Belgian Triple step mash required?

[shetc]

I'm thinking about brewing Gordon Strong's "Alison" Belgian Triple recipe (similar to Westmalle). Fermentables are Dinglemans Belgian pils and table sugar. This 2015 recipe calls for mash rests at 131, 140, 145, 158 and 168F. Do you think this mash schedule is still required?

 

[AlexKay]

Goodness no. Single infusion, all the way.

 

[dmtaylor]

I'm with @AlexKay. My initial thoughts were: "Hell no".

For a highly fermentable wort that turns out excellent, just mash at 150 F for 90 minutes. Or even 120 minutes, or overnight at almost ANY temperature, if you want it THAT fermentable.

 

[kal]

Is it "required"? No. Can it help with attenuation? Absolutely. Multiple rests in the beta/alpha ranges can certainly be done if you want to increase attenuation, which is commonly wanted in a Tripel as it's supposed to be well attenuated. I always do this with my Tripels that use Belgian pilsner malt (or Weyermann pils in a pinch). My Tripel goes from 1.084 to 1.012 (86% attenuation) using WY3787 and 83.5% pils malt, 1.5% melanoidin, 15% regular table sugar.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

I made a Tripel with a one step mash at 65C (149F) for 60 minutes. Sparged at 75C (167F). OG 1080 and ABV 9.2%, used Mangrove Jack M31 Yeast.

 

[Komodo]

Every Belgian I’ve made was mashed around 147-149 and used a sugar addition right after initial krausen dropped (maybe 2-3 days). This allows the yeast to get a good foothold, do most of the heavy lifting first, and then feast on the easy to ferment sugars as dessert. There are of course lots of variables, but this is the ballpark.

Also, many Belgian yeasts like it warm. I’ve let it rise naturally and then applied gentle heat and fermented up to 85F with some yeasts.

 

[Holden Caulfield]

The step mash below took my Westmalle Tripel from 1.074 to 1.006. The key to high attenuation is the long Beta rest. No need for the 140. Just do a rest around 148 as the Beta will not be denatured (stay below 149) and will work a long time and quickly. Jamil Zainisheff's Bitburger clone (which needs a high level of attenuation) uses a single 90 minute infusion at 149.

Some other notables to consider to help make your brew day a bit simpler.

Per Brew-Like-a-Monk and BYO, the Westmalle Brewery uses a low pitching rate, so a big starter is not necessary - "At American microbreweries, the usual pitching rate is 1 million cells of yeast per milliliter of wort per degrees Plato (cells/mL/°P). (One degree Plato is roughly equivalent to 4 gravity “points” on the specific gravity scale.) Common advice for homebrewers calls for boosting the pitching rate by 50% for higher gravity beers. In contrast, Westmalle pitches 5–6 million cells per milliliter for its 19.6 °P (1.081) Westmalle Tripel — just over 0.25 million cells/mL/°P." The low pitching may be one of the reasons for the significant yeast expression in the actual beer. I pretty much followed this pitching rate advice and had a good outcome.

When using the Westmalle strain (WLP530, WY3787) , I found it delivers very high attenuation when adding the sugar to the boil. Just one less thing to worry about after brew day is done.

If you have no experience with these yeasts, be ready for a huge krausen - its monstrous and will crawl out of anything.

Last, the Westmalle strain has a reputation for stalling out if you decrease the temperature, so a steady rise to finish is important.

 

[Dog House Brew]

I brew my Triple every spring. I mash @ 148 for 90. I then raise to 168 for 30. Just how I do mine. I don’t use the yeasts listed. I’ve never had any issues with attenuation. I’ve always used 3864 for mine. I pitch @ 68 and raise the temp once it gets rocking. I pretty much quit stepping my mashes. I didn’t see enough of a benefit.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Haven’t the modern malts made it unnecessary to step mash?

 

[kal]

Haven’t the modern malts made it unnecessary to step mash?

No, not necessarily. While certain steps may no longer need to be done by the brewer for most grains, there are still times when some steps can be advantageous (see my post above).

Kal

 

[VikeMan]

Just do a rest around 148 as the Beta will not be denatured (stay below 149) and will work a long time and quickly.

