An interesting new video gets down into the weeds on autolysis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ICSP9xq9o0
I agree with her conclusion. For a while I have considered autolyse "necessary and desirable", and tried to incorporate it in every bake using wheat flour. But I have recently learned that is not always necessary, and some breads actually come out better without it. Particularly ones that combine different types of flour, or incorporate significant amounts of other ingredients during the knead.
Autolyse may reduce kneading time for the simple white wheat flour breads used in their tests. But combining other flours with an autolysed flour is more difficult, requiring an extended knead time to mix them in. The same benefits with better results can be obtained by skipping the autolyse, mixing the flours dry, and increasing the BF and/or proofing time.
Am interested in your thoughts on autolyse.
If you look at my Pullman bakes they are all autolyse after mixing everything together . I put all the liquid ingredients which includes my Trinity of yogurt( or buttermilk) EVOO and honey all in equal parts into the bowl. I then mill my mixture of whole grains and add them to the liquids and “ beat” it with a wooden spoon like making a cake batter. I then add the Arrowhead White flour and Semolina very fine flour ( if I’m using it and generally I am) . I do enough in the bowl folds to get everything wet and then cover and leave at least an hour.
When I come back to do the first round of in the bowl folds the dough is always incredibly developed . I leave it another hour do a last set of in the bowl folds leave one more hour and by then the gluten is so very developed that I do 2 of my wet counter laminations one right after the other and roll the dough into a long cylinder place in the buttered Pullman and let rise then bake. No bulk rise , no preshape no retard .
Others have been using this method and added their own “ twists and turns” but it’s definitely a game changer.
Normally I mix everything together, mix them until there aren't any dry clumps, and let it rest for about half an hour, or even several hours if it's more convenient. Then I knead and go on from there. After the rest, the dough is smoother, relaxed, and less sticky and much easier to work with. I don't care if this method doesn't meet somebody's definition of "autolyse", it's a rest, and it gets me a good dough with minimal effort (I don't usually use a mixer).
If the dough were yeasted and was expected to rise in just two hours, say, I'd reduce the rest to 15 or 20 minutes but not get rid of it.
TomP
Know your dough. I have found that the " beating " of the freshly milled whole grains with all the liquids before I add the white and semolina ( these are the only tow flours I currently have that I am not milling) gets the gluten really motivated . LOL !! Everyone has their own ways and as long as it works for you, like the linked Youtube works for her it's great !!! c
How would you change your process if you were using only freshly milled whole grains (no bread flour or semolina)?
Thanks
Gary
I thought about that after I typed my answer. I don't think it will come up as I always use those two flours but I have lessened them over time particularly the Arrowhead and I am trying to use more freshly milled. I wouldn't be able to beat the dough as I currently do if I switched to all milled whole grains and added them to the amount of liquid required in the formula that I use. So I think I would just proceed as I am currently doing but only use a portion of each whole grain flour and let the balance of the other flours do their thing during the autolyse as well as my laminations. I use about 50-100 cc water to do the laminations so the dough is pretty wet but I have been so lucky that it is incredibly pliable . I hope that helps answer. c
I'm more confused than I suspect!
Thanks, I like the idea of beating a portion, then adding the rest.
Gary
not confused !!
I thought that "mixing everything together and letting it rest" is NOT the same as autolyse... that autolyse specifically excludes salt and leavening agents.
However, isn't the point she makes in the video is that where the rest period occurs is not that important... that good results can be had, no matter when it happens?
I don't call my practice "autolyse" exactly because of those uncertainties, which I don't think matter much anyway. Leaving out the salt until after the rest does seem to have some effect on the dough later on. The dough tends end up more extensible that way. I will usually add the salt at the start because I plan to proof the loaves freestanding and want more elasticity and less extensibility to keep them from spreading too much, but it also depends on the flour properties.
I hate adding the salt later. The gluten will never develop until salt is added...at least in my experience. I want the gluten development to start asap since I am doing the bare minimum of handling . I also never have had any luck adding the leavening later either I like it completely mixed into all the other liquids.
