Adjuncts, starches, and sour beer.

Since I've subscribed to this thread I've brewed two sours with steeping oats for unconverted starches and have used 16oz for 11 gallons, in a mesh strainer as my wort hist 170F, pulled them out just before the boil.

ALSO might I add...I ate those oats for breakfast immediately and they were PHENOMENAL.

I have done several variations of this.
I will be following and adding my results when I have some.

Will steeping unmalted wheat instead of flaked oats yield the same results? Also, what about adding lactose to the boil? Has anyone tried this yet?

I would not expect the same results from steeping unmalted wheat. Very different from rolled oats.

Why add lactose?

40watt said:

I would not expect the same results from steeping unmalted wheat. Very different from rolled oats.

Why add lactose?

Click to expand...

While I know it is very different from flaked oats, I would think that unmalted wheat could still add a significant amount of starches if it is steeped in the same fashion before the boil, no?

My thinking for the lactose was to add some long chain sugars for the brett to munch on since the sacch can't eat it.

40watt said:

I would not expect the same results from steeping unmalted wheat. Very different from rolled oats.

Click to expand...

Flaked wheat and rolled oats are made using the same process and both are unmalted. They're rolled with very hot rollers and are both pre-gelantinized which means they don't need a cereal mash done. Either way, with this process the idea is to get unconverted starch in the wort so the bugs have something to eat over a longer period of time, so it doesn't really matter. I've used whole wheat flour before to achieve the same results.

cjalderman said:

While I know it is very different from a flaked malt, I would think that unmalted wheat could still add a significant amount of starches if it is steeped in the same fashion before the boil, no?

My thinking for the lactose was to add some long chain sugars for the brett to munch on since the sacch can't eat it.

Click to expand...

I think we're using some incorrect words here, and just want to set everything straight for other people who read this.

There are several types of unmalted grain and they are usually flaked grains (rolled oats, flaked wheat, flaked maize, etc) - these are pre-gelatinized and are able to be used in the mash without having to do a cereal mash in normal brewing. In this process the idea is to have them only contribute starches that the lacto and brett are able to eat over a longer period of time. By adding them in a steeping bag when the temp is over 180F, you ensure they don't convert and only contribute starch which sacch can't eat.

Here's another thread that talks about flaked vs rolled oats - they're basically the same thing, only one is cut smaller - https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/rolled-oats-vs-flaked-oats-134530/

There really isn't "flaked malt" that I'm aware of.

cadillacandy said:

By adding them in a steeping bag when the temp is over 180F, you ensure they don't convert and only contribute starch which sacch can't eat.

Click to expand...

flaked grains will not convert on their own. their enzymes were denatured during the flaking process. "mashing" flaked grains at 150*F for an hour will yield very little to no conversion. you need to mash flaked grains with a base malt, so that the base malt can provide the required enzymes.

cadillacandy said:

There really isn't "flaked malt" that I'm aware of.

Click to expand...

yup, you can't flake malt since malt has been dried out during the malting process. it would shatter when rolled. also, there wouldn't be much point in flaking malt: no need to gelatinize the starches in a malt.

cadillacandy said:

I think we're using some incorrect words here, and just want to set everything straight for other people who read this.

There are several types of unmalted grain and they are usually flaked grains (rolled oats, flaked wheat, flaked maize, etc) - these are pre-gelatinized and are able to be used in the mash without having to do a cereal mash in normal brewing. In this process the idea is to have them only contribute starches that the lacto and brett are able to eat over a longer period of time. By adding them in a steeping bag when the temp is over 180F, you ensure they don't convert and only contribute starch which sacch can't eat.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction, I edited my original post. And just so my question is clear, I bought rahr unmalted wheat (raw wheat) to use in my lambic that I'm brewing soon. If I separate portion of it and steep it in 180F wort, it will release starches that will not be converted, correct? Or, would I have to do a cereal mash to release the starches and add them back in after the mash is done (above any amylase conversion temps).

cjalderman said:

Thanks for the correction, I edited my original post. And just so my question is clear, I bought rahr unmalted wheat (raw wheat) to use in my lambic that I'm brewing soon. If I separate portion of it and steep it in 180F wort, it will release starches that will not be converted, correct? Or, would I have to do a cereal mash to release the starches and add them back in after the mash is done (above any amylase conversion temps).

Click to expand...

That would be correct. Using unmalted wheat is basically the same as using flour.

cadillacandy said:

That would be correct. Using unmalted wheat is basically the same as using flour.

Click to expand...

How much flour do you use for what batch size? Any details on process? Just dump it into the boil kettle?

I'm interested in trying out the use of flour for starches but haven't found anything definitive on the process yet.

ne0t0ky0 said:

How much flour do you use for what batch size? Any details on process? Just dump it into the boil kettle?



I'm interested in trying out the use of flour for starches but haven't found anything definitive on the process yet.

Click to expand...

That's a good question. I don't think anyone has a solid number. I frequently use whole wheat flour in the mash, and have only added it to the kettle once and I only used about 1/8 of a cup in a 6 gallon batch.

If anyone has better info, please chime in.

