Over the past year or so, I've been having issues mixing panettone dough . After a lot of research and talking to a few different people. I've concluded that my LM is not healthy. If I am reading the signs correctly, it's too weak.
After feeding and leaving at 30C for 3-4 hours, the LM doubles but does not quite triple. A cross-section of the LM after fermentation shows very tiny alveoli. The starter tastes mild and fruity, but there's really not much acidity to it and the pH seems stuck in the 4.4 - 4.55 range after fermentation. If I understand correctly, after about 12 hours bound at 16-19C, the starter should register a pH of 3.8-3.9, yet mine is still sitting in the 4.4 - 4.5 range.
The issue I'm having now is correcting the balance of microorganisms in the dough, and while there seems to be a lot of information out there on how to create and maintain a LM, there's surprisingly little information on what to do when something goes wrong.
I initially created this LM maybe 1.5 years ago from my 100% sourdough starter and I suspect that something went wrong with this process as my LM has never really behaved correctly. The typical schedule for my starter is to refresh 1/1/0.5 and leave for 3-4 hours at 30 C. I'll do this 2 or 3 times in a day, after which I will bind it and put it in the refrigerator for about a week. If I'm going to bake with it, I'll take it out of the fridge about 3 days before and begin the typical cycle of 3 short warm refreshments followed by 1 long cold one. The starter is maintained exclusively with KA Sir Lancelot flour.
I've been doing things a bit differently lately in order to try and correct the issues I've noticed. I've been taking some suggestions from https://www.dissapore.com/ricette/lievito-madre-di-iginio-massari/ and https://biancolievito.com/how-to-fix-your-sourdough/ on how to strengthen a weak LM.
Over the past week I have been tracking refreshments and have gathered some interesting (and frustrating) data points:
- I have done many 1/0.8 refreshments (starter/flour) at 45% - 50% hydration per Massari's recommendation, yet the starter still seems weak and is not acidifying below 4.4, even after as much as 5 hours at 30 C.
- I have done 2 rather lengthy "long" refreshments. One of these was a submerged refreshment with 19C water left at room temp (about 71F) for 17.5 hours, the other was a bound refreshment at 17-19C for about 35 hours. Both of these resulted in some decent acidification down to about 4.1-4.2. I followed both of these up with 1/0.8 warm refreshments which, in both cases, brought the pH right back up to about 4.4 after 3.5 hours.
- I'm tracking the difference in pH before and after fermentation. The two very long refreshments I mentioned acidified the most, resulting in a pH change of about 0.8 - 0.9. The refreshments immediately following these long ones, however, resulted in the least acidification of all 15 or so refreshments I've tracked so far, decreasing the pH by only 0.29 (oddly, exactly 0.29 in both cases)
- I've tried a longer warm refreshment where I mixed and laminated the dough, rolled it in a ball, and left it at 28C for about 9.5 hours (neither bound nor in water). This only acidified down to about 4.38 and was right back to about 4.5 after the subsequent 3.5 hour warm refreshment
- Out of desperation, I've begun using bottled water instead of filtered tap water. This hasn't seemed to make any difference at all
I'm tempted to create a new LM either from my 100% starter once again, or perhaps from scratch, but I really want to figure this out. If I were to create a new starter that behaved perfectly, I feel I will have lost out on what seems like a valuable learning experience. I am kind of running out of ideas though, which is the purpose of this post.
At this point, I feel like I could leave my LM out in the yard for a week and still effortlessly bring it back to 4.4 pH 🤣. I thought maybe my LM is just happy at 4.4 - 4.5, but given all of my issues mixing panettone dough, I do think it's an issue.
what caused your LM to go downhill ?
Mine turned into the same pale floury flavour because I suspect too many bagnettos
Bingo. I suspect that was my problem too.
I was maintaining my LM by adhering to relatively strict rules, without much attention to what I was observing. So, every day my LM was out of the fridge began with a morning bagnetto. I didn't even bother reading the pH after a while.
I would also follow the same schedule every day my LM was out of the fridge - morning bagnetto, 3x 1:1 refreshes 4 hrs @ 30C, then overnight rest at 16 - 18C or back in the fridge until next time. I suspect that blindly refreshing every 4 hours, combined with a possibly unnecessary bagnetto, was not allowing the starter to acidify enough. Then, the next day, repeat - throughout the previous day, the starter was refreshed before it was ready, so the overnight pH wasn't acidic enough (and probably wasn't "purifing" as it should), followed then by a bagnetto that almost certainly wasn't necessary, etc, etc.
Edit: It's worth noting that I don't believe my LM was ever in good shape. I've only succeeded in baking panettone with my LM a few times and they barely turned out, unsurprisingly missing all of the qualities attributed to a healthy LM. Since creating my LM, I have more or less been following instructions without understanding enough about what needed to be done in different situations. A year later and I feel like I might be finally scratching the surface lol.
My LM has swung the other way now, while last week it was leavening and acidifying very fast and featured a persistent esterified aroma, now the pungent sweet esters have died back and the leavening and acidification rate have slowed somewhat, which is pretty interesting!
At least the goal of curtailing acidification has been achieved! In line with this, I have also observed how my LM is now far more oxidative than it ever was before. Which I'm okay with, now I just need to up the leavening again...
Sometimes I worry about dough pH readings - how accurate are they?
Case in point below. Two different meters, freshly calibrated 10mins previously with the same pH7&4 buffers.
A liquid sd starter sample (120% hydrn) which had been stored in the fridge.
Which one is right?
Lance
Don't do this to me, Lance 🤣
Sorry Joe, I didn't mean to increase your LM paranoia!
And spare a thought for me - I'll have to buy a third pH meter now ! ;)
Lance
You know if you do, you'll just have 3 different readings!
It's all kind of concerning and frustrating though. Having never handled a healthy PM, it's hard to really understand if it's exhibiting the correct qualities. White, but not too white. Dry, but not too dry. Not too sticky. Alveoli that are not too big or too small. Acidic, but not too acidic, etc etc. The only thing I can really rely on is temperature and pH, but now one of those is in question 😞.
The massive discrepancy in pH is making it difficult to decide how to proceed with maintenance. For example, I unwrapped my PM after 16 hours at 18 C and got a reading of around 4.15 in the dough and 3.9 in solution. I'd probably do a bagnetto for 3.9 after the long purification, but probably wouldn't for 4.15. Similarly, a 4 hour warm refreshment yields a direct pH of 4.3-4.4 and a solution pH of about 4.1. In this case my PM is either acidifying properly or needs some sort of correction.
I took some pictures of my PM after its last warm fermentation. I'll post them later. Maybe those of you who know what it should look like can confirm what I'm thinking about it.
Sure I can understand the need for objectively measurable qualities without first-hand knowledge of what a mature LM should be like. I wonder if measuring TTA would actually more helpful than measuring pH. Although I understand if you don't want to go down that route…
LM maturo TTA = 6.5-8 (Standard assay: millilitres of 0.1 M NaOH to neutralise acids in a 10g sample to pH 8.4)
At least with TTA its kinetics are pretty linear and the easiest way to deal with a TTA too high is to add more flour...
Another measure is volume increase which should be measured quantitatively to ensure this requirement is met. To do this you can use a graduated cylinder:
80g of dough should rise to fill 200ml of space. This should be followed as a minimum. Based on this we can assume a dough density of 1.2g/cm3. Massari however demands more rise: 100g of dough should rise to fill 300ml of space.
I look forward to seeing those photos of your LM.
I am obsessive and determined in nearly everything I do, so I could definitely see myself measuring TTA, however, I have a demanding job and small children and I believe to be at the upper limit of how much of this "panettone nonsense" others in my life will tolerate 😅. My kitchen already looks like a science experiment multiple times each day. I have considered it though.
