This post's about the hand-baking of white bread. I've made quite a few, now, and whereas I'm very happy with the *taste* of the finished product, it's in the *texture* department that I feel improvements could be made in.
I'm from the UK, and I tend to use the 'Super Strong' white bread flour made by the Hovis company (though I've also used the standard-grade stuff by the same firm), and their 'Fast Action' yeast, which only requires one "kneading and proving".
I always follow the instructions to the letter. Kneading takes 10 minutes, after which I let it "double in size" (that's *so* specific!). As it's still summer, that usually means I allow it to sit for about an hour-and-a-half, at room temperature, before I pop it into the oven for half an hour (230° C). In winter, I'll place the dough somewhere warm.
When finished, it looks good, and tastes good. The problem is that it tends to be a little . . . . well . . . . "denser" than the uncut loaves I can buy from a baker. Nothing wrong with that, as such, but I'd really like to try and aim for something a little lighter, while still keeping the great taste.
Question is - is this possible? I wonder if a *second* kneading, or something, would result in a lighter product? Or perhaps letting the dough sit longer? Perhaps adding some ingredient that's not mentioned in the instructions, like sugar?
Anyone else use the basic methodology, above, and get a non-dense result? Or is that just the way of things?!
my results are similar. bread great but not soft or fluffy enough. some day I am going to try adding a bit of oil. Typical chiffon cakes have oil added to their batter. I wonder if this would help?
I'm in the US and know nothing about the particular flour you mention, but I suspect it is a high-protein flour with strong gluten-forming characteristics. The problem with this kind of flour for home bakers is that it is very difficult to fully develop that strong gluten by hand kneading -- certainly 10 minutes of hand kneading is not even going to come close to fully developing the gluten, unless you're quite strong. With good electric mixer with a dough hook, it's a different story, but if you're hand-kneading, your results with lower-protein flour may be about the same. High-gluten flours will also tend to produce tougher, chewier loaves, which may or may not be what you're after.
One thing you might try to get better gluten development with hand kneading is to add a rest period to the process. That is, combine all the ingredients until the dough just comes together, cover it to keep it from drying out, let it sit 30 minutes, then knead it until it is smooth, elastic, and slightly tacky but not sticky. You will find that this decreases the total amount of kneading necessary.
The idea of only one proofing cycle is marketing hogwash. Your loaf volume, texture, and flavor will be markedly improved if you have one "bulk fermentation", meaning that the dough rises in a bowl or on the counter before being formed into a loaf shape (allowed to double, more or less), then it is degassed ("punched down") and shaped into loaves, then is allowed to nearly double again in loaf shape before being baked. Note that for bulk fermentation, the increase in volume ("doubling", or whatever the recipe says) is less important than the amount of time it takes. Time allows the yeast and enzymes to change the chemistry of the dough, which has effects on the volume, texture, and taste of the final bread. The final proof, however, is largely intended to improve volume by letting the yeast create air pockets in the loaf before it is baked, which then expand in the heat of the oven.
Generally speaking, slower and longer fermentation will result in better bread. Forget about putting it in a warm place, use half the yeast, let it proof for twice as long, and you'll probably be pleased with the results. I usually let my doughs sit 8-24 hours in the refrigerator, in fact, which is a minor complication in the process but can be used to good effect to make the process fit into your life's schedule better, at least when advance planning is possible.
A second kneading should be unneccessary, although there is a relatively new movement (or, perhaps, a resurgance of a very old idea) usually called the "stretch and fold" method, which is in some ways an extreme version of the mix-rest-knead approach I mentioned above. In this case, you mix the dough briefly, but never really knead it. Instead, you let it sit on the counter, and every 30-45 minutes you stretch it and fold it in thirds on itself, just once, then let it sit again. There are usually 2-5 repetitions of this process, depending on the length of the bulk fermentation, and then the loaves are formed and the final proof goes as usual. This process is especially suited to the lower-protein flours and very wet, sticky doughs.
On that subject, you will also probably find that texture and flavor get better with wetter doughs (higher ratio of liquid to flour). Make it as wet as you can manage -- wetting your hands slightly is better than flouring them for working with sticky doughs.
Sugar will not directly improve volume -- in fact it will weigh the dough down somewhat -- but it will accelerate the yeast activity (except in extreme quantities, which slows or kills yeast). It will make the final bread softer and moister, but not any lighter. Ditto for other enrichers such as milk and oil or fat.
Dense bread, especially white bread, can definitely be avoided, even without the tools of a professional baker. Some people, of course, like dense bread, but most of those people are also looking for whole-grain bread. (I happen to be one of them, not that I can't appreciate a good white bread now and then.)
I'm not familiar with flours in the UK, so I can't comment upon your flour. However, if your results are similar with both products, I doubt you need to pay extra for the super strong bread flour. These flours are generally formulated to allow doughs to tolerate the abuse that is inherent in an industrial bread making environment. They are intended to make the ultra-light breads that most people in this forum would rather avoid.
