Pressure cooker: A decoction hack?

[AlcheMania]

I've always loved the unique malty flavors i taste when drinking beer brewed using the triple decoction methods of old like Munich Dunkel or a Bohemian Pils.
Unfortunately for us homebrewers the process to obtain this malt profile involves a mash schedule that extends the brew day at least several hours and greatly complicates the process. In the new age of BIAB, i personally love to KISS. Low stress 4 hr brew days while watching Sunday Football? Yes please!!
Whats more, we don't need an acid rest for PH or a protein rest for undermodified malts. We now have salts, calulators, ph meters, refractometers, thermometers, etc to hit every needed mash parameter with far greater accuracy than they did 400 years ago!
So what about the ancient convoluted process made it taste uniquely good? Well its my belief that its (mostly) the extended boils and time within the maillard reaction window.
Between 3 decoctions youre boiling a small amount of wort (and grain) for 45 plus minutes, PRIOR to the main boil.
But how about we just boil a portion of wort WITHOUT the grain in a pressure cooker to achieve in 20-30 minutes what used to take 3-4 hrs AND do it while the single infusion mash is already happening?

And so my game plan is as follows,
For a SMaSH Pilsner Keg Ferm:
Mash in 100% Bark Pilsner @ 155F
for 20 minutes w 6 gallons of soft'ish PH adjusted water.
Remove about 1 to 1.2 gallons of wort and pressure boil for 30 minutes. (15psi should = 250F BTW)
Depressurize n add back to mash once its time to ramp to mashout (i recirc thru a herms coil in a HLT) Rinse grains off w a gallon of RO. (I BIAB soooo a few % efficiency loss from rinsing cold be damned)
Boil w typical Saaz additions for 75 to 90
Cool and Ferment w WLP800

Predictions?

My fermenters are now occupied w/ a DunkelWeizen and an ESB and I'm going out of town Dec 29th thru Jan16th. But ill give it a go when i return. Will keep yall posted on the results. Ultimately i want a little color w out relying on specialty grains and if it gets even half the malt character I'm looking for its a win.

Cheers!!

 

[doug293cz]

I've always loved the unique malty flavors i taste when drinking beer brewed using the triple decoction methods of old like Munich Dunkel or a Bohemian Pils.
Unfortunately for us homebrewers the process to obtain this malt profile involves a mash schedule that extends the brew day at least several hours and greatly complicates the process. In the new age of BIAB, i personally love to KISS. Low stress 4 hr brew days while watching Sunday Football? Yes please!!
Whats more, we don't need an acid rest for PH or a protein rest for undermodified malts. We now have salts, calulators, ph meters, refractometers, thermometers, etc to hit every needed mash parameter with far greater accuracy than they did 400 years ago!
So what about the ancient convoluted process made it taste uniquely good? Well its my belief that its (mostly) the extended boils and time within the maillard reaction window.
Between 3 decoctions youre boiling a small amount of wort (and grain) for 45 plus minutes, PRIOR to the main boil.
But how about we just boil a portion of wort WITHOUT the grain in a pressure cooker to achieve in 20-30 minutes what used to take 3-4 hrs AND do it while the single infusion mash is already happening?

And so my game plan is as follows,
For a SMaSH Pilsner Keg Ferm:
Mash in 100% Bark Pilsner @ 155F
for 20 minutes w 6 gallons of soft'ish PH adjusted water.
Remove about 1 to 1.2 gallons of wort and pressure boil for 30 minutes. (15psi should = 250F BTW)
Depressurize n add back to mash once its time to ramp to mashout (i recirc thru a herms coil in a HLT) Rinse grains off w a gallon of RO. (I BIAB soooo a few % efficiency loss from rinsing cold be damned)
Boil w typical Saaz additions for 75 to 90
Cool and Ferment w WLP800

Predictions?

My fermenters are now occupied w/ a DunkelWeizen and an ESB and I'm going out of town Dec 29th thru Jan16th. But ill give it a go when i return. Will keep yall posted on the results. Ultimately i want a little color w out relying on specialty grains and if it gets even half the malt character I'm looking for its a win.

Cheers!!

During the mash, most of the enzymes are in the wort, not the grain bits. This is why traditional decoctions are done with thick fractions of the mash to minimize the amount of enzymes denatured during the boiling. Also many decoction schedules include a saccharification rest of the decocted portion before proceeding to a boil. As long as you boil a small faction of the total wort volume, you should still have enough enzymes to complete hydrolysis of your starch. But, if you have marginal diastatic power in your grain bill to start, it might be an issue.

