? For Scratch Bakers Re: Chocolate Cake Recipe Preferences
Decorating By confectionsofahousewife Updated 14 Apr 2011 , 7:36pm by LindaF144a
I just posted this in another thread. We went to the bakery owned by the authors of the Whimsical Bakehouse cookbooks, and bought a small version of the cake on the cover of their book. It was from a chocolate cake recipe in the book, and it had cookies and cream filling and it was covered in neon buttercream. And it was DELICIOUS! My non-cake eating husband said it was the best cake he ever tasted. I wasn't insulted because I agreed. Can't wait to try the recipe!
Cutthecake -
I have made the whimisical bakehouse recipe and it is delicious. I must agree with your hubby.
Confessionsofahousewife-Your cakes are so cute. And the truck ones look so realistic. I can't believe it is as easy as you make it out to be. I think you need a good eye for that too. You do fantastic work.
Thanks Linda!
OK, I have turned out and leveled the 9x13. While it cooled it did sink a little in the middle, but not bad at all. I still got a nice tall cake. It truly tastes the same as the original recipe (remember, I added two eggs and subtracted half cup sugar). I won't be torting any of these cakes since they are for carving so I won't be able to speak to that. If I have any batter left over I will make an extra 6 inch round and torte that so I can see what it does. I can say that the 8 inch rounds have a better dome on them than the 9x13 which is what I would expect. Perhaps more leavening if making a 9x13?
While the taste is the same, I can tell a subtle difference in the texture of the cake. Not so much in my mouth, but the edges are...more crisp, less crumbly, sharper. Hard to describe but the cake just held up better when turned out of the pan. I think these will be easier to carve than the original recipe. I will let everyone know how it goes when I carve Wednesday or Thursday.
Thanks Linda!
OK, I have turned out and leveled the 9x13. While it cooled it did sink a little in the middle, but not bad at all. I still got a nice tall cake. It truly tastes the same as the original recipe (remember, I added two eggs and subtracted half cup sugar). I won't be torting any of these cakes since they are for carving so I won't be able to speak to that. If I have any batter left over I will make an extra 6 inch round and torte that so I can see what it does. I can say that the 8 inch rounds have a better dome on them than the 9x13 which is what I would expect. Perhaps more leavening if making a 9x13?
While the taste is the same, I can tell a subtle difference in the texture of the cake. Not so much in my mouth, but the edges are...more crisp, less crumbly, sharper. Hard to describe but the cake just held up better when turned out of the pan. I think these will be easier to carve than the original recipe. I will let everyone know how it goes when I carve Wednesday or Thursday.
In Bakewise by Shirley Corriher she talks about how eggs in a batter can affect the surface of the cake or brownies. It can make it harder like you describe. I'll pull out the book and see what she said exactly so I get it right.
You added 5 eggs altogether? That means the egg weight was 8.75 ounces and the fat weight was 5.625. You want the eggs to equal the fat, so 3 eggs would be good. If I read this wrong and you did 4 eggs, then I do remember reading one of the reviews where someone did this.
You added more structure and took out a little bit of tenderizer. My guess is that taking out 1/2 cup of the sugar like I did lowered the tenderizing part of the batter to equal the structure part in the cake. By doing both, you upset the equality just enough to get the slightly hard crust.
I am notorious for doing more than one change to a batter and then when I get different results I don't which change made it happen. My DH is constantly after me to make one change at a time. Probably because I have complained to him enough and then when he asks what I did, I proceed to tell him at least 3 or 4 things I changed. Baking is a chemistry experiment with edible results I always say; and my DH always says back that I can't expect to verify good results if I change more than one thing.
So what I guess I am saying don't do what I do, do what my DH says and in the future only change one thing! 
Easier said than done, huh? 
So Linda, what would you recommend could be done with the epicurious recipe? The sugar should surely be able to be lowered 1/2 cup at minimum, because the sugar is a 3 c and the flour is a 2.5 c. But maybe the amount of the cocoa has to be factored in?
Wow! You guys are baking scientists! I guess I'm more of a "wing and a prayer" baker!
housewife and Linda,
Could you please post the recipes--with modifications--that you used?
Thanks.
So Linda, what would you recommend could be done with the epicurious recipe? The sugar should surely be able to be lowered 1/2 cup at minimum, because the sugar is a 3 c and the flour is a 2.5 c. But maybe the amount of the cocoa has to be factored in?
Actually kger, it goes by weight and not volume. I'm assuming we are still talking about the epicurious recipe, but I'll use the measurements you posted. Three cups of sugar weighs 21 ounces. 2.5 cups of AP flour weighs 11.25 ounces. And yes, you do include the weight of the cocoa. Cocoa has a huge drying affect in cake batter and acts like a starch. That is why if you take a non-chocolate cake and add cocoa, you need to reduce the flour by the amount of cocoa that you add. Unsweetened cocoa for me ways about 3.5 ounces. I've seen in Bakewise where she says 3.9, but I go by the weight I get.