If you are trying to make a bread as light as the white fluff in the market, the best way to obtain such a bread is to purchase it. It is very difficult to duplicate in the home.
Oddly enough, the time of kneading is not terribly exact. You are looking for a resultant dough condition, not to have put in xx minutes of kneading. Sometimes 5 minutes is enough. Sometimes 20 are required. With a wheat bread, the windowpane test gives a good indication that the dough has been kneaded enough. You can google the windowpane test to spare my a lot of typing.
Also, there are variations in flour from batch to batch. It's not a chemical produced in a sterile environment. Variations exist between farms, varieties of wheat, and so on. As a result, using 100 grams of water and 250 grams of flour will not always give the same results, even when the brand and type of flour are the same. Note the feel of the dough, observe how the bread comes out, note the correlations... and then go for the optimum feel in the dough.
Lastly... for this section.... many beginning bakers add flour as they are kneading. This isn't bad per se, but it is fraught with peril. When you add flour, you really need to start your kneading time again. Also, many people have heard things like, "knead until the dough is satiny and no longer sticky." The "easy" way to get rid of the sticky is to add flour. Which leads to a dense loaf. Dough would rather be a bit too wet than a bit too dry. And sticky isn't a bad thing anyway. Just get the dough to the point where it would rather stick to itself than to you or the kneading board.
In the US, home bakers typically measure by volume, which is inherently inaccurate. So, recipes tell the baker to use "4 to 6 cups of flour". I suggest that my students stop measuring by volume... but if they can't break that bad habit, they should start with 2/3 to 3/4 of the flour the recipe calls for and then grudgingly add more, a tablespoon at a time. "Pretend you're Ebeneezer Scrooge and flour costs as much as saffron, the most expensive spice in the world" is what I tell them to get them into the right mind set. Put the flour on your hands, not the dough. Suddenly the student's bread gets lighter.
Actually, that is VERY specific. However, many people don't understand that the doubling should be in volume, not in height. The two may or may not be related, depending on how the dough is constrained during its rise. If the loaf is in a bread pan, doubling the height (I assume you have access to a ruler) doubles the volume. With a free-form loaf, the length and width can increase at the same time as the height, depending on the firmness of the dough and how the loaf was formed. In the worst case with a freeform loaf, doubling the height can mean an increase of
8x in volume. Some people let bread rise in a graduated container so they can tell when the dough has doubled.
However, doubling is not a holy grail. You want it to rise fully. A good test is to let it rise until it no longer springs back when poked with a finger. Or you can gently rest your hand upon it and feel if there is still tension in the surface of the dough. If there is, let it rise a bit longer.
Dense has different meanings to different people..... your dense could be my too light. Your just right could be my too dense. Perhaps you could elaborate a bit.
Sugar is usually added to dough to help feed the yeast. They don't need it. If the amount of sugar is small, 20 grams or less per loaf, its yeast food and can be eliminated. Larger amounts are for taste. And larger amounts can slow the dough's rise.
Lightness and softness of crumb are often confused. Adding milk or oil will give a softer crumb, but lightness is a separate matter. You may be after lightness, you may be after softness, you may be after both. Once you decide upon your goals, it will be easier to fine tune your recipe.
The advice you got was sound, but here is my take. If you want fluffy bread with an even crumb, you have to do the opposite of what is recommended for "good" bread. I would use all-purpose flour, use a generous amount of sugar, add some bland oil, use lots of yeast, let it rise in a warm place, let the formed loaf nearly over-proof before baking. I know that people will be horrified at that advice, but it does produce a product that is fairly close to "Wonder Bread." It is the advice I give people who want recreate the rolls they used to eat in the school cafeteria.
For about 450gm of flour (3 1/2 cups or a pound), I might use two packets or a heaping tablespoon of instant yeast, two teaspoons of salt, two tablespoon sugar, three tablespoons vegetable oil, and enough rather warm milk (115F -
120F) to produce a slightly sticky dough. I knead in the food processor or stand mixer, but you could do it by hand. Round-up the dough and let it rise in an oiled bowl in a warm location until double - about an hour. Deflate, form into a loaf or rolls, and let rise until double again. Bake at 400 for 35-540 minutes for the loaf and at 350 for 25-30 minutes for the rolls. The bread will be light and bland with a uniform, fine crumb and have a yeasty flavor and soft crust. It will be the antithesis of artisan bread.
Hmmm...my first thought would have been the higher protein flour being the problem, but it sounds like the result is the same with regular flour.
My second guess would be too little water. A wetter dough might help.
Third guess is...Are you just kneading with the clock, or are you kneading until the dough changes to become very smooth, shiny and elastic? With good gluten development the bread can hold more air and thus be lighter.