Volume increase is one of the things I'm looking at now. Again, if the solution pH values can be trusted, it is acidifying properly, so based on that, I have begun looking into other defects, specifically rise and the honeycomb. I found myself browsing #pastamadresolida on instagram the other night. I saw a cross-section of a LM that looked like a cross-section of a croissant, with a caption along the lines of "after 3.5 hours at 28 C". If that is the goal, I am not even playing the same game lol. As a sanity check (I'm not quick to trust pictures of a LM on instagram, of all places) I went back to SPV and found a picture of a LM being sliced, and its honeycomb structure was also considerably more developed than mine, so ultimately decided that I do have an issue here.
I've also noticed that a lot of LM pictures I see post-fermentation show a rise that is almost explosive - as if the dough begins forming a crust, but the yeast continues to rise, breaking through the crust. The rise of my LM is rather flat.
Montanari describes some defects and corrections for them. The one that seems the most fitting is his description of a starter that has too much lactic acid. Consistency is sticky and soft (relative, but I think it fits), smells slightly perfumed (vague, but I think it also fits), scarce small and rounded alveoli (definitely), "slightly acidic" flavor (again, vague but it fits) with a pH between 4.1 - 4.3 (I think so, but pH discrepancies..). His correction is to refresh 1:2:0.43 twice per day, every 12 hours, left to ferment "open" at 20-22C. He also specifies mixing lightly. The idea is to increase heterofermenters and acetic acid. This is what I'm currently doing.
Here are some images after the last fermentation that preceded the Montanari correction that I'm now following. I'm not particularly happy with the rise or the alveolation. These images are of a 250g LM fed 1:1:0.5 and fermented for 4 hrs at 29C
At first glance that definitely looks too dark, while lighting can be misleading, contrasted against the cloth it looks dark and slightly dull. I say dull because a more mature LM has what I can only describe as a more reflective quality under light. Dark to me signifies an abundance of LAB and not enough yeasts.
The cross not opening is actually a big deal.
For sure it could benefit from being dosed with more flour.
Aim for this:
Source: Lievito naturale - Wikipedia
Thanks Michael.
This makes sense. I've been focused on the bacteria and pH side of this for a while now, knowing that in the course of doing so, I was likely creating other issues. I've suspected an issue with the yeast, so what you're saying makes sense. The color is indeed quite dark/yellowish in person.
Luckily, I think I'm on the right track. As I said, I'm following a correction by Montanari which involves a 1:2 refreshment at low hydration (43%), making sure to not overmix. This approach seems to align with a similar method suggested by https://biancolievito.com/how-to-fix-your-sourdough/. The section I'm referring to is "Excessive Lactic Acidity" which mentions that the fix is used to promote the development of yeast.
I will give it a few days with this maintenance routine before seeing how it responds to a more typical warm refreshment. I'm not sure if I should see any difference in color with these 1:2 12hr refreshments, but it is good that you pointed it out since color is not something I was really monitoring.
yeah, its odd how it hasn't opened out.
Mine even when floury was still opening out the middle and up like Michael's.
This LM has never had a great rise. Something I need to work on, but I guess I was more concerned about the bacteria side of it.
I let my starters ferment in the oven with the light on. Keeping the door cracked in different ways gives me different temps. One day last week, we had to use the oven so my starter had to ferment at room temp. This seemed to give the yeast quite a boost (difference between 30C in the oven and 22 room temp). The cross was finally starting to open.
A few days later, I found my starter at about 3.9 pH after the night rest, so for the first time in about a month I did a bagnetto, which always seems to suck some of the life out of my LM. The images are from the second refreshment after the bagnetto. Right back to the pathetic rise I'm used to lol
I'm currently doing 12 hour refreshments at room temp, which theoretically should stimulate yeast activity without causing an excess of lactic acid. Since I had good results fermenting at this temp, I'm hopeful this will move things in the right direction.
always knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure.
Not that that helps you any…
Paul
My guess is that I've of those is compensating for temperature and one isn't?
'Fraid not Jon; both meters have automatic temperature compensation.The Hanna temperature probe is integral to the tip, the Hach has a separate NTC probe - shown in the pic.
Lance
Some interesting data points over the past few days.
I tried Montanari's method for fixing a LM that is too lactic, which involved 1:2 refreshments at 43% hydration every 12hrs at 20-22C. This definitely worked - my LM has regained the acidic notes that it had lost a few days prior after a bagnetto and consecutive warm refreshments. The color is also lighter, though not nearly as white as the one in the Wikipedia image that Michael provided. It's rising better as well, but not enough.
About a week ago, I began mixing the Lancelot flour with some Cento Anna 00. I was initially using 3/4 Lancelot and 1/4 Cento at 50% hydration. I recently increased the amount of Cento flour to 1/3 which significantly reduced the discrepancy in my pH readings - the difference was finally down to only a few hundredths. I believe the Cento flour absorbs less water as I began to find the dough a little too sticky at 50%, so I reduced the hydration to 48% and am right back to having huge pH discrepancies. Very interesting to have almost zeroed in on the hydration percentage where discrepancies begin arising.
I tested a warm refreshment of 1:1.6 @ 50% hydration after the series of "Montanari refreshments" (5 in total) and it took nearly 7 hours to acidify below 4.2 at 28-29C. That still feels a bit long, so will test again with 1:1.
I now need to boost the yeast activity as I'm not getting the rise I want - it's doubling, maybe just barely tripling, but I'd prefer a strong tripling or even a larger increase. Not entirely sure how to get there, so will continue with regular refreshments every 4-8 hours depending on rise and pH.
Out of interest what method of storage are you using for the overnight? In water, bound (anaerobic), or free (dry and non anaerobic)?
After a long exclusivity using the bound method, I applied the in water for the overnight, and it is amazing what it can do...
To be honest, my LM hasn't seen much storage in the past month as I've been trying a lot of different things.
This week, I started overnight storage again. I'm binding at about 18 - 19C for no more than 16 hours.
When you say it's amazing what submerged storage can do, what do you mean? Given I've had problems with my LM acidifying, I've been hesitant to use submerged storage. If I understand correctly, submerged storage tends to create a less acidic starter than bound storage.
Separately, I've changed a few things over the past few days and was waiting for a few more refreshments to see how the LM was responding, but might as well update while I'm here. I wanted to get more rise out of my LM. Here's my thinking -
Chambelland says that LAB has optimal development at pH 5. He also notes that the yeast is sensitive to acetate and at pH 4.76, the dissociation of acetic acid into acetate becomes significant. My interpretation of that, which might not be correct, is that acetate will begin inhibiting yeast activity below 4.76. My plan has been to dose with more flour (as you suggested, coincidentally) so that the pre-fermentation pH lands in the range 4.76 < pH < 5. This way, I'm hoping that the yeast will thrive without being inhibited by acetate and the LM won't become too lactic.
Perhaps my hypothesis is flawed, but a single refreshment at 1:1.2:0.45 has yielded promising results. Here are a few pictures - I do think there is an issue with the white balance or something. I took these pictures literally minutes apart - first in the bowl, then I set the LM on a white cloth and took the others. The picture of the LM in the bowl is much closer to what I'm seeing in person.
Very different from my last pictures. More rise, some tearing on the surface, much better alveoli inside. I've repeated a similar refreshment today, this time using 1:1.25 and the tearing seems to be more pronounced (haven't cut it yet, but I'm hoping to find decent alveoli - hopefully even better than yesterday).
Edit: It's probably also worth noting that I'm having some difficulty deciding when to end fermentation due to the pH discrepancies. I've been leaving it to ferment for about 6 hours. I guess I expect longer than the typical 3-4 hours because I'm dosing with more flour and starting with a higher initial pH. I typically refresh when the pH reading in the dough is around 4.2 - 4.3, which yields a solution pH of around 3.9 - 4.1. I'm also finding that the quantity of water I use to test the pH in solution slightly affects the reading - so I'm no longer obsessing over pH because I've lost a bit of confidence in the readings.
