Forum Activity for @Sebastian

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Those solid coconut oils you're seeing have a melting point of approximately 96F - the natural coconut oils have such a range of fatty acids that, even though they're 'designated' a melting point of 76, it's really a huge range - meaning that in the 60-70's ish - they'll start to solidify, take on a pasty consistency, and look very strange. Jessica does make a good point about eutectics below - which is absolutely true - sort of a strange phenomenon where the sum of the two parts is less than the whole. You're best to experiment with different fats - however going with a fractionated/hydrogenated coconut oil for use as a centering fat will not, in my experience, deliver a great meltaway type texture. That said, acceptable texture is not up to me to decide for your product 8-)

Other options to consider include palm kernal and palm oils. Soybean if you want to start playing with the laurics; although now you've got to be more careful of what you use as your flavorants to ensure you're not wading into the realm of enzymatic degradation.

Although this goes against conventional wisdom, a chocolate shell really isn't a great oxygen barrier - it certainly does help, but it's not as good as one might think.

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

there is some long shelf life ready made from belcolade. the name is crystofill.

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

you can use cocoa butter, or maybe copha

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Just a note about quirky chemistry between cocoa and coconut fats. Mixing these two actually lowers the melting point of your mixture to BELOW the melting point of either fat individually. This is known as a eutectic effect, and will happen when you mix cocoa fats with either coconut fats or palm kernal oil, or any lauric fat, in fact.

Coconut fat has a melting point around 33C/94F

Cocoa butter has a melting point around 34C/94F

Combined, the melting point actually drops well below 33C

We're talking meltaway centres, where the transition in the mouth from solid to liquid state happens VERY quickly, and the transfer of heat that happens in the melt actually leaves the tongue feeling cooled. There is a chocolate candy that makes use of this chemistry... I used to love them when I was 6. They come foil wrapped squares and triangles.

With the drop in melting point for your centres, this could cause a few problems for enrobing/dipping, so you'd have to be more careful if you were going to coat in that manner. Shell moulding would work better with a centre involving coconut fat.

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Sebastian:

Thanks for the technical clarifications on coconut oil ... especially on the melt point.

When I go into my local health food store I do see coconut oils that are solid at "store temp" which is maybe ten degrees lower than 76F, hence my saying that it's solid at "room temp."

Anhydrous milk fat (sometimes called butter oil) is a good option as you suggest - a little harder to find, but if the chocolate shells covering the ganache are done with properly tempered chocolate and are thick enough, they should form a sufficient oxygen barrier, no?

:: Clay

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Klassy:

There is no "standard of identity" for ganache, so there's no legal reason why you can't call it a ganache instead of a "ganache-like substance" even if there is no dairy in the mix. Many ganaches have ingredients like invert sugars (e.g., sorbitol) and those don't disqualify them from using the term ganache.

Technically, emulsions consist of two different substances (water, oil) mixed together. Chocolate is a suspension of cocoa powder particles in crystallized cocoa butter, so I suppose that what you're making is still a suspension (because there is nothing to emulsify lecithin, which is an emulsifier, won't help).

Canola oil is used because it's cheap. Because cocoa butter is solid at room temp I like the idea of using coconut oil because it has a similar melt point and it's also a tropical plant. Another name for canola oil is rapeseed and I just don't like the sound of that in my chocolate.

As for the 4-6 month claim, you're best off getting these tested so you can feel confident making the claim. There is a potential liability issue if someone gets sick eating one before the "best by" date.

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Canola oil isn't going to be great for long shelf life as it's so highly unsaturated. Coconut oil - depending on what type you get - will vary quite a bit - you're really not going to want something that's highly fractionated or hydrogenated - you don't want it to have a high melting point (or read another way - you don't want it to approximate cocoa butter) as the whole reason you're using it is as a replacement for cream - you want it to be soft. Now, normally, softer oils have lower shelf life (they'll oxidize more rapidly due to lower saturation). I'd look for a high oleic oil - high oleic canola oils do exist commercially. If you go as Clay suggests, i'd consider a natural coconut oil (has approximately a 76F melting point) - it should not appear solid at room temperature - if it does, it's either been highly fractionated or hydrogenated, and isn't likely to give you the texture you're after. Anhydrous milk fat may be another option to consider, but will likely have more exposure to both price volatility as well as oxidation - it will, however, make a very good center.

