20 minute boil - my experience

I read lots of threads on here about the issues associated with a short boil time and all-grain brewing, but I haven't seen any concrete evidence that it creates problems. I put the theory to the test and hopbursted a Saison, only boiling it for 20 minutes. Below are my results.





Great clarity, no DMS, and a rocky head that won't quit.

Not trying to stir the pot, just wanted to put some actual results out there.

Very interesting, thanks for the data. If I combine this w/ the 20 minute mash, and no chill, grinding the grain and heating strike water are half the brew day

I was thinking of trying this for my Hop-Bursted Pale. Seems like a good idea now

Btw, what's the recipe

Recipe can be found here: http://www.brewtoad.com/recipes/spelt-saison

This is interesting. Did you use any clarifying agents? I use Belgian pilsner malt in many of my recipes and it is known to produce a lot of hot break. I get hot break throughout most of a 60 minute boil, so much that I can scoop it out. Plus you have the whole DMS thing with Pilsner, which I've never encountered. What I'm getting at is have you tried this using pilsner malt?

Haven't tried it with Pilsner malt. I'm curious to see how that would turn out.

I added whirlfloc with 15 mins to go. No gelatin or isinglass or anything.

Please keep us updated on how the beer ages. I ran into lactobacillus problems when I did a short boil.

Very Cool. I was thinking about starting a thread dedicated to reducing the length of the brew day but this one already does the job. Now only one question remains...

There may be no defects but is it good enough to win an award?
(Trying this with something as malt focused as a bock would be a good test, and maybe a imperial stout or barleywine to test for stronger beers, and obviously the pilsner malt everyone is curious about)

If so you just saved everyone 40 minutes at least!

I'll have to try this out, combine it with the 20 minute mash and see how it does with a complex malt focused beer, unless someone beats me to it.

If you have access to a local beer club bring it in and see what a few judges think. Don't tell them about the short boil before the test.

Good comments by all. I will try to bottle a few off the keg and share with other homebrewers / judges I know and see what they think. I passed the "consumption by my friends test" with flying colors a few nights ago :cross:

Regarding award-winning, lacto, etc... The goal of this beer was to create an easy drinking "rustic" farmhouse beer. That's why I picked the Saison style for this test. If it develops a sour tinge or other flaws develop, well that just adds to the rustic-ness. If I was brewing a malt focused beer for competition, I'd stick to a standard length boil at this point until I get more experience with short boils...

Simps said:

There may be no defects but is it good enough to win an award?

Click to expand...

that could be said of many, many beers

Feedback from my buddy who's an award-winning homebrewer.

Hey Ryan,

I tried the hoppy Belgian and the IPA. I really enjoyed both.

The Belgian was my favorite. It was really nice, this is the kind of beer that I could keep coming back to. Susan said it was hoppy Belgian, right? I like that the yeast was more neutral than phenolic or estery. The hops weren't too bitter or too distracting with an overly strong hop aroma, but were well emphasized in the hop flavor.
The hops seems to be more on the clean side than high cohumlone, American hops. I'm taking a long time to get to the point, which is to say that this was a really nicely balanced Belgian, where the additional hops added a great mid palate addition, which I feel added a lot of mouth feel, to an already great beer. Every other hoppy Belgian, or Belgian IPAs that I've tried, just slammed American hops against very Begian yeast, which I never seem to enjoy.

Click to expand...

I didn't share any process information with him. No mention of DMS.

Using a 20 minute boil, how do you make up for the bittering hops for hoppier beers like IPAs?
(does Hopsbursted mean using more hops?)

Also, why 20 minutes as opposed to 30 or some other number?

I am just a beginner but I have been doing a 30min boil for AG recently. I am hit and miss anyway but that's mainly on water chemistry. I haven't had and issues I can attribute to short boils. I personally think a lot of this is because the common method has spread widely and some of it is just common knowledge. 60 min boil is what is done but I dont think it needs to be. I only have done ales so no pilsner malts yet. I think tasty has questioned boiling higher kiln malts like crystal for long periods on a podcast I listened too. It may even give a little more malty flavor with shorter boil but that is just speculation based on tasty's comments.

How about a 30 minute mash, 20 minute boil, followed by a 10 minute chill? Now you're saving time.

I think you'll need a plate chiller for the 10 minute chill

I think you could make a pale ale with those times. Other styles may need earlier hop additions and longer mash.

kehaar said:

How about a 30 minute mash, 20 minute boil, followed by a 10 minute chill? Now you're saving time.

I think you'll need a plate chiller for the 10 minute chill

I think you could make a pale ale with those times. Other styles may need earlier hop additions and longer mash.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. There was a whole thread and linked article about how some craft breweries are favoring late hop additions (just way more of them) for pales and IPA's. You still get IBU's from 20m additions, for instance, but just less of them (but more flavor and aroma as they're not driven off by the boil).