I would say this a little differently. B-Amylase will denature more slowly at 148F than it will at higher temps, so you have more of it working longer. But denaturing starts right away. There's a lot of web sites out there that say things like "B-Amylase denatures above 160°F and A-Amylase denatures above 170°F" (or pick your temp, you can find 'em all). Which is true, but is not the whole story, and can be misleading if interpreted as binary.

 

[dmtaylor]

Haven’t the modern malts made it unnecessary to step mash?

Yes.

 

[Bassman2003]

Haven’t the modern malts made it unnecessary to step mash?

Be careful to not mix homebrew dogma! Modern malts have made the protein rest unnecessary. Step mashing is a technique to best utilize the different enzymes in wort. There are more than two. Mashes are complex. A simple Hoch Kurz with an extended low rest is what I would recommend for a tripel. 148F & 161F (172F mashout as well) 2nd choice would be a 90 to 120 min 148F.

Working the two major enzymes leads one to use a two step mash over a single infusion. They work as a team, so why not visit the temps where they work the best? Stay in the 140's does not give Alpha as much temp as it wants.

The two most important things for an authentic Belgian beer are very, very well attenuated (does not mean thin) and very fresh, vibrant yeast. If you are going to underpitch, you better have some thoroughbred's ready to go or the poor buggers might just wear out by the end.

 

[shetc]

Having worked my way through this interesting thread, my general take away is is that step mashing can still help with achieving higher attenuation regardless of the degree of malt modification. So I think I'll try protein, Beta-amylase, Alpha-amylase rests -- in for a penny, in for a pound as they say in Belgium.

Just to throw another data point out there: exBEERiment | The Mash: Single Infusion vs. Hochkurz Step Mash In A Munich Helles

 

[Protos]

Absolutely required.

It's Tripel, a well-attenuated strong beer, so you need to extract as much fermentable substances as you can, and multistepped mash greatly helps to maximize extraction. That's why Belgian traditional mashing schedues are always multi-stepped.

What's more, the schedules they employ in their Cloisters are as much a part of the style as the ingredients, hop or yeast we pay so much attention to. We can't replicate all or even much of their technology at home, but the masching schedule part is perfectly emulatable at our hobby level. So we should to, I believe.

One may make a single-infusion Tripel but I think it won't be a true Tripel. Stores are full of "cut the corners" industrial beers, why to replicate same approach at home when we hopefully enjoy a different approach?

 

[mac_1103]

I mostly do extract brewing so it's not like I have a ton of experience with this, but ISTM that conversion efficiency is conversion efficiency. The yeast don't care how you made your wort. They only care what's in it. So if I hand two of you a Karmeleit clone recipe and you both use it to make 1.081 wort that you hop the same way and ferment down to 1.012 with the same yeast at the same temperature, what would be the basis for saying that one is a tripel and the other isn't?

 

[VikeMan]

Having worked my way through this interesting thread, my general take away is is that step mashing can still help with achieving higher attenuation regardless of the degree of malt modification. So I think I'll try protein, Beta-amylase, Alpha-amylase rests -- in for a penny, in for a pound as they say in Belgium.

What are you hoping the protein rest will accomplish?

 

[shetc]

What are you hoping the protein rest will accomplish?

My understanding is that even for standard modern malt, the protein rest helps with head retention and a good foam stand.

 

[VikeMan]

My understanding is that even for standard modern malt, the protein rest helps with head retention and a good foam stand.

If doing a protein rest with modern malts, I would recommend keeping it short. A protein rest on top of the protein breakdown that already happened during modification can result in the opposite of the desired effect, i.e. too many proteins can be broken down past the "foam scafolding" sizes to "yeast nutrient" (amino acid-ish) sizes.

Here's what Hubert Hanghofer (sort of the Austrian John Palmer) recommends in one of his books, "Gutes Bier selbst brauen: Schritt für Schritt - mit Rezepten," which AFAIK hasn't been translated to English in full.

