# What Do You Think of This? (No trace, no gel.)



## alchemy_cake (Aug 14, 2014)

So, I've been taking my time learning about soap making, and as I have a kindle I decided to browse the ebooks about soap crafting. I found one, highly rated, on sale for $0.99. So, of course, I bought it! And it's really a very nice little book, informative, concise, and newbie-friendly. However, the author addresses what she says are some myths in soap making, I wanted to get the opinions of some experienced soapers regarding them.

The first is that she says that soap does not need to be mixed until one gets trace. Apparently, with handheld mixers, this isn't required, because the lye and oils get thoroughly blended together well before that point. (She goes on to say that with hand mixing, you do indeed need to go until trace is reached.) I'd not heard of that before, but it seems believable.

The second, which I find stranger, considering how important it seems to many soapers, is that there is basically no such thing as a 'gel stage'. To quote her, "Temperature during the setting period has little or nothing to do with soap setting." The only thing that warmth apparently does is prevents the formation of a "thin rind... that you can trim off". Yet many people clearly find that it does make a difference. Perhaps I've been overestimating how important it is, and it truly doesn't matter?

Thanks for your advice and opinions!


----------



## coffeetime (Aug 14, 2014)

She's full of hooey. When stick blending you still have to reach at least emulsion or the fats and lye/water will separate in the mold. 

And gel is a real thing. When the soap reaches a temp of 160-170 degrees, it will become a translucent gel, even if it was an opaque soft solid before. (As long as saponification is not complete)

Scientific Soapmaking by Dunn had an excellent explanation of the process.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 14, 2014)

The no gel is definitely hooey, soap does have a very defined gel stage when it hits certain temps. Soap does not need to gel to set up though. 

The part about reaching trace is kinda true. If you get full emulsion which is a stage where the oils and lye no longer separate then you don't have to stir anymore, the soap will set up fine. Emulsion can be hard for some people to spot though so its always better to reach trace before pouring to prevent fail.

Best advice I can give you, delete that book and find another or better yet, just ask on here.


----------



## Meganmischke (Aug 14, 2014)

Can I ask the name of this book?


----------



## alchemy_cake (Aug 14, 2014)

Thanks for your input, everyone! I'm thinking that she might be partially correct, like Obsidian said. However, I think that until I'm experienced, it's better safe than sorry for me. I'll stick with the tried and true for now. Thanks for the recommendation, coffeetime. Dunn's book does look good! It's not available for kindle, though, so I'll have to wait until I can buy the paperback.

Meganmischke, the book is "Smart Soapmaking: The Simple Guide to Making Traditional Handmade Soap Quickly, Safely, and Reliably", by Anne L. Watson. Besides those two bits I mentioned, everything else seems to mesh with what I've learned from other sources, but there might be more little things that I overlooked in my inexperience.


----------



## Meganmischke (Aug 14, 2014)

Interesting,  I thought her books came highly rated? Not to say she is exactly wrong but it seems misleading. Not so good for beginners.  Thumbs up for double checking your doubts. I agree 100% with Obsidian.


----------



## Jaccart789 (Aug 14, 2014)

I think you should stop reading that book.


----------



## alchemy_cake (Aug 14, 2014)

It was highly rated. And it was very readable, and very clear. It might be a matter of different methodology, but I'll stick to the regular way for now.

Jaccart789, it's too late! I read it ALL! And most of it was pretty good. 

Honestly though, if it lead to asking questions and getting good answers it was worth the dollar. And it didn't diminish my desire to make soap one bit. 

I'm glad there are people I can turn to for answers - finding a community of helpful and knowledgeable people before the Internet came around must have been nearly impossible!


----------



## coffeetime (Aug 14, 2014)

alchemy_cake said:


> I'm glad there are people I can turn to for answers - finding a community of helpful and knowledgeable people before the Internet came around must have been nearly impossible!




Yes, yes it was. And there weren't very many books out there on it either.


----------



## My Mountain Soaps (Aug 14, 2014)

i have to smile because as soon as you said "Myths in soap making" i knew exactly which book you were talking about, the same Anne watson i read when i started soaping. The same one that caused me to ask the very same questions you asked, and these wonderful people here steered me in the right way.  good for you double checking what you have learned


----------



## Dorymae (Aug 15, 2014)

I am going to say that the way she worded it, she is correct for the most part.

The first is that she says that soap does not need to be mixed until one  gets trace. Apparently, with handheld mixers, this isn't required,  because the lye and oils get thoroughly blended together well before  that point. (She goes on to say that with hand mixing, you do indeed  need to go until trace is reached.) I'd not heard of that before, but it  seems believable.

This is absolutely true.  I seldom reach trace before beginning to pour - what I do reach is emulsion.  


To quote her, "Temperature during the setting period has little or  nothing to do with soap setting." The only thing that warmth apparently  does is prevents the formation of a "thin rind... that you can trim  off". 

This is partially true - soap will set with or without gel.  The warmth does cause a thin rind when you get a full gel, I'm not sure if it is any worse with ungelled - I never noticed- however it is not the only thing it does.   It also makes colors much more vivid for one.