You could also FWH on shorter boils to get more bitterness.

tre9er said:

Not necessarily. There was a whole thread and linked article about how some craft breweries are favoring late hop additions (just way more of them) for pales and IPA's. You still get IBU's from 20m additions, for instance, but just less of them (but more flavor and aroma as they're not driven off by the boil).

You could also FWH on shorter boils to get more bitterness.

Click to expand...

Some styles need low hop flavor and aroma. I agree late hops are awesome but with late hops you also get lots of flavor and aroma which may be judged harshly for some styles. I give you my Citra "Blonde". All hops added with 15 minutes or less time left in boil. It had OG and IBU of a blonde. BJCP judges said it was delicious but not a blonde because it had too much hop flavor and aroma. That beer scored really low (22-23) as a result. It was my favorite home brewed beer ever though.

kehaar said:

Some styles need low hop flavor and aroma. I agree late hops are awesome but with late hops you also get lots of flavor and aroma which may be judged harshly for some styles. I give you my Citra "Blonde". All hops added with 15 minutes or less time left in boil. It had OG and IBU of a blonde. BJCP judges said it was delicious but not a blonde because it had too much hop flavor and aroma. That beer scored really low (22-23) as a result. It was my favorite home brewed beer ever though.

Click to expand...

I think some of that aroma and flavor could be driven off by aging. Aroma is known to fade over time. Flavor I'm not sure of. My point was that if you wanted a big IBU/low flavor/aroma beer, you could FWH and likely not have much flavor/aroma, especially with a high alpha hop. You'd use less hop matter and thus more easily drive it off in the boil.

tre9er said:

I think some of that aroma and flavor could be driven off by aging. Aroma is known to fade over time. Flavor I'm not sure of. My point was that if you wanted a big IBU/low flavor/aroma beer, you could FWH and likely not have much flavor/aroma, especially with a high alpha hop. You'd use less hop matter and thus more easily drive it off in the boil.

Click to expand...

I am curious if a FWH with a short boil would have similar bitterness, flavor, and aroma profile as a FWH with 60 minute or longer boil. I don't think it would. I think the hops need the longer boil to isomerize.

I am no expert and I am not trying to say you're wrong.

kehaar said:

I am curious if a FWH with a short boil would have similar bitterness, flavor, and aroma profile as a FWH with 60 minute or longer boil. I don't think it would. I think the hops need the longer boil to isomerize.

I am no expert and I am not trying to say you're wrong.

Click to expand...

I don't think they would be the same as a 60m FWH, no, but the longer you can have them in heated liquid the more IBU's you'll get from them (to a point) in a short boil, and in-turn the more aroma you'd drive off if you don't want that sort of thing.

Mash-hopping is also an option with which to experiment.

There's also products like this for bitterness without flavor:

http://www.hopunion.com/1020_IsomerizedHopExtract.cfm?p4=open

And yet another method would be a 60m hop-tea made while you mash and sparge, then add it to the boil. Couldn't be much aroma/flavor at all from that.

Someone mentioned shorter mash as well. Thats also what I did with my 30 boil. The point is to get the sugars out...that takes exactly 1 hour? Just mash until you have what you need or test and make sure the starches are converted. I have been doing a short mash and short boils also. Sometimes the mash one night and the boil the next morning. These are all ideas to be a newer home brewer with a newer baby, it takes a little to get used to.

I think as far as style guidlines go, its kinda exactly not what you want to do. The styles are based on beers brewed for ages. Doing old beers with new techniques takes a lot of practice to not introduce new variables and flavors. Thats like what the big boys do like bud light with a seven day fermentation. They tried to make it more efficiently and just end up making an awful beer

Im rambling, point is - mix it up. 20-30 min boil has been great for me making good PAs and IPAs.

A 30 minute mash can work, it will be a little less effective, meaning you will miss several gravity points. You can try offseting that by adding an extra pound of base malt.

>>And yet another method would be a 60m hop-tea made while you mash and sparge,
Your hops utilization might not be as high unless you use enough water, though I guess you can boil for longer.

http://www.picobrewery.com/askarchive/dms.htm
Based on this chart, a 20 minute boil seems too short, though maybe with more DMS, more will be scrubbed by the escaping CO2.
I wonder how much the vigor of the boil affects the DMS boil off rate.

ArcLight said:

A 30 minute mash can work, it will be a little less effective, meaning you will miss several gravity points. You can try offseting that by adding an extra pound of base malt.

>>And yet another method would be a 60m hop-tea made while you mash and sparge,
Your hops utilization might not be as high unless you use enough water, though I guess you can boil for longer.

http://www.picobrewery.com/askarchive/dms.htm
Based on this chart, a 20 minute boil seems too short, though maybe with more DMS, more will be scrubbed by the escaping CO2.
I wonder how much the vigor of the boil affects the DMS boil off rate.

Click to expand...

i wouldnt jump to the conclusion that a 30 min mash is less effective. there have been a few studies (pretty sure BYO did a conversion test) that show full conversion can take place in as little as 15 minutes.

mash temp has an effect as well, mashing higher will reach conversion faster (thats why its suggested you mash longer when going at say 148 degrees)

i mash almost all my beers for 30 min and have consistent efficently and attenuation. i rarely mash under 152 though, usually 154-156.