Also, sparging with cold water does not lead to a loss of lauter efficiency.

Brew on

 

[Red over White]

I've always loved the unique malty flavors i taste when drinking beer brewed using the triple decoction methods of old like Munich Dunkel or a Bohemian Pils.
Unfortunately for us homebrewers the process to obtain this malt profile involves a mash schedule that extends the brew day at least several hours and greatly complicates the process. In the new age of BIAB, i personally love to KISS. Low stress 4 hr brew days while watching Sunday Football? Yes please!!
Whats more, we don't need an acid rest for PH or a protein rest for undermodified malts. We now have salts, calulators, ph meters, refractometers, thermometers, etc to hit every needed mash parameter with far greater accuracy than they did 400 years ago!
So what about the ancient convoluted process made it taste uniquely good? Well its my belief that its (mostly) the extended boils and time within the maillard reaction window.
Between 3 decoctions youre boiling a small amount of wort (and grain) for 45 plus minutes, PRIOR to the main boil.
But how about we just boil a portion of wort WITHOUT the grain in a pressure cooker to achieve in 20-30 minutes what used to take 3-4 hrs AND do it while the single infusion mash is already happening?

And so my game plan is as follows,
For a SMaSH Pilsner Keg Ferm:
Mash in 100% Bark Pilsner @ 155F
for 20 minutes w 6 gallons of soft'ish PH adjusted water.
Remove about 1 to 1.2 gallons of wort and pressure boil for 30 minutes. (15psi should = 250F BTW)
Depressurize n add back to mash once its time to ramp to mashout (i recirc thru a herms coil in a HLT) Rinse grains off w a gallon of RO. (I BIAB soooo a few % efficiency loss from rinsing cold be damned)
Boil w typical Saaz additions for 75 to 90
Cool and Ferment w WLP800

Predictions?

My fermenters are now occupied w/ a DunkelWeizen and an ESB and I'm going out of town Dec 29th thru Jan16th. But ill give it a go when i return. Will keep yall posted on the results. Ultimately i want a little color w out relying on specialty grains and if it gets even half the malt character I'm looking for its a win.

Cheers!!

For a 1.050 pils (guess) with 100% Barke with a guesstimated 100-110°L for that malt which is unpublished by weyermann, I think you will have plenty of enzymes to convert upon re-entry with your decoction mash. I'm looking forward to your results and especially tasting notes.

In 1994 I built a "brew magic system" clone and used a pressure cooker to introduce steam into the mashtun under the false bottom for temp ramps. I sure made some tasty beers with that rig. Exceeding 212°F and getting into the 225°F realm is mimicking the Krones Stromboli boilers. Keep us posted!

 

[huckdavidson]

This has been done many times before.

There are some caveats to be aware of but definitely give it a try if you haven't done so before.

Why bother to go to all this trouble in the first place? The reason is that decoction mashing doesn’t produce more malt flavor but instead, better malt flavor.

https://crescentcitybrewtalk.com/pr...ss involves using a,to use a pressure cooker.

 

[Red over White]

This has been done many times before.

There are some caveats to be aware of but definitely give it a try if you haven't done so before.



https://crescentcitybrewtalk.com/pr...ss involves using a,to use a pressure cooker.

I think the approach of simply boiling the wort under pressure without grist is different than what Mike is talking about and might bring something to the table.

 

[Spivey24]

I remember doing wort in the pressure cooker for some reason or another I can’t remember now. I do remember the mess it made of the pressure cooker. so factor in extra cleaning time. My prediction is it won’t be different enough than an extended boil to be worth the hassle. One more thing to go wrong and clean.

 

[hottpeper13]

One of the reasons that you get a higher efficiency with a decoction is that the distal end of the kernel is not modified and when boiled the starches are released and then converted when put back into the main mash. So that would not happen in your sinerio.

 

[AlcheMania]

One of the reasons that you get a higher efficiency with a decoction is that the distal end of the kernel is not modified and when boiled the starches are released and then converted when put back into the main mash. So that would not happen in

One of the reasons that you get a higher efficiency with a decoction is that the distal end of the kernel is not modified and when boiled the starches are released and then converted when put back into the main mash. So that would not happen in your sinerio.

Makes sense.
Which is fine by me. Im just looking for the color and flavor addition.

 

[AlcheMania]

I remember doing wort in the pressure cooker for some reason or another I can’t remember now. I do remember the mess it made of the pressure cooker. so factor in extra cleaning time. My prediction is it won’t be different enough than an extended boil to be worth the hassle. One more thing to go wrong and clean.

