Forum Activity for @Mann Made Chocolate

blending couverture

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

Re: blending dark with milk - I'm not an expert, but I have done this successfully using "couverture" quality milk and dark. I don't know if this is right, but its worked for me: melt both first to the manufacturer's recommendations, although I admit I often cheat and just target 115-118 F. I then pick a ratio (wild guess), say 80% milk and 20% dark (depending, of course, on the dark I'm using). I pour the dark into the milk, and fold it in. I don't know if the folding is necessary (as opposed to just quickly mixing), but folding just feels better to me. Then I temper the mixture using the temperature profile of the milk chocolate. After it is fully tempered and set a while (I like to wait a day if I can), I then taste it. I don't really find a lot of value in tasting the melted, pre-tempered chocolate, because to my palate, it doesn't predict the final taste. I try to do several experiments at once: 80/20, 75/24, 67/33, 50/50. That way, I know on day 2 which will work and which won't. Interestingly, I've found that while the end product will temper fine...I have been disappointed with the flavor often. Instead of adding depth and complexity (as I had hoped), the dark adds a "muddiness." But that may be the brands I'm using. I'm still playing with it, looking for the right blend that will make a somewhat darker, somewhat less sweet "dark milk chocolate."

The WORST "Article" About Chocolate - EVER

Posted in: Opinion

Clay, this is such a thoughtful, articulate response -- bravo! Thank you for keeping the record straight.

The WORST "Article" About Chocolate - EVER

Posted in: Opinion

My feeling is that this "article" finds its voice in the parlance of the infomercial: First, find something that is popular. Then, find a way to use just a hint of truth to state that ALL forms of the thing (whatever it is) have been made vulgar, artificial, fake, and so on. It's especially good if you use hifalutin talk like: "a genetically divergent cacao plant that lacks the true phytochemical potency that gives real chocolate its many beneficial properties." (Really? Sure is a lot of research on theobromine, (-) epicatechin, effect on endothelial function, etc. on a product that lacks "phytochemical potency.") Next, with great PASSION for all that is GOOD, claim that what you are selling is ALL NATURAL and PURE and THE ONLY ONE OF ITS KIND! Finally, make sure that this wonderful and precious new version is VERY RARE and VERY HARD TO OBTAIN and painstaking to produce.This "article" seems little more than advertising that follows the typical pattern mastered by Ron Popeil, then brought to its current fear-mongering status by Kevin Trudeau: Set the problem as undisputed fact; establish that YOU THE CUSTOMER have this problem and "THEY" have DUPED you; reveal the SECRET solution that THEY don't want you to know about; and then offer it for sale, ideally in LIMITED AMOUNTS or FOR A LIMITED time.In related news, I just heard that to protest that there is NO MORE REAL CHOCOLATE, some preacher with 12 parishioners is going to burn a stack of Dagoba bars.PS: By the way, I am not in any way impugning the product itself. I'm just commenting on the method of using an "article" to sell a product.

Unsweetened (or stevia sweetened) milk chocolate?

Posted in: Classifieds F/S or Wanted

Update: Check out this article from Confectionary News

Unsweetened (or stevia sweetened) milk chocolate?