>>i wouldnt jump to the conclusion that a 30 min mash is less effective. there have been a few studies (pretty sure BYO did a conversion test) that show full conversion can take place in as little as 15 minutes.

There is a chart (somewhere on Google Docs) that shows after 15 minutes you have undergone much of the conversion, but you do get a bit more going up to 60 minutes. Not a huge amount more, but several gravity points. It depends on how you define effective. 30 minutes is fine, 60 can give several more points of gravity.


>>i mash almost all my beers for 30 min and have consistent efficently and attenuation. i rarely mash under 152 though, usually 154-156.

At those temperatures, 30 minutes is probably ok, you wont get more than a few points going to 60 minutes, so why bother.
Question - why not mash at 152 instead of 156?

ArcLight said:

Question - why not mash at 152 instead of 156?

Click to expand...

Mouthfeel, to style. Simple.

My APA is done with hopburst style additions...I think I'm going to try a shorter 30 min boil next time! Great thread/discussion!

I'm going to try this tomorrow! My very first recipe, no idea how this is going to turn out. I'm going to try a 45min boil first before I try a 30 or 20min.. Thoughts?

45 Min Citra Pale Ale
45min mash/45min boil
5.75 gallons

10.5# Pale
.75# Wheat
.25# Honey Malt
.5# Dextrin/Carapil
.5# Vienna

.5oz Citra - FWH
.25oz Cascade 10min
.25oz Citra 10min
.25oz Cascade 1min
.25oz Citra 1min
.25oz Cascade 0min
.25oz Citra 0min

.25oz Cascade during whirlpool
.25oz Citra during whirlpool

.5oz Citra dryhop

idigg said:

I'm going to try this tomorrow! My very first recipe, no idea how this is going to turn out. I'm going to try a 45min boil first before I try a 30 or 20min.. Thoughts?

45 Min Citra Pale Ale
45min mash/45min boil
5.75 gallons

10.5# Pale
.75# Wheat
.25# Honey Malt
.5# Dextrin/Carapil
.5# Vienna

.5oz Citra - FWH
.25oz Cascade 10min
.25oz Citra 10min
.25oz Cascade 1min
.25oz Citra 1min
.25oz Cascade 0min
.25oz Citra 0min

.25oz Cascade during whirlpool
.25oz Citra during whirlpool

.5oz Citra dryhop

Click to expand...

Can you list the IBU's for each addition, please?

Question - why not mash at 152 instead of 156?[/QUOTE]

maltiness, mouthfeel. i'm happiest with beers at that temp. i've been happier using a more robust base malt and less crystal + the higher temp... letting the basemalt talk.

also depends on the yeast, if i was using american ale for a pale ale i might mash 154-156, but if i used an english i would probably mash a few degrees lower since american ale yeast tend to attenuate more.

i still see around 78% attenuation. if you like your beers a little drier, i'll cheers to that

idigg said:

I'm going to try this tomorrow! My very first recipe, no idea how this is going to turn out. I'm going to try a 45min boil first before I try a 30 or 20min.. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Not sure that's going to give you enough bitterness. I'd up the 10 min and 1 min additions to a full half oz each.

If more bitterness you want, up the FWH addition. The 10 and 1 will hardly affect IBU's.

I'll be doing a 45min mash and 45min boil on my PA and IPA from now. This is the best beer I made, probably hasn't nothing to do with shorter boil, but hop bursting is amazing.

Hookie, you vids rule.

justin

I usually boil for 30 or 40 minutes. When you're using small amounts of low-flavor, high-alpha hops, 30 should be fine; you'll just need about 1/3 more (you only need roughly 15% more at 40 vs 60). How much flavor do Magnum/Millenium/etc... add anyway? If I'm using CTZ/Nugget/Apollo or whatever, I'm probably adding the same thing later in the boil anyway. The extra 1/4 oz of hops is nothing compared to the extra propane I burn. Thi method also allows me to spend 20 fewer minutes outside in the Texas summer.

As far as a short mash goes, you might convert almost all your starches to sugars in 15 minutes, but a lot more of them will be unfermentable dextrins. Mashing at a higher temp makes both amylase enzymes work faster, except that they both get destroyed faster as well, especially the beta-amylase that is more responsible for fermentable sugars. That's all fine as long as it's consistent with the intended beer profile. Unless you're stirring almost constantly, letting your malt sit in hot water for longer will also increase the amount of sugar that's able to dissolve. You can do a sort-of hybrid short mash, mashing for 15 minutes, then letting the sparge water re-mash for as long as it takes to bring the first runnings to a boil.

kingwood-kid said:

You can do a sort-of hybrid short mash, mashing for 15 minutes, then letting the sparge water re-mash for as long as it takes to bring the first runnings to a boil.

Click to expand...

Or run-off really slowly and don't mash-out when you sparge.