S1-C1: Lean wheat baseline (direct dough)
S1-C1 learning control: lean wheat bread made from flour, water, salt, and fresh yeast, without tangzhong, milk, butter, sugar, or sourdough.
Recipe
Current recipe
For baking now: the final working formula, ingredients, steps, and baking worksheet.
Baking worksheet
Lesson block: direct dough as a control
S1-C1 is the baseline reference point. It shows what only flour, water, salt, and yeast give, without a preferment, sourdough, sugar, butter, milk, or cold retard.
- Lesson question
- Can the formula 400/260/8/3 give a technologically normal bread, and where is the line between "baked" and "tasty".
- Main variable
- Do not complicate anything: direct mix, target dough temperature, bulk fermentation, final proof, bake, and an honest tasting.
- Why this way
- The modern course starts with a control: without it, it is impossible to understand what exactly poolish, cold, flour, scald, or sourdough will change in later lessons.
- Expected flavor
- Clean, simple, fairly neutral white bread. If flavor is weak, this is not a failure but proof that flavor must be built through fermentation and crust.
- Learning format
- An entry lab: baker’s percentages, workstation setup, dough temperature, control jar, final proof, bake, weight loss, and an honest sensory baseline of 2/10.
Theory
- Baker’s percentages: flour = 100%, water = 65%, salt = 2%, yeast = 0.75%; later lessons read against this baseline.
- Dough temperature matters more than the schedule: the same recipe runs faster or slower with different kitchen, water, and flour.
- Bulk fermentation and the final proof separate two tasks: first build gas and structure, then prepare the shaped piece for the oven.
- A direct dough shows the limit of the baseline formula: if the bread rose and baked through but flavor is weak, that is the signal to move to fermentation, flour, and crust.
- Yeast solves the rise but does not make the bread expressive on its own; flavor will appear in the next lessons through fermentation, flour, and baking.
- A professional assessment of S1-C1 looks not at result beauty but at causality: formula, temperature, rise, final proof, steam, internal temperature, and the sensory conclusion.
Checkpoints
- Before mixing, record the lesson hypothesis: the baseline formula should bake but flavor may stay weak.
- After mixing, record dough temperature and stop before overheating above 26 °C.
- Run bulk by the control jar and dough state, not by the wish to reach a round number.
- Decide on the final proof by the poke test and piece geometry.
- Bake to 96–98 °C internal and record mass before/after to see moisture loss.
Sensory
- Crust
- color, thickness, crunch, score opening, bitterness, toastiness
- Crumb
- moisture, elasticity, gumminess, chew, pore size and distribution
- Aroma
- separate crust and crumb aroma: floury, yeasty, milky, rye, malty, spicy
- Flavor
- sweetness, salt, acidity, flouriness, depth, aftertaste
- Score
- 0–10 plus one decision: repeat, increase fermentation, change flour, change bake, or close the lesson
What comes next
- If structure is normal, S1-C1 closes as a control even when flavor is weak.
- The next step is S1-C2 with poolish: change not the amount of yeast but the fermentation path.
- Shaping, scoring, and steam remain separate technical skills inside the wheat track.
S1-C1 is the entry control for the lean artisan wheat track. This page is not a final product recipe: it exists to make a baseline direct dough visible without a preferment, enrichment, sourdough, or cold retard.
What This Lesson Studies
The main learning topic is direct yeasted dough as a control point. The lesson asks: is the baseline formula 400/260/8/3 enough to give a technologically normal bread, and where is the line between “the bread baked” and “the bread became tasty”?
Theory
In a direct dough, all the flour, water, salt, and yeast meet on the same day. This is convenient for control, but flavor develops in a limited way: there is no poolish, sourdough, cold fermentation, or whole-grain portion. That is why S1-C1 checks not product expressiveness but the baseline skills: baker’s percentages, dough temperature, gluten development, bulk fermentation, final proof, steam, internal temperature, and weight loss.
