Interesting German Brewing PDF

[mabrungard]

Does the boiling process break it down so it would not be an issue for sensitive people or is the amount used too low to cause issues?

As Derek mentioned, SMB is degraded in the brewing process and does not exist in the finished beer as it might in finished wine. Either the oxidation reaction consumes the SMB or the heat of the boil dissociates the SMB into SO2 that evaporates from the wort during the boil.

The other issue that was raised regarding low extraction efficiency in the mash due to the brewer's avoiding mixing the grist: This is where wort recirculation is very valuable in avoiding the need to physically mix the grist. The recirculation mixes all the wort into a homogenous volume. If that recirculation is done properly, little or no atmospheric contact will occur. RIMS and HERMS brewers Rejoice!

 

[stpug]

Isn't the whole idea is that completely reworking your brewhouse for LODO is going to make a different beer? The sulfur differences are peculiar, though.

There is no need to completely rework your brewhouse to brew a low oxygen beer. It's almost exclusively about process adjustment in your methodology. Any chemicals that may be added happen at the same time you would add water additives. It's a fairly simple adjustment to brew a low oxygen beer that requires minimal extra expenditure above what you've already paid out for your brewery.

It's been made out to be this HUGE undertaking with ridiculous expense and planning, when a little aluminum foil and some SMB is all that's needed. Then you minimize any incorporation of air throughout the process, which turns out to be a major arm/elbow saver.

 

[Brulosopher]

DISCLAIMER: This is not me jumping to the defense of LoDo. It's just an observation from someone dabbling in the process.



It's not a deficiency in LoDo in general, because LoDo doesn't dictate a mash profile. Rather it's the result of a choice of the brewer and perhaps an assumption that in brewing LoDo you can't stir or otherwise ensure equal heat distribution.

For example, many of the progenitors of the style have recirculating mash systems, so they don't mention stirring because it's irrelevant in a recirculating system. For those of us who are dabbling in LoDo who have simpler systems, stirring gently while not breaking the surface tension of the wort (then capping) is perfectly acceptable.

I have gotten 75% brewhouse efficiency in the last two LoDo batches by step mashing (boiling water infusions) and stirring gently.

We consulted with 4 progenitors when designing this xBmt.

Jake stirred both mashes the same number of times at the same points during the rest.

So if the Brulosophy experiment used 55 mg/l for a kolsch using no sparge, would that mean they potentially used double the recommended dose? I say that because the paper shows 100 mg/l as a start point for traditional setup and cut it in half for an ale. If no sparge lager is 50 mg/l, would that mean an ale needs to be between 20-30 mg/l? I find this strange and not sure why the taste test results are published knowing there is a sulfur issue with the beer and the gravity was missed by a significant margin. Maybe I'm missing something. I know my first and only attempt I used 40 mg/l for a BIAB no sparge ale and it was a complete sulfur bomb, but I did not experience efficiency issues. I plan on brewing a lager using 30 mg/l next time around.



Also, I noticed the DO readings would indicate that maybe more SMB should have been used. What is the possibility that the readings were incorrect from oxygen pickup during sampling?



I'd like to see a repeat cutting that dosage in half and using it on a system where successful results with LODO were reported. Until then, I think test results should be withheld. I say this as someone who has only made one attempt at LODO, but for me I didn't find the results of this experiment to really add anything useful into the LODO debate. I appreciate the time and effort it takes to conduct these experiments, but I think its clear there were issues in execution on the LODO batch. If we want to have discussion around that, let's leave the taste test out of the equation.

One person, Jake, who admitted his bias, reported perceiving sulfur, yet that's what's being focused on.

This is why we are so hesitant to share our personal opinions.

Exactly. I'm not on either side of the debate. My first attempt at LODO is fermenting right now. The Brulosophy exbeeriment should be considered invalid.



Seems like they were eager to get their findings out there, and cause a little ruckus. Maybe get some attention because it's a hot topic, when in actuality the idea of LODO isn't to create sulfur. Seems like his system was tight enough that he didn't need as much SMB. If he could dial in the amount of SMB needed to not create sulfur, then maybe I'd consider the exbeeriment valid.

If by eager you mean consulted with the people who wrote the PDF and spent over 6 months working toward this article, yeah, we were eager.

As far as attention, based on traffic, it's not as hot a topic as some seem to think (admittedly part of the reason we weren't terribly eager to get something out sooner and took our time on this one).

I can't help but wonder how different the responses from LODO adherents would be if the preference data were swapped...

 

[Bilsch]

What's the logic behind having a brewer who, by his own admission, was never able to properly execute the low oxygen process, do the experiment to evaluate same?

Unless your looking for a specific result, why not ask someone with more positive LoDO experiences perform the next test?

 

[Cavpilot2000]

We consulted with 4 progenitors when designing this xBmt.

Jake stirred both mashes the same number of times at the same points during the rest.

