"Only use light malt extract"

I was browsing for recipes and found this opinion on a message board. The reasoning was that light malt extract can only be made from one combination of grains in contrast to amber, dark or any other malt extract which can be made from multiple combinations of grains which means the extract might be different from different companies or even different lots from the same company.

Does this make sense? What is everyone's opinion on this?

Light malt extract is made from 2-row malt with a low lovebond, so yes, it would tend to be more uniform than other extracts.

There are a couple of malt types that confuse me. One is the "extra light" vs. "light" from the same manufacturer. What is the purpose of carrying two different extracts that are so similar? The other is dark extract. As far as I know you can get more accurate color and fresher taste if you add specialty grains so why bother with dark extract? People must buy and use this stuff if it's still on the market, but I just don't understand why you would use it.

Even light uses other grains: http://www.brewingwithbriess.com/Products/Malt_Extracts.htm#GoldenLight it is however more consistant, and in addition to that you get added benefits by steeping your own grains for color like choosing the grains to get there which will have an effect on taste, mouthfeel, etc.

I don't always brew extract, but when I do, I use only Golden Light DME.

I believe my extract beers have been way better since doing this. I use that for the fermentables, then do a steep/tiny-mini-mash-in-a-bag for the other flavors I need.

The other big thing is to add only half the DME for the full boil and the remaining half with about 10m left in the boil.

Boerderij_Kabouter said:

I don't always brew extract, but when I do, I use only Golden Light DME.

I believe my extract beers have been way better since doing this. I use that for the fermentables, then do a steep/tiny-mini-mash-in-a-bag for the other flavors I need.

The other big thing is to add only half the DME for the full boil and the remaining half with about 10m left in the boil.

Click to expand...

You should try the Briess pilsen light instead of the Briess Golden Light.
The Pilsen has a lovibond of 2. 2-row has a lovibond of 1.8

Forrest

Austinhomebrew said:

You should try the Briess pilsen light instead of the Briess Golden Light.
The Pilsen has a lovibond of 2. 2-row has a lovibond of 1.8

Forrest

Click to expand...

I use the Pilsen Light for all my extract brews, however it is a mixture of Pilsner Malt and Carapils.

Boerderij_Kabouter said:

The other big thing is to add only half the DME for the full boil and the remaining half with about 10m left in the boil.

Click to expand...

That is really only a benefit in lighter colored beers brewed with a concentrated wort boil (i.e. 3 gallon boil for a 5 gallon batch). If you're brewing a dark beer or a doing full wort boils (I boil 7 gallons to get 5.5 gallons in the fermenter), dump it all in up front.
:rockin:

As for the posted topic, I feel (and I think a lot of others on HBT do, as well) that basing recipes on light (or extra-light/pilsen) DME and steeping specialty grains or mini-mashing a combination of base and specialty malts to get the malt/color character that you're aiming for does a fairly good job of mimicking the process that all-grain and pro brewers use to brew their beers. Really, it gives you, the brewer, more control over the malt character of an extract brew considering that as an extract is manufactured to be darker in color, the more specialty malts are used in the process of making it. I personally want dictatorial control over the contents of my recipes, so using an extract that is made using mostly base malt gives me as close to a blank canvas as an extract brewer can get.

When I am formulating any extract with grain recipes I ALWAYS base it around Extralight DME, then I get all my flavor and color complexity from my steeping (or partial mashing) grains. That way you get to use more and varied grains.

For example, let's say you are making an amber ale....If you based it around amber extract, you have very little room to get complexity from roasted or crystalized grains.....you run the risk of muddying the flavor and ending up too dark for your recipe.....

Staying with my Amber example...The Srm range for that style is SRM: 10 – 17 so if your base extract already puts you into 14 srms, you son't have much room to move around it....you may be able to sneak in a pound of crystal 30 let's say in it.

But if your Extralight DME has a color of 5 SRMs, you can really get into the recipe and play around with different combinations of grains until you get into the right color and Og range for the style.

And that will also get you a deeper, more complex flavor.

