| Margaret Suran |
Today when I went grocery shopping, I wanted to get a couple of
packages of the Ghiradelli Double Chocolate chips. I couldn't find
them in their usual place, but instead there were packages of "60%
Cocoa Bittersweet Chocolate" chips, They were $2.89 per 11.5 oz.
package, the same price as the other chips. I bought two packages.
I also remembered that I could not get the double chocolate ones in
another store last week, but that one has a much smaller choice of
chocolate chips.
Have you heard of these new chips? If so, have you tried them? Are
they the same as the double chocolate ones, in a new package?
Thank you for any information you may give me. M
|
|
|
| Alex Rast |
at Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:14:12 GMT in <dld5140ejm@news3.newsguy.com>,
margaret@no.spam.for.me.invalid (Margaret Suran) wrote :
>Today when I went grocery shopping, I wanted to get a couple of
>packages of the Ghiradelli Double Chocolate chips. I couldn't find
>them in their usual place, but instead there were packages of "60%
>Cocoa Bittersweet Chocolate" chips,
>
>Have you heard of these new chips? If so, have you tried them? Are
>they the same as the double chocolate ones, in a new package?
No - they're the replacement for the Double Chocolate chips. Ghirardelli
has chosen to trade off improved flavour and mouthfeel for poorer shape
maintenance during baking. So a batch of cookies made with these new chips
will taste better, but the chips flatten dramatically more, and out of the
bag they're flatter to begin with, more like mini-discs than the familiar
"chip" profile. What they've done is to tinker with fat and sugar ratios -
it's something of a mixed blessing. I can't deny that the boost in flavour
is a *big* plus, but I also think the problems of flattening during baking
are a negative. I suspect Ghirardelli succumbed to the observation that an
increasing proportion of chocolate chips these days are used for general-
purpose baking and confectionery applications, (where typically bloc
couverture is used), not to mention eating out of the bag, and decided to
shift their chips to this model - it's basically bar chocolate in the shape
of chocolate chips. Is this an improvement? Depends on your POV.
--
Alex Rast
ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com
(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)
|
|
|
| Dee Randall |
"Alex Rast" <ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:970FE4959adrastnwnotlinkcom@216.168.3.44...
> at Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:14:12 GMT in <dld5140ejm@news3.newsguy.com>,
> margaret@no.spam.for.me.invalid (Margaret Suran) wrote :
>
>>Today when I went grocery shopping, I wanted to get a couple of
>>packages of the Ghiradelli Double Chocolate chips. I couldn't find
>>them in their usual place, but instead there were packages of "60%
>>Cocoa Bittersweet Chocolate" chips,
>>
>>Have you heard of these new chips? If so, have you tried them? Are
>>they the same as the double chocolate ones, in a new package?
>
> No - they're the replacement for the Double Chocolate chips. Ghirardelli
> has chosen to trade off improved flavour and mouthfeel for poorer shape
> maintenance during baking. So a batch of cookies made with these new chips
> will taste better, but the chips flatten dramatically more, and out of the
> bag they're flatter to begin with, more like mini-discs than the familiar
> "chip" profile. What they've done is to tinker with fat and sugar ratios -
> it's something of a mixed blessing. I can't deny that the boost in flavour
> is a *big* plus, but I also think the problems of flattening during baking
> are a negative. I suspect Ghirardelli succumbed to the observation that an
> increasing proportion of chocolate chips these days are used for general-
> purpose baking and confectionery applications, (where typically bloc
> couverture is used), not to mention eating out of the bag, and decided to
> shift their chips to this model - it's basically bar chocolate in the
> shape
> of chocolate chips. Is this an improvement? Depends on your POV.
>
> --
> Alex Rast
Perhaps with the national interest in chocolate in percentages is also a
reason to change the packaging. I checked out a book from the library which
I read much of last night, Alice Medrich, author, of "Bitter Sweet ..
Recipes and Tale from a Life in Chocolate." She gives recipes many of which
include the variations for the different percentages of chocolate. I must
admit it looks very persuasive, given her creditentials.
I am not a chocolate-recipe maker, but I have gathered my chocolate with
the thought in mind. I'm definitely not headed toward 'tempering'
chocolate, and she only refers to it in a rather small portion of her book.
I thinking of buying the book (as a pleasurable reference book, if nothing
else) because if I do make more chocolate recipes, I know of nothing like
this book -- do you have any opinion on this book, Alex, if you know it?
Thanks.
Dee Dee
|
|
|
| Melba's Jammin' |
In article <dld5140ejm@news3.newsguy.com>,
Margaret Suran <margaret@no.spam.for.me.invalid> wrote:
> Today when I went grocery shopping, I wanted to get a couple of
> packages of the Ghiradelli Double Chocolate chips. I couldn't find
> them in their usual place, but instead there were packages of "60%
> Cocoa Bittersweet Chocolate" chips, They were $2.89 per 11.5 oz.
