efficiency's impact on taste

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

ampsman

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
154
Reaction score
12
Location
SAN JOSE
Say you have 2 batches of the same beer, all other things being the same lets say one was brewed with 12 lbs of 2 row and hit 70% efficiency, the other brewed with less grains but hit 85% efficiency, thus they both ended up with the same OG despite differing grain bills.
How would the flavor differ between these beers?
 
since efficiency, does not take in account for fermentable vs non-fermentable (dextrine) sugar, and just ratio, you could end up with what looks like better eff. but really just more dextrines due to temprature variances. so at the end of primary you'll then notice what seems like two identical beers, but your process has varied between the two. hope that make sense, pretty much sci/chem at it best!!!
 
ampsman said:
Say you have 2 batches of the same beer, all other things being the same lets say one was brewed with 12 lbs of 2 row and hit 70% efficiency, the other brewed with less grains but hit 85% efficiency, thus they both ended up with the same OG despite differing grain bills.
How would the flavor differ between these beers?

Is this a "riddle me this"??

If the grain bills are identical except for scale and the Og is the same they should be the same, assuming they both finish the same as well-I believe....
 
So the real question would be.... Are fermentable or unfermentable sugars easier to extract or do they extract at the same rate?

good question?

If unfermentables extract first/easier. than a lower eff would result in more flavor. If fermentables extract first than lower eff would result in less flavor and more alchol.

I would guess they extract at the same rate.

i don't have a clue scientifically, but I'd be interested in results from a study.
 
Completely unscientific and purely personal, but after I stopped chasing efficiency my beers got better. All of my 70-75% beers always had a more satisfying mouthfeel and better flavors than my 85% and higher beers.
 
It's possible that the more sugars you extract the higher the chance of extracting tannins. So there may be more tannins in the higher efficiency batch. but there is only one way to find out...
 
The flavor compounds (dextrines, proteins, beta-glucans, Maillard/Caramelization byproducts etc...) seem to be easier to extract. Extract+Steep brewers get plenty of flavor from a 30-minute steep and rudimentary sparge. AG brewers might spend 2 hours mashing & sparging just to get 75% of the sugars in the grain.
 
Say you have 2 batches of the same beer, all other things being the same lets say one was brewed with 12 lbs of 2 row and hit 70% efficiency, the other brewed with less grains but hit 85% efficiency, thus they both ended up with the same OG despite differing grain bills.
How would the flavor differ between these beers?

They would be the same. If I'm doing someone else's recipe and they get 85% efficiency, I scale the recipe for my 72% efficiency.

What I mean is this- if a recipe is 90% pale malt, 5% crystal 20L and 5% 60L, and the OG is 1.073, it doesn't matter if I got it with 72% efficiency (12 pounds two row, .70 pounds each of both crystal malts) or with 85% efficiency (10.5 pounds two-row, .60 pounds of each crystal). It's the same grainbill.
 
Higher efficiency can yield more poly-phenols but so can low efficiency if the pH is out or conversion was so low it was over sparged.

In Brewing science and practice there is a graph showing different systems. Mash tuns typically at 96-97% have 165 ppm polyphenols, Lauter tuns at 98-99% have 180 ppm and mash filters that yield 102% have 195 ppm. Obviously our MLTs are far inferior to the commercial setups.

Polyphenals can be fined, filtered or aged out.
 
I debate the efficiency question in my head. We use the grain for two things; Simple sugars to give us alcohol, and other compounds that contribute to the flavor and body. Efficiency is largely just a measure of the starch conversion, and I don't think it relates much to the extraction of flavor compounds (unless the efficiency is way low). I always wonder that if one gets too efficient, then you use less grain to keep the alcohol content down. But then do you get less flavor compounds as a result of using less base malt?

I don't have a good answer. I made some changes and my efficiency is now routinely 90%. I can't say that I've noticed any decrease in the flavors of my beers. Most of my beer recipes are probably at least 85% base malts, in fact many are all base malts (pils, munich, vienna and wheat)
 
I think this mostly comes for things JZ has said on BN. He has posted here that he thinks his beer tastes best at 70-75% (back in 2009.) That made me try to lower my mash efficiency with less water and topping the kettle off. I honestly could not tell any difference in beer quality. I don't think any homebrewer has had their wort chemically analyzed to see exactly how much bad stuff their really getting, and even if they did it would only apply to them and their setup.
 
OP, I think your focus is in the wrong place, like a few of the other responses have alluded to.

The importance of efficiency isn't really chasing a higher number, it is in CONSISTENCY. The commercial brewers don't figure out ways to increase efficiency, per se, they dial in a 75-85% efficiency on each of their setups then aim to consistency replicate whatever that number may be. This way they can rely on the fact that if they hit all of their numbers throughout the process, including the equipment's target efficiency, then they will consistently recreate the exact same beer.

So in the grand scheme, efficiency is really more important consistency in replicating past recipes. Once you get your system consistently above about a 70% efficiency, the aim should be replicating that efficiency, not UPPING it.
 
I don't think so. If a commercial operation is more the 3% off laboratory extract they find out what they are doing wrong. Homebrewer's can just relax.

Denny has posted than Serra Nevada has hit 100%. I assume that is with a lauter tun (separate mash tun.)
 
This is an interesting topic. My last two, a schwarzbier with bavarian lager and an IPA both finished a few points higher than the target FG, lending to a slightly sweeter than desired beer. Over time, the conditioned beer lost some of it's sweetness but the FG was definitely .02-.03 higher. With a change in my grain crush and volume of mash, I'm hitting 80-85% with recipes that are 80-85% base malt.
 
Efficiency is largely just a measure of the starch conversion, and I don't think it relates much to the extraction of flavor compounds (unless the efficiency is way low).


I would disagree. I look at efficiency in 2 parts. Mash Efficiency is a measure of starch conversion. Lauder efficiency is a measure of your ability to rinse the sugars off the grain. The higher the lauder efficiency the more flavor compounds I would extract. That includes phenols, tannins, etc...
 
I would disagree. I look at efficiency in 2 parts. Mash Efficiency is a measure of starch conversion. Lauder efficiency is a measure of your ability to rinse the sugars off the grain. The higher the lauder efficiency the more flavor compounds I would extract. That includes phenols, tannins, etc...

You are correct. I guess I tend to think of efficiency in terms of conversion. I think that most people who have efficiency issues do so largely because of conversion issues, not lauter efficiency. But it is true, problems with lautering can lead to efficiency issues.
 
Mill gap has more to do with it than anything. The tighter it is makes lautering more difficult but it also makes more conversion happen. Conversion is 90% or more of my total efficiency. If I mashed thinner and didn't sparge 10% is all I could loose. BIAB eats into that difference even more with less grain absorption.
 
If you're looking at the whole beer and not just extract, hopping rates would be affected too by varying efficiency. I brewed an APA recently where I missed my efficiency by 10% (still can't figure out how?!?) and my beer was considerably hoppier than I was anticipating (not that it's a bad thing, mind you).
 
Back
Top