to be?

Many thanks for your help.

"rockbeer" > wrote in message oups.com...

> The crust has lost some of the amazing crunchy-
> chewy quality, and although my dough still rises beautifully on the
> first prove, it isn't nearly as lively or consistent in the bake.

> [ ... ]

> can anyone suggest other reasons why my bread isn't as good as it
> used to be?

Possibly something about your oven -- could the thermostat need to
be recalibrated (or a correction table compiled)?

The relative humidity of the atmosphere in which the loaves are cooled
is very important. Real dry --> crackly crusts. Cool it sealed in a
plastic bag and you get elastic (soggy) crusts.

Why not try some new Carl's after considering those possibilities?

I think it is safe to say that the SD culture used has very little, if anything
at all, to do with the physical characteristics of the resultant loaves,
assuming of course that it is a decent culture.

But of course you will get some advice here, probably up to, and
including, about the phase of the moon.

--
Dicky

On May 10, 3:44 am, rockbeer > wrote:

> although my dough still rises beautifully on the
> first prove...

Which indicates the starter is healthy and doing it's thing...

> it isn't nearly as lively or consistent in the bake.

Which suggests: a) the oven is not performing, b) you're over-
proofing.
or c) the quality of your NG has changed. Those North Sea fields
aren't what they used to be.

rockbeer wrote:
> I've been using Carl's starter here in Ireland very happily for almost
> a year... However, although I'm still making OK bread, I've noticed
> the character of my loaves has changed significantly over that time,
> and not for the better, even though I'm still using the same
> ingredients and method. The crust has lost some of the amazing crunchy-
> chewy quality, and although my dough still rises beautifully on the
> first prove, it isn't nearly as lively or consistent in the bake.
>
I'd look at how you are feeding it. When a sourdough starter is at room
temperature, it should be fed twice a day, and fed enough to double its
size. So, if you have 100 grams of starter, you need to add 50 grams
each of water and flour. If you have a cup of starter, you need to add
about 1/2 cup of water and 3/4 cup of flour.

If you aren't using the starter, refrigerating it allows you to avoid
the twice a day feedings.

Feeding it less will cause problems in my experience.

> I was reading up on the good old web trying to figure out why this
> might be, and came across the following statement:
>
One of the sad things about the net is that anyone can put up a web page
and say anything they want. Apricot pits cure cancer. The Martians
have landed. Lee Harvey Oswald shot J.R. Ewing. If you touch your
starter with a metal spoon, you must immediately discard all the starter
and begin over.

One of the recurring myths about sourdough is that "I moved from San
Francisco to Boise and my culture was taken over by local critters, and
it just ISN'T THE SAME!" I (almost) never argue with observations, but
I often argue with the causes.

Yes, when people move, their starters often behave differently. However,
there are a number of things to consider. While folklore has it that
when you put flour and water outside critters in the air start the
culture, there is a lot of reason to believe what started the culture
was the critters already on the flour. The concentration of
micro-organisms on the flour is MUCH higher than in the air. Dr. Ed.
Wood had some flour irradiated so it was absolutely sterile so he could
catch a native sourdough culture in Egypt for an article in National
Geographic. Dr. Wood is an experienced sourdough person, but when he
sterilized the flour, his success rate at starting cultures dropped from
near certainty to over 90% failure. A few people in rec.food.sourdough
tried the poor-man's version of this experiment. They mixed flour with
boiling water. Again, they went from a 90% success rate to a 90%
failure rate. The conclusion is, while it is possible to start a
culture from the air, it is far more likely that a culture is started
from the flour.

Next, most "natural" cultures have a number of yeast strains and
lactobacillus bacteria strains in them. One strain of each is usually
dominant by several orders of magnitude. In Germany, bakers get
cultures from biological supply houses that have one strain of yeast and
one strain of bacteria. And they usually get a new culture every week.
While interesting, you can make good, and consistent, bread without
being quite that Teutonic.

Next, the concentration of yeast and bacteria in a healthy culture is
much higher than the concentration on yeast. They've been cultivated.

