You made me go and review why I had intervened in the thread.
Yes, you are correct. Volume is an extremely imprecise measure for dry ingredients and it was because of that I commented as I did, as the discussion was as commercial baking/cooking revolved around large batches, measured by weight, while family cooking/baking revolves around measurements by volume.
But you get hard pressed to have that problem in recipes expressed in metric, even if we went and tried our best to make matters as complicated as possible and measured liquids by mass.
That’s a fair point, but I think you’re overestimating how difficult it is to convert units in less rational measurement systems. People who’ve used metric their whole lives seem to have it stuck in their heads that it’s some kind of herculean task to look up a couple numbers and plug them into a calculator and then write that number down for your recipe. If it was as hard as you seem to think it is even America would have changed over by now. Metric is better, but it’s not that much better.
Biased as I am, if for nothing else, metric uses a decimal base, which facilitates converting between scale units by shifting the point. The representation by fractions used in the imperial system is not that straighforward.
But I wasn’t even considering that in my comment. The point was what you ilustrated very well in you comment: measuring dry ingredients by volume can and will cause deviation in the end result.
I can’t fathom what “one cup, hard packed” means. What if I’m stronger than the original author of the recipe and pack it harder or my dry is coarser or has a different moisture content?
But I can easily understand what half a pound, half and one quarter, etc, precisely requests, although I prefer to have it expressed in metric units as 1lb = 453g, so 1 and 1/2lb is 679,5g, out of personal preference.
You made me go and review why I had intervened in the thread.
Yes, you are correct. Volume is an extremely imprecise measure for dry ingredients and it was because of that I commented as I did, as the discussion was as commercial baking/cooking revolved around large batches, measured by weight, while family cooking/baking revolves around measurements by volume.
But you get hard pressed to have that problem in recipes expressed in metric, even if we went and tried our best to make matters as complicated as possible and measured liquids by mass.
That was why a I replied as I did.
That’s a fair point, but I think you’re overestimating how difficult it is to convert units in less rational measurement systems. People who’ve used metric their whole lives seem to have it stuck in their heads that it’s some kind of herculean task to look up a couple numbers and plug them into a calculator and then write that number down for your recipe. If it was as hard as you seem to think it is even America would have changed over by now. Metric is better, but it’s not that much better.
Biased as I am, if for nothing else, metric uses a decimal base, which facilitates converting between scale units by shifting the point. The representation by fractions used in the imperial system is not that straighforward.
But I wasn’t even considering that in my comment. The point was what you ilustrated very well in you comment: measuring dry ingredients by volume can and will cause deviation in the end result.
I can’t fathom what “one cup, hard packed” means. What if I’m stronger than the original author of the recipe and pack it harder or my dry is coarser or has a different moisture content?
But I can easily understand what half a pound, half and one quarter, etc, precisely requests, although I prefer to have it expressed in metric units as 1lb = 453g, so 1 and 1/2lb is 679,5g, out of personal preference.