Reasonable prediction. Im shooting for getting the pressure boil done during the mash, cooker emptied and soaking in hot dishwater, before draining grains for the boil.

 

[doug293cz]

One of the reasons that you get a higher efficiency with a decoction is that the distal end of the kernel is not modified and when boiled the starches are released and then converted when put back into the main mash. So that would not happen in your sinerio.

I've not heard of this effect before. Do you have a reference? Thx in advance.

Brew on

 

[hottpeper13]

I've not heard of this effect before. Do you have a reference? Thx in advance.

It would take awhile to find it but it was either the ingredients course at Sieble or the malt portion of the Brewing and Malting course at UW Madison thru the MBAA. It makes sense because the acrospire only gets 3/4 the length of the corn to be considered fully converted so that small portion remains crystal like and completely unmodified.

 

[Beer234]

Looking forward to your results.
Was thinking about using the method huckdavidson posted above, but watching here with interest.
Trying to get my hands on some Weyermann floor malted bohemian malt atm.
Best of luck.

 

[GoodTruble]

Please post a picture of your pressure cooker after using but before cleaning. I am curious how much of a mess this does or doesn't make.

 

[PCABrewing]

One of the reasons that you get a higher efficiency with a decoction is that the distal end of the kernel is not modified and when boiled the starches are released and then converted when put back into the main mash. So that would not happen in your sinerio.

So are you saying that the modification happens in a linear manner through the endosperm?

My understanding is that in the malting process the first enzyme (alpha amylase) activity basically prepares the endosperm by perforating it. thus exposing more surface area to the subsequent mash activity.
The acrospire length is more indicative of the time that has passed and thus is an indicator, not precise, of the amount of work the alpha amylase has likely accomplished. The enzymes that trigger modification are produced by the aleurone. The aleurone encases the entire length of the endosperm and thus the enzymes are fully available to the surface of the endosperm upon initial hydration of the grain. This assumes sufficient level of hydration to allow the enzymes produced by the embryo to contact the full surface area of the endosperm. As long as it does, there will be activity happening concurrently at the distal end as well as the proximal.
Do I misunderstand the process?

I don't doubt that your process has an effect, I just wonder if it is directly a result of the distal end being under or UN-modified.

 

[hottpeper13]

Page 59 of the Malt book states "A quick visual assessment or the elongation of the acrospire can indicate the degree of modification because the two factors are roughly in sync with other. Read it again on page 184. And then page 240 for more. I believe it's in Kunce's book Technology Brewing and Malting,I have the 5 th edition and can look it up if you want me too.

 

[PCABrewing]

So I found this page which seems to indicate that the water (hydration) flow is probably responsible for the distal-end under modification:

Malt 12. Master the Method

As for the acrospire length being indicative of level of modification I do not dispute that and the term "well modified" is used as opposed to "fully modified", that supports the incomplete enzyme activity on the endosperm.
The degree of modification could likely be increased with time but the trade-off would be depletion of the desired starch by the growing acrospire which I presume is the reason for striking the balance at 3/4 acrospire length.

So the above mentioned pressure-cooker approach aims to free-up that remaining (5-8%?) of the usable starch by using heat to breakdown the protein bond that otherwise keeps the starch inaccessible.
Do I have that right?
If so, it seems like we could test that pretty easily by gently smashing "spent" (from the mash) and the subsequent pressure-cooked kernels. Presumably the pressure-cooked kernel would not have a hard nugget at the distal end whereas the spent grain would. Seem plausible?

I guess the next question is whether the cooking results in greater yield from the grain than the simple mash.
I.E. does the cooking really break the protein bond or simply soften the end of the kernel.
That leaves open the question of how boiling liquid wort only achieves that final utilization of the grain. I don't see how it could.

Now this started as a suggestion that the cooking process may yield a perceived/perceivable increase in "maltiness".
Does it seem likely that the small increase in utilization (less than 10%) of the starches (speculated) affects the malt flavor in a noticeable way?

The fun part obviously will be in the multiple rounds of blind taste tests to determine which overall process results in a better malt flavor.

Done rambling...

 

[Brooothru]

I'm a total noob when it comes to detoction. Check that, I'm not even Noob Adjacent when it comes to detoction. It's always seemed to be such a time consuming mess with minimal upside in an already long and messy day, that I never seriously considered trying one. Not that it doesn't make for better beer, but it just didn't strike me as being worth the risk/reward. That said, and being attracted to trying new things, this thread has sparked an interest.

