Ghee

JimLane said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

make it last longer.

Quoted message said:

Not always the reason. Many people prefer the taste of salted butter.

However, the original reason salt was added was as a preservative. You have no position there.
That people became used to it and then salted became the standard is another matter.

... butter was designed as a way to preserve milk. salt preserves butter better. Hence salted butter
is a superior product, that exceeds the design specs for the original.

Lena

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane said:

Charles Gifford said:

"Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]... <snip>

snip

Quoted message said:

> Why use unsalted butter? For the same reason one should always use unsalted butter and that is
> because it allows the cook to control the salt level, not the ingredients.

Quoted message said:

Nonsense. Most recipes using salted butter also call for added salt. The added salt can be
adjusted.

Most of my cookbooks recommend in the front matter that unsalted butter be used. You might want
to check that section once in awhile.

This is one of the perennial discussions amongst foodies. The fact is that there's a bit over two
teaspoons of salt in a whole pound of American commercial butter. I don't know a recipe where the
salt content is so critical as to demand unsalted.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Salt is added to butter to make it last longer.

No. It isn't. It was before refrigeration, but not any more.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Not always the reason. Many people prefer the taste of salted butter.

However, the original reason salt was added was as a preservative. You have no position there.

That was then, this is now.

Quoted message said:

That people became used to it and then salted became the standard is another matter.

To be sure. But the amount of salt in butter today will make not a whit of difference in just
about any recipe I've ever seen. A whole stick of butter has a tad over a half-teaspoon of salt.

Thank you for the info! It's useful in baking, and other places where salt flavoring is rather...
inappropriate.

Lena

JimLane said:

Charles Gifford said:

"Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]... <snip>

snip

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why use unsalted butter? For the same reason one should always use unsalted butter and that is
because it allows the cook to control the salt level, not the ingredients.

Quoted message said:

Nonsense. Most recipes using salted butter also call for added salt. The added salt can be
adjusted.

Most of my cookbooks recommend in the front matter that unsalted butter be used. You might want to
check that section once in awhile.

This is one of the perennial discussions amongst foodies. The fact is that there's a bit over two
teaspoons of salt in a whole pound of American commercial butter. I don't know a recipe where the
salt content is so critical as to demand unsalted.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Salt is added to butter to make it last longer.

No. It isn't. It was before refrigeration, but not any more.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Not always the reason. Many people prefer the taste of salted butter.

However, the original reason salt was added was as a preservative. You have no position there.

That was then, this is now.

Quoted message said:

That people became used to it and then salted became the standard is another matter.

To be sure. But the amount of salt in butter today will make not a whit of difference in just about
any recipe I've ever seen. A whole stick of butter has a tad over a half-teaspoon of salt.

Pastorio

Lena B Katz said:

JimLane said:

Quoted message said:

>make it last longer.

Quoted message said:

Not always the reason. Many people prefer the taste of salted butter.

However, the original reason salt was added was as a preservative. You have no position there.
That people became used to it and then salted became the standard is another matter.

... butter was designed as a way to preserve milk. salt preserves butter better. Hence salted
butter is a superior product, that exceeds the design specs for the original.

Lena

Tell that to the cake you just mentioned above.

jim
;-)

Lena B Katz said:

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane said:

Charles Gifford wrote:

>"Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>"]news:[email hidden]... <snip>

snip

>>Why use unsalted butter? For the same reason one should always use unsalted butter and that is
>>because it allows the cook to control the salt level, not the ingredients.

>Nonsense. Most recipes using salted butter also call for added salt. The added salt can be
>adjusted.

Most of my cookbooks recommend in the front matter that unsalted butter be used. You might want
to check that section once in awhile.

This is one of the perennial discussions amongst foodies. The fact is that there's a bit over two
teaspoons of salt in a whole pound of American commercial butter. I don't know a recipe where the
salt content is so critical as to demand unsalted.

Quoted message said:

>>Salt is added to butter to make it last longer.

No. It isn't. It was before refrigeration, but not any more.

Quoted message said:

>Not always the reason. Many people prefer the taste of salted butter.

However, the original reason salt was added was as a preservative. You have no position there.

That was then, this is now.

Quoted message said:

That people became used to it and then salted became the standard is another matter.

To be sure. But the amount of salt in butter today will make not a whit of difference in just
about any recipe I've ever seen. A whole stick of butter has a tad over a half-teaspoon of salt.

Thank you for the info! It's useful in baking, and other places where salt flavoring is rather...
inappropriate.

Well, I was mistaken in the figures that I quoted. I inadvertently doubled the figure for the amount
of salt in a pound of butter. Here's the real info from an older post of mine where I did all the
calculations after weighing and measuring volumes of salt:

"...the amount of salt in butter is rather trivial for most recipes. Roughly 90 mgs sodium in a
tablespoon of butter. 32 tablespoons of butter in a whole pound or 2880 mgs of sodium (2.88 grams).
That's about 7200 mgs or 7.2 grams of salt. A tablespoon of table salt weighs right at 0.6 ounces or
16.8 grams. A tablespoon is 3 teaspoons of salt which weigh 5.6 grams each. A whole pound of butter
will have about a teaspoon and a quarter of salt in it."

Most cake recipes include some salt. Look at German Chocolate cake or spice cakes or pound cakes or
even simple white cakes. At least 1/4 teaspoon salt (most start at 1/2) and on up to a teaspoon.

There's so little salt in butter that I've never been able to taste the difference in finished
product, even tasting side by side. I made hot milk sponge cakes for the holidays and used salted
butter. My daughter read the recipe and it called for unsalted. She asked what the difference was
and I said, "None." She asked why they'd specify unsalted and I gave her a cynical answer. She said
let's test it. We did a test and made 4 cakes. Two with salted and two with unsalted. Couldn't taste
any difference. Nobody could who tried them - 12 people. The "testing" went on for two days until
there were no cakes left. (Filled them with a creme patissiere with Grand Marnier and white creme de
cacao, and topped with a dark chocolate ganache with peach schnapps and brown creme de cacao - sorta
an uptown Boston Cream Pie.)

