Do thin runnings affect flavor?

[Upstate12866]

I have an app with beer recipes called DIY dog. Under the recipe for "77 lager" they include a brewing tip:

"Watch out for collecting too much wort. Collecting too much liquid from run off (under 1008) may impart massive and undesired 'grainy' flavours into the beer."

I've never encountered such a tip, so I was curious if anyone could share some perspective on this. (Reminds me of the myth that squeezing a brew bag will impart bitterness and bad flavors.)

 

[kevin58]

It's actually pretty common advice for fly sparging. The PH can go up at that point as well and produce tannins.

 

[Upstate12866]

Ok, thanks for that!

 

[day_trippr]

Right. Strive to keep the "end of runnings" below pH 5.6 and above SG 1.010.
Combined, that will minimize pulling tannins and silicates out of the mash...

Cheers!

 

[bracconiere]

temperature plays a part in tannin extraction too, i think? although, i've heard not as much as i used to think, from other people here.

 

[day_trippr]

Nah, that's been debunked. It's pretty much a pH thing...

Cheers!

 

[Dland]

In practice, my last runnings are seldom below 1.020 & I get pretty good efficiency. If one tastes some 1.010 or even 1.020 wort, one can tell one is not missing that much in the way of sugars or flavor in that range. The 1.010 number seems to me to be more of a commercial brewing set point, where economic factors are the main driving factor.

 

[VikeMan]

Temperature and pH are both factors in tannin extraction. Increase either one and more are extracted. That said, in real life mash scenarios, pH is the more important driver.

Let's not forget... every beer has tannins that come from malt. It's part of what makes beer taste like beer. It's a question of how much is too much.

 

[odie]

In practice, my last runnings are seldom below 1.020 & I get pretty good efficiency. If one tastes some 1.010 or even 1.020 wort, one can tell one is not missing that much in the way of sugars or flavor in that range. The 1.010 number seems to me to be more of a commercial brewing set point, where economic factors are the main driving factor.

I'd think the commercial breweries are trying to get down closer to 1.000 squeeze every last penny outta that grain...

well, I guess at some point you are gonna have to boil off excess water, which then eats up the money you saved on squeezing that last drop outta the grain.

 

[doug293cz]

I'd think the commercial breweries are trying to get down closer to 1.000 squeeze every last penny outta that grain...

well, I guess at some point you are gonna have to boil off excess water, which then eats up the money you saved on squeezing that last drop outta the grain.

Commercial breweries have the option of using hydraulic/pneumatic filter presses to literally squeeze (almost) all of the wort out of the spent grain. They can have apparent grain absorption rates below zero (compared to typical homebrew rates of 0.04 - 0.12 gal/lb.) If you don't know the difference between "apparent" and "true" absorption, then negative absorption won't make any sense to you.

Brew on

 

[VikeMan]

If you don't know the difference between "apparent" and "true" absorption, then negative absorption won't make any sense to you.

Don't sugarcoat this. I mean, I'm sure the explanation is sweet.

 

[odie]

Commercial breweries have the option of using hydraulic/pneumatic filter presses to literally squeeze (almost) all of the wort out of the spent grain.

I saw a wine making grape press at a flea market last year. Looked unused. I shoulda grabbed it. I was looking at it and thinking "bag squeezer"...probably would have been 50 bucks well spent...