What Happens in a Direct Dough
S1-C1 deliberately removes all flavor enhancers so the baseline mechanics of bread are visible.
| Process | What happens | What to record |
|---|---|---|
| Hydration | Flour absorbs water; dough goes from a coarse mass to a more cohesive one | Are there dry pockets, how does stickiness change after the rest |
| Gluten | Wheat proteins form a net that holds gas | Does the dough stretch, does it tear during folds, does it hold shape |
| Yeast | Produces CO2, alcohol, and some aromas, but in a direct dough there is little time | Dough temperature, control-jar growth speed |
| Enzymes | Slowly create sugars for the yeast and the future crust | Crust color and aroma after baking |
| Salt | Strengthens flavor, affects dough and fermentation speed | Does the salt stand alone, without a bread background |
| Bake | Gas expands, structure sets, crust darkens | Internal temperature, mass before/after, score opening |
The main S1-C1 conclusion: if the bread rose and baked through but flavor is weak, this is not a yeast error. It is the normal result of a direct white dough without additional flavor sources.
Bulk Fermentation and Final Proof
Bulk fermentation and the final proof cannot be reduced to a single word “risen”. They have different jobs.
| Stage | Task | Good sign | Error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bulk fermentation | Build gas, develop structure, bring the dough to life | Control jar +60–80%, dough rounded, small bubbles on the sides | Dragging to +100% automatically, even if the dough is already weakening |
| Preshape | Gather the dough without rough degassing | Piece holds a short oval or ball | Adding lots of flour and squeezing out all the gas |
| Final proof | Prepare the shaped piece for the oven | Poke returns slowly, surface still holds a dome | Baking a dense piece or waiting until collapse |
For this formula the control jar is especially useful: it separates real dough growth from the feeling that “a lot of time has passed”.
Temperature Logic
The baseline sheet assumes a kitchen at about 23 °C and dough after mixing around 24–25 °C. If the dough is warmer, fermentation goes faster; cooler, slower. So time in the recipe is not an order, but a starting hypothesis.
| Dough temperature after mixing | What to expect | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| 22–23 °C | Bulk may run noticeably slower | Do not increase yeast immediately; watch the jar |
| 24–25 °C | Target control regime | Work by the sheet and dough state |
| 26 °C and above | Fermentation accelerates; dough can weaken faster | Check earlier; do not drag bulk to a large rise |
In S1-C1, the yeast has already proven it is enough. If you want more flavor, the next lever is fermentation, crust, or flour, not “more yeast”.
Diagnosing Errors
| Symptom | Likely cause | What to change in the next lesson |
|---|---|---|
| Dense crumb and weak opening | Underproof or weak shaping | Check the poke test and piece tension |
| Flat piece, weak score | Overproof or too long bulk | Stop bulk earlier, closer to +60–80% |
| Pale crust | Lack of heat, steam, or sugars in the dough | Check stone preheat and steam mode; develop flavor through fermentation |
| Flavor 2/10 with normal structure | Lean white dough is too neutral | Move to S1-C2/S1-C3 instead of boosting yeast |
How This Would Be Taught in a Strong School
In a strong bread school, S1-C1 would not be treated as a “simple recipe”. It is an entry laboratory exercise: the student proves they can read a formula, run a direct dough, record temperature, distinguish bulk fermentation from final proof, and make an honest sensory conclusion.
| Class block | What the student does | What is assessed |
|---|---|---|
| Before the lab | Calculates baker’s percentages, records a hypothesis and target dough temperature | Understands that the change is in the process, not the ingredients |
| Workstation setup | Weighs 400/260/8/3, prepares jar, basket, probe, stone, and steam | No chaos at the end of bulk and at loading |
| Mixing lab | Mixes on Min, gives a rest, finishes on speed 1 | Dough hydrated, not overheated, salt evenly distributed |
| Fermentation lab | Compares clock, jar, and dough state | Bulk decision made by facts, not by the habit of waiting longer |
| Bake analysis | Compares piece, score, crust, temperature, and weight loss | Can link result to process |
| Conclusion | States one conclusion for S1-C2 | Does not try to fix weak flavor with sugar, butter, or extra yeast |
This kind of lesson is not for a pretty loaf but for calibrating hands and language. Without S1-C1, it is impossible to honestly understand what poolish, cold, whole-grain flour, baguette form, and high hydration give later.
