high efficiency question

[bryanjints]

Brewing with high efficiency numbers can cause some level of tannin extraction. Is there any other negatives to getting 80+ efficiency numbers?

I only ask because I routinely get about 85 and shared this with a fellow homebrewer. He tried to say that this was not going to turn out as good of a beer as something in the 70's. He acted like he knew more than me and was letting me in on some great brewing secret. He referenced Palmer saying in his study they found with flour you could make close to 100 percent efficiency but the beer would taste like crap.

I have read Palmer's book cover to cover 3+ times and read different parts more times than I would like to figure out. I have read Papazian's books more than once. I have spent hundreds upon hundreds of hours reading about brewing. Not once have I found that an efficiency in the 70's would make a better tasting beer than an efficiency in the 80's.

 

[Germelli1]

By your buddies logic, no commercial beer whether it be nano/microbrewed or craft should be any good. They get 95+% because ONE point in efficiency translates to hundreds or thousands of pounds of grain!

If this was a thread intended to toot your own horn...it worked on me haha. I'm impressed!

 

[bryanjints]

I am not trying to toot my own horn. I hesitate to share my efficiency with many people but the opening was there in the conversation and I had drank some beer that night. I was really looking for some concrete evidence to show this guy he is wrong.

He really seemed to be showing off in front of his friends. He was telling a story about how there were these big time brewers that were dialing their systems back because they wanted to turn out a better beer and shooting for 75 is what you want.

 

[Pivovar_Koucky]

It sounds like jealousy to me.

 

[Germelli1]

I am not trying to toot my own horn. I hesitate to share my efficiency with many people but the opening was there in the conversation and I had drank some beer that night. I was really looking for some concrete evidence to show this guy he is wrong.

He really seemed to be showing off in front of his friends. He was telling a story about how there were these big time brewers that were dialing their systems back because they wanted to turn out a better beer and shooting for 75 is what you want.

It was a friendly jest! By no means do I think you are trying to brag!

And I hate people like that who show off in front of others ignorantly. I personally cannot tolerate misinformation coming from a source that spreads it intentially or in an ignorant manner. I have run into many people who act like they know everything about beer just to show off. That is my personal line between being a snob and just passionate about a subject

It sounds like jealousy to me.

Even though I suspect some venom in that post...I am jealous, but not in a spiteful manner! After days and days leading into weeks of planning I was disappointed when my MLT sprung a leak giving my first batch 59%. My latest batch is up to 76% but I still feel I can do better. I am going to dial in my crush and build a better fly sparging system. As always advice is welcome either publically or in a PM

 

[Yooper]

There has been discussion that you get "better quality wort" if it's not a super high efficiency (John Palmer and Jamil Zainascheff notably). However, define a super high efficiency- and no one really seems to do that. I'd say that efficiencies in the 70s and low to mid 80s aren't super high, and 85% is fine. I wouldn't strive for any higher by crushing finer or adding extra sparging (which can decrease quality of the wort) but 85% is fine in my opinion.

Signed- someone who always gets 73-75% and is happy.

 

[bryanjints]

It sounds like jealousy to me.

That's what it sounded like to me too. Just wanted to make sure.

 

[bryanjints]

There has been discussion that you get "better quality wort" if it's not a super high efficiency (John Palmer and Jamil Zainascheff notably). However, define a super high efficiency- and no one really seems to do that. I'd say that efficiencies in the 70s and low to mid 80s aren't super high, and 85% is fine. I wouldn't strive for any higher by crushing finer or adding extra sparging (which can decrease quality of the wort) but 85% is fine in my opinion.

Signed- someone who always gets 73-75% and is happy.

What would "better quality wort" get you? I assume a better fermentation but if your wort at 85% is getting good fermentation and producing quality beer, then how much better could the wort be at less of an efficiency?








As for my efficiency. I have been relying on Brewmasterswarehouse for my crush up to this point. Moving forward I am going to buy grain in bulk to save money and I have converted my own pasta/clay roller into a grain crusher. I don't expect high efficiency at first. I will see how that goes but I expect a change in efficiency once I make a batch from grain i have crushed.

 

[Airborneguy]

He referenced Palmer saying in his study they found with flour you could make close to 100 percent efficiency but the beer would taste like crap.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and state that the 100% efficiency is not what makes "flour beer" taste like crap!

 

[devilishprune]

What would "better quality wort" get you? I assume a better fermentation but if your wort at 85% is getting good fermentation and producing quality beer, then how much better could the wort be at less of an efficiency?








As for my efficiency. I have been relying on Brewmasterswarehouse for my crush up to this point. Moving forward I am going to buy grain in bulk to save money and I have converted my own pasta/clay roller into a grain crusher. I don't expect high efficiency at first. I will see how that goes but I expect a change in efficiency once I make a batch from grain i have crushed.

I think what Yooper is getting at was that certain people may do unesirable things to get those extra efficiency points. It seems like the culprit in question here is usually excess sparging, which can lead to an undesirable pH and to too many tannins being extracted.

It's my understanding that higher quality wort just indicates one with less tannins. The highest quality wort that you can produce comes from the first runnings from your mash tun.

If you think that your beer tastes fine, then I wouldn't worry about or change a thing; consistency is what's important!

 

[bryanjints]

I think what Yooper is getting at was that certain people may do unesirable things to get those extra efficiency points. It seems like the culprit in question here is usually excess sparging, which can lead to an undesirable pH and to too many tannins being extracted.

It's my understanding that higher quality wort just indicates one with less tannins. The highest quality wort that you can produce comes from the first runnings from your mash tun.

If you think that your beer tastes fine, then I wouldn't worry about or change a thing; consistency is what's important!

Thanks. I understand consistency is what is important. That is what I have always thought was important. It seems just about all brewers I come across suggest that consistency is most important.

I understand the over sparging thing. I also understand that tannins will cause astringency in beer. Seems this guy had a small bit of information and was trying to make himself seem smarter than he really was.


I don't plan on changing anything. I know I make good quality beer. I was just making sure I had the science down right.