It's kind of like making model airplanes....remember the "snap together" types that you started out with? You had maybe 8 pieces; 2 body halves two front wings, 2 rear wings and maybe 2 pieces for a cockpit, or two pieces for landing gear...

But if you got one of those 500 piece b52 bomber kits....you had a much more complex final product.

headfullahops said:

That is really only a benefit in lighter colored beers brewed with a concentrated wort boil (i.e. 3 gallon boil for a 5 gallon batch). If you're brewing a dark beer or a doing full wort boils (I boil 7 gallons to get 5.5 gallons in the fermenter), dump it all in up front.
:rockin:

Click to expand...

A less-dense wort will also promote better hop utilization. Harder to extract alpha acids in a denser wort.

the_bird said:

A less-dense wort will also promote better hop utilization. Harder to extract alpha acids in a denser wort.

Click to expand...

I've actually heard some convincing arguments against the wort-boil-concentration=hop-utilization correlation. If I recall correctly (which I might not be :cross, John Palmer has changed his stance on that issue, as well. I personally did not notice a perceptible difference in bitterness moving from concentrated to full wort boils.

Butcher said:

I was browsing for recipes and found this opinion on a message board. The reasoning was that light malt extract can only be made from one combination of grains in contrast to amber, dark or any other malt extract which can be made from multiple combinations of grains which means the extract might be different from different companies or even different lots from the same company.

Does this make sense? What is everyone's opinion on this?

Click to expand...

I concur with the "Use the lightest extract available" mantra, for the reasons cited above, primarily control over final color and flavor.

To answer some of your other concerns/questions:

• "Light" extracts are generally made with one or two grains. Briess, for example, mixes Pils and Carapils malt for their Pilsner extract, and 2-row and Carapils for the Golden Light. Briess Organic extract is 100% Briess Organic 2-row. Alexander's Pale is 100% "2-row". Muntons does not release ingredients information, but I've heard through the industry grapevine that the Extra-Light Muntons uses a proportion of brewing sugar.
• Briess Munich extract is 50/50% 2-row/Munich malt.
• "Amber" and darker extracts use proportions of Crystal/Caramel, Munich, Black, and other grains/products to arrive at a proprietary blend.
• Different companies do indeed produce different extracts. Experiments have been done comparing Briess Amber against Muntons Amber, for example. I find I prefer Briess Amber, as Muntons tends to ferment quite dry (leading me to suspect non-malt adjuncts in their extracts). In fact, I've brewed surprisingly good beer from just Briess Amber or Dark extract, hops and yeast. Is it phenomenal? Nope. But it's better than no beer at all!

Hope this helps!

Cheers,

Bob

Butcher said:

I was browsing for recipes and found this opinion on a message board. The reasoning was that light malt extract can only be made from one combination of grains in contrast to amber, dark or any other malt extract which can be made from multiple combinations of grains which means the extract might be different from different companies or even different lots from the same company.
Does this make sense? What is everyone's opinion on this?

Click to expand...

It doesn't make sense, since you can make a light extract with many
brands and qualities of light grains, including the North American type,
the German type, the English type etc.

Some people want to make soup with a soup mix. But you can't
control the exact flavor unless you use your own garlic, celery
etc in the amounts you want. Making a porter with dark extract
will give you a porter, but it won't be the exact porter you want.

Ray

rayg said:

Making a porter with dark extract
will give you a porter, but it won't be the exact porter you want.

Click to expand...

...unless it's the exact porter you want.

Non-light extracts are ingredients just like any other. Once you figure out what it'll do in your beer, you know enough to use it. Thus, there's nothing at all wrong with using them.

Cheers,

Bob

Bob said:

Non-light extracts are ingredients just like any other. Once you figure out what it'll do in your beer, you know enough to use it. Thus, there's nothing at all wrong with using them.

Click to expand...

I don't think the argument is whether or not any extracts beside pilsen or light are ingredients worth using or not. It seemed the intent of the question was wondering why some (I don't feel comfortable saying most) extract brewers use only pilsen or light extracts in formulating their recipes. I doubt anyone would argue whether or not you could make a good beer with amber or dark extracts. Of course you can. It's more of a matter of control.