I've got a pressure canner capable of holding 7 quart jars. I also sous vide using a precision temperature bath. It occurred to me that I could divide a pound or so of grist into four 800ml canning jars with strike water, place them (sealed) into a 145F sous vide bath for :40 minutes, step the temperature to 158F for another :40, then boil them in the pressure canner for :15 minutes at 1 BAR/250F. Once the jars of wort/grain had cooled sufficiently, I'd combine the wort and grist into an already mashed 'main' grist in the mash tun, and perform a 169F mash out.

Basically I'd be performing parallel step mashes with the bulk of the grist in the mash tun and the remainder (the detoction mash) processed separately in the sous vide bath and the pressure cooker, then combining the two for mash out and sparge.

Does this make any sense, and would it work? If so it would save the mess of interrupting the main mash to scoop hot wort and grain out to boil separately. Additionally, the pressure 'detoction' could be accomplished a day or more before brew day since the contents of the jar had already been sterilized in the 250F pressure bath. There would be sufficient enzymes in the 150+ Lintner pilsner in the main mash to convert the starches in the combined mash, even though the detocted portion's enzymes had long since been denatured. Somebody tell me what I'm missing.

 

[Mr. Vern]

Decoction for flavor. I think you would want the pulled mash to achieve Maillard reaction and this will not easily happen in a regular pressure cooker. At that temperature (sautee setting for an instapot) you need to keep stirring.. might as well be in a regular pot.

In a pot there is some caramelization happening and non-enzymatic browning that cooked biscut/malty kick. This is from the wall temperature of the pot even if the mash is not hitting 270 deg. F

 

[GoodTruble]

Why not flambé the top of the mash? (Half kidding).

 

[Brooothru]

Decoction for flavor. I think you would want the pulled mash to achieve Maillard reaction and this will not easily happen in a regular pressure cooker. At that temperature (sautee setting for an instapot) you need to keep stirring.. might as well be in a regular pot.

In a pot there is some caramelization happening and non-enzymatic browning that cooked biscut/malty kick. This is from the wall temperature of the pot even if the mash is not hitting 270 deg. F

That makes sense. However…

I use the pressure canner to make 1.038 SG yeast starter worts in 1 quart jars with Extra Light Pilsner DME. After :20 minutes at 1 BAR/250F, there is noticeable caramelization darkening without any enzymatic activity with spray malt.

Since the surface area of the jar is submerged and in contact with high thermal mass 250F water, and since there is a constant, gentle convection circulating the jars’ contents, doesn’t that effectively ‘stir’ the wort? I might have to lengthen the time in the pressure canner to obtain sufficient caramelization.

It seems like there’d be sufficient “wall contact” to create the desired Maillard reactions, IF there’s enough convection induced circulation of the grist and wort within the sealed jars.

I see three possible outcomes: it works as envisioned; it doesn’t work, but doesn’t ruin the batch; it scorches the wort and grist in the pressure canner jars which then gets tossed, and the finished main mash produces a low ABV beer.

Since the ‘pressure detoction’ could be done the day before, if it doesn’t work out very little would be lost and I could adjust the ‘main mash’ grain bill to brew a non-detoction beer.

Looks like a low-risk test batch is in order. If it works I’ll have discovered a useful hack. If it works but doesn’t produce an improvement, it’ll be a useful lesson learned as well. And if it’s an epic fail, I’ll have only lost a day’s effort and a pound of grain.

 

[Mr. Vern]

Good points.. I was thinking along the lines of saturated steam pressure / temperature being far too high to achieve the temps *I think* would be needed. The cooker headspace would become saturated steam @ 1 BAR / 120 deg. C (250 deg F.)

Your experience shows a reaction is occurring, a gentle indirect heat could possibly be all we need. If I were more proficient at test batches I would be interested in a side-by-side.

 

[huckdavidson]

Written in 1914 this paper gives the results of pressure boiling wort of different sugar makeups for various periods of time. The more alkaline the wort and the more simple sugars (besides malt, i.e. sucrose, etc..) it was composed of the more color it gained during the pressure boil. Also noted are taste differences and brewing process differences from a regular boil.

The Chemistry of Pressure Wort Boiling

 

[Bassman2003]

@AlcheMania - Any news on the pressure boiling of your mash wort? I am also interested in hearing about the taste of the beer once it is done. Have you tried the method yet?