I used 1 TBSP, but that was part of a multi pronged aproach that included malted wheat in the mash and rolled oats steeped in the boil as well as the flour.
I am not worried about having too much starches or proteins in a sour.

I transferred one of the beers made with this process to secondary yesterday. Yeast used was ECY20. It had gone from 1.052 to 1.009. Taste was funky, sweet, with a silky mouth-feel and very slight sourness. The wort is still very cloudy.

The beer is about 1.5 months old at this point. I'll keep an eye on it to see how its appearance changes, but I won't be tasting again for a few months.

metic said:

I transferred one of the beers made with this process to secondary yesterday. Yeast used was ECY20. It had gone from 1.052 to 1.009. Taste was funky, sweet, with a silky mouth-feel and very slight sourness. The wort is still very cloudy.

The beer is about 1.5 months old at this point. I'll keep an eye on it to see how its appearance changes, but I won't be tasting again for a few months.

Click to expand...

I recently did an ECY20 beer, and am eager to get the beer off of the yeast so that I can put another batch on it. How much flocculation did you get after 1.5 months?

Plenty, there was what looked like a fairly large yeast cake. Some of it may have been trub, but I am careful to transfer as little as possible into the fermenter.

I thought about saving some, but all my fermenters are full/earmarked for now; besides, I split my vial between several batches so I have plenty of beers in secondary with some ECY20 in that I can reuse.

i too have recently done a steeped oats experiment. in my case they were steeped and boiled. i made a 1.058 brew using some leftover second running from my oud bruin batch, some wheat DME, a little malto-d, and both instant and steelcut oats that were cooked for a half hour. the resulting wort was rather thick and opaque. i had been stepping up (without a stir-plate) dregs from several sour beers (Jester king Uberkind, Rivertown Brewing Ojos Negros, two Crooked Stave bottles, possibly others). i split the wort into 3 one-gallon jugs. i added a few drops of Westmalle yeast to 2 of the 3 because i wanted some brett-on-sacch funk and i wasn't sure how much sacch if any was in my hodge-podge of dregs.

i'm about a week and a half in. primary fermentation was pretty messy, unconverted starch = thick blowoff. air lock smelled really nice and fruity.

That's one thing I'm getting about this yeast is airlock is probably not a good idea the first few weeks. Just let that thing come out of a foil cover or blow off for a few days and clean it up and put the airlock on there. Beast of a yeast.

statseeker said:

That's one thing I'm getting about this yeast is airlock is probably not a good idea the first few weeks. Just let that thing come out of a foil cover or blow off for a few days and clean it up and put the airlock on there. Beast of a yeast.

Click to expand...

I was shocked to have not had that experience. The krausen was maybe an inch at it's peak (documented on my YT chan). However, I put about 4 drops of Five Star Defoamer in the fermenter. I've never done this before, but I've read that it helps keep krausen/blow off from getting out of control. I can't be certain that this is what kept the krausen down, but it is one factor. Someone on my YT channel commented that he split his ECY20 between 10 gallons and had a similar krausen level to me, and did not use a defoamer agent. Maybe the ECY20 culture has changed. Mine was from the November 2013 batch.

dantheman13 said:

I was shocked to have not had that experience. The krausen was maybe an inch at it's peak (documented on my YT chan). However, I put about 4 drops of Five Star Defoamer in the fermenter. I've never done this before, but I've read that it helps keep krausen/blow off from getting out of control. I can't be certain that this is what kept the krausen down, but it is one factor. Someone on my YT channel commented that he split his ECY20 between 10 gallons and had a similar krausen level to me, and did not use a defoamer agent. Maybe the ECY20 culture has changed. Mine was from the November 2013 batch.

Click to expand...

Yup - that would be me that commented on your video. I split it between 2 carboys and had about an inch of krausen at peak fermentation. My temp was right at 70F too.

I steeped some oats in my boil; here is the beer 2 weeks after pitching ECY20. It looks like orange juice with pulp! I have a feeling this is going to take a couple of years to get it where I want it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzBjLIJqdyg

Tasting my ECY20 beer with oats steeped in the boil at a month and a half: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o158aTnuPKM&list=PLibE2BjPG_8GdGT0mC9pXapWtbgr6_UfJ

Surprisingly, the beer doesn't taste much more turbid than a normal Hef, even at this early age.

What were you trying to accomplish or get out of tasting that beer so young and early?

chad_ said:

What were you trying to accomplish or get out of tasting that beer so young and early?

Click to expand...

Nothing more than learning really, and as a comparison note between another young sour beer (which was way more sour than this one at 2.5 months). For example, I am now curious if this beer will get more sour over time as sometimes with other blends they never get very sour on the first use. As they tell new homebrewers, taste everything along the way.

TL;DR up front: Would adding a porridge made with a good source of starch, say rice flour, and adding to the secondary after cooling provide some starch without adding much more than staling accelerators (oxygen)?

I'm in a rather specific situation and this is one of the things I've considered to improve a particular beer I am working on.