You are not emulsifying anything via your approach. You're only looking to homogenize it via vigorous mixing.

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

The same thing happens when I make my version of nutella in my grinder - essentially hazelnut oil/canola oiland chocolate instead of just canola oil. The granular bits I think are crystals of cocoa butter forming. The way to prevent this is to agitate the ganache by stirring it wellevery now and then as it cools to room temp - this iskind of like tempering it just makes the crystalising cocoa butter not form such large crystals, you willfind the 'ganache' will be thicker too.

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Thank you Lana, Clay and Sebastian for your responses. I am going for a 4-6 month shelf life, or longer if possible, unless that is unrealistic. And you were right about the mixing, I did use a wooden spoon in a bowl. I will try blending it with the canola oil better, and then let it sit at room temp till it cools. I was being impatient by using the freezer lol. Also, I will be enrobing them in dark chocolate (Cacao Barry Extra Bitter Guayadill, Tempered), so they will be enclosed. Also, I will try the coconut oil that you recommend. The only reason that I chose canola was because thats what I saw it on so many ingredients lists for similar products.

So another question; since there is no water in my recipe (just melted chocolate and oil), is there really any emulsification going on? What exactly am I making here, just a creamier chocolate center? Im not sure what to call it.

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

My strong suspicion is that what you're experiencing has absolutely nothing to do with the canola oil (although w/o knowing exactly what it is you're using, it's hard to say for certain). Additional soy lecithin will not help in the least. Canola's freezing point is somewhere between -20 and -40F, so it's not likely 'fat balls' you're getting, unless your oil has been tainted (much of store oil is, actually). The microwaving may be denaturing some proteins, which could be part of your problem - be very gentle with your melting. Be very thorough with your mixing, and do your cooling very slowly.

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Shelf life of confections is determined by many things, but water activity plays a big part. Water is the medium in which spores grow, turning dairy sour and inviting mold. However, the science is not that simple ...

What kind of shelf life at room temperature are you looking for?

Ganache is a usually a water/fat emulsion. The chocolate provides the fat while the liquid (most commonly dairy, including cream and butter) provides the water. By replacing the dairy with another fat you introduce a number of challenges.

The first things that occur to me in your description:

A) There is no need to freeze;cover the ganache (with plastic wrap) let cool to room temp, and then put in the fridge to set.

B) Though you say you are mixing it well, my guess is that you're not mixing it well enough. Don't use a wooden spoon or a balloon whisk, use a stick blender.

C) Choose another fat ... a cold-pressed coconut oil comes to mind. It's much better for you and the fat is solid at room temp; the melting point is closer to that of cocoa butter. The quantity of added fat you use will determine the texture. More fat, more fudge-like texture.

Finally, what are you using to cover the ganache? If you're just rolling balls in cocoa powder shelf life will be shorter. If you're covering the ganache centers with chocolate, the covering chocolate will have to be tempered, the ganache, because of the addition of the fat, will never temper.

HTH,

:: Clay

Need "ganache" help quick!

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

So I have 1 day to figure this out! I am trying a different method of making truffles. I need my truffles to have a long shelf life so I can package them and sell them in stores without refrigeration. So instead of heavy cream, I am using Canola Oil. The only reason I switched to oil is because when I look at truffles sold on the shelf (like Lindt's Lindor Truffles), they dont have cream in them, they have some sort of vegetable oil. The problem is I just made 2 test batches and it was perfect when it was cold/cool, but when it hit room temp, it got super grainy! It was so smooth, just like the center of those Lindt Truffles, like a super smooth creamy chocolate "ganache like" center. (I realize its not a TRUE ganache, but I dont know what else to call it lol). But after it hits room temp, it feels like I dumped a cup up sugar in there. Is this a temperature problem? Is it something to do with the emulsification? Do I need to temper it or something?

The way I made them was:

Melted the Guittard Chocolate (12 ounces) in microwave.