S1-C1 Lab Protocol
Before starting, record the hypothesis: the baseline formula should give a technologically normal bread, but flavor may stay weak because there is no developed fermentation.
| Stage | What to record | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Raw materials | flour, water, salt, yeast, kitchen temperature | separate a formula error from an environment error |
| Mix | speed, duration, dough temperature, stickiness | understand whether development is sufficient without overheating |
| Rest | how cohesion changed after rest | see the role of hydration before salt |
| Bulk fermentation | jar growth, rounding, bubbles, smell | do not drag dough to a tired +100% without reason |
| Preshape | how much gas was lost, whether a rest is needed | link crumb density to hand mechanics |
| Final proof | poke test, geometry, lightness of the piece | separate underproof from overproof |
| Bake | steam, color, center temperature, mass before/after | check doneness and water loss |
| Tasting | crust, crumb, salt, flouriness, aftertaste | build a 2/10 comparison baseline for the next lessons |
Advanced Technological Map
S1-C1 has four technological axes. Mixing them up makes it easy to mistake weak flavor for a yeast error.
| Axis | What controls the result | Professional criterion |
|---|---|---|
| Formula control | 65% water, 2% salt, 0.75% fresh yeast | formula is repeatable and reads in baker’s percentages |
| Dough development | rest, Kenwood Min/1, dough temperature | dough cohesive, not overheated, stretches without rough tearing |
| Fermentation | temperature, bulk, jar, final proof | gas is present, but the dough is not tired or spread |
| Bake and sensory | steam, internal temperature, weight loss, tasting | bread baked through, weak flavor described as a learning fact |
If the bread is dense, check final proof and shaping first. If the crust is weak, check preheat and steam. If flavor is weak with normal structure, this is not a reason to add yeast: it is a signal to move to the fermentation lessons.
Full course map: Bread Lab curriculum (in Russian). Detailed track map: Wheat track: lean artisan curriculum (in Russian).
Theory Sources
- King Arthur Baking: bulk fermentation — practical explanation of bulk fermentation, dough strength, and folds.
- American Society of Baking / BAKERpedia: Dough Mixing — mixing tasks: hydration, ingredient distribution, air incorporation, and structure development.
- Chemistry of bread aroma: A review — review of how fermentation and baking build bread aroma.
- SFBI Artisan I: Systematic Approach to Bread — learning frame: formula, ingredients, mixing, fermentation, shaping, and baking as a system.
Home Adaptation
The professional point of S1-C1 is the same as in introductory bread schools: see the whole process in a clean form. The home translation is simple: 400 g flour, an ordinary mixer, a linen-lined basket, a control jar, a probe thermometer, a stone/sheet pan, and hand steam. There is no need for a proof box, pH meter, or a professional steam oven.
The main home constraint: do not fix weak flavor with additions. This lesson checks only the baseline technology — dough temperature, bulk fermentation, final proof, steam, doneness, and weight loss. If the bread baked through but flavor is flat, this is not a lesson failure: it is proof that S1-C2 with poolish is the next step.
Grading Rubric
| Competency | 0 points | 1 point | 2 points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Formula | gram error | formula correct, percentages not understood | 400/260/8/3 explained through baker’s percentages |
| Mix | dough dry, overheated, or torn | dough working but state weakly described | dough hydrated, temperature and development recorded |
| Bulk fermentation | ended by clock only | jar or description present but conclusion unclear | decision made by +60–80%, bubbles, and shape |
| Shape and proof | piece crushed or underproofed | bread holds shape but cause of result unclear | preshape, rest, poke test, and geometry recorded |
| Bake | no center or mass control | bread baked but steam/loss not recorded | temperature, mass, crust, and moisture loss recorded |
| Sensory | only an overall score | flavor noted but not linked to the process | 2/10 flavor explained as the limit of direct dough |
Interpretation: 0–5 points — repeat S1-C1 without moving on; 6–9 — technique works, one clarifying repeat is needed; 10–12 — control closed, move to S1-C2.
Control Questions
- Did dough temperature after mixing stay in 24–26 °C?
- Was bulk ended by jar and dough state, not by the clock alone?
- Was the piece weighed before the oven, and does the finished loaf give a clear weight loss?
- Did internal temperature reach 96–98 °C without overdrying?
- Is flavor described with words, not only the number 2/10?
- Is the next step still S1-C2 with poolish, not more yeast?
