anyone done a brew in a bag

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.

ThePonchoKid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
377
Reaction score
8
Location
Toronto
1 min boil brew?

I'm temped to try this.

How much water would I need for 10lbs of grain at 5.25 gal after a 1 min boil? 5.6 gal?
 
If you are going to boil for just 1 minutes, how are you going to get your hot break to precipitate, and where are you going to get you hop bitterness from?

-a.
 
If you are going to boil for just 1 minutes, how are you going to get your hot break to precipitate, and where are you going to get you hop bitterness from?

-a.

dump all the hops in in one go. can easily get 30ibu with 3-4oz high aa% hop pellets
 
That, and what about boiling off of the DMS precursors?

What are those?

I was making yogurt today and that's what made me think about the 1 min boil. You only need to make the milk reach a boil before cooling it and adding your cultures. So if not 1 min, what's the shortest boil time you can possibly do?
 
I'd do a one hour mash at a temp that suits the beer style, followed by one hour boil or 90 minutes for wheat. The water volume depends on your equipment loss and method of removing water from grain bag. I use the drip method, some will twist and squeeze the bag. I leave about .4 to .5 gal in the bag, I fear squeezing, that's just my way. If you tend to boil off 1.5 gallons in an hour you will need to add that to the pre boil volume. For me, that means .5 gal for grain loss & 1.5 gal evap loss in an hour, plus desired post boil volume 5.5 gal. So I would mash with 7.5 gallons for a non wheat beer. Keep the grain bag off the kettle base. You don't want a melted or burned sack. That's good advice for anytime. Enjoy, let me know how it turns out.
 
dump all the hops in in one go. can easily get 30ibu with 3-4oz high aa% hop pellets

According to Promash, using 6 lbs US pale malt for a 5g batch, you would need 9.75 oz of 15%AA pellet hops to achieve 30 IBU with a 1 minute boil. Increase the malt to get an OG > 1.032, and you would need even more hops.

That, and what about boiling off of the DMS precursors?

Agreed, and there are probably many other reasons for not doing it, that neither of us have thought about.

-a.
 
For 10 lbs of grain and a desired batch size of 5.25 gallons you'd need:
Batch volume * (1 + grain absorption constant ) = 5.25*(1+0.2) = 6.3 gallons. Or 25.2 quarts.
You're going to want to split that up so you don't mash too thin. Most people recommend 1.25-2 quarts of water per pound of grain. So: 1.5 quarts/lb * 10lbs. = 15 quarts of mash water.
Then your sparge volume is: (batch size + loss) - Mash volume = (25.2 + your system loss) - 15 = 10.2 quarts = 2.6 gallons.

Like others have said, getting hop bitterness is going to be difficult since even if you can extract the correct compounds they won't have enough time to undergo the reactions that give you the smooth bitterness you want. I'm sure you could find already isomerized hop oils online somewhere but it won't be the same thing. If you're looking to cut down your brew day that bad you can buy pre-bittered liquid malt extract, but it's not known for its superior flavor profile.
The shortest boil I've done was a 40 minute APA, it was good but it lacked the maltiness I was after that comes from some of the sugars getting caramelized in the boil. You could probably get away with a 20-30 minute boil if you used pre-bittered/hopped liquid extract and then added your own flavor hops in the remaining time. I doubt you'd win ribbons with it but it wouldn't be bad by any means. Keep in mind the long boil is there for a number of reasons: Sanitization, hop oil isomerization, protein denaturing, sugar caramelization, etc. Unfortunately you can only cut so much time off of the brewing process.

DMS is an undesired flavor compound that tastes like corn. The chemicals needed to create it are boiled off during the 60-90 minute boil process. You can read more here. https://www.homebrewtalk.com/wiki/index.php/Dimethyl_sulfides
 
Agreed, and there are probably many other reasons for not doing it, that neither of us have thought about.

-a.

Probably because there are about 100 reasons to not do this, and only one to do it. To save time. If saving 59 minutes is so crucial, then using six times as many hops might be worth it if you could find a way to boil off the DMS precursors and get a good hot break while doing the 1 minute boil. I assume you'd kill the lactobacillus on the grain with a 1 minute boil.