Added 1/3 cup canola oil for one batch, 1/2 cup for the second (as a test)

Mixed well.

Put in freezer for maybe 5 minutes.

Moved to fridge.

Took it all out when it was firm.

Then when I would take a little spoon full, it was super smooth and pretty good! But after 20 minutes of sitting out, it was the worst "ganache" ive ever had.

Im pretty new to this (chocolate), but really love working with this stuff. I want to get good at it so bad, but cant afford to go to school right now. Does anyone know what Im doing wrong here?

Possible solutions that I can think of:

I have some Soy Lecitin... Should I put some of that in the mix?

Should I let it set at a different temp? Maybe for a day instead of 20 min?

Too much/too little oil?

Maybe some butter?

Temper it? (I have a Rev2 machine, and a Mol de art melter (6kg, havent used it yet)

Ask the pros? (:

Any help would be greatly appreciated, and I wont forget it either!

Thanks!

Ryan

updated by @Klassy: 04/11/25 09:27:36

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Excellent and very informative post Damion.

Thank you!

Brad

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Damion - Thanks! This is exactly the kind of info I was looking for.

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

hey jessica,

from a chemistry stand point, agave syrups can be used as an invert sugar for ganaches. the basic composition of agave is made up of fructose and glucose. both of which have a greater capacity than sucrose to bind and stabilize water. your typical confectionery invert (i.e. trimoline, nuvoline etc..) is composed of dextrose and fructose. typically in a 50/50 split. on the surface, i would say that its quite possible that invert sugars might be slightly more effective at stabilizing water as dextrose is more effective than glucose in this regard. the one thing to consider when using these ingredients is what is their role in the recipe. from a flavor standpoint, both inverts and agave (due to the presence of fructose) are roughly 30% sweeter than sucrose. this naturally adds a sweetness to the finished product. they also affect the texture of ganache, sometimes making it creamier, sometimes softer or gummier....depending on the types of sugars we use. however the real importance of adding sugars, of any sort, to ganache is their abilities to bind and stabilize water. this is how we are able to modify the shelf life of ganaches....the control and stabilization of water. all sugars, inverts, fruit sugars, alcohol sugars, do this to different capacities. as we write our ganache recipes, we must keep in mind the total amount of water in the recipe so that we know how much and of what kind of sugars to add to create the desired result. this is especially important if you are looking to convert recipes with invert into agave. typically, commercial inverts are 82% dry (sugar) and 18% wet (water). in contrast agave syrups have about 75% dry and 25% wet (there does seem to be some differences in brands, so probably best to check with specific manufacturers for more precise info). this extra water will actually help to reduce shelf life, so it must be checked through a reduction in water from the other ingredients in the recipe (i.e. cream, butter, puree, alcohol etc...)

from standpoint of 'health' or ' natural', there does seem to be some controversy around agave these days. agave is an industrial sugar product that seems to have been around only since the 90's. the two main methods of production are by boiling the ball the at the base of the agave plant (the source of the carbohydrates) or by enzymatic hydrolysis (the same method that commercial inverts are produced). in the case of the boiling of the carbohydrates (to convert them to sugars), the product is not 'raw'. on the other hand, the hydrolysis is not exactly natural. the real controversy comes up when you look at the chemical composition of agave. agave is very high in fructose sugar. it can range anywhere from 70-90%. this is even higher than high fructose corn syrups. there is an increasing amount of studies linking high fructose levels with obesity (having to do with the way the sugar is absorbed and stored in the body).

so is agave exactly natural...honestly, i don't know. im not advocating for or against its usage in confections. for diabetics, this is clearly a better option than many other sugars out there. from the stand point of chemistry its totally usable. i would advise checking with different manufacturers and try to get as much info as you can. there are companies that do make raw versions and there are differences in water and sugar contents. in the end, the percentages we are using are quite small when compared to other food manufacturers. a ganache bonbon is not exactly a can of soda.

hope this helps!

damion

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Jessica, I have begun to experiment with agave in my ganache, since I do not like things too sweet. I have found there is no problem with the emulsification at all and I am hoping to start using this in my products soon. I am still doing some further testing and would love to hear your thought if you do decide to try it.

