Conditioning grain == awesome.

Finally got my own mill and a bunch of bulk grain. decided to try this malt conditioning thing for my inaugural batch and I'm wow'd. The grind is so light and fluffy I want to make a pillow out of it. I searched but I couldn't find a grain in there that wasn't perfectly crushed with a nice puffy, intact hull. The conditioning step only took a couple of minutes, why don't more people do this?

On the down side I don't have a drill so I hand cranked all 18lbs of grain and I'm typing this with my left arm because I can't feel my right. seriously, I underestimated how much work that was going to be.

I've yet to try it, but I think I should since my mill is home built and doesn't grab quite as good as a proper one.

So you just soaked the grain en mass for a certain time? Was there a certain temp of water you used? Did you dry it out again before running it through?

Here's a really good write-up on the process...

http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php/Malt_Conditioning

Psych said:

I've yet to try it, but I think I should since my mill is home built and doesn't grab quite as good as a proper one.

So you just soaked the grain en mass for a certain time? Was there a certain temp of water you used? Did you dry it out again before running it through?

Click to expand...

i followed kaiser's write-up on the wiki. I used just cold filtered tap water with a squirt bottle. I used about 5 oz. I was excpecting the grain to feel wet but it doesn't. I just sprayed and mixed about 10 minutes before milling. the husks will feel less papery and a little more pliable after the process but doesn't really feel wet.

I did this for the first time today as well. It's amazing how much of a difference it makes, and it's so easy to do that everyone should. Only bad thing is that it gunked up my rollers a little bit, but that's easily fixable.

im setting up an ugly junk corona grinder this week, should i condition when using that type of mill

thinking of trying myself, do u have a link to the process?

Sheldon

ArcaneXor said:

I did this for the first time today as well. It's amazing how much of a difference it makes, and it's so easy to do that everyone should. Only bad thing is that it gunked up my rollers a little bit, but that's easily fixable.

Click to expand...

i was expecting more of a mess on my mill but it turned out clean. I have the schmidling maltmill which funnels all the grain to the very center of the rollers so none of the grain worked its way over to the edges where it could have gotten gummed up.

It's the bees knees. I'll never go back to milling dusty ass grain.


-

Do you tighten up your grain mill when using conditioned malt?

I don't, but one could.

_

nickharbour said:

On the down side I don't have a drill so I hand cranked all 18lbs of grain and I'm typing this with my left arm because I can't feel my right. seriously, I underestimated how much work that was going to be.

Click to expand...

I don't care what anyone says, hand cranking a mill is hard work. I always use a drill. I tried to hand crank the mill when I first got it and I quickly decided to use a drill.

I bought a barley crusher last year and threw the handle away after about 2 lbs. I am a firm believer in power tools.

Delete

wildwest450 said:

It's the bees knees. I'll never go back to milling dusty ass grain.
-

Click to expand...

I hear you. It also helped me jump 5 points in eff due to cranking down my mill. I now have my Monster set at .030 and could go tighter I think. The husks come out almost whole. You can see why commercial breweries do it.

From my understanding, if you've got the grain wet enough its gunking up the rollers, its too wet.

Really you mist, wait, mist, wait...the grain doesn't ever feel 'wet' or even 'damp' so it won't stick.

I went on the Boulevard tour, and their setup sprays the malt as it falls into the mill hopper. Pretty sweet.

HawkATP said:

Do you tighten up your grain mill when using conditioned malt?

Click to expand...

I did. I am running at 25 mil on my MM3. Awesome crush.

malkore said:

From my understanding, if you've got the grain wet enough its gunking up the rollers, its too wet.

Really you mist, wait, mist, wait...the grain doesn't ever feel 'wet' or even 'damp' so it won't stick.

I went on the Boulevard tour, and their setup sprays the malt as it falls into the mill hopper. Pretty sweet.

Click to expand...