Posted in: Classifieds F/S or Wanted

The only sugar-free products I can find use sugar alcohols, usually maltitol. It is interesting there is no "unsweetened" milk chocolate. I don't know if the chemistry is the issue, but more likely just not a lot of demand for it. I suspect the average customer for milk chocolate expects a sweet product. Even the "high percentage cocoa" milk chocolates are pretty sweet, in my opinion. But maybe there is a market for "bittersweet milk chocolate" that has been undiscovered.Stevia is still a relatively new sweetener in the U.S. I can't help but believe that there would be a demand eventually because of the perception that it is "natural" etc. I don't know how expensive it is when purchased on an industrial scale, which probably is important.You might contact PerfectlySweet.com . The owner is on a "sugar-free mission" and only sells sugar-free products. He may know of either a source or something coming "down the pike."On the medical side, while it's reasonably easy to incorporate small amounts of dark chocolate (70%) into one's diet with minimal adverse effect on blood sugar, it's a harder (but not impossible) to manage with milk chocolate. The impact on blood sugar levels for about 3 oz of milk chocolate is comparable to an 8 oz glass of apple juice, a ripe banana, or a 2 oz bag of corn chips, based on Glycemic Load (GL), which is the most commonly used method of expressing the effect of a food on blood sugar. A "high cocoa mass" milk chocolate has a GL around 7 per 50 gms. However, a milk chocolate that has a lower percentage of cocoa mass (meaning more sucrose and lactose) may have a GL double that. The lactose has some effect, although it's glycemic index is fairly low at 46-48.A sugar free version of milk chocolate typically cuts the GL to about 3-5 per 50 gms, or roughly half of a good quality milk chocolate, so it makes some sense that people who are very concerned about minimizing blood glucose spikes consider a sugar-free product. (However, sugar-free products still contribute calories, and if one develops excess body fat, insulin resistance can lead to blood sugar elevations.)Once a Hollywood celebrity starts demanding stevia-sweetened chocolate, it'll happen somewhere.

Small-scale Chocolate Storage?

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

Jennifer,First, I'll be of no help, so feel free to ignore this, but I am facing the same situation. I am fortunate to be in very low humidity part of the world, and between October and March the way I solve this is that I have a north-facing room with a lot of windows, and by opening and closing the windows I'm able to keep the room at a nearly constant 60 degrees, augmented by a ductless air conditioner (and, though rarely needed) a heater. In this region, our humidity is usually 10% (ranges 8% winter-20%summer), so humidity is controlled by mother nature. I can store chocolates with even fairly high water activity (Aw) (such as truffles) in this room for 4 weeks without appreciable loss of quality, blooming, etc. (Of course, they are in air tight containers and not exposed to light.)But as a non-commercial artisanal chocolatier, I simply shut down operation between March and October, because without a temperature controlled environment, the ambient temperature is too hot for tempering, let alone storage.We have a commercial vineyard nearby, and I talked to them if I could maybe rent some of their lovely dark, cool space -- the problem of course is they have to control their humidity in exactly the wrong direction: they need high humidity and cool temperatures. So they actually ADD humidity. Dead end there.I have discussed with local small construction/remodeling companies building a small room that would have the right temperature and humidity control. With the recession, they are very hungry for work. For maybe 50% more than a commercial cabinet + shipping, they might be able to build a simple room (frame/stucco with heavy insulation) that would work. Temperature control would be fairly easy with a small unit. But again...I'm very lucky I don't need to worry much about humidity.If you find a workable solution, I hope you'll post a follow-up! Best of luck-Bruce

Chocolate Technique: What would you like to learn more about?

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, & Techniques

Best of luck on your endeavor, Brendan. When it's released, I'll let my vast Facebook fanbase know about it. (By "vast" I mean 16.)For background, I've been studying chocolate for about 8 years, buying every book, studying with some chocolatiers, and though I've made about 20,000 pieces over those 8 years, I still feel quite the tyro with my share of moments that go like this: "I don't get it? I'm doing everything right? Why the heck is THIS piece blooming, but THAT piece isn't????"I mention this because one of the major flaws of most cookbooks (including chocolate books) is that there is very little attention paid to what goes wrong and why it goes wrong. Some will show pictures; such as the look of a broken ganache, and certainly they all describe untempered vs tempered, but they do very little to help the reader figure out what she or he is doing wrong. Granted, some of this is just getting the feel of it, and I suspect some cannot be learned without a "mentor" on one hand, or trial/error on the other. But to the extent you can help the beginner figure out WHAT she/he is doing wrong with tempering, molding, making ganache, dipping (large "feet" for example), etc. - I think you'd be doing a real service.Anyway, just a thought. Again, best of luck. - Bruce