If few starters are actually started from the air, it seems that it is
very unlikely that critters from the air could take over a healthy
starter. Similarly, the critter count in a healthy starter compared to
on flour makes it unlikely that the critters on the flour could take
over a healthy starter. In short, if you've been taking good care of
your starter, it is unlikely that stray critters could take it over.
Also, the conditions between San Francisco and Reykjavik aren't that
different for a sourdough starter. The bacteria are swimming in a mix
of flour and water, at something approaching room temperature.

So, where do the observed changes come from? I think there are two
major causes of starter drift. Here's one....

French farmers feed their geese special foods to change the taste of the
geese's livers and thus the taste of the pate made from the livers.
Hunters in some parts of the country prize boars that have been feeding
on acorns. And many mothers will tell you that when they eat some foods
their nursing infants react to it. If larger animals are affected by
what they eat, is it at all surprising that small animals are also
affected? Many bakers will tell you that if you want to duplicate
another baker's bread, don't worry about his sourdough culture, find out
what kind of flour he's using.

If you want to see major changes in your culture, start feeding your
starter whole wheat or rye flour. Even changes of flour within the same
type will affect the taste of the breads, though the changes aren't as
obvious. When a culture is moved from San Francisco to Boise, it's
pretty likely that it is no longer being fed the same flour, and most
likely the changes observed are due to changes in the flour being used.

The other one gets back to the observation that we don't have pure
cultures. If you change the feeding schedule and regiment, or have a
sub-optimum feeding schedule and regimen, you can favor organisms that
are in the minority, to the detriment of the formerly dominant strains.
One fairly common occurrence is when a starter isn't fed for a whole
strains of bacteria that can digest protein become dominant. This
causes dough to become slack very quickly. Adding more flour to thicken
the dough doesn't really work well. The starter also changes aroma, and
has a smell like fingernail polish remover, or acetone. Sadly, this
change is not easy to reverse. I've tried and I've talked to others who
have tried, and the common view is, "its time to get, or start, a new
culture." There are less catastrophic changes as well.

However, much of this paragraph also comes under the heading of, "if you
have a healthy starter, it is unlikely that foreign micro-organisms can
take it over." A healthy sourdough culture is very stable and very well
protected. Lactobacillus bacteria reduce the pH of the starter (or
increase the acidity) to a point where few organisms can survive in it.
Dr. Gaenzle says that bakers yeast added to a sourdough culture will be
dead within two feedings of the starter. According to Dr. Wood, the
lactobacillus produce 50 identified compounds that all act to kill off
foreign bacteria and yeasts. When the culture is healthy, it is hard
for any stray critters to take it over.

My suggestions are to get a fresh starter and see if your bread becomes
more like what you used to make. If so, work on putting together a
better feeding schedule and regimen for your starter. Think of your
starter as a pet or a child and remember it needs to fed regularly.

Hope that helps,
Mike

--
Mike Avery mavery at mail dot otherwhen dot com
part time baker ICQ 16241692
networking guru AIM, yahoo and skype mavery81230
wordsmith

A Randomly Selected Thought For The Day:
Foolproof operation: All parameters are hard coded.

rockbeer wrote:
[..]
> I was reading up on the good old web trying to figure out why this
> might be, and came across the following statement:
>
> "(an imported starter) will eventually lose its potency and flavor.
> Why? Because ... a mail order San Francisco sourdough starter ...
> contains lactic acid bacteria that aren't adapted to living in
> climates that aren't their own. Eventually they'll be out-competed by
> whatever local lactic acid bacteria that happen to live on your end of
> the block"

Well, that goes down the lines of urban legend in that there is some
interest either in gaining a commercial or "fame" benefit from claiming
the SF or any other locality stuff is special and won't grow elsewhere.

Honor with this also goes to one SF poster on this forum claiming:

"I'm told our starters are different"

without being able to substantiate anything.

My experience with this:

Moving my starter in form of a moist face mask from 1600' 20 % humidity
Colorado to 0' and 300' 80+ % humidity Brazil, reviving with no problem
and making bread with local flours (FG rye, wheat + gluten) with very
similar results - taste, crumb, crust & all on three different occasions.

