Denny Conn's decoction experiment

[dfhar]

I've been wondering about Denny Conn's decoction experiment, as detailed here:

http://www.ahaconference.org/wp-con...011/2011 - Pragmatic Brewing - Denny Conn.pdf

All of the beers except the pale ale were listed as being single decoctions without any further details. Most single decoction techniques involve stepping from saccharification to mashout by boiling a thin decoction, so as to not release any additional starches which could not be converted effectively at mashout. If that's the kind of decoction that was used, then no grain was actually boiled in the making of all but one of those beers (or perhaps none, if the pale ale was brewed with two thin decoctions), which would definitely call the results into question. On the other hand, if something like a Schmitz decoction was used, or a two-step saccharification rest with a decoction in between, then there may not be a problem after all.

Does anyone know the answer?

 

[Yooper]

I don't know the answer. I always assumed it was a decoction, with boiling grain, but I really don't know. You could always just send Denny a PM on this forum, and ask him to respond. He's really good about that, and he'd be the one who would know!

 

[VladOfTrub]

The wording of the text has to be considered. The writer mentions the phrase "typical brewer." The experiments were performed using brewing processes that a "typical brewer" is familiar with. The Schmitz and tri-decoction methods might have been considered methods that the "typical brewer" isn't familiar with. That might be the reason why the methods were left out of the experiment.

If you're interested, the website has an article about a similar experiment performed in 1999.
http://www.wahomebrewers.org/clinics/242-decoction-clinic-notes