While it is true that any pilsen or light extract you buy can be made of a combination of either different strains of the same type of base malt or base malts in addition to some combination of other malts (dextrine malt, caramels, viennas, munichs, etc.), the intent of using light extract is to mimic as closely as possible the recipe formulation that all-grain and pro brewers use - a large percentage of a base malt (or combination of base malts) and, most of the time, a small percentage combination of specialty malts to control the malt character, color, body, head retention, etc. for the style of the beer being crafted.

I would never discourage someone from building an extract recipe around a darker extract. I would, however, encourage them to think about whether or not they are interested in controlling the aforementioned factors in their brewing process. I am an unapologetic micro-manager in my brewery. I have the feeling quite a few others here are the same.

For the most part I stick to the "Light Extract Only" rule. However I do make exceptions. For weizens I'll obviously use the Wheat extracts. Also I occasionally use Munich LME mainly because it's just a 50/50 blend of Munich and 2-Row. I don't like using an extract that has specialty malts in it. I'd rather add them myself.

headfullahops said:

I don't think the argument is whether or not any extracts beside pilsen or light are ingredients worth using or not. It seemed the intent of the question was wondering why some (I don't feel comfortable saying most) extract brewers use only pilsen or light extracts in formulating their recipes. I doubt anyone would argue whether or not you could make a good beer with amber or dark extracts. Of course you can. It's more of a matter of control.

While it is true that any pilsen or light extract you buy can be made of a combination of either different strains of the same type of base malt or base malts in addition to some combination of other malts (dextrine malt, caramels, viennas, munichs, etc.), the intent of using light extract is to mimic as closely as possible the recipe formulation that all-grain and pro brewers use - a large percentage of a base malt (or combination of base malts) and, most of the time, a small percentage combination of specialty malts to control the malt character, color, body, head retention, etc. for the style of the beer being crafted.

I would never discourage someone from building an extract recipe around a darker extract. I would, however, encourage them to think about whether or not they are interested in controlling the aforementioned factors in their brewing process. I am an unapologetic micro-manager in my brewery. I have the feeling quite a few others here are the same.

Click to expand...

The bolded part sums it all up.

Gentlemen, I don't disagree at all. I fully understand the intent behind the urging to use pale extracts and specialty grains - the pale extract mimics the contribution made by pale malt in an all-grain grist.

It must be said, however, that many well-intentioned advisers tell n00bs to avoid anything other than pale extracts. There appears to be a climate of thought against darker extracts as an ingredient less than worthy of brewers of quality product. This doesn't have to be; darker extracts are simply another weapon in a brewer's arsenal.

I can think of an even half-dozen recipes in my library which call for darker-than-pale extracts of different types. I've a brown ale recipe I spent several iterations tweaking until I decided to use Briess Amber instead of Muntons. It actually works out less expensive and easier to brew using a darker-than-pale extract in that case, because I can use less specialty grain - less waste, less mess, less fuss, less money spent in LHBS.

It's often said that there's a loss of control. While that's true to an extent, it's only true to that extent. Say, for example, you're after a Brown Ale. You could get there by using pale extract, with crystal, munich and black malt in grain bags. It'll take you a while to tune the recipe in, getting each ingredient to where you like it. You'll buy the base extract, plus at least a pound each of the specialty grains.

Or you could use Briess Dark extract and an ounce or two of roasted barley to tweak the color exactly where you want it.

See what I mean?

Don't fear the darker extracts. Just another club in the bag.

Cheers,

Bob

Bob said:

...unless it's the exact porter you want.

Non-light extracts are ingredients just like any other. Once you figure out what it'll do in your beer, you know enough to use it. Thus, there's nothing at all wrong with using them.

Cheers,

Bob

Click to expand...

Right, if it you get what you want out of it, it's no problem. There's no
reason why you couldn't use a can of dark and a can of light, for
example. But I don't use the darker extracts because there is only
one beer I (mostly) make the same way every time, everything else
I'm always changing things a bit and it's just more practical to use
grains when I'm using small amounts of several grains.

