Lager Decoction Help

CidahMastah said:

I sort of feel I need to explore each style and lager is the next one on my hit list

Click to expand...

Mischaracterization. Sorry to be so pedantic, but "lager" is not a style, it's a technique, a biological distinction, a mindset. Probably 90% of beer sold, by volume, is lager, but that includes everything from Keystone to Samichlaus.

I love brewing lager beers since I came across 2308. It's incredibly easy to work with, and the resulting beers are clean and tasty. I won't use another lager yeast until someone can demonstrate an advantage over the Wissenschaftliche strain.

944play said:

Mischaracterization. Sorry to be so pedantic, but "lager" is not a style, it's a technique, a biological distinction, a mindset. Probably 90% of beer sold, by volume, is lager, but that includes everything from Keystone to Samichlaus.

I love brewing lager beers since I came across 2308. It's incredibly easy to work with, and the resulting beers are clean and tasty. I won't use another lager yeast until someone can demonstrate an advantage over the Wissenschaftliche strain.

Click to expand...

yah yah - meant I am chasing a pilsner!!

I grabbed the Wyeast 2001 for this one, but I will have to check out your 2308 for a recipe if you stand by it as well.

Yooper said:

Yes, for most lagers I will do a decoction. Some are just "nice" to do, like in an Oktoberfest, but I think it's absolutely required for a Bohemian pilsner! For some lagers, you could throw in some melanoidin malt and call it good, but NOT in a BoPils.

Click to expand...

Do you do the single decoction with the 10-20 minute rest (before heating decoction up to a boil) as tigerbrew and spanish were describing?

question 2 - do you think I am ok with doing a single decoction at the end of a step mash, boiling for 10-20 minutes as I noted earlier? or do you think this will not have a similar effect.

i.e. :
1. Use strike water to get to 133F then rest;
2. direct fire to 155f and hold 45 minutes,
3. Pull decoction from mash and boil 20 minutes and return to achieve mash out @ 170F.

CidahMastah said:

Do you do the single decoction with the 10-20 minute rest (before heating decoction up to a boil) as tigerbrew and spanish were describing?

question 2 - do you think I am ok with doing a single decoction at the end of a step mash, boiling for 10-20 minutes as I noted earlier? or do you think this will not have a similar effect.

i.e. :
1. Use strike water to get to 133F then rest;
2. direct fire to 155f and hold 45 minutes,
3. Pull decoction from mash and boil 20 minutes and return to achieve mash out @ 170F.

Click to expand...

The protein rest is a short rest, and yes, you'll heat it up to saccification temperatures, hold it, and then bring it to a boil before adding back to the MLT. That means that you almost immediately have to pull the decoction.

I don't think I've ever done a single decoction just to mash out. Usually, I do either one from protein rest to saccrification rest #1 and then saccrification rest #2 (like this: 133/149/156) or from protein rest to saccrification rest to mashout (like this: 133/152/168)

Yooper said:

The protein rest is a short rest, and yes, you'll heat it up to saccification temperatures, hold it, and then bring it to a boil before adding back to the MLT. That means that you almost immediately have to pull the decoction.

I don't think I've ever done a single decoction just to mash out. Usually, I do either one from protein rest to saccrification rest #1 and then saccrification rest #2 (like this: 133/149/156) or from protein rest to saccrification rest to mashout (like this: 133/152/168)

Click to expand...

So maybe you can answer my question on the sacch rest before boil on the first decoction. 1. Is this done because we are using highly modified malts?

It just didn't seem to me like this was how I read old school decoctions where done before thermometers. Guess I am saying, how would they have known when they hit 155F for the sach rest? I assumed that the decoction, when boiling and in a certain volume when added back in was the mechanism to reach the next step. Am I misunderstanding that?

I was thinking that if the main purpose, since we have highly modififed malts, is to cook a thick decoction for 10-30 minutes, why bother with all the transfers and rests? If you have to bring the malt up to 155F and hold it, similar to an infusion mash, aren't you simply doing an infusion, then boiling for slight color and possible flavor improvement (sort of like carmelization of sugars when roasting vegetables).