The cakes each took 2 tablespoons butter, 5 eggs, 3/4 cup of flour,
1/4 cup milk, 3/4 cup sugar, teaspoon baking powder, 1/8 teaspoon salt, teaspoon lemon extract. The
butter (if I had measured it exactly) contained 0.45 grams of salt (28 grams are an ounce), 1/62nd
of an ounce or 0.08 teaspoons of butter. Eight hundredths of a teaspoon. Less than 1/10th of a
teaspoon. That's a Scroogy pinch for a whole cake intended to serve 8. Combining 1/8 teaspoon salt
the recipe calls for with the 1/12th teaspoon from the butter makes the amount of salt leap from
3/24 of a teaspoon to 5/24 of a teaspoon. All the way up to just under 1/5 of a teaspoon in a 9-
inch cake.

Meaningless.

Pastorio

Bob Pastorio said:

Lena B Katz said:

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane wrote:

> Charles Gifford wrote:
>
>> "Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>> "]news:[email hidden]... <snip>
>
>
> snip
>
>>> Why use unsalted butter? For the same reason one should always use unsalted butter and that
>>> is because it allows the cook to control the salt level, not the ingredients.
>
>
>> Nonsense. Most recipes using salted butter also call for added salt. The added salt can be
>> adjusted.
>
>
> Most of my cookbooks recommend in the front matter that unsalted butter be used. You might want
> to check that section once in awhile.

This is one of the perennial discussions amongst foodies. The fact is that there's a bit over
two teaspoons of salt in a whole pound of American commercial butter. I don't know a recipe
where the salt content is so critical as to demand unsalted.

>>> Salt is added to butter to make it last longer.

No. It isn't. It was before refrigeration, but not any more.

>> Not always the reason. Many people prefer the taste of salted butter.
>
>
> However, the original reason salt was added was as a preservative. You have no position there.

That was then, this is now.

> That people became used to it and then salted became the standard is another matter.

To be sure. But the amount of salt in butter today will make not a whit of difference in just
about any recipe I've ever seen. A whole stick of butter has a tad over a half-teaspoon of salt.

Thank you for the info! It's useful in baking, and other places where salt flavoring is rather...
inappropriate.

Well, I was mistaken in the figures that I quoted. I inadvertently doubled the figure for the
amount of salt in a pound of butter. Here's the real info from an older post of mine where I did
all the calculations after weighing and measuring volumes of salt:

"...the amount of salt in butter is rather trivial for most recipes. Roughly 90 mgs sodium in a
tablespoon of butter. 32 tablespoons of butter in a whole pound or 2880 mgs of sodium (2.88
grams). That's about 7200 mgs or 7.2 grams of salt. A tablespoon of table salt weighs right at 0.6
ounces or 16.8 grams. A tablespoon is 3 teaspoons of salt which weigh 5.6 grams each. A whole
pound of butter will have about a teaspoon and a quarter of salt in it."

Most cake recipes include some salt. Look at German Chocolate cake or spice cakes or pound cakes
or even simple white cakes. At least 1/4 teaspoon salt (most start at 1/2) and on up to a
teaspoon.

There's so little salt in butter that I've never been able to taste the difference in finished
product, even tasting side by side. I made hot milk sponge cakes for the holidays and used salted
butter. My daughter read the recipe and it called for unsalted. She asked what the difference was
and I said, "None." She asked why they'd specify unsalted and I gave her a cynical answer. She
said let's test it. We did a test and made 4 cakes. Two with salted and two with unsalted.
Couldn't taste any difference. Nobody could who tried them - 12 people. The "testing" went on for
two days until there were no cakes left. (Filled them with a creme patissiere with Grand Marnier
and white creme de cacao, and topped with a dark chocolate ganache with peach schnapps and brown
creme de cacao - sorta an uptown Boston Cream Pie.)

The cakes each took 2 tablespoons butter, 5 eggs, 3/4 cup of flour, 1/4 cup milk, 3/4 cup sugar,
teaspoon baking powder, 1/8 teaspoon salt, teaspoon lemon extract. The butter (if I had measured
it exactly) contained 0.45 grams of salt (28 grams are an ounce), 1/62nd of an ounce or 0.08
teaspoons of butter. Eight hundredths of a teaspoon. Less than
1/10th of a teaspoon. That's a Scroogy pinch for a whole cake intended to serve 8. Combining 1/8
teaspoon salt the recipe calls for with the
1/12th teaspoon from the butter makes the amount of salt leap from 3/24 of a teaspoon to 5/24 of a
teaspoon. All the way up to just under 1/5 of a teaspoon in a 9-inch cake.

Meaningless.

Pastorio

You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them plain,
cake to cake no extras?

jim

JimLane said:

Bob Pastorio said:

Lena B Katz said:

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Bob Pastorio wrote:

> JimLane wrote:
>
>> Charles Gifford wrote:
>>
>>> "Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>> "]news:[email hidden]... <snip>
>>
>>
>>
>> snip
>>
>>>> Why use unsalted butter? For the same reason one should always use unsalted butter and that
>>>> is because it allows the cook to control the salt level, not the ingredients.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Nonsense. Most recipes using salted butter also call for added salt. The added salt can be
>>> adjusted.
>>
>>
>>
>> Most of my cookbooks recommend in the front matter that unsalted butter be used. You might
>> want to check that section once in awhile.
>
>
>
> This is one of the perennial discussions amongst foodies. The fact is that there's a bit over
> two teaspoons of salt in a whole pound of American commercial butter. I don't know a recipe
> where the salt content is so critical as to demand unsalted.
>
>>>> Salt is added to butter to make it last longer.
>
>
>
> No. It isn't. It was before refrigeration, but not any more.
>
>>> Not always the reason. Many people prefer the taste of salted butter.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, the original reason salt was added was as a preservative. You have no position there.
>
>
>
> That was then, this is now.
>
>> That people became used to it and then salted became the standard is another matter.
>
>
>
> To be sure. But the amount of salt in butter today will make not a whit of difference in just
> about any recipe I've ever seen. A whole stick of butter has a tad over a half-teaspoon of
> salt.

Thank you for the info! It's useful in baking, and other places where salt flavoring is
rather... inappropriate.

Well, I was mistaken in the figures that I quoted. I inadvertently doubled the figure for the
amount of salt in a pound of butter. Here's the real info from an older post of mine where I did
all the calculations after weighing and measuring volumes of salt:

"...the amount of salt in butter is rather trivial for most recipes. Roughly 90 mgs sodium in a
tablespoon of butter. 32 tablespoons of butter in a whole pound or 2880 mgs of sodium (2.88
grams). That's about 7200 mgs or 7.2 grams of salt. A tablespoon of table salt weighs right at
0.6 ounces or 16.8 grams. A tablespoon is 3 teaspoons of salt which weigh 5.6 grams each. A whole
pound of butter will have about a teaspoon and a quarter of salt in it."