Interesting.
I don't recall it being mentioned that stirring happened, and it's easy to assume it didn't in the absence of mentioning it, because lots of people think you can't stir with Low O2 mashing.

In that case, I can't reconcile the difference in efficiency, because there is nothing in the Low O2 process that should drive down efficiency that much.
My setup is not very dissimilar from what Jake used (cooler mash tun, gravity fed, no pumps/HERMS/RIMS) and I got 75% brewhouse efficiency with the two Low O2 batches I've done.

Well, despite the feedback you guys have gotten from this experiment (much of it negative with relation to the process and/or the comparison), I, for one (and many of the other low O2 experimenters) hope you will continue to work on this - not to "prove" the value of LoDO (it has value to some but not others), but rather to fully isolate the effects achieved by its proper execution.

Kudos to you guys for trying to tackle it, and I'm looking forward to more from Brulosophy.

 

[rabeb25]

The efficiency drop is due to the low mash temp of the Low Oxygen batch, which made it fall BELOW the gelatization temp for the malt.

 

[GotPushrods]

As soon as I read "100 ppm SMB" and "sulfur" I was like... well duh!!!

Hasn't the recommendation from the LoDO guys been like 30-40 ppm for the better part of a year? Why did XBMT use the (literally) oldest recommended dose?

 

[oujens]

As soon as I read "100 ppm SMB" and "sulfur" I was like... well duh!!!

Hasn't the recommendation from the LoDO guys been like 30-40 ppm for the better part of a year? Why did XBMT use the (literally) oldest recommended dose?

If you read it again, they added 55 ppm based on a recommendation they received.

 

[Brulosopher]

What's the logic behind having a brewer who, by his own admission, was never able to properly execute the low oxygen process, do the experiment to evaluate same?



Unless your looking for a specific result, why not ask someone with more positive LoDO experiences perform the next test?

You sound familiar, have we met?

Interesting.

I don't recall it being mentioned that stirring happened, and it's easy to assume it didn't in the absence of mentioning it, because lots of people think you can't stir with Low O2 mashing.



In that case, I can't reconcile the difference in efficiency, because there is nothing in the Low O2 process that should drive down efficiency that much.

My setup is not very dissimilar from what Jake used (cooler mash tun, gravity fed, no pumps/HERMS/RIMS) and I got 75% brewhouse efficiency with the two Low O2 batches I've done.



Well, despite the feedback you guys have gotten from this experiment (much of it negative with relation to the process and/or the comparison), I, for one (and many of the other low O2 experimenters) hope you will continue to work on this - not to "prove" the value of LoDO (it has value to some but not others), but rather to fully isolate the effects achieved by its proper execution.



Kudos to you guys for trying to tackle it, and I'm looking forward to more from Brulosophy.

Cheers, man, we'll continue exploring the impact of oxygen, thought not always in the context of LODO.

As soon as I read "100 ppm SMB" and "sulfur" I was like... well duh!!!

Hasn't the recommendation from the LoDO guys been like 30-40 ppm for the better part of a year? Why did XBMT use the (literally) oldest recommended dose?

When "oldest" equates to about a year ago, and there's already new information, I'm left wondering if perhaps the paper was released a tad early? Either way, Jake wasn't at 100ppm for this xBmt.

 

[daveMN]

There is no need to completely rework your brewhouse to brew a low oxygen beer. It's almost exclusively about process adjustment in your methodology. Any chemicals that may be added happen at the same time you would add water additives. It's a fairly simple adjustment to brew a low oxygen beer that requires minimal extra expenditure above what you've already paid out for your brewery.

It's been made out to be this HUGE undertaking with ridiculous expense and planning, when a little aluminum foil and some SMB is all that's needed. Then you minimize any incorporation of air throughout the process, which turns out to be a major arm/elbow saver.

That was, perhaps, hyperbole on my part. But the net effect of the process changes is to create a beer with a different flavor profile. If nothing else, the xbmt proved that different brewhouse processes make different beers. I think Brulosopher is right that the perception notes are something of a red herring.
It kind of reminds me of the IBU measurement podcast on Experimental Brewing. Different homebrewers got widely different test results on the same recipe.
FWIW, all I have left to do to get to 100% LODO is make a spund valve. I'm sold on the fact that this process makes a different beer.

 

[rabeb25]

Dave where in MN are you?

 

[daveMN]

Dave where in MN are you?

Woodbury. You?

 

[rabeb25]

About 10miles NW of maple grove in Hanover.

 

[Iseneye]

It's been made out to be this HUGE undertaking with ridiculous expense and planning, when a little aluminum foil and some SMB is all that's needed. Then you minimize any incorporation of air throughout the process, which turns out to be a major arm/elbow saver.

I do not regret going to Lodo as I have found a general improvement in all my beers. However, you are minimising the additional gear required. I needed the following additional gear:

-replace copper immersion chiller with stainless steel (at quite a cost)
-get mash cap (stainless steel lid and gasket)
-spunding valve for carbonating
-DO meter (in hindsight I wish I hadn't bought one. They are not accurate enough in my opinion).