Sensory Card
S1-C1 remains a 2/10 comparison point. After each control bake, record not only the score but the language of flavor: crust aroma, crumb aroma, salt, flouriness, rubberiness, coarseness, moisture, chew, and aftertaste.
Lesson Conclusion
The control bake on 29 Apr 2026 has been added to the analysis along with the numeric journal and tasting. Technologically the formula works: the dough rose, the bread baked through, mass and temperature are recorded. Flavor did not improve and stayed at 2/10, so S1-C1 closes only the baseline technology. The next product step is S1-C2 with poolish, while softness and tangzhong are studied separately in S2.
Ingredients
| Component | Grams | Baker's % |
|---|---|---|
| Strong white bread flour | 400 g | 100% |
| Water | 260 g | 65% |
| Salt | 8 g | 2% |
| Fresh yeast | 3 g | 0.75% |
Ingredient details
Strong white bread flour
- Author's brand
- MukaMuka 13.5% protein
- Role
- base of the gluten matrix
- Important
- do not change the flour for S1-C1 #2; the goal is to verify repeatability
Water
- Temperature
- 18–21 °C with a kitchen at 22–24 °C
- Role
- tests water uptake of the current flour at 65% hydration
- Author's brand
- Tap water through Barrier Iron x2 filter
- Alternatives
- any filtered or bottled drinking water
Salt
- Author's brand
- Pink Himalayan salt
- Alternatives
- sea or table salt (avoid iodized)
Fresh yeast
- Range
- 3 g with a kitchen around 23 °C; 4 g only at 20–21 °C
- Author's brand
- Lux (Voronezh) fresh or Ayrek (homemade)
- Alternatives
- any fresh yeast in 100 g pack
Conditions and equipment
Conditions
- Status
- learning control bake, not a product version of white bread
- Course position
- first S1 lesson; the next product step is S1-C2 with poolish
- Previous point
- S1-C1 #1 on 27 Apr 2026: baked through but flavor 2/10; mass before/after was not weighed
- Main constraint
- do not add tangzhong, milk, butter, sugar, a preferment, or cold retard to this repeat
- Doneness criterion
- 96–98 °C internal, crumb with no sticky underbake
Equipment
- Mixer
- Kenwood KVC85.004SI; the historical 29 Apr bake was recorded on Vitek, but future repeats run on Kenwood
- Oven
- Haier HOQ-F6QS, top-bottom heat, hand steam
- Proofing
- linen-lined basket
- Control
- narrow jar with a mark, probe thermometer, scale
Nutrition: how to eat this bread
Bread nutrition facts
Per 100 g of bread
242 kcal
protein 8.2 g · fat 1.1 g · carbs 48.7 g
Per slice (50 g)
121 kcal
protein 4.1 g · fat 0.6 g · carbs 24.4 g
Automatic calculation from USDA + Skurikhin database for the baked loaf after evaporation. Numbers are approximate: 1) the database covers ingredients, not finished dough; 2) bake water loss is assumed at 10% — actual loss depends on crust, time, and pan. Add 5–10% in calorie trackers if needed.
Bread is a source of starch and energy. Its nutrition depends on flour, fermentation, salt, enrichment, serving size, and the rest of the plate.
- Digestion
- More whole grain, fibre, and fermentation usually mean longer satiety. White flour eaten alone is generally digested faster.
- Helpful or harmful
- Bread is not poison or medicine by itself. Overall diet matters; current guidance prioritizes whole grains, vegetables, fruits, and pulses.
- Amount
- For most learning tastings, 1–2 slices, about 30–80 g, is enough depending on loaf density.
- Best pairings
- Pair with protein, vegetables, and moderate fat; avoid making it a large standalone portion with sweet drinks or sweet spreads.
How to eat
- Taste the bread plain for learning, then eat it as part of a balanced plate.
- Slice dense rye thinner; with soft white bread, make sure softness does not automatically increase the serving.
Limits
- Wheat and rye breads contain gluten.
- For medical conditions, adjust bread type and serving size with a clinician or dietitian.
Instructions
-
Combine water and yeast
Stir 260 g water and 3 g fresh yeast for 1 minute.
-
Hydrate the flour
Add 400 g flour and mix 1–2 minutes on Min.
-
Rest
Cover the bowl and leave the dough for 15 minutes.