- Kolbach Index < 35%: 30 minutes at 122F
- Kolbach Index 35% - 38%: 20 minutes at 129F
- Kolbach Index 38% - 41%: 10 minutes at 135F
- Kolbach Index > 41%: no protein rest

(I converted Hanghofer's Celcius temps to Fahrenheit, rounding.)

Most modern malts will be in the last two categories. Some random examples:
- Briess 2-Row Brewers Malt: 42%
- Weyermann Pilsner: 36%-42.5%
- Briess Pilsen: 37%
- Briess 10L Munich: 40%
- Weyermann Munich Type I: 37%-46%

I hasten to add that Hanghofer's recommendations are, as far as I know, not based on experimental evidence, but on his personal impressions. My gut feeling is that they may be a bit aggressive.

The American John Palmer, whose name is oddly enough John Palmer, recommends no protein rest at all for modern malts. At least he used to. I don't know if he has changed his mind.

Personally, I don't do a protein rest unless using a lot of unmalted grains.

ETA: I wanted to check what Charlie Bamforth has to say about it, but I can't find my copy of "Foam." Anyone have it?

 

[shetc]

The latest plan is protein rest at 135F/57C for 10 mins, Beta-amylase rest at 145F/63C for 45 mins, Alpha-amylase rest at 158F/70C for 20 mins.

 

[Bassman2003]

Sounds like a good plan. That high protein rest (135F) can be thought of as a dough in rest. Great for a high pilsner grist. Maybe take the Alpha rest to 30 min.

 

[AlexKay]

ETA: I wanted to check what Charlie Bamforth has to say about it, but I can't find my copy of "Foam." Anyone have it?

I don’t have Foam, but I’m pretty sure Charlie is not a proponent of low-temperature rests, except for a ferulic acid rest for Hefeweizen.

 

[kal]

If doing a protein rest with modern malts, I would recommend keeping it short.

I'll often do a short one (under 10 mins) at the high end of the protein rest range for many of my Belgians. Don't have a pic of this from my Tripel, but here's the results from my Quad:

Kal

 

[Bassman2003]

I believe the 135F range does not have much effect foam like the 121F range does. If your system can handle the temperature rests without scorching, a 135F dough in is ideal for most every beer with a quick ramp up to wherever one is going. I have found that anything below gel temps on an electric system is prone to scorching. I mash in an Anvil Foundry and usually infuse if I am under the 140's. 135F can be done but I notice more burnt on sludge covering the element when the mash is complete. Dough in has a lot of particles everywhere since recric has not been started yet.

But, I may try this again on my system. Dough in at 135F, let sit for 10 minutes, turn the recirc on at the 8 minute mark, then turn the heat on to move up to beta. Maybe that would eliminate the scorching.

 

[kal]

I have found that anything below gel temps on an electric system is prone to scorching. I mash in an Anvil Foundry and usually infuse if I am under the 140's. 135F can be done but I notice more burnt on sludge covering the element when the mash is complete. Dough in has a lot of particles everywhere since recric has not been started yet.

FWIW, it's not all electric setups but maybe some vessel kettle electric setups. (like the one you mention). Shouldn't be all single kettle setups either I would imagine. Could be due to poor design (heat in direct contact with malt?) or incorrect use (i.e. poor flow / not using enough rice hulls).

It won't/can't happen on a 3-vessel electric HERMS setup as it's impossible to scorch due to the separated nature of the HLT and MLT where the mash is indirectly heated by recirculating through a HERMS coil in the HLT.

One of my most brewed beers on my 3-vessel electric HERMS is a weizen where I start at 113F (acid rest). Never had issues, and I don't use rice hulls either (50% unhusked wheat in the grist).

Kal

 

[Bassman2003]

I mostly do extract brewing so it's not like I have a ton of experience with this, but ISTM that conversion efficiency is conversion efficiency. The yeast don't care how you made your wort. They only care what's in it. So if I hand two of you a Karmeleit clone recipe and you both use it to make 1.081 wort that you hop the same way and ferment down to 1.012 with the same yeast at the same temperature, what would be the basis for saying that one is a tripel and the other isn't?