I have seen "misting" conveyor belts between the grain silos and the grist silo (before crushing). I wonder how much that really helps efficiency or sparging in a commercial setting where they have much better mills and continuously stirred mashes with huge falsebottoms?

Also, my experience has been that I PREFER to condition the night before. You can apply more water than what Kai has recommended (he recommends about 3 oz per 11 lbs) and it will be much more evenly distributed if you keep it in something like a cooler or closed vessel so the moisture and evenly distribute. Hulls get nice and fluffy that way.

I have thought about getting a mill, and a big reason why is to try conditioning. IMHO I get a nice crush from my LHBS, or at least nice enough that a 150-200 dollar investment in a mill is off-putting. Really convenience and ability to condition is about the only reason I'd get one.

Do any of you that do conditioning experience better extraction efficiency? How about flavor? What other benefits are some of you seeing that you like? What about stuff you don't like?

williamnave said:

I have thought about getting a mill, and a big reason why is to try conditioning. IMHO I get a nice crush from my LHBS, or at least nice enough that a 150-200 dollar investment in a mill is off-putting. Really convenience and ability to condition is about the only reason I'd get one.

Do any of you that do conditioning experience better extraction efficiency? How about flavor? What other benefits are some of you seeing that you like? What about stuff you don't like?

Click to expand...

Efficiency compared to LHBS? Yes. Efficiency compared to doing the crush myself on the same mill? Only a little. Getting a reliable and trustworthy crush from batch to batch? Hell yeah.

For some folks, though, the biggest benefit is in the filtering capability of the grain bed (and although I haven't tested this theory, I am guessing it helps conversion complete more quickly especially if you tighten the gap). The bigger and fluffier the hull output is the better your grain bed will be as a filter and the fewer rice hulls you'll have to add for things like wheats and ryes.

You don't have to spend $200 on a nice mill. You can get a barleycrusher with 7# hopper for $115+shipping, IIRC, just as one example. Plus you can buy in bulk, which is where the savings really start piling up.

Randar said:

Efficiency compared to LHBS? Yes. Efficiency compared to doing the crush myself on the same mill? Only a little. Getting a reliable and trustworthy crush from batch to batch? Hell yeah.

For some folks, though, the biggest benefit is in the filtering capability of the grain bed (and although I haven't tested this theory, I am guessing it helps conversion complete more quickly especially if you tighten the gap). The bigger and fluffier the hull output is the better your grain bed will be as a filter and the fewer rice hulls you'll have to add for things like wheats and ryes.

You don't have to spend $200 on a nice mill. You can get a barleycrusher with 7# hopper for $115+shipping, IIRC, just as one example. Plus you can buy in bulk, which is where the savings really start piling up.

Click to expand...

Its actually the opposite, conditioned grain is less effective as a filter. The light fluffy grain allows for easier flow so you reduce your chances of a stuck sparge but you need to recirculate for a lot longer to get clear wort flowing.

nickharbour said:

Its actually the opposite, conditioned grain is less effective as a filter. The light fluffy grain allows for easier flow so you reduce your chances of a stuck sparge but you need to recirculate for a lot longer to get clear wort flowing.

Click to expand...

I have not found that to be true whatsoever.

Randar said:

I have not found that to be true whatsoever.

Click to expand...

Bigger fluffier crush with more hulls suspended in the mash = lest small particles and partial hulls settled at the bottom = less dense mass at the bottom = more porous bottom = less effective filter.

We're not talking about a huge difference but it takes me about 1:30 to get a clear recirculation with conditioned malt as apposed to :30-1:00 with unconditioned.

Even if you argue that it filters the same as unconditioned I don't see how you can make the argument that conditioned malt improves the filtration.

nickharbour said:

Bigger fluffier crush with more hulls suspended in the mash = lest small particles and partial hulls settled at the bottom = less dense mass at the bottom = more porous bottom = less effective filter.

