Spike Brewing 12.5 Conical Fermenter Giveaway - Enter Now!

Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > Brew Science > Homebrew Myths

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-10-2009, 01:52 PM   #11
menschmaschine
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 3,278
Liked 31 Times on 26 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GilaMinumBeer View Post
From my readings in the opinionated texts, there is still much debate on this.

Some authors stiull suggest that even a short 10 minute rest at the range you've cited is good at breaking down those haze forming proteins without a sacrifice to head retention or body. Some others even suggest that such a practice improves the "malt character" of the beer akin to that of a decoction.

Now, I would go that far but, I do routinely employ a protein rest for most anything but Pale Ales. 10 minutes at 120 and my beer is crystal clear in record time, I have less to no need for IM. And I still maintain a huge malt backbone and a head that takes days to recede.

So, I agree and disagree. I think the amount of time spent at said rest range is more detrimental than the act of the rest alone. For well modified malts I use no more than 15 minutes. I treat the rest as a "smoke break" on the way to the "buffet".
Yes, I agree with you. There is a debate as to whether a short protein rest in the traditional temperature range is similar in benefit to a standard-duration rest in a higher protein-related temperature range. I've not tried the short duration, traditional temp. protein rests, so it's good to have your input. I've only seen the difference in standard-duration rests at the lower and higher temp. ranges and the head retention was significantly better in the higher temp ranges (same base malt).

One thing to consider is when doing decoctions, it would probably not be possible to do a short duration protein rest simply due to the time involved with decocting.

I guess the bottom line is, learn about your malt and make an educated decision for your protein-related rest temperatures and durations.
__________________

END TRANSMISSION

menschmaschine is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-10-2009, 01:59 PM   #12
GilaMinumBeer
In yo' garage, steelin' yo parts.
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
GilaMinumBeer's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oblivion
Posts: 47,398
Liked 4695 Times on 4350 Posts
Likes Given: 58

Default

To this I agree completely. There were only 2 reasons why I began to dabble in the afformentioned rest range.

The first was newly acquired ability. I got a RIMS job and now had infinitely better control over my mash schedule.

And the second was persistent chill haze with certain malts. Usually, Brewers 2 Row.

After a few mistakes, and a lot of reading. I stumbled into the short rest practice and my beers have thanked me ever since.

__________________
GilaMinumBeer is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-10-2009, 02:00 PM   #13
Boerderij_Kabouter
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Boerderij_Kabouter's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Oconomowoc, Wisconsin
Posts: 8,461
Liked 118 Times on 102 Posts
Likes Given: 11

Default

I use a 10 minute protein rest at 122º F and have good anecdotal results. My American wheat had the most ridiculous head retention I have brewed so far. Think La Chouffe kind of head.

I have the ability to quickly ramp temps though. After some reading I agree that a long protein rest at these temps can only hurt with our highly modified malts.

Mensch, what is different about the 133º range?

Boerderij_Kabouter is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-10-2009, 02:15 PM   #14
menschmaschine
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 3,278
Liked 31 Times on 26 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boerderij_Kabouter View Post
Mensch, what is different about the 133º range?
I think it comes down to proteolytic enzyme activity. Enzymes have an optimum temperature range, but they don't necessarily stop working outside that range.

So, going above that optimal range will have limited proteolytic enzyme activity, but not too little, like in a saccharification temperature range.

This is why I will concede that the short duration rest in the optimum range could be just as beneficial... because it's the same concept in limiting enzyme activity. But this could be dependent on your brewhouse. If you use hot water infusions to raise temperature, the temperature comes up quickly. But if you direct heat your step temps, starting at ~120°F and going up to saccharification rest ~150°F leaves a good additional 10-15 minutes where there could still be further proteolytic enzyme activity as it moves up through the 120s and 130s°F.

I've also seen discussion that different temps in the proteolytic range are better for breaking down specific sizes of proteins, but I don't believe there is conclusive evidence of this.
__________________

END TRANSMISSION

menschmaschine is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-10-2009, 02:28 PM   #15
menschmaschine
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 3,278
Liked 31 Times on 26 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuri_Rage View Post
So, if the required strain is available in both dry and liquid form:
Choose dry yeast to minimize cost, minimize effort, and maximize pitching rate.
I whole-heartedly agree with this. However, I would emphasize the first part of that statement. There are certain liquid yeast strains that have unique flavor profiles that aren't currently found in dry yeast strains. So, if I have used a liquid yeast in a recipe that I'm very happy with and this strain isn't available in dry form, I wouldn't substitute a dry yeast for it. I have also noticed a certain level of refinement (in flavor) in the liquid yeasts I've used compared to dry yeasts.

But Yuri is totally right. If a yeast strain you want is available in dry form, it only makes sense to use the dry yeast. Lagers are my big issue. The starters are an even bigger PITA than ales and I've read about too many flavor issues with most of the dry lager strains, so I haven't ventured to use them... until recently.

