Bochet: A question about temperature not time.

[Metalchef1]

http://alcoauto.blogspot.com/2015/07/simple-bochet.html?m=1

This is actually helpful...

 

[Metalchef1]

And if you have a pressure canner I have heard of people having good success controlling the honey caramelization too. It should be consistent for everyone regardless of different stoves, pots, etc because with the same pressure on the canner everyone should be able to achieve the same result

 

[bernardsmith]

Just some feedback - Last night I cooked the mesquite at 250 F in my oven for about 45 minutes but the honey never actually "boiled". No matter, this honey was for a hibiscus mead so I cooled the honey in an ice bath and added the hibiscus (with some elderberry). I let this stand overnight and pitched D47 (rehydrated) this morning (and added nutrient and some tannin). SG (by calculation) is about 1.100.

 

[Metalchef1]

Just some feedback - Last night I cooked the mesquite at 250 F in my oven for about 45 minutes but the honey never actually "boiled". No matter, this honey was for a hibiscus mead so I cooled the honey in an ice bath and added the hibiscus (with some elderberry). I let this stand overnight and pitched D47 (rehydrated) this morning (and added nutrient and some tannin). SG (by calculation) is about 1.100.

No boiling aside did the 45 minutes provide any color shift or sensory shift in the honey?

 

[ShareBrewing]

Was going to bake my honey in the morning @ 250F for about an hour at least. Given that most people cook their honey for about 1-1.5 hours for bochets, 45 min just doesn’t seem like enough time to compare it to an average bochet.

Was there any sensory change in the baked honey? Do you think a higher temp (maybe 325F?) would be better?

 

[bernardsmith]

No boiling aside did the 45 minutes provide any color shift or sensory shift in the honey?

Certainly darkened the honey but I don't think that there is any strong presence of caramelization by nose or taste. Which is not to say that this batch tastes bad. Just not as caramelized as I had wanted. But not to be outdown I made a batch of (soft) caramel in my microwave last night (very simple recipe, very quick process; very easy to make - takes all of about 5 minutes prep time and about 7 minutes cooking time) and my plan is to dissolve this with a bar of dark chocolate in some boiling water, allow to cool and then add some raspberry honey and ferment this (and add some vanilla to the secondary) - to make a chocolate caramel mead.

 

[Metalchef1]

Certainly darkened the honey but I don't think that there is any strong presence of caramelization by nose or taste. Which is not to say that this batch tastes bad. Just not as caramelized as I had wanted. But not to be outdown I made a batch of (soft) caramel in my microwave last night (very simple recipe, very quick process; very easy to make - takes all of about 5 minutes prep time and about 7 minutes cooking time) and my plan is to dissolve this with a bar of dark chocolate in some boiling water, allow to cool and then add some raspberry honey and ferment this (and add some vanilla to the secondary) - to make a chocolate caramel mead.

Try longer in the oven obviously...
Is the raspberry honey the one you did in the oven? If not you could try doing the oven one side by side with unbaked honey from the same batch and just make show mead to see if you have differences on the finishes?
And I'm going to need to know how that works out for you... Ive never had great success with chocolate in brewing..I use nibs all the time but they lead to astringent flavors and always give the beers a perceived dryness that is a bit irritating for me.

 

[bernardsmith]

Nope. It was the mesquite. I don't know that longer is the trick. I do think that the temperature may have been too low.
But be that as it may, this is not critical for this batch. I am using a lot of hibiscus flowers with some elderberries and the taste (a day or so after pitching so still with a great deal of sweetness) is absolutely fine at this time.
I agree that I have never made a chocolate mead or wine that I thought medal worthy. It's not - for me - that the taste is too bitter but that the taste is never chocolaty enough. The only time I made a mead that met my standards was when I used chocolate malt and chocolate malt has as much cocoa in it as do fresh tomatoes. But what I am planning to do this time is melt the caramel I made in hot water and add the chocolate bar to this same liquid so that the chocolate melts and mixes with the caramel. On top of this - once cooled, I will add the raspberry honey and then pitch the yeast.
Not certain at all how much caramel I made (I mean by weight). The ingredients together weigh a scant pound - and I am not sure whether this is likely to be too little or too much for a gallon of mead (the honey is going to be 2 lbs, but I can dissolve the caramel and the chocolate and taste the ... um... syrup and see if I want more (or less) flavor)

 

[Metalchef1]