----------



## wetshavingproducts (Aug 15, 2014)

I think you're misunderstanding her. The quote you posted does not suggest there is no gel stage, but that it's not necessary, which is not disputed on this board.


----------



## lenarenee (Aug 15, 2014)

wetshavingproducts said:


> I think you're misunderstanding her. The quote you posted does not suggest there is no gel stage, but that it's not necessary, which is not disputed on this board.


 
That's how I took it when I read the book. Never got the impression it's about gel. I found her writing to quite awkward in places.


----------



## alchemy_cake (Aug 15, 2014)

wetshavingproducts: I admit that's possible! I think you're right in that what she was trying to say is that she didn't believe there really was any use for gel stage as encouraged by keeping the mold warm etc. Like lenarenee suggested my confusion was probably due to awkward writing, combined with my own knack for misunderstanding. Anyway, since that's true, then I'm glad I clarified. I wasn't entirely certain what exactly she was trying to say before, but it makes sense now.

She never mentioned the effect of heat on colours or anything. Maybe she felt that was something that people should experiment with after they master basic soap making?


----------



## LunaSkye (Aug 15, 2014)

The first part of what the author said makes some sense only because I made a few soaps that did not reach trace (they are still curing and developing nicely). As for the second part, I can verily say that there *is* a gel stage. I have achieved it many times and I can tell you that there is a difference in the soap's appearance when you let it gel as oppose to preventing it.


----------



## coffeetime (Aug 15, 2014)

I haven't read this ebook, but I have read some of her other books and I find her soapmaking advice to be somewhat out of date and rather general. I prefer details and current research. So try the Dunn book if you can. It's a bit dry in spots but very informative about the science of soap.


----------



## Obsidian (Aug 15, 2014)

I found this to be the best free/cheap soaping book for kindle.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HKMN9RW/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20


----------



## The Efficacious Gentleman (Aug 15, 2014)

Just to add my tuppence in. 

Trace - she is right. But as others have said, knowing when it is mixed enough before trace is tricky, which is why most of us go for trace. 

Gel, not needed for the process. I wonder if the rind that she mentions is ash - in which case, I do find gelled soaps tend to have little or no ash. There was a picture of my partially gelled GMOH with ash all over the ungelled parts but none at all on the gelled


----------



## alchemy_cake (Aug 15, 2014)

Obsidian: Thanks, that's awesome! I downloaded it right away!

And the Dunn book is on my wishlist, waiting for my next paycheque. 

I need to be careful, or the next thing I know I'll be buying an immersion blender and spending all my money on blocks of butters and my partner will be waking up in the middle of the night to find me muttering to myself over bowls of batter...

TEG: I honestly am not sure what she meant. It's possible? Anyway, I don't mind ash. I actually find it rather pretty!


----------



## PuddinAndPeanuts (Aug 15, 2014)

I liked the Anne Watson books just because she makes it SO straightforward.  It REALLY took a lot of the trepidation that I had out of the equation.  After I read her books, it was like 'okay! I really CAN do this!'.


----------



## pamielynn (Aug 16, 2014)

You will get a much better "stir" with a mixer, obviously, and I have soaps that I don't bother to bring to trace; namely the FOs that don't like to play nice. But I've been doing this awhile and can tell when the batter is mixed enough to hold together - that's just practice. And, you can just leave the mixed and poured batter in the molds until they come to trace on their own if you want to do fancy tops. But, I agree that newbies should stir until at least light trace, just to be sure.

I read Anne Watson's books years after I began soapmaking and regardless of the ratings, I've never been impressed with her methods.


----------



## DeeAnna (Aug 16, 2014)

Slow down a wee bit, folks.

OP: "...The first is that she says that soap does not need to be mixed until one gets trace. Apparently, with handheld mixers [aka stick blenders], this isn't required, because the lye and oils get thoroughly blended together well before that point. (She goes on to say that with hand mixing, you do indeed need to go until trace is reached.) I'd not heard of that before, but it seems believable...."

Response: "...She's full of hooey. When stick blending you still have to *reach at least emulsion* or the fats and lye/water will separate in the mold. ..."

Um, Anne's point is precisely that a *stable emulsion* can occur before actual signs of *trace* when one uses a highly efficient mixing device like a stick blender. How is that "full of hooey"?

***

OP: "...The second, which I find stranger, considering how important it seems to many soapers, is that *there is basically no such thing as a 'gel stage'*. To quote her, "Temperature during the setting period has little or nothing to do with soap setting." The only thing that warmth apparently does is prevents the formation of a "thin rind... that you can trim off"...."

Response: "...The no gel is definitely hooey, soap does have a very defined gel stage when it hits certain temps. Soap does not need to gel to set up though...."

As far as this issue, I gather you are assuming gel stage is the same as saponification, but I'll let Anne speak for herself:

"...Myth #7: Soap must be incubated.

