Will science take some of the fun out of baking bread?

goo.gl/QVpVNk

The first mistake is that one assumes they can qualify what is "perfect". I am sure my perfect will be different than his. And yours will be different still.

FWIW, most of what he says in the linked interview fits common wisdom here.  I won't buy the book, but I'll look for the interesting bits to leak out.

I have always found that science *adds* to the fun.

("Perfect" was just the word used by the headline-writer at the Daily Beast.)

swish!

:)

Edit, just to clarify things.  That's the answer to the main Question.    "Kabong" describes what I do with the idea of science replacing my taste buds by hitting it with my imaginary broom.   Swish is taking that broom and sweeping it away with one good power move.  I don't have the strength for a "Swoosh" which is a bit bigger than a "Swish."

Mini 

seeing a nice loaf of sourdough come out of the oven with good color and a nice ear never fails to amaze me!!!

Reminds me about the man who was on the quest for the world's most perfect beer.  He kept sampling beers from all over the world until he found what he decided was the "perfect beer".  So he sent a sample to a testing lab to understand the technical details of what made it "perfect".  In about a week he got the results.  He opened the letter and it said, "Sorry Sir to inform you that your horse has diabetes."  Have always loved that story and I love both good beer and bread.

I like to know some of the science so I know what I can change and what I shouldn't change, and why. Or understanding what's in my sourdough culture and what grows best at different stages and temperature. However, this interview about Modernist Bread shows that what is in that very expensive set of books isn't necessarily even true. This statement, for example:

“The best way to make a crusty bread is to bake it in a cast-iron pot—but use black cast-iron: The fancy enameled ones don’t work as well."

I know for sure that's not true, because I regularly bake eight loaves of bread in my cast iron pots, half of which are enameled and the others are black cast iron. They turn out exactly the same. Every time.

I think I'll save the $700-odd CDN dollars.

I'll make a statement.

"Science will never take the fun out of anything".

I should really have put that in caps, as I like to shout that at people I know, or don't know.

I've said it before, I'll be buying this collection of books. I'm looking forward to it.

If this person didn't already have more money than god, I might be intrigued, (if it says CTO after their name I know he makes a LOT more than me....) sounds like a bored retireee trying to make som MORE money.  I live with a family of Chemical Engineer, Biochemist, Electircal Engineer, Computer Engineer, and have many other friends to turn to if I want the "sciency" side of things. (actually this site is great for that) to me this is more an Art form mixed with scientific knowledge.  Not gonna bite on this one.

Has Mr Myhrvold's publicist been sneaky here and got us talking about Mod Bread?

If I was Postal Grunt (assuming they aren't the publicist), I'd send him a bill for the extra publicity about the books.

The price of books is a bit like the price of cars, you buy what you can afford to get you from A to B.

Is Microsoft, in the eyes of some, still an evil entity?

Is commercial white bread poison?

Who will win the Rugby League World Cup?

Ah, enough.

"Baking bread" combines features of both science as well as art. It is considered as a science because it has an organized body of knowledge which contains certain universal truth. It is called an art because "baking" requires certain skills which are personal possessions of "bakers". Science provides the knowledge & art deals with the application of knowledge and skills.

In the original "Baking bread" = Management, "baking" and "bakers" similarly adapted.

So a summary answer to the poser, so far as I am concerned, is "no, baking will always be fun", especially for the hobbyist!

I'm afraid I don't understand all the negativity here. You are obviously free to ignore it, but it looks to me like this book is a earnest attempt to answer a lot of questions about bread that I for one would like to know. A big part of my bread baking journey is curiosity, and any book that helps me to understand what I'm doing will be of interest. Having read and listened to several interviews with Myhrvold, he would be the first to say that good bread is whatever you enjoy, and the best bread is the bread you like the most. And although he is opinionated, he goes to great pains to respectfully represent master bakers who disagree with his conclusions. For anyone interested in what the team found out, Heritage Radio is running a free podcast called Modernist Bread Crumbs that explores some of the ideas, especially about history. It includes interviews with Jim Lahey, the reigning Poilaine, Peter Reinhardt, and many other famous bakers.

more interesting.  