Nope. It was the mesquite. I don't know that longer is the trick. I do think that the temperature may have been too low.
But be that as it may, this is not critical for this batch. I am using a lot of hibiscus flowers with some elderberries and the taste (a day or so after pitching so still with a great deal of sweetness) is absolutely fine at this time.
I agree that I have never made a chocolate mead or wine that I thought medal worthy. It's not - for me - that the taste is too bitter but that the taste is never chocolaty enough. The only time I made a mead that met my standards was when I used chocolate malt and chocolate malt has as much cocoa in it as do fresh tomatoes. But what I am planning to do this time is melt the caramel I made in hot water and add the chocolate bar to this same liquid so that the chocolate melts and mixes with the caramel. On top of this - once cooled, I will add the raspberry honey and then pitch the yeast.
Not certain at all how much caramel I made (I mean by weight). The ingredients together weigh a scant pound - and I am not sure whether this is likely to be too little or too much for a gallon of mead (the honey is going to be 2 lbs, but I can dissolve the caramel and the chocolate and taste the ... um... syrup and see if I want more (or less) flavor)

Definitely curious how this comes out.

 

[bernardsmith]

Will keep this updated. I think what I will be doing (we have a power outage tonight - go figure) is using a double batch of the caramel and (so a scant 2 lbs and so using only 1 - 1.5 lb of the honey to ferment and using about half a pound to back sweeten assuming that the caramelization of the sugars does not create compounds that don't ferment.

 

[ShareBrewing]

Apologies, this will be a long post because it is based on data... writhing this up really reminded me of all the time I spent in the chem labs at college.

Took me awhile to get around to the bochet honey baking experiment. I took notes on the aroma, honey temp and observations every 15 min. (See below)

Based on the gathered data in my experiment, I’ve done a lot of thinking about the question/title of this thread, and I believe we are looking at this in entirely the wrong way. To say that it is a function of solely temperature is flawed, as this is physically impossible to test (let me explain).

As in ALL cooking, it’s impossible to simply take an object or substance (ie honey) at ambient room temp and heat up (pre-heat) a skillet/pan/pot/whatever, and expect that enough stored energy from the hot object will instantaneously be transferred to the substance upon contact, enough energy that the object/substance will be instantly raised to the cook’s desired precise temperature. That will never happen. You cannot start at naught and go to several hundred degrees instantly and then maintain said temp for X amount of time, even for experimental purposes. Such a transfer of energy is what causes objects to explode. Or in the case of honey or sugar, scorch the heck out of your product upon making contact.

That’s why the idea of preheating the kettle (and oven, which you definitely should preheat) before adding in the honey is flawed. The honey will not immediately reach the desired cooking temp. It might raise temp slightly upon contact, but will still have to undergo a substantial period of gradual heating until reaching the target temp. That’s what ALL cooking is.

We are dealing with Maillard reactions, the true question is - at what rate (intensity) are these reactions occurring and what drives it?

In my mind, it could be finding the optimal slope (average) as function of time (x) and the honey’s temp (y), plotted on a graph. Finding the average would give you, let’s call it, a Rate of Caramelization Factor (ROCF). The higher the value for your slope (ROCF), the faster you’re creating Maillard reactions.

For instance, using the traditional method would most likely represent your highest outlier value for the ROCF in the experiment, being that it is over an open flame. The temp will rise much faster and to much higher temperatures. Based on results in the oven I wouldn’t be surprised if honey in a kettle could reach near 400F.

On the other hand, if you picked a target temp that is too low for the honey, say 200F, you may not be even reaching temp to actually drive a vigorous caramelization. It may dark some over time but the time required to have a darker end product would be substantial.

Point being, temps drive heavier Maillard reactions, faster. Any experienced cook worth their weight in salt knows this, lack of such knowledge is how you quickly burn something. They would also know that there are hot spots inherent in virtually every piece of equipment you use and how you use it - stove burners, kettles/pots/skillets, grills, ovens. Most of us aren’t using crazy expensive induction burners. Hot spots are thus rendered a mute point in this argument, and are negligible in this experiment. If one was paranoid, they can just take several readings around the kettle and calculate an average.

So in that thinking, there appears to be a threshold or range at which to optimally drive these Maillard reactions in honey. Rational thinking would probably place the range between 250F to 400F (when setting a temp-controlled heat source, which will I turn be the honeys target temp). To hone in on the actual range will require many more tests but at least we will begin to have a baseline. Hence why I chose a comfortable 325F to bake my honey, it’s in the middle of the hypothesized range.