Another fallacy is that soap must be kept warm after it’s poured into the mold. All sorts of little nests and incubators have been prescribed for this purpose. Some soap books give dire warnings that the soap won’t set if you even peek at it while it’s getting there.

*According to this myth, soap has to go through a “gel stage.” Now, it’s true that soap becomes a kind of gel if you hold in the heat. Then, as it cools, it becomes solid and opaque—*just like soap that hasn’t gone through a “gel stage.”*

*Temperature during the setting period has little or nothing to do with soap setting.* I’ve tried to make soap fail by pouring it into molds that don’t conserve heat and then putting them in a cold place. No matter what I did, the soap came out fine. In fact, when I asked other soapmakers about this, I learned that most milk soap mixtures are actually cooled. If a soap mixture doesn’t set, the reason is usually excess water in the recipe—*not temperature.

In some cases, though, warming may have other advantages. Some recipes produce soap with a sort of thin rind if the mixture isn’t kept warm. This rind doesn’t hurt anything, and you can trim it off—*but warming may prevent it entirely.

Also, some soapmakers report that warming creates a better texture in soap from the recipes they use. Others say warming makes the texture worse! In my own testing, I’ve noticed no difference at all. In any case, you will certainly get soap, whether you warm it or not...."

So, for those of you who put your soap in the fridge or freezer to prevent gel, do you find your soap does not saponify? It doesn't go through gel stage, right?

***

OP -- I really think you are not interpreting Anne's information correctly. It also bothers me that you are selectively quoting her words out of context. I will concede she may not be saying what she means in words that make sense to you, but that doesn't mean she's wrong. It's hard as an author to refine and adapt one's written words to ensure the reader always understands, unlike what a teacher can do with a student in the classroom. Anne is one of the most objective, factual authors writing introductory soap making books that I can think of. I might not always agree with her point of view, but I do not think she's full of hooey.


----------



## green soap (Aug 16, 2014)

Not much to add to the first issue (emulsifying oils and lye water will be enough but trace is a good insurance that soap is happening....) but I have a question on the second one.

I have observed that there are perhaps more than one temperature range for gel.  I think gel / no gel is from a change in the soap salt 'crystal' structure, just the way the molecules are stacked or organized.  Could there be two stages?

Here is a thread I started a couple of years ago.  The soap is not pretty and has drag marks, but look at the apparent two gel phase structure - and I tried to describe what I saw while cutting the best I could.  Could there be lets say no gel at T room to 120F, gel 1 from 120F to 140F and gel 2 from lets say 140F to 180F ?  the temperature ranges are just possible examples, these will also differ with differing lye concentration (water discount).  In another attempt I was able to suppress the gel stage completely by going with a steeper water discount.  Gel 1 and gel 2 would be two different crystal structures, look how much darker the center is.  

not to hijack this thread, but since we have so many new members than when I first posted this two gel stage question - any comments or ideas?

http://www.soapmakingforum.com/showthread.php?t=26677&highlight=stages


----------



## Susie (Aug 16, 2014)

Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I was re-reading the book in question.  It is one of the first ones I got when I got my Kindle, and I needed to re-read the portion in question before responding, and I got carried away, as it is one of my favorites.

There is nothing wrong with what she wrote.  You can take any book and make anything out of it you want if you take enough out of context.  She did sort of not make points as clear as could be, but her info is factual if read completely.


----------



## DeeAnna (Aug 16, 2014)

Green soap -- I am not entirely sure what you're seeing in that soap is two gel stages, although it is true that soap doesn't change from one phase (solid) to another (gel) in one tidy jump. The difference in color is certainly due to varying levels of temperature and possibly moisture. The multiple rings could also be caused by an unusual, uneven rate of cooling after the center reached gel. This might have affected the calendula in the soap as well as the soap itself. 

Not sure -- just throwing ideas out. I've been cleaning house all day today and my brain is rather fried, so my apologies if I sound like I am rambling. House cleaning is not my strong suit. :crazy:

Anyways, Auntie Clara recently did an intriguing study about moisture levels and gel vs. not gel. Her results might be somewhat related to what happened to you. Not sure, but I thought you might find it interesting to compare her experience with what you know about your soap. See: http://auntieclaras.com/2014/08/intentional-crop-circles-water-discount-as-a-design-tool/


----------



## green soap (Aug 17, 2014)

I read the blog on different water discount, I have experienced this when spoon swirling different soap batters with different water discounts - you get different textures - but not the same as different stages of gel.  

I no longer see this effect since I use stand alone silicone molds now.  The effect I showed was seen using wooden molds lined with silicone.  I do not use them often but the thermal gradient from the inside of the loaf to the outer edges or 'rind; is huge as I had the loaf in the freezer.   This could explain the 'standing wave ' effect.


----------



## LunaSkye (Aug 17, 2014)

Obsidian said:


> I found this to be the best free/cheap soaping book for kindle.
> http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00HKMN9RW/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20



Thank you, Obsidian. :smile: I found this after I checked your link (I love freebies):

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00LCFLC4U/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20

Thank you too DeeAnna for being a calm voice of logic.


----------

