5/30/23 Final thoughts: TLDR: (3 weeks ago)Ann: writes me an email saying: I can’t get the air back into my buttercream after using the immersion blender. So that must mean that the air loss is causing the color saturation. Me: Ok, sure, let’s try to figure this out together. I write back email saying: ok, here’s how you whip air back to the initial volume, and also, notice how the color remains dark. In addition to air loss, there must be other things going on. Here is all my data for you to see. *crickets for 3 weeks* (at this point, I’m thinking she’s busy or just not interested) Ann: Releases a new video without emailing me back or considering suggestions in the email exchange, and performs a similar technique to her first video, and says cannot rewhip back to the initial volume, therefore it must be air. Me: …? --- Ok, what’s strange to me is that I’ve acknowledged aeration even before these response videos, which are annotated in all my previous videos. I believe it fits into a bigger picture of what’s going on, yet Ann hasn’t once acknowledged homogenization, emulsions, or even topics that both of us know exist, such as diffusion or concentration gradients. I’m trying here. Anyone who watches this channel knows I aim to be as transparent as possible. I’m meeting her at every step here to explain what I think is going on. I am definitely interested in seeing how everything fits together in the bigger picture of things. However, it’s pretty clear that we disagree on the fundamental properties of what’s going on. I'm not sure how to move forward in a productive manner with those who refuse to acknowledge that anything exists outside of what they think. So with that, I will continue to do my work here. Many of you have commented or messaged me, and please know that although I can’t answer everything, I am grateful for your ideas and suggestions. More baking and frosting videos to come! - FAQ: Why would you go through all this, rewhipping, ice bath, etc. Why not just add more dye? I don’t really suggest doing that at all. This all began when Ann suggested that loss of air was the only reason that the color was saturated. So, I tried to help by showing that yes, you can rewhip it back and the color remains dark. --- 05/26/23 OK, I've tried to help out as much as possible, and I'm not sure there's much else I can assist with but I’ll try. Additionally, I’ve been trying to answer some interesting questions in the comments below but there’s a bit to cover so apologies if I don’t get to yours. Please remember I’m just one person here and because some commenters can’t behave themselves with their language 😔I’ve had to turn up stricter filters for commenting. So, I'm hoping this will help those interested in some background reasoning or using this technique. Most of this was mentioned in my previous email (written out below). And it was a long and detailed email - but the gist of it was that I could whip air back into the frosting, maintaining most of the color and how to achieve the same results. And, so regarding the last video, yes, I agree about experiments needing to be repeatable. That being said, it's been hard to keep up since new variables are constantly being introduced. *These are a few differences I've observed in the latest video:* 1. This time Italian meringue buttercream was made - that's an emulsion-based buttercream too, but, again, for consistency, I use Swiss meringue buttercream for everything across the board. 2. The gel color is added directly to the meringue, the water-based component of buttercreams. This was not done in the previous experiments, and doing this will result in an initial darker buttercream than if gel food coloring is added to the final buttercream. *In other words, the starting point, from which all the rest of the changes are compared, is darker and makes color changes less apparent in the final comparison. This may skew the final picture and favor the contribution of aeration plays vs. homogenization.* (I explain a little more about aeration vs. homogenization below in the email) *The amount and type of color pigment, in addition to when you add it, and how you add it in, is what we're measuring and therefore is very important when making comparisons such as in these experiments.* 4. The final volume cannot be achieved due to the reasons outlined in my letter below. An ice water bath is needed to aerate the butterfat post-immersion blender. Aeration is from butterfat in meringue-based buttercreams, not the meringue component, which largely deflates when added to the buttercream. I'm happy to share all the data and images: including weight and percent loss, and a picture indicating where I used a stand mixer in experiment #3. For reference, if you wish to see the contents of my email, it's in a comment of mine further down. (I have maxed out characters for this particular comment it seems.)
If adding the gel to the meringue directly already gets you to a darker starting color, then isn’t it better to just do that and save the hassle of the immersion blending and rewhipping over an ice bath? I feel like Ann’s whole point in all this was simply to highlight the fact that there is a tradeoff between color and texture. You can clearly tell that the darker buttercreams in your video do not have the same consistency as the pre-blending version. That’s fine, but you should be more upfront about the fact that the end product from your method is going to be a different one than what folks normally think of as a standard Swiss buttercream
@@mattmb5157 yeah so I thought that too and tested that in a video a couple years ago - turns out the stand mixer isn’t so good at homogenizing, so the color is darker than if you were to add it at the end, but still lighter than using the immersion blender. And yeah, I definitely state textural differences in all my vids for bakers who are interested in trying it.
As a cake baker, I am usually making one base Swiss meringue buttercream from which I take smaller amounts to colour - so colouring my base would not be helpful. I have tried both the immersion blender method and heating small amounts to add back in and both work well. When creating a cake, I will use my base buttercream (which i might fllavour after removing the amount I need for colours) and fill and crumbcoat my cakes. The small amounts I colour will be my final coat or used as decor (ie piping) and as such the amount of deflation doesn't concern me as much as using massive amounts of colouring. I feel that Adriana has fully explained her methods and shouldn't need to justify herself anymore. I am saddened that this hasn't been put to rest already. Debunk things that will hurt people or cause damage - no need to carry on trying to debunk something that hurts no one and is actually used by many people in the baking world.
Putting the scientific aspect of it aside, and assuming it works, what's the point of it? Is there a reason why someone might want to go through all of the work of emulsion blending the frosting, then re-whipping it, only for it to not have the right texture and density, when they could have just added a few more drops of food colouring at the beginning and saved themselves all of that work? This is a genuine question btw. I'm not an avid baker, so there could be something I'm just not getting here.
@@thelemurofmadagascar9183 I doubt anyone would want to go through all that honestly… actually I don’t ever suggest doing that. The thing is that she said that rewhipping back to the initial volume wasn’t possible, and therefore the lack of aeration was the only cause for the color change. So I thought I’d help out but explaining how and why to rewhip it back to the initial volume while maintaining a majority of the color. The homogenization of color is effective enough to withstand rewhipping. Most bakers I know don’t bother with re-whipping though, and are happy with using the frosting post immersion blender. 😊
I have been receiving tags and comments on every platform to add my reply to this video, so here it is. I, like others, have watched her videos for a while now. I am fully supportive of those videos targeted at the mindless content mills that make it difficult for small food content creators (like myself) to put out trustworthy and high value content. The lack of research on my video, however, was a bit uncharacteristic of her channel. As my channel grows, I try to be as helpful and approachable as possible, even though it can be difficult. If you follow on Instagram, you may have seen my Q&A sessions or my comment threads where I'm pretty active, or maybe we've had a conversation in my DMs. Along those lines, if there were any questions from her or her team, I would have been more than happy to help out or answer. 💗🧁
"The lack of research on my video, however, was a bit uncharacteristic of her channel." You say that, and yet this has happened before. You might be interested in her video "Should You Stop Drinking MILK?", and MatPat's response to it, "Food Theory: Should I DELETE This Video?"
@Losty while I agree with you on this video, Anne wasn't wrong on food theories video about milk and have you seen Anne's video in response to food theories pink sauce video she annihilated his "theory" on the pink sauce
@@resolecca actually she was. His response explained all the issues with her video coming at him. She took numerous things out of context and this has habitually been a habit of hers. She didn’t do her research then and didn’t do it now. You can be a fan of someone and still understand they are human and can be wrong.
@Tiffytatortots 1 I do understand that I never said I agreed with everything Ann says, that Helen Rinnie's video about Anne and cooking pans, i agreed with Helen that Anne is in the wrong in that, Anne is in the wrong bout this video, but Anne wasn't wrong about food theories video on diary infact food theories is one of the most inaccurate of any other of the science foodtubers, and like I said Anne utterly annihilate food theories on his pink sauce video
**Here is an update with those who are interested** Ann has retested the buttercream saturation experiments and has since written me an email. I'm not going to post the exact email unless I get permission to do so, but the purpose of it was to ask if I was able to re-whip the buttercream back to its initial volume after using the immersion blender. She's observed that: 1) Swiss meringue buttercream is airy from the foam in the meringue and is difficult to re-whip once deflated with the immersion blender; and 2) since it cannot be re-whipped back to the starting volume, the air is the significant factor causing color saturation. Below you can see my response trying to help: -------- Hi Ann, Sure, so to answer your question, yes, I could re-whip your Swiss meringue buttercream (SMBC) up to nearly the initial starting volume with a minimal loss in color saturation. I achieved this using my logic that color saturation is due to the emulsive properties of the frosting. I'll share my dataset and pictures with results with you here: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LMoefL079gksJQn9nSZh-dPhGDwyeXJwHdsLmcOH72I/edit?usp=sharing Before I explain how I did this, one issue needs sorting out: the source of aeration in the frosting. You mention that Swiss meringue buttercream is "a very airy frosting, so it is hard to re-whip the air (gained from making a foam with the egg whites) back into it." Yes, so I agree that foaming occurs during the meringue whipping step. But because the foam is aqueous, it is largely destabilized/deflated by adding butterfat. The lipids interfere with the egg white protein's ability to encase large air bubbles. Maybe some bubbles at the microscale still exist, but I think, for the most part, the larger ones get deflated. The deflation is also probably due to the sheer amount of butterfat we have to add, and this is competing for the air-water interface that was once occupied by the egg white protein matrix. And you can see this happen in real-time; once the butter is added when making SMBC, it deflates the meringue, causing a significant loss in total volume. After adding all the butter (given that the meringue and butter temperatures are between 65-75F/18-23C), we often see a runny or perhaps "curdled" texture. After mixing the fat and aqueous phases, the emulsion forms, the buttercream thickens, and perhaps, there is a slight increase in volume. In my experience, at this point on, the majority of aeration in these types of buttercreams is from gas trapped in the butterfat, not meringue. That's not to say that the meringue doesn't offer other textural and space-filling (bulk) advantages, which I believe to be from the extended and denatured egg white proteins. But as far as aeration, I think it is localized primarily within the continuous phase of the water-in-oil emulsion, that is, in the butterfat, not meringue. Now, using this logic, I could re-whip your Swiss meringue buttercream closely back to its initial volume. It's hard to tell with a beaker instead of a graduated cylinder, but my guess is that it's within 5% of the initial volume, just by gauging visually. This is while maintaining the weight within an average of 3% of the initial frosting. When using the immersion blender with the buttercream, the emulsion is homogenized due to the shearing effects but is also heated, which melts some of the butterfat. And we can see this; the resulting frosting post-immersion blending is a little glossier and more liquid-like. Typically, I measure the temperature and observe average increases around 5 degrees F post-immersion blender. And because the aeration of the buttercream occurs primarily within the butterfat, we can control the aeration by adjusting the temperature of the butterfat. Lipids hold air more efficiently when solid, so we need to chill the frosting slightly. Now there are a couple of methods to go about this if the goal is to achieve the initial volume via re-whipping. You can wait (i.e., leave at room temperature) until the buttercream lowers its temperature (I've found that between 60-70F/15-21C is ideal) and then attempt to re-whip. Or you can do what I do: put the frosting bowl atop an ice water bath. Then mixing the entire time, the buttercream will aerate because the fat is now more solid and can retain the air bubbles. The tricky thing is that I think most people (including myself at one point) will want to put the whole thing in the fridge to chill. But that sets the emulsion - such that if you solidify the butterfats entirely and attempt to agitate it, you'll destroy the emulsion. In that case, you'll likely have to redo the steps (immersion blend, etc.) Most bakers have experienced this when trying to re-whip buttercream that has been chilled; it will look broken or split until the butter reaches the proper temperature to re-emulsify the meringue. Through working with buttercreams, I've realized it's all about balance. In this case, re-whipping to add air to the continuous phase of the emulsion is dependent on getting the butterfat to the right plasticity (temperature) such that the emulsion is stabilized while maintaining enough solid structure to trap gas. ➡And as far as the color, it did lighten a little after whipping. We can use the color to understand each mechanism's impact: aeration vs. homogenization. The important thing here is to look at the color change. The difference between before the immersion blender vs. after the immersion blender is greater than the difference between after the immersion blender vs. re-whipping. ➡To me, this indicates a more significant effect due to homogenization, which allows the dispersion of pigment into the aqueous phase inside the continuous phase of butter. That there is still saturation post-re-whipping even back to its initial volume shows that the pigment has diffused enough such that added aeration has a minimal effect. Now to address anything else that I may not have covered: You ask, "Do you use a stand mixer or hand mixer? I am wondering if that may account for the difference?" I've used both. The stand mixer got the frosting back up to the initial volume much quicker than my hand mixer. I performed this using Sample 3, so you can compare it to samples 1 and 2. You also state, "After whipping in a stand mixer for 5 minutes, it was back up to 600mL. But still not all the way up to 700mL But it was already nearly back to the pale color. Indicating that the air is making it paler or lack air, making it darker." So I covered how to address the loss of volume by chilling above, but other thoughts regarding the paler color. I don't have the concentration of my color pigment, and I don't know if that's available. This will affect the overall saturation of my frosting vs. yours. I'm using Americolor in Royal Blue at a 0.1% w/w in my frosting. Also, maybe the fat content of your butter is different than mine, or your mixer is better at aeration. If, overall, the concentration of pigment is not enough to permeate the emulsion such that a color change is strong, it may be that the aeration will override any color changes. Lastly, some other notes: - Volumetric measurements are not very quantitative, particularly with something as solid as frosting. That's why I give weight measurements for every step to ensure all the frosting is accounted for. You can see in my datasheet I track the weight at every step. - Along those lines, I try to limit container switching to reduce sample loss and remove as much frosting as possible from the immersion blender and mixer attachments. Again, this is why I was weighing. - One topic we haven't even attempted to explore is the process of diffusion of the pigment across concentration gradients.
Alright, I read this entire comment, watched the video. While I agree emulsion has something to do with the result... you don't once in your video mention to put the frosting in an ice bath to we-whip it. And honestly, the results are not worth the hassle at that point. Ill just add a few more drops of food dye.
@@summerrocks2013 So the point isn't to use an ice bath - rewhipping was never anything I suggested until it was used as an argument to try to say that my hypothesis was invalid. But if you are having trouble rewhipping (for whatever reason) I explain exactly how to do it and why it works.
I was really disappointed that Ann included you in her video. Lumping a real creator in with a bunch of content farm crap goes against everything she has been complaining about for years. I then got even more frustrated by her refusal to respond to *any* of the responses questioning her. People were kind and respectful but got no response. I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, so I'm trying not to judge, but I lost a lot of respect for Ann over this. It was lazy and felt like Ann had become what she hates - someone who resorted to shortcuts in a rush to create content for content sake. Either way, she owes you an apology. Thanks again for the work that you do. This hack was 100% how I manged to get macaron fillings that matched the shells I had made for a rainbow display. They were bright and beautiful and tasted great. And your ADBC is a game changer!
Considering I know Sugarlogie's demonstrated method works first hand, I wonder how many others she's just lumped in and attempted to railroad with halfassery/intentional misdirection.
Same, was really sad she included sugarologie, she(sugar) always shows us the process and the science behind it (my nerdy brain loves that). and im also with phreak is it the first time? dont know, and honnestly it really sucks I havent tried yet sugaralogie's recipes but i really want, usually i find lots of things too sweet so i need to find a tasty alternative!
@^-.-^ Cutie I also find that most desserts are too sweet for me. But sites like this one, Helen Rennie's & Erin Jeane McDowell's spots on Food52 have given me the confidence to play around with recipes to find things that work for my family's pallet. Now I even get compliments from people use don't usually like desserts. Give the American Dreamy Buttercream a try! It's really good.
Its that 'PhD in Biochem/Molecular Bio' coming out. bless. Wait it would actually be really cool if Ann corrected herself bc the whole point of her debunking series was to take apart misinformation in food making videos, which she herself is not immune too.
I got a big miffed when she said that pan color didn't make a difference, when, if your materials are the same, it 100% make a difference with color and cook times.