> package, the same price as the other chips. I bought two packages.
> I also remembered that I could not get the double chocolate ones in
> another store last week, but that one has a much smaller choice of
> chocolate chips.
>
> Have you heard of these new chips? If so, have you tried them? Are
> they the same as the double chocolate ones, in a new package?
>
> Thank you for any information you may give me. M
I think perhaps you need to try them and submit samples to Quality
Control for comparison and evaluation. You have my address.,
-Barbara, always trying to be helpful
--
http://www.jamlady.eboard.com, updated 11-9-05 finishing in four
parts the trip report from our vacation time in San Francisco
for Nephew Pat's wedding last weekend.
|
|
|
| Margaret Suran |
Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> In article <dld5140ejm@news3.newsguy.com>,
> Margaret Suran <margaret@no.spam.for.me.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>Today when I went grocery shopping, I wanted to get a couple of
>>packages of the Ghiradelli Double Chocolate chips. I couldn't find
>>them in their usual place, but instead there were packages of "60%
>>Cocoa Bittersweet Chocolate" chips, They were $2.89 per 11.5 oz.
>>package, the same price as the other chips. I bought two packages.
>>I also remembered that I could not get the double chocolate ones in
>>another store last week, but that one has a much smaller choice of
>>chocolate chips.
>>
>>Have you heard of these new chips? If so, have you tried them? Are
>>they the same as the double chocolate ones, in a new package?
>>
>>Thank you for any information you may give me. M
>
>
> I think perhaps you need to try them and submit samples to Quality
> Control for comparison and evaluation. You have my address.,
> -Barbara, always trying to be helpful
Thank you. You are number 1 on the list. :o)
|
|
|
| Margaret Suran |
Alex Rast wrote:
> at Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:14:12 GMT in <dld5140ejm@news3.newsguy.com>,
> margaret@no.spam.for.me.invalid (Margaret Suran) wrote :
>
>
>>Today when I went grocery shopping, I wanted to get a couple of
>>packages of the Ghiradelli Double Chocolate chips. I couldn't find
>>them in their usual place, but instead there were packages of "60%
>>Cocoa Bittersweet Chocolate" chips,
>>
>>Have you heard of these new chips? If so, have you tried them? Are
>>they the same as the double chocolate ones, in a new package?
>
>
> No - they're the replacement for the Double Chocolate chips. Ghirardelli
> has chosen to trade off improved flavour and mouthfeel for poorer shape
> maintenance during baking. So a batch of cookies made with these new chips
> will taste better, but the chips flatten dramatically more, and out of the
> bag they're flatter to begin with, more like mini-discs than the familiar
> "chip" profile. What they've done is to tinker with fat and sugar ratios -
> it's something of a mixed blessing. I can't deny that the boost in flavour
> is a *big* plus, but I also think the problems of flattening during baking
> are a negative. I suspect Ghirardelli succumbed to the observation that an
> increasing proportion of chocolate chips these days are used for general-
> purpose baking and confectionery applications, (where typically bloc
> couverture is used), not to mention eating out of the bag, and decided to
> shift their chips to this model - it's basically bar chocolate in the shape
> of chocolate chips. Is this an improvement? Depends on your POV.
>
Alex, Thank you. The people who get my baked stuff, will not care
about the thickness or height of the chips. As it is, I have tried
baking with some of the flat discs of some luxury chocolates (samples
from the Chocolate Show, to which I did not go this year) and the
cookies tasted good and the chips did not melt too much. I will try
the new chips as soon as I get around to baking. Today in New York,
the temperature is up in the 70's, not conducive to baking. The
building air conditioning is long turned off and only steam heat is
coming out of the radiators. :o(
Thank you for all the information. When I open the packages, I will
sample some of the chips. I assume that you already tasted them. M
|
|
|
| Charles Gifford |
"Margaret Suran" <margaret@no.spam.for.me.invalid> wrote in message
news:dlm0070of6@news2.newsguy.com...
>
>
> Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> > In article <hjQef.96$rM2.7@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
> > "Charles Gifford" <taxicolor@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>"Melba's Jammin'" <barbs.challer@earthfink.net.invalid> wrote in message
> >>news:barbs.challer-76FA37.15410516112005@individual.net...
> >>
> >>Oops: Mme Suran here:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>Thank you. You are number 1 on the list. :o)
> >>>
> >>>Why does that sound like a dubious honor? <=8-o)
> >>>--
> >>
> >>Margaret has my address too. What am I; Number 2? >:0
> >
> >
> > Honey, I believe the correct term is "chopped liver."