Ray

While reading this thread, I could get a thought out of my head...

How much difference is there in steeped versus mashed crystal or specialty grain?

As extract brewers there are definitely limitations on what we can do compared to all-grain. Yes, a good recipe is a good recipe regardless of what ingredients are used.

Is something lost by controlling color and flavor only by steeping specialty grains?

Through the use of darker extracts are there proteins or other flavor compounds that will be present because the specialty malts were mashed?

Good questions!

How much difference is there in steeped versus mashed crystal or specialty grain?

Click to expand...

Depends. With crystal/caramel and roasted malts, there is virtually no difference. Some other specialty grains - like Victory and Biscuit and Special Roast - will impart some of their flavor/aroma characteristics but none of the gravity potential.

Is something lost by controlling color and flavor only by steeping specialty grains?

Click to expand...

No, not really.

Through the use of darker extracts are there proteins or other flavor compounds that will be present because the specialty malts were mashed?

Click to expand...

Sometimes. Take, for example, Briess Traditional Dark extract. It's brewed with Base Malt, Caramel Malt 60L, Munich Malt, Black Malt. You can mimic this extract with pale extract plus Caramel and Black malts. But you can't get the Munich malt, because Munich malt must be mashed; steeping does positively nothing for Munich malt.

But there's not some sort of magic phenomenon which happens only in the mash that makes specialty malts more flavorful or something.*

Cheers,

Bob

* Okay, that's not entirely true. There are techniques you can use in a mash to affect the contribution of specialty grains. But those techniques involve lessening the total impact (or one facet of the total impact) of the specialty grains, not enhancing it.

I would have to assume there is some difference, whether perceptible or not, I can't say. It seems that some of the more complex sugars coming from the specialty malts would be converted, fermented, and, therefore, contribute less sweetness compared to steeping.

I've never brewed an all-grain batch before, but I have made all-grain formulations of my extract recipes in my brewing software by keeping the specialty malt bill the same and replacing light dme with 2-row base until the OG's are the same. It would make a neat experiment although, I don't know if it could be done outside of a scientific lab with factors like mash temp and thickness, lautering rate, etc. making a nearly infinite amount of variables. I suppose you could make two all-grain batches, steep the specialty grains and mash the base malts in one, and mash everything in the other and see what happens.

This thread has thoroughly enlightened me.

But now that I've brewed a couple of extract batches using other-than-light dry malt extracts, I'm wondering what, exactly, I've been putting in my beer.

Does anyone know the grains used in Northwestern Extract's amber dry malt extract? I've used it in several batches recently.

If you go to their website under ingredients they describe the exract. I believe it is pale, carapils, and munich. How much exactly is as secret as Bush's baked bean...

Yeah, you'll find that most of the producers of malt extracts will provide you with information including the grain malt contents of the extracts they produce. You usually will not find any proportions, though. So, even with pilsen and light extracts, there is no way for the extract brewer to know or control exactly what is in their beer. We just do the best with what we've got to work with (until we decide to make the leap to all-grain).
:cross:

There's a good article in the latest Brew Your Own mag covering this exact subject. A microbrewery in Oakland uses only extract and says he uses only light extract as a base for the reasons stated by so many above.

I've brewed all my batches with amber, dark, light, whatever the recipe called for. I'm planning a russian imperial stout right now that I will use only light extract on. There's many ways to skin a cat.

Bob said:

...unless it's the exact porter you want.

Non-light extracts are ingredients just like any other. Once you figure out what it'll do in your beer, you know enough to use it. Thus, there's nothing at all wrong with using them.

Cheers,

Bob

Click to expand...

Thanks. I never bought into this whole thing. I'm making a caramel ale with NB amber extract next. I talked to a NB rep about this. If you think extract beers taste fine, then there's no reason to be afraid of darker extracts.

I've brewed several extract beers without steeping grains, and they tasted great.

Is there anywhere else i can read on this subject. It has sparked my interest for more control over my beers as i cant do all grain right now