 

[Bassman2003]

I was able to perform a single decoction in a simple manner recently. It basically amounted to an extended beta rest in terms of extra time. I do have a separate boil kettle along with an Anvil Foundry, so the ability to have a parallel operation is available. The method was to separate 1/3 of the dry grist into a 2nd brew bag. When it came time to move the 1/3 thick mash I just lifted the bag out and put it into the boil kettle pot which already had a grate and enough liquid at temperature to cover the grains. I then did a 15 minute alpha rest then a 15 min boil. After the boil I just lifted the bag and moved it over to the main mash then dumped the grains back into the main mash bag. The main mash continued to alpha while I rinsed out the boil kettle.

Here is a video of the entire brew day. I talk about the grain separation early on. Then you can skip around to see more about the decoction part. The beer is yet to be tapped, so I can not say if I gained any flavor (which is all I wanted) but will try to update once it is tapped.

 

[Mr. Vern]

The more alkaline the wort and the more simple sugars (besides malt, i.e. sucrose, etc..) it was composed of the more color it gained during the pressure boil.

I read yesterday that non-enzymatic browning is increased with greater alkalinity. Thanks for the reference material it is interesting!

 

[Miraculix]

You might have noticed that you boil the entire wort after the mash anyway, so there's no point to take a part of the wort out during the mash, boil it and bring it back into the mash.

The whole decoction thing only makes sense if you include the grain and minimise the amount of wort. Then the glycoproteins can be build which increase head and mouthfeel. All the other things decoction should do are debatable but this one actually happens. I'm not sure if this also happens when heated to higher temperatures than 100c, or if they are destroyed at that temperature. Room for some experiments!

 

[Brooothru]

Good points.. I was thinking along the lines of saturated steam pressure / temperature being far too high to achieve the temps *I think* would be needed. The cooker headspace would become saturated steam @ 1 BAR / 120 deg. C (250 deg F.)

Your experience shows a reaction is occurring, a gentle indirect heat could possibly be all we need. If I were more proficient at test batches I would be interested in a side-by-side.

Agree. The results I observed are casual and anecdotal rather than empirical. So it’s time to test the theorem and see if the results are favorable and repeatable.

 

[Brooothru]

Written in 1914 this paper gives the results of pressure boiling wort of different sugar makeups for various periods of time. The more alkaline the wort and the more simple sugars (besides malt, i.e. sucrose, etc..) it was composed of the more color it gained during the pressure boil. Also noted are taste differences and brewing process differences from a regular boil.

The Chemistry of Pressure Wort Boiling

This is exactly the empirical data needed to formulate a brew plan. It’s going to take some time and effort for me to wade through everything and sort it out, but the takeaway cursory read through suggests that a ‘pressure mash’ that tends towards alkalinity and simple sugars will result in higher levels of desirable detoction components.

The roles of thicker detoction mash as well as time and higher temperatures attainable under pressure are strongly suggested. It’ll take me awhile to wade through this paper before I can find my starting point.

 

[DuncB]

I've only dipped my toe into the decoction, it was a step mash, I pulled about 4 litres of grain and enough liquid to cover it in the pot. Raised it to 65 celsius, stirring and then up to the boil. Added back to the grains that were at 62 in the brew system. Then temp was nearly at my next rest at 68.

Didn't really create too much chaos or stress in my brew day, beer seems to have a much better head than any lager I've made before. But I did use novalager yeast for first time so can't put it down to the decoction alone.
But much better tasting than my previous efforts.

 

[AlcheMania]

Update: im back in the states and jet lagged as hell!!
Plan to brew this 1/27
To clarify i have no intention of pressure cooking grist. Just a portion of the wort *after 15-20 minutes of mashing) for about 30. Then adding back to mash when its time to mashout. Ill save a shot of the pre pressure boiled wort to compare to a shot of the post.

 

[DuncB]

Why not just put a very thick portion of the mash and some liquor in a pan and bring it to the boil and add it in.
The wheel has already been made by others.

 

[Brooothru]

Why not just put a very thick portion of the mash and some liquor in a pan and bring it to the boil and add it in.
The wheel has already been made by others.

That’s effectively the same thing as pressure ‘canning’ a thick mash, without having to do an actual detoction. Strike water and grist in several quart canning jars, sous vide mash with precise temperature control in the jars, then pressure can (boil) @ 250F. Combine the contents with the main mash. Mash out, sparge, boil.

Extra work, yes. But work that can be performed a day or more before the brew day. Less mess, more control. Same end results?

Don’t know. Worth a try? Won’t know unless I give it a try. Better beer? Guess we’ll see.