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Hi Jessica, I've been making agave sweetened ganache for truffles and fillings since 2004 and it works great! As I do not like my truffles too sweet I start with 100% chocolate and use the agave for the sweetener. That way I get an intense Dark chocolate truffle. The shelf life is not as long as when using corn syrup (which I never use) so don't expect to have truffles sitting on a shelf for months (like most candy). In any case truffles are at their best when freshly made and should be consumed within a short time span. Some chocolatiers never hold truffles past one day! Hope this helps. -Mark

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Anytime I can help!

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Thanks Jessica! I'll definitely do that.

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Hey Brad - Agave is totally available in Canada. It's actually where I first came across it. Check places where health-food is found. David's tea also has a decent agave at a fairly good price - I ordered some from them since the stuff I've seen here is stupidly expensive.

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

just curious....

What does chunky/grainy/gritty have to do with emulsification?

Further to the referenceof the chocolate being"chunky/grainy/gritty", the texture means that the cocoa hasn't been refined long enough to where the particles are small enough that our palletes can't detect the texture anymore. In my opinioin, one could get a better effect and the same health benefitsfrom a silky, well refined chocolate, with good quality nibs added to the bars.

With regard to the agave syrup, that would certainly be an interesting ingredient to try. I'm interested, but don't even know if we can get that up here in Canada.

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Hi Jessica,

We recently started ranging a RAW chocolate product. The company is not bean to bar, but uses raw product they buy in, re-combine (I think) and then use Agave nectar as a sweetener. This means the chocolate is sugar free (apart from natural occurring sugars which is about 2.5%), vegan, gluten free, etc. It has been surprisingly popular, especially given it is quite a high price in comparison.

Interestingly, they do not use an emulsifier either, so it is chunky/grainy/gritty. Surprisingly, I thought the chocolate was rather intense in flavor (its 74% I think) and not too bad! I have no opinion on the benefits of raw, and am not sure about their claims that it contains 4x the anti-oxidants of other chocolate, but if customers want it, we will sell it (so long as it meets our criteria, which this does)

You can find the company here: http://www.naturesgold.co.nz/index.html

Cheers

Stu

Agave

Posted in: Tech Help, Tips, Tricks, Techniques

Has anyone tried using agave syrup as an invert sugar in ganaches?

At first glance, the chemistry seems to work, and I like the idea of a natural, vegan invert sugar that doesn't have as detectable a flavour as honey. The idea of this natural additive to prolong shelf life a little is attractive to me.

Any negative or positive comments on this would be appreciated.

updated by @Jessica Conrad: 04/11/25 09:27:36

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

thanks for saying it so clearly. I am with you too and may quote you if you don't mind.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Why no peanut butter?

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Hi,

Our CocoaTown equipment like ECGC-12SL melangers and ECGC-65A Grindeurs have been used bychocolatiers around the world to grind almonds, pistachios, cashews, macadamia nuts, walnuts etc. (except peanut butter) into nut butters, and to grind raw or roasted cocoa nibs into cocoa liquor.You canfind more information atcocoatown.com

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Do you know about "metate"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metate

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Every time I see a new package in the health food store with "Raw Chocolate" I just can not get into it. Just a marketing ploy, not the best tasking chocolate or the most healthy chocolate. And when ever I do buy a "raw" bar the taste is just not there. So for me "raw" on a chocolate bar means its a low / poor quality bar that is relying on a marketing gimmick rather then on taste. I have done some experiments with processing chocolate at low temperatures. Not letting the temp get high when fermenting and drying, not roasting, etc...grinding in a santha rather then a cocoatown, and guess what, grade A criollo beans ending up tasting very nasty. I did not have the feeling that it was good for me in any way, very astringent, dry, bitter, tannic, not good. Is there any credible chef, nutritionist, or chocolate maker who has seen any valid study to say that "raw" chocolate is heather? We paid $500 a year for the organic label. If someone slaps RAW on the label, you guessed it, its free.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Thanks again for the information Clay!

