Posts
I'm going to be looking at butter temperature a bit. I always thought measuring the temperature of butter before beating cookies was going a bit too far. But is it, really?
I'm trying to get to a point where I can change some certain thing in a recipe and know that everything else is the same. There are different ways to do that, but sometimes you simply have to start again from the cream-the-butter-and-sugar stage, and if you don't do it exactly the same in every respect except the thing you're changing, then you don't know what is responsible for the change in results. What happens if it's summer, and you start with butter literally at room temperature, but the second time it's ten degrees warmer in the room because your air conditioner went on the fritz AGAIN? How do you get the butter to the same temperature again? Furthermore, there are warnings against letting the butter get too warm, mentions of chilling the bowl before you cream the butter and sugar, warm the butter sufficiently before adding the flour, etc. etc. etc. If you don't know what temperature your butter is, all you can do is guess. Which lots of people are good at! But I'm trying to see the effects of different things, and if I can't measure the temperature of the butter, I just can't tell for sure what's happening.
So, I bought a couple of thermometers I can use to measure the temperature of butter. I've attached a photo of both.
The first is an "instant read thermometer" with a traditional sort of dial that reads from 0 to 220 degrees Fahrenheit, or -18 to -104 degrees Centigrade. It is manufactured by Bradshaw International and sold under the Good Cook brand. I bought it at the local supermarket for only a few dollars - I have forgotten the exact price. I don't like it because the gradations on the face are way too small - I literally have to use a magnifying glass, and even then the gradations are too close together - there are 110 gradations on a face the size of a watch, after all. However, it was the only instant read thermometer I found that went down to freezing. I am sure there are many better ones, but I spent enough time hunting.
The dial thermometer can be calibrated. (There goes my favorite word again!) It's a good thing, too - I put it in a glass of ice water in the refrigerator, and it read 40 degrees F. instead of 32. No problem, because it's designed to be adjusted to read the correct temperature, but I hate fussing with a dial I can hardly read. Even worse - I calibrated it to read 32 in freezing water, but I see that in 68-degree butter it then reads too high! What a piece of crap. But I think it will be OK for refrigerator temperatures, which is all I mean to use it for. If I ever see a better thermometer for low temperatures, I will buy it if I still have a need for it.
The other thermometer is much nicer - it's an instant read thermometer with a digital readout. It only works from 50 to 392 degrees F, so it doesn't read refrigerator temperatures, and that's its first drawback. However, it's quite easy to read. It has an on/off switch, and runs on a battery similar to a watch battery. Unlike my kitchen scale that turns off after a minute, this thermometer stays on indefinitely until it is manually turned off, so I have to remember to turn it off when I'm done with it. I predict a short battery life. :-) That's its other drawback, from my point of view. But I have used it a couple of times already, and I like it.
I found the digital instant read thermometer, manufactured by Polder, at Bed, Bath & Beyond for $9.99, battery included.
Both thermometers have relatively narrow probes - thinner than a pencil, wider than a pencil lead - and are very lightweight. They say they are "instant read", but they still have to equilibrate for a bit before you get a stable reading. I haven't used them enough to know how they behave over a range of temperatures. If the temperature of the probe metal is more than a degree different than the temperature of the food you are measuring, the colder or warmer probe can change the local temperature of the food when you stick it in, so if you want a dead accurate reading you insert the probe a few inches, wait ten seconds or so for the temperature of the metal probe to adjust to near the temperature of the food, and then remove it and quickly insert it again at a different place. This could be avoided if the probe was very narrow like a needle and so contained very little metal to perturb the local temperature, but I didn't see any food thermometers like that. I'm sure they're manufactured, possibly for other purposes, but I assume they're a lot more expensive. They might be more fragile, too. I can work with these two thermometers well enough. Hopefully!
So, I bought a couple of thermometers I can use to measure the temperature of butter. I've attached a photo of both.
The first is an "instant read thermometer" with a traditional sort of dial that reads from 0 to 220 degrees Fahrenheit, or -18 to -104 degrees Centigrade. It is manufactured by Bradshaw International and sold under the Good Cook brand. I bought it at the local supermarket for only a few dollars - I have forgotten the exact price. I don't like it because the gradations on the face are way too small - I literally have to use a magnifying glass, and even then the gradations are too close together - there are 110 gradations on a face the size of a watch, after all. However, it was the only instant read thermometer I found that went down to freezing. I am sure there are many better ones, but I spent enough time hunting.
The dial thermometer can be calibrated. (There goes my favorite word again!) It's a good thing, too - I put it in a glass of ice water in the refrigerator, and it read 40 degrees F. instead of 32. No problem, because it's designed to be adjusted to read the correct temperature, but I hate fussing with a dial I can hardly read. Even worse - I calibrated it to read 32 in freezing water, but I see that in 68-degree butter it then reads too high! What a piece of crap. But I think it will be OK for refrigerator temperatures, which is all I mean to use it for. If I ever see a better thermometer for low temperatures, I will buy it if I still have a need for it.
The other thermometer is much nicer - it's an instant read thermometer with a digital readout. It only works from 50 to 392 degrees F, so it doesn't read refrigerator temperatures, and that's its first drawback. However, it's quite easy to read. It has an on/off switch, and runs on a battery similar to a watch battery. Unlike my kitchen scale that turns off after a minute, this thermometer stays on indefinitely until it is manually turned off, so I have to remember to turn it off when I'm done with it. I predict a short battery life. :-) That's its other drawback, from my point of view. But I have used it a couple of times already, and I like it.
I found the digital instant read thermometer, manufactured by Polder, at Bed, Bath & Beyond for $9.99, battery included.
Both thermometers have relatively narrow probes - thinner than a pencil, wider than a pencil lead - and are very lightweight. They say they are "instant read", but they still have to equilibrate for a bit before you get a stable reading. I haven't used them enough to know how they behave over a range of temperatures. If the temperature of the probe metal is more than a degree different than the temperature of the food you are measuring, the colder or warmer probe can change the local temperature of the food when you stick it in, so if you want a dead accurate reading you insert the probe a few inches, wait ten seconds or so for the temperature of the metal probe to adjust to near the temperature of the food, and then remove it and quickly insert it again at a different place. This could be avoided if the probe was very narrow like a needle and so contained very little metal to perturb the local temperature, but I didn't see any food thermometers like that. I'm sure they're manufactured, possibly for other purposes, but I assume they're a lot more expensive. They might be more fragile, too. I can work with these two thermometers well enough. Hopefully!
No comments:
Post a Comment