> The suggestion being that my starter is in fact no longer pure Carl's,
> but some hybrid colony of local squatters who gradually evicted Carl's
> bacteria without me noticing.

By neglecting your starter, other organisms can move in - molds, red-ish
color coating on hooch, loosing ability to become sour etc.

That's not the starter's fault nor is the cause a change of location on
this planet.

> I was just wondering, do people agree with this statement - that long
> term use of a non-native starter is doomed to eventual failure. Should
> I make up a fresh starter from Carl's original magic powder every so
> often to keep the true Carl character in my bread?
>
> Or can anyone suggest other reasons why my bread isn't as good as it
> used to be?

It is possible to change the properties of a starter by using minute
changes in temperature and hydration consistently over time and change
the balance of the two main organisms (a yeast and a LB bacteria).

This method is used to create a robust starter with this process:
http://samartha.net/SD/procedures/DM3

A starter grown too warm will loose it's yeast component over time and
only LB's will be dominant which will change the starter's
characteristics significantly.

If you don't have a fairly strict regiment of feeding, storing and
reviving your starter, the properties will change over time in an
unpredictable way. That has nothing to do with the location you are.

The only way to keep your starter stable is by keeping your procedure
stable.

The other issue with white flour starters is that they are fairly
inexpressive and get oversour quickly due to a low buffering capacity.
That means that you may be harming your starter unintentionally because
it "looks ok" - i. e. white goo where in reality, it is already too sour
and suffering although it does not really taste very sour. I think that
full grain based starters are safer in this aspect.

Samartha

Many thanks for the interesting and extremely detailed replies. Much
food for thought.

The consensus certainly seems to be that geography has nothing to do
with it. (That makes sense to me, but it's good to have some well
thought out reasons to back up my instincts.) So it's time to start
looking for other causes.

I'd wondered about the oven, it doesn't seem to be cooking anything
quite as well as it used to - but the inconsistency makes it very hard
to pin it down precisely. And a new oven is out of the question at
present so I'm just going to have to live with that one.

Other environmental factors are certainly fair game for consideration.
My golden age was through last summer. Once the winter came both the
starter and my doughs definitely became more sluggish as you would
expect, so I compensated by moving them around to warmer places. Which
was fine, but now summer's nearly here again yet they've never
regained their original vigour. If I start out with a brand new batch
I'll definitely try to establish a permanent home for them where
things are stable whatever time of year.

Feeding is probably the big one. My starter has lived at room
temperature all this time, but I've never fed it twice a day, and
often it only gets fed every two days. I didn't think this was a
starvation diet for it as it always seemed to respond well when fed
and baking was going well. But obviously I'll have to look at that
again, maybe try and get some kind of fridge thing going for it as I
can't imagine being together enough for twice daily feedings.

Do other folk feed their room temp starters that often?

Anyway, looks like it's time to start from scratch. Many thanks again
for the thoughts.

Cheers for now,
Bruce

rockbeer wrote:
> I'd wondered about the oven, it doesn't seem to be cooking anything
> quite as well as it used to - but the inconsistency makes it very hard
> to pin it down precisely. And a new oven is out of the question at
> present so I'm just going to have to live with that one.
>
Your best investment might be an oven thermometer. They cost about
$5.00 in the USA. Oven thermostats are notorious for being inaccurate
and for drifting. I'd put one in and check the temperature several
times throughout a bake. You may be surprised at what your oven is doing.
> Other environmental factors are certainly fair game for consideration.
> My golden age was through last summer. Once the winter came both the
> starter and my doughs definitely became more sluggish as you would
> expect, so I compensated by moving them around to warmer places. Which
> was fine, but now summer's nearly here again yet they've never
> regained their original vigour. If I start out with a brand new batch
> I'll definitely try to establish a permanent home for them where
> things are stable whatever time of year.
That's also an issue. The ideal temperature for (most) dough
development is about 78F. The rule of 240 lets one make doughs that are
about that temperature. The simplified version is to subtract the room
temperature and the flour temperature from 240, the result being your
water temperature. In most kitchens, water temperature is the easiest
thing to control.