We also have to face the fundamental fact that we cannot use the same parameters and techniques for caramel, or cheese, or burgers. It’s comparing apples and oranges. Honey is honey.

Honey is a very complex agricultural product that cannot simply be likened to basic cane sugar, or even broken down to its basic components (sucrose, fructose, etc) and treated as such. The energy required to cook basic sugars is far less than a substance as dense and as complex as honey.

Plus from scouring the depths of the internet, it looks like no one has even stuck a thermometer in their cooking honey to even know how high it goes or at what point certain chemical reactions begin to occur. Which means we don’t even have a baseline or control with which any other experiment to... or to say that it’s similar to caramel/toffee production.

In order to begin testing this:
First the honey can be tested in a temp controlled environment (oven) to get a baseline rate of temp change over a given time. This can then be compared to the data values one would gather doing the same process in a kettle over open flame (the seemingly “traditional/historical” method for most). One can then perform a sensory analysis on the finished batches of mead and note the differences in aroma, flavor, etc. From this point on, one can test the rate of temp change (using different temp settings on an oven or induction burner) to determine the effects of the Maillard reactions occurring on different batches.

75 minutes was decided for the experiment because I followed “the nose knows” rule. At 60 min there was significant darkening of the honey but I felt that I could drive the flavors a little farther without hurting the honey. That amount of time is also closer to the usual 1.5 hr cooking time most open-flame bochets get.
———-
NOTES FROM EXPERIMENT

Process:
Preheat oven to 325F. Ambient temp 65F.

Added about half up of water to 2lbs 15 oz mesquite honey and mixed. Took pot out out of oven every 15 min to check temp, stir and observe the honey. Quickly place back in oven to maintain temps.

15 min
Honey has turned to liquid and loosened but no cooking visible. Temp has reached 140F.

30 min
Honey has begun bubbling to 5x it’s size. But not caramelizing. Foam is white and very puffy and light. Similar in consistency to the scuzzy foam when cooking potatoes (possibly a protein break). Head falls dramatically just by opening oven. Honey has finally begun to release its floral sweet aroma. Temp has reached 220F

45 min
Honey has begun to take on more toasted aromas, graham cracker. Much less floral notes now. Light amber color. Temp has reached 245F.

60 min
Solid amber color with much more caramel and graham cracker notes. Bubbles have become much more large and soap like. Foam would reach the top of kettle and stop completely and held constant. No more boil overs. Temp up to 278F.
*** Normally a small amount of water is added at this point in the “traditional” but none was added to the baking honey.

75 min
Finished Honey has turn dark mahogany, but no smoke has risen and no burnt notes are detectable in the aroma. Notes of caramel/toffee, graham cracker, no campfire marshmallow notes in taste or aroma. Temp 322F, almost oven temp.

***After 1 hour, the bubble structure and foam stability has completely changed. Before the foam was very frothy and unstable, rising slowly but continuously until boil-over. Bubbles changed to being more soap like and the foam level stayed constant at the top, hardly moving, bubbles rarely popping. Could this have been triggered by the honey reaching a critical temp (around 270-280F)?

Reconstituted with water to 1 gal and mixed in nutrients, aerated, pitched EC1118.
View attachment 600103
———-

322F - 65F = 257 degrees changed
257 degrees / 75 min = ROFC

The ROCF of my honey was 3.43.
That may not mean anything now, but my guess would be that the traditional method would product a ROCF 4-5x greater than this baked trial. Yes, this is just a measure of how fast your temp rises, but in my hypothesis is that this is what drives the rate of caramelization of honey.

Thoughts?

 

[Metalchef1]

Thoughts? I have a few....
Being a chef for so long I agree with pretty much everything you stated..
You beat me to my honey experiments.... And your data is great...
I think this is what OP was looking for and like you said... Everyone cooks the honey but no one ever does any control tests on time or temperature.. It's always "cook until it's dark". Dark based on what? The color of the pot reflecting through it? Led vs halogen lights in the room? Age or even personal visual ability?

This is clear scientific data and I for one appreciate the long write up. It's nice to be able to read someone's research and not have multiple questions.

I will say as you stated all equipment is different and someone else may not achieve the exact same results you have but close enough to be able to use this data for their own purposes.

