Foam stability without turbidity

[mustardtiger]

In the case of water, is there anyway to increase foam stability? Without having to have suspended solids(protein polyphenol complex) in solution.

 

[ajdelange]

No. Foam stability comes from scrupulous cleanliness and the right spectrum of proteins. This is controlled by mashing appropriate malt(s) for the right time at the right temperature and the right pH. I've also noticed with lagers that fermentation in the traditional way (as opposed to diacetyl rest followed by a temperature crash) produces the desired meringue-like foam.

 

[NeoBrew]

In the case of water, is there anyway to increase foam stability? Without having to have suspended solids(protein polyphenol complex) in solution.

This NEIPA thing has gone too far!

Are people really starting to think that cloudy beer is necessary to create the properties of a good beer? Like a good head and mouthfeel? These properties can come from crystal clear beer. I'm frankly getting tired of ordering/buying and IPA off the shelf only to pour it and see that it looks like a turbid mess! I'm all for creating another category for these NEIPA things. That way the consumer can start to know when they are getting a well made clean IPA vs a cloudy experiment.

Forgive the rant, but I've not been able to brew as much as I'd like lately and have been buying more beer than usual. I'm just frustrated that there is no way to know what you are buying these days. This craze seems to be lowering the standards for clarity in the marketplace.

 

[mustardtiger]

No. Foam stability comes from scrupulous cleanliness and the right spectrum of proteins. This is controlled by mashing appropriate malt(s) for the right time at the right temperature and the right pH. I've also noticed with lagers that fermentation in the traditional way (as opposed to diacetyl rest followed by a temperature crash) produces the desired meringue-like foam.

What would you consider the right spectrum of proteins? I started this thread because I contacted I very accomplished brewer from the New England region. He had essentially said that a clear beer can have the same mouthfeel as a beer that is turbid and that he finds this turbidity to be sloppy. He also said suspended solids will lead to no foam stability. It’s all about the water. I have known it’s all about the water but have yet to hit on what will give me that mouthfeel.

 

[mustardtiger]

This NEIPA thing has gone too far!

Are people really starting to think that cloudy beer is necessary to create the properties of a good beer? Like a good head and mouthfeel? These properties can come from crystal clear beer. I'm frankly getting tired of ordering/buying and IPA off the shelf only to pour it and see that it looks like a turbid mess! I'm all for creating another category for these NEIPA things. That way the consumer can start to know when they are getting a well made clean IPA vs a cloudy experiment.

Forgive the rant, but I've not been able to brew as much as I'd like lately and have been buying more beer than usual. I'm just frustrated that there is no way to know what you are buying these days. This craze seems to be lowering the standards for clarity in the marketplace.

I’m fine with a hazey, even murkey if it tastes good. However I have found less and less murkey beer satisfying. As mentioned to Aj, I contacted a brewer about achieving mouthfeel. He pointed me to the water, and to not rely on protein polyphenol complex/turbidity for mouthfeel. I have yet to achieve the mouthfeel I’m searching for with water adjustments. Next batch will be kegged in a week. Went higher on sodium. 50ppm. And I think I might even want to go higher after revisiting my water book.

 

[NeoBrew]

I would love to know if you fine a water mineral property that affects mouthfeel. I think there are a lot of other levers that you can pull to affect mouthfeel. Yeast, malt selection, and mash temp are some of the common ones. This article seems to have a pretty good round up of that. Maybe you have already tried these and that is why you are going after water?

 

[mustardtiger]

I would love to know if you fine a water mineral property that affects mouthfeel. I think there are a lot of other levers that you can pull to affect mouthfeel. Yeast, malt selection, and mash temp are some of the common ones. This article seems to have a pretty good round up of that. Maybe you have already tried these and that is why you are going after water?

Exactly why I am questioning Water now. I have mash temps 156-158 and that hasn’t fixed the problem. Yeast selection is something I have considered I typically use 1272 though I have used 1318 in the past. I don’t recall 1318 providing more mouthfeel, though that was some time ago. I also recently picked up Nottingham which I haven’t tried yet. And I have messed around with all types of Malts as well. Flaked adjuncts haven’t seemed to do the trick.

 

[ajdelange]

I would love to know if you fine [sic] a water mineral property that affects mouthfeel.

That would be chloride but I thought the question was regarding foam stability. There is nothing that you can do to the water, AFAIK, to increase foam stability unless you want to consider the steps taken to establish proper mash pH (and I suppose decarbonation of water could be considered such). It is not about the water. It is about the protein spectrum.

What is the proper protein spectrum? Given that the only tools we have for analyzing this are our eyes I'm afraid the answer has to be "The one that gives the best foam stability". And the only things that we can vary to effect that that I can think of are selection of malts with decent protein concentration and experimentation with protein rest times (including leaving one out as many a professional brewer will advise you to do).

