90 min boil not needed for pilsner malt?

[MHBT]

After trying to troubleshoot a bad batch it was brought to my attention on another forum that a 90 min or even a 60 minute boil is not needed and a 45 minute boil can be employed when using pilsner malt. People also stated that a long and vigorous boil can be detrimental to flavor stability. This goes against everything i have learned so far in this hobby, also leaving the lid on until the last 15 mins of the boil, never heard of that either.. this all new to me and if this is the current way people brew with pilsner i'm interested cause its alot shorter brew day, is this a common technique these days? im lost

 

[waldoar15]

You should experiment and report back.


While you could probably get away fine with a 60 minute boil, I'd personally draw the line at the covered pot thing. A good boil also goes a long way when it comes to clarity in your finished beer. If you're brewing murky beers, then it's probably a moot point. But I make mostly lagers now days (with an occasional ESB thrown into the mix).

 

[MHBT]

i am definitely gonna experiment with this but first wanted to post this thread and hear other people thoughts on it

 

[homebrewer_99]

I was under the impression that covering the pot doesn't allow the bad stuff (SSM & DMS) to evaporate out. (The lid allows the steam to condensate and drop back into the pot).

Once the boil starts you can lower the flame to where it maintains a rolling boil (versus a vigorous one).

I used to think Pilsner malts were only used for lagers (Pilsners, Pils) until I read differently.

Pilsner malt (1L), 2 row Brewer's malt (1.8-2.1L) and Pale malts (3.5L) are all the same grain with varying degrees of Lovibond.

 

[jekeane]

After trying to troubleshoot a bad batch it was brought to my attention on another forum that a 90 min or even a 60 minute boil is not needed and a 45 minute boil can be employed when using pilsner malt. People also stated that a long and vigorous boil can be detrimental to flavor stability. This goes against everything i have learned so far in this hobby, also leaving the lid on until the last 15 mins of the boil, never heard of that either.. this all new to me and if this is the current way people brew with pilsner i'm interested cause its alot shorter brew day, is this a common technique these days? im lost

It is the way some people brew.

There is a popular brewing blog that has done a experiment showing that if you do all of these things at the same time a panel of tasters can't conclusively tell if there is DMS. They also have rarely conclusively told anyone anything.

Having judged plenty of pilsner based beers that contain varying levels of DMS I would not recommend doing any of the things listed here with the exception of your boil time which can be reduced a bit as long as your boil vigor is strong.

http://scottjanish.com/how-to-prevent-dms-in-beer/ Here is an article that points out the ease of detecting and creating DMS in even a hoppy style like a neipa.

Try out varying methods for yourself.

 

[waldoar15]

i am definitely gonna experiment with this but first wanted to post this thread and hear other people thoughts on it

Depending on the style, lets say a Pilsner Urquell clone, you're probably not going to get the melanoidin and slight caramel production from an all (or mostly all) Pils brew if you shorten the boil too much.

You can probably hack your way around it with some melanoidin malt and some crystal if you were so inclined.

But I understand you wanting to shorten your brew day.

 

[CanAm]

My experience with no cover on the boil kettle is that a 60 minute boil did not produce DMS for 10 gallons batches with a 1.5 gallon boil off rate

 

[Sammy86]

Gotta agree with all who’ve said you don’t need a 90 minute boil.

I’ve been on a lager kick lately and use 90-100% Pilsner frost and haven’t had any problems with DMS and a 60 minute boil.

Even got myself a 3rd place medal at a beer comp this summer.

 

[dmtaylor]

I wouldn't recommend putting a lid on the pot. But 60-90 minute boil is not necessary.

 

[RM-MN]

Those of us doing very short boils probably have a very limited number of different sources for our malts. Not all grains are the same as growing conditions vary and the level of SMM may be different. Then there is the contribution of the malting house and that also may make a difference. I'v not noticed any DMS in my beers with the 30 minute boil but I have only used brewers malt and pale malt from either Briess or Rahr, not a very big sample size. You'll have to run a batch with the malt source you use to see if your malt produced excessive DMS with a short boil.

 

[BroStefan]

I don’t know about OP methods but I’ve coached a number of new Brewers and three common misunderstandings I see.

1 - an over vigorous boil. All you need is enough to see the Wort gentle turning over of the Wort. This minimizes heat stress.

2 - uncovered boils don’t need to be completely uncovered. All they need is a clear exhaust path. When I brew inside (MN winter here) I prop the lis up with a wooden spoon to direct the water vapor to the exhaust fan and to keep crude from melting off the hood. No DMS.

3 - a vigorous healthy fermentation cures many issues or at least makes them better.

YMMV

 

[ba-brewer]

I have had beers that I did a 90min boil uncovered with a very healthy boil-off(1.5gal/hr) and judges were still able to detect low levels of DMS even though I could not. I switched from german pilsner to Belgian pilsner malt and did not notice those comments.

