Islandboy85
Well-Known Member
Would I be getting close to the same results, probably not quite as dark of a final product, doing direct fire step instead of decoction?
Decoction vs direct fire step mash
- Thread starter Islandboy85
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
JonK331
Well-Known Member
Not really because decoction involves actually boiling part of the mash. You can use some melanoidin malt or a malt with high melanoidin content such as Munich to mimic the effects of a decoction.
OP
OP
Islandboy85
Well-Known Member
JonK331 said:
I'll have to try that. I'd prefer that over what seems like a lot of work with a decoction.
First, you have to assume that decoction has effects those malts will mimic. I have not found that to be the case. Read this, starting on pg. 25...http://www.ahaconference.org/wp-content/uploads/presentations/2008/DennyConn.pdf
Then, you should read this.....
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f13/decoction-vs-melanoidin-malt-345844/
OP
OP
Islandboy85
Well-Known Member
Denny said:
That was some interesting reading. Definitely see an obvious difference in opinions about this subject. I'll have to YouTube decoction more to see if I want to go to the trouble.
While I think that anyone who's interested in decoctions should try at least one, I also don't think you should expect to see or taste major differences in the beer. It seems like most (not ALL) of the people who think decoction makes a difference haven't done side by side testing with a blind triangle test.
JonK331
Well-Known Member
Nice reads. We do know that decoction creates melanoidins that are not there if we don't decoct. That's where the logic comes from with using malts that have higher melanoidin content. So while adding those types of malts may not be exactly the same as decocting, it is closer than not using them at all.
Keep in mind that melanoidins are colors, not flavors. Melanoidin malt is misnamed, I feel. It has a distinct flavor as well as the color.
VladOfTrub
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2011
- Messages
- 770
- Reaction score
- 183
The pdf picture of the brewing equipment: Do you use that system for decoction mashing? If you don't, can you put in a picture of your decoction equipment?
VladOfTrub
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2011
- Messages
- 770
- Reaction score
- 183
WAHA Projects - Clinics
Written by Mark Emiley
Wednesday, 22 July 2009 19:09
A few notes and results from the decoction clinic experiment.
In January, 2009, The Washington Homebrewer's Association sponsored a decoction mashing clinic. Some 35 people showed up to learn about the process and why it is used. Three different doppelbocks were brewed using the same yeast slurry generously provided by Baron Brewing of Seattle, (Wyeast 2308), the same hops, German Hallertauer, the same fermenting temperature 48 degrees, (and the same basic malt bill. One used a single infusion mash at 150 degrees. The second used a single infusion mash at 150 degrees but also had replaced about 4% of the base malt with melanoidin malt. Finally, the third used a triple decoction mash schedule at 95, 122 and 140. Each pull was heated to 158 degrees and allowed to rest for 20 minutes, boiled for 10 minutes, and then blended back into the mash tun and allowed to rest for 20 minutes before making the next pull.
The purpose of the clinic and brewing the different beers was to get an idea whether decoction mashing makes any appreciable difference in the outcome of the beer versus an infusion mash. For comparison, melanoidin malt was added to one of the infusion mash beers to see if that resulted in an increase in that character element.
Recipe (10 Gallons) Single Infusion & Triple Decoction
Malt Bill
Vienna Malt 12 lb
Lt Munich Malt 12 lb
Dk Munich Malt 2 lb
Hop Bill
2.75 oz Hallertauer 4.1% AA 60 min
1.00 oz Hallertauer 4.1% AA 30 min
Yeast
Wyeast 2308 Munich Lager Primary Temp 48 Degrees, Diacetyl rest at 62 degrees for 3 days min.
At the National Homebrewers Conference, participants were given the three beers without knowing which was which. They were then asked the following two questions:
1. Which beer was the triple decoction mash?
2. Which beer do you like best?
The results for the first question were:
Single Infusion Mash: 13.89%
Single Infusion Mash with 4% Melanoidin Malt: 40.28%
Triple Decocted Mash: 45.83%
The results for the second question were:
1. Triple Decocted Mash
2. Single Infusion Mash with 4% Melanoidin Malt
3. Single Infusion Mash
Written by Mark Emiley
Wednesday, 22 July 2009 19:09
A few notes and results from the decoction clinic experiment.
In January, 2009, The Washington Homebrewer's Association sponsored a decoction mashing clinic. Some 35 people showed up to learn about the process and why it is used. Three different doppelbocks were brewed using the same yeast slurry generously provided by Baron Brewing of Seattle, (Wyeast 2308), the same hops, German Hallertauer, the same fermenting temperature 48 degrees, (and the same basic malt bill. One used a single infusion mash at 150 degrees. The second used a single infusion mash at 150 degrees but also had replaced about 4% of the base malt with melanoidin malt. Finally, the third used a triple decoction mash schedule at 95, 122 and 140. Each pull was heated to 158 degrees and allowed to rest for 20 minutes, boiled for 10 minutes, and then blended back into the mash tun and allowed to rest for 20 minutes before making the next pull.
The purpose of the clinic and brewing the different beers was to get an idea whether decoction mashing makes any appreciable difference in the outcome of the beer versus an infusion mash. For comparison, melanoidin malt was added to one of the infusion mash beers to see if that resulted in an increase in that character element.
Recipe (10 Gallons) Single Infusion & Triple Decoction
Malt Bill
Vienna Malt 12 lb
Lt Munich Malt 12 lb
Dk Munich Malt 2 lb
Hop Bill
2.75 oz Hallertauer 4.1% AA 60 min
1.00 oz Hallertauer 4.1% AA 30 min
Yeast
Wyeast 2308 Munich Lager Primary Temp 48 Degrees, Diacetyl rest at 62 degrees for 3 days min.
At the National Homebrewers Conference, participants were given the three beers without knowing which was which. They were then asked the following two questions:
1. Which beer was the triple decoction mash?
2. Which beer do you like best?
The results for the first question were:
Single Infusion Mash: 13.89%
Single Infusion Mash with 4% Melanoidin Malt: 40.28%
Triple Decocted Mash: 45.83%
The results for the second question were:
1. Triple Decocted Mash
2. Single Infusion Mash with 4% Melanoidin Malt
3. Single Infusion Mash
Yep, interesting results. I did the tasting, but I don't recall which I picked.
OP
OP
Islandboy85
Well-Known Member
So if you're doing a triple decoction you're looking at about 3.5-4 hours for a mash right?
JonK331
Well-Known Member
Sure but let's take a step back. The Maillard reaction is what creates the melanoidins in the first place, along with other compounds that DO have flavor. Saying that the reaction does not change flavor would be wrong. Like saying an untoasted piece of bread doesn't taste any different than a toasted one. So yeah it might be more appropriate to call it Maillard Malt.
Another point to observe is that when decoction was the norm, there weren't all these specialty malts. Basically meaning that ALL of our specialty malts including crystal malts have gone through the Maillard reaction which creates both melanoidins and flavor compounds. That said, and I don't know the answer, does something like Victory Malt (non crystal specialty malt) have the same compounds as Munich or Melanoidin Malts? Sure, the level of these compounds, including melanoidins, change depending on how the malt is roasted/toasted but by how much? Also, is Lovibond an indication of how much of these compounds are present?
Great discussion by the way.
Yes, of course the Maillard reaction which produces the melanoidins also produces flavors. My only point was that many homebrewers seem to think of melanoidins are the flavors themselves, which is not correct.