Darn if I know why I thought you were in Iceland, on re-reading your
note I see I mis-took the r for a c. That eliminates a number of water
quality questions.

Feeding is probably the big issue. Back in the olden days, sourdough
stayed out at room temperature all the time, but it was used at least
once a day, often several times a day. As a result, it was fed often
and was happy.

Mike

--
Mike Avery mavery at mail dot otherwhen dot com
part time baker ICQ 16241692
networking guru AIM, yahoo and skype mavery81230
wordsmith

Once seen on road signs all over the United States:
His crop of
Whiskers
Needed reaping
That's what kept
His Lena leaping
Burma-Shave

Samartha Deva wrote:
> rockbeer wrote:
> [..]
>> I was reading up on the good old web trying to figure out why this
>> might be, and came across the following statement:
>>
>> "(an imported starter) will eventually lose its potency and flavor.
>> Why? Because ... a mail order San Francisco sourdough starter ...
>> contains lactic acid bacteria that aren't adapted to living in
>> climates that aren't their own. Eventually they'll be out-competed by
>> whatever local lactic acid bacteria that happen to live on your end of
>> the block"
>
> Well, that goes down the lines of urban legend in that there is some
> interest either in gaining a commercial or "fame" benefit from claiming
> the SF or any other locality stuff is special and won't grow elsewhere.
>
> Honor with this also goes to one SF poster on this forum claiming:
>
> "I'm told our starters are different"

Nice snip out of context.

One wonders why you're so interested in me and my doings. After all,
you aren't on the case of someone else in this group who claims to have
two particular starters of particular provenance.

B/

Samartha Deva wrote:

> Honor with this also goes to one SF poster on this forum claiming:
>
> "I'm told our starters are different"
>
> without being able to substantiate anything.

Not doing isn't the same as not able.

You don't pay my mortgage. I don't owe you, or any other garden-variety
troll anything.

B/

"Brian Mailman" > wrote in message ...
> I don't owe you, or any other garden-variety
> troll anything.

Do you know -- that is very insulting to be referred
to as "garden variety"?

--
Dicky

Brian Mailman wrote:


> One wonders why you're so interested in me and my doings.

_You_ pretend to wonder - right?

You caught my attention on this newsgroup because you appear to peddling
your starter to anyone asking here for an original SF starter:

> Newsgroups: rec.food.sourdough
> From: Brian Mailman >
> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:07:28 -0800
> Local: Sun, Oct 26 2003 11:07 am
> Subject: Starter Request
> If you want a SF starter (I live in the center of the City, so it really
> really is) write to me and I'll give you instructions on where to send
> the SASE...

As I found out now, the lack of proof that your starter contains indeed
the LB SF has been pointed to you about 2 years ago on this newsgroup
and you responded in the same obnoxious way as you are doing now.

If you "caught" our starter close to the center of SF - what flour did
you use? Where was it coming from?

Can't find SF on this map:

http://www.mapsofworld.com/usa/thema...wing-area.html

So - apparently, your starter was grown with flour from an area far from
SF.

Since it is accepted opinion that the organisms for a new starter are
coming from the flour, your starter organisms then cannot be of SF origin.

I would accept a starter from an established SF bakery as an original SF
starter - or the one from SDI. But yours appears to be a "self grown" at
the center of SF and the only reference I could find was that a friend
of yours is using it on whole grain flours.

If you really have proof that your starter has the LB SF's and would
qualify as an original SF starter, not just by growing a starter from
flour at your residence, you would have shown it long time ago and
blasted all suspicions out of existence.

So please, show what you have to support that your starter has the LB
SF's and therefore can be called "really really" a SF starter as people
would expect when asking for a SF sourdough starter.

> After all,
> you aren't on the case of someone else in this group who claims to have
> two particular starters of particular provenance.

Haven't figured out yet that things rarely run as expected ;-)

Samartha

On 10 May, 14:01, Will > wrote:

> or c) the quality of your NG has changed...