Not that it will make any difference to you but the science is important: See my comments here: https://www.thefreshloaf.com/comment/518508#comment-518508 regarding the errors in theory of what Chambelland says.
Clearly your LM is not tripling, and that is either because there is too much acidity (likely) or not enough (unlikely). Based on what you've said it must be the former.
I noticed two things with the recent overnight I did in water, indeed it developed little acidity and the refreshments done following that showed a significantly slower decrease in pH.
So now I can't trust my pH values or what I've read in SPV 😅
In your comment that you linked, you say this:
This is concerning since I based my hypothesis on the fact that LAB have the competitive advantage below 4.5, but if it is in fact the yeast that has the advantage, then what I'm doing might not make much sense.
Based on your reasoning that my starter has too much acidity, what would be an appropriate correction? I can re-introduce the bagnetto but honestly, I've always felt like the bagnetto just sucks the life out of my LM. In fact, the earlier pictures I posed of my LM (the very yellow ones with no tearing on top) were right after a bagnetto. Prior to that, my starter looked closer to the more recent pictures I posted. Perhaps I should perform refreshments closer together, though I'm a bit worried about finding myself stuck at around 4.4 again.
It seems like it's moving in the right direction, despite my hypothesis being based on incorrect data.
Here are some pictures after fermentation today. The alveoli are the most noticeable difference, and while maybe not as noticeable in the pictures, there is also more tearing than yesterday. Maybe for you guys, this cross-section looks pretty bad, but this is honestly the best I've ever seen in my own LM.
I agree though - it's not tripling.
You should focus on tripling because that can't really happen until the other important factors are in place.
To my eyes yours your LM doesn't even look doubled... You can't know objectively unless you measure it... like so...
See my LM below, from here:
You might see the alveolatura is lighter / more expressive / uninhibited? Elevated acidity exerts a tightening effect, an oxidative effect and an impairment to fermentation.
Food for thought: If the pH reaches the target pH 4.1 before it has tripled then clearly there is too much acidity present.
Thanks for that. Makes sense.
I have measured the rise in a graduated container, though I have not done that for a few weeks now. It did actually seem to just barely double the last time I checked, but no more than that. Sadly, I don't think this LM has ever tripled in its lifetime.
Your last two comments seem to make sense together, along with something I was just reading in Omnia Fermenta about a maintenance method whereby the LM is kept in water exclusively.
As you said, if the pH reaches 4.1 before the starter has tripled then there is too much acidity. Considering the starter doesn't have a very strong flavor and definitely not one that I would say is overly acidic, I'm assuming that there is too much lactic acid as opposed to acetic acid. You also noted a slower decrease in pH after the night storage in water, which would theoretically provide more time for the starter to triple before reaching 4.1.
When discussing the starter maintained in water 24 hours, Montanari notes that yeast activity is very high and production of acid is very low. He notes that this method doesn't allow the yeast to produce "the slightest amount of lactic acid". As a general maintenance routine, this seems a bit extreme, but it could be useful short-term as a correction.
Perhaps some refreshments / storage in water is in order.
Busy weekend, so I opted for refreshments every 12 hours at 22 C. I kept the starter submerged for these refreshments thinking that it might help with the yeast activity. I did a bunch of these, maybe 6 or so, and noticed literally zero change in rise. I'm going to measure it today to see where it is but it's starting to feel impossible to get this thing to triple. Some of the refreshments were as much as 1:1.6 to help dilute the current microorganism colony in hopes of building a better one, but it didn't really make a difference. I'm considering 1:2 or maybe even 1:3 or something. I feel like I'm running out of ideas.
I notice that after 12 hours, the starter still seems very active. I can see it producing a lot of bubbles, however, no matter how long I leave it, the size doesn't seem to increase in a significant way beyond the first ~6 hours.
Something interesting I read in Montanari's "pH4.1" was about how high the dough floats above the surface of the water. It should be about half way, the picture of mine I linked, would be too strong (not much of the dough is underwater) and that makes sense, since mine has always leaned to the too strong side of things.
Personally I have always noted how quickly the exposed dough creates a crust and how tick and dry or not it is.
Sorry to hear, you haven't seen any changes.
Funny you mention how high it's floating because it's something I've taken note of recently. I went back to the original method I used to create my LM, which was a document published by fullproofbaking (I assume you are familiar with it since my version says it was updated "after consultation with Michael Wilson"). Anyway, there is a picture of a floating LM in that document and it seems that nearly the entire starter is above the water. I started taking note of mine and the water almost perfectly crosses the center of the dough.
I tried a warm submerged refreshment today (again, taking inspiration from the fullproofbaking where it is used quite frequently). I refreshed 1:1:0.45. I noticed that the starter was floating after 45 minutes at 28-29C. I also used a spy to see how much rise I was getting. After 2 hours, it had easily doubled (measuring from the base of the convex "dome" that formed on top). By the end of 3 hours, the bottom of the dough was beginning to pull upward, which I took to mean that it was beginning to deflate. The honeycomb, of course, was still very tight - much like the last few images I uploaded. The pH...I don't know. The direct reading was 4.42, solution reading was 4.19 🥲
The following images show the starter at the beginning and end of fermentation - 3.25hrs @ 28-29C. I realize it might be a little difficult to make out, but the dough begins right at the 50ml mark (~75g dough). Again, hard to see, but there is a small gap between the dough and the bottom of the glass in the post-pic. The dough seems to have pulled up to the 25ml mark
Could it be a flour/hydration issue? Meaning could the gluten be so tight that the yeast cannot inflate it (meaning I should possibly add more water or use a weaker flour) or would the issue, in that case, be that the yeast is just too weak to inflate it, meaning the solution probably lies elsewhere? I notice when I knead the starter (always done by hand as it's not quite enough for my mixer to grab onto), the dough tears the whole time. The dough gets smoother as I laminate but no matter how much I knead (have not gone more than 15 mins), the dough tends more towards tearing than stretching.
Seems like such a long time ago since I last spoke with Kristen, a shame as she is lovely to talk with! After providing some initial feedback on some of the things I was hearing, we arranged a video call where she ran through a number questions she had. Some of the ideas I either agreed or disagreed with and I explained some of the technical science, she took notes and used these to make an update her documentation on LM. Last I remember she called quits on taking it any further and unfortunately she broke one of her mixers mixing the LM! To this day I haven't actually seen the document in its final iteration!
Floating in 45 minutes is good! The rise looks fairly decent too, but yes the dough seems a little lacking in extensibility I would say. The tearing during kneading is certainly indicative of it being too strong, i.e. too much acidity. Acidity effects the consistency, it allows for the binding of more water and makes it tougher to knead. On top of that using NA flour from hard wheat contributes to the toughness, as they tend to be tenacious and lacking in extensibility.
The document details a maintenance routine of 1 warm submerged refreshment lasting 4 hours, followed by bound storage for 20 hours.
If it were a matter of acidity, would this not be reflected in the pH? Is it something related to the balance of acids where the pH can be within range but but the starter overall can be too acidic, as you're saying? I ask because I'm not getting crazy pH readings or anything but of course have not measured TTA.
I did attempt to take your earlier suggestion of mixing my Lancelot 50/50 with a NA soft wheat. I couldn't find a good soft wheat flour, so opted for the only soft wheat i could find that day, which was Cento Anna 00. I believe it's something like 12% protein with a W rating of 270, but not sure of the other specs. It has been quite a while now but I do vaguely remember my LM tightening up after switching to 100% Lancelot from King Arthur Bread Flour.
I do have some Caputo Americana that I typically use for panettone. I'd also like to not have to maintain my LM with imported flour, but I'm too curious now - might try refreshing with that flour and seeing what happens.