Tigerbrew said he actually had some luck with a similar process.

CidahMastah said:

Do you do the single decoction with the 10-20 minute rest (before heating decoction up to a boil) as tigerbrew and spanish were describing?

question 2 - do you think I am ok with doing a single decoction at the end of a step mash, boiling for 10-20 minutes as I noted earlier? or do you think this will not have a similar effect.

i.e. :
1. Use strike water to get to 133F then rest;
2. direct fire to 155f and hold 45 minutes,
3. Pull decoction from mash and boil 20 minutes and return to achieve mash out @ 170F.

Click to expand...

The single decoction for mash out works, and will get you close, but for true authenticity, I usually do the mash schedule Yooper mentioned. If you wanted to, you could start with the simpler single decoction, then try the double or triple once you're comfortable and compare the two.

TB

Tiber_Brew said:

The single decoction for mash out works, and will get you close, but for true authenticity, I usually do the mash schedule Yooper mentioned. If you wanted to, you could start with the simpler single decoction, then try the double or triple once you're comfortable and compare the two.

TB

Click to expand...

Not a bad idea. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to dodge decoction. It does make me think that authenticity can't be found unless you do an old school decoction, with old school under modified malts.

This of course is all intuitive reasoning on my part - not practical, tried or actual experience. Though I can't help but think that:
1. if we rely on an infusion to convert starch in the described decotion, why not do an infusion, and pull a thick decoction and boil it until we get the melanoidins we are looking for in the batch.

One other tidbit:

Assumptions:

a.since today's malts have solved the issue of reliable starch to sugar conversion
b. thermometers solved the issue of obtaining accurate temperatures

It would make sense to pull the decoction late in the game, as to preserve enzymes for a solid infusion.
OR, as I understand it (correct me if I am wrong); the melanoidins are can be created simply by boiling. So possibly extending your boil to 120 or 150 minutes on the wort may get similar results.

However, I would assume boiling a thick decoction for 30 minutes would give you more bang for your buck on melanoidin production than extending wort boil 30 mintues - but not sure on that.

CidahMastah said:

Not a bad idea. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to dodge decoction. It does make me think that authenticity can't be found unless you do an old school decoction, with old school under modified malts.

This of course is all intuitive reasoning on my part - not practical, tried or actual experience. Though I can't help but think that:
1. if we rely on an infusion to convert starch in the described decotion, why not do an infusion, and pull a thick decoction and boil it until we get the melanoidins we are looking for in the batch.

Click to expand...

That's essentially what you're doing with the single mashout decoction. However, when you do a pre-sacch rest decoction, you're breaking down cell walls and exposing more available starches for the upcoming conversion rest, among other chemical events I don't fully understand. I suppose there are other benefits to multiple decoctions, but I can't tell you with any certainty what exactly is happening in the decoction/mash interaction. Yoop? Anything to add?

TB

Tiber_Brew said:

However, when you do a pre-sacch rest decoction, you're breaking down cell walls and exposing more available starches for the upcoming conversion rest,

TB

Click to expand...

Understood - but this would only lead to slightly better efficiency right? My argument there would be, grain is cheap so the slightly better efficiency wouldn't be enough incentive for the hassle.

With the caveat that other possible chemical reactions may be going on to contribute to flavor complexity etc. (which you noted you don't understand, and I sure as heck don' understand them )

CidahMastah said:

One other tidbit:

Assumptions:

a.since today's malts have solved the issue of starch conversion
b. thermometers solved the issue of obtaining accurate temperatures

It would make sense to pull the decoction late in the game, as to preserve enzymes for a solid infusion.
OR, as I understand it (correct me if I am wrong); the melanoidins are can be created simply by boiling. So possibly extending your boil to 120 or 150 minutes on the wort may get similar results.