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

There is a small export market for pods into the US, mainly for decorative floral applications. The pods must be fumigated, and because the supply chain is not as tightly integrated as it is in flowers, by the time the pods arrive they are way past their prime. You could eat just the seeds, but the pulp is the real treat here and once a pod has been off a tree for a more than a couple of days it starts to dry out inside and is far less appealing.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

yes bravo Clay, that was enlightening. Why don't the raw foodists eat the fresh cacao pods. Does anybody export fresh cacao pods for eating?

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Hi Yvonne,

Our customers are using the ECGC-65-A Grindeurs and Deluxe melangers for nut butters and are happy with the results. ECGC -65-A Grindeurs are easier to use and clean. They also have built in systems to prevent the motor from overheating. There is no need for external fan.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Don't forget the sheering forces in the grinder will destroy the enzymes anyway, no matter what temperature it hits. I posted a link to an article inone thread a long time agoabout protein breakdown under sheering forces. I am with you Clay on the minimally processed but I am firmly of the opinion that chocolate must be fermented and roasted, it makes me feel good and that is good for your health too. Don't forget the placebo effect.

Just had a look for that post but it is gone, it was a thread Sam started and it vanished when she left. I think the search I did was along the lines of 'enzyme activity and sheering forces'. Haven't time to look for it now but Clay you might have the thread archived somewhere to extract the info?

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Yvonne, Matt Monarch is a very interesting character. The machine he is hyping is a Santha (Spectra) stone grinder from India. These have been used in the US (and around the world) as grinder/refiner/conches for years. I personally have been using them to make nut butters for years, and I know many others who've been using them this way, too.

I notice the machines were added to the catalog May 21, 2011 - and Matt is hyping them up something fierce. Might news in rural Ecuador where he is, but not in the chocolate world.

That said, my personal experience with these machines is that the basic running temp is around 115F as measured by a laser thermometer pointed right at the point the grinding wheels contacts the stone bottom of the grinder. If you read closely, Matt suggests pointing a fan into the machine to move the heat out more quickly. Not a bad idea, overall. However, no one I know of has actually done any testing to figure out what the instantaneous temperature generated by the sheer action of the wheels on the base is. It might be much higher than the average/spot temp that can be measured by an infrared thermometer.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

I just happened to watch a video about a stone grinder for nut butters and the guy said they also use it for chocolate. Here is the link:

http://www.therawfoodworld.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=316_100465&products_id=1004870

updated by @Yvonne Forsman: 09/08/15 15:28:50

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Brian:

47C (~118F) is the most common max temp I have heard for raw anything.

It's possible to fully ferment below 118F, though pile temps "naturally" want to tend to peak around 122-125F.

While raw chocolate people talk about ferment and roast temps, they almost never consider the temp beans are exposed to during sun drying. As you point out, they can easily reach 140-150F on a drying pad in direct sun. Actually, anything above 140F is counterproductive as the shell tends to crust over at that temp, slowing evaporation of both water and acetic acid. The technique they use in Chuao, though labor intensive, may actually be more efficient from a drying perspective because peristaltic pressure builds up that "pumps" water from the interior of the bean during the mid-day rest.

I know that at least one company is using a large dehydrator system to dry their beans "low and slow."

Is there any great tasting raw chocolate? When you consider the raw chocolate world in and of itself there are some that are much better than others. If you start comparing them with conventional chocolate then raw chocolates still fall short and are generally recognizable. That may change as people start working from the moment of harvesting to optimize techniques to deliver interesting flavors in raw chocolate. I was at a tasting last week hosted by Maricel Presilla featuring Santiago Perralta of Pacari and I have to say that I was very surprised at what they have been able to achieve in this regard. I know that Vanessa Barg of Gnosis just got back from Grenada and that's such a good starting flavor it will be interesting to taste what she's been able to achieve working with Mott Green of Grenada Chocolate Co.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

clay you mentioned 47C above as a generally accepted temp for cacao / choc in the raw choc world. is that for chocolate making only or also the post-harvest processing?