My first degree was in Biochemistry, and my second is a BS in Nursing.  I have always been a self-professed "science nerd," and I am very much a "why" kind of thinker.  Like I said above, I would love to take a look at the books.  My only beef with this offering is the price.  I have 5 of Reinhart's books and I think I'm out-of-pocket maybe $150-160, all in.  And I find them highly educational (and he has online videos too.)  I just can't justify to myself paying 4 times that amount, especially with scientific articles about breadmaking aplenty online for free.

I think I'll take a leaf out of Dabrownman's book (pardon the pun) and check them out when they hit the library.

Science will not take the fun out of baking bread. But perspective is key here. Science is but a candle in the dark. Science illuminates some things, but misses many others. And if you ever mistook a shadow for a monster when you were a child, then you'll understand that what is "seen" and what actually "is" are not necessarily the same. 

I love science. I've found it very helpful in my baking career. But it is a tool, nothing more. There are other tools -- such as intuition and real-world experience. They can be just as useful, if not more so.

Science is both illuminating and misleading. That is its dual nature. Enjoy it for what it is, and remain skeptical for what it is not.

Cheers!

Trevor

Francisco Migoya, co-author of Modernist Bread, gave an interesting presentation at the Johnson and Wales Bread Symposium this summer, introduced by Peter Reinhart. It's on YouTube (along with the other presentations):

https://youtu.be/4rlqTpRYo2E

Migoya's curiosity and passion for bread is plainly evident.  The  audience for this talk, like that of the book, is mostly professional bread bakers. As a home baker I doubt I'll buy the book myself, but this gave me a glimpse of what a heavy duty scientific approach has to offer. For me at least, it doesn't kill the fun. As Trevor said, it's a tool, nothing more.

Math.  When a mathematical equation can bake a loaf of bread then it will be perfect for every math wizard alive but the rest of us want real bread instead.  Still, science is the backbone of bread baking and just about everything else as well - so nothing ne there.  The more you know about the science of bread making the better bread you will make and your ability to modify it for flavor, color, texture, nutrition, digestibility and looks will increase greatly.

Ad you thought math was far behind you :-)

That Daily Beast article is typical internet journalism. The headline is ridiculous. After spending a week looking through the "Modernist Bread" volumes, I can tell you Myhrvold never claims to bake the "perfect" loaf, nor have I found that he thinks we should "change how me make bread". 

"Modernist Bread" is an incredible body of work. It is a huge undertaking by a massive team. The artwork is out of this world, and in my opinion is the strongest element of the book. It is a fascinating work to any student of bread. 

There is A LOT of information and analysis in that set of books. Is there anything I found of use? Absolutely. Is there anything I have found to be revolutionary? Not at all. 

I saw the set on Amazon. I'll wait a few years. Get the whole thing used for $4 a book. And I'll still wait for free shipping. : )

When I learned that fire is nothing more than energy released from a chemical reaction it didn't change anything. Water didn't boil faster. The marshmallows I was roasting on a stick tasted the same. And looking into a fire after a long days work outdoors is still just as relaxing. The techniques used are used because they've been handed down for generations. Because they work. if science came up with new techniques? You have a choice. If in the end the bread is the same then neither choice is better. 

I do not own these books yet, and it might be awhile before I do. However, there seems to be a major buzz since November about there being no difference between white and wheat bread nutritional wise. I can see people having a field day now.

 I always have grown up thinking whole wheat was healthier because it contained all the nutritious bits and takes a bit longer to digest, so we will feel full longer. My perception of white flour from the store was that it went through your body like white sugar as in it did not provide the same fullness, had much less nutrition because it is mainly the endosperm and caused your body to work harder to process it. I have bought a grain mill and a special sifter, so I am making whole grain bread with just a little bit of the hard stuff sifted out.

Does anyone who has read this book have an opinion about their being no difference nutrition wise between white or wheat? Was it really mentioned in the book? And I assume that if he did say there was no difference, was he differentiating the difference between store bought and home made bread? I assume homemade would still trump store bought right?

On a personal note, does he mention anything about ancient grains like spelt or einkorn?

I have been preaching to my parents about this for years, so if someone asks me, I do not want to be giving out false information.

Thanks for any help you can give me.