Yes there's too much spam and too many tolls these days. <g>


Jim

On 10 May, 21:44, rockbeer > wrote:
> Many thanks for the interesting and extremely detailed replies. Much
> food for thought.
>
....>
> Feeding is probably the big one. My starter has lived at room
> temperature all this time, but I've never fed it twice a day, and
> often it only gets fed every two days. I...
> Bruce

Hi Bruce,

>From what you've said about your feeding schedule I would say without
doubt that there's your problem. In December 05 I decided to give
feeding out on the counter all the time a go. It was fine for a few
weeks or so but then it started to go down hill. I was just about to
ask here if anyone thought they had any ideas when about 20 voices in
my head shouted you're not feeding enough. I was feeding equal parts
starter, water and enough flour for a thick batter once a day. I
looked around for advice, most folks said how much they fed, some said
how often they fed but very few said both in the same post. So I
looked what Dicky suggested in his instructions.doc. I didn't need to
look any further.

Doing this out on the counter thing was the best thing I ever did, I
learned so much about my starter that way. Now I feed no less than
1:10 - starter : water in a twelve hour period and my starter is doing
great. Most of the time it's in the fridge chugging along very slowly,
then I hoick it out and build it up ready for baking if I haven't
baked for a week. Then every now and then it gets a holiday on the
counter for a beefing up.

Good luck

Jim

On 11 May, 03:37, Brian Mailman > wrote:
> Samartha Deva wrote:
> > Honor with this also goes to one SF poster on this forum claiming:
> You don't pay my mortgage. I don't owe you, or any other garden-variety
> troll anything.
>
> B/

Hi Brian,

My Dad's family is Scottish and my Mum's part Irish and part East
European, but I was born and raised in the North of England so the
British Government seems to think that's good enough to give me a
British passport and have me called English. Where the flour comes
from for your starter is neither here nor there I'd have thought. Okay
so it might not be the same as the starter from SDI but since this
whole think is a bit of a romantic notion anyway; why shouldn't you
sell people what they want? I really don't see how you are in anyway
deceiving anyone. Nothing anywhere is ever inherently this or that,
not even the SDI starter nor any starter from any San Franciscan
bakery. That isn't to say it doesn't have any designated meaning or
value. My 'Englishness' is not inherent (nor is anyone's) but I am
nonetheless designated 'English'. Samartha needs to study the meaning
of reality a little more closely. Sorry Samartha I don't mean to be
rude but I can think of more important things you could channel your
sense of injustice into.

Jim

TG wrote:
> On 10 May, 14:01, Will > wrote:
>
>> or c) the quality of your NG has changed...
>
> Yes there's too much spam and too many tolls these days. <g>

rec.food.sourdough
Categories Recreation >Food
Usenet : rec.food
Language : English
Activity : Low <--------- poor you -

what would you do on higher activity - deflate?

S.

TG wrote:
....
> I really don't see how you are in anyway
> deceiving anyone. Nothing anywhere is ever inherently this or that,
> not even the SDI starter nor any starter from any San Franciscan
> bakery.

Apparently, you have read up on this. Seems that the SF bakeries are
very hesitant to give out samples of their starters, so nobody can claim
to have one.

But you are wrong with your "not even the SDI", look at their web site:

> We now offer the Original San Francisco culture and guarantee that
> the dominant organisms are those discovered by the California
scientists.

Assuming also you have read the Kline/Sugihara papers and derived from
this and the naming of the then discovered and superior lactobacillus
bacteria that the name "SF starter" is synonymous with a high quality
starter containing the SF LB's.

SF sourdough bread from SF bakeries which have been proven by scientific
research to be "the" superior sourdough organism have a name in public
perception and should have much more so on this NG.

So - if somebody (Brian Mailman) participates on this forum and peddles
his home-grown starter grown from flour of unknown origin repeatedly as
"SF" and "really really" being the real thing without being able to
substantiate in any way the presence of the essential organisms - you
don't see this as deceptive and even defend it?

Well....

What's your motivation - got nothing better to do?

Samartha

PS.: Please be rude if you feel the urge. Better to let it out now, and
- don't be sorry. On long term, holding it back may promote stomach
ulcers, heart disease and uncontrolled aggressive behavior towards others.