 

[Miraculix]

Update: im back in the states and jet lagged as hell!!
Plan to brew this 1/27
To clarify i have no intention of pressure cooking grist. Just a portion of the wort *after 15-20 minutes of mashing) for about 30. Then adding back to mash when its time to mashout. Ill save a shot of the pre pressure boiled wort to compare to a shot of the post.

Why do you want to heat only the wort beyond 100c? The whole decoction thing is about heating the grain with some wort, not the wort alone. What do you expect to happen that improves your beer?

 

[AlcheMania]

Why do you want to heat only the wort beyond 100c? The whole decoction thing is about heating the grain with some wort, not the wort alone. What do you expect to happen that improves your beer?

Mostly maillard reactions.
Many if not most of the old reasons to decoct have been made moot with modern malts, chemistry, etc.
Also, base malt is cheap.

 

[AlcheMania]

Written in 1914 this paper gives the results of pressure boiling wort of different sugar makeups for various periods of time. The more alkaline the wort and the more simple sugars (besides malt, i.e. sucrose, etc..) it was composed of the more color it gained during the pressure boil. Also noted are taste differences and brewing process differences from a regular boil.

The Chemistry of Pressure Wort Boiling

This is awesome! Thank you

 

[Miraculix]

Mostly maillard reactions.
Many if not most of the old reasons to decoct have been made moot with modern malts, chemistry, etc.
Also, base malt is cheap.

This has nothing to do with decoction. Decoction needs the presence of the grain bed to work. The crucial processes need the substances of the grain.

What you are planning to do is mimicking a prolonged boil in a short amount of time. Also interesting, but not a decoction, not even related to it.

 

[Red over White]

Krones Stromboli Kettles or similar do get to above boiling temp with wort. There has to be an affect us mere mortals can't achieve or appreciate. Keep us posted!

 

[AlcheMania]

Why do you want to heat only the wort beyond 100c? The whole decoction thing is about heating the grain with some wort, not the wort alone. What do you expect to happen that improves your beer?

This has nothing to do with decoction. Decoction needs the presence of the grain bed to work. The crucial processes need the substances of the grain.

What you are planning to do is mimicking a prolonged boil in a short amount of time. Also interesting, but not a decoction, not even related to

This has nothing to do with decoction. Decoction needs the presence of the grain bed to work. The crucial processes need the substances of the grain.

What you are planning to do is mimicking a prolonged boil in a short amount of time. Also interesting, but not a decoction, not even related to it.

Yes. Im not trying to decoct. Im getting the impression you may not have read my OP and are missing the point.

 

[Bassman2003]

50/50 imho! The association with decoction is kind of a faulty premise. Boiling the grain is more of the focus with decoction and any flavors that ensue. Extended or over-boiling of the wort is a separate technique - caramelization. Are the flavors related? I know pressure cooked wort is hyper blasted. My starter wort mason jars turn very dark after a run through the cooker at 15 psi. Certain styles might benefit from this treatment (thinking Scottish ales and the like). Pilsner/helles, I am not sure about. Maybe darker German styles but this treatment brings about a heavy impression to me which often does not fit lager beer.

But it is cool to try and learn from! Keep us posted.

 

[AlcheMania]

50/50 imho! The association with decoction is kind of a faulty premise. Boiling the grain is more of the focus with decoction and any flavors that ensue. Extended or over-boiling of the wort is a separate technique - caramelization. Are the flavors related? I know pressure cooked wort is hyper blasted. My starter wort mason jars turn very dark after a run through the cooker at 15 psi. Certain styles might benefit from this treatment (thinking Scottish ales and the like). Pilsner/helles, I am not sure about. Maybe darker German styles but this treatment brings about a heavy impression to me which often does not fit lager beer.

But it is cool to try and learn from! Keep us posted.

I see the where the confusion lies.
i thought naming the thread ....decoction hack" vs "....a better way to decoct" and discussing my thought process on the maillard reactions from extended boiling being a major contributer to flavor contributions in a traditional decoction would suffice.
But to further expand, the pressurization raises the rate at which the maillard reactions take place (at 212 its quite slow, the process accelerates above 115c (239) so 250F at 15psi should be spot on. So my thought process is that i can get an equivalent amount of maillard in about 1/2 to 1/3rd the time using the pressure cooker, thus allowing me to complete the process simultaneously during my usual mash time. It may be that the color contributions are more significant than the flavor contributions in the end. Will keep yall posted.

Cheers!