Click to expand...

I would certainty do at least a 120 minute boil for a Bohemian Pils.

It does matter that we typically use highly modified malts that weren't available long ago when this method was invented. We still emulate the process, but there is still quite a bit that is either not fully understood, or debated about what exactly is going on with triple decoctions. I've done it both ways, and must say that there is something about the double or triple decoction that stands out. A single mashout decoction would certainly be better than a single infusion or ramp mash for Pilseners. Sorry if I'm not able to answer some of your specific questions!

TB

CidahMastah said:

Understood - but this would only lead to slightly better efficiency right? My argument there would be, grain is cheap so the slightly better efficiency wouldn't be enough incentive for the hassle.

With the caveat that other possible chemical reactions may be going on (which you noted you don't understand, and I sure as heck don' understand them )

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the main caveat right there. We (at very least I) don't fully understand what's happening with multiple decoctions, but differences in outcome have been acknowledged.

TB

Tiber_Brew said:

Sorry if I'm not able to answer some of your specific questions!

TB

Click to expand...

TB - don't sweat it (i am waiting for the impending RDWHAHB from the peanut gallery) - ha

I am just an infinitely, highly curious individual. In the grand scheme I am not sure my curiosity is proving useful in our discussion!

Tiber_Brew said:

That's essentially what you're doing with the single mashout decoction. However, when you do a pre-sacch rest decoction, you're breaking down cell walls and exposing more available starches for the upcoming conversion rest, among other chemical events I don't fully understand. I suppose there are other benefits to multiple decoctions, but I can't tell you with any certainty what exactly is happening in the decoction/mash interaction. Yoop? Anything to add?

TB

Click to expand...

I have nothing much to add, as I'm certainly no decoction expert! I'd defer any of the science questions to Kai.

One of my brewing idols, Denny Conn, doesn't "believe" in decoctions, and he's got some interesting things to read about why.

A protein rest (again, a short one only with today's well-modified malts!) that with a decoction goes to a beta amylase rest, then to an alpha amylase rest, works well for me. But this is for BoPils and even Vienna lagers that I don't think you can get the same flavor without these techniques.

Yeah I saw some of Denny's stuff, including his slide sheet which made me raise a bit of an eyebrow. I sort of chuckled when he said in a post that he still does about 1 decoction a year thinking he will notice a difference but still relents that it doesn't make a noticeable improvement to him.

I tried Denny's Wry IPA - man that was a standout brew to me. For that alone I have to respect his opinion on the debate.

I think I will run with a single mash out decoction and boil for 2o minutes as TB suggested. I know I will revisit this and try double and triple decoctions. But the mechanics of this one will be challenging since I want to do a 10G batch. The single mash out decoction will be a heck of a lot easier for me to manage. Maybe trying a double or triple makes more sense with a 5G batch in the future.

Thanks TB and Yooper!

You're most certainly welcome, cidah. I'm of the same inquisitive nature (engineer), and sort of came to a dead end in my quest to learn everything about decoction mashing. I just do with what I know, and must say that my lagers are quite good and well received by others too!

Hope your brew turns out! I'm sure it will be great.

TB

My Dad is an engineer - I think I get that inquisitive nature from him for sure

Thanks! I will let people know what happens when I get to this, though it will probably be a bit since I have to build up a starter, etc. I am really looking forward to it though.

OK so it has been a long time but wanted to post back because I FINALLY got to brewing a lager with a mash out decoction only. I brewed as normal and then for mash out I pulled 8 quarts and boiled it for just over 20 minutes and returned that to my mash.

All else went pretty well, but I may have screwed up a bit. For some reason I thought I was supposed to ferment at 55F! But Checking back afterwards now I see that most folks say 50F. Anyway, what is done is done so I will know if I screwed up in 2 months! ha. So I chilled the brew to 45F and pitched yeast. Then over 24-36 hours I increased the temp back up to 55F and have been fermenting ever since. (brewed on December 29, 2011).

