Ss Brewing Technologies Giveaway!

Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > Protein Rest Question
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-01-2012, 02:52 PM   #11
frankieboy007
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Denison, Texas
Posts: 43
Default

I'll be brewing a cream ale this weekend, with 2 lbs of flaked maize in the grain bill. Sounds like something I might incorporate into my mash procedure, thanks for sharing the info!

__________________
frankieboy007 is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-01-2012, 08:47 PM   #12
BIGTEX
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: , Texas - The Greatest Country in the World
Posts: 3
Default

Thanks for the insight, kcpup. I might try that next time around to see if it changes anything.

This morning I did not do the protein rest like I said I was going to do. It was a last second decision, but I mashed at 153 and said forget the protein rest. My efficiency was 72%, and I was estimating 70%. I verified this by running the preboil gravity through the hydrometer calculator on qbrew, which compensated for the temp difference. My OG was a couple points higher than what I was estimating too. All in all, it looks like the no protein rest route didn't really affect much. We will see how it turns out in a few weeks. I will use this as a baseline and compare some new methods when I do this recipe again. I'll be looking forward to it.

__________________

BIG TEX

"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." - Frank Sinatra

BIGTEX is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-02-2012, 08:36 PM   #13
Patirck
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 750
Liked 12 Times on 12 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGTEX View Post
This morning I did not do the protein rest like I said I was going to do. It was a last second decision, but I mashed at 153 and said forget the protein rest. My efficiency was 72%, and I was estimating 70%. I verified this by running the preboil gravity through the hydrometer calculator on qbrew, which compensated for the temp difference. My OG was a couple points higher than what I was estimating too. All in all, it looks like the no protein rest route didn't really affect much. We will see how it turns out in a few weeks. I will use this as a baseline and compare some new methods when I do this recipe again. I'll be looking forward to it.
Keep in mind that the purpose of doing a step mash is not so much brewhouse or mash efficiency but rather the taste and mouthfeel of the finished beer (and perhaps getting to a lower final gravity).

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the purpose of a step mash is to affect efficiency.
__________________
Patirck is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-02-2012, 10:01 PM   #14
graybabe
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 22
Default Agreed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patirck View Post
Keep in mind that the purpose of doing a step mash is not so much brewhouse or mash efficiency but rather the taste and mouthfeel of the finished beer (and perhaps getting to a lower final gravity).

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the purpose of a step mash is to affect efficiency.
I agree with you Patrick. I think that it is possible that some modification is taking place here that could lead to more conversion later but I feel that the main reason to do this step anyway is to affect mouthfeel by getting more proteins into the mash. I don't think that I would go to the trouble of doing a protein step if it was just for another gravity point or two.
__________________
graybabe is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2012, 12:41 AM   #15
texasbrewer73
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: The Colony, Texas
Posts: 146
Liked 8 Times on 6 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patirck View Post
This brings up another more generic step mash question. I was reading an old brewing techniques article and the author talked about putting hot tap water in the mash tun then douging in and turning on heat until you get to your first rest temp (protien rest in this case). What is the disadvantage of doing this? Will you lose more body and end up with thin beer? With an automated system it would remove the strike temp calculation from the process and simplify things a little bit. It would also remove the issue of starting out too hot if you miss the strike temp.

PS - don't mean to hijack the OP's thread....
Late responding, but I would never use hot tap water, even if it's filtered. No telling how long your water was in the tank, the evils that lurk in there, etc. My rule of thumb is to only use filtered cold tap water (after letting it run a minute or two) or buy my water.
__________________
texasbrewer73 is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2012, 01:53 AM   #16
FishNChips
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Denver, smack in the middle, Colorado
Posts: 32
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by graybabe

I agree with you Patrick. I think that it is possible that some modification is taking place here that could lead to more conversion later but I feel that the main reason to do this step anyway is to affect mouthfeel by getting more proteins into the mash. I don't think that I would go to the trouble of doing a protein step if it was just for another gravity point or two.
John palmer describes the protein rest as allowing enzymes to break down the larger proteins that are in moderately modified malts which cause haze and reduce head retention. That sounds to me like it will mostly affect appearance and body.

To me splitting your less modified malts from your full mod malts seems like a great idea. That way you break down the large proteins while still leaving in tact the smaller ones that act as nutrients for your yeast. Just takes a bit of care to dough in the rest of your grain and still hit your sacc temp.
__________________
FishNChips is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2012, 02:43 AM   #17
kcpup
HBT_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 269
Liked 4 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 4

Default

+1 to this perspective. Only exception I've encountered is for adjuncts. The lower temp rest does aid in conversion of those. (Flaked oats, etc) Well modified malts it's mainly to prevent chill haze.

__________________
kcpup is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2012, 03:42 AM   #18
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,270
Liked 433 Times on 326 Posts
Likes Given: 517

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FishNChips View Post
John palmer describes the protein rest as allowing enzymes to break down the larger proteins that are in moderately modified malts which cause haze and reduce head retention. That sounds to me like it will mostly affect appearance and body.

To me splitting your less modified malts from your full mod malts seems like a great idea. That way you break down the large proteins while still leaving in tact the smaller ones that act as nutrients for your yeast. Just takes a bit of care to dough in the rest of your grain and still hit your sacc temp.

Except that nearly every malt out there is so modified that a protein rest is not only unnecessary, it can be detrimental.
__________________

Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014

Denny is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2012, 04:15 AM   #19
FishNChips
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Denver, smack in the middle, Colorado
Posts: 32
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny

Except that nearly every malt out there is so modified that a protein rest is not only unnecessary, it can be detrimental.
True...unmalted grains, i.e. flaked, would benefit from the protein rest the most. Also all the more reason to do a separate step mash on the unmalted grains.
__________________

Last edited by FishNChips; 05-03-2012 at 04:19 AM.
FishNChips is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 05-03-2012, 04:22 AM   #20
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,270
Liked 433 Times on 326 Posts
Likes Given: 517

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FishNChips View Post
True...unmalted grains, i.e. flaked, would benefit from the protein rest the most. Also all the more reason to do a separate step mash on the unmalted grains.
In my experience, still unnecessary.
__________________

Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014

Denny 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
All Grain process - Protein rest Question MetuchenBrewerNJ All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 5 05-25-2011 04:27 PM
protein rest question Righlander All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 1 03-03-2011 11:31 PM
Protein rest question NorsemenRugby58 All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 6 02-02-2011 12:34 PM
Protein Rest question OhioGrown All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 27 04-13-2009 08:09 PM
Protein rest question NoNothing All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 14 11-03-2008 11:31 PM