Bringing it to a boil would take the same amount of time, cooling the wort would take the same amount of time, and so would everything else. The only time savings would be the 59 minutes of the boil. If hops are selling for $3/ounce, it would only cost $43 more in hops.

What? No takers?
 
Looks like a one minute boil might be alright for a lager style beer. Or even 5 minutes to get a little more hop bitterness. According to beer calculus each minute between 1 and 5 shows an exponential difference in ibus. Near ice age lagering should help put out some proteins over a few months
 
Looks like a one minute boil might be alright for a lager style beer. Or even 5 minutes to get a little more hop bitterness. According to beer calculus each minute between 1 and 5 shows an exponential difference in ibus. Near ice age lagering should help put out some proteins over a few months

Sounds like you've got it all figured out. I'm no expert, but I don't think it'll boil off the DMS precursors (for a lager you'd want a 90 minute boil or longer for pilsner malt), or give you proper hops utilization, but you should definitely try it since you've got it all figured out. Saving 55 minutes of time would be a huge benefit, even if it's a DMS loaded mess.
 
Just trying to get a fresher more raw taste.

Well, if you've a mind to to it, then you'll do it.

You've been told by experienced brewers that you'll need to worry about DMS precursors.

Hops utilization and flavor is a huge issue. Hops will have a ton of flavor at 5 minutes, and they don't at 60 minutes, so that will totally change the picture of the hops bittering, flavor, and aroma.

But if that stuff doesn't concern you, and you're totally comfortable with doing it, then who are we to stop you?
 
If u trying to get fresher and more raw taste why dont just chew on some grains and hops ? Just chase it with a shot of vodka and u good to go .. Making yogurt or something ...
 
ThePonchoKid said:
I was asking if anyone has done it.

I sure haven't. For all the reasons listed in previous posts. I think something like a 30 minute boil could be viable, as long as there's no pilsner malt. But I don't have enough interest in saving that time to give it a whirl.
 
Driving without tires, that's cool right?

Anyhow, boiling the wort and hops causes all sorts of good chemical reactions that lead to good beer. Yeast will grow in whatever, so do your 1 minute boil and see what you get.
 
It would probably work, and you'd most certainly make beer however bad it would taste. The methods most of us use are brewing procedures handed down over hundreds of years, tried and true methods to make the best beer possible. Occasionally a new method will be developed, but honestly can't see this being one of them. I'd suggest trying it, it can at the very least be a learning experience.
 
I have considered something along those lines, when making 1 gallon batches, but had to reconsider due to the hops utilization. I was thinking of it mainly because of the boil loss. I had thought maybe I could cut down my boil time as it was a small batch and could except for the chemistry (hops, dme etc) involved. My first attempt at a one gallon batch ended badly as I didn't realize that once it starts boiling, it doesn't matter if you are boiling 1 gallon or 10, the boil-off rate is the same.
Try a 30 minute boil and see how it works, maybe it will be drinkable, maybe not, but if it ain't very good think how bad it might be if cut back by 59 minutes. Heck, I did a 60 minute boil on what should have been 90 minutes and didn't like the results, there are timetables for a reason, far more complicated than I can explain, I just take them as gospel now and try to make better beer.
 
jmtwo said:
Were you expecting to be told that you're a genius, and why didn't anyone think of this before?

+1 to this. And nobody played off the "You don't want a melted or burned sack." Post?

Personally, I don't want either. I'd say its your brew, do what you want. But personally, if I wanted to save time, I'd reduce to a 30 min. Boil vs. a 1 min. Boil first to see how it turned out.
 
You could make a Berliner Weiss, in which you don't actually have to boil the wort at all in some cases and hops aren't really an issue. If you are interested in what the effects of a minimal boil would be, that would be one way to find out.
 