We're not talking about a huge difference but it takes me about 1:30 to get a clear recirculation with conditioned malt as apposed to :30-1:00 with unconditioned.

Even if you argue that it filters the same as unconditioned I don't see how you can make the argument that conditioned malt improves the filtration.

Click to expand...

Are you confusing "setting the grain bed" with "filtration" or am I?

Randar said:

Efficiency compared to LHBS? Yes. Efficiency compared to doing the crush myself on the same mill? Only a little. Getting a reliable and trustworthy crush from batch to batch? Hell yeah.

For some folks, though, the biggest benefit is in the filtering capability of the grain bed (and although I haven't tested this theory, I am guessing it helps conversion complete more quickly especially if you tighten the gap). The bigger and fluffier the hull output is the better your grain bed will be as a filter and the fewer rice hulls you'll have to add for things like wheats and ryes.

You don't have to spend $200 on a nice mill. You can get a barleycrusher with 7# hopper for $115+shipping, IIRC, just as one example. Plus you can buy in bulk, which is where the savings really start piling up.

Click to expand...

I take it I'm in the minority here, but my LHBS has a decent, reliable mill. they've probably got the gap set a little open to sell more grain, but I am getting 80+% effciency regularly. I also buy in bulk, and weigh it at home, and take it in with me and crush it there when I'm getting brew day stuff hops, yeast, dextrose, etc. I know I'm in the minority and I've heard the horror stories about HBS's with mill gaps you could stick your finger through. I am sure also that I could get a little better eff. by crushing myself, but honestly being in the 80's I'm ok with.

True, I could buy a Barley Crusher, but I'm a go-big-or-go-home kinda guy. If I break down and buy one, I'm eyeing the MM3. Plus I'm motorizing, if I go there. :rockin:

I am mostly curious about the other benefits - filtering, flavor, & extraction of malt that has been conditioned vs. un-conditioned malt.

nickharbour said:

Its actually the opposite, conditioned grain is less effective as a filter. The light fluffy grain allows for easier flow so you reduce your chances of a stuck sparge but you need to recirculate for a lot longer to get clear wort flowing.

Click to expand...

Complete and utter nonsense. You're living up to your user title with that post.


_

wildwest450 said:

Complete and utter nonsense. You're living up to your user title with that post.


_

Click to expand...

I'm all ears. Explain to me how a light and fluffy grain filters out particles better than the denser settled grain bed of unconditioned malt in a vorlauf. Would love to learn because it seems counter-intuitive.

williamnave said:

I take it I'm in the minority here, but my LHBS has a decent, reliable mill. they've probably got the gap set a little open to sell more grain, but I am getting 80+% effciency regularly. I also buy in bulk, and weigh it at home, and take it in with me and crush it there when I'm getting brew day stuff hops, yeast, dextrose, etc. I know I'm in the minority and I've heard the horror stories about HBS's with mill gaps you could stick your finger through. I am sure also that I could get a little better eff. by crushing myself, but honestly being in the 80's I'm ok with.

Click to expand...

I think, as you noted, you are in the minority with being able to buy in bulk but crush at the LHBS and having a tight enough setting to get 8-+ efficiency. A couple online vendors have pretty reliable crushes, but I don't consider it worth the risk of going from 80-85% efficiency to 65% and not being able to have any recourse once the grain is sitting in my MT. Also, you have a very convenient LHBS to your residence as well I take it!

But, cheers on the nice situation you have!

nickharbour said:

I'm all ears. Explain to me how a light and fluffy grain filters out particles better than the denser settled grain bed of unconditioned malt in a vorlauf. Would love to learn because it seems counter-intuitive.

Click to expand...

Your assertion is that shredded and maimed hulls are a better filter mechanism than intact ones. Every brewing-related literature written contradicts this.

Here it is put succinctly:
"This allows the grain to form a "bed" where the spent hulls support each other and form a filtration structure"

Shredded hulls will compact and just like water filter media, once it is totally compacted it loses filtration effectiveness.