TG wrote:
> On 11 May, 03:37, Brian Mailman > wrote:
>> Samartha Deva wrote:

> Hi Brian,>

> Okay
> so it might not be the same as the starter from SDI but since this
> whole think is a bit of a romantic notion anyway; why shouldn't you
> sell people what they want?

I'm not selling anyone anything. They have it for free, only cost is a
SASE.

Samartha is lying.

B/

Samartha Deva wrote:
> Brian Mailman wrote:
>
>
>> One wonders why you're so interested in me and my doings.
>
> _You_ pretend to wonder - right?
>
> You caught my attention on this newsgroup because you appear to peddling
> your starter to anyone asking here for an original SF starter:

Liar. I'm not "peddling" anything.
>
>> Newsgroups: rec.food.sourdough
>> From: Brian Mailman >
>> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:07:28 -0800
>> Local: Sun, Oct 26 2003 11:07 am
>> Subject: Starter Request
>> If you want a SF starter (I live in the center of the City, so it really
>> really is) write to me and I'll give you instructions on where to send
>> the SASE...

TG wrote:

<snip>
>
> Doing this out on the counter thing was the best thing I ever did, I
> learned so much about my starter that way. Now I feed no less than
> 1:10 - starter : water in a twelve hour period and my starter is doing

1:10 - starter : water ? what about flour?
1:10 I guess 1 is starter
So what is the 10 in the (1 : 10)

Thanks, Joe Umstead


> great. Most of the time it's in the fridge chugging along very slowly,
> then I hoick it out and build it up ready for baking if I haven't
> baked for a week. Then every now and then it gets a holiday on the
> counter for a beefing up.
>
> Good luck
>
> Jim

Got an update in this context:

Brian - You got a winner!

Just claim you have it and say it's there, you guarantee it, just try it
out and you will see!

Works great in US sourdoughland and makes everyone happy!


Samartha Deva wrote:
> But you are wrong with your "not even the SDI", look at their web site:
>
>> We now offer the Original San Francisco culture and guarantee that
> > the dominant organisms are those discovered by the California
> scientists.

Out of this follows a question:

> Subject: Your Original San Francisco Culture
> Dear Madam or Sir,
>
> I am interested in your "Original San Francisco Culture" and see on your web site that you offer the authentic starter:
>
>> We now offer the Original San Francisco culture and guarantee that
>> the dominant organisms are those discovered by the California scientists.
>
> Could you please send me more information - how do you guarantee this?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Samartha

Answer:

> Hi Smartha:
>
> The question you ask is highly proprietary and I cannot give you the answer.
> Try the culture and I think you will agree.
>
> Ed Wood


This white SF starter game is too stupid for me - I stick with my brown
stuff.

I think, the Carl's should be analyzed and steal the show.

Bye,

Samartha

On 11 May, 19:38, Brian Mailman > wrote:
..
>
> I'm not selling anyone anything. They have it for free, only cost is a
> SASE.
>
> Samartha is lying.
>
> B/

I thought so.

Jim

On 11 May, 15:57, Samartha Deva <sdnews-inbox-EEE-
> wrote:
> TG wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > I really don't see how you are in anyway
> > deceiving anyone. Nothing anywhere is ever inherently this or that,
> > not even the SDI starter nor any starter from any San Franciscan
> > bakery.

>
> But you are wrong with your "not even the SDI", look at their web site:

Samartha You should read what I wrote again. Which bit of which
starter is inherent? If you are talking about the presence of a
lactobacillus designated Lactobacillus sf. it is merely designated so
because it was first isolated from an San Franciscan culture. It is
not endemic to San Francisco and I'm sure there are starters in and
made in San Francisco by San Franciscan bakers that do not contain
that same lactobacillus isolated and called so. But I really don't
think that is the point S. As you know full well. If you don't look up
inherent in a good dictionary.


> So - if somebody (Brian Mailman) participates on this forum and peddles
> his home-grown starter grown from flour of unknown origin repeatedly as
> "SF" and "really really" being the real thing without being able to
> substantiate in any way the presence of the essential organisms - you
> don't see this as deceptive and even defend it?
>
> Well....
>
> What's your motivation - got nothing better to do?