-
Add salt and finish mixing
Add 8 g salt and mix on speed 1 for about 4–5 minutes, stopping before the temperature goes above 26 °C.
-
Bulk ferment
Separate 20–25 g into a narrow jar, cover the dough, and do not develop with folds; end bulk by sample growth of +60–80% and dough state.
-
Shape
Preshape, rest the piece 10–15 minutes, shape into a batard, and place in a linen-lined basket seam up.
-
Proof and bake
Proof until the poke test returns slowly, weigh the piece, score, and bake at 230 °C with steam, then 210 °C dry, to 96–98 °C internal.
For readers who want to understand why the formula changed.
What the S1-C1 control showed
S1-C1 #1 was technologically baked through but weak in flavor. S1-C1 #2 kept the same formula, gave a detailed process analysis with photos of the finished batard and crumb; even so, flavor did not improve and remained 2/10. Now the baseline technology can be separated from future product work.
Base version
S1-C1 fixes a baseline wheat dough: flour, water, salt, and fresh yeast. All masking factors are removed so that mixing, fermentation, final proof, shaping, and baking are visible.
Confirmed hypotheses
Only conclusions backed by a bake record: time, temperature, steam, weight, proportions, or tasting notes.
01
3 g of fresh yeast is enough for baseline fermentation
- Hypothesis
- If the formula 400 g flour, 260 g water, 8 g salt, and 3 g fresh yeast is kept without boosting yeast, the dough will still give a workable rise and hold gas.
- How it was confirmed
- Repeat S1-C1 #2 on 29 Apr 2026 showed active growth of the control sample and main dough: the sample rose about 50% at the first check and reached 100% by the end of bulk fermentation.
- Conclusion
- No need to increase yeast; for the next control it is more reasonable to stop bulk earlier, closer to +60–80% growth.
Verification facts
- Formula
- 400 g flour, 260 g water, 8 g salt, 3 g fresh yeast; hydration 65%
- Conditions
- kitchen 23 °C; flour 23.1 °C; water 22.5 °C; dough after mixing 25.3 °C
- Bulk fermentation
- 08:32–11:34; control sample: +50% at 10:31 and +100% at 11:34
- Bake
- loading 14:59; 25 minutes; internal temperature 98.5 °C
02
Technological structure is not equal to good flavor
- Hypothesis
- Repeating the baseline direct loaf with accurate records makes it possible to separate the technological viability of the formula from the product flavor.
- How it was confirmed
- S1-C1 #2 produced a baked-through batard with a working crumb and clear weight loss, but the tasting score remained 2/10, like the first bake.
- Conclusion
- S1-C1 closes as a learning control; product flavor must be developed through preferment, flour, salt, crust, or cold, not by adding more yeast.
Verification facts
- Mass
- piece 639 g; finished loaf 579 g; loss 60 g / 9.4%
- Temperature
- 98.5 °C internal at removal
- Crumb
- moderately open, no visible sticky underbake
- Tasting
- flavor unchanged vs. S1-C1 #1; score 2/10
Iteration analysis
01 S1-C1 #1 gave a usable learning point
- Observation
- The bread from 27 Apr 2026 was baked through, crumb without obvious stickiness, but flavor was rated 2/10: weak aroma, grayish color, thin crust, slightly rubbery and coarse crumb.
- Decision and why
- Do not change the formula in the S1-C1 #2 repeat, but separately record piece mass, finished-loaf mass, weight loss, shaping, scoring, and the slice.
- Conclusion
- After S1-C1 #2, a separate technical block inside S1 on shaping, scoring, and steam can be considered.
02 S1-C1 #2 confirmed working fermentation
- Observation
- The control sample reached about 50% at the first check and 100% by 11:34. The main dough became smooth and held gas, but spread noticeably by the end of bulk, and the poke test returned less.
- Decision and why
- Keep the formula 400 g flour, 260 g water, 8 g salt, and 3 g fresh yeast as the baseline learning control.
- Conclusion
- Do not increase yeast. The opposite: for the next control, stop bulk earlier when the sample is closer to +60–80%, without waiting for +100%.
