[Sca-cooks] citations on sour dough from the OED

[Chris Stanifer]

--- Terry Decker <t.d.decker at worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> If sourness was the sole standard of quality, then your dead starter would 
> make the finest loaf of sourdough around. 

Well, like I said in response to Master A's comment on the subject, a sourdough without yeast will
drop faster than a 16-year old's underpants on Prom Night.  And, if you doubt it, you didn't go to
school in my neighborhood.  :)

I believe this debacle started when you mentioned that the term sourdough does not refer to a sour
taste in the dough (or words close to that effect), but rather the 'souring' of the starter.  I
responded with the polite-society equivvelant of 'hogwash'.  My original contention was that the
term 'sourdough' implies, quite explicitly, a sour taste in the finished product, not that yeast
was unimportant.  However, when you get down to brass tacks (which is where we seem to have found
ourselves), when you are speaking in terms of true sourdough, a distinctly sour taste is a mark of
quality in the bread.  Perhaps not the sole standard of quality, but certainly hand-in-glove.


 Or add citric acid to and dough 
> and be done with it.


Now, that's just cheating....

  Simply being sour does not make a sourdough.  (If you 
> haven't managed to make a loaf of sourdough which sucks in all regards other 
> than sour, you haven't been baking very long.  In 40 years, I've had some 
> spectacular failures.)


LOL!  Maybe I haven't been trying hard enough (or trying too hard)???

> 
> The standard for quality is the loaf; crust, crumb and flavor.  Light enough 
> that it doesn't set like lead in the stomach, slightly heavier than average 
> breads with a nice chewy crust and excellent flavor (from the pungent 
> sourness of San Francisco to a very mild tang that dances on the palate). 
> All sourdoughs are not the same and it is the amazing variation that I find 
> appealing.


I don't dispute the last part.  However, you'll notice that all sourdoughs have at least some
level of sourness, whether it be pungent, or a Tangy Dancer (tm).  Usually, however, these are
variations on the classic sourdough.



> 
> One of the points you have been trying to make is that sourdough is a 
> continuous use starter.  It is impossible to keep lactobacilli out of a 
> continuous use starter and once there, they will add acid to the mixture and 
> produce some level of sourness in the bread due to the acidity.  Whether or 
> not the sourness is noticable as sour is determined by the type of 
> lactobacilli in the starter and the palate of the diner.  In general when 
> the term starter is used, a continuous starter which is fed and flucuates 
> between aerobic and anaerobic is what is meant.


Right. However, when making a starter specifically *for* classic sourdough bread, it is just this
pungency which you are looking to culture.


> A fine, spirited defense of your opinions and some interesting arguments. 
> Good work.  If you want to consider sourdough recipes, baking or chemistry, 
> trot some out.
> 
> Bear

Thanks for the invite.  I'll do just that in a few.... starting with my Sourdough Grassinni
recipe, which is delicious right out of the oven, sucks the next day, but gets even better the day
after that...

I'll also submit my theories on why you should not wrap frshly baked bread in a freshly laundered
towel (unless you don't use laundry soap), and why bread always tastes better when stored in a
wooden box...

William de Grandfort

=====
Through teeth of sharks, the Autumn barks.....and Winter squarely bites me.


	
		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail