CR -
This kind of posting is frowned upon here on TheChocolateLife. If you want to post a recipe the entire recipe, and any accompanying photography, MUST be posted here on TheChocolateLife. You should not post "teaser" links whose sole purpose is to drive traffic to your site.
Lisabeth:
I had my first dark-milk many years ago, one of the Slitti Latte-Nero family (they come in a variety of percentages) and I was immediately hooked. Dark milks are my favorite category of chocolates. The flavor intensity of a dark chocolate, the creaminess of a milk chocolate, and they're less sweet than a dark chocolate from the same bean/roast would be because lactose is less sweet than sucrose. I eat a lot of single-origin, two-ingredient chocolate, which requires attention. When I am looking for something to simply enjoy, dark-milks are the first place I think to reach.
People who know my history know my connection to Bonnat so when they introduced the 3, 65% dark-milks I immediately started using them as a tasting flight.
Your list is missing the 49% Felchlin Creole, a great offering from one of the best small chocolate makers - if not the best - in Switzerland.
I heve never heard of this type of tempering machine. Can you please post a link to it on the manufacturer's web site?
Matt:
What email did you use? (Send me it via private note so I can investigate.) I am surprised you got a bounce.
In any event, the class is NOT full and I will be happy to take a reservation for you.
:: Clay
Freddo, Sebastian -
I get asked the question about depositing thick chocolates (aka 2-ingredient chocolates, or chocolate with little or no added cocoa butter and/or lecithin) all the time. In fact, I - in conjunction with intrepid and stalwart customers - worked with FBM to develop upgrades to some of their continuous machines specifically to handle thick chocolate.
The basics are a heavier-duty motor in conjunction with a gear box at a different ratio to deliver more low-RPM torque driving the temepring auger, plus beefed up bearings to handle the load. These machines also offer the ability to change the speed of the tempering auger (increasing the dwell time in the tempering pipe results in more even spread of crystals through the chocolate) in 1% increments. Finally, through the use of a pneumatic valve that diverts the flow of chocolate, the continuous tempering cycle is never interrupted, as it is when the auger is stopped and started to regulate the flow for depositing. Taken together, this means that the FBM machines handle chocolates that other brands of continuous tempering machines struggle with.
That said, the smallest machine has a tempering capacity of up to 75kg/hr which is quite a bit more than 50kg/day. Assuming 4, 70gr cavities/mold and 2 molds/minute, that's a throughput of about 65kg/hr assuming you have enough molds and can work without interruption. That means you can do an entire week's worth of bar production in a single day rather than spending an hour or three every day molding bars.
I can tell you from experience - as can several users of these machines - that getting the dosing heads right for these high-viscosity chocolates can be a challenge.
FBM does have timed depositors on all of their machines, and we've found that the smaller machines can be used with two-ingredient chocolate, but it can take some finessing with the settings of the machine to get them to work consistently. We have chocolate makers using machines with 4 and 12kg working bowls successfully depositing 2-ingredient chocolate but it takes time and patience to dial in on the correct procedures. Over the past two years we've learned a lot about how to do it and do a pretty good job.
Something like a Savage melter will work but you'd want their measured doser, which has its own challenges with staying warm enough to keep the chocolate fluid ... but not too warm. If you don't use a measured depositor then you need to figure out an efficient way to fill the molds.
You could buy a volumetric depositor with a heated hopper. You want one cylinder per mold cavity for even dosing. The advantage is that these are incredibly accurate and can easily handle high-viscosity products. They work with an existing tempering machine, but the combination (e.g., Savage kettle and depositor with four heads) is going to cost close to $20k. FBM's Unica is in the same price range.
:: Clay
The competition will be accepting submissions until April 24. Judging will be held in the New York City area shortly thereafter. For information on eligibility, how to enter the competition and critical dates. visit the International Chocolate Awards website . The competition admission fee is USD $65 plus USD $40 for each entry.
And this year there are new categories for micro-batch chocolate makers. The categories were added to recognize the leading role that the U.S. craft chocolate scene has played in this world-wide movement.
The Americas Competition is one of 11 competitions taking place in 2015, with other regional rounds for France, Italy/Mediterranean, Belgium, Scandinavia, Eastern Europe, the United Kingdom, and Canada.
The World's Final judging will be in London in October.
Maricel Presilla, the awards co-founder and grand jury member, says in the four years since starting the Americas competition, the number of entries has continued to grow in number and quality. "The competition showcases the widespread revolutionary changes that have transformed the chocolate industry in the last two decades," Presilla says.
Judging for the Americas round takes place in NYC on April 28th and 29th. If would like to be considered to be a judge, please go to the judge registration page for more information and to sign up.
With the subtitle: "Why do specialty shops refuse to carry one of the best-known craft chocolate brands in the country?"
While "hate" is a very strong word that I don't agree with, it certainly has attracted a lot of attention and comment on Slate, Facebook, and other outlets.
Here's the link to the article and I recommend reading the comments before sharing your thoughts with ChocolateLife members.
Chocolato -
All For Sale Classifieds have been moved to TheChocolateLife.info. 30-day listings are $5 and 60-day listings are $10.
:: Clay
You are right about the math. Theoretical throughput is much higher. It was late and I was tired and dropped a zero. Anyway, most people I know who ask me for advice about belt width say they need 300mm or 400mm belts when they haven't thought through other issues that will determine the actual rate of production -- theoretical max throughput assumes absolutely no breaks in production which is only possible with fully automated lines.
You can buy neodymium magnets fairly cheaply and create your own finger or grate trap by using a bunch of them. The least expensive Eriez grate magnet I could find is over $600.
If you're using any sort of metal/metal grinder you probably also want to pump the chocolate through a magnetic trap to remove any metal particles. These are even more expensive than the grate magnets.
About ten years ago I was involved in a project to develop a software tool to help manage FDA 10k compliance for a Type 1 medical device (a device that comes in physical contact with a patient). It makes HACCP look like child's play. You have to have a written process in place that talks about how you document meetings where any product design decision even gets discussed incidentally. If you decide to change the company you source grub screws from you have to document that so that, if somehow the grub screw gets implicated in a patient safety report, you can figure out the who, why, where, how, and when the decision got made. FOR EVERYTHING.
While it's not necessary to go to these lengths, it makes a good deal of sense to have such a manual and to keep it up to date. It's exactly the sort of thing that inspectors - and insurance companies - love. A good plan could help you reduce insurance premiums.
First step: There is a manual. The first chapter (chapter zero, traditionally) in the manual talks about why there is a manual in the first palce, how to use it, who it covers, how training is done, how the efficacy of training is measured, and more.
In each chapter there is a revision history for the contents of the chapter. Everyone whose work is covered by that chapter has to sign off they they read the chapter, that they received the proper training, and that they understand what it means and how it has an impact on their work. Do not throw away pages that are outdated! There's a section in each chapter for deprecated pages, if there's an issue the inspector will want to see what changed.
One of the chapters covers cleaning procedures. Another avoiding cross-contamination. Another about the process of accepting beans and testing them when they come in. There's a separate chapter that is a compendium of test results (e.g., aW, cut tests on acceptance). Have everyone sign off on the fact that they received the proper training and know what to do. Of course, you need to actually do the training.
Keep the manuals in a prominent place and make sure the inspectors know where they are when they show up - and that they can see how serious you are about these issues.
Keep in mind also that if you are manufacturing chocolate from cocoa beans in the US that the FDA has some specific guidance for inspectors . Whatever you do (at least here in the US) this is basic stuff that you need to make sure you're paying attention to. One particular requirement is the use of magnets to remove metal in the pre-cleaning step, something that is often overlooked.
-- edited for typos and grammar --
Another thing to know is that there is small business exemption to the nutrition labeling requirements. You have to be under $50 million in sales, under 500 employees, and sell fewer than 100,000 units per product annually to qualify. All you need to do is apply, I don't think there is a fee.
I have issues with any group that promotes itself thusly:
As You Sow is a nonprofit organization that promotes environmental and social corporate responsibility through shareholder advocacy, coalition building, and innovative legal strategies .
Here's more info on their web site and read the full release:
 | AsYouSowRelease |
| AsYouSow-release.pdf, 410KB ∞ |
-- edited to add link to web site --
Care to share the link so that others can work with it as well?
Non-profit As You Sow notified the three firms after testing showed that traces of lead and cadmium in some of the companies' products, including ones from the Scharffen Berger (Hershey), Dove (Mars) and See's (Extra Dark Chocolate).
Allegedly, the products identified contain lead or cadmium above the single-serving safe harbor level for reproductive harm (or maximum daily allowable dose, MADL) and must be labeled as according to guidelines set forth in California's Prop 65. The article goes on to state specifically that the lead and cadmium are naturally-occuring and are not added during manufacturing processes.
As You Sow also notified more than a dozen other companies for allegedly failing to label heavy metal content properly, including Godiva, Ghirardelli, Lindt, Lake Champlain, Moonstruck, Theo, Trader Joe's Whole Foods, and Vosges.
What the suit fails to recognize is that many of the companies they are do not actually manufacture chocolate.
As You Sow asks that "manufacturers remove the heavy metals from their chocolate products altogether." Is there even technology that can do that?
Read the full article in ConfectioneryNews.com.
Hershey follows suit with a "simple ingredients pledge" and raises the bar (pun intended) just days after Nestlé's announcement.
Pledges to stop using artificial vanilla flavoring (vanillin), emulsifier PGPR, and HFCS; go non-GMO, gluten-free, and source milk freem from rBST in their milk chocolate and Kisses - in the US - by the end of 2015.
Source: ConfectioneryNews.com
Perhaps a more accurate headline would be: Nestle to remove artificial flavours in US chocolate candies . From the BBC News article:
Swiss food giant Nestle will be removing all artificial flavours and colours from its chocolate products in the US, the firm said on Tuesday.
Its US unit has promised to get rid of artificial flavours and government certified colours in more than 250 chocolates by the end of this year.
For example, the centre of its Butterfinger bars will now have annatto, which comes from the seeds found in the fruit from the achiote tree, instead of certified colours Red 40 and Yellow 5, it said in a statement on Tuesday.
"In CRUNCH, natural vanilla flavour will replace artificial vanillin."
There is no indication that they are going to do any work to improve the quality of the chocolate they use.
read the BBC article
read the Nestlé statement
How did your Kickstarter go?
Paul -
I am going to be vendor-neutral here and give you some information you can use to evaluate systems from a general perspective. Because I represent a specific manufacturer, and I don't used an enrober in a production environment, I am not going to offer my opinions of whether a particular belt is "better" than another. My impression, from watching people work, is experienced belt operators can accommodate to the specifics of any belt pretty quickly.
There are some things that would be really helpful to know when trying to answer this question for you. Chief among them is how many (per hour or day) of what kinds of things do you want to enrobe?
One thing to consider is that the bowl size of the continuous temperer is not the determining factor of throughput. If you want to enrobe (say) 250 pieces per hour and each piece requires 10gr of chocolate, then you only need 2.5kg of chocolate per hour. You don't need a machine with a 25kg capacity working bowl that can temper 75+ kilos of chocolate per hour because you are never going to get close to needing (or being able to use) that much chocolate.
Belt width does affect throughput, but only to a certain extent. Very quickly how the work needs to be decorated becomes a more important factor to consider - and that will determine the number of people need to work the belt. For example, if you're doing 35x35x7mm piece and putting individual transfers on each one, you can get -- theoretical maximum -- 4 pieces per row and 20 rows per meter and if the belt is running at 2 meters per minute then you could (theoretically) be enrobing about 1000 pieces per hour. To reach that production you probably need three people working the belt. One person putting pieces on, another person taking pieces off, and a third person decorating the pieces. You'd be consuming about 10kg per hour of chocolate, so a machine with a 7-12kg working bowl capacity (20-45kg per hour of tempered chocolate) is going to be just fine.
If you are going to be having more than one person working the enrober, then the overall size and arrangment of the enrober belt and temperer need to be considered. It's probably better to have something that is larger in footprint than the smallest machine that will meet your needs.
In reality, there's no significant difference between the throughput of a 180mm belt and a 250mm belt unless the size of the pieces you are making demand that you do wider. Also, most cooling tunnels (should you need one) are sized for belts that are 300mm and wider. As I hinted at above, once you get past a certain throughput, getting product on and off the belt becomes more and more of a challenge. Again, if you have a 300mm wide belt then you can roughly double the throughput of the 180mm belt: at 8 pieces per row, 20 rows per meter, and 2 meters per minute belt speed it means that the person (or people) loading the belt are putting down 320 pieces per minute. It takes skilled and dedicated people to work at this pace and the work itself needs to be extremely well organized.
Other things to look for:
If the pre-bottomer is a standard part of the enrober belt, not an option.
If there is a fan built in to blow off excess chocolate.
If there is a net beater to help remove excess chocolate.
If there is a de-tailer to remove chocolate that would form a foot.
If the chocolate veil is "double curtain" which means that there are two streams.
If the height of the curtain veil is adjustable.
If the speed of the belt is fixed or adjustable as a standard feature
HTH,
:: Clay
The proofing box is a great recommendation. I mentioned the tabletop warmers because of the quantity of chocolate involved. These can be used to keep a lot more melted chocolate on hand and I know that some people use them to warm molds as well.
If you have a used restaurant equipment store nearby you can sometimes find these for significantly less than new. Keep in mind that they also make half-size cabinets.
But, and FWIW, the customer service agent at WebRestaurantStore was wrong when s/he said that all of the warmers they sell require water. Here is one that doesn't. Oh, and a 6x18x26in pan (full-size) should hold ~40 liters. That's way more than 30kg given the density of chocolate is greater than water.
Pantoufle -
I would suggest that you look into the idea of doing your own custom blend of commercial couvertures. If you like the basic taste profile of (say) a 70% but you'd like it a little darker and the 85% is too much, then why not add some 85% (or 90% or 100%) to the 70% to get exactly you want? There's no need to accept just what the chocolate companies make and have to sell.
I know several people who take this approach for both dark and milk chocolate and it gets them exactly what they want, rather than relying on finding an exact match in an existing product. I know some people who even mix brands to get to a flavor profile and price point that they like.
You are not likely to get free samples from online shops. Go direct to company and get a sales rep to call on you. They will have samples. Go to trade shows and visit the booths and get samples.
Three other brands to look into that are not mentioned above are: DeZaan, Agostoni, and Kakao Berlin.
--- edited to fix typos ---
Dom -
There are only the ones from CocoaTown and Santha in this size range. From what people tell me, even though the Premier is small, it's better built than the larger ones. If all you are looking for is a test grinder, the Premier may be the way to go. When you're ready for production, save up your money for a grinder with a larger batch capacity.
Good luck on this venture and we look forward to hearing how it all unfolds!
Rotronic makes sensors that they claim offer .008% accuracy on aW for about $1500 that you can plug into a PC running their software.
There is software written that estimates aW and shelf life (and other things, including recipe cost) from confectionery recipes. I don't know the price.
There are many recipes on the internet for making your own invert sugar. The only extra ingredient you need - other than sugar and water - is either tartaric acid (cream of tartar) or citric acid. This makes for a clean ingredient label if you want to go that way. Honey is an invert sugar, too.
When it comes to aW numbers in a classic recipes database - it's an interesting idea and when you get your water meter I hope you'll share some of your insights! It's not as straightforward as it seems, just thinking about it for a few minutes.
Ben -
Now that the site is on the new server and appears to be more stable in general I will be able to devote more time to UX usability issues. I just you want to make sure that you are referring to the sorting of the group discussions themselves (on each group's "home" page), not the comments for any particular discussion.
As you might imagine, there are lots of configuration options. Lots more than on Ning - who basically gave little to no control over things like this. Plus, I have to dive into the code rather than just click a button.
If you have to say you are the greatest about yourself, can it be true?
The "impressively bearded" Mast Bros were featured in a Vanity Fair article, See All The Mast Bros Chocolate Wrappers .
BTW, I know the Mast Bros are impressively bearded because the article's author, Joel Podolsky, goes out of his way to point it out, emphasizing that the bros are "the self-described poster boys for hipster to gourmet chocolate." The key there is self -described.
Rick Mast then "... tells it as it is: ' I can affirm that we make the best chocolate in the world . It's not the sort of chocolate bar you’re going to pound back one after another.'"
The second half of that statement is confounding to me, as whether or not you can pound something back is not an indicator of its quality. I couldn't pound back even one blood sausage. Personally, I don't think I could pound back a single Mast Bros bar either because I find, to borrow a paraphrase made famous by Forrest Gump, " I never know what I'm going to get." They might just maybe do a good job with one batch but the next batch of "the same" chocolate will be awful. When I go into the factory tasting room in BillyBurg it's all I can do to finish a nibble of each of the samples they put out. Calling out defects in beans as virtuous in chocolate. In other words, I don't think they've mastered the craft part of craft chocolate.
The wrappers are nice. But you don't eat the wrappers.
And that sums the whole thing up, for me. It's the Emperor's new clothes. Say it loud enough and long enough and spend enough money marketing it - and you can get a lot of people to believe. But, the fact remaing, saying it is so doesn't make it so .
The real danger, in my mind, with this kind of self-ascribed position, is that people will look at the underwhelming chocolate the Mast Bros produce and think it represents what good chocolate should be. And then when some other chocolate doesn't taste like the Mast Bros chocolate well, then it must not be "good" chocolate. And that is not a good thing for the growing from-the-bean craft chocolate movement.
I have been tasting chocolate professionally now since 1998 and I have had the great food fortune over this time to taste many of the world's great chocolates made by many of the world's great chocolater makers. In my list of the top five from-the-bean chocolate makers in the US (let alone the world), the Mast Bros don't even crack the top twenty.
Your thoughts?
Luis:
From what I have heard - when you buy Pomati you don't get what you don't pay for. They are inexpensive -- and there are reasons. If you take a close look at the materials and quality of component selection you might be surprised at what you (don't) see.
That said ... in general, the rule of thumb you can use is that the maximum hourly production rate for a continuous tempering machine is roughly 3x the capacity of the working bowl. This assumes that you replace the chocolate you take out of the bowl in a way that does not interrupt the tempering cycle at any time. So, with a 5k working bowl you could expect to get up to 15kg/hr tempering capacity. This is a theoretical figure based mostly on the the rate of flow of chocolate. If you were to empty the bowl by one-third and then put unmelted chocolate pieces into the bowl it could take easily take 15-30 minutes for the machine to come back into temper.
Next, how long it takes to go from melted state to being in temper depends on the rate of flow as well as the difference between the melting point set in the bowl and the temper set point. So - it's going to take longer when the melt point is 50C and and the tempering point is 29C than when the melt point is 46C and the temper point is 32C. There are other things to take into consideration including the heating and cooling capacity of the respective systems. Looking at the wattage, the T5's heating and cooling capacity is not all that high, which leads me to believe it might take longer than with other company's models. But, rule of thumb from melted to tempered suggests that it should be 15-20 minutes.
Reviewing some of Anna's challenges with getting her T5 to work consistently there are two issues I can see without having to open the T5 up:
1) The length of the tempering pipe looks to be very short. This means that the chocolate is not in the pipe for very long. This can lead to inconsistent and incomplete crystal creation and mixing. This is, IMO, a critical design flaw when coupled with what appears to be a low-capacity cooling system.
2) The temperature probe is in the wrong place, so it's measuring the temperature of the chocolate in the wrong place. This is going to affect the feedback loop that governs the tempering cycle (and not in a good way, IMO).
All that said. The T5 is inexpensive. It might work for you, but it might not.
I don't know where you are located (update your profile to include your country code!). Here in the US I just go online and look at restaurant supply web sites . (This is NOT an endorsement of this particular site - just an example search to show you what you are looking for.) You can get all the pieces you need at any one of them. But, price shop three or four because prices can vary widely.
When searching online search for " shop restaurant countertop food warmer " if you search for " buffet warmer " you will get a bunch of hits on things that won't do what you need.
Mark -
Also interested to know if you solved this. One of the challenges is to know where you are. MT is where, Malta? I would be hesitant to make specific recommendations available in the US as you may not be able to purchase them in Malta.
Jorge - I am guessing that you also want to know, but again, it's helpful to let people know that you are in Costa Rica.
Approach companies that install commercial central air conditioning units. They may have dehumidifier units sized for larger spaces and capacities.
As far as tips and tricks to save electricity. Where does sun hit the building if it does? Awnings can reduce solar gain. The second thing I can think of is insulation. Another is to keep hot air and humidity from coming into the space to begin with, so some sort of ante-room vesitbule where you can keep the temp much higher (30C) and start to reduce the humidity there will keep heat an humidity from enter the shop space in the first place. Then why 18C? 20-22C is fine for chocolate, and 55-60% humidity.
Try an NSF-certified buffet warmer that does not require water. Use NSF-certified hotel pans to hold the chocolate. The buffet warmer should holds 8" deep hotel pans but only put 4" or 6" deep pans in it as you do NOT want the pans to touch the bottom as the temperature controllers tend to be not very sophisticated and if the bottom of the pan is touching the inside bottom of the warmer it can scorch the chocolate. Rather than using full-size pans, use third-size pans to make transferring chocolate easy. (You can also put in a new pan of chocolate when you take out a melted one during the day.) Make sure to cover the pans with lids overnight. You could also put an upside-down sheet pan over the top overnight to make it more efficient.
Total cost, under $250 depending on the buffet warmer you get. Much less, if you already have the hotel pans and lids.
If you want to make sure that you don't scorch the chocolate and get it to melt faster -- get a temperature controller and affix the sensor to the inside bottom of the warmer. Set the temp for ~140F (~60C). You can now set the temperature controller on the front of the buffet warmer to a much higher temperature knowing that the temperature controller will keep it from getting hot enough to scorch the chocolate - the external controller will cut the power if it gets too hot. When it cools down the power will come back on. After a little tweaking you can find the front panel setting that gives you the most efficient cycle.
Controllers that will do this are under $100.
--- edited to fix typos and grammar ---
In an article ahead of Valentine's Day headlined Valentine’s Day Chocolate Will Cost More This Year, as Cocoa Prices Rise (possibly paywalled), reporter Stephanie Storm writes:
"Criollo is also less susceptible to the diseases that strike the main type of cocoa, Forastero, which makes up about 85 percent of the world’s supply. The Trinitario variety, grown primarily in Latin America and Southeast Asia, ends up in high-end dark chocolate and is roughly 12 percent of the world’s cocoa."
Anybody who knows anything about cocoa knows that criollos are more susceptible to diseases than Forasteros are and that they produce significantly less than Forastero and Trinitario varieties.
And then Ms Storm quotes:
“The supply chain in West Africa is at the heart of the price problem,” Mr. Rollet [ed note: Mr Rollet is a co-founder of Alter Eco and serves as co-CEO] said. “Farmers are at the bottom of the chain, and they’re not getting any richer, thus they don’t see a future in cocoa,” he said. “So farmers there are planting rubber trees instead of cocoa trees.”
It's fair to say that this is a gross over-simplification of "the heart of the problem."
So - apart from spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) and not revealing more about the true heart of the problem - what's the real value of an article like this? One written from what appears to be a position of a near-total lack of understanding of the cocoa and chocolate markets?
Perhaps Ms Storm might benefit from reading this post from the very early days of TheChocolateLife.
Your thoughts?
--- edited for typos and clarity ---
Victor -
I have no idea how you would test this, but I wonder if there is an electrical component inside the machine that is a little flaky. As you are having problems with more than one baffle this seems like it might be a problem. What if you open up the machine and blow off any dust inside and look for loose wires somewhere. Something is working okay when the machine is cool, but when it's been on a while and it warms up - that's when the problem shows up?
Without knowing more about what's going on I would say the issue is that the crystals are not evenly mixed in the chocolate. What you may be seeing is regions of different crystal formation.
This is a problem I had with a couple of smaller Chocovision machines (Rev 2s). It usually occurred at the begining if I didn't want a while after the machine beeped and said it was done for the crystals to spread (I usually helped it along by stirring) and at the end when there wasn't enough chcoolate in the bowl to maintain temper.
It didn't happen all the time - usually it was because I as working in the kitchen and it was either much warmer (late-afternoon sun) or much colder than normal.
HTH
The article I mentioned appeared in Ars Technica today. It references a paper published in the Journal of Advertising: Reexamining Health Messages in the Digital Age: A Fresh Look at Source Credibility Effects. Three authors out of Washington State.
Although not obvious until you look really closely, the text links to the products she recommends are Amazon affiliate links. SO - FUD Babe is making money off all the direct sales of chocolate plus any other sales the buyer makes on Amazon until the affiliate tracking cookie expires or is reset.
There was a very interesting study that was released to day about the influence of commentors. Depending on the context, just saying you are a doctor (for example) even if you are not actually a doctor, can have more weight and influence on people's perception than an article actually written by a bona fide expert.
A colleague forwarded to me a link to an article - Are You Getting Conned by Cheap Chocolate ?
The problem I have with the article is that the author (anonymous Food Babe, or FUD Babe - Fear Uncertainty Doubt - as I will now refer to her) conflates candies and mass market confections with chocolate.
Is the Godiva ingredients list clean? Nope. Not by a long shot. And the author is right when she claims that the allure of of Godiva is good branding, marketing, and advertising — not that it is a quality product and it's never been advertised as being "natural" or "healthy."
But all of the products FUD Babe presents as being bad for you in this article are not rightly chocolate - they are all candies that contain varying amounts of chocolate. And, apart from Godiva, they are all mass market brands and products (Almond Joy, Ghirardelli Mint Patty, Russell Stover Pecan Delight, Butterfinger, plain M&Ms) and they are all candies. Not chocolate.
I also have a problem with the choice of "expert" opinion on vanillin. Rather than going to a widely-cited and referenced source, the link to explain what vanillin is goes to a hobbyist blogger . While the blogger might have a background in biochemistry, the 'nitty-gritty" is written from the perspective that vanillin is a villainous substance, and the article lacks background and nuance. Compare with the Wikipedia entry on vanillin .
My objection is that the article is sensationalist. It's headlined and written to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Not that the article doesn't make some good points about eating candy in moderation and looking closely at ingredient labels to understand what goes in to what you're eating.
Unfortunately, too many people believe that you have to be sensationalist and appeal to people's fears to attract attention and get your point across.
Brands are not out there trying to "trick" consumers into buying questionable ingredients. The list of ingredients is right there, out in the open. Consumers can choose to not read the ingredient labels and eat stuff that is not good for them. That does not make the products "despicable."
The comments are interesting. Some of the commenters show good knowledge of the issues surrounding chocolate candy and can distinguish between candy and chocolate though a lot of people are confused about what "fair" trade means.
What are your thoughts?
I received the following Tweet this morning:
Marcus: I am afraid the answer to that question is no, I don't.
One reason I don't keep lists of "good" pairings and make pairing recommendations is that I have learned, from doing pairing events over the past 20 years, that in settings as small as five people that at least one won't like the pairing. Some people just won't like the style of wine or the particular chocolate. Others will have come from a meal or brushed their teeth. If there is a cultural mix, I know that there are cultural differences in flavor preferences. Chances are one of them has had an argument that day with a family member or colleague or boss. Some are wearing heavy perfumes or colognes. All of these things affect the senses of smell and taste, and therefore affect the perception of the pairing. In other word, it doesn't really matter what I like.
When I do my pairing classes, I start from the presumption that at least one of the pairings (I tend to offer about five) is going to completely fail for at least one person in the room. Knowing that, I don't focus on matching a wine and a chocolate and saying that the two of them "go together." Rather, I guide participants through some basics of sensory evaluation, and specifically how combinations of aroma and flavor affect our perception of what is being smelled and tasted.
So, I know that if I make any pairing recommendations to Marcus there is a very good chance that he won't like one of them. And, if Marcus is turning around and sharing these recommendations with anyone then I am virtually guaranteed that someone will not only not like one of them - but they will hate one of them.
On a more practical level, it's also the case that Marcus may not be able to buy either the Port or the chocolate I recommend making any suggestions moot.
On a more generic level, the question is so vague that it is impossible to answer.
Let's start out with porto . By this I am assuming Port wines taken as a category. I know that Port is the oldest protected name in wine and it refers to a type of wine made in Portugal. I know that Ports can be made from a wide variety of grapes (though five varietals predominate), that there are several classes of Port wines, incluing Tawny Ports, Ruby Ports, Late Bottled Vintage, and many others from several distinct regions, and although people think of Ports as being sweet, dessert wines, they were often consumed by the British as aperitfis, not digestifs, and, in fact there are White Ports that are classified as dry and semi-dry (demi-sec). Even so, I headed on over to Wikipedia to refresh my memory .
So the first question we need to hone in on is, “Which Port are we trying to pair with?” And we haven't even thought about vintages yet.
The second question is even more vague. 70% chocolate? That doesn't tell me anything.
Origin? Blend? Made in France? The US? Italy? And why 70%? Seems kind of arbitrary. It rules out the Felchlin Cru Sauvage at 68% and the Elvesia at 74% and everything Bonnat makes and hundreds of other really quite wonderful options.
If I was forced to make recommenations I would say, "Go and purchase things that are easy for everyone to find and are not that expensive and taste everything against everything." Maybe focus on one brand - Taylor? - and get a selection. Then go to a local gourmet store and get a range of bars. Everyone knows Lindt Excellence, so get that - or something like it - at a minimum. And then taste each Port with each chocolate. What you will be surprised to find is how the aromas and flavors change. You will find that one Port tastes great with one chocolate and awful with another. The chocolate you love the most tastes best with the Port you like the least.
And that, my friends, is the fun of pairings. Not doing what you know "works" over and over again, but exploring new tastes, new combinations, on your own mission to taste where no-one has gone before.
There's another thing to consider besides interference and that is the voltage change that having other equipment on the same leg or circuit can cause. I know of one company that was having problems with a machine and just could not figure it out. When the tech showed up he put a voltage meter on the outlet and it was not running at 220~240V it was running at about 200V. They turned the machine off, plugged it into an outlet that measured just fine and the problem was solved.
Tim:
The relevant regs are in CFR 21 Part 163 . The 1.75% figure for residual shell applies to nib - as all chocolate gets made from nib and this specification gets inherited by chocolate liquor, etc.
I have not heard about much lobbying by the big chocolate makers to increase this because they know - as Sebastian has said - that pathogens, heavy metals, and mycotoxins are mainly in the shell - and the shell messes with both flavor and texture in really quite negative ways.
David -
I was thinking you could post it in the DIY group. You have all the formatting tools necessary to do this. There is even a page break you can insert so that you can put each step on its own page.
If you like, I can recreate the instructable for you, as a guide to others.