Most cake recipes include some salt. Look at German Chocolate cake or spice cakes or pound cakes
or even simple white cakes. At least 1/4 teaspoon salt (most start at 1/2) and on up to a
teaspoon.

There's so little salt in butter that I've never been able to taste the difference in finished
product, even tasting side by side. I made hot milk sponge cakes for the holidays and used salted
butter. My daughter read the recipe and it called for unsalted. She asked what the difference was
and I said, "None." She asked why they'd specify unsalted and I gave her a cynical answer. She
said let's test it. We did a test and made 4 cakes. Two with salted and two with unsalted.
Couldn't taste any difference. Nobody could who tried them - 12 people. The "testing" went on for
two days until there were no cakes left. (Filled them with a creme patissiere with Grand Marnier
and white creme de cacao, and topped with a dark chocolate ganache with peach schnapps and brown
creme de cacao - sorta an uptown Boston Cream Pie.)

The cakes each took 2 tablespoons butter, 5 eggs, 3/4 cup of flour,
1/4 cup milk, 3/4 cup sugar, teaspoon baking powder, 1/8 teaspoon salt, teaspoon lemon extract.
The butter (if I had measured it exactly) contained 0.45 grams of salt (28 grams are an ounce),
1/62nd of an ounce or 0.08 teaspoons of butter. Eight hundredths of a teaspoon. Less than
1/10th of a teaspoon. That's a Scroogy pinch for a whole cake intended to serve 8. Combining
1/8 teaspoon salt the recipe calls for with the 1/12th teaspoon from the butter makes the
amount of salt leap from 3/24 of a teaspoon to 5/24 of a teaspoon. All the way up to just under
1/5 of a teaspoon in a 9-inch cake.

Meaningless.

Pastorio

You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them
plain, cake to cake no extras?

It's the finished products that we were comparing. But years of critical measuring and tasting the
results says that it's a fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any
difference from experience.

But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as even
a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks measuring with
spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate. And given that kitchen
measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that a variation this small
wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.

The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the other
flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume of the
whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.

Pastorio

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them
plain, cake to cake no extras?

It's the finished products that we were comparing. But years of critical measuring and tasting the
results says that it's a fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any
difference from experience.

But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as
even a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks
measuring with spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate. And
given that kitchen measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that a
variation this small wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.

The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the other
flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume of the
whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.

Hmmm, I see only your opinion. Not a fact anywhere in sight. You are assuming that because you MIGHT
not be able to taste it in the bare cake, then no one else would either. That is arrogance. And
stupidity.

jim

JimLane said:

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane said:

You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them
plain, cake to cake no extras?

It's the finished products that we were comparing. But years of critical measuring and tasting
the results says that it's a fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any
difference from experience.

But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as
even a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks
measuring with spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate. And
given that kitchen measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that a
variation this small wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.

The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the other
flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume of the
whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.

Hmmm, I see only your opinion.

I'm desperately sorry I didn't convene a focus group to satisfy your urgent need for FACTS to
demonstrate that 0.45 grams of salt is a tiny bit. And that a tiny bit of salt in more than a pound
of other ingredients wouldn't make a difference. I'm desolated that you haven't had your yearnings
for absolute 10-decimal-place accuracy satisfied.

Here's a blast for you: kitchen measurements are *never* exact, particularly volumetric ones. The
equipment we work with in normal kitchens isn't designed to be lab-accurate. Teaspoons and
tablespoons of powders, leveled or not, will be off the exact measure by up to 10% depending on
compaction. A tablespoon of salt of one size crystal won't hold the same weight of salt of a
different crystal size. Recipes are written and tested by professionals with that understanding in
mind. Every effort is made to write them to relatively exact measure, but cooking is a resilient
science and forgives minor departures. A bit more or less of most ingredients won't materially
affect the dish. Like everybody's Aunt Minnie cooks by the handful and it still works.

In this case, the "bit more" is of such a small absolute quantity that it's irrelevant and below any
threshold of taste.

Quoted message said:

Not a fact anywhere in sight.

Well, the measurements are factual because I did them and recorded them for anyone who would wish to
check. I mentioned that a dozen people couldn't see any difference. Silly me, I assumed that you
could read some words on a screen and actually understand them. since I've tested saline solutions,
by taste, in researching brine strengths, I've sampled concentrations down to 1 gram in a gallon of
water (couldn't taste salt) and up to 300 grams per gallon and had others test them for subjective
analyses for articles I wrote on brining and for my radio program. And that's why I wrote above:
"But years of critical measuring and tasting the results says that it's a fruitless search at these
quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any difference from experience." How would you have liked the
"facts" to have been determined and expressed? How many witnesses would it take for you to accept
the results? Just any witnesses or should they be somehow qualified?

Quoted message said:

You are assuming that because you MIGHT not be able to taste it in the bare cake, then no one
else would either. That is arrogance. And stupidity.

What's arrogant and stupid is your insistence that I do *my* experiment *your* way. Perhaps you
failed to note in my earlier post that a dozen people tasted the cakes and were asked about any
differences perceived. Most of them tasted snippets of plain cake after hearing the question from my
daughter. Nobody tasted anything different between the cakes. Period. My 12-year-old showed better
comprehension of what was happening than you do. We weren't trying for a Nobel prize, just an
informal discussion around a diner table.

I'm assuming that since I've actually tested saline concentrations from virtually nothing to very
salty, I know where it begins to taste different. And this ain't it.

See, Jim, I've been a foodservice professional since the 70's. Studied in Europe and traveled the
world rather widely. I've operated all sorts of restaurants. I'm a professional recipe developer and
a consultant for designing commercial products, some of which are in stores around the country. All
formulated to extremely exact measurements with very exact processing and handling to meet FDA
standards and commercial requirements.

I realize you didn't know this, but it doesn't much minimize the silliness of your [censored] note.
The facts you crave include numbers I provided that you seem unable to grasp or are too unskilled to
extrapolate from. I gave you a specific recipe to consider and assumed that you could understand the
significance of the facts of it. Could grasp the orders of magnitude involved. Apparently not.

Your note disqualifies you from discussions where the actual product isn't in front of you. Either
you utterly lack the imagination to extrapolate a finished result from a recipe or you lack the
kitchen competence to appreciate the very small, real-world amounts we've been dealing with in this
question. Either way, you're over your head.