I definitely want feedback on your experience with that batch and I will throw in a personal bias of mine... I'm done with ec1118 (other than using it for a rescue yeast). I feel it strips the honey of too much character.

As far as the honey bubbles...
You mentioned that you had a boil over?
I find the temperature that the foam stabilized to be weird? The water was already removed from the solution before reaching that stage so its possible that the proteins were denatured at that higher temperature causing more foam stability?

I stick with slow and low being the way to go for pretty much all wet cooking and sugar is wet cooking.
I feel that you are more than correct about traditional heating methods producing a 4x or 5x result. As I mentioned in an earlier post, my experiments so far with table sugar and induction (going low and slow) have shown me that there is no necessity to add any additional adjuncts to sugar to prevent recryatallization of the medium. I wish I had a microscope but I always suspected that the traditional method for caramel was in fact a burning of a percentage of the solution that dyes and flavors the remainder... The solution would then recrystallize because it was not all converted in the initial process but stopped short due to the perception of it all being caramelized.

You stated that your final honey had no burnt notes in the aroma or flavor? To me this is great..... I despise anything burnt and true caramel for honey sounds fantastic. It also sounds like it would be great for multiple back sweetening applications..

1 question..... Does it still taste like honey??? Or is the "honey" gone and all you have left is a complex caramel?

And email James Spencer from bbr and do an episode with him on honey... Steve is a big mead head so this is right up his alley.

 

[bernardsmith]

This experiment is exactly what I was looking for. There is a wealth of data and information in ShareBrewing's post. A thousand thanks.
I do have one observation and a couple of questions.
If honey is allowed to age it naturally darkens - even at room temperature. Is that because of a Maillard reaction?
Is caramelization the same as a Maillard reaction? Maillard (and I am not a scientist) involves a reaction between amino acids and sugars but isn't caramelization essentially a different chemical reaction caused by the breakdown of sugars simply with heat?

 

[Metalchef1]

This experiment is exactly what I was looking for. There is a wealth of data and information in ShareBrewing's post. A thousand thanks.
I do have one observation and a couple of questions.
If honey is allowed to age it naturally darkens - even at room temperature. Is that because of a Maillard reaction?
Is caramelization the same as a Maillard reaction? Maillard (and I am not a scientist) involves a reaction between amino acids and sugars but isn't caramelization essentially a different chemical reaction caused by the breakdown of sugars simply with heat?

I'm fairly sure that the darkening of the honey is just oxidation over time...

Caramelization and maillard are not the same thing... And you stated why...
Maillard reaction involves amino acids and caramelization is the breakdown or destruction of sugar due to excessive heating..
Maillard is a chemical reaction, caramelization is simply an exothermic reaction.

 

[bernardsmith]

One more question. You added water t
o the honey before you heated it. Why? Don't you then need to boil off all the water before the honey can reach the BP of water and when it exceeds that temperature where is the water and what is it doing? Adding water to the honey seems unnecessary. But I am not a chef and have no training in food science. What is the reason for adding water to the honey? Is that to slow down the heating?

 

[ShareBrewing]

One big note on the experiment, YMMV. Agreed, no one will be able to replicate every aspect exactly. Because we all don’t have the same equipment, one can set the parameters of the experiment to suit their needs.

To be honest, I added the water in the beginning only to slightly thin the honey, and reduce the possibility of scorching early on in the heating process while the honey is at its thickest. In my defense, this was done based only on mine and others’ experience cooking honey the traditional method. But the traditional method uses a much greater heat source, and by our hypothesis - a higher ROCF. So I figured better safe than sorry yknow?

Adding water to honey for baking may NOT be necessary, based on my observations on how the honey “behaved”. The honey rose in volume significantly but it was by no means a vigorous or violent caramelization (compared to traditional). You really don’t even have to worry about stirring it... again, YMMV. Just make sure you use the largest pot possible that will fit in your oven.

I only had a few drops of foam boil over, no big deal. But lesson quickly learned: put a cookie sheet under the pot. You’ll thank me later, trust me.

Metalchef, perhaps you could give us a little insight into wet cooking and the reasoning/science behind it. Would that apply here and would it be a positive or a negative in your opinion?

From a flavor/aroma standpoint, something I noticed was that baking the honey didn’t seem to develop the discernible toasted campfire marshmallow character that the traditional method produces. Perhaps this just requires a greater cooking time, but who knows.

