97% attenuation, wtf?!

[spiffcow]

So I brewed a tripel last week, with an OG of 1.084, and pitched a 1.8L stir-plate starter of 3787, and let it self-rise to around 80*F. It's been a week now, and I checked it.. 1.003! What's going on here? I did have a longer than expected mash (about 2 hours), but this seems insane. I'm wondering if its infected. It tastes awful, mostly hot alcohol, but I would kind of expect that after only a week.

Anyway, is there a way to save this? Can I maybe add a bunch of lactose? Or perhaps just add some DME and some sort of pasteurizer, to bring it up to around 1.010, then keg to carbonate? How likely is it that the solvent flavor will go away over time?

 

[BlueZooBrewing]

I've brewed a few Tripel's and a few Quads so far and they always have a pretty hot alcohol taste if you sample them early on. I wouldn't mess with it, just let it age some and see how its tasting. If it is infected theres not much you can do, but if its just a very young big beer then give it time. I generally age my Trips and Quads at least a month in the fermenter and then a few months in the bottles. Even at a month in the fermenter you'll still pick up some heat on the big boys. Have you tested your hydrometer with water to make sure it is reading accurately?

 

[J187]

Mash temp? A lower mash temp is going to lead to a very highly fermentable wort. Especially if you started lowish and ended up a even lower over 2 hours.

 

[TheZymurgist]

So I brewed a tripel last week, with an OG of 1.084, and pitched a 1.8L stir-plate starter of 3787, and let it self-rise to around 80*F. It's been a week now, and I checked it.. 1.003! What's going on here? I did have a longer than expected mash (about 2 hours), but this seems insane. I'm wondering if its infected. It tastes awful, mostly hot alcohol, but I would kind of expect that after only a week.

Anyway, is there a way to save this? Can I maybe add a bunch of lactose? Or perhaps just add some DME and some sort of pasteurizer, to bring it up to around 1.010, then keg to carbonate? How likely is it that the solvent flavor will go away over time?

I wouldn't add any DME or lactose, you'd be changing the profile of the beer pretty significantly, and it may not be what you want. List the original recipe along with your process. That can help determine where the issue is.

As far as the hot alcohol taste, I would imagine fermenting at 80* would produce a fair amount of fusel alcohols, although I'm not familiar with that particular strand of yeast.

 

[spiffcow]

I have 3 hydrometers (don't ask..), and tested it with all of them, feeling sure there was something wrong, but they were all within 1 gravity point of 1.003.

My mash schedule was 10 minutes at 128*F, 2 hours at 150*F, and it had fallen to 145 by the end of the 2 hours. The taste is not outside of what I expect given that it has fermented to almost 11% alcohol. I'm most interested in finding a way to repair this. Maybe maltodexterin?

 

[spiffcow]

Here's the recipe..

12 lb Pils
3 lb cane sugar

mash:
10 min @ 128*F
120 min @ 150*F (fell to about 145)

boil:
2 oz Styrian Gold @ 60
2 oz Saaz @ 30

ferment:
Cool to 60*F, pitch 1.8L of 3787, let self rise to 80*F over 3 days.

 

[J187]

I have 3 hydrometers (don't ask..), and tested it with all of them, feeling sure there was something wrong, but they were all within 1 gravity point of 1.003.

My mash schedule was 10 minutes at 128*F, 2 hours at 150*F, and it had fallen to 145 by the end of the 2 hours. The taste is not outside of what I expect given that it has fermented to almost 11% alcohol. I'm most interested in finding a way to repair this. Maybe maltodexterin?

Longer mash times causing more fermentable wort + cooler temps causing more fermentable wort, I wouldn't be surprised if this, combined with an 80 deg fermentation was your problem.

 

[duboman]

Mash at 150 isn't all that low and I'm pretty sure most conversion would have been complete prior to dropping to 145 but it may have had some effect. I will also assume there was a pretty good sugar addition to this beer being a tripel. Fermenting at 80 was a little high as well. I'm with the others, I would let it condition and leave it be. The beer will mellow over some time. Adding anything at this time to adjust would be a crap shoot in terms of results gained.

 

[J187]

I would imagine you can remedy this by adding some non-fermentable maltodextrin at bottling, but I'd like someone else to back me up on that before issuing it as advice.

 

[krispy3d]

All makes sense in my head. You mashed about as low as most do to get really fermentable wort and the sugars were 20% cane sugar. That, added with letting the yeast get warm, and those buggers are in a nearly perfect environment for attenuation. On top of that you used a high-gravity yeast which is really tolerant to alcohol, so it just kept on going. Just roll with it. I'm assuming you wanted something pretty dry based on the style and your mash schedule, no?

