Conference turris::cooks

    Although I'm not a candy-making expert, I have used both white
    chocolate and the vanilla-flavored candy coatings available in most
    cake decorating shops.  I believe the candy coatings have a higher
    wax content and if you are dipping items in the coating it sets
    much faster than white chocolate.  But I much prefer the taste of
    real white chocolate and use it most of the time.  My suggestions-
    opt for white chocolate if your taste buds are more selective and
    your pocketbook can afford the additional cost, otherwise the candy
    coating will give you pleasant enough results.

    I believe the recipe is refering to summer coating or compound chocolate. 
    This is the stuff that comes in those little, semi-circular pellets.
    Compound chocolate/coating (if this is indeed what the recipe means)
    use oils instead of cocoa butter and does not need to be tempered.
    It does not taste nearly as good as real chocolate (chocolate that uses
    cocoa butter) but is *MUCH* easier to work with.  My use of capitals
    AND asterisks was intentional, take note.  
    
    I suppose I should explain "tempering" now.  Cocoa butter has a natural
    crystal pattern.  When you buy chocolates or candy bars, it is very
    shiny, firm, and has a creamy texture.  This is called "snap", and it
    indicates the choclate was tempered.  Tempering chocolate (like
    tempering steel) involves raising it to a certain temperature and then
    lowering it to another temperature and forming it at that lower
    temperature.  For dark chocolate (40-60% cooca solids, no milk solids)
    I believe you raise the temperature to 115�F and then must dip it
    between 84� and 87�F.  If you raise the temp to high or dip above 87�
    or below 84� you are at risk at messing things up.
    
    What happens when chocolate isn't tempered you may ask.  Well the it
    gets a chalky coating on it and it kind of crumbles when you break it
    (the opposite of snap).  Also, it has a grainy texture.
    
    Anyway, coating is used when you want to decorate things and don't want
    to take the chance of having cloudy chocolate all over what you
    started to decorate.  When I make truffles, I use regular chocolate for
    the ganache, and for dipping, but I use coating when I pipe patterns
    on the truffles.
    
    One other thing, if you mix chocolate with other ingredients (eg, a
    ganache) you don't have to worry about tempering since the cream (in
    this case) doesn't allow the cocoa butter to crystalize anyway.
    
    Bottom Line:  If you have never worked with chocolate, use coating.
    
    I just made 120 truffles this weekend, and I screwed up, they didn't
    temper.  They taste great, but look like h*ll.  I had to give them
    away at work.  People aren't picky here.
    
    				-David

    What would happen if you used the real stuff for coating, for taste,
    and put a thin layer of the coating stuff on the outside, for looks?
    I've always seen truffles with a fairly thick coating, so maybe this
    would solve the "looks vs taste" problem.  You could even make the
    two coatings in two different colors, to make it fancier....
    
    --L

Thanks for all your excellent suggestions; this is exactly the type of advice I
was looking for!  Since I am a novice, I think I'll be safe and use the summer
coating the first time, then if I get brave, I'll eventually attempt to use
the real stuff.  I plan on experimenting with the recipe at least a few times
before making the batches that I plan on giving away as Christmas gifts and 
hopefully by then, I'll be a pro!

re: .3 - Interesting idea, using coating on the outside; I'd be curious to 
hear from others whether anyone has ever tried this.

re:  looks vs taste

in my opinion, there ain't no such thing as an "ugly" truffle....I kinda like
them lumpy and unique.  After all, they are named after the black lumps of
fungus so prized for their taste, regardless of looks.  You can send all
your "faiures" to me....8^}

    RE: .5 
    
    Unfortunately, there is such a thing as an ugly truffle, and
    unfortunately, I made 125 of them last weekend.  Half the truffles I
    made (the coffee ones) came out spotty, and the chocolate was different
    shades of brown.  The other half (the chocolate-cinnamon ones) came out
    far worse.  They are blotchy, pasty, and chalky looking.  Fortunately,
    the insides (the ganache) is very hard to mess up, so they still taste
    good.  And yes, I give away the failures.  If you are in ZKO, stop by.
    
    Another annoying thing, is that if the chocolate isn't tempered, they
    don't cloud up for about a day or two.  So when you first dip them they
    look fine and slowly over a day or two they get "cloudier".
    