If a raw bean buyer want the beans to be fermented at below 47 i could do it i think although my beans typically ferment higher than that for extended periods of time. but what do they do about the drying beds? anyone who's on a concrete bed is up over 50C at the cement level in the tropical sun for sure, probably more like 55-60C on a hot day. i dry off the ground on elevated beds using mesh, which is cooler than on the concrete but still gets over 50C at times, which i should say I want as i am not selling into raw markets.

just curious about the raw stuff. is any of it really great tasting chocolate in your opinion clay? If you recommend any I'll try and find some when i'm in the US in september

brian

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

great write Clay and I am very much with you here.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

it will definitely go over 40 degrees C (actually around 43 without sugar). you'll have to keep a fan on it to cool the contents while grinding. that should work well since we have used our Premier Wet Grinder 1.5L (like a santha but with a more modern design) to temper the chocolate with rollers in place to 31 degress with the use of a blower. By loosening the screw to go under 34 degrees the rollers have less contact (pressure) with the base surface and the temperature can drop to 29-31 degrees, and your chocolate is tempered. We also have a 20L Wet Grinder (weighs 500lbs) and the temperature is the same. hope that's helpful.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Michel:

The FACT is that there is no proof that the Howell's enzyme theory of nutrition has any legitimate basis.

The fact that there is no firm consensus as to what defines what is, and what is not, raw.

What we DO know is that different foods have different sensitivities. Lettuces are a lot more delicate than nuts, for example. To hold them to the same temperature standard makes no sense. Another issue that raw foodists don't talk about is time/temp. If I expose a cocoa bean to a temp of 120F for 1/100 of a second does that denature all the enzymes in the bean? Of course not. In fact (and this is a test I've done personally), you can subject an intact cocoa bean to a temperature in excess of 300F for a considerable time (minutes) and not raise the surface temperature of the bean inside the shell above 110F. One reason is evaporative cooling. Think about the volume of a bean if 0.5% of the mass of the bean hits 118.01F and stays there for 10 minutes but 99.5% of the bean stays below 118.0F I think it's silly to say that all the enzymes in the bean are dead.

There's also contact time. There is research that shows that many enzymes survive in aqueous environments above 150F for extended periods of time - hours even.

I have been studying this subject for years and not one raw foodist (in the chocolate world or not) has ever been able to show me one credible scientific study (and no, Gabriel Cousens is not credible) that supports the enzyme theory of nutrition and any scientific basis for picking one temperature over another as the maximum.

THAT SAID, the idea that minimally-processed food is better for you is something I buy into, but it has to be done on a food by food basis - not at an arbitrary cut off that is the same for all foods. There is evidence that broccoli is better for you if it's lightly steamed - better in the sense that more nutrients are more bioavailable.

There is also scientific proof that cooking can create beneficial compounds not found in the raw food. A good example is the antioxidant levels of roasted coffee are far higher than green coffee.

One day, I wish the "raw chocolate" segment of the market would fund a study that proves their claims. Not one company has done the analysis. Having made the claim, the burden is on them to prove their claims - the usual response is, "Prove us wrong." That's not the way it's done.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Well I don't know specifically about chocolate but the general rule for raw food seems to be to not exceed ~42 C since there the first enzymes start breaking down. If this is actually true and relevant for chocolate is another issue. Hard scientific fact seems elusive for the raw food theories and diet.

Stone Grinder for Raw Chocolate

Posted in: Make Mine Raw ... (Read-Only)

Michel:

Why 40C? Virtually everyone I know in the raw chocolate business works at 47C (~118F).

I can confirm that the CocoaTown will easily pass 40C as Cheebs says - I have measured it. The overal "continuous" temperature in the small (5L) machines hovers between 45-49C based on measuring over a number of hours; the larger machines generate more heat but I've never measured it. With a frequency controller on the motor you can slow the rotational speed down some to keep the temp under 47C, but if you tried to slow it down to keep it under 40C the processing times might become so long that any aromatics would volatilize out.

One thing no one has done (and, frankly, I don't know exactly how you'd do this) is to measure the "instantaneous" shear temperature immediately between the grinder wheels and the base. I am fairly confident that this is at least a couple of degrees higher than whatever the "continuous" temperature might be.