> >
> >>Charlie, Egad! Or even lower on the scale!
>
>
> Barbara, you are always Number One on every list. Nobody would dare
> to give that spot to someone else.
I suppose she has to be "kept" in my Number One position too. I owe her big
time!
> Charlie, your Number Two is secure. That's all the chopped liver that
> got in touch. I mean, all the other friends that contacted me.
>
> Hugs, M
Thank you dear Margaret! The cookies were excellent! Chopped liver is a good
thing!
Hugs returned, Charlie
|
|
|
| Margaret Suran |
Alex, I made the Chocolate Chip cookies, with Ghiradelli's 60% chips
last week. The chocolate was really good, just as you said and I kept
tasting it and except for a slightly too sweet taste, it reminded me
of European dark chocolate, the kind I ate as a child.
You were right about something else. While it did not matter that the
chips were not as high as the one Hershey's or Nestle's makes, the
chocolate, soft in the cookie when they came out of the oven, would
not harden. I had to put the cookies into the refrigerator to get the
melted chocolate to firm up.
As I was trying to get the cookies into boxes, rush them to the Post
Office to get them out while still very fresh and send then to the
volunteer tasters, I completely forgot to taste one. :o(
Two of the three volunteers have tasted them. They were received
within forty eight hours of being baked.
One said he liked them very much. He is very polite and wouldn't hurt
me, so I do not really know.
One said they taste the same way as any other ones I make. She would
like nothing better than hurt my feelings, so they had to be at least
marginally edible.
The third one received the cookies on Wednesday, too, but has not
bothered to open the box, so far. He has tasted my baking before, so
that may be the reason he has yet to try the cookies. :o(
Thank you for your help. Next time I will remember to eat one of the
cookies. M
|
|
|
| Ophelia |
"Margaret Suran" <margaret@no.spam.for.me.invalid> wrote in message
news:dmae880117l@news2.newsguy.com...
> Alex, I made the Chocolate Chip cookies, with Ghiradelli's 60% chips
> last week. The chocolate was really good, just as you said and I kept
> tasting it and except for a slightly too sweet taste, it reminded me
> of European dark chocolate, the kind I ate as a child.
>
> You were right about something else. While it did not matter that the
> chips were not as high as the one Hershey's or Nestle's makes, the
> chocolate, soft in the cookie when they came out of the oven, would
> not harden. I had to put the cookies into the refrigerator to get the
> melted chocolate to firm up.
>
> As I was trying to get the cookies into boxes, rush them to the Post
> Office to get them out while still very fresh and send then to the
> volunteer tasters, I completely forgot to taste one. :o(
>
> Two of the three volunteers have tasted them. They were received
> within forty eight hours of being baked.
>
> One said he liked them very much. He is very polite and wouldn't hurt
> me, so I do not really know.
>
> One said they taste the same way as any other ones I make. She would
> like nothing better than hurt my feelings, so they had to be at least
> marginally edible.
>
> The third one received the cookies on Wednesday, too, but has not
> bothered to open the box, so far. He has tasted my baking before, so
> that may be the reason he has yet to try the cookies. :o(
>
> Thank you for your help. Next time I will remember to eat one of the
> cookies. M
I think you ought to send your cookies to me Margaret:))
I will test them for you:))
Ophelia
Scotland
|
|
|
| Margaret Suran |
Ophelia wrote:
> "Margaret Suran" <margaret@no.spam.for.me.invalid> wrote in message
>>
>>As I was trying to get the cookies into boxes, rush them to the Post
>>Office to get them out while still very fresh and send them to the
>>volunteer tasters, I completely forgot to taste one. :o(
>>
>>Two of the three volunteers have tasted them. They were received
>>within forty eight hours of being baked.
>>
>>One said he liked them very much. He is very polite and wouldn't hurt
>>me, so I do not really know.
>>
>>One said they taste the same way as any other ones I make. She would
>>like nothing better than hurt my feelings, so they had to be at least
>>marginally edible.
>>
>>The third one received the cookies on Wednesday, too, but has not
>>bothered to open the box, so far. He has tasted my baking before, so
>>that may be the reason he has yet to try the cookies. :o(
>>
>>Thank you for your help. Next time I will remember to eat one of the
>>cookies. M
>
>
> I think you ought to send your cookies to me Margaret:))
>
> I will test them for you:))
>
> Ophelia
> Scotland
Ophelia, Unfortunately, by the time they would get to Scotland, they
would be petrified. :o(
However, email your address to msuran at em eye em eff dot com (spell
as you would pronounce the address) and perhaps some day I will make
something that can be sent overseas. Anything is possible.
Margaret
|
|
|
|