What you are saying is true. But one area is up for debate - How will the 1.081 wort made both ways actually ferment? There are a lot of ways to get wort to a certain level of extract. And they will most definitely have different fermentation performance and outcomes. Which is the point us step mashers are making - your mash program is your attempt to direct the yeast during fermentation. If one made wort with a single rest at 156F compared to a single rest at 148F, the finishing gravity and drinkability of the beer would most likely be different. Both with the same original gravity.

Single infusions are fine. I/We just believe step mashes are better as you the brewer can bend the beer in the direction you desire. The famous brewing texts all do a deep dive and conclude more choice and control is better. But we all have different ideas and joys for homebrewing and we do not have financial targets and customers etc... So brew on with the knowledge that there is always more going on under the hood. And it is fine to not open the hood and enjoy as well!

 

[Bassman2003]

FWIW, it's not all electric setups but maybe some vessel kettle electric setups. (like the one you mention). Shouldn't be all single kettle setups either I would imagine. Could be due to poor design (heat in direct contact with malt?) or incorrect use (i.e. poor flow / not using enough rice hulls).

It won't/can't happen on a 3-vessel electric HERMS setup as it's impossible to scorch due to the separated nature of the HLT and MLT where the mash is indirectly heated by recirculating through a HERMS coil in the HLT.

One of my most brewed beers on my 3-vessel electric HERMS is a weizen where I start at 113F (acid rest). Never had issues, and I don't use rice hulls either (50% unhusked wheat in the grist).

Kal

Sorry, I should have stated direct contact electric systems like a coffee urn or even exposed element electric systems. The indirect nature of HERMS is a different approach in my mind when it comes to scorching.

 

[mac_1103]

If one made wort with a single rest at 156F compared to a single rest at 148F, the finishing gravity and drinkability of the beer would most likely be different. Both with the same original gravity.

Well, the premise of my question was that the FG of the two batches come out the same. You're assuming that they won't. I'm certainly not suggesting that the assumption is baseless, but if the question is whether modern malts do or do not require step mashing to get the desired fermentability for a good tripel, then maybe someone should actually do the direct comparison. I would do it myself, but I don't really have the equipment to step mash accurately so the chances that I could get the temps right for all the various rests is virtually nil.

 

[shetc]

someone should actually do the direct comparison.

See the Brulosophy link above.

 

[AlexKay]

See the Brulosophy link above.

This Brülosophy link is even more on point, and they do find a difference — though how much of one and whether one way or the other is better seems up for grabs.

 

[Bassman2003]

I looked at the brulosophy link. The only thing I would say about it is that the final gravity is 1.013. In my book that is not asking too much of the yeast and kind of a fail. I think those of use who are push a step mash would expect a final gravity of 1.008 for that same beer. Like a said in my post, 1.013 is fine, but for some that is not enough. So I do not think that comparison is a great example. Yes, the two were equal, but I would prefer to see if 1.008 was reached if they still would be equal. Those last five points are what makes the difference. Especially for a Belgian beer.

Edit, technically, the step mash had an O.G. of two points higher, so it did attenuate a little more. A small margin though.

 

[mac_1103]

Those last five points are what makes the difference. Especially for a Belgian beer.

Is it possible that we are now getting into the realm of personal taste and opinion? There are plenty of Belgian recipes with expected FG in the mid teens, even in the low twenties. Of course there are also recipes that are supposed to finish at 1.008 or 1.006.

Now I'm a guy who has been known to throw around glucoamylase like it was free (relax - not in Belgians), but maybe those last five points will make it too dry for some?

 

[Bassman2003]

In some ways it is personal opinion, but on other ways it is not. Belgian beers are known for having very high attenuation. That is not just a finishing gravity number, as the original gravity changes beer to beer. It is more of a overall "drinkability" as the monk stated in "Brew like a Monk". A lot of Belgian beers have this without being dry imho.

I mentioned 1008 as it pertained to the 1.050 helles that was brewed in the Brulosophy exbeeriment. Well attenuated does not have to drink dry. I think the key is to try to take the flabbiness out of the beer. Which a lot of homebrew has - a 1.013 helles from 1.050 is flabby for example.

 

[mac_1103]

That is not just a finishing gravity number, as the original gravity changes beer to beer.

Of course.