I also notice that you didn't go test it to see if I was wrong. Just be a spectator and fling the
contents of your head out onto the field. Go taste salt in a pint of water with 1/2 cup sugar in it.
Start with .45 grams, 1/12 of a teaspoon, and see if you can taste it. Work your way up to maybe 15
grams and see. Don't have a scale that accurate? Ok, borrow mine.

And you can save your lame judgments for others who aren't light years ahead of you. I'd guess that
it would be a small crowd.

Pastorio

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane said:

Bob Pastorio said:

Lena B Katz wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Bob Pastorio wrote:
>
>> JimLane wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Gifford wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>>> "]news:[email hidden]... <snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> snip
>>>
>>>>> Why use unsalted butter? For the same reason one should always use unsalted butter and
>>>>> that is because it allows the cook to control the salt level, not the ingredients.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Nonsense. Most recipes using salted butter also call for added salt. The added salt can be
>>>> adjusted.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Most of my cookbooks recommend in the front matter that unsalted butter be used. You might
>>> want to check that section once in awhile.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is one of the perennial discussions amongst foodies. The fact is that there's a bit over
>> two teaspoons of salt in a whole pound of American commercial butter. I don't know a recipe
>> where the salt content is so critical as to demand unsalted.
>>
>>>>> Salt is added to butter to make it last longer.
>>
>>
>>
>> No. It isn't. It was before refrigeration, but not any more.
>>
>>>> Not always the reason. Many people prefer the taste of salted butter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> However, the original reason salt was added was as a preservative. You have no position
>>> there.
>>
>>
>>
>> That was then, this is now.
>>
>>> That people became used to it and then salted became the standard is another matter.
>>
>>
>>
>> To be sure. But the amount of salt in butter today will make not a whit of difference in just
>> about any recipe I've ever seen. A whole stick of butter has a tad over a half-teaspoon of
>> salt.
>
>
>
> Thank you for the info! It's useful in baking, and other places where salt flavoring is
> rather... inappropriate.

Well, I was mistaken in the figures that I quoted. I inadvertently doubled the figure for the
amount of salt in a pound of butter. Here's the real info from an older post of mine where I
did all the calculations after weighing and measuring volumes of salt:

"...the amount of salt in butter is rather trivial for most recipes. Roughly 90 mgs sodium in a
tablespoon of butter. 32 tablespoons of butter in a whole pound or 2880 mgs of sodium (2.88
grams). That's about 7200 mgs or 7.2 grams of salt. A tablespoon of table salt weighs right at
0.6 ounces or 16.8 grams. A tablespoon is 3 teaspoons of salt which weigh 5.6 grams each. A
whole pound of butter will have about a teaspoon and a quarter of salt in it."

Most cake recipes include some salt. Look at German Chocolate cake or spice cakes or pound
cakes or even simple white cakes. At least 1/4 teaspoon salt (most start at 1/2) and on up to a
teaspoon.

There's so little salt in butter that I've never been able to taste the difference in finished
product, even tasting side by side. I made hot milk sponge cakes for the holidays and used
salted butter. My daughter read the recipe and it called for unsalted. She asked what the
difference was and I said, "None." She asked why they'd specify unsalted and I gave her a
cynical answer. She said let's test it. We did a test and made 4 cakes. Two with salted and two
with unsalted. Couldn't taste any difference. Nobody could who tried them - 12 people. The
"testing" went on for two days until there were no cakes left. (Filled them with a creme
patissiere with Grand Marnier and white creme de cacao, and topped with a dark chocolate
ganache with peach schnapps and brown creme de cacao - sorta an uptown Boston Cream Pie.)

The cakes each took 2 tablespoons butter, 5 eggs, 3/4 cup of flour,
1/4 cup milk, 3/4 cup sugar, teaspoon baking powder, 1/8 teaspoon salt, teaspoon lemon extract.
The butter (if I had measured it exactly) contained 0.45 grams of salt (28 grams are an
ounce), 1/62nd of an ounce or 0.08 teaspoons of butter. Eight hundredths of a teaspoon. Less
than 1/10th of a teaspoon. That's a Scroogy pinch for a whole cake intended to serve 8.
Combining 1/8 teaspoon salt the recipe calls for with the 1/12th teaspoon from the butter
makes the amount of salt leap from 3/24 of a teaspoon to 5/24 of a teaspoon. All the way up
to just under 1/5 of a teaspoon in a 9-inch cake.

Meaningless.

Pastorio

You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them
plain, cake to cake no extras?

It's the finished products that we were comparing. But years of critical measuring and tasting the
results says that it's a fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any
difference from experience.

But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as
even a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks
measuring with spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate. And
given that kitchen measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that a
variation this small wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.

The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the other
flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume of the
whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.

i had forgotten how little butter cakes actually take.

now, oatmeal cookies (cornell style) take significantly more...

Lena

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane said:

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane wrote:
>
> You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them
> plain, cake to cake no extras?

It's the finished products that we were comparing. But years of critical measuring and tasting
the results says that it's a fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any
difference from experience.

But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as
even a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks
measuring with spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate.
And given that kitchen measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that a
variation this small wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.

The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the other
flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume of the
whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.

Hmmm, I see only your opinion.

I'm desperately sorry I didn't convene a focus group to satisfy your urgent need for FACTS to
demonstrate that 0.45 grams of salt is a tiny bit. And that a tiny bit of salt in more than a
pound of other ingredients wouldn't make a difference. I'm desolated that you haven't had your
yearnings for absolute 10-decimal-place accuracy satisfied.

Here's a blast for you: kitchen measurements are *never* exact, particularly volumetric ones. The
equipment we work with in normal kitchens isn't designed to be lab-accurate. Teaspoons and
tablespoons of powders, leveled or not, will be off the exact measure by up to 10% depending on
compaction. A tablespoon of salt of one size crystal won't hold the same weight of salt of a
different crystal size. Recipes are written and tested by professionals with that understanding in
mind. Every effort is made to write them to relatively exact measure, but cooking is a resilient
science and forgives minor departures. A bit more or less of most ingredients won't materially
affect the dish. Like everybody's Aunt Minnie cooks by the handful and it still works.

hence why most recipes call for "kosher salt" when they want a different grind...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Not a fact anywhere in sight.

