I was wondering if I can just take any recipe--regardless of the ingredients--and turn it into a reverse creaming method recipe by just creaming the dry ingredients/fats/dairy, then adding the eggs. Would this work, or is there a specific science written into those reverse creaming method recipes?
I am a small home baker, so I can't just "experiment" :)
Thanks!
I'm only going to speak for myself here.
I HATE the reverse creaming method. Tried it a couple of times and refuse to endorse or recommend.
I consider it to be a guarantee of failure when using all-purpose flour because there is too much development of the gluten when you beat the flour and any liquid at all for a few minutes. Cake turns out like a plastic sponge regardless of how much liquid was used.
UPDATED I went through my baking reference books to confirm that the "classic" reverse creaming was a different method.
Here is what works: sift all dry ingredients including sugar into the mixing bowl. Blend in the butter-shortening-oil-margarine (BUT NO EGGS OR LIQUID) until finely dispersed. In another bowl mix the eggs and any liquids and FOLD this into the flour-fat mixture. This requires no modification of the creamed cake ingredients.
This of course will NOT work with chiffon cakes, or any other cakes where the egg whites are beaten and folded in.
AI'm not a baking science expert, but I've had success with changing mixing methods with a vanilla cake recipe I use. I found the texture was amazing with the reverse creaming method. I didn't add all the dairy in with the dry ingredients and the fat. I add a 1/4 of the dairy with the fats and mix the rest with the eggs and extracts.
Good luck!
I don't think reverse creaming would work for every recipe. Like BakingIrene pointed out, with APF you would be developing way too much gluten.
Another angle I have considered is the leavening.
One of the major functions of creaming is to get air into the batter. With reverse creaming, much less air is incorporated than regular creaming, that is why you would notice that reverse creamed cakes have a slightly denser/velvety crumb than creamed cakes which tend to rise higher and be fluffier. This is just a hypothesis, but I've looked at creamed recipes and one-bowl/reverse creamed recipes, and I've found that much more leavening is used in reverse creamed cakes (the scratch WASC for instance uses an inordinate amount of baking powder); I suspect that the extra leavening is to make up for the reduced amount of air in the batter.
So you would have to look at a recipe to see what role the ingredients are playing, how much leavening is called for? A (primarily) oil based cake for instance should more easily convert to one bowl/reverse creaming than a butter cake-- not saying that a butter cake can not, you might just have to tweak the leavening or technique. When I have converted a creamed recipe to reverse creamed in the past, I incorporated air by separating my whites, creating a 'meringue' and folding in at the end.
I dunno - I reverse cream when possible. Personally I find it fool-proof when making large volume and much quicker. I don't get the same results conventionally creaming unless I cream my butter and sugar for 10 minutes (or more depending on how many quarts of batter I'm making). My way I have perfect batter in 2 minutes. I have converted all my butter cakes to it regardless of the original mixing instructions.
I don't use APF but I don't see how reverse creaming would effect the gluten, since the butter (helps to) prevent overdevelopment - that's the whole point of reverse creaming. Leavening is also based on the weight of the flour so as long as your recipe has a good baker's percentage and not over-leavened, it should work.
I have converted a cookie cake recipe to a type of reversed creaming and it make a HUGE difference in the end product. I cream the butter and sugars together and then add the flour. (I also changed the flour to unbleached and that makes a difference too.) I just combine and then add room temp eggs until just combined. It makes for a very tender cookie.
So, the "reverse creaming' method, as opposed to the "standard creaming" method, makes the cake/cookie more "tender" and "delicate"? Meaning, the cookie and/or cake falls apart easier, is softer? Am I getting this right? Since I'm a beginner, this is the first time I've heard of this method...TIA
So, the "reverse creaming' method, as opposed to the "standard creaming" method, makes the cake/cookie more "tender" and "delicate"? Meaning, the cookie and/or cake falls apart easier, is softer? Am I getting this right? Since I'm a beginner, this is the first time I've heard of this method...TIA
Not necessarily. The tenderness of the cake is subject to more than just the mixing method; the ingredients play a huge part. And a cake that's easily falling apart is an indication of a faulty recipe. From what I've seen, you can get tender cakes with both. Tenderness is more of a mouth-feel thing, while the crumb is more visual (how the air pockets are distributed in the finished product). So you could have a tender cake with either a relatively dense crumb structure (less or smaller air pockets) from reverse creaming or a lighter, airy, less dense crumb from traditional creaming.
If you have a crappy recipe, reverse creaming isn't going to miraculously make it good.
vgcea is right. Reverse creamed cakes have a very dense, tight crumb, which I love. You don't do the fat and sugar thing together, which tears millions of holes into the fat, creating lift. You also can't over-mix (at least in my experience) using reverse creaming, so you don't end up with big holes or tunneling that can sometimes happen when you over-mix.
FromScratchSF: When you say that you've "converted" all of your butter cakes, did you change any of the ingredient amounts, or just the order of operations?
ETA: Oh, and when you say "butter cakes," do you mean to say that you did *not* convert your other cakes like chocolate or RV?? If so, why not those too!?
FromScratchSF: When you say that you've "converted" all of your butter cakes, did you change any of the ingredient amounts, or just the order of operations?
ETA: Oh, and when you say "butter cakes," do you mean to say that you did *not* convert your other cakes like chocolate or RV?? If so, why not those too!?
That's a trick question, because yes I altered every one of my recipes to make them mine and unique - I start with a base recipe, make it, then tweak it. Some recipes as many as 50 times before I am happy with it, and some get a slight tweak every time I make it. I've altered everything from the flour used to the leavening amounts. But I always start with the method to streamline it and make large batches of batter as fast as possible with the exact same results - and reverse creaming works for me.
I really have grown to hate the word "dense" almost as much as I hate the word "moist". Both are just unflattering and unappealing words to describe cake. LOL! I prefer "tight crumb".
You generally don't "cream" oil-based cakes. In the US we mostly make hi-ratio dump cakes, meaning you dump your wet in a bowl, dump your dry in a bowl, then add dry to wet in batches with buttermilk or milk. Hi-ratio means the weight of the sugar greatly exceeds the weight of the flour.
If your cake is crumbly the recipe is off. My cakes have a smooth mouthfeel so much so that they don't need icing to make them seem "moist", they are very sturdy so you can manhandle them pretty well, but are delicate and soft. They also slice really well so they look nice on the plate.
Chiffon cakes are different, there is a very specific way you mix those which I suppose you could equate to "creaming", but it's not called "creaming" I don't think. I don't make them so I'm not 100% what the method is called - I just know that you can't mess with the method because incorporating air into the oil is essential to the structure of the cake.
Gluten Free is also different - my GF butter cakes have to be creamed conventionally.
Quote by @%username% on %date%
%body%