I have a couple questions:

1. Current plan is to do a diacetyl rest at day 14 (pending ferment is done) for 24-36 hours at 68F (I will ramp up to temp over 12 hours and let it sit at 68 for 24hours) - does this sound ok? Then it will be back down to lagering temp of 55F or less. I know a lot of people say get as close to 32F as possible but my chamber only goes to 45F.
2. Will fermenting at constant 55F screw up my lager?
3. I could lager this beer at a constant temp in the refridge at 45F (but no lower, b/c my chamber won't go lower), but I am short on space and am considering lagering in my basement cold room. It is usually <55F sometimes as low as 36. The temp will swing based on the outside temp though. Will this affect the taste of the lager? Or just the time it will take to lager?

I plan to rebrew the same recipe and do a double or triple decoction when the first lager is done so I can reuse the yeast; this is why I want to lager the beer outside of the chamber - so I can start the second one.

Appreciate any advice - thanks for taking the long read!

The d-rest should coincide with the tail end of fermentation, so you can't schedule it. I watch for the kraeusen to fall, but a more industrious brewer could do a fast ferment test in a satellite vessel and check SGs.

944play said:

The d-rest should coincide with the tail end of fermentation, so you can't schedule it. I watch for the kraeusen to fall, but a more industrious brewer could do a fast ferment test in a satellite vessel and check SGs.

Click to expand...

ah gotcha - didn't realize that was a crucial part of the timing. Tough part is I am fermenting in kegs so I can't see the krausen fall, bubbles are tapering off so I will have to check tonight.

THanks!

Ok so the krausen has fallen but there is still fermentation going down (can see the bubbles rising though less vigour than before).

I took a gravity reading and I am at about 1.026 (SG was 1.046 and expect F.G. to be about 1.011-1.014). There was about a 1.5-2 day lag on the start of the ferment even though I pitched a large starter for each.

Taste test was good, no diacetyl that I could taste, though it was sweet for sure.

Looks like I should give it a couple more days and check back on the gravity. Or do you recommend starting the D-rest now since the krausen has fallen?

Ok so I did some digging last night and thought I would post this morning for anyone who is reading the thread.

Sounds like a good target for the D-Rest is after krausen drops and you are about 1/3 left to your F.G. So in my case I started with 1.046 and will wait until I get to about 1.021ish.

From there it sounds like a 10 degree increase is pretty standard for a D-rest (so for me 55F increase to 65F over 12 hours or so).

After reaching F.G. at the D-rest temp I will rack into a secondary and bring back down to lagering temps by adjusting 5F per day to get down to as close to the 32-40F range to start the lagering process for at least a month.

Looks like I will be checking my gravity again tonight to see if I hit 75% of my intended attenuation!

So one late 1/10/12 I checked the gravity and one of my kegs was at about 1.020 and the other at 1.026. I figured what the heck it is pretty close to the 1.021 gravity I was looking for to start the D-rest. Anyway I pushed the temp up to 65F and checked it late last night and it was still bubbling away.

Did I jump the gun on the D-rest (have read some people saying 3-7days for this; but looking for your anecdotal experience)? I had thought the fermentation would resolve within a day or so bit I am running on 3 days once it gets to late tonight.

I plan on letting it right out to terminal gravity and (hopefully) racking it to a secondary this weekend for lagering.

This whole thread is epic...I am planning a recipe fpr my first bohemian pilsner and this has cleared up so many things...thanks guys

I imagine you did your d-rest right at the perfect time. I myself waited too long on my Vienna Lager as I checked it every day and waited for the krausen to fall. It did and I checked it and it was fully fermented out! Oops. I used Wyeast 2308 (Munich.) I raised it to D-rest temps anyway and plan on racking it to secondary for lagering tomorrow afternoon. In the meantime, I had a boatload of hungry yeast just waiting for the dopplebock I am brewing tomorrow.