 

[mabrungard]

The science of DMS reduction is relatively young. Its only in the last 40 years that brewing scientists have uncovered the mechanisms and causes of DMS in beer. Considering that the widespread practice of homebrewing is about the same age, its no wonder that rules of thumb still persist regarding DMS reduction and control.

The 90 minute boil recommendation for wort made with high pils percentage is conservative. In most cases, its going to produce acceptable DMS results. However, its not a hard and fast RULE. There are cases where less boil time is necessary.

The key factors for determining what boiling measures are necessary are: the percentage of lightly kilned (<2L) malt and the elevation of where you're brewing. If you've got something like 30% or more, lightly kilned malt (aka: pils), then you're definitely going to need to worry about DMS reduction. If you're brewing with more kilned malt (>3L), then the DMS concern can be reduced. If you're brewing at relatively low elevation (<1000 ft), then DMS reduction is easier since the physics of boiling are in your favor. Brewing at higher elevation does make it more necessary to extend the boiling duration since the conversion rate from SMM to DMS is slowed. In general, 30 minutes of boiling at low elevation is sufficient to convert most of the SMM in wort to DMS. After that period, then its important to more actively and openly boil the wort to get that new DMS out of the wort. About 30 minutes of open boiling at low elevation is sufficient to get DMS out of wort.

Base malt color is a very important factor to consider. If you're exclusively using pale malt (>3L) or darker, then there is only minor amounts of SMM in that malt and most of it has already been converted to DMS in the grain. That makes it easier to just transfer the DMS from the grain into the wort and then out of the wort via the boil.

If you're working with high percentage of Munich malt (>6L), then you don't need to worry about SMM AT ALL! All the SMM has been converted to DMS in the grain and there isn't really that much left in that grain since the higher kilning that grain with this color has driven much of the DMS out. A 30 minute boil could easily and safely be applied to a beer like Munich Dunkel that is predominately made of Munich malt.

So there is a lot more to this DMS issue than meets the eye. I recently finished a Helles Bock with almost 100% pils malt and I applied a 30 minute fully covered simmer and a slightly more active open 30 minute boil to produce it. While its still young and needs a couple more weeks of lagering, there is no sign of DMS in the beer.

All of this information on wort boiling techniques and DMS will be covered more fully in an upcoming article in Zymurgy and presented in a presentation at this summer's HomebrewCon in Portland. Make sure you're an AHA member to learn how to improve your brewing.

PS: An another important aspect of those presentations is that you really can 'over boil' your wort and damage your beers. There are many problems with boiling too hard and too long.

 

[Cavpilot2000]

I brew a fair number of German-style Pilsners and I’ve worked my way down from 90 Minute to 70 and now generally 60 Minute Low-vigor boils (basically a good simmer) with the lid on but propped up to about a 2-3” gap. No DMS.
Personally I don’t bother with shorter than 60 Minute boils because of the POTENTIAL for things like DMS for the questionable benefit of saving 15-30 minutes.
It can also vary by your maltster and their process. It’s best if you find one you like and stick with it so you can standardize your own process around a consistent malt.
Bottom line: 90 minutes is unnecessary with most modern malts unless you start to get DMS with a shorter boil. If so, increase in 10-Minute increments until it stops.
But 60 should be plenty if you allow the Kettle to vent.

I can’t speak to leaving the lid fully on - I’ve never tried it and I can’t see any benefit from doing it, so I’m unlikely to ever start.

 

[mabrungard]

I can’t speak to leaving the lid fully on - I’ve never tried it and I can’t see any benefit from doing it, so I’m unlikely to ever start.

Reducing the heat stress on the wort and the subsequent reduction in thiobarbituric acid (TBA) is the reason that covering the kettle is important. Since SMM conversion to DMS does NOT require any venting, it makes sense to cover the kettle and reduce the power input to reduce the TBA production. Keeping that heat stress low is another reason to avoid a volcanic boil when you do need to vent the kettle.

TBA content is the number one precursor to beer staling. Its worth reducing it when you can. The only time I can see that you might want to have TBA in the wort is for big styles that benefit from aging.

 

[MaxStout]

Reducing the heat stress on the wort and the subsequent reduction in thiobarbituric acid (TBA) is the reason that covering the kettle is important. Since SMM conversion to DMS does NOT require any venting, it makes sense to cover the kettle and reduce the power input to reduce the TBA production. Keeping that heat stress low is another reason to avoid a volcanic boil when you do need to vent the kettle.

TBA content is the number one precursor to beer staling. Its worth reducing it when you can. The only time I can see that you might want to have TBA in the wort is for big styles that benefit from aging.

Interesting about the TBA production and its relation to staling. I wasn't familiar with that substance until now. I don't go through my homebrew very fast and I'm being mindful of shelf life--by reducing O2, and any other factor that impacts longevity.

Off to read up on TBA....