Well, the measurements are factual because I did them and recorded them for anyone who would wish
to check. I mentioned that a dozen people couldn't see any difference. Silly me, I assumed that
you could read some words on a screen and actually understand them. since I've tested saline
solutions, by taste, in researching brine strengths, I've sampled concentrations down to 1 gram in
a gallon of water (couldn't taste salt) and up to 300 grams per gallon and had others test them
for subjective analyses for articles I wrote on brining and for my radio program. And that's why I
wrote above: "But years of critical measuring and tasting the results says that it's a fruitless
search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any difference from experience." How would you
have liked the "facts" to have been determined and expressed? How many witnesses would it take for
you to accept the results? Just any witnesses or should they be somehow qualified?

... unfortunately, you failed to mention that salt has other uses, other than "tasting salty" just
like red peppers have other uses (and effects on the body) other than "being hot." From the way you
wrote, I would assume that you asked people if the cake "tasted salty" and not "did this cake taste
more flavorful than your last piece."

OTOH, having tastetested colored gelatin (with surprising results), i realize that people don't know
what their taste buds tell them, anywhoo.

Lena

Lena B Katz said:

i had forgotten how little butter cakes actually take.

now, oatmeal cookies (cornell style) take significantly more...

Lena

Jesus.. ya think you could trim up the quotes a bit before you add your one sentence reply? What a
nuisance it is to scroll through (not to mention download) all the recaps.

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane said:

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane wrote:

>
> You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them
> plain, cake to cake no extras?

It's the finished products that we were comparing. But years of critical measuring and tasting
the results says that it's a fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any
difference from experience.

But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as
even a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks
measuring with spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate. And
given that kitchen measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that a
variation this small wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.

The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the other
flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume of the
whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.

Hmmm, I see only your opinion.

I'm desperately sorry I didn't convene a focus group to satisfy your urgent need for FACTS to
demonstrate that 0.45 grams of salt is a tiny bit. And that a tiny bit of salt in more than a
pound of other ingredients wouldn't make a difference. I'm desolated that you haven't had your
yearnings for absolute 10-decimal-place accuracy satisfied.

Here's a blast for you: kitchen measurements are *never* exact, particularly volumetric ones. The
equipment we work with in normal kitchens isn't designed to be lab-accurate. Teaspoons and
tablespoons of powders, leveled or not, will be off the exact measure by up to 10% depending on
compaction. A tablespoon of salt of one size crystal won't hold the same weight of salt of a
different crystal size. Recipes are written and tested by professionals with that understanding in
mind. Every effort is made to write them to relatively exact measure, but cooking is a resilient
science and forgives minor departures. A bit more or less of most ingredients won't materially
affect the dish. Like everybody's Aunt Minnie cooks by the handful and it still works.

In this case, the "bit more" is of such a small absolute quantity that it's irrelevant and below
any threshold of taste.

Quoted message said:

Not a fact anywhere in sight.

Well, the measurements are factual because I did them and recorded them for anyone who would wish
to check. I mentioned that a dozen people couldn't see any difference. Silly me, I assumed that
you could read some words on a screen and actually understand them. since I've tested saline
solutions, by taste, in researching brine strengths, I've sampled concentrations down to 1 gram in
a gallon of water (couldn't taste salt) and up to 300 grams per gallon and had others test them
for subjective analyses for articles I wrote on brining and for my radio program. And that's why I
wrote above: "But years of critical measuring and tasting the results says that it's a fruitless
search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any difference from experience." How would you
have liked the "facts" to have been determined and expressed? How many witnesses would it take for
you to accept the results? Just any witnesses or should they be somehow qualified?

Quoted message said:

You are

Quoted message said:

assuming that because you MIGHT not be able to taste it in the bare cake, then no one else would
either. That is arrogance. And stupidity.

What's arrogant and stupid is your insistence that I do *my* experiment *your* way. Perhaps you
failed to note in my earlier post that a dozen people tasted the cakes and were asked about any
differences perceived. Most of them tasted snippets of plain cake after hearing the question from
my daughter. Nobody tasted anything different between the cakes. Period. My 12-year-old showed
better comprehension of what was happening than you do. We weren't trying for a Nobel prize, just
an informal discussion around a diner table.

I'm assuming that since I've actually tested saline concentrations from virtually nothing to very
salty, I know where it begins to taste different. And this ain't it.

See, Jim, I've been a foodservice professional since the 70's. Studied in Europe and traveled the
world rather widely. I've operated all sorts of restaurants. I'm a professional recipe developer
and a consultant for designing commercial products, some of which are in stores around the
country. All formulated to extremely exact measurements with very exact processing and handling to
meet FDA standards and commercial requirements.

I realize you didn't know this, but it doesn't much minimize the silliness of your [censored]
note. The facts you crave include numbers I provided that you seem unable to grasp or are too
unskilled to extrapolate from. I gave you a specific recipe to consider and assumed that you could
understand the significance of the facts of it. Could grasp the orders of magnitude involved.
Apparently not.

Your note disqualifies you from discussions where the actual product isn't in front of you. Either
you utterly lack the imagination to extrapolate a finished result from a recipe or you lack the
kitchen competence to appreciate the very small, real-world amounts we've been dealing with in
this question. Either way, you're over your head.

I also notice that you didn't go test it to see if I was wrong. Just be a spectator and fling the
contents of your head out onto the field. Go taste salt in a pint of water with 1/2 cup sugar in
it. Start with 0.45 grams, 1/12 of a teaspoon, and see if you can taste it. Work your way up to
maybe 15 grams and see. Don't have a scale that accurate? Ok, borrow mine.

And you can save your lame judgments for others who aren't light years ahead of you. I'd guess
that it would be a small crowd.

Pastorio

Here's a fact for you, being as you want to be a clown about this, even the salt called for in many
recipes is too much for my taste and I regularly halve it. I know others who do the same for the
same reason.

Now did you have something to put up factually, or not?

By the way, you are stuck in reverse (the "R" does not mean race on your Model T.

jim

Bob Pastorio said:

This is one of the perennial discussions amongst foodies.

My, aren't we the dismissive reverse snob. (Not that you're not entitled ;-)

Quoted message said:

The fact is that there's a bit over two teaspoons of salt in a whole pound of American commercial
butter. I don't know a recipe where the salt content is so critical as to demand unsalted.

Hollandaise. I don't think that I've ever gotten enough butter into a beurre blanc to offend any but
my most sodiumphobic friends.

Martin
--
Martin Golding | If there were a God, DoD #236 | cocoa butter would be monounsaturated.