Evidence
- Source
- photos of S1-C1 #2 on 29 Apr 2026: control jar and dough at the end of bulk fermentation
- Conditions
- kitchen 23 °C; flour 23.1 °C; water 22.5 °C; dough after mixing 25.3 °C
- Bulk fermentation
- start 08:32; first check 10:31, +50%; end 11:34, +100%
03 Shaping produced a batard, but scoring and opening still need separate work
- Observation
- The piece in the basket held its shape, and the finished batard was convex and baked through. Shaping was recorded around 11:52, loading at 14:59, piece mass before the oven 639 g. Score opening was fragmentary: the crust opened in patches, without a clean long ear.
- Hypothesis
- Main candidates for improvement are shaping tension, score angle and depth, and the steam regime in the first minutes.
- Decision and why
- Do not change the baseline formula for cosmetics; move shaping and scoring purity into a separate S1 technical block.
- Conclusion
- The shape is already usable as a control; improve appearance through technique, not additions. Separately verify the pause between preshape and shaping.
Evidence
- Source
- proof photo before the oven and finished batard on 29 Apr 2026
- Final proof
- end of proof 14:58; piece mass 639 g
- Bake
- loading 14:59; 25 minutes; internal temperature 98.5 °C
- Missing
- text description of the poke test before loading
04 Crumb improved as a learning indicator, but flavor did not change
- Observation
- The slice shows a moderately open, non-dense structure: pores of varying size are spread across the cut, no dense raw center is visible in the photo. For lean dough at 65% hydration this is already a working learning crumb, but the tasting score stayed the same.
- Result
- By photo, S1-C1 #2 looks more convincing as a control baseline than the original description of S1-C1 #1 with rubberiness and coarseness. Piece mass was 639 g, finished loaf 579 g, weight loss during baking 60 g / 9.4%. By flavor the bread is the same; the score remains 2/10.
- Conclusion
- S1-C1 can be kept as a clean baseline formula only for learning. The product white bread must be developed on a separate branch, not mixed with the learning control.
Evidence
- Source
- slice photo from 29 Apr 2026
- Bake
- 25 minutes to 98.5 °C internal
- Mass
- piece 639 g; finished loaf 579 g; loss 60 g / 9.4%
- Tasting
- flavor unchanged vs. S1-C1 #1; score 2/10
Version history
- v1.16May 25, 2026
- Problem
- Template labels like 'Actual timing', 'Actual temperatures', and 'Actual mass' in kitchenCheatsheet mixed the facts of one repeat with general instructions: on the public card they looked like requirements for every bake rather than observation notes.
- Change
- Labels replaced with neutral 'Control schedule', 'Temperature control', and 'Weight-loss control'. Specific numbers from the 29 Apr repeat (start 08:06, kitchen 23 °C, internal 98.5 °C, piece 639 g) are kept in the research block; the working sheet is still available on /kitchen/.
- Result
- The public card now reads as instructions, while the research block remains an honest journal of a specific repeat.
- Conclusion
- Separating 'instructions to repeat' (kitchenCheatsheet) from 'facts of the past repeat' (research) is a general pattern for all lessons.
- v1.15May 20, 2026
- Problem
- Recipe time metadata was shorter than the actual working sheet: the sheet runs from mixing through baking and includes at least 1 hour of cooling before slicing.
- Change
- prepTime, cookTime, and totalTime are aligned with the current working sheet of the next control repeat.
- Result
- The recipe card no longer promises too short a total time for S1-C1.
- Conclusion
- Working decisions on bulk and proof are still made by dough state, not by time metadata.
- v1.14May 20, 2026
- Problem
- The recipe mixed the actual 29 Apr protocol with the target sheet for the next repeat: the Kenwood mode disagreed between blocks, shaping happened right after preshape, and bulk fermentation was described at once as fact +100% and target +60–80%.
- Change
- The sheet is now called the next control repeat sheet, the Kenwood mode is set to Min/1, shaping is moved after a 15-minute rest, and the bulk target stays as the corrected working bound +60–80%.
- Result
- Historical S1-C1 #2 facts are preserved in the research analysis, but the working sheet no longer locks in the old overshoot of bulk or contradictory mixer speeds.
- Conclusion
- S1-C1 remains a control lesson: structure works, flavor is 2/10, the next product lever is S1-C2.
