step mash - Lagers only - benefits or waste of time?

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.

haeffnkr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
505
Reaction score
38
Location
St Peters Mo
Hi,
I have an E-BIAB setup.
So step mashing is easy for me.
I am interested in step mashing for lagers only.

I listened to the podcast the other day about Vienna lagers and the author recommended a mash of 130, then 150 then 160.

I ask the lager brewers, are there any taste benefits to a lager beer by doing a step mash?

thanks Kevin
 
With today's well modified malts, probably not so much. But decoctions are super fun and I do believe they make for better beer, especially with lagers.
 
My friends who do decoctions swear there's a definite difference. I think they're unnecessary. That being said, I'll do it eventually b/c it's a traditional practice I'd like to add to my repertoire.
 
The reasoning that malt is high modified, low protein, therefore, a step mash nor decoction isn't needed. Was started by a guy that didn't understand that certain things, having nothing to do with high modification, are created during the step or decoction method. A step mash or decoction create minerals and nutrients that aid yeast reproduction and an environment that aid enzymes. When some one mentions that 2 row, high modified malt is low in protein, is true. However, the term protein is a broad term. Excess protein is responsible for chill haze. During the 130F step that the recipe calls out. Protein, though less of it in high mod. malt, is broken down into albumin. It's albumin that creates body and head retention in the beer. When using high mod. malt, the 130F rest can be over done, resulting in a thin beer. Keep the rest short. Lagers are meant to be aged, not boiler to belly in 4 weeks. The step mash mimics the decoction except for the boiling part. The process is done to create a cleaner beer, free of excess starch and chill haze protein. The beer has the ability to age, and have a longer shelf life. George Fix developed the step mash method.
 
I do a very short rest at 133 for many of my lagers. I normally decoct, but infusion works well also especially for lighter lagers.

Is it strictly necessary? No, probably not. But I feel that I get a cleaner tasting lager with the right mouthfeel.
 
How short? I am currently drinking a Munich Helles that I mashed at 132 for 15 minutes and I ended up with no head retention. It pours with a pretty nice foam cap of really tight bubbles, but they totally disappear at high speed. It's almost like you can hear them fizzing out. Glassware is clean and retains head on other beers. I also did an overnight mash that I started too low (148f), and the beer went from 1.053 to 1.005 - so I may have just wiped out the protein with my entire mash.
 
I have experimented many times making the same recipe using step infusion mashes, decoction, and single infusion. I have never found any improvements (and minor, if any differences) by using step infusions or decoctions.
 
I have experimented many times making the same recipe using step infusion mashes, decoction, and single infusion. I have never found any improvements (and minor, if any differences) by using step infusions or decoctions.

Denny, the rational part of me suspects this is true. But I still don't want to admit it.

I do think there's a difference for a ferulic acid rest. Or maybe not. But I still do it anyway.
 
I have experimented many times making the same recipe using step infusion mashes, decoction, and single infusion. I have never found any improvements (and minor, if any differences) by using step infusions or decoctions.

Might depend on whether taste buds are stunned. Or, there is a failure within the processes used in the experiment. Experimenting means just that, experimenting. Experimenting would prove little, it it was done according to the way a person figured it should be done, if the person figured the wrong way. Perhaps, that's why you see minor, if any differences.


OP. Overnight mashing accomplishes little, enzymes become denatured with time and temp. After an hour or so at 148, beta is denatured. In a couple of hours alpha denatures. The grav. dropped low, due, to the 148 temp rest. The 148F rest makes a more fermentable wort. The beer will be thinner. Before a certain rest can accomplish what it is supposed to do, mash pH needs to be in the park. The degree of protein reduction during the protein rest can be based on how thick and slimy the protein sludge is, that lays on top of the filter bed. It should be pretty thick and kind of powdery. If it's gummy, the mashing process needs improvement. Doing BIAB or batch sparge methods, make it harder to determine if certain things take place, if those processes are blended with a step mash or decoction method, that are usually fly sparged through a filter bed.
 
Thanks for the replies thus far.

The people who have done the same recipe both ways, were they lager recipes?
Just asking if a light lager would show through any taste differences for a step vs single infused mash.

thanks Kevin
 
I have experimented many times making the same recipe using step infusion mashes, decoction, and single infusion. I have never found any improvements (and minor, if any differences) by using step infusions or decoctions.

Might depend on whether taste buds are stunned. Or, there is a failure within the processes used in the experiment. Experimenting means just that, experimenting. Experimenting would prove little, it it was done according to the way a person figured it should be done, if the person figured the wrong way. Perhaps, that's why you see minor, if any differences.