Come watch me re-circ my mash at over a gallon per minute. Explain that.


_

It seems like the consensus from the previous threads I've read on this topic was opposite of what you guys are saying.

for example: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/malt-conditioning-wow-rocks-144752/

Search down the page for "filter".

That "consensus" simply relates to setting the grain/filter bed, as I noted above. You requiring a little more Vorlauf volume (recirc time) to set the grain bed is not directly indicative of any "filter" mechanism at all.

Once you have the filter mechanism "set" then the filtration is more effective. THAT is the point.

Randar said:

That "consensus" simply relates to setting the grain/filter bed, as I noted above. You requiring a little more Vorlauf volume (recirc time) to set the grain bed is not directly indicative of any "filter" mechanism at all.

Once you have the filter mechanism "set" then the filtration is more effective. THAT is the point.

Click to expand...

Well stated.


_

Randar said:

That "consensus" simply relates to setting the grain/filter bed, as I noted above. You requiring a little more Vorlauf volume (recirc time) to set the grain bed is not directly indicative of any "filter" mechanism at all.

Once you have the filter mechanism "set" then the filtration is more effective. THAT is the point.

Click to expand...

so this whole time I've been talking about vorlauf taking longer and you guys were bashing me, thats like, over?

I dont know how you are defining filter but I define it as to allow certain things to pass through while keeping other things out. vorlauf, getting clear wort, filterting out all the little pieces of junk. vorlauf takes longer = less effective filtering.

nickharbour said:

so this whole time I've been talking about vorlauf taking longer and you guys were bashing me, thats like, over?

Click to expand...

As long as you're going to keep confusing Vorlaufing with filtering, no, it's not over. And don't confuse "bashing" with disproving your logic/argument.

nickharbour said:

I dont know how you are defining filter but I define it as to allow certain things to pass through while keeping other things out. vorlauf, getting clear wort, filterting out all the little pieces of junk. vorlauf takes longer = less effective filtering.

Click to expand...

Seriously? You can't differentiate the need to remove the small particles from between the large hulls (TO SET THE GRAIN/FILTER BED) initially from the filtration process during the entire rest of the lauter? Really?

wildwest450 said:

Come watch me re-circ my mash at over a gallon per minute. Explain that.


_

Click to expand...

So here he's not talking about vorlauf? haha, nice try though.

nickharbour said:

So here he's not talking about vorlauf? haha, nice try though.

Click to expand...

No, he's talking about a RIMS with constant recirculation.

Would you like to keep digging that hole or you going to admit you were wrong?

Randar said:

No, he's talking about a RIMS with constant recirculation.

Would you like to keep digging that hole or you going to admit you were wrong?

Click to expand...

thats semantics. what we have here is a split definition of filtration and this still clearly falls in line with what I was describing. The flow of liquid through conditioned grain is better and it filters less effectively. By the same token sand filters great but flows poorly while marbles flow well put filter poorly.

If you think there's a big difference as it relates to this discussion between vorlaufing and recirculation, quit while you're behind.


_

nickharbour said:

thats semantics. what we have here is a split definition of filtration and this still clearly falls in line with what I was describing. The flow of liquid through conditioned grain is better and it filters less effectively. By the same token sand filters great but flows poorly while marbles flow well put filter poorly.

Click to expand...

It's not semantics when your only inclusion for defining filtering is during the Vorlauf period, in which case the only purpose is truly to remove "loose" particles and to place the filterbed into action.

Comparison to sand and marbles is a complete non sequitur.

It is clear, however, that you are unable to discuss outside the narrow scope to which you've convinced yourself this applies. So have fun talking in circles... I'm out.

Back to the topic at hand, I have not tried conditioning yet, but I am interested in trying it. What do you mix you grains in. I guess a hd homer bucket will work. How fine should the mist be? Any other tips and tricks?