Back to weights. I can't remember how much cocoa is in the recipe, but combining both the flour and the cocoa was not close in weight to the sugar, so I droped it by 1/2 cup to 16 ounces of sugar. If I remember correctly this put the weight of the flour and sugar closer together. One of the factors of a sunken cupcake, and possibly cake, is too much sugar to the flour. Plus 21 ounces of sugar is a lot of sugar in comparison to the flour, so I dropped it down just to see if it would affect the taste. Plus you are adding a semi-sweet melted chocolate amount that has sugar in it also. And you don't know how much sugar exactly is in the bar. I used Ghirardelli which had sugar listed as the first ingredient over the chocolate. That means there is a lot of sugar in that melted chocolate. On the Sherfen-berger bar chocolate was listed as the first ingredient. I have read, again in Bakewise I believe, that 145% of the flour is as high as you can go and that is with a hi-ratio shortening or oil too. With butter, it is much lower. Hope this helps. Let me know if I left anything out.
Cutthecake - There is a link to the epicurious recipe on page 1 of this discussion. And I posted my modifications too. I think I only reduced the sugar by 1/2 cup. And I made cupcakes instead of a cake, so I baked it at 350 for 21 minutes. HTH
OK, so I guess I blew it. Tonight after work I made the chocolate cake from epicurious, and I had intended to substitute the water with coffee, and I wanted to add Godiva chocolate liquor. I was in a hurry, making dinner, and forgot my substitutions. Therefore, the recipe was made exactly as it's printed. I got 3 9" layers that appear moist. All I did after popping them out of the pans was wrap them up and get in the freezer.
Did anyone like this recipe as it was printed? I see some of your posts that there was too much sugar? This cake MUST taste good, as I'm taking it to a party at the home of a past president of ICES. I can't blow this cake! Do you think I should bake another cake? I was thinking that I would torte the three layers, so that I could make sure the cake was baked completely. Bad idea? Good idea?
Man.... I need to slow down and pay better attention. I did NOT make the cake from epicurious, but I made a chocolate fudge cake recipe from the Food Network that received 5 stars. I hate taking a cake that I've never tasted... Maybe I can sneak off a bite when I torte it.
Has anyone ever made this cake?
Never had it Kay, sorry! But the epicurious as printed is amazing!
http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/40-a-day/chocolate-fudge-cake-with-vanilla-buttercream-frosting-and-chocolate-ganache-glaze-recipe/index.html
Here is the link for the cake. The reviews for it are amazing - almost 150 reviews, and it's a 5 star review! I'm hoping it's as good as everyone says it is!
How did it taste? Was it dense? I'm curious. Thanks.
Aha, Linda, this is the problem. I froze the cake as I don't need it until the picnic on Sunday. I really shouldn't have made a new recipe for a picnic for professional cake decorators - especially when I'm probably the newest cake person there!!!!! I'd intended to make one cupcake for tasting, but I didn't think I had enough batter (it made 3 9" layers). I'll let you know how the recipe was after I taste it on Sunday. Hopefully I don't totally embarress myself.....
Linda, yes you read right. I added 5 eggs total (two more than the recipe states) and reduced the sugar by half cup. And I didn't mean to imply the edges were hard or crusty in a bad way. I have had trouble with the edges of the epicurious recipe being really crumbly. To the point where it is difficult to ice the cake. These edges held up much better. Also, Linda you said that you get cocoa to weigh 3.5 ounces per cup?!? Bakewise indicates 2.9 ounces per cup (which is what I go by). So here is the recipe as I did it:
3 ounces melted semi sweet chocolate
1.5 cups hot brewed coffee
17.5 ounces sugar
11 ounces all purpose flour
4 3/8 ounces unsweetened cocoa powder
2 tsp. baking soda
3/4 tsp. baking powder
1 1/4 salt
5 eggs
3/4 cup vegetable oil
1 1/2 cups buttermilk
3/4 teaspoon vanilla
Not yet! I debated between doing it today or tomorrow. I didn't want the cakes sitting around from Wednesday to Saturday so I'll be extra busy tomorrow carving both cakes! I've spent today coloring fondant and modeling chocolate. I plan to start carving early afternoon and will let you know! Keep in mind that the cakes will have been frozen which always increases the gooey-ness.
I don't know why I'm on such a roll lately, but here goes (and more advice needed). I made the double chocolate cake recipe from epicurious today after work. The directions said (after all the ingredients were added) to mix only until well blended. I really only mixed an extremely short time because of that, as I've read on here about the dangers of over beating. As I was pouring the batter into my pans, I could see that it was lumpy. So, I obviously didn't beat long enough.
Is there a rule of thumb, on how long to beat batter once all the ingredients are in? I was able to save enough batter for a cupcake, so once the cakes are baked (in oven now), I will bake the cupcake, so I can taste it tomorrow.
I feel like I'm ruining all that I touch.....
I feel like I'm ruining all that I touch.....
I felt like that a couple of weeks ago. Everything I baked failed and because I had no other explanation I actually went oven-shopping 
but I figured out I just had an unlucky week. I got back on the horse and have been pretty successful since.
Dont let it get you down.