I made a German Pils 2 weeks ago with Saflager W34/70 which is supposed to be the same strain as WLP830 and Wyeast 2124. So, in a couple months when it's ready to drink, I'll post my results. If it's as good as WLP830, goodbye lager starters.
__________________

END TRANSMISSION

menschmaschine is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-10-2009, 02:35 PM   #16
SpanishCastleAle
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 4,384
Liked 29 Times on 29 Posts

Default

Quote:
I've also seen discussion that different temps in the proteolytic range are better for breaking down specific sizes of proteins, but I don't believe there is conclusive evidence of this.
I've had better luck with short 122 F rests than I have similar duration 133 F rests...but a very small sample size there. I've only done a few 133 F protein rests. And again...I don't do it for clarity...rather for flavor (mainly body/mouthfeel).

I have one beer that I (mistakenly though I didn't know it at the time) let rest at 122 F while I did a decoction w/ 45 minute boil. That beer is a lager...and has more chill haze than any other lager I've done. Maybe the proteins got broken down so much that the polyphenols had nothing to bond to? Or at least not enough to make the whole clump big enough to sink?
__________________
Early brewers were primarily women, mostly because it was deemed a woman's job. Mesopotamian men, of some 3,800 years ago, were obviously complete assclowns and had yet to realize the pleasure of brewing beer.- Beer Advocate
SpanishCastleAle is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-10-2009, 02:42 PM   #17
menschmaschine
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Delaware
Posts: 3,278
Liked 31 Times on 26 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpanishCastleAle View Post
I have one beer that I (mistakenly though I didn't know it at the time) let rest at 122 F while I did a decoction w/ 45 minute boil. That beer is a lager...and has more chill haze than any other lager I've done. Maybe the proteins got broken down so much that the polyphenols had nothing to bond to? Or at least not enough to make the whole clump big enough to sink?
That's very interesting. That backs up the hypothesis that higher protein-related temperatures are better for breaking down larger-sized proteins. In your case, they didn't get broken down. How was the foam stability, body and mouthfeel?
__________________

END TRANSMISSION

menschmaschine is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-10-2009, 02:56 PM   #18
SpanishCastleAle
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 4,384
Liked 29 Times on 29 Posts

Default

Head retention is poor. Mouthfeel is also poor but I think I extracted excessive tannins in this beer so that prob skews the mouthfeel and also prob contributes to the haze. Maybe it was just too many polyphenols to begin with. This brew was subpar in more ways than one, it's far better than BMC just not one of my better efforts.

__________________
Early brewers were primarily women, mostly because it was deemed a woman's job. Mesopotamian men, of some 3,800 years ago, were obviously complete assclowns and had yet to realize the pleasure of brewing beer.- Beer Advocate
SpanishCastleAle is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-23-2009, 04:14 PM   #19
z987k
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
z987k's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Anchorage
Posts: 3,545
Liked 22 Times on 20 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by menschmaschine View Post
I guess the bottom line is, learn about your malt and make an educated decision for your protein-related rest temperatures and durations.
I think this is the most important thing here, aside from yuri's comment. I use a high amount of under or even unmodified malt in some of my beers. They get a good protein rest. 50% unmalted wheat.... yeah.

As far as myths go, and I really don't know why I have to explain this, but using ale yeast or any kind and calling it a lager because the grain bill was for some lager you were wanting to make, does not make it a lager. It is an ale and it will NOT taste like a lager.

Esters do not belong in a bock.
Esters do not belong in anything scottish or irish and a handful of other beers.
Diacetly is usually inappropriate.

I always thought those were rather self evident, but in tasting a lot of homebrewed beers lately.. and some brewpubs, I think some people forgot about the basics.
__________________
Beer Style Guidelines - Kaiser's Brewing Experiments - American Society of Brewing Chemists - Journal of the Institute of Brewing
z987k is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-23-2009, 04:45 PM   #20
jkarp
Beer Herder
HBT_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
jkarp's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Elizabeth, CO
Posts: 2,105
Liked 33 Times on 29 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

I just know if my grist has rye, wheat, or oats and I skip the protein rest, I end up loosing 5-10 points efficiency due to slow sparge. A 10-15 minute 122F rest makes all the difference on my system with un-malted grain.

__________________
jkarp is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Drink up! 12 Most common beer myths exploded wildwest450 General Chit Chat 39 09-13-2012 07:41 PM
Perpetuating the myths of extract homebrewing farmbrewernw General Beer Discussion 34 01-30-2009 02:45 PM
MythBusters: Alcohol Myths tonight! talleymonster General Beer Discussion 23 10-24-2008 12:27 PM
Myths I debunked today on my 2nd AG greg75 All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 3 04-15-2007 05:12 PM



Newest Threads