No, not always, such is the nature of pH. Certainly measuring TTA would help take the guess work out of it. You can however get a gauge of TTA by measuring the starting pH. Where a feed occurs at 1:1, if the pH is lower than 4.8-5.0 then there is too much acidity present.
As part of my interpretation I ascribe the influence of redox potential and how this parameter affects things.
Effects of oxidation; stiff, dry, tough, tight alveoli. (reduced extensibility)
Effects of reduction; damp, soft, extensible, relaxed alveoli. (increased extensibility)
Generally, SD specific LAB activity drives reduction through enzymatic processes, but acidity however drives oxidation. As a rule the higher the TTA the slower everything happens fermentation wise and it can be the case where there is a continuous presence of acidity that blocks the ideal fermentation and the reductive power of LAB.
Regarding the flour, sure I get that and to be honest this factor of tenacity and its influence is probably far more subtle than the effects of acidity. I just thought it was worth mentioning.
Interesting points - I have noticed these different qualities of oxidation and reduction in the dough and it's helpful to name them and better understand what's happening. In fact I do often notice that the pH of a 1:1 feeding starts in the 4.7 - 4.8 range, which seems slightly low.
I did a 1:1 refreshment with the Americana flour. I didn't see any remarkable differences, however, I do feel that the honeycomb looks different. It does seem like it is moving more toward the image you linked of your LM. It is not there yet, obviously, and the starter is still 50% Lancelot flour, but this seems promising enough for me to continue with a few more Americana refreshments. Kneading was significantly easier - the dough was considerably softer and more extensible. It's very interesting how different these two flours feel.
On the top is a cross-section of my starter refreshed with Lancelot and underneath, Americana (50/50 as the previous refreshments were 100% Lancelot).
That certainly looks better! To my eyes, a little too much acidity still, but moving in the right direction for sure.
The pH not dropping adequately in the typical refreshment timeframe is a very good sign of a lactic imbalance to begin with. So is lack of volume/growth during refreshments. This is especially likely since (assuming you still use Lancelot) you use a malted flour with a somewhat low-ish falling number (i.e. below 300).
Lancelot works well for panettone flour though. Can't guarantee it works for every recipe, and it very likely won't work for a LM imbalanced toward lactic acidity.
Cool night-rests/"refreshments" are definitely critical for correction here. I would even say avoid too many successive warm refreshments for now. Water maintenance would also definitely help steer away from lactic acidity. I will say though that water maintenance is a quite tedious, inconvenient, and wasteful (from personal experience). It is quite beginner-friendly though (in my opinion), just takes more resources. I'd say opt for doing baths instead, as they are much more effective in reducing lactic acidity than acetic.
Ultimately there is a trade-off here: spend more for a more "technical" flour and possibly do water management to get more reliable/consistent results (pretty much guarantees fixing the acidity issue if you can do daily refreshments at the right temperature) or go the cheaper trial-and-error way with common (U.S.) flours (my preferred choice, for the sake of learning, science, and exploration!) by tweaking hydration, refreshment temperatures, scheduling, etc. along the way.
Still working on getting my LM into shape. This primo impasto didn't rise on time, only 1.5x rise in twelve hours (challenging formula) and pH too low (although vasty improved!). So instead of chucking it, I waited until triple, then knocked it back and shaped. It came out of the container completely cleanly and very aerated, very elastic and developed, supplely extensible, audible popping of large bubbles, rounded into a very taught ball - lots of strength!
The strength remained, and rose very strongly - very domed and very taught. When scored it immediately opened up!
With a pat of butter laid in the cross, it expanded well in the oven...
Final weight = 450g in a 500g mould.
And quite beautiful. Have you tasted it??
I've made a primo impasto this evening, Roy recipe, and am rising it at 21-22C (cool) tonight as an experiment.
I've been handling my LM a bit differently, 18-19C for 18 hours at 1:1.5:.40 and 27C for 6 hours at 1:1.25:40. It seems sweeter, and is rising well, but we'll see tomorrow. It looked like this:
Good looking I agree, it's got that lovely bloom iconic of a typical panettone, but it was inedible I'm sorry to say...
Without salt, of course it is bland, sweet at first and then quite sour, it's a very jarring experience.
How did your bake go?
Unfortunate, I was hoping you would say it was like a delicious brioche!!
My bake went very well. It was actually the best so far, but I still have a long way to go I believe. I have been studying everything I can, and the more I learn, the more complex it becomes.
I've been trying to pull together all the factors I know of that produce successful outcomes, but there are probably hundreds of choices and actions that affect this.
Anyway, this bake was extremely light, shreddable and fluffy, with excellent flavor. It was a Classico, Roy recipe. My Lievito Madre is bound, put away in my very cold storage fridge until the next bake in a couple of weeks.
Also, I purchased an incubation cooler that can hold my dough rising container, so that my ongoing experiments will be more precisely temperature-controlled.
Any pH measurements? My eyes tell me it's too lactic... An easy way to tell, is how springy the baked panettone is. The more firm it is the more lactic it probably is. I could be wrong but it looks firm-set to me.
Elevated acidity (lactic) during the process mostly just gets in the way of flavour development.
I'm curious, have you tasted a real artisan panettone? Ever since tasting the real deal, there is no comparison... Even with enriching ingredients present which one might consider detractive, truly there is no better expression of sourdough / wheat fermentation!
You're right, I am still not there with the pH, from the classic perspective.... however I took a class recently which stressed hitting a lower pH as a key point in achieving alveolation.
I would say the crumb is somewhere in between totally springy and set; I have seen videos of panettones which can almost be crushed and then spring back, this isn't to that degree.
And no, although I have purchased rather expensive panettones online, I have not had one of the best, like those from the panettone championship. And living where I do, it seems unlikely.
My first impasto final pH was just like all the other times, 4.39. Both of my impastos had very strong gluten development, and final dough handled very well, could be coil folded, pirlatura was easy and correct..
There is absolutely no sour or off taste in the crumb, but that has never been an issue in my bakes. I am looking for higher rises and more alveolation, but progress is gradual.
I encourage you to not be succumbed by superficial goals. Open crumb does not a good panettone make nor is it any real mystery. Generally where there is fully developed gluten and good extensibility there will be an open crumb. What class, may I ask?
For perspective, pH 4.39 is actually about 5 times more acid than it should be! Because of that I imagine your secondo gets worked for a good amount of time since the presence of acidity will increase resistance and therefore time to develop.
"classic perspective" - sounds like some sort of compartmentalisation!
Please understand it's not my goal to offend, nor to diminish ones efforts, but the coldness of hard reality is where I live not the glistening gold of delusion. Hope you understand.
Yes, I agree the pH is and always has been too low for my 1st impasto.
It was Claudio Perrando's course.
On mix times: My mix times follow along similar times I've seen in online mix demonstrations. I have a spiral mixer, and I'm comparing to spiral mixer times. My dough was very extensible, but I would like to make it more extensible.
Here's a question: Can you comment on this? I was reading (in a Giorilli piece) that the lipid portion of a dough can to some extent actually bond with some of the protein in the flour.... I'll search for the quote. That is interesting to me, as I have started to insert the butter at an earlier stage in the process, and it seems to have increased extensibility.
Protein/lipid interactions can be complex and I imagine what Giorilli was describing was in respect to an interplay with acidity regarding ionic charges. Certainly there can be a detrimental effect where the level of lactic acid is high which then causes problems with binding fats, something which always happened to me in the early days. Adding yolks last or making an emulsion with butter and yolks might help to alleviate that issue...
Trust me, you will give less time to, the thought of, and the action of, mixing when you sort out the acidity!