I'm not exactly experienced but what I do with most recipes is mix the ingredients one at a time, and beat well as I go along, then when everything is added I give it a short burst of high speed then stir with a spoon to make sure there's no lumps.
Also make sure butter is soft and dry ingredients are sifted. I dont have a problem with lumps now (but I still check).
One of our more seasoned cakers will likely be able to help you better.
Not yet! I debated between doing it today or tomorrow. I didn't want the cakes sitting around from Wednesday to Saturday so I'll be extra busy tomorrow carving both cakes! I've spent today coloring fondant and modeling chocolate. I plan to start carving early afternoon and will let you know! Keep in mind that the cakes will have been frozen which always increases the gooey-ness.
great thanks 
ok i'm too excited about this cake I have to bake for this weekend so i've put the coco loco recipe together and its currently in the oven - wasnt supposed to start it til the kids went to bed tonight. I used a 9x13 pan though so hopefully it'll come out ok. I added a tablespoon of bourbon and 2 cups of coffee minus a tablespoon. (not brave enough to use too much bourbon yet! )
Right the cake is out of the oven and currently cooling in it's tin. smells very very chocolately (almost like brownies?)
I used the amounts given and poured it into a 9x13 tin then baked for 42 minutes at 275 (turning the tin after 30 mins). I've got about 1.25 inches of perfectly flat cake. No sinkage or dome. Yay! I did use a flower nail so maybe that helped. Will try this in the 2 8 inch rounds next and may just add the coconut because I want a raspberry filling and I think the overall taste would be wow!
Cant wait to taste this.
Also, Linda you said that you get cocoa to weigh 3.5 ounces per cup?!? Bakewise indicates 2.9 ounces per cup (which is what I go by).
Confections- I know! I don't know why, but when I weighed it I got 3.5 ounces. There are so many variables of how you scoop it out, and how compacted it is and maybe which brand. So I wanted to see how much it weighed doing it the way I handle the cocoa. I measured out a cup three times and put it on the scale and I consistently got 3.5 ounces. I should revisit it again and see if it still does. I wonder if humidity can affect it?
Eve - Good luck with the cake, let us know how it tasted.
KayMc - I would definitely mix it a little longer if you see lumps. This cake recipe is so thin and made in such a different way that I'm wondering if you could overbeat it. Did you taste it yet? Did you come across anything peculiar looking in the batter?
I cut away a sneaky trimming before I wrapped the cake (the recipe said to chill it in the pan but I need the pan to bake something else lol)
It's very flavoursome, very chocolately and has a beautiful light moist texture. dare I say it might be too chocolately for me? but I know it's going to go down really well. the 9x13 is the base for my "box" that I'll be putting a carved bottle cake into/onto. Debating now whether to use the cocoloco again for the bottle or to go with the amended epicurious recipe. Think i'll just wait and see how Confections gets on carving it....
Kay- I had that kinda week last week, and I underbeat one of my cakes and the lumps rose to the top and I was able to torte the top so that I just cut off a smidge and those lumps came with it. Do be careful if you see these white lumps in there, mine had a HORRIBLE taste to them. So I'd make sure you get them, but like I said mine were all right at the top of the cake so it was easy to get them out!
eve- I think the cocoloco cake is just as chocolatey as the epicurious cake (IMHO), so if you're looking for not as chocolate maybe the Hershey's cake?
Jae, I hadnt thought of that. The two recipes have been compared so it likely will be the same intensity of chocolate. Not that I'm sure the party goers will enjoy it anyway, but maybe I'll do a Hershey instead of the epicurious for those with a lighter palette. hmmmmmmmmmm........
Ok so I have used the double chocolate cake recipe since I started and always had problems with it sinking unless I baked it at like 300 and then still had some problems. So today I had to bake that cake and after reading this post cut the amount of sugar by 1/4. The results are amazing. No sinking. Looks beautiful but is still in the pans cooling. Once I go to level them that is the test. Hopefully they won't stick and tear like that sometimes do. I will keep you updated.
Jenn2179 - please let us know if decreasing the sugar helps decrease the stickiness of the cake.
Ok so I couldn't wait for it to cool. Just used my Agbay to level a 6 in round. It was still warm and leveled perfectly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am so happy. My customers love the flavor of that cake but I hated that it sank and tore. Just to put a little icing on the cake top and see how it tastes.
OK I carved the cakes. The dinosaur carved better than the thunderbird. If I could have carved the thunderbird cold I think it would have been better. The dino was cold and there wasn't nearly as much cake sticking to my knife as usual. I had to carve the thunderbird at room temp because it was 26 inches long and wouldn't fit in the fridge. I am hoping I can smooth it out with icing because its got some lumps and dips in it where more cake came off it than planned. Its just for my dad so its not a huge deal if its not perfect. So, I think that adding two extra eggs and subtracting a half cup of sugar from the recipe made it more workable without affecting the taste or texture. I will definitely do this next time I have to make a round or square cake since the edges were less crumbly and would have been much easier to ice had I not had to carve them off!
Quote by @%username% on %date%
%body%