Problem:
I've added cantaloupe to the secondary of a saison I had intended to be clean. I guess I didn't use enough sorbate in the fruit because now I have a great band-aid profile from some wild stuff.

My plan to fix:
I'd like to pitch some brett to eat up some of the phenolic character and leave some farmhouse in its place, I've heard that B. bruxellensis can do this. In order to ensure that I have enough starch left over, I have considered making a pasteurized starch porridge and adding a small amount of that to give the Brett some food to munch on.

Does it sound sane? Should I just pitch brett without the porridge?

Brettanomyces doesn't actually need much in the way of starches/sugars to make a flavour contribution. The ideas in this thread were more directed towards leaving food for lactic-acid producing bacteria, which do need food to do their thing. In fact, this is pure speculation, but I wonder if by adding extra starch along with the brett you might make it less likely to work on whatever compounds are giving you off-flavours.

metic said:

Brettanomyces doesn't actually need much in the way of starches/sugars to make a flavour contribution. The ideas in this thread were more directed towards leaving food for lactic-acid producing bacteria, which do need food to do their thing. In fact, this is pure speculation, but I wonder if by adding extra starch along with the brett you might make it less likely to work on whatever compounds are giving you off-flavours.

Click to expand...

+1. you might even end up feeding whatever nasties you have in there.

don't worry about feeding the brett, just pitch it. there is plenty in there for the brett to eat, including the cantaloupe.

So did we reach any idea on the best practice for what percent of the total grist the steeped unmalted adjuncts can be? I've seen some pretty wildly varying amounts.

I'm curious too. Any samples of the beers that have been brewed?

TheZymurgist said:

I'm curious too. Any samples of the beers that have been brewed?

Click to expand...

I'll video up a tasting in the next week or two. Now is a good time to decide if I want to add more oak to it anyway. Cheers!

Subscribed. I'm interested to hear feedback from the beers that where brewed.

I brewed two 5G sour batches this summer and added 1TBS of wheat flour to each batch at the beginning of the 90 minute boil. I also fermented each batch for a month in a bucket and then transferred into glass carboys onto used sour yeast cakes. I know this thread consists of experimental techniques. What I'm wondering is does anyone have feedback on using wheat flour and when to add it in the boil, beginning vs. end? If starch was present in the wort during primary fermentation, would it have dropped out of suspension before I transferred to the secondary?

I am under the impression that it is a last 15 minute addition.
One would think that if it was added at the start,then it would just drop out?

My update on steeping .5 lbs of oats in the beginning of the boil. The beer is 9 months old:

http://tinyurl.com/l437y7f

In short, the beer tastes really good, is pretty sour, but I can't determine what the starches contributed to the beer!

A lot of information on this thread about adding starches in the boil.

The gist of adding them seems to be for bugs to make lactic acid. However, some posts say brets can breakdown starches as well, and will do it faster. Would there then be benefits of adding some boiled flour or something similar to add starches several months after you pitched?

Also, has anyone done a comparison? Turbid mash vs Adding starches in other ways vs just using something like malted or torrified wheat in a normal mash?

I pitched some ECY20 yesterday on a 7lb pils and 5lbs torrified wheat wort. I am thinking of leaving it as is, but maybe adding starches months down the road if I want more lactic acid.

messiah said:

A lot of information on this thread about adding starches in the boil.

The gist of adding them seems to be for bugs to make lactic acid. However, some posts say brets can breakdown starches as well, and will do it faster. Would there then be benefits of adding some boiled flour or something similar to add starches several months after you pitched?

Also, has anyone done a comparison? Turbid mash vs Adding starches in other ways vs just using something like malted or torrified wheat in a normal mash?

I pitched some ECY20 yesterday on a 7lb pils and 5lbs torrified wheat wort. I am thinking of leaving it as is, but maybe adding starches months down the road if I want more lactic acid.

Click to expand...

I would hold off on trying to make anything with ecy20 more sour.

I brewed a sour with it almost a year and half ago, it included flaked rye, flaked week I gave it a taste and its really good! More importantly the pH of the uncarbonated beer is 2.6! Which is really freaking acidic for a flat beer.

messiah said:

Also, has anyone done a comparison? Turbid mash vs Adding starches in other ways vs just using something like malted or torrified wheat in a normal mash?

Click to expand...

Check this guy out:

http://americanlambic.blogspot.com/

mnick12 said:

I would hold off on trying to make anything with ecy20 more sour.

I brewed a sour with it almost a year and half ago, it included flaked rye, flaked week I gave it a taste and its really good! More importantly the pH of the uncarbonated beer is 2.6! Which is really freaking acidic for a flat beer.

Click to expand...

are you sure you measured that right? 2.6 ph sounds undrinkable!

Double post. Mobile app acting up.

inflictor-of-grimness said:

are you sure you measured that right? 2.6 ph sounds undrinkable!

Click to expand...

Ya I have a pretty decent pH meter, so I am confident in that reading. As far as sourness goes it is very tart, but good. This is definatly going to be blended with something more mild when I decide to bottle.

A contributing factor, I believe, is the tempurature. I live in AZ and it is always warm here, which I think favored bacterial activity.