Moscato cupcakes

Among the (admittedly few) wines that I drink is moscato.  Among the (admittedly many) desserts that I think are very tasty are macarons.  So when Kroger has a wine sale and Macaron Moscato is among the discounted varieties, I go for it.  Sadly, the wine was not as good as one might have expected.  There was a very strange and sort of artificial taste that I'd never tasted in a moscato before which led to something hitherto never seen before--us not finishing a bottle of wine we'd bought.  So, what to do with the rest of the bottle?  Make something delicious out of it, right?

Cute label, but the wine was not so good.

The magic of the Interwebs led me to this recipe for moscato wine cake.  Not owning a Bundt pan, I decided to do cupcakes instead, which led me to some ad-filled blog that probably tried to install malware on the University's network (ha! denied!).  But it did have a recipe for moscato cupcakes that I hastily copied and pasted into a comparatively safe Word document.

Reception to these was mixed.  I thought they would have been better with better wine and not using a boxed cake mix.  But when Dom took them to his office, apparently they were a big hit.  Like many of our other culinary experiments, this one could benefit from a bigger sample size!

Our notes:

• I didn't search for too long, but all of the recipes I found used a boxed cake mix.  Now, prior to this, I had not used a boxed cake mix in years.  I discovered that boxed cake mixes have quite a few ingredients that don't sound all that appetizing, and also that there is no inherent difference in the mixes for "yellow" and "butter recipe yellow" cakes; it's the end user that has to add the butter to the mix in the latter case.  Still, to be faithful to the recipe the first time trying it, I bought a boxed cake mix (just regular yellow cake--not yellowcake, mind you).  Next time, I'd just make my own cake batter, and adjust the recipe as needed, which in my case means "until the batter looks about right".
• A better wine would have led to tastier cupcakes, but then I suppose that's the classic case of "you get out of it what you put into it".  I could still taste that weird slightly metallic taste in the cupcakes which means that, amazingly, we still have unconsumed cupcakes in the apartment five days after baking.
• There was no frosting for these things.  We didn't have enough powdered sugar to make frosting; neither did we have enough wine left to flavour it according to the recipe.  By all accounts these didn't really need frosting, and frosting probably would have just decreased the shelf life anyway.
• The photo below shows some cornbread-looking cupcakes.  The recipe produced 17 cupcakes; this came out to one full 12-cup muffin tin and one 6-muffin tin that only had 5 cupcakes.  To save time, I just put both tins in the oven at the same time, with the 12-muffin tin on the top rack and the 6-muffin tin on the bottom rack.  The 12-muffin tin produced the cornbread-looking cupcakes, but the 6-muffin tin produced cupcakes with very smooth tops that were more a beige-y colour rather than the cornbread color.  It didn't really matter too much in this case, but just some interesting tidbit of information that may come in useful sometime in the future.

Verdict: Probably something I'd try again, but with my own cake recipes.  Also, it would mean not drinking all of a bottle of moscato in order to save some for the cupcakes, which would be sort of difficult for me.

Cupcakes with wine in them, not cornbread muffins without wine.

Cranberry orange bread

To be fair, this was originally a cranberry walnut bread, but since I don't really like nuts in breads, we decided to omit those and just go with cranberry orange.  The cranberries just recently showed up at our local Kroger, unless they showed up while I was on vacation...in which case then no, that wasn't so recently that they showed up.

Anyway, our notes:

• Of course, we omitted the walnuts, partly because I don't like using nuts in bread, but also for a reason explained below.
• The recipe calls for 1 cup of sugar.  If you know us at all, then you know that we don't like too much sugar in our recipes.  We used something less than 1 cup and the end result turned out fine; one could probably use about 3/4 cup of sugar and it would still turn out fine.
• I have no idea how much orange zest I actually used.  Since I wasn't about to zest the orange and then determine how close to 1 Tbsp. I was, I just figured that the zest of 1 orange was sufficient.  The end result didn't seem to suffer from any lack of orange zest.
• Perhaps because of the layout of the back of the bag of cranberries (where I got the recipe), I somehow missed that I was to have "coarsely chopped" the cranberries before tossing them into the batter.  This didn't seem to adversely affect things, though it probably would have turned out marginally better had the berries been chopped.
• Also speaking of the cranberries, the recipe calls for 1 1/2 cups of them.  Somehow I assumed that this was the entire package, so not only were they not chopped, there were also way more of them than the recipe had said to use.  Oops.  Only after I'd dumped all of the cranberries into the batter did I notice that the serving size for the package was a 1/2 cup, and that there were 6 servings in the bag.  So apparently I was to have used only half the bag.  But then I realized that it wouldn't have been as easy to use the leftover half of the bag (all the other recipes on the bag used the entire thing), and since the final product was tasty, we figured that this wasn't a bad thing to have thrown all of the cranberries into the batter.  This was a contributing factor in the decision not to use walnuts; there was barely enough room in the bowl for all of those cranberries, so we figured that the batter wouldn't also be able to hold chopped walnuts.

This was definitely a recipe to keep, especially with our modifications.  I'd like to say that next time I'll probably make at least some effort at chopping those cranberries, but most likely I'll chop one or two handfuls, call it good, and then throw the rest in whole.

Whole cranberries.

Lavazza: Qualità Oro

Bought this because I liked that other Lavazza.  With a name like "Qualità Oro", I expected some high quality coffee, but sadly, it did not meet the exacting standards I set out for it.  Lavazza's website claims that this blend is "a selection of the finest 100% Arabica coffees from Central America and the African highlands" and lists it first among its selection of coffee blends.  So why didn't I like it?

• Weaker flavour compared to the "Caffè Espresso" blend: I prefer my coffee tasty, not tasting like it's a bit watered down.  Lavazza's website gives it a 4/5 for "Intensity"; Caffè Espresso had gotten a 5/5 for that one.  Was this part of the issue?  Perhaps...
• Price: rather more expensive than the espresso blend, and to make matters worse, the price listed on the shelf did not match the price it scanned for at checkout.
• The most egregious offense: for whatever reason, it was effectively a decaf coffee, and when it's 6.45 AM, that is most definitely not what I'm looking for.

Verdict: would not buy again.

Qualità oro? More like, qualità piombo, I'd say.

Slow cooker tapioca pudding

I wanted to make some tapioca pudding.  However, as the minute tapioca at Kroger was selling for an exorbitant price, I decided to get a bag of tapioca pearls for $0.99 at the Chinese grocery store.  I found a good recipe and went to work.

My notes:

• This really could not have been easier: mix ingredients; turn on slow cooker.  Not too difficult.  It didn't even require soaking the tapioca pearls beforehand.
• A few of the reviewers at AllRecipes mentioned that the eggs were more for texture rather than taste.  I'd probably only use one egg next time instead of two.
• The recipe didn't call for vanilla but I threw some in.  It probably ended up being somewhere between 1 1/2 and 2 teaspoons since I just used whatever we had left in the bottle.
• Our slow cooker doesn't have a "medium" setting; it has "high", "low", "simmer", and "warm".  So I set it for 1.5 hours on high, then turned it to low for about 15 minutes, after which I thought that was too much heat and set it to simmer for the last hour of cooking.  This seemed far under the time that recipe said the pudding would take, but it seemed to be nicely thickened at this point, and based on evidence it didn't seem to be getting any thicker with the longer cooking.  Rather than risk it burning, I just turned off the heat.
• If anything, I'd reduce the sugar a bit, maybe to half cup; 2/3 cup seems a bit excessive.
• I used nonstick spray on the liner of the slow cooker.  I don't know if this helped, but I certainly didn't want to find out how fun cleanup would be without it.

Definitely a recipe I'd try again.

Delicious!

Cloverleaf rolls v3.0

This recipe for cloverleaf rolls even says in its title that they are "fantastic".  This, unfortunately, was not my experience with them.  From an imbalance of liquid and dry ingredients to a lower yield, this was not anywhere near as good of an experience as I'd had on Wednesday with making cloverleaf rolls.

My notes:

• The recipe calls for 3 1/2 cups of flour, but I ended up using a little more than 4 cups, and even then I did not really get a dough, but more of a stiff batter.  I didn't want to add more flour because of a dire warning in the recipe about flour amount.  Maybe this was a mistake on my part.

Cake batter?

• There was a lot of liquid in this recipe: 3/4 c. water to dissolve the yeast, 1 c. milk, 1/4 c. melted butter, and 1 egg.  By contrast, the recipe I used on Wednesday only used a little over 1 c. milk, 1 egg, and 6 (not melted) tablespoons of butter.  Maybe this is why I should have added more flour.
• However, it did seem like a good idea to dissolve the yeast in what amounted to sugar water.  Get the yeast to really start eating before it even got to the flour, right?
• Because of the point at which I'd stopped adding flour, I ended up with what was essentially a thick batter, but a batter with gluten (there was definitely gluten forming in this stuff).  By the time I finished dividing the dough into 12 muffin cups, I felt like one of those people in the commercials for the faucets that you only need to hit with your wrist to get to turn on.  I had anticipated this and had, against my environmental science bachelor's degree, turned on the water before I started dealing with the dough.

Before 2nd rising: they look like biscuits, or something.  There was no way this stuff was going to be formed into any other shape than 'blob'.

After 2nd rising: at least they look more like rolls, now. 

They may not be "cloverleaf" rolls, but they turned out to be rolls nonetheless.

These turned out to be more like brioche: soft, buttery, sort of eggy, a little sweet.  This would have been great had I been going for something like a brioche (which, honestly, had been next on my list of breads to try), but this did not make for good cloverleaf roll dough.  The recipe had promised 12 large cloverleaf rolls, but I ended up with 12 comparatively smaller brioche.  So, this turned out to be not so bad of a result as I had thought at the start; I might keep the recipe around for brioche, but then I might just find a recipe that specifically says that it's for making brioche!