Martin Golding said:

Bob Pastorio said:

This is one of the perennial discussions amongst foodies.

My, aren't we the dismissive reverse snob. (Not that you're not entitled ;-)

I see how you came to that conclusion and I apologize for the tone. It was inadvertent. I meant that
it's an ongoing topic when aficionados get together and talk about food. The whole mythology
surrounding salt in butter, why it's there, how much was there before and how much now and is
unsalted really any better and on and on. It's a topic I've sat in on many times and in many places.
Once tasted several different brands of butter side by side just to see. Not much difference.

I think of myself as a foodie and the only requirements to be one are to appreciate food and be
interested in more than just recipes.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The fact is that there's a bit over two teaspoons of salt in a whole pound of American commercial
butter. I don't know a recipe where the salt content is so critical as to demand unsalted.

Hollandaise. I don't think that I've ever gotten enough butter into a beurre blanc to offend any
but my most sodiumphobic friends.

Well, I was wrong in that amount, it's actually about half what I said it is. About a teaspoon and a
quarter in a whole pound.

And you can't get enough butter, salted or unsalted, into a Hollandaise, IMO. I use salted.

Might want to look at Jacques Pepin's thing with beurre blanc where he says you don't need anything
besides just plain butter to make one. Some funny kitchen science overtaking ancient preparations.

Pastorio

JimLane said:

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane said:

Bob Pastorio wrote:

> JimLane wrote:
>>
>> You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them
>> plain, cake to cake no extras?
>
> It's the finished products that we were comparing.

And this should have been the end of JimLane's "brilliance." But did he say, "Oh, I understand"? No,
he didn't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> But years of critical measuring and tasting the results says that it's a fruitless search at
> these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any difference from experience.
>
> But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as
> even a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks
> measuring with spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate.
> And given that kitchen measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that a
> variation this small wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.
>
> The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the other
> flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume of the
> whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.

Hmmm, I see only your opinion.

And then Poor JimLane posts that he only sees my opinion. Whose opinion was I supposed to post? Or
was I supposed to post a lengthy dissertation detailing a study restricting all the variables to
suit poor JimLane and proceeding like an earnest grad student trying to get published? Who knows,
since JimLane didn't really add anything to the discussion except some shallow [censored].

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm desperately sorry I didn't convene a focus group to satisfy your urgent need for FACTS to
demonstrate that 0.45 grams of salt is a tiny bit. And that a tiny bit of salt in more than a
pound of other ingredients wouldn't make a difference. I'm desolated that you haven't had your
yearnings for absolute 10-decimal-place accuracy satisfied.

Here's a blast for you: kitchen measurements are *never* exact, particularly volumetric ones. The
equipment we work with in normal kitchens isn't designed to be lab-accurate. Teaspoons and
tablespoons of powders, leveled or not, will be off the exact measure by up to 10% depending on
compaction. A tablespoon of salt of one size crystal won't hold the same weight of salt of a
different crystal size. Recipes are written and tested by professionals with that understanding
in mind. Every effort is made to write them to relatively exact measure, but cooking is a
resilient science and forgives minor departures. A bit more or less of most ingredients won't
materially affect the dish. Like everybody's Aunt Minnie cooks by the handful and it still works.

In this case, the "bit more" is of such a small absolute quantity that it's irrelevant and below
any threshold of taste.

Quoted message said:

Not a fact anywhere in sight.

And poor JimLane now demonstrates that he doesn't really know what a fact is. So I explain. Does he
get it? No, he doesn't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well, the measurements are factual because I did them and recorded them for anyone who would wish
to check. I mentioned that a dozen people couldn't see any difference. Silly me, I assumed that
you could read some words on a screen and actually understand them. since I've tested saline
solutions, by taste, in researching brine strengths, I've sampled concentrations down to 1 gram
in a gallon of water (couldn't taste salt) and up to 300 grams per gallon and had others test
them for subjective analyses for articles I wrote on brining and for my radio program. And that's
why I wrote above: "But years of critical measuring and tasting the results says that it's a
fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any difference from experience."
How would you have liked the "facts" to have been determined and expressed? How many witnesses
would it take for you to accept the results? Just any witnesses or should they be somehow
qualified?

Quoted message said:

You are assuming that because you MIGHT not be able to taste it in the bare cake, then no one
else would either. That is arrogance. And stupidity.

And now he tells me what I think. Do JimLane's wonderful analyses ever end? We don't know, but they
haven't stopped yet, apparently.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What's arrogant and stupid is your insistence that I do *my* experiment *your* way. Perhaps you
failed to note in my earlier post that a dozen people tasted the cakes and were asked about any
differences perceived. Most of them tasted snippets of plain cake after hearing the question from
my daughter. Nobody tasted anything different between the cakes. Period. My 12-year-old showed
better comprehension of what was happening than you do. We weren't trying for a Nobel prize, just
an informal discussion around a diner table.

I'm assuming that since I've actually tested saline concentrations from virtually nothing to very
salty, I know where it begins to taste different. And this ain't it.

See, Jim, I've been a foodservice professional since the 70's. Studied in Europe and traveled the
world rather widely. I've operated all sorts of restaurants. I'm a professional recipe developer
and a consultant for designing commercial products, some of which are in stores around the
country. All formulated to extremely exact measurements with very exact processing and handling
to meet FDA standards and commercial requirements.

I realize you didn't know this, but it doesn't much minimize the silliness of your [censored]
note. The facts you crave include numbers I provided that you seem unable to grasp or are too
unskilled to extrapolate from. I gave you a specific recipe to consider and assumed that you
could understand the significance of the facts of it. Could grasp the orders of magnitude
involved. Apparently not.

Your note disqualifies you from discussions where the actual product isn't in front of you.
Either you utterly lack the imagination to extrapolate a finished result from a recipe or you
lack the kitchen competence to appreciate the very small, real-world amounts we've been dealing
with in this question. Either way, you're over your head.

I also notice that you didn't go test it to see if I was wrong. Just be a spectator and fling the
contents of your head out onto the field. Go taste salt in a pint of water with 1/2 cup sugar in
it. Start with .45 grams, 1/12 of a teaspoon, and see if you can taste it. Work your way up to
maybe 15 grams and see. Don't have a scale that accurate? Ok, borrow mine.

And you can save your lame judgments for others who aren't light years ahead of you. I'd guess
that it would be a small crowd.

