Judge my first NEIPA recipe

[wepeeler]

Where have you read that Pilsner malt is the most fermentable malt? I’ve honestly never read that and it’s sort of a blanket statement. “Pilsner” malt is very different depending on where it’s grown.

I would think that standard American 2 row, and American Pilsner malt would be pretty similar as far as fermentability goes due to them having pretty similar enzyme profiles just slightly different lovibond.

Just going by what I was told, and what I've experienced firsthand. I share my beer (neipas mostly) with the owner of a local brewery pretty regularly. I switched from Rahr 2 row to Pilsner malt for 1 batch to try to lighten the color a bit, and I couldn't figure out why the Pilsner batch fermented down to 1.012 vs 1.018-1.020 which I was getting consistently with the Rahr. He told me that Pilsner malt was most likely the reason, since it's the most fermentable malt. Made sense, since my only change to the recipe was swapping in Pilsner malt for the 2 row. I took it at face value. Also, Rahr was definitely more hazy than the Pilsner and had a fuller mouthfeel.

What? Dude.

North American 2-row is a low-flavor enzyme bomb that will dry out far beyond a reasonable Pilsner malt, due to the higher Diastatic Power. 2-row usually has like double the enzyme content of continental Pilsner.

Furthermore, residual sweetness, if you mean unfermented sugar, would depend on the yeast.


If you are talking about some 2-row that is kilned to a "Pilsner" profile, sure. But there's so much sideways here . . . .

That has not been my personal experience. I always thought diastatic power was more important when dealing with multiple grains, especially when using grains with low DP, which can't convert starch to fermentable sugars? Isn't mash temp was more important when predicting FG, and in turn, residual sweetness?

 

[skibb]

North American 2-row is a low-flavor enzyme bomb that will dry out far beyond a reasonable Pilsner malt, due to the higher Diastatic Power. 2-row usually has like double the enzyme content of continental Pilsner.

This is not necessarily true. Higher diastatic power does not mean higher fermentability. It means it has a higher ability to ferment .
2-row has more enzymes, but they are the same enzymes as Pilsner malt has, so they will not make it more fermentable. High diastatic power comes in to play when you have a large amount of adjuncts (non-malted grains) and ensures you convert all their starches.
Mainstream Continental Pils malt these days is plenty modified and will convert just as well as any 2-Row.

 

[couchsending]

This is not necessarily true. Higher diastatic power does not mean higher fermentability. It means it has a higher ability to ferment .
2-row has more enzymes, but they are the same enzymes as Pilsner malt has, so they will not make it more fermentable. High diastatic power comes in to play when you have a large amount of adjuncts (non-malted grains) and ensures you convert all their starches.
Mainstream Continental Pils malt these days is plenty modified and will convert just as well as any 2-Row.

I remember a really interesting MBAA podcast with Joe Hetrich. I think it was the Six-rowification of American 2 Row series. Anyways I distinctly remember him saying brewers have such little control with most North American 2 Row because of such high DP. I distinctly remember him saying you need to mash short and hot in order to have any chance of altering the fermentability if the wort. I have to go back and listen to that podcast (should prolly go back and listen to all the podcasts he’s a guest on). I swear he was referring to DP at the time, could be wrong.

That being said continental pilsner malt is definitely not more fermentable and I’m pretty sure NA Pilsner malt that’s just the same high enzyme barley variety kilned to a lower L is not any more fermentable than standard American 2 row.

 

[Mer-man]

I remember a really interesting MBAA podcast with Joe Hetrich. I think it was the Six-rowification of American 2 Row series. Anyways I distinctly remember him saying brewers have such little control with most North American 2 Row because of such high DP. I distinctly remember him saying you need to mash short and hot in order to have any chance of altering the fermentability if the wort. I have to go back and listen to that podcast (should prolly go back and listen to all the podcasts he’s a guest on). I swear he was referring to DP at the time, could be wrong.

That being said continental pilsner malt is definitely not more fermentable and I’m pretty sure NA Pilsner malt that’s just the same high enzyme barley variety kilned to a lower L is not any more fermentable than standard American 2 row.

You're correct. I recommend those podcasts, @skibb

 

[Brian66]

I have one fermenting now with London III. I think I'll try the US-04 next time

I've done a batch with 1318 and I've now done a batch with US-04. Used the same recipe each time. The 1318 batch was by far better. Great aroma, juicy and very good. The US-04 batch had a good aroma but lacked the juiciness of the 1318 batch. Also on the finish I could detect a hint of alcohol flavor.

That was a CitMo kit. Doing my own recipe now with citra and amarillo using 1318.

 

[deuc224]

I've only done one batch of NEIPA in my life, so take this fwiw, but I did use 1318 and it came out good other than just finishing a few points high around 1.022 I think. So it was about 7% and a little sweet, should have been drier and 8.5, but was still plenty drinkable with a great flavor.
That said, next time I'm going to do everything I can to get it down further: Mash lower, oxygenate the crap out of it, and hit it with a massive starter.

Twins! I have the same FG