It doesn't sound like anyone is really considering the viability of what you're proposing, which surprises me a little. Maybe it'll be awful, but maybe it won't. I've done a hop-bursted beer where I didn't put any hops in until 5 minutes, so you can get some utilization with just a few minutes. I assume if you boil for one minute, you might have the hops in there during the ramp-up and ramp-down stages which might mean as much as 20 minutes or more in hot liquid, which is plenty of time for bitterness, especially if you're doing a bock. I'd be a little concerned that in order to sterilize water, we're told to boil for at least 15 minutes, so any less time than that and you might find infection is a problem. DMS is less of a problem if you're not using Pilsner malt, or even extract. So if you're intent on this, you might have to pay careful attention to your style, and why a short boil might enhance that style. I don't think "freshness" is diminished through boiling, and especially if you're using extract. I suspect if you want a raw taste, you just want to use barley as lightly kilned as possible. Just my 2 cents.
 
barley as lightly kilned as possible? is there a name for that? i'm doing all grain btw

it doesn't surprise me that no one is considering the viability. they're all old timers here. they no doubt have tons of knowledge and wisdom. less so ideas

i might not be able to get 30 ibu reasonably on a 1 min boil, but i can on 3 min

as for DMS, the document that i was linked to never described definitively how much there is or how much of a problem it is. So I don't see the problem in giving this a try
 
it doesn't surprise me that no one is considering the viability. they're all old timers here. they no doubt have tons of knowledge and wisdom. less so ideas

There's no reason to assume that people who are experienced are short of ideas. Just because they presented a number of very reasonable concerns does not mean they're stick-in-the-mud fuddy duddies. They're trying to help. I don't think insulting people who are trying to help is the best plan, but you may disagree.

I mean, I could call brewing a beer using tomato soup for mash water and fermenting at 120 degrees an idea, but it doesn't mean that people shouldn't point out why that might be a problem.

i might not be able to get 30 ibu reasonably on a 1 min boil, but i can on 3 min

You certainly can. You will end up with tons of hop aroma and flavor, which may be exactly what you want, and depending on style, could be awesome. You may potentially end up with some vegetal notes just based on the large amount of hopping, but maybe not.

as for DMS, the document that i was linked to never described definitively how much there is or how much of a problem it is. So I don't see the problem in giving this a try

No one told you not to try it. They gave you reasons why it might not work. DMS is one of them. Depending on the beer you make, it may not be an issue at all. The stronger the flavors in your beer (including the massive hop flavor discussed above), the less likely you are to notice DMS.

While I agree that "its always been done this way" is not the end all and be all as far as how things should be done, its worth considering that there's typically a reason why things are done as they are. If microbreweries felt they could cut 55 minutes off each batch by doing a 5 minute boil, they would have a financial incentive to do so. However, I don't believe any of them are (none that I know if). So while its possible that you have come up with a brilliant plan, it seems more likely that some of the concerns others have raised explain why its not done commercially.

But certainly, good luck with your endeavor. I, for one, would be quite curious to hear how it turns out.
 
ThePonchoKid said:
Just trying to get a fresher more raw taste.

Then just grind up a bunch of grain, sprinkle some hop pellets on top add some milk and call it breakfast cereal:)
 
U can probably do it with supercritical water. Just add some boson lasers and u got urself perfect system. I can see advertisement in near future "From grain to glass in an hour". But seriously ... Why? What's the point of 1 min boil? Maybe do 10 hour boil .. See how that works out for ya
 
In the interest of civility...; To the OP, I presume if you tinkered with the recipie you probably could approximate a reasonable beer doing a 1 minute boil. As stated above, you'd have to adjust the hops, and proteins would be much higer along with the DMS issue. Perhaps this could be solved by adjusting the grain bill? I suggest you do a few and see how it works for you. Personally, I believe that the process used for hundreds of years is probably a good place for a novice like me to start, But hey, there was a babylonian somehere that left some grains out in a jar, they go rained on and then baked in the sun. Fermentation took place and the rest is history. Perhaps if that babylonian had instead left that same jar on a fire for a while, we'd be brewing in an entirely different manner. Pleasee let us know what your results were
 
Back
Top