Pastorio

Here's a fact for you, being as you want to be a clown about this,

Poor, Poor JimLane. Posts nonsense and wonders why he gets smacked. Ignores what's on the screen to
make his own tiny points.

Quoted message said:

even the salt called for in many recipes is too much for my taste and I regularly halve it. I know
others who do the same for the same reason.

Yes, and...

You know, if you had said that up front... Nah. You'd still be a [censored].

The salient fact is that you've offered combat and not a single test or idea of your own. Have you
bothered to do the test I described above to find your true threshold of salt perception? No? What a
surprise. You just want to [censored] about something and this seems to be it.

Have anything to contribute or will you merely continue to whine about the flaws in my methodology
for a casual culinary experiment with a curious 12-year-old? Will you continue to prattle on about
yourself and merely prattle?

Quoted message said:

Now did you have something to put up factually, or not?

Like it says up top: "The facts you crave include numbers I provided that you seem unable to grasp
or are too unskilled to extrapolate from. I gave you a specific recipe to consider and assumed that
you could understand the significance of the facts of it."

Perhaps in your dimwitted state, you missed the questions I asked in the post quoted. What "facts"
are you looking for that weren't included above? What "facts" will make any difference to you and
your personal conditions. What sorts of "facts" do you want?

Here are some "facts" for you. You don't read/understand very well. You don't know much about the
kitchen. You are whining about salt as perceived by normal people when you're atypical (if you're
to be believed and I wonder) and the situation doesn't apply to your tastes. Since it wasn't
about you and since you haven't raised any significant issues, why are you bothering to post
*anything* about it?

Quoted message said:

By the way, you are stuck in reverse (the "R" does not mean race on your Model T.

This is your idea of wit? Have you absolutely nothing to contribute? Why did you even bother to
chime in on this topic since you've demonstrated utter ignorance about it?

By the way, indeed...

Pastorio

Lena B Katz said:

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Bob Pastorio wrote:

A bit more or less of most ingredients

Quoted message said:

won't materially affect the dish. Like everybody's Aunt Minnie cooks by the handful and it
still works.

hence why most recipes call for "kosher salt" when they want a different grind...

As far as I'm concerned, kosher salt is an affectation unnecessary for virtually all recipes. It's
bigger chunks of salt than table salt. NaCl. That's all. Different brands are different-sized. Some
have anti-caking agents, some don't. All sound and fury...

Quoted message said:

... unfortunately, you failed to mention that salt has other uses, other than "tasting salty" just
like red peppers have other uses (and effects on the body) other than "being hot." From the way
you wrote, I would assume that you asked people if the cake "tasted salty" and not "did this cake
taste more flavorful than your last piece."

Godfrey Daniel on a crutch. I didn't mention that salt has other functions because it wasn't a
freakin treatise on salt and all it's applications and properties. It was about salted butter and
unsalted butter and how they worked in the specific cakes. We weren't doing research for
publication, it was a family gathering.

My daughter and I asked if the cakes tasted any different from each other, and if they did, what was
the difference. When *everybody* said "No difference" we then told them why we asked. Since it was a
family group, it was informal and ran over two days as people came and went.

Quoted message said:

OTOH, having tastetested colored gelatin (with surprising results), i realize that people don't
know what their taste buds tell them, anywhoo.

How, um, interesting.

Pastorio

Lisette said:

Is this the correct method? (obtained from "Food 911"😉 Why the specification for unsalted butter?
Will it harden upon refrigeration?

Unsalted butter is used because ghee is used for making a lot of Indian sweets liek halwa, jalebi's,
etc., etc.

As for the posters who are wondering what "Vegetable Ghee" is, yes it is
a mixture of hydrogenated vegetable oils that has a ghee-like texture.

It is popular because it is a much cheaper (at least in India) alternative to "pure ghee".

Hope this helps.

MAYA

AA #2152

***
Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare. I think some people in togas are plotting against me.
***

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane said:

Bob Pastorio said:

JimLane wrote:

> Bob Pastorio wrote:
>
>> JimLane wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You did a great job of covering any salt flavor with your filling. Why did you not test them
>>> plain, cake to cake no extras?
>>
>>
>> It's the finished products that we were comparing.

And this should have been the end of JimLane's "brilliance." But did he say, "Oh, I understand"?
No, he didn't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> But years of critical measuring and tasting the results says that it's a fruitless search at
>> these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any difference from experience.
>>
>> But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as
>> even a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks
>> measuring with spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate.
>> And given that kitchen measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that
>> a variation this small wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.
>>
>> The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the
>> other flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume
>> of the whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.
>
>
> Hmmm, I see only your opinion.

And then Poor JimLane posts that he only sees my opinion. Whose opinion was I supposed to post? Or
was I supposed to post a lengthy dissertation detailing a study restricting all the variables to
suit poor JimLane and proceeding like an earnest grad student trying to get published? Who knows,
since JimLane didn't really add anything to the discussion except some shallow [censored].

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm desperately sorry I didn't convene a focus group to satisfy your urgent need for FACTS to
demonstrate that 0.45 grams of salt is a tiny bit. And that a tiny bit of salt in more than a
pound of other ingredients wouldn't make a difference. I'm desolated that you haven't had your
yearnings for absolute 10-decimal-place accuracy satisfied.

Here's a blast for you: kitchen measurements are *never* exact, particularly volumetric ones.
The equipment we work with in normal kitchens isn't designed to be lab-accurate. Teaspoons and
tablespoons of powders, leveled or not, will be off the exact measure by up to 10% depending on
compaction. A tablespoon of salt of one size crystal won't hold the same weight of salt of a
different crystal size. Recipes are written and tested by professionals with that understanding
in mind. Every effort is made to write them to relatively exact measure, but cooking is a
resilient science and forgives minor departures. A bit more or less of most ingredients won't
materially affect the dish. Like everybody's Aunt Minnie cooks by the handful and it still
works.

In this case, the "bit more" is of such a small absolute quantity that it's irrelevant and below
any threshold of taste.

> Not a fact anywhere in sight.

And poor JimLane now demonstrates that he doesn't really know what a fact is. So I explain. Does
he get it? No, he doesn't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well, the measurements are factual because I did them and recorded them for anyone who would
wish to check. I mentioned that a dozen people couldn't see any difference. Silly me, I assumed
that you could read some words on a screen and actually understand them. since I've tested
saline solutions, by taste, in researching brine strengths, I've sampled concentrations down to
1 gram in a gallon of water (couldn't taste salt) and up to 300 grams per gallon and had others
test them for subjective analyses for articles I wrote on brining and for my radio program. And
that's why I wrote above: "But years of critical measuring and tasting the results says that
it's a fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any difference from
experience." How would you have liked the "facts" to have been determined and expressed? How
many witnesses would it take for you to accept the results? Just any witnesses or should they be
somehow qualified?