Baking seems to accentuate the more toasted flavors, especially graham cracker, and reduces the bitter/burnt flavor development. It was a bit more of a caramel sweetness with a light toasty quality. On my palate, a bit of the honey’s original flavor and sweetness remained but it had lost its floral/fruity notes.

This appeared to be the primary difference between traditional vs oven (temp-controlled) method. The timeline of flavor development.

Traditional Method - Strong burnt/toasted aromas develop significantly faster. Often a pronounced s’mores aroma (graham cracker/marshmallow/bittersweet cocoa) can develop by 45 min or so, only about halfway through the cooking process. Also remember that water has to added at sometime several points in the process, most notably around the 60 min point. Caramel notes develop well within 30 min.

Oven Method - Much more research and observations are required to fully judge this, but here’s what I noticed in the one trial. The development of flavor in the baked honey is much more gradual and slow (obviously). Toasted flavors seem to be dominant, most notably toasted honey graham crackers and amber caramel. Color also seemed to be less of an indication of the flavor profile here... again, more research required. It took at least 45-60 min for the floral/fruity honey aroma to full dissipate.

 

[ShareBrewing]

Planning on conducting the experiment for the traditional method tomorrow, if the weather holds up.

 

[JimRausch]

I've been following this thread since it started because about a month ago I decided I wanted to do a 1 gallon bochet, bought 3lb of honey and started doing the research. First I want to thank you guys for the discussion. I found it enormously helpful. Second I want to add my data point, although as most experiments go, it's not exactly clearcut. I boiled 3 lb of local wildflower honey on my stove this afternoon. I'll try to add pictures, but here's the data: 2:00 started boil. The honey was at 145* because I heated it in the microwave to make it flow better. 15 minutes into it she started boiling and generating a little foam. Temp was 228*. At 30 minutes it was darkening and starting to expand. Temp 240*. I turned down the heat a bit. It never expanded like some pictures I've seen. Maybe doubled, but not the 4-5 times that seem to be typical. 60 minutes getting some of the 'marshmellow' smell. Temp 245*. Stopped the boil at 85 minutes.

 

[ShareBrewing]

Currently working on graphing and plotting all the data in an easy accessible way. Will post when finished.

One thing I can say is that the data collected from the traditional method were quite surprising. The oven actually got to a higher temp than the kettle.

From what I’ve gathered, I may also try several runs with the traditional method to maybe extrapolate the difference in cooking honey volumes for a given surface area (of a kettle/pot). For instance, I usually cook at least 6 lbs using the 5 gal steel kettle I used in the experiment. Using 3lbs is only half of what I usually do. How the honey responded was noticeably more accelerated in its caramelization process than with my usual 6lbs. That’s not a surprise but I’d like to get another set of data points to get a clearer picture of what’s happening when we use the traditional method for bochets.

 

[Metalchef1]

Delayed response... Work has been a nightmare.

Wet cooking is just using moisture as opposed to dry which would be air, fire or fat.
I mentioned it because I think of honey in an oven as "braising" which is a wet method.

I love the results you guys had where Share got his honey in the oven to 322f without burnt notes in the honey, but Jim started to get those burnt notes at 245f using direct heat.

That goes along with my earlier mention and suspicion of sugar cookery in general and recrystallization of the solutions.

I wish I had the equipment /knowledge to know for sure but I'm convinced that because of the direct heat Jim burned a portion of his honey which then flavored and colored the remaining solution where as Share caramelized a significantly larger part of the solution by going very slow with the process.. For purposes of stability I would be sure that Share's honey would last where as Jim's would recrystallize.

As far as flavor goes? Without a side by side taste of the honeys and vinting the mixtures identically in a vacuum, we can't ever know for sure if the honey would be the difference in the flavor or other elements of the process (microoxidation, biological differences of the yeast (even if they are the same strain), etc.). I feel safe in assuming however that the oven method would provide a more rich and deep flavor as once again I'm assuming more of the sugar was converted as opposed to the stove method where I liken it to adding flavoring to the mixture.

 

[ShareBrewing]

Still working out how to put all the data so far in a chart that I can get on here for everybody.

Nevertheless, to the metalchef’s point, it’s all about how the heat is applied and at what pace.

For instance, in the kettle it took just 3 minutes for the honey to increase from 80F (ambient) to about 160F. Yet it took the oven 15 min just to get to 140F. In my graphs and data points, I’m making sure to calculate the rate at which the honey is being caramelized (rate of temp change). I plan on doing this for a plethora of temps and heating methods (see below list), if others would like to help gather more data points.