 

[mbauer013]

+1 to Krispy, with your mash schedule and the sugar/yeast, this beer is pretty much what I would expect. If you don't want it that low, in the future reduce your sugar or eliminate the protein rest at 128.

 

[J187]

All makes sense in my head. You mashed about as low as most do to get really fermentable wort and the sugars were 20% cane sugar. That, added with letting the yeast get warm, and those buggers are in a nearly perfect environment for attenuation. On top of that you used a high-gravity yeast which is really tolerant to alcohol, so it just kept on going. Just roll with it. I'm assuming you wanted something pretty dry based on the style and your mash schedule, no?

I'm assuming he wanted something sweeter based on his reaction, but I think I'd be happy with the attenuation.

 

[spiffcow]

I'm assuming he wanted something sweeter based on his reaction, but I think I'd be happy with the attenuation.

I was looking for dry, but below 1.008 or so the dryness is unpalatable. If I had not used as much sugar I probably wouldn't mind as much, but 11% alcohol and an FG at 1.003 makes this more like a wine than a beer.

 

[TheZymurgist]

Longer mash times causing more fermentable wort + cooler temps causing more fermentable wort, I wouldn't be surprised if this, combined with an 80 deg fermentation was your problem.

I don't think this is right. My understanding is that the majority of conversion takes place very early on in the mash, so an extended mash won't cause more fermentable wort. Also, I believe that as you go up in temperature and enzymes are denatured, they are not reactivated by a drop in temperature. So once the temperature goes above the working range of an enzyme that produces easily fermentable simple sugars is denatured, it won't be reactivated by a drop in temperature.

I could be wrong here, but that's how I understand it.

 

[spiffcow]

I don't think this is right. My understanding is that the majority of conversion takes place very early on in the mash, so an extended mash won't cause more fermentable wort. Also, I believe that as you go up in temperature and enzymes are denatured, they are not reactivated by a drop in temperature. So once the temperature goes above the working range of an enzyme that produces easily fermentable simple sugars is denatured, it won't be reactivated by a drop in temperature.

I could be wrong here, but that's how I understand it.

I have noticed higher attenuation in the past when I let the wort sit for long periods before brewing.

This would be an interesting experiment.. Collect 6 gallons wort, boil half immediately while letting the other half sit for 2 hours at 145*F, then boil it. Pitch equal amounts yeast, ferment at the same temp, and take gravity readings after fermentation is complete..

 

[sweetcell]

ramping up to 80*F in 3 days was a bit fast. i would have waited for activity to die down a bit before going over 73-74. getting to 80* that quickly likely produced some fusels which you are probably tasting, along with the 11%. you'll definitely want to give this big boy some time to settle down, i'm thinking 6 month minimum with a year being more likely.

i would be cautious about adding lactose or malto to "fix" your tripel. i would think that lactose would be better than MD, since tripels aren't supposed to have a lot of mouthfeel and body. i'd be really conservative in their use... if i used them at all.

An option would be to brew another tripel, mash very high so there is a lot of residual sugars left, and then blend.

 

[BrewinHooligan]

Until the enzymes are denatured by temps of 170 or higher, they will continue to break down the sugars in the mash making it more fermentable which is different from conversion

 

[sweetcell]

continue to break down the sugars in the mash making it more fermentable which is different from conversion

maybe i'm getting caught up on semantics here, but conversion is in fact the enzymes breaking down complex sugars (AKA starches) into simpler ones, thus making the wort more fermentable.

all processes that breaks down starches into simple sugars are called "conversion"... or at least i thought so. i have never heard of any simplification process that is "different from conversion", but i'd be interested in learning!

 

[duboman]

It is somewhat semantics but there is evidence in brewing science and history that increasing mash time does for some reason provide for some increase in fermentable sugar.

I don't have the articles I've read, I do know in reading the book "Brewing with Wheat" long mash times were and still are used. It's my understanding that some malts benefit from this.

I'm no expert so I'm hoping someone can chime in with more definitive information I'm curious.....

 

[edds5p0]

It is somewhat semantics but there is evidence in brewing science and history that increasing mash time does for some reason provide for some increase in fermentable sugar.

I don't have the articles I've read, I do know in reading the book "Brewing with Wheat" long mash times were and still are used. It's my understanding that some malts benefit from this.

I'm no expert so I'm hoping someone can chime in with more definitive information I'm curious.....

There are 3 key factors in enzyme kinetics:
1. Time
2. Temperature
3. PH

While a lower temperature favors activity of one amylase over the other, they are both at work during a mash. Provided pH is ideal, time comes in to play. Much like yeast, the longer the enzymes are given to convert the starches, the more they will catalyze. As the sugar concentration increases and the starch decreases, the rate of conversion slows due to product inhibition. This is why an overnight mash won't give a huge advantage over a 1 hour mash.

 

[plinythebadass]

...On top of that you used a high-gravity yeast which is really tolerant to alcohol, so it just kept on going. Just roll with it. I'm assuming you wanted something pretty dry based on the style and your mash schedule, no?

3787 is called "High Gravity", I say let it bang my friend. With all of that cane sugar combined with the lower mash temps PLUS the fact that the yeast is gonna consume consume consume since it can stand the higher percentages, it's gonna have some fusel flavors. Maybe add a Belgian roasted malt to help mask some of it next time? I've seen a few Trippel recipes that utilize Biscuit or Aromatic malts for this reason.

 

[BrewinHooligan]

maybe i'm getting caught up on semantics here, but conversion is in fact the enzymes breaking down complex sugars (AKA starches) into simpler ones, thus making the wort more fermentable.

all processes that breaks down starches into simple sugars are called "conversion"... or at least i thought so. i have never heard of any simplification process that is "different from conversion", but i'd be interested in learning!

I used the wrong word and you are right, conversion is the conversion of the starches to sugars. A portion of that is the extraction of the grains which most brewers measure as their mash efficiency. In the 140-149 degree range the amylase enzymes are breaking down and "converting" the sugars into a more fermentable form. A long mash won't necessarily yield a higher extraction or greater efficiency although it might provide small gains, but the enzymes continue to work and make the wort more fermentable.

I also think this one will just need some time. My 8.5% Baltic Porter was good at 2 months, and is getting great at 5 months. An 11% beer simply needs some time to mellow and come into it's own before receiving judgment IMO. If it were me, I would hide this one away in a closet for 6 months before even thinking about trying it to decide if it is ready to drink.

 

[spiffcow]

So I did another gravity reading today, and it was down another point to 1.02. A few other interesting things I noticed...

- The smell does not have any hint of alcohol. It's a pleasant fruity scent
- Initial tasting of a small amount does not reveal solvent flavors. There's a heat that becomes pretty intense after a few sips, but it's not a *taste*, just a warming sensation


Also, I added .03 oz lactose to my 2.5 oz sample (roughly equivalent to adding 8 oz to a 5 gallon batch), and it greatly improved the drinkability of the beer. I think I will be adding at least 8 oz when I move to secondary.

Anyone know how to tell the difference between fusel alcohols vs. high quantities of ethanol?

 

[helibrewer]

So I did another gravity reading today, and it was down another point to 1.02. A few other interesting things I noticed...

- The smell does not have any hint of alcohol. It's a pleasant fruity scent
- Initial tasting of a small amount does not reveal solvent flavors. There's a heat that becomes pretty intense after a few sips, but it's not a *taste*, just a warming sensation


Also, I added .03 oz lactose to my 2.5 oz sample (roughly equivalent to adding 8 oz to a 5 gallon batch), and it greatly improved the drinkability of the beer. I think I will be adding at least 8 oz when I move to secondary.

Anyone know how to tell the difference between fusel alcohols vs. high quantities of ethanol?

Fusels are solventy, high ethanol is warming to burning.

Nice job on bench trialing the addition, that is absolutely the correct way to test additions. Sounds like things are coming along nicely.

 

[duboman]

I used the wrong word and you are right, conversion is the conversion of the starches to sugars. A portion of that is the extraction of the grains which most brewers measure as their mash efficiency. In the 140-149 degree range the amylase enzymes are breaking down and "converting" the sugars into a more fermentable form. A long mash won't necessarily yield a higher extraction or greater efficiency although it might provide small gains, but the enzymes continue to work and make the wort more fermentable.

I also think this one will just need some time. My 8.5% Baltic Porter was good at 2 months, and is getting great at 5 months. An 11% beer simply needs some time to mellow and come into it's own before receiving judgment IMO. If it were me, I would hide this one away in a closet for 6 months before even thinking about trying it to decide if it is ready to drink.

So slightly off topic, perhaps....
There is no significant advantage to a longer mash other than, dependent upon temperature, there is the possibility the enzymatic action may continue to assist in breaking down some of the more complex sugar chains so they become more fermentable by the yeast, resulting in greater attenuation?

 

[BrewinHooligan]

So slightly off topic, perhaps....
There is no significant advantage to a longer mash other than, dependent upon temperature, there is the possibility the enzymatic action may continue to assist in breaking down some of the more complex sugar chains so they become more fermentable by the yeast, resulting in greater attenuation?

Correct, a long rest between 140-149f will yield a very fermentable wort with a higher attenuation than something mashed at a higher temp and for a shorter period of time.

To the OP, sorry for the