See, this is the crux of it. I think (though I don't presume to talk for) RPh is answering the question with a Socratic response (another question). At least I infer from his post that he is implying that "it takes as long as it takes." Or at least it should. But we humans are creatures of habit and too often succumb to inertia at the expense of reason. I'm as guilty as the next brewer. Yep, when I first started out I obeyed the mantra, "60 minutes for ales, 90 minutes for lagers." Got to drive off that DMS, don't ya' know. Out of laziness or complacency I finally gravitated to 75 minutes for both, figuring my boil-off volumes would be the same while not altering my lagers and maybe improving my ales.
But increasingly after reading and studying different fact-based observations and conclusions (not Brulosophy 'exbeeraments') I'm gradually coming to the belief that boil time is only a factor in hop utilization, and a "vigorous boil" for whatever length of time is actually a very bad thing for the flavor and stability of beers. By increasing my bittering hops by about 20% I can shorten my boil time to about 30 minutes (from 75). At least that's a rough number I get when I plug those numbers into BeerSmith using some past recipes. If true in the 'real world' of brewing, it begs the question RPh asked:
"What happens during the boil and how long do each of those processes take?"
Once you answer that question you'll have answered your original question. Then add to that, "And not one minute more."
Brooo Brother
Thoughtful input and great explanation. However, I do know, in my own experience, once I began the 60/90 mantra, depending on the malt, my brews have significantly improved. I guess, to each his own...