 

[mustardtiger]

That would be chloride but I thought the question was regarding foam stability. There is nothing that you can do to the water, AFAIK, to increase foam stability unless you want to consider the steps taken to establish proper mash pH (and I suppose decarbonation of water could be considered such). It is not about the water. It is about the protein spectrum.

What is the proper protein spectrum? Given that the only tools we have for analyzing this are our eyes I'm afraid the answer has to be "The one that gives the best foam stability". And the only things that we can vary to effect that that I can think of are selection of malts with decent protein concentration and experimentation with protein rest times (including leaving one out as many a professional brewer will advise you to do).

The question on this thread does indeed address foam stability, but my question to the brewer and overall problem is with mouthfeel. He had mentioned foam stability being a problem due to suspended solids. Leading me to believe it is connected with mouthfeel. Really all I’m after is finding that mouthfeel that I find in commercial examples that I can’t seem to get in my beer.

 

[Dcpcooks]

The question on this thread does indeed address foam stability, but my question to the brewer and overall problem is with mouthfeel. He had mentioned foam stability being a problem due to suspended solids. Leading me to believe it is connected with mouthfeel. Really all I’m after is finding that mouthfeel that I find in commercial examples that I can’t seem to get in my beer.

What examples are you looking to replicate? Can you elaborate on the “mouth feel” your targeting.

I made a beer today and I followed the water profile suggested by Martin in the summer issue of Zymurgy for a neipa. It called for .5 grams of gypsum and .9 grams of CaCL per gallon of RO water.

When I tasted the water it was dry and blocky with a mineral punch. That will definitely impact mouth feel/ flavor perception. So if your looking at mineral additions for water then I can say you will notice a difference and I could see how that could be described as mouth feel.

I usually think of mouth feel as a product of mash profiles and grain bills but I could see how water could play into the conversation.

 

[mustardtiger]

What examples are you looking to replicate? Can you elaborate on the “mouth feel” your targeting.

I made a beer today and I followed the water profile suggested by Martin in the summer issue of Zymurgy for a neipa. It called for .5 grams of gypsum and .9 grams of CaCL per gallon of RO water.

When I tasted the water it was dry and blocky with a mineral punch. That will definitely impact mouth feel/ flavor perception. So if your looking at mineral additions for water then I can say you will notice a difference and I could see how that could be described as mouth feel.

I usually think of mouth feel as a product of mash profiles and grain bills but I could see how water could play into the conversation.

The mouthfeel I lack is a “full” feeling. My beers always tend to have a watery beginning to them, minus a sour that I recently brewed. I also enjoy the feeling of the beer melting on my tounge. Higher carbonation? Grain bill and mashing temps have done very little in my opinion to fix the problem. I really don’t get it. I talked to another brewer yesterday at a very successful brewery who showed me his grainbill. Showed him using 17% oat milk to essentially have the protein polyphenol complex lend mouthfeel. He also said he mashes low 150-154. I’ve gone as high as 158 with a “watery” result. Also showed him using 1318. I think possibly yeast selection but then I know there are breweries with very low yeast count in the final product.

 

[mabrungard]

Excessive boiling intensity and duration can reduce the amount of Coagulable Nitrogen in your wort too much and that can reduce body and head.

 

[mustardtiger]

I believe I’ve solved my problem. Sadly it was a very easy fix that has been troubling me this whole time. The volume of mashing water. I had always used a larger amount of mash water than sparge since I started brewing. After a sour mash I did I noticed a large boost in efficiency of mash. This lead me to use a smaller amount on my recent ipa. Just tapped and feels full. Though I did change water profile and make sure my boil was slight I’m sure the mash volume was the problem

 

[chris000]

I believe I’ve solved my problem. Sadly it was a very easy fix that has been troubling me this whole time. The volume of mashing water. I had always used a larger amount of mash water than sparge since I started brewing. After a sour mash I did I noticed a large boost in efficiency of mash. This lead me to use a smaller amount on my recent ipa. Just tapped and feels full. Though I did change water profile and make sure my boil was slight I’m sure the mash volume was the problem

so, are you saying that a higher grain to water ratio in the mash enhanced the mouthfeel of your beer?
if so, how would one translate that to BIAB (no sparge)?

 

[mustardtiger]

so, are you saying that a higher grain to water ratio in the mash enhanced the mouthfeel of your beer?
if so, how would one translate that to BIAB (no sparge)?

Yeah that is what I’ve gathered so far. I used nearly two gallons less in the mash and moved it to sparge. Not really sure how to explain it. Considering gravity is a constant. But it certainly doesn’t seem as watery as my previous, even with missing my mash temp and only hitting 152. Though abv was at 8%, so possibly that affected my perception of the beer. I’ll have to wait until my next batch to truly get a good feel. Ill go back to my house ale that I have dialed in pretty well.