My motivation S is to perhaps in god knows how many years you might
just wake up and learn to let go.
>
> Samartha
>
> PS.: Please be rude if you feel the urge. Better to let it out now, and
> - don't be sorry. On long term, holding it back may promote stomach
> ulcers, heart disease and uncontrolled aggressive behavior towards others.

Why do you want me to be rude Samartha? Does it turn you on? I'm more
than able to deal with my feelings towards you Samartha. I don't have
any problem with you in the slightest but you seem to have to take a
slice out somebody on a regular basis. Thing I can't understand is
there doesn't seem to be any cause from the other person. I don't know
why you had to attack Brian here. I'm not defending Brian, he's more
than able to do that himself. But for your own good you should chill
out.

Jim

On 11 May, 20:51, Joe Umstead > wrote:
> TG wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > Doing this out on the counter thing was the best thing I ever did, I
> > learned so much about my starter that way. Now I feed no less than
> > 1:10 - starter : water in a twelve hour period and my starter is doing
>
> 1:10 - starter : water ? what about flour?
> 1:10 I guess 1 is starter
> So what is the 10 in the (1 : 10)
>
> Thanks, Joe Umstead
>

I didn't specifically say the flour Joe because some people weigh and
others use volume, I figured that you'd add the flour as you normally
would. The water is the same by weight or volume, at least in relation
to a stirred starter for what matters.

Jim

On 11 May, 15:40, Samartha Deva <sdnews-inbox-EEE-
> wrote:

> Categories Recreation >Food
> Usenet : rec.food
> Language : English
> Activity : Low <--------- poor you -
>
> what would you do on higher activity - deflate?
>
> S.

What? lol, Good grief Samartha. Either I'm missing something or you're
really grasping.

Breathe Samartha, count down from 10 to 1. Smile. Give yourself a hug.
You know mate there's only one person pushing your buttons. You might
think it's me but I can only do what you give me permission to do. If
you have a problem with Brian why don't you take it up with Brian off
list. You don't have to make it public. We all know what depths you'll
stoop to for your own gratification. But the only person you're
hurting mate is yourself. Let it go. Its bread, there are bigger
issues in this world that would benefit from your energy and
inteligence. Think about you being happy rather than thinking about
****ing other people off.

Jim

On Fri, 11 May 2007 02:58:09 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
wrote:

>> I don't owe you, or any other garden-variety
>> troll anything.
>
>Do you know -- that is very insulting to be referred
>to as "garden variety"?

So what kind of a troll is she then?

TG wrote:
....
> Which bit of which
> starter is inherent? If you are talking about the presence of a
> lactobacillus designated Lactobacillus sf. it is merely designated so
> because it was first isolated from an San Franciscan culture. It is
> not endemic to San Francisco and I'm sure there are starters in and
> made in San Francisco by San Franciscan bakers

Ah - you are sure? What is your reason to be sure - any other evidence
than your - my guess: "feeling"?

From the Kline/Sugihara/McCready paper:

"In commercial practice, the starter sponge is rebuilt about every 8
hours or at least two to three times a day, seven days a week.
Presumably, it has been carried in this fashion for 100 years, although,
we can guess only, how it got started originally".

So - that's a solid SF bakery by my standards.

> that do not contain
> that same lactobacillus isolated and called so.

No, I have a different opinion - it's been researched by Spicher,
Stephan... as the most potent (acid production, crumb structure, crumb
elasticity and taste) LB organism. And if the bakeries where the K/S/M
got their samples from had the LB SF, they sure made some good stuff.
The LB SF is a quality criteria by my measures and the name is synonymous

(checking....)

synonymous adj. gleichbedeutend
synonymous adj. sinnverwandt
synonymous adj. synonym
synonymous with sth. mit etw. gleichzusetzen

Yupp! fits.

to quality San Francisco starter/bread.

I can't help you if it does not fit your frame of mind.

Maybe you understand this:

The LB SF is the holeiness of sourdough. If somebody claims to have SF
sourdough without proof (coming from an established source *), grown in
his/her kitchen it's blasphemy.