> You are assuming that because you MIGHT not be able to taste it in the bare cake, then no one
> else would either. That is arrogance. And stupidity.

And now he tells me what I think. Do JimLane's wonderful analyses ever end? We don't know, but
they haven't stopped yet, apparently.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What's arrogant and stupid is your insistence that I do *my* experiment *your* way. Perhaps you
failed to note in my earlier post that a dozen people tasted the cakes and were asked about any
differences perceived. Most of them tasted snippets of plain cake after hearing the question
from my daughter. Nobody tasted anything different between the cakes. Period. My 12-year-old
showed better comprehension of what was happening than you do. We weren't trying for a Nobel
prize, just an informal discussion around a diner table.

I'm assuming that since I've actually tested saline concentrations from virtually nothing to
very salty, I know where it begins to taste different. And this ain't it.

See, Jim, I've been a foodservice professional since the 70's. Studied in Europe and traveled
the world rather widely. I've operated all sorts of restaurants. I'm a professional recipe
developer and a consultant for designing commercial products, some of which are in stores around
the country. All formulated to extremely exact measurements with very exact processing and
handling to meet FDA standards and commercial requirements.

I realize you didn't know this, but it doesn't much minimize the silliness of your [censored]
note. The facts you crave include numbers I provided that you seem unable to grasp or are too
unskilled to extrapolate from. I gave you a specific recipe to consider and assumed that you
could understand the significance of the facts of it. Could grasp the orders of magnitude
involved. Apparently not.

Your note disqualifies you from discussions where the actual product isn't in front of you.
Either you utterly lack the imagination to extrapolate a finished result from a recipe or you
lack the kitchen competence to appreciate the very small, real-world amounts we've been dealing
with in this question. Either way, you're over your head.

I also notice that you didn't go test it to see if I was wrong. Just be a spectator and fling
the contents of your head out onto the field. Go taste salt in a pint of water with 1/2 cup
sugar in it. Start with 0.45 grams, 1/12 of a teaspoon, and see if you can taste it. Work your
way up to maybe 15 grams and see. Don't have a scale that accurate? Ok, borrow mine.

And you can save your lame judgments for others who aren't light years ahead of you. I'd guess
that it would be a small crowd.

Pastorio

Here's a fact for you, being as you want to be a clown about this,

Poor, Poor JimLane. Posts nonsense and wonders why he gets smacked. Ignores what's on the screen
to make his own tiny points.

Quoted message said:

even the salt called for in many recipes is too much for my taste and I regularly halve it. I
know others who do the same for the same reason.

Yes, and...

You know, if you had said that up front... Nah. You'd still be a [censored].

The salient fact is that you've offered combat and not a single test or idea of your own. Have you
bothered to do the test I described above to find your true threshold of salt perception? No? What
a surprise. You just want to [censored] about something and this seems to be it.

Have anything to contribute or will you merely continue to whine about the flaws in my methodology
for a casual culinary experiment with a curious 12-year-old? Will you continue to prattle on about
yourself and merely prattle?

Quoted message said:

Now did you have something to put up factually, or not?

Like it says up top: "The facts you crave include numbers I provided that you seem unable to grasp
or are too unskilled to extrapolate from. I gave you a specific recipe to consider and assumed
that you could understand the significance of the facts of it."

Perhaps in your dimwitted state, you missed the questions I asked in the post quoted. What "facts"
are you looking for that weren't included above? What "facts" will make any difference to you and
your personal conditions. What sorts of "facts" do you want?

Here are some "facts" for you. You don't read/understand very well. You don't know much about the
kitchen. You are whining about salt as perceived by normal people when you're atypical (if you're
to be believed and I wonder) and the situation doesn't apply to your tastes. Since it wasn't about
you and since you haven't raised any significant issues, why are you bothering to post *anything*
about it?

Quoted message said:

By the way, you are stuck in reverse (the "R" does not mean race on your Model T.

This is your idea of wit? Have you absolutely nothing to contribute? Why did you even bother to
chime in on this topic since you've demonstrated utter ignorance about it?

By the way, indeed...

Pastorio

I may be a [censored] head but that is way up the feeding chain from you. You're normally associated with
the word "unmitigated."

You also need to remember liars figure and figures lie and your numbers are not the absolute truth
when it comes to taste despite your protestations. Your numbers are irrelevant because this thread
is about taste changes that occur when adding salt in terms of salted butter, or did that simple
fact go right over your head?

jim

Okay, let's clean this up a bit so the silly clown can see what is what:

Bob Pastorio wrote:

To be sure. But the amount of salt in butter today will make not a whit of difference in just about
any recipe I've ever seen. A whole stick of butter has a tad over a half-teaspoon of salt.

There's so little salt in butter that I've never been able to taste the difference in finished
product, even tasting side by side.

It's the finished products that we were comparing. But years of critical measuring and tasting the
results says that it's a fruitless search at these quantities. I knew it wouldn't make any
difference from experience.

But can anyone seriously believe that an additional 1/12 of a teaspoon of salt will show up as even
a remote flavor determinant in the 9-inch cake described above? I daresay that folks measuring with
spoons will make an error within that range while trying hard to be accurate. And given that kitchen
measures are in the "close enough" category, it's hard to imagine that a variation this small
wouldn't fall invisibly in the cracks.

The pile of salt that makes up 0.45 grams is a small pinch. It simply disappears into the other
flavors, even without the filling and glaze. That ratio of additional salt to the volume of the
whole cake is way more subtle than anybody I know can pick up.

I'm assuming that since I've actually tested saline concentrations from virtually nothing to very
salty, I know where it begins to taste different. And this ain't it.

And then Poor JimLane posts that he only sees my opinion.

Now, other than personal insults, you DO NOT HAVE one single fact to support any of these
statements. I DID NOT argue with the mg of this vs. that, I asked for numbers to support your
contention (empirical will do nicely and any peer-reviewed studies you care to cite) that no one can
tell the difference in small quantities. That is your statement, not a fact anywhere in evidence.
And that makes it opinion and like [censored] (you, specifically) everyone has one.

Now silly boy, put up the proof. Or, make like a child, best seen and not heard from.

jim