Calichusetts said:

This whole thread is epic...I am planning a recipe fpr my first bohemian pilsner and this has cleared up so many things...thanks guys

Click to expand...

I am glad that you confirmed that my last three "in a row posts" were not just the rantings of a mad man

Really glad you and possibly others are getting some good use out of the information in this thread.

Mk010101 said:

I imagine you did your d-rest right at the perfect time. I myself waited too long on my Vienna Lager as I checked it every day and waited for the krausen to fall. It did and I checked it and it was fully fermented out! Oops. I used Wyeast 2308 (Munich.) I raised it to D-rest temps anyway and plan on racking it to secondary for lagering tomorrow afternoon. In the meantime, I had a boatload of hungry yeast just waiting for the dopplebock I am brewing tomorrow.

Click to expand...

I have heard a lot of good things for that lager yeast - plan on grabbing some. I am actually trying to decide what to brew next with the wyeast 2001 urquell yeast. I should have a good amount and would really like to get some more lager action going

Thanks for the info!

CidahMastah said:

So one late 1/10/12 I checked the gravity and one of my kegs was at about 1.020 and the other at 1.026. I figured what the heck it is pretty close to the 1.021 gravity I was looking for to start the D-rest. Anyway I pushed the temp up to 65F and checked it late last night and it was still bubbling away.

Did I jump the gun on the D-rest (have read some people saying 3-7days for this; but looking for your anecdotal experience)? I had thought the fermentation would resolve within a day or so bit I am running on 3 days once it gets to late tonight.

I plan on letting it right out to terminal gravity and (hopefully) racking it to a secondary this weekend for lagering.

Click to expand...

That sounds about perfect. I still would recommend trying to lager a bit colder if you can (but I think you can't?) as I find that a smoother lager results from lagering near freezing. If you can't, you will still get a nice lager of course.

Yooper said:

That sounds about perfect. I still would recommend trying to lager a bit colder if you can (but I think you can't?) as I find that a smoother lager results from lagering near freezing. If you can't, you will still get a nice lager of course.

Click to expand...

Well. I could, it just means giving up fridge space.

My yeast/lager fridge that kept at about 33-34f temps died on me over the holidays. So I am out the prime spot I had been planning for this lager.... I have another fridge I can use, but would have to pull my stout keg out for a few months - eek!

I was thinking I might throw one in the attic and one in the stout fridge if I can cram in... hoping that the attic one will not completely freeze!

I will try to get at least 1 of the kegs lagering at the low temps consistently. At least then I can compare a controlled lager to a sporadic one! :cross:

Well I stopped being lazy and cleared and consolidated my fridge - enough room for both kegs of the brew!! So they get 34F of lagering temps

Just a quick update. Been lagering about a month at 32F and just tried a sample. I REALLY like it. I want to let it sit for another 2-4 weeks before I put it on tap, but I am really happy with the outcome. Has a really nice nose and a good body similar to Pilsner Urquell. Now I wish I had some more space to do more lagers!!

CidahMastah said:

Just a quick update. Been lagering about a month at 32F and just tried a sample. I REALLY like it. I want to let it sit for another 2-4 weeks before I put it on tap, but I am really happy with the outcome. Has a really nice nose and a good body similar to Pilsner Urquell. Now I wish I had some more space to do more lagers!!

Click to expand...

That's awesome! I don't do many lagers, as I do far more IPAs and APAs than anything, but I enjoy making them and drinking them. They are such a departure from my normal ales that it's a treat to enjoy them.

Yooper said:

That's awesome! I don't do many lagers, as I do far more IPAs and APAs than anything, but I enjoy making them and drinking them. They are such a departure from my normal ales that it's a treat to enjoy them.

Click to expand...

Its funny you say that but I felt the same. Normally a lager is pretty boring compared to my brews. But I really felt like it was a treat- ha! perspective is everything I suppose.

Great thread! I'll be referring back to this and the other info linked to herein as I try to add decoction capability to my system.