Continuous Hazed batches (not chill haze)

[Acasta]

Hi guys,
Im having a bit of trouble lately with my home brewing. I've done about 15 batches of beer, and out of the last 7, 4 of them were cloudy. I also just completed another one today that was cloudy into the fermenter.
I've been looking around alot and different information, tried adding a few salts ect to my water but i still haven't managed to fix my problem. On another forum i use (an aussie one) people seem to think that my issue is with mash PH, however, i've made ales with/with out salts that have come out cloudy and not, so im doubting its a PH issue.
Other then that, i have no idea what it could be, i've ruled out dry hopping and yeast issues.
Any advice appreciated?

 

[Walker]

Are you using irish moss, whirlfloc, or anything like that? I forget how much that stuff helps until I forget it on a brew. I've got an ESB that looks like a hefeweizen on tap right now.

 

[kanzimonson]

Yeah, I really think that yeast and chill haze probably account for 98% of haze problems.

To rule out yeast as the culprit, can you do some crash cooling with gelatin? That'll suck the yeast out of the brew in a week tops. If it's still hazy after that, I'd blame the protein.

 

[kanzimonson]

One more comment - my beers are cloudy as hell going into the fermentor so don't worry about that.

Lemme readjust my "98%" comment - I think one other cause of haze that people sometimes encounter is starch haze. Do you feel like your batches are attenuating enough? If not, that might be an indication you're not getting complete conversion in the mash.

 

[mtbiker278]

didn't read the post all the way..... thought it was hop haze.

Maybe try letting the wort settle for a while after it's chilled. If you get a good separation of trub and clear wort I would have no doubts that you should end up with clear beer.

A kettle fining like whirl floc or irish moss might help.

Are you getting a good cold break? What are your chilling methods? What kinds of malts are you using?

 

[Acasta]

1. Yep im using whirlfloc
2. Its not chill haze, its permanent.

It could be yeast, but i doubt it as i cold condition and add gelatine for a week.
It could be starch haze too, im going to invest in some PH strips and some iodine to really get a grip of whats going on in my brews.

And also, it seems to happen when i use lighter malts (which points to a PH thing) however, i have made lighter colored beers that are really bright still.
There seems to be no correlation between a particular malt and the haze, as far as i've seen. Ill have do have a close look.

 

[wncbrewer]

I use whirlfloc and isinglass, I've had much better luck with isinglass than gelatin. Its kind of hard to find, I have my lhbs special order it for me.

 

[BrewThruYou]

For the people without haze problems, are your beers crystal clear?

I'm running into this issue too, but I don't cold crash and I don't use gelatin. I use whirlfloc, primary for a month and bottle.

 

[kanzimonson]

I use 1968 for most of my ales, and one of the many reasons I like this yeast is because it is highly flocculant.

I'm not lying - my beers are brilliant, crystal clear. No need for gelatin, though I do use whirfloc. You really would think they're from a brewery.

 

[BrewThruYou]

I use 1968 for most of my ales, and one of the many reasons I like this yeast is because it is highly flocculant.

I'm not lying - my beers are brilliant, crystal clear. No need for gelatin, though I do use whirfloc. You really would think they're from a brewery.

Hmm. I've been using mostly US05. I think I also need to get more careful with the siphoning at bottling time.

 

[waldoar15]

Brisk boils tend to help with clearer beers. Causes more proteins to drop out as break material.

 

[MalFet]

Brisk boils tend to help with clearer beers. Causes more proteins to drop out as break material.

Really? I've never observed that. What is the cause for the difference?

 

[tedclev]

I don't recall what the science is behind it, but it's true. Not having a vigorous enough boil leaves more proteins. Of course, not having a solid cold crash does the same...

 

[MalFet]

I don't recall what the science is behind it, but it's true. Not having a vigorous enough boil leaves more proteins. Of course, not having a solid cold crash does the same...

Says you

I have a very soft boil and I get a wicked hot break every time. Team Palmer-Zainscheff said much the same ("A boil is a boil.") on a recent Brew Strong, as well. That's always been my experience and understanding, not that anecdotal evidence counts for much. If anyone has a side-by-side or some science, though, I'd be interested in seeing it.

 

[tedclev]

Well, I guess as the adage goes, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it." Everyone gets to do what works best for them; it just seems that in my brews a more vigorous boil makes a difference, but that may just be my perception... Would I be mistaken to suggest, though, that the vigor of the boil affects hop isomerization? I know I'm getting this vigorous boil thing from somewhere- Zain., Palmer, Daniels...

 

[MalFet]

Well, I guess as the adage goes, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it." Everyone gets to do what works best for them; it just seems that in my brews a more vigorous boil makes a difference, but that may just be my perception... Would I be mistaken to suggest, though, that the vigor of the boil affects hop isomerization? I know I'm getting this vigorous boil thing from somewhere- Zain., Palmer, Daniels...

Indeed indeed! Don't change what you're doing just because some dude on the internet gets equivalent results with a different method.

I've not seen anything to suggest that hard boils cause more isomerization. Temperature is a key element in isomerization rates, but hard boils and soft boils are equally hot. Theoretically, it is possible that the agitation of a hard boil would mix things up more, but I doubt that would lead to a difference in hop utilization.

There is some speculation that a hard boil helps drive off dms, but I've never seen any data. It would certainly be an interesting experiment. Based on a parallel experience trying to figure out how to keep aromatics in while pasteurizing coffee, I'm skeptical that there's a meaningful difference.

 

[waldoar15]

Really? I've never observed that. What is the cause for the difference?

http://www.thebrewingnetwork.com/shows/572

 

[MalFet]

http://www.thebrewingnetwork.com/shows/572

The Bam says that a non-turbulent simmering is badbad, which is no doubt true. But even a soft boil should be turbulent. I didn't take anything in there to suggest a distinction between relatively more turbulent and relatively less turbulent, did you? I certainly could have missed it.