This made me think of something - I remember reading some of the mixing times in SPV and thinking they were crazy - e.g. mixing all of the butter into the primo in one shot for 3 minutes on second speed. Granted I'm using a vastly inferior mixer than the ones prescribed by the book, but it would take me nearly 20 minutes to accomplish this - and this is with me helping the dough hook to grab onto the dough.
I'm now sufficiently convinced that my LM has always been too lactic. Maybe that's why it always takes me so long to incorporate the butter...
Hey Sue, was this picture taken after the long fermentation at 18C or the short one at 27C?
I've been working with YenForYang on rebalancing my LM. The plan has basically been to try and shift it towards being less lactic and more acetic.
Refreshments have been 1:1:0.35 (35% hydration is miserable to work with, in case you were wondering) and left submerged at 18C for 12-24hrs, but generally around 20 hours. We did switch to King Arthur Bread Flour, which helps with the low hydration (pretty sure 35% is impossible with Lancelot lol). This has done some really interesting things to the honeycomb after 20 hours. I'm sure you all are used to seeing things like this but it was quite the surprised when I sliced it open (I was surprised the first time, this is maybe the 8th or so refreshment):
I started testing warm refreshments and am seeing some improvements (I think - tell me the truth Michael I can handle it 😅), but not quite there yet
That's really coming along!! The photo of my LM was taken at 1:47 PM, which means after the 18 hour cooler refreshment. I like how yours is going!!
Last night, I was looking at various sources, and your new direction sounds (to me) somewhat like the allyoukneadis bread.com one. Which I think has real potential. I think the 35% is a good idea...
Then I was reading Massari in Cresci again, and I think that is my next direction. That is where I started originally, and there were some things about my earliest LM that were good, that I would like to revisit. I do recall getting a 5.2 pH after 1st impasto in the early days, although I didn't have a clue how to mix or bake, etc.
This is the first time I've ever seen a rise like this. Perhaps there is a primo in my future.
The pH is still not exactly where I want it to be. I took a few readings here - sometimes I would get 4.3 - 4.4, other times I would get 4.2 - 4.3. Dissolved in water, I got 4.20 🤷🏻♂️.
Can it look so right and still be so wrong haha? I might continue this routine for a bit longer and then let a primo guide me from there. The LM keeps getting better but the pH always seems to be in the same range (unless of course the pH is actually 4.20 according to the water measurement, but never sure what to believe). Surely this LM is in significantly better shape than the earlier images I sent regardless of what the pH meter says.
There's been a significant shift with my LM!
Since the beginning of January I've had more time to work on / investigate this and ever since making the move to using very strong Italian 00 flour, I had not yet seen sufficient tripling and I always felt the yeast was just not as active as they should be...
That is now fixed! - It had been driving me crazy that it wasn't tripling. The last time I saw proper tripling was quite some time ago but that was when using an English / Canadian blend milled in the UK (see the previous picture I added to this thread). So nice to pick up a light-weight dough!
I attribute the recent change to using the Morandin style hot bagnetto. Something I often used in the past, especially when re-establishing a long time stored / neglected starter.
Wow, that looks great. I'm going to try the hot bagnetto! My LM has been in the refrigerator for 5 days.
Thanks Sue.
I would reiterate that this is what one should be after.
Tonight's LM Rinfresco:
I'm starting with the Morandin bagnetto tomorrow morning.
I looked it up in SD&V, and that is indeed a hot bagnetto!!! But should definitely favor yeast development...
While this very warm bagnetto is a staple in the methodology of Morandin, in researching I did find Giorilli to write of this type of bagnetto. He describes it as a viable option for up to 3 hours in his book Panificando...
Just as I would do when refreshing a long time stored starter, I would remix it with flour and just enough water to make a firm dough, and then slice and leave to rise in bowl of sweetened water for 3 hours at 38C.
It certainly has been working well for me as a standard bagnetto in recent times...
I see that Morandin is doing a 40 min bagnetto..... and so Giorilli does an initial one for 3 hours? That is a big departure from the others! But look at your LM, it is marvelous!!!
I can't help but see the similarity in the bagnetto and YW...
Pasteur effect me thinks?!
He talks broadly (as the maestros do) of the the bagnetto. Up to three hours...
I prepare my bagnetto at 40C, Giorilli says up to 43C IIRC.
I took my LM out of refrigeration (not bound), and I wasn't expecting very quick growth after 5 days of storage...
Gave it the hot (well, 37C) bagnetto with some sugar, for 25 minutes... being conservative there...
Mixed it 1:11:.30, due to the water from the bagnetto, which came out to a pretty good consistency, perhaps a tiny bit on the soft side..
Put in my 86F incubator, and 3 hours later it had grown enormously, in a way I have not seen before.
I might have to try it too lol.
I have to say, I love that this thread has become people sharing their maintenance routines and posting pictures of their LM.
I'm not entirely sure what my LM is doing, but the fermentation process has become visually impressive. I'm not sure if I'll ever tire of seeing it "bloom" like this. Even if it's a bad sign, I quite enjoy it.
The starter has definitely made a more acetic shift. I think that has a lot to do with what's going on. For almost a month, the LM has been refreshed almost exclusively at 18-19C for long stretches (18-24 hrs). Water management has become a burden - it's messy, wasteful, and takes a long time. I recently ditched the water and just ferment "free" in a container - no water, no binding, no ceremonial offerings to the fermentation gods. Somehow, even with the striking visual differences, I'm still landing in 4.3-4.4 (as high as 4.45 actually) territory after warm refreshments.
Very big difference from a few weeks ago:
Maybe after such a long stretch in the cold, the heat will do it well.
.
@joegranz
In fixing one problem that has given me the proper tripling I was after... I now have the same problem you have, where the pH is very reluctant to dip below 4.3. But I think I am fixing it already...
If you want more lactic acidity and therefore a lower pH, binding seems to help...
Thanks for the tip! I haven't bound the madre for a few weeks now. I have been considering it to solve this problem, but couldn't convince myself that it was the right course of action given the pH wouldn't drop below 4.3 even when the LM was overly lactic.
Conceptually it does make sense.
I did a series of warm refreshments today that was somewhat encouraging, though not quite what I wanted in order to proceed with a primo. The first refreshment dropped from 4.84 to 4.22 in 6 hours. The second refreshment dropped from 4.93 to 4.24 in 5 hours. So, the second one had a bigger drop in less time. I have a 3rd refreshment working right now just to see if the pattern continues.
Getting below 4.2 will be another challenge.
Also, I'm no longer getting massive pH discrepancies between testing the dough directly and dissolving it in distilled water. Perhaps something about the acetic/lactic acid balance has something to do with this as the shift towards acetic acid is the biggest change my LM has undergone recently.
It seems we've switched places.
My LM is acidifying pretty well now, at least over a long storage refreshment. I do a lot of long 18-24hr refreshments at about 18C. The pH used to start around 4.8 and get down to maybe 4.1-4.2. Now, it's starting at 4.8 and getting down to 3.8-3.9. The issue, as you might have guessed, is that my yeasts aren't happy - the madre is just barely doubling in 4 hours. The flavor is interesting - there is a sweetness to this LM that I've never tasted before.
I've tried the hot bagnetto - I don't think it's working its same magic for me.
I have been doing something similar utilising longer maintenance times, approx. 18hrs and also long refreshment times, 5-6hrs to reach pH 4.1.
The refreshed LM is now showing signs of maximised yeasts since I have now seen signs of CO2 production ceasing which is another thing I have been waiting to see, so that is at least a goal reached. Perceived acetic acid is still elevated and the dough darkens somewhat (losing its oxygen).
I haven't seen sub pH 4.0 for a while now, so indeed we have switched places which is in some way a good thing... We have both affected a change.
I noted you have not been very positive about the bagnetto technique and I'm sorry it hasn't worked for you for which I am surprised since it worked so well for me and in the school of Morandin the bagnetto is king!
