Vent: I saw something at the bakery in Springfield that made me rethink my whole sourdough process.

I was picking up a loaf at Mill Creek Bakery last Friday and noticed their starter jar was basically a science experiment, with a thick crust and a weird color, but their bread was perfect. The baker said he only feeds it once a week and it's over 20 years old. So is a neglected starter actually more resilient than my daily-fed one?

4 comments

4 Comments

juliaa6519d agoMost Upvoted

Huh. Nobody's mentioned the water factor yet. Springfield has notoriously hard water compared to the surrounding towns. That baker's crusty old starter might actually be thriving on mineral buildup that would kill a newer culture. I've had two starters going with the exact same flour and feeding schedule, one with tap water and one with filtered, and they behave completely different. The tap water one is more stable but slower to rise. So maybe that neglected starter isn't neglected, it's just adapted to ugly conditions that a daily-fed starter would reject.

blair_torres703mo ago

That "neglected starter" thing is interesting, but I see it differently. A crust and weird color usually means it's hooch, which is the starter starving. That baker's weekly feed probably works because his kitchen is super stable, same temp and humidity. My daily fed one at home deals with way more changes, so it needs the attention. A starter that looks like that at my house would be a goner.

ray_burns3mo ago

But hooch is just alcohol, right?

pat_harris3mo ago

Remember my buddy who tried the "neglect method" after hearing something similar. He left his starter in the back of his fridge for a month, only feeding it a spoonful now and then. When he pulled it out, it had this gray, rubbery layer on top that smelled like old gym socks. He tried to bake with it anyway and the loaf came out flat and sour, like vinegar bread. He had to throw the whole thing out and start over from scratch.