A second kneading will produce a finer crumb, not necessarily a lighter texture.
You might also be sure to let the dough rise fully before baking. Let the next batch rise a bit longer and see if that makes a difference.
You are an Englishman I suppose....therefore your basic bread is not sweet and your normal doughs are less rich than the North American version.
If the dough appears dense, it can be it needs s more kneading /dough development and also needs more fermentation. before you divide it , mold and proof. You are using a strong flour and that animal kneads more" rough treatment" or kneading to attain the desired dough development.
certainly
The Brits are not known to add sugar into their basic doughs. Besides English flour are known for its high diastatic activity( can provide sufficient sugars for the yeast to "munch " on.) Just give it a proper kneading,check for' window pane' and give it prolonged fermentation with knock down in between to allow the gluten to stretched to the limit and hence will result in better volume and lighter textured bread.
This is exactly the same problem I had when I started making bread. Solved by:
Switching to an other brand of flour Using a traditional method with two rises Using ordinary dried yeast rather than the instant kind
I now use Tesco own brand bread flour. It is cheap and, for me, produces better bread than Hovis.
To be honest I didn't try very much with instant yeast, Its just that it seems to solve some problem that I don't have. For some reason I rather went off it when I noticed it contained Plaster of Paris.
It is important to remember that the amount of water controls how much the dough rises. The more water the higher it will rise. The downside is that the dough gets more difficult to work.
Have a look at alt.bread.recipes they are nice people and the FAQ will teach you more than you ever wanted to know.
As a side question... I have always wondered when I see "double in size", is it meant that the volume of the dough should double in size,
- meaning that the diameter increases by a mere 26%, - or does it mean that the diameter should double in size, meaning that the volume of the dough actually increases by a factor 8? I saw this instruction written in many places, but nowhere is it explained what is meant by it. My guess - seeing what my dough does - is that it is the second one (the diameter doubles in size), except as it tends to increase more in size laterally, the increase in volume is probably nearer to 4 or 6 than 8. Any thoughts?
Is it? Nobody has posted a recipe in this thread yet -- we're discussing general baking techniques, which seems like just the thing for rec.food.baking. (If there were a rec.food.baking.bread, that would be better.)
Of course, the real reason I didn't redirect to alt.bread.recipes is that I don't follow that group, so I'm not familiar with what goes on there. Browsing the last few posts, though, I do see that it's quite a bit more than just recipes, so maybe this would be appropriate there. Perhaps I'll have to start following that group as well.
Not trying to start a flame war here, just trying to find my way.
And if you want to do that accurately, do it in a translucent or transparent straight-sided container (not a bowl with sloping sides, press the dough into it so the top is flat, and mark the starting height with marker or a piece of tape. Because the sides are straight, you know that when the height is double, the volume is double. You can get cylindrical food-safe plastic containers with lids in 2-, 4-, and 6-qt sizes (in the US) from restaurant supply stores, which are perfect for this task.
But as others have said, recipes tell you to go for a particular volume increase because it's easier than explaining how to tell when dough is properly risen, which takes some experience and is best taught in person. The brief explanation is usually that fully-risen dough will not spring back quickly when you make indentations in it with your fingertips (trim nails, please). How well this test works depends a lot on the nature of the dough you're working with -- for the OP's type of dough (all white flour, straight dough, mid-range hydration, I'm guessing), it should work pretty well as a first approximation.
That's a very good recipe for "very bad" bread, at least the American version of it, and the OP should note that even if this is the kind of bread you want to make, having two rising periods (as in the recipe above) is a good idea. Even if the rises are warm and quick, it will be better than just having a single rise. Using fast-acting yeast and warm liquid, I would be surprised if the first rise took even an hour
-- probably closer to 45 minutes. The second rise, after shaping, should be about that long as well. This will depend on lots of factors, of course, so let the timer be a reminder only, not a master.
The OP should also note that "Bake at 400" means "Bake at 400F", which is about 200C.
But don't feel bad about making it. Fresh-baked commercial-style bread made at home can still be better than the commercially-baked version you get in the store, and it's not much effort, so it's still worthwhile. It ought to be cheaper, too.
Are you sure that it is really what is meant? In all the web sites I could find with pictures of bread rising, the dough diameter had increased by 50% or more, which corresponds to 3.4 times (or more) the original volume. See for example:
formatting link
From the pictures in both sites, I estimate the dough volume increasedby about 4, although they write that the size doubled. I found severalother sites with a similar increase in volume. Either the site authorsdon't know how to make bread, or there is a misunderstanding about themeaning of "double size". Mite
I would disagree....a recipe is not usually the reason for product variation... the technique being applied , counts.. In fact having more recipes will lead to confusion that( will make you speculate) supposing the results is not what you expected and will make you think whether that particular recipe is right or wrong..
InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.