I certainly pinpoint the use of the hot bagnetto as a key step which finally allowed my dough to physically triple in volume and wiped out the once continuous plague of low pH and high TTA (high lactic).
I am trying something now to see if I can reclaim some of that acidity, will let you know if it works..
As for your LM, I can only try and persuade you to keep experimenting with the hot bagnetto.
Perhaps I'm not doing this hot bagnetto correctly? I am preparing the water at 40C, adding a little bit of sugar (close to the usual amounts you see recommended - I don't really measure it) then slicing the madre and letting it soak for 20-30 minutes. I've only tried this at most once per day after the long maintenance. Anything special about the refreshment following the bagnetto? Do you use hotter water or anything to keep the temp higher during the refreshment?
I will keep trying it - it worked so well for you and Sue. I have generally been quite negative on the bagnetto. I feel like every time I've used it, I've seen less of a rise in subsequent refreshments. It's also worth noting that for as little as I might understand now, I understood even less back then. Nearly nothing lol. I wasn't measuring pH, didn't know what to look for in a LM, and basically just blindly followed a process, performing a bagnetto every morning because that's just "the process". I was definitely not in a position to assess the effectiveness of a bagnetto.
I've been a bit indecisive, getting in my own way of fixing this I think. You had told me that the madre won't triple because of too little acid (almost definitely not the problem here) or too much acid. So am I correct in thinking that the general idea here is to reduce acid so that the yeast is less inhibited? Are there any other reasons for yeasts to "lag" like this?
Specifically, what I'm seeing is over a 4 hour refreshment, hours 1 and 2 are dormant in terms of growth. About 75% of the growth happens in hour 3 and 25% in hour 4. A the end of 4 hours, it hasn't really even doubled. In terms of submerged maintenance, I was typically seeing my LM float after about 90mins at 18C refreshed 1:1. Now, regretfully, it is taking 6 long hours to float.
The long submerged maintenance at the low hydration of 35% worked so well for balancing my LM a few weeks ago. I tried it again for a few days but still can't get the madre to float in less than 6 hours.
All sounds about right, as a matter of routine I only use a bagnetto after the long overnight maintenance as prescribed. I think there are some nuances to the technique that being aware of could be beneficial. I don’t enjoy those moments where it feels as if the dough pieces are melting and it's difficult to reclaim the solid matter. I think wringing the pieces well, is important, so that the added water at 35-40% still results in a stiff dough. With a good routine and strong flour this should be assured. The refresh after this I am actually using very cold water for the mix, since I noted how my doughs were actually getting too warm with hand kneading (31.5C)! In the same light I took care to measure the sugar addition to the bagnetto water - I would often add too much because I was not measuring it. I now know what the appropriate amount looks like. Following the hot bagnetto leavening activity was always lively!
Regarding too little and too much acidity affecting the rise, this was very much in the light of the physical ability to rise. LAB drive reduction and this can cause physical weakness that means the dough prefers to spread than to rise upward in the case the cross won't open. Or there can be too much acid that the gluten becomes inextensible and again the cross doesn’t open because it is physically restricted. I don't generally comment along the lines of favouring yeast over LAB or the other way around because I don't see things that way. This Yeast Vs LAB idea is a bit of a red herring, thinking this way is limited and not a realistic interpretation of the facts. High acidity is not good as it slows fermentation generally, both yeast and LAB are slowed but that may be more to do with how low pH impedes amylolytic activity.
pH - Yeast growth not affected / LAB growth limited (in the ranges typical of SD)
High TTA - Yeast and LAB and sugar release from flour slowed.
Wow 6hrs to float that is not good! And not seeing any rise for 2hrs is also pretty concerning.
Apologies I don't post as frequently as I like, but I gather things with your LM have improved since…?
I have been fermenting it at room temp 21 - 22C and refreshing every 12 hours or so. I have begun seeing signs of activity after about 3 hours. Not great by any means, but an improvement as it had been taking longer than that. It's still not tripling though. It's doubling nicely, which is an improvement, but not tripling. I've been fermenting a piece of the starter in a straight walled jar to judge growth - the covex dome on top reaches the tripling mark, but the base of the dome is only at the point of doubling. I'm judging by the base, which I had seen triple in the past (but I had scored the top in the past, which i haven't been doing, which perhaps makes it rise differently but i doubt this has much to do with the issue).
The pH range has shifted lower than it was in the past. In fact the pH is behaving in a way I'm not familiar with, which makes sense because I haven't experienced this issue before. My last fermentation ended at pH 4.12, I refreshed 1:1 and the pH after mixing was only 4.67, which seems quite low. I typically see something like 4.8 after mixing.
Ive tried a few things. At first I thought maybe there was too much lactic acid and so resorted to the cold, low hydration submerged refreshments which corrected that issue for me in the past.
When that didn't work, I tried refreshing with less flour than starter, which is something I typically see recommended when yeast is lagging. That did not work.
Then, I decide to dilute the starter quite a bit and refreshed a few times 1 part yeast, 2 parts flour, hoping that yeasts would get more active by using a lower hydration, which I understand inhibits bacteria more than yeasts. That has slightly improved things, I think.
I am so close to trying the egg yolk lol. Separately, I've started a new madre "for science", but I am too stubborn to abandon this one.
Thanks for the info. I will think about it and see if I can come up with a remedy I haven't yet tried.
With a starting pH of 4.67 then I can assure you there is too much acid (high TTA) present and that fits with the symptom of not rising to triple.
Not tripling doesn't definitively mean yeasts are deficient, often it is the case that the gluten can't stretch sufficiently. However, in your case they probably are deficient based on a lack of leavening activity. Under these circumstances I think a common trap is to feed again before the yeasts have fully regained their cellular population. Where acidity is high everything is slower, so the trap perpetuates itself. When my LM had these these symptoms, I established that with long ripening times I could coax very rapid leavening activity even though the acid load was very high and pH levels were low.
Low hydration (stiff) starters dont actually favour yeasts over LAB (I have posted supporting evidence for this). I know it flies in the face of common knowledge but the evidence is there. And if that was the case, why are we all having issues with acidification?!
Stiff starters characterised by high pH and high TTA.
Liquid starters characterised by low pH and low TTA.
The extra water in looser consistency is just that, extra water.
Meanwhile I have made some massive strides with my LM! It seems the acid load (TTA) is lower than ever and I'm truly enjoying seeing the refreshes cease CO2 production in 4-5 hours!
It feels different too, like kneading a yeasted biga dough. The pH levels are within acceptable range, not quite hitting 4.1 as the yeasts tend to complete their growth before that point at about 4.2-4.3.
I am aware of the trap and my plan for dealing with it has been waiting for yeast activity to cease and then refreshing. I assume the activity has died down once volume stops increasing. It sounds like I still might be refreshing too early - perhaps the yeast are still regaining their cellular population even though growth has stopped.
And even though I'm aware of the trap, the low pH has definitely made me hesitant to let fermentation go too long. It's hard to ignore. I guess my thinking was that if there is too much acidity for the starter to triple, letting the pH get even lower could only make things worse. So yeah, I've been struggling with letting the madre ferment for a long time as the pH approaches 4.0. sounds like it's worth a shot.
Glad your LM is doing well - definitely gives me hope!
Nothing major to report here, but I have come across a copy of pH4.1 which is influencing how I approach this problem.
One really interesting point is where Montanari talks about homofermentative LABs. He describes them almost like an infection - they have a wide activation temp all the way up to 45C, produce lactic acid almost exclusively, and "colonize the environment by inhibiting the development of any other microorganism including heterofermenters, even making yeasts inactive". They sound pretty stubborn and this description applies to my PM pretty well. I wonder if this is the issue and why it so often feels like nothing I try makes any difference.