    RE: .3,.4.
    
    Yes there is an easy way to cover up mistakes with a thin layer of
    coating.  You can pipe compound choclate over what you dipped.  As a 
    matter of fact I patched up some of the sorrier looking chocolate
    cinnamon ones this way.  Actually, I usually pipe patterns over all the
    truffles I make, only this time, I completely covered them.  You can
    pipe the chocolate using parchment.  I never try to pipe real
    chocolate.  It's hard enough to try to keep the temperature of the
    (real) chocolate correct when you're melting it in a pot, and even harder,
    when you're piping it through parchment - so I don't even try.
    
    BTW, The Cake Bible (Rose Levy Beranbaum) has a nice discussion of
    chocolate/piping and all sorts of other techniques.  It probably has
    already been mentioned in this conference somewhere.
    
    				-David
    

    I forgot to mention 2 things.
    
    1) Before I am corrected my original note describing tempering (.2)
    isn't entirely accurate.  It is actually quick tempering,  a sort of
    short cut to real tempering.  Real tempering is more involved and I
    won't bother describing it.  Quick tempering relies on two assumptions,
    you are using chocolate that is already tempered, and you don't melt
    all of the chocolate.  Quick tempering works on the principle that you
    are using the pattern of the unmelted tempered chocolate to form the
    proper crystal structure when you dip.  If you melt all the chocolate,
    or if the chocolate you or using isn't tempered, there is no crystal
    structure for the chocolate to form around.
    
    2) I still wouldn't use real choclate unless you know what you are
    doing - even if you cover it up with something else.  Part of the good
    taste of chocolate is its texture.  Untempered choclate is very grainy
    and has a poor texture.  You will taste (or perhaps sense this) even if
    you successfully cover it up.
    
    If you wish to know more, may I suggest the CHOCOLATE notes file, I
    think this is starting to get a bit too in depth.
    
    				-David

    I make truffles every year and I have never tempered chocolate, nor
    have I ever had a failure. I don't always dip them though, sometimes I
    roll them in powdered unsweetened cocoa, finely chopped nuts, coconut,
    chocolate shots (jimmies). or different colored sugars. 
    
    One of the things that I do with my chocolate before I start dipping is
    add a little Crisco to the melted chocolate. It always has a nice shine
    to it when set.
    +pat+

I buy calebaut chocolate in the big bars.  It IS a tempered chocolate and,
if treated gently, works wonderfully well for such stuff.

    RE: .8   Yes, adding shortening (or butter or oil) is another method
    of getting around tempering.  The shortening retards the formation of
    the large cocoa butter crystals that cause the cloudy texture.  I 
    personally don't like this technique since you are degrading the 
    quality of the choclate.  After spending up to $5.50/lb for chocolate
    I don't like to water it down.  Adding shortening also produces a
    thinner coat of chocolate.  This may be better or worse depending on
    what you are using it for.  One last thing, the chocolate produced by
    adding fats is also softer than those without fats.  Not usually a good
    thing.  On the plus side of this technique, most of the fat content *is*
    still mostly cocoa butter, and dipping will almost never fail.
    
    RE: .9   Where do you get your Calabut chocolate, and how much do you
    pay per pound?
    
    				-David

>    RE: .9   Where do you get your Calabut chocolate, and how much do you
>    pay per pound?
    
I don't cook enough to buy in real bulk.  I talked a local market into
carrying 5 lb. bars/chunks of the stuff.... and I pay MUCH TOO MUCH for it,
but I do love it for eating, cooking, rubbing it on my...well, nevermind...8^}

I'm out here in Silly cone Valley....try the original Cosentino's market
if you are out this way.  They carry it in the "baking goods" aisle.

p.s. I misspelled it...callebaut is the brand.  It works nice for anything
you want to make.  I learned about it from a real chef.  It's not diet food.

RE: .9

I don't know where you are located, but Williams Sonoma, a San Francisco 
based chain which now has several stores in the greater Boston area (Copley 
Place, Burlington Mall, Atrium Mall in Chestnut Hill) and has a mail order 
catalog, sells Callebaut chocolate.  I cannot recall the price, but it is 
not cheap and it only comes in multi-pound bars.  You could call one of the 
Williams Sonoma stores and ask the price.  I just got their catalog, and 
it's in there as well.