- v1.13May 8, 2026
- Problem
- S1-C1 theory was too short compared to the new lesson standard.
- Change
- Added blocks about direct dough as a system, the difference between bulk fermentation and final proof, temperature logic, diagnostic errors, and sources.
- Result
- S1-C1 now explains what exactly the baseline formula controls and why weak flavor is not fixed by simply adding more yeast.
- Conclusion
- The lesson stays a control: its job is to give a clean baseline for comparison with poolish, cold, flour, crust, and the soft track.
- v1.12April 30, 2026
- Problem
- Repeated review against modern curricula showed the lesson lacked an explicit home adaptation and control questions.
- Change
- Added the home S1-C1 standard, control questions, and criteria that translate the professional systematic approach into a normal kitchen.
- Result
- S1-C1 is now not only a control-bake journal but also an entry learning exercise in direct dough.
- Conclusion
- The formula stays a control; product flavor develops not through yeast but through the next fermentation lessons.
- v1.11April 30, 2026
- Problem
- After the general course revision, S1-C1 lacked explicit lesson theory and a link to the new S1/S2 map.
- Change
- Added the course code, direct-dough theory, sensory card, and a link to the new course program; the old branch chart was replaced with S1-C2 and S2.
- Result
- S1-C1 now reads as an entry control for the lean artisan track, not as a failed product attempt.
- Conclusion
- Lesson closed: do not increase yeast; develop flavor through S1-C2 and study softness in S2.
- v1.10April 29, 2026
- Problem
- After tasting, it turned out the flavor of S1-C1 #2 did not improve compared to S1-C1 #1.
- Change
- Tasting score recorded in the journal: same flavor, score remains 2/10.
- Result
- Photos and the numeric protocol confirm a technologically working bake, but the product score did not change.
- Conclusion
- S1-C1 closes the learning control of the baseline technology but does not solve the problem of tasty white bread; the product version must develop on a separate branch.
- v1.9April 29, 2026
- Problem
- The process journal was kept on an iPad in the working sheet and did not make it into the previous publication.
- Change
- Added real times, temperatures, control-sample growth, piece mass, finished-loaf mass, internal temperature, and weight loss.
- Result
- Mix start 08:06; bulk 08:32–11:34 with sample growth up to 100%; loading 14:59; bake 25 min to 98.5 °C; piece 639 g, finished loaf 579 g, loss 60 g / 9.4%.
- Conclusion
- 3 g of yeast in the formula is sufficient; bulk can probably be stopped earlier, closer to 60–80% growth, and the next technical focus is shaping, scoring, and steam.
- v1.8April 29, 2026
- Problem
- S1-C1 #2 was baked, process and slice photos appeared, but some of the numeric data was not yet added.
- Change
- Added photos of the control sample, end of bulk fermentation, final proof, finished batard, and crumb; the analysis was updated from facts visible in the photos.
- Result
- Fermentation worked, the loaf baked through, the crumb became more open and even than expected from a first weak repeat.
- Conclusion
- S1-C1 can be considered a usable learning control by structure; the next node to improve is shaping, scoring, steam, and precise numeric records.
- v1.7April 28, 2026
- Problem
- A fixed 07:30 start was inconvenient when the actual start shifts in the morning.
- Change
- The working sheet received an input for mix start time and automatic recalculation of the other steps.
- Conclusion
- Scheduling became relative, while criteria for bulk and proof doneness remain sensory.
- v1.6April 28, 2026
- Problem
- The rye R1 section was temporarily delayed while restoring the starter, so the next active bake shifted to wheat S1-C1 #2.
- Change
- Added a schedule for 29 Apr 2026 starting at 07:30 and expanded kitchen-cheatsheet fields for mass, temperature, final proof, scoring, and weight loss.
- Conclusion
- The formula stays the same; the main task is repeatability and a complete record of facts.
Questions
Why is the recipe not improved with additions after the 2/10 score?
S1-C1 is required as a clean learning formula. Flavor through fermentation is studied in S1-C2, while softness, milk, sugar, butter, and tangzhong are moved into a separate soft wheat track S2.
Why not just wait exactly until the scheduled time?
Dough and kitchen temperature change fermentation speed. Time is a frame, but the decision is made by the jar, dough shape, bubbles, and the poke test.