I've also learned in pH4.1 that the yeasts seem to suffer in environments that are too lactic whereas they seem to do well in the presence of acetic acid. Montanari describes acetic acidity as accompanied by a "greater vitality of the yeasts". This has made me focus less on how to strengthen the yeast and more on how to rebalance favoring acetic acid (I guess they are effectively the same thing, but the different perspective has helped me).
I won't be able to deal with the PM for a few days, so decided to bind it and put it in the fridge. Before doing that, I spent a few days following some of Montanari's fixes for a too-lactic PM. I refreshed about every 12-18 hours 1 part yeast, 2 parts flour at about 40% hydration. I mixed the dough to biga consistency and left it at about 20C. Today, I bound it up and after about 2.5 hours at 20C, I began to feel a tightness in the string. This is a PM that would show zero activity for nearly 6 hours at 20C, so hopefully an improvement but hard to tell until I can test a few more refreshments.
Also, I had started another PM in the style of Alberto Bernardi. I used KABF for that starter as well. Probably no surprise, but both my new starter and old one are exhibiting the same issues - very prolonged leavening times with a failure to triple. Starting over was a fun experience but obviously won't help when you run into the same issues with the new madre.
A Panettone with the highest sugar content, above 50% of the flour (bakers %). Also with high butter (~60%) and low egg %.
And yes, no flour added in the second dough!
Stats
Not a great result technically but nonetheless delicious! Still as yet plagued by pH issues. Primo was 4.2!!
Otherwise, sensory analysis reveals a flavour very moist, sweet and very buttery, without any sourness or any obvious acidic flavour that the average palate might discern.
EDIT: Removed IFRAME excel sheet as it was negatively affecting page load speed. Replace with UM Calculator image of Zoia formula.
Looks good!
How was your LM leading up to mixing the panettone dough? Were you able to get it below 4.3?
If you were not able to get it below 4.3, how did you proceed? Given my pH issues, I find that when I do the 3 preparatory refreshments I have two choices -
Option 1 would lead to a primo being mixed with a starter around 4.3-4.4. Option 2 would only allow for 2 refreshments, unless I want to be mixing at 2am.
I've read that a healthy LM can be anywhere from about 4.1 to 4.4, yet 4.1 is the target we all seem to aim for and which an entire book is named after. Obviously, even with the pH issues, you've produced a very nice loaf.
I would like to start seeing how my LM behaves in a primo, so have been debating which approach is better.
Not really, 4.26 IIRC. I think it's important to stick religiously to the 3-4 hour timeframe in the lead up to a primo so that's what I did.
My LM is becoming very acetic now, which makes sense since I've always said lactic promotes lactic.
Regarding pH 4.1, indeed while this is important to some maestros it isn't so much with others, such as Giorillli, for him the optimum is pH 4.5!
Wow, I had no idea that there are maestros using a LM at 4.5. All the more reason for me to start baking. I think the issue of my second dough turning into a soupy mess was caused by the madre being too lactic. I've definitely seen enough of a shift that I no longer think that's an issue, so worth another shot I think.
To be honest I'm not too familiar with Giorilli's practices. Is there a particular publication detailing his process? A quick search shows quite a few books by him. The one entitled "La Lievitazione Lenta" seems like it might be a good one.
Personally I'm not quite onboard with the whole lactic / acetic descriptors even though I get it and have used it. I guess it works for a sensory analysis but in real terms, lactic acid will always dominate.
In the case where butter fails into incorporate, my own interpretations of what's going on here is an oxidative problem / acidity problem. The gluten is tightened so much that it becomes impossible to work as the slippery fats lubricate everything. More extensibility allows for better incorporation.
I have a copy of La Lievitazione Lenta, it's quite a general book nothing like others that go into more depth, for instance Montanari's.
There's several technical resources written by Giorilli on DolceSalato, there links on my blog: Lievito Madre | Italian Baking (wordpress.com)
here's one: http://www.dolcesalato.com/blog/2012/07/17/a-lezione-di-lievito-madre/
Hey joegranz ...still trying to rebalance this? Or have you eventually got it?
I ask because I was in the same boat, however I have started again from scratch and can tell you I should have done it months ago. If its not performing and you have exhausted most routes you could have a fully performing LM within a week.
just trying to help, if you enjoy the struggle/learning, I also get that.
Alex
I do enjoy the struggling/learning - if that's not happening I tend to lose interest. I'm also stubborn and want to learn how to maintain a LM indefinitely - which means correcting any issues or imbalances that might arise. My LM acidity is good now, but I cannot get it to triple - a new problem I'm working on.
I've also started a new madre in the past few days. I follow Alberto Bernardi on Instagram and he goes from apple to panettone in less than 2 weeks. Recently, he began documenting his creation of a new madre which was enough inspiration for me to follow along and try it myself. I'm fully expecting the new LM to quickly get to a healthy state and outperform my old one by far, but let's see.
I'm not sure how much I'm on board with some of Alberto's points. He speaks of madres created from apple water and sugar as having a "memory" that allows them to be very powerful once they mature. He also tends to prefer younger madres because they vastly outperform old ones (though I have a feeling that there are more than a few maestros who might disagree...). Anecdotally, I've met a few people with the exact same balancing issues I'm experiencing and coincidentally all of us started our madre in the same way - from a liquid starter (which was not started from fruit).
For a long time I've wondered if I just don't have the right strains of bacteria in my madre - perhaps something about starting from fruit increases the chances of getting the right microorganisms? I'm not sure. Someone from EIDB was in Al's comments talking about dextran production and how Chambelland lists a few bacteria known for dextran production, but it's impossible to be sure which bacteria will be in your starter when creating it from scratch. I've also heard some people say that the best panettone is made from madres started from fruit.
I have a lot of questions, so thought it was worth a shot. I don't want to have to throw away a LM and start a new one every time I run into an issue, but starting fresh can be a valuable learning experience as well.
Also, I'm in no position to defend the points and thoughts I've relayed from Alberto's Instagram posts, but would love to hear counterarguments from those who disagree.
I also did the same except im about day 8 or so from albertos guide and I must say the results (only on PM) are amazing. If you look at my blog ive got more photos on it. Broad strokes though see images...its hitting all the perameters most suggest are desirable. I would say though thats me only at the first stage of this, getting it to this point doesnt mean im going to be hitting a primo above 5 haha, thats a whole other journey im expecting. Everything you had though from the initial post, I also had. Glad I restarted because at least I know now I can hit the initial foundation marks. Good luck, hope it goes as well as mine has!
Also yes same boat, I started from a liquid starter previously (not initially with a fruit ferment). Ive also seen a few now who started with dung...
I am just about to start my LM on 18C water maintenance. The pH of my starter is still extremely high around 5.5, but as Al suggests I am prioritizing yeast and using volume increase as a key metric right now, not really worrying much about pH. I am about to start water maintenance which should hopefully get the pH under control.
I will say though, I have never in my life seen a starter grow like this. The initial liquid starter made from the apple water must have increased about 5x by the time it was done fermenting. I mixed it a little too big, filling the jar just under halfway. I knew that would be an issue and I'd have to stir it down, but I had to stir it down every 45-60 minutes for a few hours lol. When that became too much work, I transferred it to another container where it continued to grow. Not really sure how much it grew in the end, but it was really incredible. The stiff dough reaches maximum volume in less than 3 hours, though I expect this to slow once the acidity arrives.
What kind of flour are you using? I'm sure the crazy yeast activity I'm seeing has to do with my flour being malted.
Haha! Yeah mine wasnt that wild at all. It about doubled max first few days. Then once I hit my schedule and refreshed it at the right point it began to really pop. I only started to look at ph when it started to hold shape.
I kept one in water and one just dry. I find the one in water acififies to what is expected - about 4.1/2 and then ig I leave it longer it will go below 4. Where as the dry version tends not to go below 4.1 im yet to push it though time wise. On the correct schedule though I have found a good rythem.