(checking...)

blasphemy die Blasphemie
blasphemy die Gotteslästerung
blasphemy das Lästern
blasphemy die Schmähung

Yupp! fits.

So - in essence, something very dishonorable to do on the SD NG.

*) - source being an established (SF) SD bakery or - the other source I
know are German sourdough vendors, they lab-analyze their stuff.

> But I really don't
> think that is the point S. As you know full well. If you don't look up
> inherent in a good dictionary.

inherent adj. angeboren
inherent adj. anhaftend
inherent adj. inhärent
inherent adj. innewohnend
inherent adj. rechtmäßig gehörend

- in essence "belonging to" - looks ok and appropriate to me. And with
that, I sure "don't know full well". What I said, stands - if you agree
or not.

> My motivation S is to perhaps in god knows how many years you might
> just wake up and learn to let go.

oh ghee, there you go again, tape....

Can't you just drop that crap - punk!

(checking....)

....

- not strong enough, but nothing better in that language, maybe if Clint
Eastwood spits it out, it would fit, so think it expressed in those
terms. If you don't know it, get the movie - punk!

Samartha

TG wrote:
> On 11 May, 15:40, Samartha Deva <sdnews-inbox-EEE-
> > wrote:
>
>> Categories Recreation >Food
>> Usenet : rec.food
>> Language : English
>> Activity : Low <--------- poor you -
>>
>> what would you do on higher activity - deflate?
>>
>> S.
>
> What? lol, Good grief Samartha. Either I'm missing something or you're
> really grasping.

hmmmpfff!!! yes! ;-) you're making my day! Very predictable and always
dependable:

Input -> programming tape loads, runs -> output

It's a beauty!

S

Andrew Price wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2007 02:58:09 GMT, "Dick Adams" >
> wrote:
>
>>> I don't owe you, or any other garden-variety
>>> troll anything.
>> Do you know -- that is very insulting to be referred
>> to as "garden variety"?
>
> So what kind of a troll is she then?

Forest

- and who is "she"?

S.

On 12 May, 23:27, Samartha Deva <sdnews-inbox-EEE-
> wrote:
....
> oh ghee, there you go again, tape....
>
> Can't you just drop that crap - punk!
>
> (checking....)
>
> ...
>
> - not strong enough, but nothing better in that language, maybe if Clint
> Eastwood spits it out, it would fit, so think it expressed in those
> terms. If you don't know it, get the movie - punk!
>
> Samartha

Samartha,

you've really flipped. You still haven't got my point, the only point
that I'm concerned with since it's the point over which I got involved
with your attack on Brian.

You're not even funny. I really am so not bothered what Kline/Sugihara/
McCready et al, think or have done. As far as I'm concerned if Brian
made his starter while in San Francisco than I'm satisfied that it's
San Franciscan, just as if I had a child here in London it would be a
Londoner. I'm not obsessed about the things I can't see and need some
guy in a lab to tell me about. I have enough confidence in myself and
my appreciation for what my starter can do not to have to hang on
every syllable of some guy I've never met. Now if he can bake great
bread I might listen but names for little bugs you can't see. I don't
think it's that important for what I want out of it nor to Brian's
starter's authenticity.

Jim

On 12 May, 23:31, Samartha Deva <sdnews-inbox-EEE-
> wrote:
....s a beauty!
>
> S

It's like catching someone abusing himself Samartha. It's all a bit
too personal, self involved and just a bit yucky.

Do your self a favour Samartha, don't show the world.

Jim

TG wrote:

> You still haven't got my point

You are mistaken, I understand your point (and Brians), think they are
inadequate and have a different viewpoint, as I hopefully made clear
enough so it can be understood.

Samartha

On Sat, 12 May 2007 18:08:32 -0600, Samartha Deva
> wrote:

>> So what kind of a troll is she then?
>
>Forest

Oh, that's all right then. Much better class of troll than the urban
riff-raff !

> - and who is "she"?

Old age contriving with innate stupidity, such that I read "Samantha"
rather than "Samartha". Toutes mes excuses ...