Tasting was done by a panel of experienced homebrewers, commercial brewers and BJCP judges.
 
Thanks for the replies thus far.

The people who have done the same recipe both ways, were they lager recipes?
Just asking if a light lager would show through any taste differences for a step vs single infused mash.

thanks Kevin

I brew quite a few lagers - especially helles, dortmunder, and pilsner. I have done decoction, step and infusion mashes. I have listened to all the podcasts and read many, many posts. I have done as Denny has suggested and experimented with various methods......

All, said and done..... I now do all my lagers with a straight infusion mash. Looking back over the past year or so, I can honestly say that I have brewed the 3-5 best lagers I have ever brewed in my life (based on personal tasting notes as well as competition results, as well as feedback from friends who are both knowledgeable about beer, and others who know nothing about it). Every one of those lagers was a simple infusion mash - 2 helles, 2 dortmunder, 1 pilsner. I have an oktoberfest lagering now, that I sampled yesterday, that I am really optimistic about - also infusion.

One danger, as mentioned earlier, with modern, highly modified malt - a protein rest that is even 15 minutes could leave you with a beer that has no head retention.

Overall, I think the potential reward of attempting step mashes, decoction mashes is somewhere between nonexistent and "maybe" perceived if you are looking for it(but probably not in a true blind tasting). On the other hand, there are a number of very real things that can go wrong in these processes that WILL screw up your beer, in very detectable ways. Plus, they take longer.

All said - I still recommend experimenting with each of the methods multiple times over the years. Decoctions are kind of cool to do if you don't mind taking some extra time. But, for brewing great lagers..... infusion can definitely do the job.
 
I've done them, I have a master brewer friend who swears by it. Although I don't think it's a huge difference between a single infusion and a decoction, why not try it? Why not brew the same beer twice over a weekend and see if YOU notice a difference? It takes an extra 5-10 minutes during your mash. Big deal. You're already in the beer for at least 3-5 hours. Just try it out and see what YOU like.
 
I do what is called a Hochkurz mash. (last section there)

Basically I it's a two step infusion mash (one at 145, a second at 158) that the German commercial breweries use. It works very well on my system, so I use it on all of my German lagers. I think it works quite easily, I can vary the first rest to influence my fermentability and I get tasty beers. I don't bother doing this on American style lagers. Why? Because I'm German myself and it makes me feel a slight bit more authentic to use the current German practices in my own brewery.
 
I do what is called a Hochkurz mash. (last section there)

Basically I it's a two step infusion mash (one at 145, a second at 158) that the German commercial breweries use. It works very well on my system, so I use it on all of my German lagers. I think it works quite easily, I can vary the first rest to influence my fermentability and I get tasty beers. I don't bother doing this on American style lagers. Why? Because I'm German myself and it makes me feel a slight bit more authentic to use the current German practices in my own brewery.

Right on, I love the Hochkurz mash. I did one just yesterday with infusions. The tricky part is getting the correct infusion volume to account for temp loss in mash. I had to adjust with a little more boiling water to get from 142 up to 158. Then pulled off about a gallon, brought to boil to raise to mash out.
I think a step infusion/decoction may benefit you if you're using 100% munich 10L in a dunkel, as a single infusion might not quite cut it.
 
I do what is called a Hochkurz mash. (last section there)

Basically I it's a two step infusion mash (one at 145, a second at 158) that the German commercial breweries use. It works very well on my system, so I use it on all of my German lagers. I think it works quite easily, I can vary the first rest to influence my fermentability and I get tasty beers. I don't bother doing this on American style lagers. Why? Because I'm German myself and it makes me feel a slight bit more authentic to use the current German practices in my own brewery.

Will BeerSmith 2.0 correctly calculate the amount of boiling water required for the next step? Or how do you calculate this?
 
Right on, I love the Hochkurz mash. I did one just yesterday with infusions. The tricky part is getting the correct infusion volume to account for temp loss in mash. I had to adjust with a little more boiling water to get from 142 up to 158. Then pulled off about a gallon, brought to boil to raise to mash out.
I think a step infusion/decoction may benefit you if you're using 100% munich 10L in a dunkel, as a single infusion might not quite cut it.

I use a heat stick to increase my temperature. I mash at 2qts/gal.

I also think perception is subjective, so we're all going to have different opinions on this one. What works for me may not work well for someone else., e.g. not having a heat stick.
 
Are you raising the temperature very slowly from the beta to alpha rest? I've had issues with denaturing enzymes with past brews in a bag where the bottom of the kettle is much hotter than the temp I'm recording near the top, even with stirring. A heat stick would be nice, but they're a little pricey.
 
Back
Top