Tweet
Re: Today's Bread!
Window pane is taking a ball of dough (once it is reasonably mixed - won't really work on dough that still has dry stuff) and stretching it (and rotating it to stretch it somewhat uniformly to see how thin a "window pane" you can get before it tears. With really well developed doughs you can get a pane that is sort of clear and more or less able to read a newspaper through. That is TOO MUCH development for rustic breads and baguettes.
If you try it on a few doughs I think you will find that a no-knead dough, for example, will be highly extendible but will tear fairly easily - it will get thin but will remain whitish and opaque. It is still capable of making a good loaf but it can't take much handling or shaping without degassing. So you dump it in a dutch oven so it doesn't have to be touched. (and the tight/closed confines of the dutch oven traps humidity to give a good crust.)
At SFBI they mix until the dough is to a point where the dough yields a window pane that is still somewhat ragged - about half to 2/3 opaque (mainly strings/globs of opacity) with the rest somewhat clear and thin. If there are big globs of opacity it still isn't mixed well and it will tear early. This optimal mix will let you get a "window" (or at least be close) before it tears. While this is ideal it is certainly not necessary. I often mix a bit short and rely on the autolyse/rest to help finish the dough by forming the gluten and then rearranging it in the S&Fs.
SFBI follows the mixing in tubs with S&Fs every 30 minutes for up to two hours in an approximately 3 hour bulk proof. The dough is done (i.e. no more S&Fs or working during the bulk ferment) when it has the right "bouncy" smooth feel and that will typically correspond to a window pane that is about 1/4 to 1/3 threads (small cords) of opacity passing through a relatively thin/clear window.
Obviously words are not very precise for describing this but that is about the best I can do. Pictures don't work in my experience either so... Hands on experience is the best way to learn it.
What this working accomplishes is that it creates a dough that has the gluten well developed and organized and a dough that is strong enough to survive being shaped and formed into loaves that can typically stand alone (i.e. proof on a sheet of linen) and stand up to being flipped over and onto a peel without degassing significantly. It is not that underdevelopment yields bad bread so much as that the loaves will tend to degas more and you will get flatter loaves with less oven spring. (assuming proper proofing). Proper development is most critical for breads like baguettes that have a lot of handling and some of the big loaves (Pane di Genzano weighing 4 to 8 pounds that are like giant pillows and will fall like a cake if not properly developed.) and for breads like batards where you want to create a tight loaf so you can get a dramatic split/rip. But you can make really lovely loves with underdeveloped dough. Overdeveloped can be tough and lose taste - especially if it is overmixed and oxidized.
That feels like an enclyclopedic answer!
Jay
Window pane is taking a ball of dough (once it is reasonably mixed - won't really work on dough that still has dry stuff) and stretching it (and rotating it to stretch it somewhat uniformly to see how thin a "window pane" you can get before it tears. With really well developed doughs you can get a pane that is sort of clear and more or less able to read a newspaper through. That is TOO MUCH development for rustic breads and baguettes.
If you try it on a few doughs I think you will find that a no-knead dough, for example, will be highly extendible but will tear fairly easily - it will get thin but will remain whitish and opaque. It is still capable of making a good loaf but it can't take much handling or shaping without degassing. So you dump it in a dutch oven so it doesn't have to be touched. (and the tight/closed confines of the dutch oven traps humidity to give a good crust.)
At SFBI they mix until the dough is to a point where the dough yields a window pane that is still somewhat ragged - about half to 2/3 opaque (mainly strings/globs of opacity) with the rest somewhat clear and thin. If there are big globs of opacity it still isn't mixed well and it will tear early. This optimal mix will let you get a "window" (or at least be close) before it tears. While this is ideal it is certainly not necessary. I often mix a bit short and rely on the autolyse/rest to help finish the dough by forming the gluten and then rearranging it in the S&Fs.
SFBI follows the mixing in tubs with S&Fs every 30 minutes for up to two hours in an approximately 3 hour bulk proof. The dough is done (i.e. no more S&Fs or working during the bulk ferment) when it has the right "bouncy" smooth feel and that will typically correspond to a window pane that is about 1/4 to 1/3 threads (small cords) of opacity passing through a relatively thin/clear window.
Obviously words are not very precise for describing this but that is about the best I can do. Pictures don't work in my experience either so... Hands on experience is the best way to learn it.
What this working accomplishes is that it creates a dough that has the gluten well developed and organized and a dough that is strong enough to survive being shaped and formed into loaves that can typically stand alone (i.e. proof on a sheet of linen) and stand up to being flipped over and onto a peel without degassing significantly. It is not that underdevelopment yields bad bread so much as that the loaves will tend to degas more and you will get flatter loaves with less oven spring. (assuming proper proofing). Proper development is most critical for breads like baguettes that have a lot of handling and some of the big loaves (Pane di Genzano weighing 4 to 8 pounds that are like giant pillows and will fall like a cake if not properly developed.) and for breads like batards where you want to create a tight loaf so you can get a dramatic split/rip. But you can make really lovely loves with underdeveloped dough. Overdeveloped can be tough and lose taste - especially if it is overmixed and oxidized.
That feels like an enclyclopedic answer!
Jay
) The reason to change it a lot is to help you learn what underproofing does. Once you are on both sides of the proof you want, you cn interpolate and get a lot closer.
Comment