I also wish she does more recipe videos. She’s gone from that to just straight debunking videos. Which I mean, I suppose her debunking videos does do better but still, I miss her new possible recipes 😅
@@WiggyWamWam No, iirc she didn’t make an effort to get pans of the same weights/thicknesses. Others who’ve experimented have demonstrated that all else being equal, a darker pan _does_ brown a cake more, which is in line with scientific theory (oven heat = infrared light, and black absorbs more light so gets hotter). But tbf her point was that the materials and thicknesses of pans are a bigger contributing factor than the colour anyway. Basically, darker pans get hotter _in theory_ but in practise we shouldn’t rely on this “tip” alone.
@@renownedbandanawearer1345 Ann was partially correct, the blended and re-whipped cream was a lighter tone than just blended/emulsified cream (as well, there’s more air in it). So yes she was correct about that part, (I guess sugarlogie just didn’t explain that the cream will lose some volume after being blended and perhaps that’s what made ann make her assumption?) idk. But Ann wasn’t fully correct :/
@@WiggyWamWam Plain American buttercream is mostly butter and sugar with some amount of milk to lighten the density, thus not an emulsion since it's a low water based cream. Swiss meringue butter cream is an emulsion because it's combining eggs, which are heavy in water content and butter is mostly fat or oil, which separate from water. American butter cream does not need to go through an emulsion process to keep it light and fluffy. Nothing separates. Swiss meringue does because the water from the eggs wants to separate from the butter. So it needs to be emulsified in order to keep it all together to be nice and fluffy.
The first thing she does in this video is explain how butter is the emulsion in question. It’s about how the food dye spreads in the *butter* and how that by extension affects the buttercream. Right after she explains that butter is an emulsion she explains why she’s debunking with plain american. Since Anne claimed the only difference was air the non-emulsion buttercream should be exactly the same colour before immersion blending and after re-whipping. It clearly isn’t! Because the butter in the cream is still an emulsion that gets more evenly dyed when immersion blending :) It took me a bit to understand too since I’m not a scientist, but she did 100% explain it in the video. Hope I could clear things up a bit more
Am I blind? The rewhipped buttercream is way lighter than the blended buttercream and looks identical to the initial whipped buttercream. It’d be helpful to see the rewhipped version next to the original color.
I was shocked to see you pop up in the htct debunking video. As someone who loves baking and works in the science field, your videos have been an absolute delight. The science of baking and cake decorating is quite underdeveloped/ not adressed much. I think Ann does a great job with debunking dangerous hacks, but it seems even she is not immune to the pitfalls of keeping up with the entertainment machine. I really hope she adresses this.
This is so disappointing for me. I love HTCT, and even though I'm fairly new to Sugarologie, I love her work as well. I always saw them both as reliable sources for information. Everyone makes mistakes, we're all human. I just hope Ann admits to her misinformation, and hey, maybe we'll get a HTCT/ Sugarologie collab? One could wish... 🤞
@@JessInTheCityy she's unfortunately done a back-handed double down in the pinned comment. Not even acknowledging the bigger issue people had of her action of going after another content creator with an unfair shake, and is boiling it down to agree to disagree over the frosting, when the frosting wasn't the real issue. Sugar has very graciously accepted her half-assed apology.
@@s.colins2050 everyone can make mistakes, but I was hoping for a more authentic apology or explanation from Ann, but instead she just doubled down with a basic unapologetic apology on this video instead of holding herself accountable to save face. All in all it’s just a little disappointing, especially since I enjoyed them both. But I’ll never support bigger platforms pushing down smaller ones for no good reason other than to bully and then being disingenuous about it
Hi Sugarologie, Firstly I apologies if you have been bombarded with comments - that was not my intention and I know it can be overwhelming. As I stated in the video that you are responding to - this DOES work - so we agree on that. But where we disagree is the reasoning for it happening. I understand emulsions, but still believe the air volume loss is the major factor causing this colour change and this video did not change my mind. We will have to agree to disagree on this one. At the end of the day it is just frosting - so it's not a big deal. To answer your question in this video about why American buttercream was chosen for the rewhipping test, and why I did not use the Italian meringue buttercream that I had already used to show the volume loss in the first experiment ... The reason is that you can not just rewhip the same amount of air back into the other types of frosting. Other butter creams, like the Italian Meringue Buttercream ones are made by whipping egg whites to a foam with heated sugar syrup. They are particularly light and airy and once you've knocked the air out of them you can't just rewhip them with beaters to get the air back in - so you will not see it go pale again and you will not see the volume return to what it was. This is demonstrated in this response video, they did not go pale again - but unfortunately you did not measure the volumes after rewhipping, so may not have realised that the full amount of air was not added back into them. To answer your other question on the percentage volume loss - The amount the frosting volume decreases is dependant on the initial amount of air in the buttercream. And how fluffy and airy the frosting is will be be effected by the recipe and technique that you use to make the frosting. The more fluffy the frosting, the more volume loss you will get. You had a lower volume loss which would indicate that your recipe / technique made a frosting with less air in it than the recipe that I use. At the end of the day it is just frosting, so blend it and make it denser and darker if you want to use that technique or leave it light and fluffy and use. more colour it's personal choice. 😀
Ann disagreeing with an actual food scientist about her own hack after recreating it without even using the same ingredients is so disheartening. I used to love watching ann debunk content farms putting out dangerous hacks. It's not fun to see her try to discredit actual content creators, bakers, & food scientists with shoddy experimentation and poorly done research.
You couldn't even finish your comment to Sugarologie. Which, again, you keep saying her channel name *WRONG*. This is not a good look for you. If you cannot even manage to say Sugarologie's channel name correctly *once* in the 3 times you've said it in a comment, how do you actually expect us to believe you do your due diligence? The science is right there in front of you in both videos, and you continue to ignore it because it's clearly easier/less time consuming for you. How can you expect people to believe YOUR scientific explanations for things on your channel, in your book, when you cannot even respect the very *name* of another scientist who's been harmed by your negligence?
@@heyguysits-nicole Reading your comment shows that you have not watched both videos. I did use the same frosting to test the hack. There is no way to use the same recipe because the recipe was not given.
Furthermore, what is the purpose of this "debunking?" So that bakers know that imursion blending will result in less buttercream? The process still results in a deeper color, and it still "works." And knocking the air out is actually kind of helpful, because you’ll end up with fewer air pockets when you're trying to get a smooth finish on the side of a cake.
Ann was wrong, and she’s making a habit out of her juggernaut channel misrepresenting creators with fewer subs. Tactfully pointing out her errors is the point.
@@katvtay Perhaps you misunderstood, but I believe the OP's statements are like a continuation of this video in their head and is asking what is even the purpose of Ann's "debunking", and so on. I imagine they thought it was nonsensical to "debunk" something that Ann herself said works. Then they went on to state that knocking the air out of frosting can be beneficial, so it shouldn't even be seen as a downside. Basically, they are saying nothing was "debunked" at all even in Ann's own terrible recreation using a non-emulsion based frosting. ... I may have added the last bit. 😅
Ann was wrong but I’ll explain but I’ll explain why knocking the air out is a problem. Most people want fluffy icing. So knocking the air out would result in a denser icing that most people won’t like as much as fluffy icing.
This is the 3rd time I've seen Ann be so confidently wrong. Plus she tends to not admit when she's wrong. Starting to trust her word less and less. Imagine disagreeing with an actual scientist about chemistry.
I’ve seen this vid and a video by Helen. I also know she took a scam sponsorship a while ago and didn’t ever acknowledge it once the scam was known, but can’s remember the details. What’s the third instance you are referring to?
@@1TieDye1 It was a video about a souffle pancake recipe and that it wouldn't work. Then David Seymour made the recipe and it turned out fine. So then she doubled down and said that he is also wrong and sent her fans to bully him.
I had to laugh because you literally said in the shorts, word for word, "This works best with emulsion based buttercreams - Italian, French, German etc. (less so with American - that's not emulsion-based)" and Ann goes and uses American buttercream. Really?
She started with Swiss, so I really want to know why she switched it out for the rewhipping part. Hard to believe it was an honest mistake at that juncture especially because the whole issue is with an emulsion, and even non-scientists know, one of the most common in food is _eggs._
@klover yes, I found that part very peculiar. To me it seems that Ann intentionally did this, since a majority of her viewers probably won't understand the difference between SMBC and ABC/emulsion and non-emulsion based BCs beyond texture and taste. Very disappointed in Ann.
THere is a clear difference in color tones. After using the blender, its at least twice as intense in color. WHen you whip it again, the color gets a bit lighter
There's a really important difference, though. On a non-emulsion-based frosting, like American buttercream, the color goes from 1) the original, to 2) somewhat more intense after using the immersion blender, to 3) after whipping it back up again, back to the original color. You can see this in Sugarologie's sample at 2:22 and Ann's sample at 2:24. Note that there's basically no difference at all between the original color and the final color, and the difference in the middle color is noticeable but not shocking. This is what we'd expect to happen in a non-emulsion-based frosting like American buttercream. Which is also why it's so suspicious that Ann chose that frosting in particular to use. Because if you use an emulsion-based-frosting, like Swiss Meringue Buttercream or Sugarologie's emulsion-based "Dreamy" American buttercream, you get a totally different result. You go from 1) the original color, to 2) a significantly more intense color after using the immersion blender, to 3) after whipping it back up, a color that is less intense than in step 2 *but* still MUCH more intense than the original color. You can clearly see the difference from the original to final color at 3:04. You can see the comparison of the emulsion-based frosting results and the non-emulsion-based results in 3:09. Again, notice how different the final color in the emulsion-based frostings are (Swiss Meringue + "Dreamy" American). In contrast, notice that in the non-emulsion-based frosting (American buttercream), the original color and the final color are pretty much the same. That difference in results between the emulsion-based and the non-emulsion-based shows that something else is going on than just the amount of air.
Ann usually gets stuff right, but she isn’t immune to wrongdoing. I Just hope she apologizes for this Edit: after looking into it and seeing all the stuff people are pointing out, I guess I just never noticed, or was blissfully ignorant too the stuff she has gotten wrong over the years and just ignored. Quite a shame really.
I hope she does too. She's had plenty of opportunity in any of the comments questioning her results but it's been crickets. She's responded to the praise comments, just nothing to the questions.
@Alyss Harte I'm starting to realize that. It's pretty disappointing. Between the sketchy sponsorship video, the dark vs light baking pan video & then this one, I feel like she's cutting corners in order to create content. A far cry from what she used to be.
@@rumbleinthekitchen_Amy I unsubbed a while back for exactly these reasons. IMHO, it’s more important to have integrity and own up to your faults and failings and keep the trust of your viewers than to simply always have to be right, and I think she’s lost that along the way.
She has had egotistical behavior for awhile. It's weird how so many defend her. She might know a lot, but the thoroughness of her methods pale in comparison to this channel's, so it's all just so laughable that this situation even happened. Talk about a "yikes".
Your immersion blender hack is literally the best hack I've seen in getting the perfect color. I really appreciate the work you do, your work is fuelled by such passionate curiosity by you, i love it!!!!!
I too have noticed that Ann Reardon has been "uncharacteristic" (read: jumped the shark, lazy, apathetic, etc...) lately. Her videos are shorter, more shallow, and now as we see, throwing the wrong person under the bus! I totally support you, Sugarologie! I'm glad I'm not the only one to think Ms. Reardon is badly missing the mark and losing credibility.
She had another video not too long ago (a cake rescue) where instead of rescuing the cake she just told you how to make it from the beginning...which isn't the point of the video, nor is it overly helpful for those in a similar situation. I've slowly been noticing more and more things that are off with her channel, and it's really unfortunate. It really makes her seem less credible, imo. There are plenty of content farms to debunk, or even show us how to get their results for real. This just seems like a dig at another creator unnecessarily.
I think you're being a bit unfair to call her lazy and apathetic. At the end of the day, she's human and will get things wrong. She's not meant to be your roll model. She's meant to be an entertainer who also happens to demonstrate how to cook. Holding anyone to a high standard on TH-cam is your own fault. We don't really know her. Maybe she's got stuff going on in her life that is affecting her content creation. Maybe she's trying something different and will get things wrong in that process (this is very likely). Who knows. But to call her lazy and apathetic because she isn't meeting your high standard is just unwarranted and misguided considering her videos are just as upbeat, well made, informing, and fun as they have always been. Just because she messed up the buttercream or didn't make the cake video (referring to a comment here) to your liking does not mean she's lazy, hateful, apathetic, or disingenuous. It's clear that sugar doesn't have any issue with Ann and still enjoys her content. She messed up. Sugar explained it. Life will move on. But don't be rude just because your high standards weren't met. She's human. Not a God.
@@beefar0ni Way back in the day she had a lot more actual baking videos, the tiny kitchen, playing around with gadgets, etc and most of HTCT seems to have turned into its own content farm to go after content farms as well as few other creators that just seem to get caught in the middle of it. I miss things like the actual baking videos and the ones where she did things like go through all of the Russian flower piping tips and show everyone what they made.
This is the second video (first one Helen Rennie) where htct science has been debunked. This doesn't take away her credibility, but it does make me sit back and evaluate what people are saying on this platform
In the case against Helen, I do think they were both right for different reasons. Different situation here, where I do think Ann is objectively in the wrong.
@@aritin5259 Correct, Helen's video was a result of Helen misunderstanding what Ann was debunking, so they were essentially arguing about different things. Here, Ann didn't even do what was demonstrated in the video (using the wrong type of frosting)
@aritin the underlying issue with both cases is her methodology. In Helen Rennie's case, she changed too many variables so it would not be wise to conclude anything from the experiment and in this case, she didn't keep the buttercreams the same (i.e. wasn't testing an emulsion). So I think if she worked on her methodology she could have avoided both of these scenarios. I do think she's done a good job of everything else though, but that first video made me take a pause
I still watch her sometimes but I find Ann sus since she "debunked" that the beef and dairy industry is very bad for the environment/climate change. Her research just seemed like she didn't consider motivations or vet sources enough for me. Also she reviewed a multilevel marketing kitchen product without a good disclaimer about the predatory nature of MLMs. And Thermomix machines have burned people because of defects that are still happening, even if they aren't as commonly as the old models.
I used to really enjoy Anne’s, ‘Debunking’ series, but her video trying to, ‘debunk’ your video seemed really unnecessary. I thought the whole point of her series was to debunk the rubbish put out by content farms, not to go after good and descent creators in the baking community. It’s really a shame and quite disheartening. Please keep up your great work Sugarologie!
Ann Reardon is an interesting case. I've been watching her forever, and her consumer-focused sort of meta-TH-cam debunking videos have been pure gold. But for quite a while I've noticed this...breezy overconfidence, from both her and her husband, that has started to border on insularity and cluelessness.
That's the right word: overconfidence. I was wondering for a while what had changed in Ann's channel, and you put it on the spot! Thanks for giving me that word haha I just wish Ann would make more desserts and cakes... The endless debunking is just too much for a dessert channel... I don't mind the occasional debunk, but that's definitely not the reason why I started following her years ago.
@@AlienLiz eh debunking is a category of it's own, personally I enjoy that type of video, but it was really off putting to me how her audience non-stop praises her. if I was in her position I would be kinda squicked out the way people talked about me, and ask them to stop idolizing me. one of her top comments was "can someone put ann in charge of the internet?" and I know that's a joke, but still weird to me. not at all saying she's a bad person or should in any way be bullied, just wish people were more critical (in a polite and respectful way)
There are several paths successful TH-camrs end up on. “The King of Random” got tired of creating videos and signed on new people to host the show, thereby sharing the success and giving himself more time and joy before he tragically passed away. We have Mr Beast, and so many more who clearly are getting burned out, some take breaks. Many leave TH-cam completely but keep their videos up. Then we have Ann types who get pissy when others profit from their work. I’ll say that there’s been many times I’d rather watch a slimmed down, compilation video than to have to click through a video skipping all of the talking and noise, then repeat the same for 10 more videos. Her debunking series was decent but too many of her videos have just “proven” that no, placing a charcoal in peanut butter doesn’t turn it into crystal. Anyway I believe that underlying her Karen-ness is burn out. She should take a break, outsource content creation, or just plain do something else.
Yes! As soon as this segment came on (I was watching with my husband) I said "there's no way she's going to debunk this one because this isn't fake!" Then I watched in shock as she did. I am so glad to see this response, and I hope Ann readdresses this in a more respectful way with better science.