Im testing a panettone with it to see how it goes, im not expecting any miracles to be honest but now at least I know im closer to the goal.
Good luck with it hope it turns out good!
Ah yes, Italian flour. I expect my experience to be quite a bit different from yours!
Interesting results with the bound vs submerged starters. I would've expected the opposite - bound to finish at a lower pH than submerged.
Thanks, and good luck to you as well. I'll report back here with anything notable.
Im expecting it will probably just end up the same acidified primo!
Yes me too. I think the water makes it easier somehow to balance.
Thanks primo in 1hr! Need all i can get
Hey,
I am looking to get my LM started again for Easter.
The apple water seems interesting to try, do you need to use particular apples or any apple from the supermarket will do ?
thanks,
L
From what I understand, the microorganisms are on the skin of the apple, so you want an organic apple.
I can try to summarize Alberto Bernardi's method as best I can, with the disclaimer that this method is not my own, but the information I gathered while looking through some of Alberto's recent posts. I realize a lot of people here are knowledgeable enough to create a starter without explicit instructions, but maybe someone will find it useful.
First, you ferment apple water. Take 1 organic apple (probably 200 - 250g), cut it into large pieces and mix with about 400g water and 20g sugar. I don't think this has to be exact. Alberto mentions having used up to 100g of sugar. Leave that at about 28 - 30C for about 48 hours, shaking the jar every 4 or 5 hours. You should see signs of fermentation in the water. I was getting a lot of bubbles when I shook it and would hear the pressure release when I opened the lid. Near the end of the 48 hours, I started to see bubbles around the edge of the surface even without shaking the jar, but it took almost the full 48 hours to see this.
Next, mix a liquid starter. Take equal parts flour and apple water and mix well. Leave this at 28 - 30C for 10 - 12 hours or up to 24. It should double, but in Alberto's latest attempt it didn't grow at all and mine probably grew like 5x (which I assume is because my flour is malted).
Next, create a stiff starter. Bring the hydration to 40 - 43%, refreshing with 1 part starter and about 0.85 flour. Again, leave this at 28 - 30C for about 12 hours. Repeat this every 12 hours or so. From this point on, you're looking for the starter to reach its maximum level of fermentation in 3 - 4 hours (I am not sure how he determines "max fermentation"). Throughout these refreshments, there doesn't seem to be a great reduction in pH. Once the starter is performing well, you can increase the ratio to 1:1.
Once you've obtained max fermentation in 3 - 4 hours, you can begin a normal maintenance routine. I believe Alberto does 20 hours submerged at 18C followed by 3-4 hours at 28 - 30C (not sure if the warm refreshment is submerged). Once the pH is within range and the starter is rising well, you should be able to use it for panettone.
He claims that the entire process takes about 10 - 15 days in total.
Again, this formula is not my own. I'm just trying it out for fun. I have some notes on times and pH from my own attempt that I haven't included but can share them if you want. I'm also not finished creating my starter yet (just began submerged maintenance today), so cannot speak to its effectiveness (though I'd happily take one of Alberto's panettone any day lol).
I live in the tropics, apples sold here are all imported and I doubt they are organic.
But I will still try and see what happens.
I'm not sure it has to be an apple. I don't know what's so special about apples. That's what Alberto always uses, however I did see a comment on one of his posts where he confirmed that raisins should work too. I don't understand how the apple must be organic but the raisins can be packaged - either it doesn't really matter that much or there's something about the processing/packaging that I don't understand.
After resting bound in the fridge since dec 31st, I have attempted to revive my LM as it looked flabby.
it took few dry refreshes of long times, 6-8hrs 28c as well as overnight in wine chiller to get it at least doubling.
Last night I put it in water submerged, it more than tripled and ph is 3.7. Gonna do normal feeds and see how it responds now.
Unfortunately every time I do a submerged overnight it unrolls.
Wonder if it is too dry.
I think the unraveling means something. Mine has been doing the same, but it only started recently.
Maybe someone here remembers what it means - I feel like it's something more than just being too dry but I could be wrong
I have devised my own formula for panettone!! It is Morandin-esque for the primo but the overall formulation is similar to Fabri / Roy - low yolk, high sugar (a la Zoia), high butter, extra water...
I think it could be an "approachable panettone" while still being very enriched.
Sounds good, low or lower yolk is the best in my opinion. I think that use of high yolk percentages is a crutch.
Composition / Enrichment Formulation - Comparison
Things are coming along nicely with my formulation...
Mixing up the primo is a joy! The dough feels so supple and elastic it's great to feel while handling.
How did the panettone turn out Michael?
Lance
as yet, I have had a bit of a bad run with panettoni falling from their moulds lately, even before I tried my own formulation. So there is, as always, something not right with the fermentation and therefore not right with my LM! Namely the ongoing pH problem that many report - An inability to reach 4.1 in 3-4 hours and the primo acidifying to below pH 5.
At least with my formulation the finished dough has never felt better, excellent elasticity and extensibility, perfectly enveloping the add-ins. However, I did encounter a new problem with this latest bake, butter melting out of the dough while proofing which I blame squarely at using budget butter which seems like it has a lower melting point. I will not be buying butter from Aldi again, at least not for baking anyway!
Sorry to disappoint!
Michael
Well, a minor disappointment for those of us with an interest, but much more so when you're the one at the pointed end.
Have you considered a reboot with the LM?
Lance
This is exciting. Let us know once you sort it out.
He's only gone and done it!
Thought I'd never see the day... pH above 5 in my tripled impasto!
Not out of the woods yet, this primo took 15hrs to triple and formula isn't fully tested!
To re-cap, this turned out to be a false reading. It can be difficult to get an accurate reading on gaseous dough.
It was very oxidative, somehow this problem assists in giving inaccurate reading of pH.
This one became this...
The extreme of too much lactic acid / too oxidative causing problems with fat incorporation.
Will she fall or won't she... Place your bets now...
Zoia panettone formula tweaked and in a Veneziana style.
All the flour is in the first dough and while it leavened bang on time, tripling in exactly 12hrs, it had a pH too low at 4.6.
Paid much more attention to mixing this time, another aspect for which I'm re-treading old ground. Gluten very well developed at minimum speed.
We need pictures of the madre to make that bet! I hope it turns out well.
I have been making some progress with my madre. About a week or so ago, I was seeing a time-to-float of 6-8 hours at 20C. I've gotten it down to about 3 hours and 15 minutes at 18C. Still more than double what I'd like to see, but a massive improvement. This increase in yeast activity seems to have gotten it tripling again as well.
I have been trying to promote hererofermenters and acetic acid in a somewhat unorthodox way that I don't think I've seen mentioned anywhere. I've been doing what I describe as "biga maintenance". I refresh 1:2 at about 40% hydration, mix it to biga consistency, and leave it at 18C for 18-24 hours. Each time I've done this, subsequent submerged maintenance has resulted in shorter float times. My logic is increased surface area, so increase oxygen for the yeast. Mixing lightly along with lower temps should help to promote acetic acid.
I'm still experimenting to see if the improvements are actually coming from these biga refreshments or something else, but in any case, happy to see the madre getting in better shape. I seem to be ruining it during the 3 preparatory refreshments - probably leaving it too long and allowing too much lactic acid to build up. Hopefully can get to testing it out soon.
Huge rise in the oven, especially considering it was barely risen two thirds of the way up the mould.
Not bad at all, where did the original dough start in the mold, 2" from bottom ?
Thanks lenny. This is a 750g panettone, so probably about 1 ½ inches, not sure.
Ultimately it's too lactic, but at least a "too lactic" panettone is sour free and doesn't present any sign of tartness when eating.
But it does affect the texture both visually and on the palate. It has that typically firm-set quality. This reminds of why I don't really enjoy common market sourdough breads, with elevated levels of lactic acid they are also firm in texture.