The nicest thing about the whole breadmaking process is that you don't need a text book or any rules and can explore your way through if you choose. I don't believe in reinventing the wheel so I definitely look at what others are doing but since I have been baking breads consistently since the mid 1970's I think I can be pretty safe following my instincts these days.
Love the conversations and hearing what others are experiencing. c
In general, I have not really found much benefit from autolyse when using white bread flour and descent AP flour. I think that the longer fermentation times with SD bread kind of does the same thing as an autolyse. My routine involves mixing the BF flour, water, salt, and SD preferment and leaving it for about 40mins just mixed before attempting any kneading or S&Fs etc, and in that time the gluten develops nicely as suggested by the autolyse proponents. So don't think there is much to be gained from autolyse for those flours.
Where I have found a really big benefit is with wholemeal wheet flour where I have found an overnight fridge autolyse with salt of the whole wheat flour improves the bread in terms of moisture and texture of crumb and crust dramatically by make it possible to increase the hydration of the loaf through the greater absorption of water by the bran.
Autolize is a term - nothing more. Enjoy!
It's been a couple weeks since I watched that video, but I think I recall Seraphine saying that if you are going to autolyse it should not extend beyond a certain length of time. I think there may have been scientific reasons for that. There are scientific reasons for doing things in all her videos.
Yes, I forgot to mention the time element. If I autolyse (no salt or leavening), I typically do 30-45 min, it seems to be plenty.
I'm confused: are all rests autolyses (or is the plural autolysi?) Or is an autolyse a particular kind of rest -- flour and water before salt and leaven are added, for instance.
If the former, then bulk and proof are forms of autolysis. If the latter, they're not.
And if we can't clarify, then Davey1 is right: it's just a term -- nothing more. Enjoy!
Rob
The latter, of course.
Remember, the technique called autolyse was developed in a particular industry and time period for a particular purpose. None of those conditions apply to most of us any more, and if we follow Serafine, they don't even apply in industrial baking environments either. As a term now, it's almost useless because no one knows what is supposed to be included and what excluded. I have no interest in arguing about what exact variation of technique should be called autolyse. I think the term should drop out of use because it is a constant point of confusion. Salt or not salt? Yeast or no yeast? non-gluten-forming additions or not? Starter or not? No one knows unless it's spelled out, in which case there is no value in a term that no longer acts as a shortcut to avoid being more specific.
For me, an initial rest after a short, rough mixing has a tangible benefit that is easy to observe - it makes hand kneading after the rest easier and shorter. Machine mixing too, for that matter. Variations relating to including salt and starter are secondary. I know there are at least two parts to this - a smoother dough with more uniform hydration and a relaxation after initial mixing.
I say give it a rest!
I definitely see your point. But I think it's still a useful term, distinguishing it from, say, other types of preferment.
In fact, that's more how I see it; as a minimalist preferment.
An autolyse - by definition - is not a preferment, and the benefits of a preferment and an autolyse are completely different.
I agree with several others who have stated that a ~30 minute rest between initial mix and full development is helpful, but whether the salt and leavening are added is not relevant. I wouldn't use the word autolyse for my process. Rather, I mix all my ingredients together and let the dough rest 30-60 minutes before starting a series of 3 stretch and folds spaced out by 30-60 minutes. Total bulk fermentation time is ~12 hours, so I'm not in a rush to get the mixing done as fast as possible.
If you want to have a very fast bulk fermentation, then it makes sense to let the gluten hydrate and develop for a while before you add the leavening. Otherwise, in my opinion, rest is rest.
d'Accord.
King Arthur has a much looser definition:
"A preferment is a preparation of a portion of a bread dough that is made several hours or more in advance of mixing the final dough."
When I started in this insanity/inanity called breadbaking, I pronounced preferment Bartleby-style as 'prefer-ment' and autolyse Fleetwood Mac-style as 'auto-lies.' I think I'm gonna return to that.
A friend of mine from college studied psychology in grad school and wrote a paper on whether oenophiles actually knew more or whether they just had more sophisticated vocabularies. I forget what his finding was, so I'll just quote Wallace Stevens:
Let be be finale of seem.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.
Rob