• Share:
  • Send to Reddit
  • Send to StumbleUpon
  • Send to Facebook
  • Send to del.icio.us
  • Send to digg

NYT cookies

So ... has anybody tried that nyt chocolate chip cookie recipe yet? If so ... is it worth it? ;-)

16 Comments:

The dough is sitting in my fridge and will hit the 36 hour mark around 9 pm tomorrow :-)

I was talking with my wife about the recipe and she said something like, "Isn't half the fun of chocolate chip cookies the fact that you can whip them up and satisfy your craving inside of an hour?" I tend to agree with her and think that I have a pretty good recipe, but I'm willing to test these out.

FYI - I don't know if I'm hoping they'll be spectacular or not worth the extra time :-)

Dominic
the zen kitchen

@Dominic - patience is a virtue I think I possess, but definitely NOT when it comes to chocolate chip cookies. Having that dough in the fridge for that long might put me over the edge. Can you say straight jacket? I'm "patiently" waiting for your opinion, since they are my favorite sweet food in the whole universe.

I didn't make the recipe from the NYT, but I did whip up a batch from Joy of Cooking and baked half after resting for 24 hours and half after 36 hours. WOW! It was difficult to wait that long to bake them, but they were SO good that I have a second batch resting in the fridge right now! (26 hours and counting...)

Okay-I made the dough yesterday at 11 am. Waited up till 10:30 last night to bake a batch (couldn't stay awake much longer). Good, soft in the middle not too crunchy on the outside. Made another batch after waiting 24 hours this morning. Much more golden color and crunchier all around. Didn't have the softness that last night's batch had and too much crisp for me. I guess maybe the optimal resting time for me would be 18 hours.

Bottom line.........much ado about nothing for this recipe. Yes, I did like the idea of adding bittersweet chips and using a bigger scoop than normal but waiting 24 hours to make a batch of one of my favorite foods is just not worth the effort. Also, I didn't think that the recipe was any better than the recipe I currently use which uses unbleached regular flour and brown sugar instead of white. Will try the bigger cookies with bittersweet choc next time in my recipe and I don't think that there will be a better cookie around.

My advice to PerkyMac-don't wait!!!!!!

I'm confused. I looked up the recipe and it says 24 hours. Where did the 36 hour wait come from? Not that it matters since I don't bake, but I am a curious soul.

Funny--I have no problem waiting. The buzz at Cookie Madness was that they were great--I have always rested my dough like this, and have to wait a long time anyway because I like my cookies super chewy--I take them out rawish and have to wait for them to cook on the baking sheet. However, I don't bake bread very much so I haven't tried this particular recipe yet because I don't know if I want to get bread and cake flour rather than all-purpose which I usually use.

izatryt--you have to try baking some chocolate chip cookies--it is totally worth it! 36 hrs was the max--too long, 24 hrs is optimal.

@suschef - I like my CC cookies buttery, crispy & chewy. Delicate balance there. Looks like I'm going to have to practice patience. Who knew? I guess some of you did, but resting cookie dough never occurred to me. Same goes for oatmeal raisin and peanut butter? I'm not buying different flour, but I'll go for a 24-36 hour wait if the cookies are even more delicious. My granddaughter is on the opposite coast and it's not a holiday, it's super hot outside, but now I'm craving cookies.

The story itself talked about various length of times for the wait, that's where the time variance came from.

@izatryt: here's a bit from the article --

"At 12 hours, the dough had become drier and the baked cookies had a pleasant, if not slightly pale, complexion. The 24-hour mark is where things started getting interesting. The cookies browned more evenly and looked like handsomer, more tanned older brothers of the younger batch. The biggest difference, though, was flavor. The second batch was richer, with more bass notes of caramel and hints of toffee.

Going the full distance seemed to have the greatest impact. At 36 hours, the dough was significantly drier than the 12-hour batch; it crumbled a bit when poked but held together well when shaped. These cookies baked up the most evenly and were a deeper shade of brown than their predecessors. Surprisingly, they had an even richer, more sophisticated taste, with stronger toffee hints and a definite brown sugar presence. At an informal tasting, made up of a panel of self-described chipper fanatics, these mature cookies won, hands down."

I figure if I'm going to wait, I might as well go the distance!

Thanks for the responses! Even if it would be rather torturous to let nummy cookie dough sit unmolested in the fridge for that long, I think I could make the sacrifice in the name of scientific and tastebudinal discovery. The problem is that I, like HeartofGlass, am hesitant to sacrifice money and pantry space, both of which are in short supply, on two types of flour I'm unlikely to need in the near future. Mebbe I'll split the difference and allow the dough to rest, but use all-purpose flour.

Those of you who have attempted the recipe: Did you just happen to have Valhrona feves in your pantry or did you use something else. I wanted to make that recipe immediately but decided to wait until I had the right chocolate.

@izzy's mama: I used Ghirardelli 60% Cacao chocolate chips. I'm more interested in what the wait time does to the non-chocolate part of the cookie. If it's absolutely sublime and worth the wait, I'll look for the feves on my next trip to Whole Foods.

@tacroy80: I think you'd be fine with AP flour, as almost every chocolate chip cookie recipe uses it. In fact, based on protein content, you'll be right in the ballpark. I'm sure that Jacques Torres has a reason for using half cake flour and half bread, but I very much doubt that you'll end up with a bad product -- just slightly different :-)

It will be a miracle if any of that dough is left after another 24 hours.

@izzy's mama-I also used Ghirardelli 60% and really liked them. They have a much different taste than the usual Toll House and they are worth the expense if the people you are baking for are worth it. For a bunch of little kids, I would stay with the Toll House chips.

As for waiting, as I said, since I like chewy gooey cookies, 12 hours was plenty for me.

Regarding the flour, I would say that using King Arthur's unbleached regular flour would work as there was someplace I saw that said that combining cake and bread flour would give you the same gluten content as just using regular flour. Next time, that is what I would use the regular flour. I happen to bake both breads and sweets so I had both.

@PerkyMac-I would think that the resting thing is good for all cookie doughs not just the choc chip ones as it is giving the dough a chance to rest, not the chips. I intend to try it with other doughs going forward.


JoyTheBaker did a little experiment on this. Check out her blog if you want to see her results: www.joythebaker.com/blog

maybe its cheaper to buy cake and bread flour separately when you're buying beeeeeeeeeeg amounts of flour? go figure... I'm using all purpose.
and because of what suschef said...i may underbake mine.

Add a comment:

Comments can take up to a minute to appear - please be patient!

Previewing your comment:

 

HTML Hints

Some HTML is OK: <a href="URL">link</a>, <strong>strong</strong>, <em>em</em>

Comment Guidelines

Post whatever you want, just keep it seriously about eats, seriously. We reserve the right to delete off-topic or inflammatory comments. Learn more at our Comment Policy page.

If you see something not so nice, please, report an inappropriate comment.

Start Talking!

Need a question answered? Have advice to share? Start a Talk topic now!

Sign up to start a talk topic

Sign up to get your questions answered and share advice.