 

[mabrungard]

Read the Institute of Brewing and Distilling journal article "A study of kinetics of beer aging and development of methods for predicting the time to detection of flavour changes in beer". It is eye-opening. TBA is cited as the best indicator.

 

[Cavpilot2000]

I’ll look I to that article, but I already use a low-vigor boil.
I know volcanic boils are bad, but low-vigor boils (gentle simmer) should reduce the detrimental effect of the hard rolling boil that is both traditional and detrimental.
Am I incorrect in this?

 

[MaxStout]

Read the Institute of Brewing and Distilling journal article "A study of kinetics of beer aging and development of methods for predicting the time to detection of flavour changes in beer". It is eye-opening. TBA is cited as the best indicator.

I did find an online pdf for Esslinger's Handbook of Brewing, that discusses TBA to some extent. I'll look for the pub. you cited, too.

 

[Horseflesh]

Please post a link if you find it.

 

[RM-MN]

Personally I don’t bother with shorter than 60 Minute boils because of the POTENTIAL for things like DMS for the questionable benefit of saving 15-30 minutes.

You did find it worthwhile to risk DMS by shortening the boil from 90 to 60 minutes. Why not the risk from going shorter? Why is one 30 minute savings worthwhile but another is not?

 

[Cavpilot2000]

You did find it worthwhile to risk DMS by shortening the boil from 90 to 60 minutes. Why not the risk from going shorter? Why is one 30 minute savings worthwhile but another is not?

It's all a matter of finding the sweet spot, and for everyone that's different.
There are detrimental effect from boiling longer than necessary, and there are detrimental effects from boiling shorter than necessary. The sweet spot for me is 60 minutes. I get zero DMS from a 60 minute boil, so unless I am looking for additional carmelization, boiloff, or other potentially desirable effects of a long boil, there is no reason to go longer.
I have experienced DMS in a 30 minute boil I did once, so depending on my malts, my true sweet spot is somewhere between 30 and 60 minutes, and that may vary depending on malts, but I know for certain that at 60 I will get no DMS. Anything less would be an experiment that might end up with DMS and for most batches, I don't want to risk it. So I use 60. More is unnecessary (for me) and less increases risk.

 

[Dcpcooks]

The science of DMS reduction is relatively young. Its only in the last 40 years that brewing scientists have uncovered the mechanisms and causes of DMS in beer. Considering that the widespread practice of homebrewing is about the same age, its no wonder that rules of thumb still persist regarding DMS reduction and control.

The 90 minute boil recommendation for wort made with high pils percentage is conservative. In most cases, its going to produce acceptable DMS results. However, its not a hard and fast RULE. There are cases where less boil time is necessary.

The key factors for determining what boiling measures are necessary are: the percentage of lightly kilned (<2L) malt and the elevation of where you're brewing. If you've got something like 30% or more, lightly kilned malt (aka: pils), then you're definitely going to need to worry about DMS reduction. If you're brewing with more kilned malt (>3L), then the DMS concern can be reduced. If you're brewing at relatively low elevation (<1000 ft), then DMS reduction is easier since the physics of boiling are in your favor. Brewing at higher elevation does make it more necessary to extend the boiling duration since the conversion rate from SMM to DMS is slowed. In general, 30 minutes of boiling at low elevation is sufficient to convert most of the SMM in wort to DMS. After that period, then its important to more actively and openly boil the wort to get that new DMS out of the wort. About 30 minutes of open boiling at low elevation is sufficient to get DMS out of wort.

Base malt color is a very important factor to consider. If you're exclusively using pale malt (>3L) or darker, then there is only minor amounts of SMM in that malt and most of it has already been converted to DMS in the grain. That makes it easier to just transfer the DMS from the grain into the wort and then out of the wort via the boil.

If you're working with high percentage of Munich malt (>6L), then you don't need to worry about SMM AT ALL! All the SMM has been converted to DMS in the grain and there isn't really that much left in that grain since the higher kilning that grain with this color has driven much of the DMS out. A 30 minute boil could easily and safely be applied to a beer like Munich Dunkel that is predominately made of Munich malt.

So there is a lot more to this DMS issue than meets the eye. I recently finished a Helles Bock with almost 100% pils malt and I applied a 30 minute fully covered simmer and a slightly more active open 30 minute boil to produce it. While its still young and needs a couple more weeks of lagering, there is no sign of DMS in the beer.

All of this information on wort boiling techniques and DMS will be covered more fully in an upcoming article in Zymurgy and presented in a presentation at this summer's HomebrewCon in Portland. Make sure you're an AHA member to learn how to improve your brewing.

PS: An another important aspect of those presentations is that you really can 'over boil' your wort and damage your beers. There are many problems with boiling too hard and too long.

Edit. Sorry I don’t read through the rest of the text. Can you elaborate a bit more on the damages connected to “over boil”? I’m cool with waiting if it will covered in an upcoming issue of Zymurgy.

Cheers!