I say this as a viewer of you and Ann, amazing response! While watching Ann’s video, I was also left wondering if air was the sole factor in color change. Her experiment was certainly not enough to prove that, and I’m so glad you were able to show otherwise. Keep up the great work!
I think the best demonstration of color saturation, for both Anne Reardon's video and yours, would be to leave a space between the original buttercream and the imulsified one, then putting the re-whipped frosting in between them once it was made. That way, comparison between the original buttercream and the finished product is much easier
Question-would it not make more sense to rewhip the buttercream until the volume is equal to what it was prior to immersion blending, rather than whipping, blending, and rewhipping for the same amount of time each? I think that would make the comparison a bit more direct since there are lots of variables that could impact the rate of aeration. But of course, as you mentioned, there’s no doing away with outside variables completely.
I saw Ann’s video and wondered your thoughts. She is also a food scientist but I have noticed her methods lately are not as precise as I would hope. Her ‘debunking’ of dark pans vs shiny ones also sticks out because she concluded dark pans have little to do with darker results. I couldn’t agree with her conclusion on that either. Your recipes have been very good in my kitchen and I love your posts.
Her pan debunk upset me, because it went directly against my own personal experiences. One issue I took was her pans were all sorts of different materials. If she had done even one experiment with two pans of the same material, she would find that the color made a difference
@@lrso5152 "...against my own personal experiences.." Mine, too-- and I was a professional baker. There is a reason some pans are dark and others are not! I am all for ridding the world of useless folklore, but I will continue to bake my cookies on shiny sheets and and my meatloaf in a dark metal pan.
Ann was wrong here but to be fair, she never concluded dark pans have little to do with browning. She was not trying to disprove that dark baking pans brown better than light ones. She wanted to show that there are a lot of factors to browning, not just the color of pans. She deliberately chose pans with different materials and thicknesses. The issue with Ben’s short was that it claimed that a dark pan would brown better than a light pan. But they did not qualify this with an “of the same material.” Ann was trying to show that there are many other factors that go into pans, which makes what the short is saying bad advice. Especially because it’s hard to find pans of the same material and thickness in different colors. In fact, in Ann’s video you can see that the stainless steel pan and the aluminum pan were both light colored but the stainless did not brown well, while the aluminum one browned really well.
When I saw Anne Reardon calling YOU out, of all channels, I was shocked. I would consider you both peers, approaching recipes and baking from a scientific perspective. I expected her to do the due diligence of reaching out to you before making her video. I'm sad and disappointed to see someone who I would expect to be in praise of your work be so off the mark
when watching ann's video i didn't take it as being placed with a content farm/5 minutes crafts type thing, just a claim that may or may not work (like the video's thumbnail is about water exploding in the microwave, that's not a hack more than an interesting fact). it's interesting to see both opinions for why something might happen the way it does, especially as someone with no knowledge about food science.
I'm not sure if i'm missing something, so here is how i underatand it. Knocking the air out (regardless of buttercream type) will make the frosting darker. If you whip it back up again it will not retain its original volume and therefore the colour will not go back to being as light as it has before? However, it seems that the darker colour does not stay the same once air has been added back in either. The video says the difference is marginal but there is still a difference. So are they not both correct? Knocking the air out will make it darker but, even after adding air back in it will never achieve the same light colour as before but it will get lighter?
Your correct. In candy making to make white or light colors they pull the molten sugar to introduce air bubbles those air bubbles lighten the color. That's what Anne was saying. And even in her it showed that the rewhipped icing while lighter then the blended icing was darking then the orginal but only marginally so
Free class in the science of colored frosting! Thank you so much. So glad I found your channel. I find this so interesting and thank you for showing us the options and methods. This home baker is very much appreciative 😊
I'm glad you made a response. I love your work and its intellectual and scientific rigor. I find it fascinating and delightful. I hope Ann sees this. I would think it would be right up her alley--debunking a debunking video. But who knows.
This makes me sad because I noticed your video in the thumbnail of her video and was looking forward to watching it because I assumed yours would be one of the videos she says does work. I was pretty shocked to find out that wasn’t the case. We support you, Adriana! Hopefully you have gained a few new subs from this at least.
i've been watching your videos for a while, and i didn't know Ann made a video about you. i'm currently studying food science and i think your response video is really interesting. i look forward to more of your videos as i think the depth you go into is really great. you are clearly a very dedicated and knowledgeable scientist!
Great video. Helen Rennie also made a video debunking one of Ann's debunking videos recently. It was about cookie/baking sheets. Makes you question all of Ann's debunkings.
@@monochr0m that fat not only doesn’t matter when it comes to whipping egg whites but that you can in fact pour oil into them without changing the outcome. False to an absurd degree, backed up by one of Ragusea’s videos on whipping egg whites (can’t remember which one). I haven’t trusted a word out of her mouth since. I don’t love Adam Ragusea but I at least trust his methodology
When I watched her video , I immediately knew she was not comparing them accurately, but I have a background in science, so I recognized that her answer would be wrong beca she was not comparing the two experiments accurately. As she said in that video, we have to stop taking every we find online as gospel… with that being said, even people trying to do good make mistakes.
I've been watching htct for a while now and even before this video, I had started feeling the slight shift in her content or rather her demeanor. The way she interacted and responded to the Food Theory Milk/Calcium episode left a bad aftertaste in my mouth cuz matpat had been nothing but respectful towards her while she continued being borderline condescending and even seemed to deliberately pick and choose points of his research to maintain that he was wrong. Since then, I made it a point to watch the source video for any of the "creator videos" she features. Glad I did that cuz that's how I found this channel and now I'm subscribed. I love it when I'm given scientific explanations to what I'm watching, especially when I'm shown all the different experiments and their outcomes that lead to the final product + it's also generally very very satisfying to watch the frosting/buttercream (the shorts especially) Thank you
Matpat is one of the most inaccurate foodtubers out here, did you see pink sauce vs her pink sauce video, nice try at cherry pink you should buy a farm
@@resolecca if you read my comment, I said nothing about him being correct. It was about their attitudes towards each other. He could be the single most misinformed channel but that does not mean you should be condescending when he's being nothing but respectful. I don't even follow his channel and only knew of the drama from Ann's comment section. And that interaction was not it.
If airation is not the main factor here, would you please consider trying this experiment without whipping the buttercream at all in the first place? I am really curious of the results! Is it even possible to completely rule out the air component from an emulsion buttercream? If it's not then in my opinion it is a component in an experiment and it must affect the result in some way.
I’ve repeatedly been seeing Ann get things wrong and convince the masses, like her saying color doesn’t matter for baking pans or getting oil in egg whites doesn’t inhibit their ability to whip up. She’s never debunked someone I was subscribed too, tho, until I saw her recent video. I’m glad you’re standing up for yourself! People have to understand that her word is not gospel
To be fair, although Ann is wrong with the icing video, she never said pan color doesn’t matter when it comes to browning. Ann was not trying to disprove that dark baking pans brown better than light ones. She wanted to show that there are a lot of factors to browning, not just the color of pans. She deliberately chose pans with different materials and thicknesses. The issue with Ben’s short was that it claimed that a dark pan would brown better than a light pan. But they did not qualify this with an “of the same material.” Ann was trying to show that there are many other factors that go into pans, which makes what the short is saying bad advice. Especially because it’s hard to find pans of the same material and thickness in different colors. In fact, in Ann’s video you can see that the stainless steel pan and the aluminum pan were both light colored but the stainless did not brown well, while the aluminum one browned really well.
Everyone’s saying there’s drama. But Ann has reached out and conducted an experiment together with this channel 😂. Please don’t take this as drama, we all like the do experiments here and share our findings, please watch both sides of the full story.
I stand corrected. I thought she used the same buttercream you did for the color and volume changes, but apparently she did not. Kinda crappy, to be honest. How can you be mad at the recipe when you didn't follow it to the T? Also the amount of volume loss in Ann's video is suspicious compared to your much thorough and bigger sample size. I think I might have to reconsider my opinion about Ann. It seems like her effort to do good by the community (and to stay relevant in the landscape of short-form content), she's rushing into conclusions without delving into the proper methodology to actually arrive with significant results.
If your explanation is correct, then why does it lighten at all when you re-whip? Even if you think the colour change is negligible, you can't deny it lightened at least a bit each time. What is your explanation for this?
it lightens slightly because you add air in it once again after re-whipping. Air causes large pockets inside the buttercream to form which gives a lighter appearance. Its that simple
Finally someone who debunks the debunking videos of Ann. I am not a fan of her videos that are often showing obvious fake videos or spectacular. Love your videos that are clear and scientific.
@@1TieDye1 Ann was wrong with sugarologie but to be fair, Helen misunderstood Ann’s experiment. Ann was not trying to disprove that dark baking pans brown better than light ones. She wanted to show that there are a lot of factors to browning, not just the color of pans. She deliberately chose pans with different materials and thicknesses. The issue with Ben’s short was that it claimed that a dark pan would brown better than a light pan. But they did not qualify this with an “of the same material.” Ann was trying to show that there are many other factors that go into pans, which makes what the short is saying bad advice. Especially because it’s hard to find pans of the same material and thickness in different colors. In fact, in Ann’s video you can see that the stainless steel pan and the aluminum pan were both light colored but the stainless did not brown well, while the aluminum one browned really well.
@@1TieDye1 i've never watched one of ann's videos, but i have enjoyed the thorough videos of both helen and this channel. from this video and scrolling through the comments, i have no interest in even checking out ann's stuff.
@@kubbybear5458 you have to keep in mind people are swooping in to defend because they are fans. There is not some huge outcry against her channel and she's not a bad person with ill intent...although you would think so from the same like 5 people replying to every comment with personal attacks.
I have been following Ann Readon for them very start, but I am personally not a big fan of those debunking videos. In the last one she ruined her microwave with a plastic Nutella jar. But what she failed to acknowledge is that most countries have glass Nutella jars, that wouldn’t melt in the microwave. I think the quality of those videos is definitely lacking lately.
Happy to see this mentioned. That also rubbed me the wrong way. Sure, it is possible the very same thing that happened to her could happen to sbdy living in country where Nutella is sold in plastic so it is fair to warn and show what happens w plastic jar. But she failed to adress that is not how they are sold everywhere just as the hack video failed to warn viewers that they are using glass jar, cause that is how it is sold in Europe where the original hack video was made I assume. It makes it seem like she has missed it. It still would not have worked most likely and was not a good hack, but in past she did catch stuff like this and pointed it out.
In Ireland the Nutella jars are glass, that was the first time I saw a plastic jar, also the smaller jar if Nutella can be re-used as a glass for drinking so it's really cool because there is little waste.
@@bad.samaritan I am pretty sure the hack wouldn’t have turned out well either. But she probably wouldn’t have ruined her microwave and had to buy a new one. It just came across so wasteful and badly researched. It seemed like she wanted to ruin the microwave to prove a point.
@@bad.samaritan she might not know that I've lived in 3 countries across 3 different continents I only learnt about Nutella being sold in glass jars when I went to Europe on holiday, it was a surprise it never even occurred to me, people can have oversight you know
There is that trend going around in almost every area of life lately, where ppl love to over simplify things. It might be due to the fact that simple short bursts of contetnt captivate people's attention more. But honestly, I'm here for the details, I wanna know all the nuances. I love your approach❤ keep up the amazing work you're doing!
@@bar_libraryI don't have TT for a reason. Then when YT decided to add their shorts content it filled me with a bit of anger, lol. Those platforms just don't give enough time for you to learn anything no matter the subject. My solution IS to not click. Just know we're not alone in our feelings...
i just want to say i was ecstatic when i found your content. without the level of education needed for as deep an understanding of how food works at a molecular level as yours, and the funds to try and experiment with stuff, for the longest time i thought it would be so cool if i could experiment with food like you do and record what happens to see if i can perfect my recipes. i'm just so genuinely happy i get to watch someone else do it and learn from them! all the best of luck to you
I actually used this technique to try it yesterday and it was such a visible difference, even for someone who only bakes fairly casually. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us and giving us new things to try !
I had no idea Ann made a video about you, but I am here to tell you that I absolutely adore your content and purchased your recommended immersion blender to try your technique. Keep your head up and keep making content, we love it!!
I used to like Ann Reardon's videos when she actually made desserts. Hard to believe she has to resort to attacking creators who actually create instead of making good content. Her cakes were really creative.
She made the switch up bc her baking content wasn't getting the views it used to. i think that should be allowed and its totally fine for her to do what she's doing. Its kind of a big claim to say that she is 'attacking' anyone. i think she made an mistake due to her ignorance and that's it.
@@daffo595 Being ignorant isn't a defense when more research and conversation can easily happen before a video is created. Clearly Ann didn't look at this channel thoroughly. The question to me is.. why? Did she not care? Did she not do the research herself? There's really no acceptable excuse in my mind. I think people shouldn't call others out if they can't even follow due diligence when it comes to the people they are calling out. I find that sort of content intentionally sensational and shady anyway, especially with you mentioning how she changed her channel format for views. Of course she has every right to do whatever she wants on her channel, but creating potential discourse seems like something someone much, much younger than Ann would do...
@@TheSwauzz i didnt say it was a defense? it was a response to the original person saying she's 'resort to attacking creators' which i thought was a really bad faith interpretation of what could be an ignorant mistake.
Omg your last statement on scientist inspired me so much. I'm still a student so it's hard for me yo call myself a scientist. But I felt so identified when you said that all scientist like to talk about their work and even tho I haven't put out that much knowledge into the world I love to talk about what I've discovered. Not on a soberbio kinda way (sorry I'm not a native English speaker) but on a purely passion based way ❤❤❤. You inspired me to keep investigating
Thank you for responding so eloquently! I've been following Ann's channel since she used to make amazing cakes and desserts, and was shocked to see your legitimate advice on there.
she seems to be getting a little too desperate for attention or to be "right", without actually taking time to research the things she says. she used to be a respectable creator.
I prefer her older videos where she shared baking and decor tips. Esp those complicated cake designs which she made them looked so easy with the step by step videos
Thank you for this video. The moment I saw your name on Ann Reardon's page, I knew she was full of bs. You are one of, if not the best baking channel out here. I'm quite sick of her debunking videos, I've also seen her attacking videos that are clearly satire and while there is danger in satire, she never even mentions that they are.
I just want to say thank you for making a polite and dignified response to this, rather than an angry one. It takes every act of kindness we can muster to keep this world turning, and we all know it isn't easy. I don't know much about your channel (coming into this as a How to Cook That follower) but you seem like a decent human being, and I'm curious what other tips you have to share. Here's hoping that this continues to a nice and peaceful resolution, and again, thank you! 💕
There are people in the comments saying that Ann was just saying that the hack worked for different reasons, if that was the case and there was no reason to put your content in the thumbnail of a video where the title says debunking hacks
This whole thing really kind of grossed me out (along with a couple other things I have noticed in her past videos to a lesser extent) and the fact that she hasn’t replied to anyone or made a statement or reached out to you is the proverbial “Icing on the cake”. It’s just not a great look on Anne’s part.
Ann really enjoys making a splash with these videos. While I understand not reaching out to a channel like five minute crafts I wish she would be a little more nuanced when it came to responsible channels. But I guess that wouldn’t be as good of a gotcha, huh?
This is the second time Ann has come after a real genuine creator that I'm aware of, if she has done it more than this then I'm not aware, the other instance I'm aware of is The Food Theorists. I haven't seen the video Ann made about you but I'm sorry she did that, you seem like such a nice person and I always enjoy your videos :)
Yeah after I watched Food Theory's response to Ann's video, I unsubscribed from HTCT. Matt is willing to admit when he made a mistake, Ann isn't. She's so overconfident in her own expertise she doesn't give other people's ideas/opinions a fair chance.
@@lordmysticlaw1991 it was fine when she was overconfident and condescending to these content farms that promote dangerous things to children but she is now falling into the same trap. I watched her video after this and even she used a minuscule amount of food colouring when adding it to the frosting, it’s like she was actively trying to discredit from the moment she saw it. I have also unsubscribed now because this is becoming a pattern of behaviour now. I guarantee you next she will come after sidesurf cakes
@@ColinsCity i think thats shes already talked about sideserf before, ann complimented her work, but i agree, its like she doesnt want the hack to work, all she had to do was look up the posters account and she wouldve known that the hack didnt need debunking
Your videos are so meticulously researched & you have the ability to explain the chemistry involved in baking so that it’s easy for N at home chef to understand why things work. Keep doing what you are doing 💜
I don't think Ann meant this purely as entertainment. However, I will be disappointed if she doesn't look at this video. She is a food scientist, so she should understand the scientific process.
I'm a little confused. When you explain the science of emulsion, it all makes perfect sense. But then when you showed the experiments, I see it doing exactly what Ann said; the first sample is light blue for instance, then after using the immersion blender it's darker blue, then when you re-whip it it is more or less back to light blue. So wouldn't that mean it really is all about the air molecules (knocking air in/out of it)? Edit: misspoke/spelling
At 3:06 for the buttercreams on the left, the second (blender) and third (rewhipped) swipes look similar in colour, and the change from the original is drastic, showing that air is not what caused the colour change. For the American one, you can see that the original and rewhipped look quite similar.
Glad this popped up in the recommended. Ann has made mistakes before such as those shown by Helen, it's disappointing that she hasn't responded, everyone makes mistakes and she really should clear things up. I'm not sure what dodgy sponsorship others are taking about here? I'd be interested in knowing if someone could answer.
Ann was wrong with sugarologie. But to be fair, Helen misunderstood Ann’s experiment. Ann was not trying to disprove that dark baking pans brown better than light ones. She wanted to show that there are a lot of factors to browning, not just the color of pans. She deliberately chose pans with different materials and thicknesses. The issue with Ben’s short was that it claimed that a dark pan would brown better than a light pan. But they did not qualify this with an “of the same material.” Ann was trying to show that there are many other factors that go into pans, which makes what the short is saying bad advice. Especially because it’s hard to find pans of the same material and thickness in different colors. In fact, in Ann’s video you can see that the stainless steel pan and the aluminum pan were both light colored but the stainless did not brown well, while the aluminum one browned really well. Helen herself admitted her error in the comments.
I see it as a good thing. It means that she is being impartial and not considering who made the video, this way she is not influenced by knowing who made it.
@@lemonadewithstrawberries it's the same reason some teachers prefer to correct assignments without looking at the name of the student so they know they are not going to be influenced by their opinion on the particular student, that way they can give a fair shot to every student. It's just a basic practice in a lot of fields of education, science and workplace. If this method stands on its own, it should not matter if it's from 5minutescraft or a "rispectable" channel.
@@dariosilvestri473 That’s _generally_ true, especially in the evaluation of what something is at face value, but it would make her a little less incredulous in the reporting aspect at the end of writing/filming. It’s worthwhile to address who something comes from, even professionals, since it can be a note to not always trust or be wary of little mix-ups. Things get lost in translation. People can say something wrong or be taught some verbiage wrong and never know to correct it. Little things affect us all, and it takes years of education and experience to understand the vast realm of cooking and baking. You’ll probably never know everything. Even knowing the theory and numbers, you can still fail to temper chocolate or make the correct stage of caramelised sugar.
I’m grateful to the TH-cam algorithm - it can be useful. I’m also a self taught baker and I love science as well (no PhD yet). I appreciate the scientific approach of your videos
I’m glad you had this back and forth though because I had only seen your short immersion blender video of the technique and didn’t realize that this was emulsion-buttercream specific. I had it in my mind that it would work on any of them. So thank you for addressing this!
This is just a fantastic video. I normally really enjoy HTCT videos but there have been a few times when it seems Ann seems to superficially research something before making a definitive judgement. The other instance that really got on my nerves was her conclusion that removing gluten from one’s diet would result in an increased consumption of fat, and that gluten has no negative affects on the body. Gluten is, in fact, incredibly inflammatory and can weaken the digestive system over time. It’s not quite as neutral as HTCT painted it, and her tone seemed to imply that anyone who cut gluten from their diet without a celiac diagnosis was foolish. I was happy to see your content in her video, especially because it was requested by a fan. I assumed she would praise your method and delight in the scientific explanation you provided. When she failed to do so, I very quickly realized which channel I trusted more and began to rethink a lot of the truths I’ve accepted from her videos. Thank you for this response! I can only hope she continues the conversation on her channel
Hello! I would love to know where you found your source for gluten being inflammatory! I am concerned about that, as I may be misinformation. I believe that there are no harmful effects from consuming gluten because it is so prevalent, but I would really love to know whether that is something I could learn more about
I am loving the discourse happening in this comment section. No scandals, no controversy, no fighting. I’ve scrolled for several minutes and have read many insightful, neutral, or positive comments. Goes to show how wonderful of a community you (both) have created. I’ve never seen such calm in a TH-cam comment section. This video showed up in my recommended so you just earned a new subscriber.
I stumbled upon this video after seeing Ann Reardon on a Sugarcologie thumbnail, and I had to watch both response and HTCT video. I honestly don't see anything THAT wrong in both videos. The main issue here is that Ann Reardon said Sugarcologie's "hack" was not working based on how Sugarcologie explained, but rather by a surface-level observation that she is "knocking out all the air" from the frosting. Based on Sugarcologie's research, there seem to be other factors that play in the whipping, emulsion, and pigmentation of dyes in buttercream. But the thing is, is that both channels have different audiences and purposes, therefore, different advice is being given that makes them both correct. Remember that Ann Reardon's main concern is to debunk "hacks," not necessarily get into the finer details of the chemistry behind everything; hacks should be something easy and practical. Sugarcologie's channel is dedicated to explaining how and why these phenomena occur. So out of technicality, Sugarcologie's response can most likely "debunk" Ann Reardon's "debunk video.' But in practicality, I would just follow Ann Reardon's advice by skipping the immersion blender and adding a tad bit more dye to your buttercream; most likely you wouldn't find yourself in a situation where you ran out of dye. Also, I definitely wouldn't want an extra dish to clean. I think it's just better to melt the buttercream and re-whip it. So in conclusion, do I think Ann Reardon should have done more research before absolutely dismissing Sugarcologie's explanation? Yes. But is Ann Reardon wrong about air deflation? Not entirely. Both are respectable bakers and food scientists in their own rights. And as humans, we make slip-ups from time to time. I think the real criminal here is the person who asked Ann Reardon "Does this work?" Because, yes it does.
Ann is wrong though. The colour change ISNT due to the air being knocked out. If you learn all the facts and decide you can’t be bothered that’s one thing, but saying you might not want do this because it’s just air being knocked out is factually incorrect. You can rewhip it and it stays dark. You can use this to get a saturated, voluminous frosting. Ann’s claims that it is the air being knocked out or that you cannot rewhip meringue frosting are both completely wrong.
Yes, Ann is wrong to claim that 100% color saturation comes from knocking all the air out. I didn't dispute that. Although, Sugarcologie did say that air deflation does play a small role in color saturation, just not as significant compared to Ann Reardon's demonstration (perhaps different room temperature, humidity, butterfat content, etc.). But both have proven and admitted that air deflation does occur and it can be rewhipped back and give a lighter shade, but it will not achieve its original peak volume and original shade. What I'm most curious about are the data sets from the six samples. I know she mentioned it was difficult to keep all variables the same, but it still makes me wonder: were the beakers re-weighted after putting in the immersion blender (to record loss of sample); is there significance between dye mass and final volume; did temperature have any significance toward emulsion and/or color saturation? In my eyes, despite the recorded dye-to-frosting mass ratio and volume change loss (although this shouldn't be trusted since not all frosting was scraped down and we don't have microscopic vision), the color saturation all look different to me. I could be partially color blind 😅, or that each beaker was shown in different light angles. So, it's difficult for me to see the differences in color in each data set.
@@josephceleste5540 it does reach pretty much the original volume when rewhipped, and the shade change is almost imperceptible compared to the just blended frosting. Sugarologie showed this in the Google doc in her pinned comment. Sugarologie mentioned that she weighed at every stage to minimise and keep track of volume loss.
Just commenting to say thanks for being so transparent and clear in your responding--this is exactly how science ought to be, and you're really demonstrating that epistemological process perfectly.
I mean, she melted down both samples (and so releasing the air) to show if there was decrease in voulune due to deflating the cream, and that doesn't seems a great way to do it because they both and up being deflated so she can't measure what she wanted to measure.
I've seen two videos now relating to a statement by Ann which feels like a lot lol, considering how long she's been on the debunk train. I fear what speculations my brain could come up with, even so I enjoyed this deeper dive into the frostings!
So happy you reacted to the ‘debunking’ video. Just like you, I also enjoy watching Ann Reardon’s videos. That’s why I thought it was so strange and unlike her to tar you with the same brush as 5 minutes crafts and the likes. I appreciate your extensive research and clear explanations about anything cakes.
There is a pretty clear flaw with your experiment here. It takes a lot more than 30 seconds to rewhip frosting that has been blended the way you have. Of course it will be darker, because it isn't fully whipped back to the volume it should be at. So neither of you are "wrong" or misunderstanding how this whole thing works, it is simply the fact both of you are using different steps. It is interesting honestly.
Yeah that’s a good point - my last set of results I rewhipped until it went back to initial volume to show the effects of aeration + homogenization to correct for that. But agreed there’s definitely technique differences across the board 👍🏼
@@Sugarologie And that could all it is in the end. The smallest thing in baking could make a difference. How cold something is, how long something is dine. As far as I can tell, you both are right and it comes down to the smallest of details. But until someome tests all variants, we won't know. But I do appreciate how you do things.
when I saw your immersion blender hack in anns video i was like nah this isnt right . i wish ann had properly researched what was happening instead of just giving her audience the wrong information :(
When you were using the emulsion blender, it did look like the buttercream almost disappeared. The volume loss does look like a lot. But I failed science so😅
In the bowls on the original video she actually removed half the buttercream beforehand so she could compare. At the end of this video you can see there’s only a small change
Great response. I was surprised to see your clip pop up in Ann's video because I know you're so methodical and scientific. I love her videos but I hope she apologizes for the mistake.
As a baker myself, you've explained everything in this video extremely well, your videos have helped so many including myself learn more of the chemistry involved in baking
I remembered this today as I finally had an opportunity to use your immersion blender technique - and the difference b/w before and after is so dramatic and immediate that whatever small loss in volume happens is... irrelevant to me lmao. Just want to say that this has absolutely changed my life for the better and I appreciate all of your videos (I also used a slightly modified version of your American dreamy buttercream! your work has improved my baking, and my enjoyment of baking, so much).
I was suprised to see your clip in that video, which is why I immediately messaged you on Instagram! I love Ann but i think she didn't follow the recipe properly. I'll give her the benefit of doubt and guess she might have just glanced through your video since she clearly only shows part of your video! I'm sure she didn't do her due diligence. Hope she responds to your video, reaches out to you & hope you both work together someday ! 🤞🤞 I have been following your channel from the start - and have made several of your cake recipes that I absolutely love so i know for a fact you ain't like one of those content farms! 💖 Keep doing what you are doing! Love you & your channel!
Hi! Self-taught and constantly improving baker here. Your videos have taught me quite a bit about the composition and process of frostings. I watch Anne occasionally, and I had no clue this came from one of her videos. As a viewer who may be less versed in food science, I understand your point, and I find your response sensible through your experiment.
I was surprised when she "debunked" your video. It's not the first time I've been disappointed with what Ann has said about something. She's forgotten that she's allowed to say "I don't know"
lol, yes! I have an old KitchenAid (mentioned because mine is old enough to have metal gears, I've heard people blame the newer models' nylon gears) and I _still_ have occasional overheating issues with SMBC! I have been known to drape an icepack over my old lady's "back" between batches in an effort to get her to stop moaning. 😅 Although honestly the real answer is to get a commercial mixer if you're making mass amounts on a regular basis. (restaurant supply companies often have refurbished used ones) They're BEASTS. The ones at my pastry school program did _kilos_ of SMBC and cake batter and whatever else at a time, back to back to back to back with only a break to empty and wash out the bowls, in a constantly hot kitchen, for years and years.
@bsidethebox glad I'm not the only one who uses the ice pack trick. My daughter sprained her knee a few months ago and was using my ice packs but didn't put them back in the freezer. I needed to make a huge batch of buttercream and it wasn't pretty. 😂
I watch you both, and never thought I would see your vids having to be debunked as you are both science based. Im going to have to give this one to you! And I made same comment to HTCT!
ahh incredible video showing how its related to the emulsion properties- I love science (I have a degree in chemical engineering) and id never seen your channel before- This popped up in my recommended (I did watch the htct vid) - there have been a handful of experiments ann has done on her channel that were a bit flawed in terms of her methodology. I didnt even know the different types of buttercreams and that some were emulsions while others werent so I totally didnt notice that that one was wrong- I really appreciate the way you went about this and made a genuinely educational video explaining and showing how it works :)
Omg she is put you in her video? Maan..I love Ann, I watch all her stuff, but this is disappointing But from the comments it gets worse, as she refuses to even acknowledge the situation. That's...Disappointing
5/30/23
Final thoughts:
TLDR:
(3 weeks ago)Ann: writes me an email saying: I can’t get the air back into my buttercream after using the immersion blender. So that must mean that the air loss is causing the color saturation.
Me: Ok, sure, let’s try to figure this out together. I write back email saying: ok, here’s how you whip air back to the initial volume, and also, notice how the color remains dark. In addition to air loss, there must be other things going on. Here is all my data for you to see.
*crickets for 3 weeks* (at this point, I’m thinking she’s busy or just not interested)
Ann: Releases a new video without emailing me back or considering suggestions in the email exchange, and performs a similar technique to her first video, and says cannot rewhip back to the initial volume, therefore it must be air.
Me: …?
---
Ok, what’s strange to me is that I’ve acknowledged aeration even before these response videos, which are annotated in all my previous videos. I believe it fits into a bigger picture of what’s going on, yet Ann hasn’t once acknowledged homogenization, emulsions, or even topics that both of us know exist, such as diffusion or concentration gradients.
I’m trying here. Anyone who watches this channel knows I aim to be as transparent as possible. I’m meeting her at every step here to explain what I think is going on. I am definitely interested in seeing how everything fits together in the bigger picture of things.
However, it’s pretty clear that we disagree on the fundamental properties of what’s going on. I'm not sure how to move forward in a productive manner with those who refuse to acknowledge that anything exists outside of what they think.
So with that, I will continue to do my work here.
Many of you have commented or messaged me, and please know that although I can’t answer everything, I am grateful for your ideas and suggestions. More baking and frosting videos to come!
-
FAQ:
Why would you go through all this, rewhipping, ice bath, etc. Why not just add more dye?
I don’t really suggest doing that at all. This all began when Ann suggested that loss of air was the only reason that the color was saturated. So, I tried to help by showing that yes, you can rewhip it back and the color remains dark.
---
05/26/23
OK, I've tried to help out as much as possible, and I'm not sure there's much else I can assist with but I’ll try.
Additionally, I’ve been trying to answer some interesting questions in the comments below but there’s a bit to cover so apologies if I don’t get to yours. Please remember I’m just one person here and because some commenters can’t behave themselves with their language 😔I’ve had to turn up stricter filters for commenting.
So, I'm hoping this will help those interested in some background reasoning or using this technique.
Most of this was mentioned in my previous email (written out below). And it was a long and detailed email - but the gist of it was that I could whip air back into the frosting, maintaining most of the color and how to achieve the same results.
And, so regarding the last video, yes, I agree about experiments needing to be repeatable. That being said, it's been hard to keep up since new variables are constantly being introduced.
*These are a few differences I've observed in the latest video:*
1. This time Italian meringue buttercream was made - that's an emulsion-based buttercream too, but, again, for consistency, I use Swiss meringue buttercream for everything across the board.
2. The gel color is added directly to the meringue, the water-based component of buttercreams. This was not done in the previous experiments, and doing this will result in an initial darker buttercream than if gel food coloring is added to the final buttercream.
*In other words, the starting point, from which all the rest of the changes are compared, is darker and makes color changes less apparent in the final comparison. This may skew the final picture and favor the contribution of aeration plays vs. homogenization.* (I explain a little more about aeration vs. homogenization below in the email)
*The amount and type of color pigment, in addition to when you add it, and how you add it in, is what we're measuring and therefore is very important when making comparisons such as in these experiments.*
4. The final volume cannot be achieved due to the reasons outlined in my letter below. An ice water bath is needed to aerate the butterfat post-immersion blender. Aeration is from butterfat in meringue-based buttercreams, not the meringue component, which largely deflates when added to the buttercream.
I'm happy to share all the data and images: including weight and percent loss, and a picture indicating where I used a stand mixer in experiment #3.
For reference, if you wish to see the contents of my email, it's in a comment of mine further down. (I have maxed out characters for this particular comment it seems.)
If adding the gel to the meringue directly already gets you to a darker starting color, then isn’t it better to just do that and save the hassle of the immersion blending and rewhipping over an ice bath?
I feel like Ann’s whole point in all this was simply to highlight the fact that there is a tradeoff between color and texture. You can clearly tell that the darker buttercreams in your video do not have the same consistency as the pre-blending version. That’s fine, but you should be more upfront about the fact that the end product from your method is going to be a different one than what folks normally think of as a standard Swiss buttercream
@@mattmb5157 yeah so I thought that too and tested that in a video a couple years ago - turns out the stand mixer isn’t so good at homogenizing, so the color is darker than if you were to add it at the end, but still lighter than using the immersion blender.
And yeah, I definitely state textural differences in all my vids for bakers who are interested in trying it.
As a cake baker, I am usually making one base Swiss meringue buttercream from which I take smaller amounts to colour - so colouring my base would not be helpful. I have tried both the immersion blender method and heating small amounts to add back in and both work well. When creating a cake, I will use my base buttercream (which i might fllavour after removing the amount I need for colours) and fill and crumbcoat my cakes. The small amounts I colour will be my final coat or used as decor (ie piping) and as such the amount of deflation doesn't concern me as much as using massive amounts of colouring.
I feel that Adriana has fully explained her methods and shouldn't need to justify herself anymore. I am saddened that this hasn't been put to rest already. Debunk things that will hurt people or cause damage - no need to carry on trying to debunk something that hurts no one and is actually used by many people in the baking world.
Putting the scientific aspect of it aside, and assuming it works, what's the point of it? Is there a reason why someone might want to go through all of the work of emulsion blending the frosting, then re-whipping it, only for it to not have the right texture and density, when they could have just added a few more drops of food colouring at the beginning and saved themselves all of that work? This is a genuine question btw. I'm not an avid baker, so there could be something I'm just not getting here.
@@thelemurofmadagascar9183 I doubt anyone would want to go through all that honestly… actually I don’t ever suggest doing that.
The thing is that she said that rewhipping back to the initial volume wasn’t possible, and therefore the lack of aeration was the only cause for the color change.
So I thought I’d help out but explaining how and why to rewhip it back to the initial volume while maintaining a majority of the color. The homogenization of color is effective enough to withstand rewhipping.
Most bakers I know don’t bother with re-whipping though, and are happy with using the frosting post immersion blender. 😊
I have been receiving tags and comments on every platform to add my reply to this video, so here it is.
I, like others, have watched her videos for a while now. I am fully supportive of those videos targeted at the mindless content mills that make it difficult for small food content creators (like myself) to put out trustworthy and high value content.
The lack of research on my video, however, was a bit uncharacteristic of her channel.
As my channel grows, I try to be as helpful and approachable as possible, even though it can be difficult. If you follow on Instagram, you may have seen my Q&A sessions or my comment threads where I'm pretty active, or maybe we've had a conversation in my DMs.
Along those lines, if there were any questions from her or her team, I would have been more than happy to help out or answer.
💗🧁
"The lack of research on my video, however, was a bit uncharacteristic of her channel."
You say that, and yet this has happened before. You might be interested in her video "Should You Stop Drinking MILK?", and MatPat's response to it, "Food Theory: Should I DELETE This Video?"
chk chk *BOOM*
GET HER ASS GIRL
@Losty while I agree with you on this video, Anne wasn't wrong on food theories video about milk and have you seen Anne's video in response to food theories pink sauce video she annihilated his "theory" on the pink sauce
@@resolecca actually she was. His response explained all the issues with her video coming at him. She took numerous things out of context and this has habitually been a habit of hers. She didn’t do her research then and didn’t do it now. You can be a fan of someone and still understand they are human and can be wrong.
@Tiffytatortots 1 I do understand that I never said I agreed with everything Ann says, that Helen Rinnie's video about Anne and cooking pans, i agreed with Helen that Anne is in the wrong in that, Anne is in the wrong bout this video, but Anne wasn't wrong about food theories video on diary infact food theories is one of the most inaccurate of any other of the science foodtubers, and like I said Anne utterly annihilate food theories on his pink sauce video
**Here is an update with those who are interested**
Ann has retested the buttercream saturation experiments and has since written me an email. I'm not going to post the exact email unless I get permission to do so, but the purpose of it was to ask if I was able to re-whip the buttercream back to its initial volume after using the immersion blender.
She's observed that:
1) Swiss meringue buttercream is airy from the foam in the meringue and is difficult to re-whip once deflated with the immersion blender; and
2) since it cannot be re-whipped back to the starting volume, the air is the significant factor causing color saturation.
Below you can see my response trying to help:
--------
Hi Ann,
Sure, so to answer your question, yes, I could re-whip your Swiss meringue buttercream (SMBC) up to nearly the initial starting volume with a minimal loss in color saturation. I achieved this using my logic that color saturation is due to the emulsive properties of the frosting.
I'll share my dataset and pictures with results with you here:
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LMoefL079gksJQn9nSZh-dPhGDwyeXJwHdsLmcOH72I/edit?usp=sharing
Before I explain how I did this, one issue needs sorting out: the source of aeration in the frosting. You mention that Swiss meringue buttercream is "a very airy frosting, so it is hard to re-whip the air (gained from making a foam with the egg whites) back into it."
Yes, so I agree that foaming occurs during the meringue whipping step.
But because the foam is aqueous, it is largely destabilized/deflated by adding butterfat. The lipids interfere with the egg white protein's ability to encase large air bubbles. Maybe some bubbles at the microscale still exist, but I think, for the most part, the larger ones get deflated. The deflation is also probably due to the sheer amount of butterfat we have to add, and this is competing for the air-water interface that was once occupied by the egg white protein matrix.
And you can see this happen in real-time; once the butter is added when making SMBC, it deflates the meringue, causing a significant loss in total volume.
After adding all the butter (given that the meringue and butter temperatures are between 65-75F/18-23C), we often see a runny or perhaps "curdled" texture. After mixing the fat and aqueous phases, the emulsion forms, the buttercream thickens, and perhaps, there is a slight increase in volume.
In my experience, at this point on, the majority of aeration in these types of buttercreams is from gas trapped in the butterfat, not meringue. That's not to say that the meringue doesn't offer other textural and space-filling (bulk) advantages, which I believe to be from the extended and denatured egg white proteins. But as far as aeration, I think it is localized primarily within the continuous phase of the water-in-oil emulsion, that is, in the butterfat, not meringue.
Now, using this logic, I could re-whip your Swiss meringue buttercream closely back to its initial volume. It's hard to tell with a beaker instead of a graduated cylinder, but my guess is that it's within 5% of the initial volume, just by gauging visually. This is while maintaining the weight within an average of 3% of the initial frosting.
When using the immersion blender with the buttercream, the emulsion is homogenized due to the shearing effects but is also heated, which melts some of the butterfat. And we can see this; the resulting frosting post-immersion blending is a little glossier and more liquid-like. Typically, I measure the temperature and observe average increases around 5 degrees F post-immersion blender.
And because the aeration of the buttercream occurs primarily within the butterfat, we can control the aeration by adjusting the temperature of the butterfat. Lipids hold air more efficiently when solid, so we need to chill the frosting slightly.
Now there are a couple of methods to go about this if the goal is to achieve the initial volume via re-whipping. You can wait (i.e., leave at room temperature) until the buttercream lowers its temperature (I've found that between 60-70F/15-21C is ideal) and then attempt to re-whip. Or you can do what I do: put the frosting bowl atop an ice water bath. Then mixing the entire time, the buttercream will aerate because the fat is now more solid and can retain the air bubbles.
The tricky thing is that I think most people (including myself at one point) will want to put the whole thing in the fridge to chill. But that sets the emulsion - such that if you solidify the butterfats entirely and attempt to agitate it, you'll destroy the emulsion. In that case, you'll likely have to redo the steps (immersion blend, etc.) Most bakers have experienced this when trying to re-whip buttercream that has been chilled; it will look broken or split until the butter reaches the proper temperature to re-emulsify the meringue.
Through working with buttercreams, I've realized it's all about balance. In this case, re-whipping to add air to the continuous phase of the emulsion is dependent on getting the butterfat to the right plasticity (temperature) such that the emulsion is stabilized while maintaining enough solid structure to trap gas.
➡And as far as the color, it did lighten a little after whipping. We can use the color to understand each mechanism's impact: aeration vs. homogenization. The important thing here is to look at the color change. The difference between before the immersion blender vs. after the immersion blender is greater than the difference between after the immersion blender vs. re-whipping.
➡To me, this indicates a more significant effect due to homogenization, which allows the dispersion of pigment into the aqueous phase inside the continuous phase of butter. That there is still saturation post-re-whipping even back to its initial volume shows that the pigment has diffused enough such that added aeration has a minimal effect.
Now to address anything else that I may not have covered:
You ask, "Do you use a stand mixer or hand mixer? I am wondering if that may account for the difference?"
I've used both. The stand mixer got the frosting back up to the initial volume much quicker than my hand mixer. I performed this using Sample 3, so you can compare it to samples 1 and 2.
You also state, "After whipping in a stand mixer for 5 minutes, it was back up to 600mL. But still not all the way up to 700mL But it was already nearly back to the pale color. Indicating that the air is making it paler or lack air, making it darker."
So I covered how to address the loss of volume by chilling above, but other thoughts regarding the paler color. I don't have the concentration of my color pigment, and I don't know if that's available. This will affect the overall saturation of my frosting vs. yours. I'm using Americolor in Royal Blue at a 0.1% w/w in my frosting.
Also, maybe the fat content of your butter is different than mine, or your mixer is better at aeration. If, overall, the concentration of pigment is not enough to permeate the emulsion such that a color change is strong, it may be that the aeration will override any color changes.
Lastly, some other notes:
- Volumetric measurements are not very quantitative, particularly with something as solid as frosting. That's why I give weight measurements for every step to ensure all the frosting is accounted for. You can see in my datasheet I track the weight at every step.
- Along those lines, I try to limit container switching to reduce sample loss and remove as much frosting as possible from the immersion blender and mixer attachments. Again, this is why I was weighing.
- One topic we haven't even attempted to explore is the process of diffusion of the pigment across concentration gradients.
Idk why i’m so into this but I am, so thank you for posting follow-up!
I always find it funny when people heart their own comment.
@@louiscyphre2267 We all need a lil self love lol
Alright, I read this entire comment, watched the video. While I agree emulsion has something to do with the result... you don't once in your video mention to put the frosting in an ice bath to we-whip it. And honestly, the results are not worth the hassle at that point. Ill just add a few more drops of food dye.
@@summerrocks2013 So the point isn't to use an ice bath - rewhipping was never anything I suggested until it was used as an argument to try to say that my hypothesis was invalid. But if you are having trouble rewhipping (for whatever reason) I explain exactly how to do it and why it works.
I was really disappointed that Ann included you in her video. Lumping a real creator in with a bunch of content farm crap goes against everything she has been complaining about for years. I then got even more frustrated by her refusal to respond to *any* of the responses questioning her. People were kind and respectful but got no response. I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, so I'm trying not to judge, but I lost a lot of respect for Ann over this. It was lazy and felt like Ann had become what she hates - someone who resorted to shortcuts in a rush to create content for content sake. Either way, she owes you an apology.
Thanks again for the work that you do. This hack was 100% how I manged to get macaron fillings that matched the shells I had made for a rainbow display. They were bright and beautiful and tasted great. And your ADBC is a game changer!
Thanks Amy 💗 Ah and that's so smart to use it for macaron fillings - it's the perfect texture to offset the drier and crispy shells...brilliant
Well put
Considering I know Sugarlogie's demonstrated method works first hand, I wonder how many others she's just lumped in and attempted to railroad with halfassery/intentional misdirection.
Same, was really sad she included sugarologie, she(sugar) always shows us the process and the science behind it (my nerdy brain loves that). and im also with phreak is it the first time? dont know, and honnestly it really sucks
I havent tried yet sugaralogie's recipes but i really want, usually i find lots of things too sweet so i need to find a tasty alternative!
@^-.-^ Cutie I also find that most desserts are too sweet for me. But sites like this one, Helen Rennie's & Erin Jeane McDowell's spots on Food52 have given me the confidence to play around with recipes to find things that work for my family's pallet. Now I even get compliments from people use don't usually like desserts. Give the American Dreamy Buttercream a try! It's really good.
Its that 'PhD in Biochem/Molecular Bio' coming out. bless. Wait it would actually be really cool if Ann corrected herself bc the whole point of her debunking series was to take apart misinformation in food making videos, which she herself is not immune too.
I got a big miffed when she said that pan color didn't make a difference, when, if your materials are the same, it 100% make a difference with color and cook times.
I also wish she does more recipe videos. She’s gone from that to just straight debunking videos. Which I mean, I suppose her debunking videos does do better but still, I miss her new possible recipes 😅
@@lrso5152 Okay but didn’t she use pans made of the same materials but different colors and found no difference? Sooooooo
@@WiggyWamWam No, iirc she didn’t make an effort to get pans of the same weights/thicknesses. Others who’ve experimented have demonstrated that all else being equal, a darker pan _does_ brown a cake more, which is in line with scientific theory (oven heat = infrared light, and black absorbs more light so gets hotter).
But tbf her point was that the materials and thicknesses of pans are a bigger contributing factor than the colour anyway. Basically, darker pans get hotter _in theory_ but in practise we shouldn’t rely on this “tip” alone.
@@renownedbandanawearer1345 Ann was partially correct, the blended and re-whipped cream was a lighter tone than just blended/emulsified cream (as well, there’s more air in it). So yes she was correct about that part, (I guess sugarlogie just didn’t explain that the cream will lose some volume after being blended and perhaps that’s what made ann make her assumption?) idk. But Ann wasn’t fully correct :/
It is pretty sad that she used a non-emulsion based buttercream when the whole point was to debunk something about emulsion buttercreams
I would like to know if the immersion blender trick works on a big bowl of buttercream?
I only ever see minimal amounts being darkened…
@@cakerbaker9965 it does just do it long enough
How is American buttercream not an emulsion tho?
@@WiggyWamWam Plain American buttercream is mostly butter and sugar with some amount of milk to lighten the density, thus not an emulsion since it's a low water based cream. Swiss meringue butter cream is an emulsion because it's combining eggs, which are heavy in water content and butter is mostly fat or oil, which separate from water.
American butter cream does not need to go through an emulsion process to keep it light and fluffy. Nothing separates.
Swiss meringue does because the water from the eggs wants to separate from the butter. So it needs to be emulsified in order to keep it all together to be nice and fluffy.
The first thing she does in this video is explain how butter is the emulsion in question. It’s about how the food dye spreads in the *butter* and how that by extension affects the buttercream.
Right after she explains that butter is an emulsion she explains why she’s debunking with plain american. Since Anne claimed the only difference was air the non-emulsion buttercream should be exactly the same colour before immersion blending and after re-whipping. It clearly isn’t! Because the butter in the cream is still an emulsion that gets more evenly dyed when immersion blending :)
It took me a bit to understand too since I’m not a scientist, but she did 100% explain it in the video. Hope I could clear things up a bit more
Am I blind? The rewhipped buttercream is way lighter than the blended buttercream and looks identical to the initial whipped buttercream. It’d be helpful to see the rewhipped version next to the original color.
I was shocked to see you pop up in the htct debunking video. As someone who loves baking and works in the science field, your videos have been an absolute delight. The science of baking and cake decorating is quite underdeveloped/ not adressed much.
I think Ann does a great job with debunking dangerous hacks, but it seems even she is not immune to the pitfalls of keeping up with the entertainment machine. I really hope she adresses this.
So far she has never addressed mistakes in the past so I doubt it.
This is so disappointing for me. I love HTCT, and even though I'm fairly new to Sugarologie, I love her work as well. I always saw them both as reliable sources for information. Everyone makes mistakes, we're all human. I just hope Ann admits to her misinformation, and hey, maybe we'll get a HTCT/ Sugarologie collab? One could wish... 🤞
She’s really great at directing a bunch of hate at people who did nothing wrong
@@JessInTheCityy she's unfortunately done a back-handed double down in the pinned comment. Not even acknowledging the bigger issue people had of her action of going after another content creator with an unfair shake, and is boiling it down to agree to disagree over the frosting, when the frosting wasn't the real issue. Sugar has very graciously accepted her half-assed apology.
@@s.colins2050 everyone can make mistakes, but I was hoping for a more authentic apology or explanation from Ann, but instead she just doubled down with a basic unapologetic apology on this video instead of holding herself accountable to save face. All in all it’s just a little disappointing, especially since I enjoyed them both. But I’ll never support bigger platforms pushing down smaller ones for no good reason other than to bully and then being disingenuous about it
Hi Sugarologie,
Firstly I apologies if you have been bombarded with comments - that was not my intention and I know it can be overwhelming. As I stated in the video that you are responding to - this DOES work - so we agree on that. But where we disagree is the reasoning for it happening. I understand emulsions, but still believe the air volume loss is the major factor causing this colour change and this video did not change my mind. We will have to agree to disagree on this one. At the end of the day it is just frosting - so it's not a big deal.
To answer your question in this video about why American buttercream was chosen for the rewhipping test, and why I did not use the Italian meringue buttercream that I had already used to show the volume loss in the first experiment ... The reason is that you can not just rewhip the same amount of air back into the other types of frosting. Other butter creams, like the Italian Meringue Buttercream ones are made by whipping egg whites to a foam with heated sugar syrup. They are particularly light and airy and once you've knocked the air out of them you can't just rewhip them with beaters to get the air back in - so you will not see it go pale again and you will not see the volume return to what it was. This is demonstrated in this response video, they did not go pale again - but unfortunately you did not measure the volumes after rewhipping, so may not have realised that the full amount of air was not added back into them.
To answer your other question on the percentage volume loss - The amount the frosting volume decreases is dependant on the initial amount of air in the buttercream. And how fluffy and airy the frosting is will be be effected by the recipe and technique that you use to make the frosting. The more fluffy the frosting, the more volume loss you will get. You had a lower volume loss which would indicate that your recipe / technique made a frosting with less air in it than the recipe that I use.
At the end of the day it is just frosting, so blend it and make it denser and darker if you want to use that technique or leave it light and fluffy and use. more colour it's personal choice. 😀
Ann disagreeing with an actual food scientist about her own hack after recreating it without even using the same ingredients is so disheartening. I used to love watching ann debunk content farms putting out dangerous hacks. It's not fun to see her try to discredit actual content creators, bakers, & food scientists with shoddy experimentation and poorly done research.
You couldn't even finish your comment to Sugarologie. Which, again, you keep saying her channel name *WRONG*. This is not a good look for you. If you cannot even manage to say Sugarologie's channel name correctly *once* in the 3 times you've said it in a comment, how do you actually expect us to believe you do your due diligence? The science is right there in front of you in both videos, and you continue to ignore it because it's clearly easier/less time consuming for you.
How can you expect people to believe YOUR scientific explanations for things on your channel, in your book, when you cannot even respect the very *name* of another scientist who's been harmed by your negligence?
@@heyguysits-nicole Reading your comment shows that you have not watched both videos. I did use the same frosting to test the hack. There is no way to use the same recipe because the recipe was not given.
@@missgirl3410 thanks for letting me know, not sure what happened there, only half the comment posted. weird.
@@HowToCookThat The frosting recipes are on her website just like your recipes are on your website. Hope this helps!!
Furthermore, what is the purpose of this "debunking?" So that bakers know that imursion blending will result in less buttercream? The process still results in a deeper color, and it still "works." And knocking the air out is actually kind of helpful, because you’ll end up with fewer air pockets when you're trying to get a smooth finish on the side of a cake.
Ann was wrong, and she’s making a habit out of her juggernaut channel misrepresenting creators with fewer subs. Tactfully pointing out her errors is the point.
@@katvtay Perhaps you misunderstood, but I believe the OP's statements are like a continuation of this video in their head and is asking what is even the purpose of Ann's "debunking", and so on. I imagine they thought it was nonsensical to "debunk" something that Ann herself said works. Then they went on to state that knocking the air out of frosting can be beneficial, so it shouldn't even be seen as a downside. Basically, they are saying nothing was "debunked" at all even in Ann's own terrible recreation using a non-emulsion based frosting. ... I may have added the last bit. 😅
Ann was wrong but I’ll explain but I’ll explain why knocking the air out is a problem. Most people want fluffy icing. So knocking the air out would result in a denser icing that most people won’t like as much as fluffy icing.
This is the 3rd time I've seen Ann be so confidently wrong. Plus she tends to not admit when she's wrong. Starting to trust her word less and less. Imagine disagreeing with an actual scientist about chemistry.
This!!
I’ve seen this vid and a video by Helen. I also know she took a scam sponsorship a while ago and didn’t ever acknowledge it once the scam was known, but can’s remember the details. What’s the third instance you are referring to?
@@1TieDye1 It was a video about a souffle pancake recipe and that it wouldn't work. Then David Seymour made the recipe and it turned out fine. So then she doubled down and said that he is also wrong and sent her fans to bully him.
I an not on either side, I don't mind both women but Ann has a masters in Food science & Nutrition.
Typically people that go on someone else’s video to prove them wrong have something to hide themselves.
I had to laugh because you literally said in the shorts, word for word, "This works best with emulsion based buttercreams - Italian, French, German etc. (less so with American - that's not emulsion-based)" and Ann goes and uses American buttercream. Really?
She started with Swiss, so I really want to know why she switched it out for the rewhipping part. Hard to believe it was an honest mistake at that juncture especially because the whole issue is with an emulsion, and even non-scientists know, one of the most common in food is _eggs._
@klover yes, I found that part very peculiar. To me it seems that Ann intentionally did this, since a majority of her viewers probably won't understand the difference between SMBC and ABC/emulsion and non-emulsion based BCs beyond texture and taste. Very disappointed in Ann.
THere is a clear difference in color tones. After using the blender, its at least twice as intense in color. WHen you whip it again, the color gets a bit lighter
There's a really important difference, though.
On a non-emulsion-based frosting, like American buttercream, the color goes from 1) the original, to
2) somewhat more intense after using the immersion blender, to
3) after whipping it back up again, back to the original color.
You can see this in Sugarologie's sample at 2:22 and Ann's sample at 2:24. Note that there's basically no difference at all between the original color and the final color, and the difference in the middle color is noticeable but not shocking.
This is what we'd expect to happen in a non-emulsion-based frosting like American buttercream. Which is also why it's so suspicious that Ann chose that frosting in particular to use.
Because if you use an emulsion-based-frosting, like Swiss Meringue Buttercream or Sugarologie's emulsion-based "Dreamy" American buttercream, you get a totally different result.
You go from
1) the original color, to
2) a significantly more intense color after using the immersion blender, to
3) after whipping it back up, a color that is less intense than in step 2 *but* still MUCH more intense than the original color.
You can clearly see the difference from the original to final color at 3:04.
You can see the comparison of the emulsion-based frosting results and the non-emulsion-based results in 3:09.
Again, notice how different the final color in the emulsion-based frostings are (Swiss Meringue + "Dreamy" American).
In contrast, notice that in the non-emulsion-based frosting (American buttercream), the original color and the final color are pretty much the same.
That difference in results between the emulsion-based and the non-emulsion-based shows that something else is going on than just the amount of air.
Ann usually gets stuff right, but she isn’t immune to wrongdoing. I Just hope she apologizes for this
Edit: after looking into it and seeing all the stuff people are pointing out, I guess I just never noticed, or was blissfully ignorant too the stuff she has gotten wrong over the years and just ignored. Quite a shame really.
I hope she does too. She's had plenty of opportunity in any of the comments questioning her results but it's been crickets. She's responded to the praise comments, just nothing to the questions.
She never does. When this has happened before, she’s just doubled down.
@Alyss Harte I'm starting to realize that. It's pretty disappointing. Between the sketchy sponsorship video, the dark vs light baking pan video & then this one, I feel like she's cutting corners in order to create content. A far cry from what she used to be.
@@rumbleinthekitchen_Amy I unsubbed a while back for exactly these reasons. IMHO, it’s more important to have integrity and own up to your faults and failings and keep the trust of your viewers than to simply always have to be right, and I think she’s lost that along the way.
She has had egotistical behavior for awhile. It's weird how so many defend her. She might know a lot, but the thoroughness of her methods pale in comparison to this channel's, so it's all just so laughable that this situation even happened. Talk about a "yikes".
6:11 “or aaaask…?!” made me giggle 💀
Your immersion blender hack is literally the best hack I've seen in getting the perfect color. I really appreciate the work you do, your work is fuelled by such passionate curiosity by you, i love it!!!!!
I too have noticed that Ann Reardon has been "uncharacteristic" (read: jumped the shark, lazy, apathetic, etc...) lately. Her videos are shorter, more shallow, and now as we see, throwing the wrong person under the bus! I totally support you, Sugarologie! I'm glad I'm not the only one to think Ms. Reardon is badly missing the mark and losing credibility.
She had another video not too long ago (a cake rescue) where instead of rescuing the cake she just told you how to make it from the beginning...which isn't the point of the video, nor is it overly helpful for those in a similar situation. I've slowly been noticing more and more things that are off with her channel, and it's really unfortunate. It really makes her seem less credible, imo. There are plenty of content farms to debunk, or even show us how to get their results for real. This just seems like a dig at another creator unnecessarily.
@@Izzy-cp8yt Yes!! I think I recall that video and I thought the same, about how it's just showing the cooking and not much more!!
me too
I think you're being a bit unfair to call her lazy and apathetic. At the end of the day, she's human and will get things wrong. She's not meant to be your roll model. She's meant to be an entertainer who also happens to demonstrate how to cook. Holding anyone to a high standard on TH-cam is your own fault. We don't really know her. Maybe she's got stuff going on in her life that is affecting her content creation. Maybe she's trying something different and will get things wrong in that process (this is very likely). Who knows. But to call her lazy and apathetic because she isn't meeting your high standard is just unwarranted and misguided considering her videos are just as upbeat, well made, informing, and fun as they have always been. Just because she messed up the buttercream or didn't make the cake video (referring to a comment here) to your liking does not mean she's lazy, hateful, apathetic, or disingenuous. It's clear that sugar doesn't have any issue with Ann and still enjoys her content. She messed up. Sugar explained it. Life will move on. But don't be rude just because your high standards weren't met. She's human. Not a God.
@@beefar0ni Way back in the day she had a lot more actual baking videos, the tiny kitchen, playing around with gadgets, etc and most of HTCT seems to have turned into its own content farm to go after content farms as well as few other creators that just seem to get caught in the middle of it. I miss things like the actual baking videos and the ones where she did things like go through all of the Russian flower piping tips and show everyone what they made.
This is the second video (first one Helen Rennie) where htct science has been debunked. This doesn't take away her credibility, but it does make me sit back and evaluate what people are saying on this platform
It actually does take a way a lot of her credibility to be spreading misinformation and using unscientific methods
In the case against Helen, I do think they were both right for different reasons. Different situation here, where I do think Ann is objectively in the wrong.
she wasn't wrong in that helen rennie vid, you niggas just don't know basic thermodynamics
@@aritin5259 Correct, Helen's video was a result of Helen misunderstanding what Ann was debunking, so they were essentially arguing about different things. Here, Ann didn't even do what was demonstrated in the video (using the wrong type of frosting)
@aritin the underlying issue with both cases is her methodology. In Helen Rennie's case, she changed too many variables so it would not be wise to conclude anything from the experiment and in this case, she didn't keep the buttercreams the same (i.e. wasn't testing an emulsion). So I think if she worked on her methodology she could have avoided both of these scenarios. I do think she's done a good job of everything else though, but that first video made me take a pause
I still watch her sometimes but I find Ann sus since she "debunked" that the beef and dairy industry is very bad for the environment/climate change. Her research just seemed like she didn't consider motivations or vet sources enough for me.
Also she reviewed a multilevel marketing kitchen product without a good disclaimer about the predatory nature of MLMs. And Thermomix machines have burned people because of defects that are still happening, even if they aren't as commonly as the old models.
I used to really enjoy Anne’s, ‘Debunking’ series, but her video trying to, ‘debunk’ your video seemed really unnecessary. I thought the whole point of her series was to debunk the rubbish put out by content farms, not to go after good and descent creators in the baking community. It’s really a shame and quite disheartening.
Please keep up your great work Sugarologie!
I agree 100%. There's enough dangerous rubbish online to debunk, she can leave the content creators who know what they're talking about alone.
wouldn't be the first time she knocked a good creator and didn't address it on her channel
Ann Reardon is an interesting case. I've been watching her forever, and her consumer-focused sort of meta-TH-cam debunking videos have been pure gold. But for quite a while I've noticed this...breezy overconfidence, from both her and her husband, that has started to border on insularity and cluelessness.
That's the right word: overconfidence. I was wondering for a while what had changed in Ann's channel, and you put it on the spot! Thanks for giving me that word haha
I just wish Ann would make more desserts and cakes... The endless debunking is just too much for a dessert channel... I don't mind the occasional debunk, but that's definitely not the reason why I started following her years ago.
Its the fame gone to the head thing. the Creator Ego.
I miss when she just made recipe videos honestly. They were always so relaxing and comforting.
@@AlienLiz eh debunking is a category of it's own, personally I enjoy that type of video, but it was really off putting to me how her audience non-stop praises her. if I was in her position I would be kinda squicked out the way people talked about me, and ask them to stop idolizing me. one of her top comments was "can someone put ann in charge of the internet?" and I know that's a joke, but still weird to me.
not at all saying she's a bad person or should in any way be bullied, just wish people were more critical (in a polite and respectful way)
There are several paths successful TH-camrs end up on. “The King of Random” got tired of creating videos and signed on new people to host the show, thereby sharing the success and giving himself more time and joy before he tragically passed away.
We have Mr Beast, and so many more who clearly are getting burned out, some take breaks.
Many leave TH-cam completely but keep their videos up.
Then we have Ann types who get pissy when others profit from their work. I’ll say that there’s been many times I’d rather watch a slimmed down, compilation video than to have to click through a video skipping all of the talking and noise, then repeat the same for 10 more videos. Her debunking series was decent but too many of her videos have just “proven” that no, placing a charcoal in peanut butter doesn’t turn it into crystal. Anyway I believe that underlying her Karen-ness is burn out. She should take a break, outsource content creation, or just plain do something else.
I was surprised to see you in a htct video, especially when it's clear you don't mess around with scientific data!
My thoughts exactly!
yep!
Yes! As soon as this segment came on (I was watching with my husband) I said "there's no way she's going to debunk this one because this isn't fake!" Then I watched in shock as she did. I am so glad to see this response, and I hope Ann readdresses this in a more respectful way with better science.
Ann definitely dropped the ball on this one. It's ok to make a mistake, it's how you learn and grow from it
I say this as a viewer of you and Ann, amazing response! While watching Ann’s video, I was also left wondering if air was the sole factor in color change. Her experiment was certainly not enough to prove that, and I’m so glad you were able to show otherwise.
Keep up the great work!
And usually she does try harder to replicate the results when "debunking" something. She gives five minute crafts hacks more of a chance!
I think the best demonstration of color saturation, for both Anne Reardon's video and yours, would be to leave a space between the original buttercream and the imulsified one, then putting the re-whipped frosting in between them once it was made. That way, comparison between the original buttercream and the finished product is much easier
Question-would it not make more sense to rewhip the buttercream until the volume is equal to what it was prior to immersion blending, rather than whipping, blending, and rewhipping for the same amount of time each? I think that would make the comparison a bit more direct since there are lots of variables that could impact the rate of aeration. But of course, as you mentioned, there’s no doing away with outside variables completely.
I saw Ann’s video and wondered your thoughts. She is also a food scientist but I have noticed her methods lately are not as precise as I would hope. Her ‘debunking’ of dark pans vs shiny ones also sticks out because she concluded dark pans have little to do with darker results. I couldn’t agree with her conclusion on that either.
Your recipes have been very good in my kitchen and I love your posts.
Her pan debunk upset me, because it went directly against my own personal experiences. One issue I took was her pans were all sorts of different materials. If she had done even one experiment with two pans of the same material, she would find that the color made a difference
@@lrso5152 "...against my own personal experiences.." Mine, too-- and I was a professional baker. There is a reason some pans are dark and others are not! I am all for ridding the world of useless folklore, but I will continue to bake my cookies on shiny sheets and and my meatloaf in a dark metal pan.
Didn’t America’s test kitchen like a decade ago test and determine that pan color indeed makes a difference?
Ann was wrong here but to be fair, she never concluded dark pans have little to do with browning.
She was not trying to disprove that dark baking pans brown better than light ones. She wanted to show that there are a lot of factors to browning, not just the color of pans. She deliberately chose pans with different materials and thicknesses.
The issue with Ben’s short was that it claimed that a dark pan would brown better than a light pan. But they did not qualify this with an “of the same material.” Ann was trying to show that there are many other factors that go into pans, which makes what the short is saying bad advice. Especially because it’s hard to find pans of the same material and thickness in different colors.
In fact, in Ann’s video you can see that the stainless steel pan and the aluminum pan were both light colored but the stainless did not brown well, while the aluminum one browned really well.
Nutrition science is mostly wack 😅
When I saw Anne Reardon calling YOU out, of all channels, I was shocked. I would consider you both peers, approaching recipes and baking from a scientific perspective. I expected her to do the due diligence of reaching out to you before making her video. I'm sad and disappointed to see someone who I would expect to be in praise of your work be so off the mark
when watching ann's video i didn't take it as being placed with a content farm/5 minutes crafts type thing, just a claim that may or may not work (like the video's thumbnail is about water exploding in the microwave, that's not a hack more than an interesting fact). it's interesting to see both opinions for why something might happen the way it does, especially as someone with no knowledge about food science.
I'm not sure if i'm missing something, so here is how i underatand it. Knocking the air out (regardless of buttercream type) will make the frosting darker. If you whip it back up again it will not retain its original volume and therefore the colour will not go back to being as light as it has before?
However, it seems that the darker colour does not stay the same once air has been added back in either. The video says the difference is marginal but there is still a difference.
So are they not both correct? Knocking the air out will make it darker but, even after adding air back in it will never achieve the same light colour as before but it will get lighter?
Your correct. In candy making to make white or light colors they pull the molten sugar to introduce air bubbles those air bubbles lighten the color. That's what Anne was saying. And even in her it showed that the rewhipped icing while lighter then the blended icing was darking then the orginal but only marginally so
In all honesty I love your videos so much cause you include the science behind and it becomes so interesting. Thanks for the videos
Free class in the science of colored frosting! Thank you so much. So glad I found your channel. I find this so interesting and thank you for showing us the options and methods. This home baker is very much appreciative 😊
I'm glad you made a response. I love your work and its intellectual and scientific rigor. I find it fascinating and delightful.
I hope Ann sees this. I would think it would be right up her alley--debunking a debunking video. But who knows.
I had to go watch the other video first for more context but this is a cool response and I like the way you broke it down.
This makes me sad because I noticed your video in the thumbnail of her video and was looking forward to watching it because I assumed yours would be one of the videos she says does work. I was pretty shocked to find out that wasn’t the case. We support you, Adriana! Hopefully you have gained a few new subs from this at least.
i've been watching your videos for a while, and i didn't know Ann made a video about you. i'm currently studying food science and i think your response video is really interesting. i look forward to more of your videos as i think the depth you go into is really great.
you are clearly a very dedicated and knowledgeable scientist!
Great video. Helen Rennie also made a video debunking one of Ann's debunking videos recently. It was about cookie/baking sheets. Makes you question all of Ann's debunkings.
Adam Ragusea also (indirectly) debunked what she claimed about oil and whipping egg whites
@@MinaF99 I love Adam. Not everyone’s cup of tea, but he’s definitely my go to for home cooking.
@@MinaF99 What did Ann say?
@@monochr0m that fat not only doesn’t matter when it comes to whipping egg whites but that you can in fact pour oil into them without changing the outcome. False to an absurd degree, backed up by one of Ragusea’s videos on whipping egg whites (can’t remember which one). I haven’t trusted a word out of her mouth since. I don’t love Adam Ragusea but I at least trust his methodology
@@MinaF99 Thanks! Yeah that is absurd.
It's obvious that the "rewhipping" barely added any air and volume back, hence it still being darker. Measure the volume.
When I watched her video , I immediately knew she was not comparing them accurately, but I have a background in science, so I recognized that her answer would be wrong beca she was not comparing the two experiments accurately. As she said in that video, we have to stop taking every we find online as gospel… with that being said, even people trying to do good make mistakes.
I've been watching htct for a while now and even before this video, I had started feeling the slight shift in her content or rather her demeanor.
The way she interacted and responded to the Food Theory Milk/Calcium episode left a bad aftertaste in my mouth cuz matpat had been nothing but respectful towards her while she continued being borderline condescending and even seemed to deliberately pick and choose points of his research to maintain that he was wrong.
Since then, I made it a point to watch the source video for any of the "creator videos" she features. Glad I did that cuz that's how I found this channel and now I'm subscribed.
I love it when I'm given scientific explanations to what I'm watching, especially when I'm shown all the different experiments and their outcomes that lead to the final product + it's also generally very very satisfying to watch the frosting/buttercream (the shorts especially)
Thank you
Matpat is one of the most inaccurate foodtubers out here, did you see pink sauce vs her pink sauce video, nice try at cherry pink you should buy a farm
@@resolecca if you read my comment, I said nothing about him being correct. It was about their attitudes towards each other. He could be the single most misinformed channel but that does not mean you should be condescending when he's being nothing but respectful. I don't even follow his channel and only knew of the drama from Ann's comment section. And that interaction was not it.
If airation is not the main factor here, would you please consider trying this experiment without whipping the buttercream at all in the first place? I am really curious of the results! Is it even possible to completely rule out the air component from an emulsion buttercream? If it's not then in my opinion it is a component in an experiment and it must affect the result in some way.
I’ve repeatedly been seeing Ann get things wrong and convince the masses, like her saying color doesn’t matter for baking pans or getting oil in egg whites doesn’t inhibit their ability to whip up. She’s never debunked someone I was subscribed too, tho, until I saw her recent video. I’m glad you’re standing up for yourself! People have to understand that her word is not gospel
One of the benefits of unsubbing to her channel is I won’t have to see a bunch of lemmings cape for her in the comments. It’s revolting.
To be fair, although Ann is wrong with the icing video, she never said pan color doesn’t matter when it comes to browning.
Ann was not trying to disprove that dark baking pans brown better than light ones. She wanted to show that there are a lot of factors to browning, not just the color of pans. She deliberately chose pans with different materials and thicknesses.
The issue with Ben’s short was that it claimed that a dark pan would brown better than a light pan. But they did not qualify this with an “of the same material.” Ann was trying to show that there are many other factors that go into pans, which makes what the short is saying bad advice. Especially because it’s hard to find pans of the same material and thickness in different colors.
In fact, in Ann’s video you can see that the stainless steel pan and the aluminum pan were both light colored but the stainless did not brown well, while the aluminum one browned really well.
Everyone’s saying there’s drama. But Ann has reached out and conducted an experiment together with this channel 😂. Please don’t take this as drama, we all like the do experiments here and share our findings, please watch both sides of the full story.
I stand corrected. I thought she used the same buttercream you did for the color and volume changes, but apparently she did not. Kinda crappy, to be honest. How can you be mad at the recipe when you didn't follow it to the T?
Also the amount of volume loss in Ann's video is suspicious compared to your much thorough and bigger sample size.
I think I might have to reconsider my opinion about Ann. It seems like her effort to do good by the community (and to stay relevant in the landscape of short-form content), she's rushing into conclusions without delving into the proper methodology to actually arrive with significant results.
If your explanation is correct, then why does it lighten at all when you re-whip? Even if you think the colour change is negligible, you can't deny it lightened at least a bit each time. What is your explanation for this?
it lightens slightly because you add air in it once again after re-whipping. Air causes large pockets inside the buttercream to form which gives a lighter appearance. Its that simple
It did upset me when she “debunked” you, because she clearly didn’t even know who you are, or the fact you 1000% know what you’re talking about!
Finally someone who debunks the debunking videos of Ann. I am not a fan of her videos that are often showing obvious fake videos or spectacular. Love your videos that are clear and scientific.
Helen Rennie did a debunking of Ann recently too. Also a great vid
@@1TieDye1 Ann was wrong with sugarologie but to be fair, Helen misunderstood Ann’s experiment. Ann was not trying to disprove that dark baking pans brown better than light ones. She wanted to show that there are a lot of factors to browning, not just the color of pans. She deliberately chose pans with different materials and thicknesses.
The issue with Ben’s short was that it claimed that a dark pan would brown better than a light pan. But they did not qualify this with an “of the same material.” Ann was trying to show that there are many other factors that go into pans, which makes what the short is saying bad advice. Especially because it’s hard to find pans of the same material and thickness in different colors.
In fact, in Ann’s video you can see that the stainless steel pan and the aluminum pan were both light colored but the stainless did not brown well, while the aluminum one browned really well.
@@1TieDye1 i've never watched one of ann's videos, but i have enjoyed the thorough videos of both helen and this channel.
from this video and scrolling through the comments, i have no interest in even checking out ann's stuff.
@@kubbybear5458 then you have no right to comment do you
@@kubbybear5458 you have to keep in mind people are swooping in to defend because they are fans. There is not some huge outcry against her channel and she's not a bad person with ill intent...although you would think so from the same like 5 people replying to every comment with personal attacks.
I have been following Ann Readon for them very start, but I am personally not a big fan of those debunking videos. In the last one she ruined her microwave with a plastic Nutella jar. But what she failed to acknowledge is that most countries have glass Nutella jars, that wouldn’t melt in the microwave. I think the quality of those videos is definitely lacking lately.
Here in the US, they are plastic.
Happy to see this mentioned. That also rubbed me the wrong way. Sure, it is possible the very same thing that happened to her could happen to sbdy living in country where Nutella is sold in plastic so it is fair to warn and show what happens w plastic jar. But she failed to adress that is not how they are sold everywhere just as the hack video failed to warn viewers that they are using glass jar, cause that is how it is sold in Europe where the original hack video was made I assume. It makes it seem like she has missed it.
It still would not have worked most likely and was not a good hack, but in past she did catch stuff like this and pointed it out.
In Ireland the Nutella jars are glass, that was the first time I saw a plastic jar, also the smaller jar if Nutella can be re-used as a glass for drinking so it's really cool because there is little waste.
@@bad.samaritan I am pretty sure the hack wouldn’t have turned out well either. But she probably wouldn’t have ruined her microwave and had to buy a new one. It just came across so wasteful and badly researched. It seemed like she wanted to ruin the microwave to prove a point.
@@bad.samaritan she might not know that I've lived in 3 countries across 3 different continents I only learnt about Nutella being sold in glass jars when I went to Europe on holiday, it was a surprise it never even occurred to me, people can have oversight you know
You put so much work into doing all these tests - just incredible.
I love your content and find it so valuable. 💜
I legit didn't even know what was going on, so I clicked for drama and was rewarded with the scientific method~ such a professional response
There is that trend going around in almost every area of life lately, where ppl love to over simplify things. It might be due to the fact that simple short bursts of contetnt captivate people's attention more. But honestly, I'm here for the details, I wanna know all the nuances. I love your approach❤ keep up the amazing work you're doing!
Very much agree, it’s extremely frustrating. I’m glad others have noticed also.
The solution is to boycott all shorts and ticktock.
Ok not really. But I do hate shorts because they’re so info lite.
@@bar_libraryI don't have TT for a reason. Then when YT decided to add their shorts content it filled me with a bit of anger, lol. Those platforms just don't give enough time for you to learn anything no matter the subject. My solution IS to not click. Just know we're not alone in our feelings...
i just want to say i was ecstatic when i found your content. without the level of education needed for as deep an understanding of how food works at a molecular level as yours, and the funds to try and experiment with stuff, for the longest time i thought it would be so cool if i could experiment with food like you do and record what happens to see if i can perfect my recipes. i'm just so genuinely happy i get to watch someone else do it and learn from them! all the best of luck to you
I actually used this technique to try it yesterday and it was such a visible difference, even for someone who only bakes fairly casually. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us and giving us new things to try !
I had no idea Ann made a video about you, but I am here to tell you that I absolutely adore your content and purchased your recommended immersion blender to try your technique. Keep your head up and keep making content, we love it!!
I used to like Ann Reardon's videos when she actually made desserts. Hard to believe she has to resort to attacking creators who actually create instead of making good content. Her cakes were really creative.
Same here. Nowadays it's only debunking and nothing else. Which is sad, her desserts and cakes were so cool to watch!
I loved old HTCT. I rarely watch her content anymore bc I don’t have a tiktok so I don’t really ever see the stuff that she’s reacting to.
She made the switch up bc her baking content wasn't getting the views it used to. i think that should be allowed and its totally fine for her to do what she's doing. Its kind of a big claim to say that she is 'attacking' anyone. i think she made an mistake due to her ignorance and that's it.
@@daffo595 Being ignorant isn't a defense when more research and conversation can easily happen before a video is created. Clearly Ann didn't look at this channel thoroughly. The question to me is.. why? Did she not care? Did she not do the research herself? There's really no acceptable excuse in my mind. I think people shouldn't call others out if they can't even follow due diligence when it comes to the people they are calling out. I find that sort of content intentionally sensational and shady anyway, especially with you mentioning how she changed her channel format for views. Of course she has every right to do whatever she wants on her channel, but creating potential discourse seems like something someone much, much younger than Ann would do...
@@TheSwauzz i didnt say it was a defense? it was a response to the original person saying she's 'resort to attacking creators' which i thought was a really bad faith interpretation of what could be an ignorant mistake.
Omg your last statement on scientist inspired me so much. I'm still a student so it's hard for me yo call myself a scientist. But I felt so identified when you said that all scientist like to talk about their work and even tho I haven't put out that much knowledge into the world I love to talk about what I've discovered. Not on a soberbio kinda way (sorry I'm not a native English speaker) but on a purely passion based way ❤❤❤. You inspired me to keep investigating
You’re only re-whipping for 30 seconds which is not long enough to get the air back into it that it previously had
Thank you for responding so eloquently! I've been following Ann's channel since she used to make amazing cakes and desserts, and was shocked to see your legitimate advice on there.
Anne has some weird takes recently.
she seems to be getting a little too desperate for attention or to be "right", without actually taking time to research the things she says. she used to be a respectable creator.
I prefer her older videos where she shared baking and decor tips. Esp those complicated cake designs which she made them looked so easy with the step by step videos
@Concrete its just odd that she never evolved her content and instead is trying to tear down other creators in the name of her "debunking" brand
Thank you for this video. The moment I saw your name on Ann Reardon's page, I knew she was full of bs. You are one of, if not the best baking channel out here.
I'm quite sick of her debunking videos, I've also seen her attacking videos that are clearly satire and while there is danger in satire, she never even mentions that they are.
Also doesnt she say she used swiss buttercream for the test in the video but her example is american buttercream???? What is going on there ann????
I just want to say thank you for making a polite and dignified response to this, rather than an angry one. It takes every act of kindness we can muster to keep this world turning, and we all know it isn't easy. I don't know much about your channel (coming into this as a How to Cook That follower) but you seem like a decent human being, and I'm curious what other tips you have to share. Here's hoping that this continues to a nice and peaceful resolution, and again, thank you! 💕
There are people in the comments saying that Ann was just saying that the hack worked for different reasons, if that was the case and there was no reason to put your content in the thumbnail of a video where the title says debunking hacks
Ann was still wrong though. It works for the reasons sugarologie describes.
@@roanc3709 oh yeah, definitely.
This whole thing really kind of grossed me out (along with a couple other things I have noticed in her past videos to a lesser extent) and the fact that she hasn’t replied to anyone or made a statement or reached out to you is the proverbial “Icing on the cake”. It’s just not a great look on Anne’s part.
I don't know what's going on with the other persons content about you but i love how you explained everything! Great video
Ann really enjoys making a splash with these videos. While I understand not reaching out to a channel like five minute crafts I wish she would be a little more nuanced when it came to responsible channels. But I guess that wouldn’t be as good of a gotcha, huh?
This is the second time Ann has come after a real genuine creator that I'm aware of, if she has done it more than this then I'm not aware, the other instance I'm aware of is The Food Theorists. I haven't seen the video Ann made about you but I'm sorry she did that, you seem like such a nice person and I always enjoy your videos :)
Yeah after I watched Food Theory's response to Ann's video, I unsubscribed from HTCT. Matt is willing to admit when he made a mistake, Ann isn't. She's so overconfident in her own expertise she doesn't give other people's ideas/opinions a fair chance.
@@lordmysticlaw1991 it was fine when she was overconfident and condescending to these content farms that promote dangerous things to children but she is now falling into the same trap. I watched her video after this and even she used a minuscule amount of food colouring when adding it to the frosting, it’s like she was actively trying to discredit from the moment she saw it. I have also unsubscribed now because this is becoming a pattern of behaviour now. I guarantee you next she will come after sidesurf cakes
@@ColinsCity Same also unsubscribing especially since she isn’t addressing the issue and is continuing as if nothing happened.
@@ColinsCity i think thats shes already talked about sideserf before, ann complimented her work, but i agree, its like she doesnt want the hack to work, all she had to do was look up the posters account and she wouldve known that the hack didnt need debunking
Your videos are so meticulously researched & you have the ability to explain the chemistry involved in baking so that it’s easy for N at home chef to understand why things work. Keep doing what you are doing 💜
I don't think Ann meant this purely as entertainment. However, I will be disappointed if she doesn't look at this video. She is a food scientist, so she should understand the scientific process.
I'm a little confused. When you explain the science of emulsion, it all makes perfect sense. But then when you showed the experiments, I see it doing exactly what Ann said; the first sample is light blue for instance, then after using the immersion blender it's darker blue, then when you re-whip it it is more or less back to light blue. So wouldn't that mean it really is all about the air molecules (knocking air in/out of it)?
Edit: misspoke/spelling
At 3:06 for the buttercreams on the left, the second (blender) and third (rewhipped) swipes look similar in colour, and the change from the original is drastic, showing that air is not what caused the colour change. For the American one, you can see that the original and rewhipped look quite similar.
Glad this popped up in the recommended. Ann has made mistakes before such as those shown by Helen, it's disappointing that she hasn't responded, everyone makes mistakes and she really should clear things up. I'm not sure what dodgy sponsorship others are taking about here? I'd be interested in knowing if someone could answer.
I believe it was established titles.
Ann was wrong with sugarologie. But to be fair, Helen misunderstood Ann’s experiment. Ann was not trying to disprove that dark baking pans brown better than light ones. She wanted to show that there are a lot of factors to browning, not just the color of pans. She deliberately chose pans with different materials and thicknesses.
The issue with Ben’s short was that it claimed that a dark pan would brown better than a light pan. But they did not qualify this with an “of the same material.” Ann was trying to show that there are many other factors that go into pans, which makes what the short is saying bad advice. Especially because it’s hard to find pans of the same material and thickness in different colors.
In fact, in Ann’s video you can see that the stainless steel pan and the aluminum pan were both light colored but the stainless did not brown well, while the aluminum one browned really well.
Helen herself admitted her error in the comments.
It’s sad that the first step of her videos is not googling the creator. In another universe, I could see a really amazing collab between you guys.
I see it as a good thing. It means that she is being impartial and not considering who made the video, this way she is not influenced by knowing who made it.
@dario silvestri, how is that a positive? That's not taking all of the information into account.
@@lemonadewithstrawberries it's the same reason some teachers prefer to correct assignments without looking at the name of the student so they know they are not going to be influenced by their opinion on the particular student, that way they can give a fair shot to every student. It's just a basic practice in a lot of fields of education, science and workplace.
If this method stands on its own, it should not matter if it's from 5minutescraft or a "rispectable" channel.
youre acting like they can never talk now because there is a disagreement about FROSTING. get a grip wtf.
@@dariosilvestri473 That’s _generally_ true, especially in the evaluation of what something is at face value, but it would make her a little less incredulous in the reporting aspect at the end of writing/filming. It’s worthwhile to address who something comes from, even professionals, since it can be a note to not always trust or be wary of little mix-ups. Things get lost in translation. People can say something wrong or be taught some verbiage wrong and never know to correct it. Little things affect us all, and it takes years of education and experience to understand the vast realm of cooking and baking. You’ll probably never know everything. Even knowing the theory and numbers, you can still fail to temper chocolate or make the correct stage of caramelised sugar.
I’m grateful to the TH-cam algorithm - it can be useful. I’m also a self taught baker and I love science as well (no PhD yet). I appreciate the scientific approach of your videos
damn ! this was an amazing and super informative response. really enjoyed and appreciated it. :)
I’m glad you had this back and forth though because I had only seen your short immersion blender video of the technique and didn’t realize that this was emulsion-buttercream specific. I had it in my mind that it would work on any of them. So thank you for addressing this!
This is just a fantastic video. I normally really enjoy HTCT videos but there have been a few times when it seems Ann seems to superficially research something before making a definitive judgement. The other instance that really got on my nerves was her conclusion that removing gluten from one’s diet would result in an increased consumption of fat, and that gluten has no negative affects on the body. Gluten is, in fact, incredibly inflammatory and can weaken the digestive system over time. It’s not quite as neutral as HTCT painted it, and her tone seemed to imply that anyone who cut gluten from their diet without a celiac diagnosis was foolish.
I was happy to see your content in her video, especially because it was requested by a fan. I assumed she would praise your method and delight in the scientific explanation you provided. When she failed to do so, I very quickly realized which channel I trusted more and began to rethink a lot of the truths I’ve accepted from her videos.
Thank you for this response! I can only hope she continues the conversation on her channel
Hello! I would love to know where you found your source for gluten being inflammatory! I am concerned about that, as I may be misinformation.
I believe that there are no harmful effects from consuming gluten because it is so prevalent, but I would really love to know whether that is something I could learn more about
I am loving the discourse happening in this comment section. No scandals, no controversy, no fighting. I’ve scrolled for several minutes and have read many insightful, neutral, or positive comments. Goes to show how wonderful of a community you (both) have created. I’ve never seen such calm in a TH-cam comment section. This video showed up in my recommended so you just earned a new subscriber.
I stumbled upon this video after seeing Ann Reardon on a Sugarcologie thumbnail, and I had to watch both response and HTCT video. I honestly don't see anything THAT wrong in both videos. The main issue here is that Ann Reardon said Sugarcologie's "hack" was not working based on how Sugarcologie explained, but rather by a surface-level observation that she is "knocking out all the air" from the frosting. Based on Sugarcologie's research, there seem to be other factors that play in the whipping, emulsion, and pigmentation of dyes in buttercream. But the thing is, is that both channels have different audiences and purposes, therefore, different advice is being given that makes them both correct. Remember that Ann Reardon's main concern is to debunk "hacks," not necessarily get into the finer details of the chemistry behind everything; hacks should be something easy and practical. Sugarcologie's channel is dedicated to explaining how and why these phenomena occur. So out of technicality, Sugarcologie's response can most likely "debunk" Ann Reardon's "debunk video.' But in practicality, I would just follow Ann Reardon's advice by skipping the immersion blender and adding a tad bit more dye to your buttercream; most likely you wouldn't find yourself in a situation where you ran out of dye. Also, I definitely wouldn't want an extra dish to clean. I think it's just better to melt the buttercream and re-whip it. So in conclusion, do I think Ann Reardon should have done more research before absolutely dismissing Sugarcologie's explanation? Yes. But is Ann Reardon wrong about air deflation? Not entirely. Both are respectable bakers and food scientists in their own rights. And as humans, we make slip-ups from time to time. I think the real criminal here is the person who asked Ann Reardon "Does this work?" Because, yes it does.
Ann is wrong though. The colour change ISNT due to the air being knocked out. If you learn all the facts and decide you can’t be bothered that’s one thing, but saying you might not want do this because it’s just air being knocked out is factually incorrect. You can rewhip it and it stays dark. You can use this to get a saturated, voluminous frosting. Ann’s claims that it is the air being knocked out or that you cannot rewhip meringue frosting are both completely wrong.
Yes, Ann is wrong to claim that 100% color saturation comes from knocking all the air out. I didn't dispute that. Although, Sugarcologie did say that air deflation does play a small role in color saturation, just not as significant compared to Ann Reardon's demonstration (perhaps different room temperature, humidity, butterfat content, etc.). But both have proven and admitted that air deflation does occur and it can be rewhipped back and give a lighter shade, but it will not achieve its original peak volume and original shade.
What I'm most curious about are the data sets from the six samples. I know she mentioned it was difficult to keep all variables the same, but it still makes me wonder: were the beakers re-weighted after putting in the immersion blender (to record loss of sample); is there significance between dye mass and final volume; did temperature have any significance toward emulsion and/or color saturation? In my eyes, despite the recorded dye-to-frosting mass ratio and volume change loss (although this shouldn't be trusted since not all frosting was scraped down and we don't have microscopic vision), the color saturation all look different to me. I could be partially color blind 😅, or that each beaker was shown in different light angles. So, it's difficult for me to see the differences in color in each data set.
@@josephceleste5540 it does reach pretty much the original volume when rewhipped, and the shade change is almost imperceptible compared to the just blended frosting. Sugarologie showed this in the Google doc in her pinned comment.
Sugarologie mentioned that she weighed at every stage to minimise and keep track of volume loss.
@Roan C ahh, gotcha. I didn't see that comment she made with the new data set. It practically covers my concerns. Thanks.
Just commenting to say thanks for being so transparent and clear in your responding--this is exactly how science ought to be, and you're really demonstrating that epistemological process perfectly.
I mean, she melted down both samples (and so releasing the air) to show if there was decrease in voulune due to deflating the cream, and that doesn't seems a great way to do it because they both and up being deflated so she can't measure what she wanted to measure.
I've seen two videos now relating to a statement by Ann which feels like a lot lol, considering how long she's been on the debunk train. I fear what speculations my brain could come up with, even so I enjoyed this deeper dive into the frostings!
So happy you reacted to the ‘debunking’ video. Just like you, I also enjoy watching Ann Reardon’s videos. That’s why I thought it was so strange and unlike her to tar you with the same brush as 5 minutes crafts and the likes. I appreciate your extensive research and clear explanations about anything cakes.
There is a pretty clear flaw with your experiment here. It takes a lot more than 30 seconds to rewhip frosting that has been blended the way you have. Of course it will be darker, because it isn't fully whipped back to the volume it should be at. So neither of you are "wrong" or misunderstanding how this whole thing works, it is simply the fact both of you are using different steps. It is interesting honestly.
Yeah that’s a good point - my last set of results I rewhipped until it went back to initial volume to show the effects of aeration + homogenization to correct for that. But agreed there’s definitely technique differences across the board 👍🏼
@@Sugarologie And that could all it is in the end. The smallest thing in baking could make a difference. How cold something is, how long something is dine. As far as I can tell, you both are right and it comes down to the smallest of details. But until someome tests all variants, we won't know. But I do appreciate how you do things.
@@breel75 agreed 👍🏼
Your rigor and dedication is matched only by your grace and patience. Beautiful reply :)
when I saw your immersion blender hack in anns video i was like nah this isnt right . i wish ann had properly researched what was happening instead of just giving her audience the wrong information :(
The scientific version of “Per my last email. . .” Lol I love it! Thank you for what you do.
both of have a background in science....
When you were using the emulsion blender, it did look like the buttercream almost disappeared. The volume loss does look like a lot. But I failed science so😅
In the bowls on the original video she actually removed half the buttercream beforehand so she could compare. At the end of this video you can see there’s only a small change
nothing like debunking a debunking channel with science and common sense lol
Great response. I was surprised to see your clip pop up in Ann's video because I know you're so methodical and scientific. I love her videos but I hope she apologizes for the mistake.
2 of my favorite youtubers 💞💞💞 I don't even care how this works out...more learning for me. Thank you ladies...you are beautiful!
As a baker myself, you've explained everything in this video extremely well, your videos have helped so many including myself learn more of the chemistry involved in baking
I remembered this today as I finally had an opportunity to use your immersion blender technique - and the difference b/w before and after is so dramatic and immediate that whatever small loss in volume happens is... irrelevant to me lmao. Just want to say that this has absolutely changed my life for the better and I appreciate all of your videos (I also used a slightly modified version of your American dreamy buttercream! your work has improved my baking, and my enjoyment of baking, so much).
I have absolutely no idea what’s going on… but I really love that shade of blue buttercream 🫠
I was suprised to see your clip in that video, which is why I immediately messaged you on Instagram! I love Ann but i think she didn't follow the recipe properly. I'll give her the benefit of doubt and guess she might have just glanced through your video since she clearly only shows part of your video! I'm sure she didn't do her due diligence. Hope she responds to your video, reaches out to you & hope you both work together someday ! 🤞🤞
I have been following your channel from the start - and have made several of your cake recipes that I absolutely love so i know for a fact you ain't like one of those content farms! 💖 Keep doing what you are doing! Love you & your channel!
Hi! Self-taught and constantly improving baker here. Your videos have taught me quite a bit about the composition and process of frostings. I watch Anne occasionally, and I had no clue this came from one of her videos. As a viewer who may be less versed in food science, I understand your point, and I find your response sensible through your experiment.
I was surprised when she "debunked" your video. It's not the first time I've been disappointed with what Ann has said about something. She's forgotten that she's allowed to say "I don't know"
I can't believe this!. But I am so disappointed that she included you in her debunking video. You deserve the best!
I think everyone's real question here is how do you make so much SMBC! My mixer wants to die after one batch!
lol, yes! I have an old KitchenAid (mentioned because mine is old enough to have metal gears, I've heard people blame the newer models' nylon gears) and I _still_ have occasional overheating issues with SMBC! I have been known to drape an icepack over my old lady's "back" between batches in an effort to get her to stop moaning. 😅
Although honestly the real answer is to get a commercial mixer if you're making mass amounts on a regular basis. (restaurant supply companies often have refurbished used ones) They're BEASTS. The ones at my pastry school program did _kilos_ of SMBC and cake batter and whatever else at a time, back to back to back to back with only a break to empty and wash out the bowls, in a constantly hot kitchen, for years and years.
@bsidethebox glad I'm not the only one who uses the ice pack trick. My daughter sprained her knee a few months ago and was using my ice packs but didn't put them back in the freezer. I needed to make a huge batch of buttercream and it wasn't pretty. 😂
I watch you both, and never thought I would see your vids having to be debunked as you are both science based. Im going to have to give this one to you! And I made same comment to HTCT!
Simply love Sugarlogic. Very good science information as well as recipes. Now if I could just see some adjustments for altitude I'd be set.
ahh incredible video showing how its related to the emulsion properties- I love science (I have a degree in chemical engineering) and id never seen your channel before- This popped up in my recommended (I did watch the htct vid) - there have been a handful of experiments ann has done on her channel that were a bit flawed in terms of her methodology. I didnt even know the different types of buttercreams and that some were emulsions while others werent so I totally didnt notice that that one was wrong- I really appreciate the way you went about this and made a genuinely educational video explaining and showing how it works :)
Omg she is put you in her video? Maan..I love Ann, I watch all her stuff, but this is disappointing
But from the comments it gets worse, as she refuses to even acknowledge the situation. That's...Disappointing