I plan on running two trials for each method/temp, that way one batch can be flavor and aroma comparisons and the second trial will be produce more data points, offset any mistakes in the previous trial, and also be my fun batch that I add weird things to. Can’t help myself if I’m making this many small batches.

List of trials- all trials cook 75 min. Trials conducted twice (2x). 3lbs of honey used, unless otherwise stated.

OVEN - set to 250F, (2x)
OVEN - set to 275F, (2x)
OVEN - set to 300F, (2x)
OVEN - set to 325F, (1x more)
OVEN - set to 350F, (2x)
OVEN - set to 375F, (2x)

TRAD. - using 3# honey, (1x more)
TRAD. - using 6# honey, (2x)


That’s 14 - 1 gal batches that need to be made. Anyone care to pick one of the trials and collect a set of data and share?

 

[ShareBrewing]

I need some input though on yeast selection for the rest of my batches.

For these first two batches, I used EC1118 (champagne yeast). What should I use for the rest of the batches? Would prefer something fairly clean in profile and low-foaming, and also not be incredibly alcohol tolerant.

EC1118 is good for those things but will easily ferment to full dryness if allowed, which wouldn’t be the best way to compare flavors of these. Backsweetening would then be required, altering the finished products’ flavor. Then the true results of the experiment are skewed.

Metalchef is right about EC1118, it can tend to strip too much of the mead’s character. Might not be best for trials where taste tests/comparisons are involved.

Any suggestions on yeast?

 

[Metalchef1]

I would like to assist, but I'm not sure I would be able to add data until after the new year? If you don't mind a slow burn and can wait for data.... Let me know and count me in..

As far as yeast? Us04..... Not too alcohol tolerant and you can't get more boring than that...?

 

[Metalchef1]

Sorry us05... Finger slipped

 

[Metalchef1]

It usually dies around 10% ish.... I think it will go a bit further with mead because the way we aerate and SNA and all that but it is not a spectacular attenuator so I think it's a good choice for this to leave a decent chunk of character behind..

 

[JimRausch]

I use Red Star Cote des Blancs for all my fruit wines/ meads. I haven't developed a preference yet, just haven't tried anything else. I can't complain about how it has worked and the results.
Sharebrewing- I might grab one of your data points after the new year. I have 2 more beers to brew by 12/31- a marzen and a bock (yeah it's a tradition with me). Plus one scheduled after 1/1. But my bochet batch was pretty easy to make, and I have another 3lb of honey. Plus, I would like to contribute to the general knowledge. I'll keep in touch.

 

[ShareBrewing]

Nice, thanks everybody! It’s much appreciated, just post which test you’d like to do and drop a thermometer in that puppy.

 

[bernardsmith]

I intend to make a small batch oven cooked at 350 F - and here's the thing: I suspect that volume of honey is critical if we are measuring time and heat energy in the context of temperature. - (not certain but I think that the volume of the honey is 2 lbs and it's local raw wild honey). Not sure that I will have any "data" to provide other than very subjective information and I won't be able to make the data any more "inter-subjective" because I am not making several batches at the same time allowing each batch to cook for , say, 15 minutes longer than the previous batch, so there cannot be any samples of sealed containers each displaying flavor and aromatic differences with only cooking time (at constant temperature ) being the one variable.

 

[Metalchef1]

I intend to make a small batch oven cooked at 350 F - and here's the thing: I suspect that volume of honey is critical if we are measuring time and heat energy in the context of temperature. - (not certain but I think that the volume of the honey is 2 lbs and it's local raw wild honey). Not sure that I will have any "data" to provide other than very subjective information and I won't be able to make the data any more "inter-subjective" because I am not making several batches at the same time allowing each batch to cook for , say, 15 minutes longer than the previous batch, so there cannot be any samples of sealed containers each displaying flavor and aromatic differences with only cooking time (at constant temperature ) being the one variable.

I definitely agree that volume will play a role.
Another variable will be the vessel the honey is in (not necessarily a huge variable but a giant cast iron thick walled Dutch oven will have dramatically more significant carry over cooking ability than a disposable foil pan).

 

[JimRausch]

Bottled the batch of Bochet started on 12/5/2018. OG was 1.103, FG is 1.006. Color is a beautiful Ruby, taste is rather fruity, almost like a plum wine. Let you know in about a year what the final taste is.