From: bondc@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Clay M. Bond)
Subject: Re: Another bread flour question
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 10:39:31 GMT

In article <SMNMHHB@taronga.com> arielle@taronga.com (Stephanie da Silva) writes:

>I left that mixed-flour dough I made the other night sitting too
>long (I think I was reading news or something {guilty look}) but
>I thought it'd be okay.  When I finally got to it, the dough had
>collapsed.  That's okay, I thought.  It'll rise in the oven.
>
>Well, it didn't.  I ended up with some rather dense, slightly dry
>(albeit) tasty loaves of bread.

Ah yes, it happens to us all, but take heart; your bread is fine.
Try this the next time it happens, and it *should* work:

	When you let the bread proof too long and the rise
	collapses, punch down the dough, knead until the
	dough is pliable and feels alive (3 min. is enough)
	shape into loaves, cover and let rise till double
	in bulk (or whatever your recipe states).  Unless
	the yeast are dead, this will work (the kneading
	restores the gluten).  As Bernard Clayton says, bread
	is forgiving.  

>I did it again today -- left my bread dough out sitting too long.
>This dough didn't have any whole wheat flour in it though and by
>the time I punched it down, it had a rather remarked alcohol smell.
>It had been fermenting for a while.  I thought it was neat because
>that's how they used to make sourdough a long time ago, before they
>figured out what yeast was.  I haven't tasted any yet -- I hope it
>came out better than the wheat bread did.

And did it?  The smell of alcohol *could* be a bad thing; alcohol
kills yeast, you know.  Sourdoughs are a different ballgame, as
it's not only the yeast initially present that make the starter,
but more the microbes from the air--microbes which tolerate more
alcohol than yeast.

Btw, the alcohol smell has nothing to do with whether you used
white or non-white flour.  Nor does non-white flour necessarily
have less gluten than white flour, as non-white flours are made
from both hard and soft wheats.  The germ and bran particles do,
however, limit the ability of the gluten to expand--sort of like
somebody not being able to lift 100 pounds as high as 50 pounds.

>> I think that bread flour is simply another, *different*, product that 
>> can be marketed and sold to increase market share.  I'd pay much more 
>> attention to getting *good* flour than getting *bread* flour.
>
>Bread flour *is* a better flour.

For most breads, yes.  As far as "good" flour goes, standards are
so high for milling flour in the United States that even the
super budget cheapo generic flours are good--as good as anything
you'll find in Europe, certainly, if not better.  The rip-off is
the "natural foodstore" industry, which perpetuates ignorance and
myths about food in order to con people into paying exorbitant
prices for flour which is, in no way, superior to anything you
can buy on the shelves at Kroger.

>And dried yeast didn't become available to the home consumer 
>until after World War II!

I know people who will only use cake yeast, as they are misled
similarly to those who buy "good flour", and mistakenly believe
that there is something wrong with dried yeast.  When I was
baking for a living, every patisserie and boulangerie I worked in
used exclusively dried yeast, as it keeps longer and takes up
less space, but larger commerical bakeries often buy huge blocks
of cake yeast.

>Whole wheat flour has less gluten in it than all-purpose and therefore

Not necessarily.  Check the protein percentage on the side panel.

>Maybe you should try adding a little gluten flour to your mix and
>see if it makes any difference?

Better, do what peasants all over Europe (and the Americas) have
been doing for centuries: mix whole-wheat with white so you end
up with bread and not adobe.

-- 
"I like women too much to want to be a straight man."
                                                     -- John Fisher
Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking