3 ms·

Weight is a lot harder to use than volume. If I'm measuring a cup of flour (for example), I dip my measuring cup in, level it off, and I'm done. Takes a few sec

by bigstrat2003 10mo ago

Weight is a lot harder to use than volume. If I'm measuring a cup of flour (for example), I dip my measuring cup in, level it off, and I'm done. Takes a few seconds. If I use a scale, I have to watch the scale carefully until I'm getting close, then slow down my rate of pouring into the bowl greatly so that I don't go over. Sometimes I will still go over despite my best efforts, and then I have to take flour out to get the measurement right*. It's a huge faff, and it doesn't even produce a better result the vast majority of the time. Some recipes are finicky and do better with a scale, but 90% of the time volume measurements are much faster for the same result. * and to head off the obvious "just don't worry about it if you go a few grams over" rebuttal: that defeats the purpose of using a scale for precision! So either you don't worry about the wiggle room in measurements (at which point just use volume, it's faster), or you strive for precision and it takes you much more work. Either way it's a worse solution unless you really, truly need maximum accuracy.

D-Machine 10mo ago
The imprecision of volumetric measurements can absolutely ruin much baking, and many other recipes based on things like surface areas, or where the perception of flavours does not scale linearly with things like either volume or mass of the ingredient. You're right volumes seem easier, at first blush, but the cost of this easiness is a dramatic / considerable reduction in consistency, compared to when measuring by mass. Once you switch to regularly scaling by mass (just as a guideline, and still adjusting to taste, texture, and other factors), you'll realize the apparent easiness of volumes is pure illusion, and actually makes getting good results much harder.
throw0101c 10mo ago
> Weight is a lot harder to use than volume. If I'm measuring a cup of flour (for example), I dip my measuring cup in, level it off, and I'm done. You can have huge variance variance with flour or sugar depending on how hard it is packed and even humidity: > I weighed each cup on its own, tared the scale, then scooped it into a bucket of granular sugar and bulldozed the top with the flat side of a butter knife (I figured that there's less divergence in sugar-measurement technique, and it's composed of fine granules that settle fairly evenly). > The results ranged from 6.81 ounces (193 grams) to 8.08 ounces (230 grams). * https://food52.com/story/16497-the-truth-about-your-measuring-cup-dun-dun-dun https://food52.com/story/16497-the-truth-about-your-measurin... And you have to trust your measuring cups (>5% off) and spoons (>20% off): * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5Q21DWg0Fk&t=54s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5Q21DWg0Fk&t=54s * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEXLt4gz7lY&t=59s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEXLt4gz7lY&t=59s * https://www.kingarthurbaking.com/blog/2014/11/03/your-measuring-cups https://www.kingarthurbaking.com/blog/2014/11/03/your-measur... Have you ever verified that your cups/spoons are actually accurate? > Takes a few seconds. If I use a scale, I have to watch the scale carefully until I'm getting close, then slow down my rate of pouring into the bowl greatly so that I don't go over. Yes, that's the point, especially in baking: to get an accurate quantity. (Though in cooking it's less important, relatively speaking.)

D-Machine 10mo ago

The imprecision of volumetric measurements can absolutely ruin much baking, and many other recipes based on things like surface areas, or where the perception of flavours does not scale linearly with things like either volume or mass of the ingredient. You're right volumes seem easier, at first blush, but the cost of this easiness is a dramatic / considerable reduction in consistency, compared to when measuring by mass. Once you switch to regularly scaling by mass (just as a guideline, and still adjusting to taste, texture, and other factors), you'll realize the apparent easiness of volumes is pure illusion, and actually makes getting good results much harder.

throw0101c 10mo ago

> Weight is a lot harder to use than volume. If I'm measuring a cup of flour (for example), I dip my measuring cup in, level it off, and I'm done. You can have huge variance variance with flour or sugar depending on how hard it is packed and even humidity: > I weighed each cup on its own, tared the scale, then scooped it into a bucket of granular sugar and bulldozed the top with the flat side of a butter knife (I figured that there's less divergence in sugar-measurement technique, and it's composed of fine granules that settle fairly evenly). > The results ranged from 6.81 ounces (193 grams) to 8.08 ounces (230 grams). * https://food52.com/story/16497-the-truth-about-your-measuring-cup-dun-dun-dun https://food52.com/story/16497-the-truth-about-your-measurin... And you have to trust your measuring cups (>5% off) and spoons (>20% off): * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5Q21DWg0Fk&t=54s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5Q21DWg0Fk&t=54s * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEXLt4gz7lY&t=59s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEXLt4gz7lY&t=59s * https://www.kingarthurbaking.com/blog/2014/11/03/your-measuring-cups https://www.kingarthurbaking.com/blog/2014/11/03/your-measur... Have you ever verified that your cups/spoons are actually accurate? > Takes a few seconds. If I use a scale, I have to watch the scale carefully until I'm getting close, then slow down my rate of pouring into the bowl greatly so that I don't go over. Yes, that's the point, especially in baking: to get an accurate quantity. (Though in cooking it's less important, relatively speaking.)