I already fermented in kegs and kegged the final product. Now imagine the additional gear that someone who ferments in buckets and bottles their beer would require. It would be a complete overhaul of their system.

 

[TexasWine]

I do not regret going to Lodo as I have found a general improvement in all my beers. However, you are minimising the additional gear required. I needed the following additional gear:

-replace copper immersion chiller with stainless steel (at quite a cost)
-get mash cap (stainless steel lid and gasket)
-spunding valve for carbonating
-DO meter (in hindsight I wish I hadn't bought one. They are not accurate enough in my opinion).

I already fermented in kegs and kegged the final product. Now imagine the additional gear that someone who ferments in buckets and bottles their beer would require. It would be a complete overhaul of their system.

I think you might be overstating what's required.

- Several folks have continued to use their copper chillers, along with BTB, with no I'll effects.
- Mash cap can be as simple as a piece of foil or Saran wrap
- Spunding, while optimal, isn't required. Ferment to final gravity, prime, and transfer is a process several folks have adopted. Kegs aren't even required. Edit: forgot to mention "bottle spunding" as an option as well.
- Not sure why you listed the DO meter as it isn't required at all. Sulfite strips are recommended, but not required.

 

[schematix]

The Brulosphy conclusions are totally irrelevant as the author made 2 very different beers, low oxygen or not. The resulting beers are so vastly different in gravity that to provide a proper experiment it should have been dumped before fermentation and the brewing process repeated. Mash temperature is clearly to blame.

There was no conclusion to draw from this, yet they continued on for paragraph after paragraph with disclaimers, only to conclude it's not worth it.

I think many others here recognize that low oxygen brewing is not easy and it takes some level of process refinement, probably more than most others are willing to do. But when you get it dialed in, the results don't need a triangle test to prove anything.

 

[myelo]

I can't help but wonder how different the responses from LODO adherents would be if the preference data were swapped...

That would actually be a very interesting experiment.

... if you haven't already done one (hmmmm)

 

[Bilsch]

You sound familiar, have we met?

Interesting.. Yet another dodge on answering my question.

But I'll be happy to answer your question; Yes we have met, I'm Bilsch. Also aka 'Bilsch' on GBF, and aka 'Bilsch' on AHA forum.
You might have seen my same question above asked by these three aliases on the other forums and were confused so maybe that's why you never answered it.

 

[Cavpilot2000]

I needed the following additional gear:
-replace copper immersion chiller with stainless steel (at quite a cost)

- Several folks have continued to use their copper chillers, along with BTB, with no I'll effects.

FWIW, when I started trying Low O2, instead of my copper IC, which got shelved, I went back to the classic ice bath plus sanitized plastic bottles of ice gingerly lowered into the wort for cooling.
Not ideal, but tit worked.
Now I have a SS chiller and went from 25' to 50'.
I used plastic wrap for mash cap on my first one (stainless pizza pan on the second).
I finally have the parts for my spunding valve, but havent assembled it yet and have my second Low O2 beer spunding as we speak. I just vent the PRV once a day to prevent overpressure hurting my yeast.
Don't have a DO meter and don't care to get one.

Just saying, there are ways to do it that aren't massively expensive. Sure, you may not be fully "paper-compliant", but it's really a spectrum, not a binary solution, and you can see benefit even with half-measures.

 

[arigato]

Well WO is brewed with 8% carahell. So depending on what your recipe was, that's probably a factor as well

Do you know the rest of the Wehenstephaner Original Recipe and where did you get it?

 

[ba-brewer]

Just saying, there are ways to do it that aren't massively expensive. Sure, you may not be fully "paper-compliant", but it's really a spectrum, not a binary solution, and you can see benefit even with half-measures.

The way the LODO pdf is written it seems like it was an all or nothing kind of thing to me. I had a hard time believing it was cut and dry so I was glad to see people varying from the guidelines and still getting improvements.

I use batch sparge mashing so that is why I have not tried it yet.

 

[rabeb25]

Do you know the rest of the Wehenstephaner Original Recipe and where did you get it?

I (Bryan) asked a fellow brewer who was at a German beer festival with some Weihenstephan brewers.
http://forum.germanbrewing.net/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=590

I made up a recipe here:

http://lowoxygenbrewing.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=30


Cheers

 

[rabeb25]

The way the LODO pdf is written it seems like it was an all or nothing kind of thing to me. I had a hard time believing it was cut and dry so I was glad to see people varying from the guidelines and still getting improvements.

I use batch sparge mashing so that is why I have not tried it yet.

I apologize for that, the tone of that paper was definitely absolute. However, the paper was written as a sure fire way 100% of the time get the full Monty of all that is beer.

We took a stepped approach here at low oxygen brewing with the release of our sister paper http://www.lowoxygenbrewing.com/paper/

and our blog and forums to try and help folks use incremental (and less expensive) ways to this glorious beer.

 

[ba-brewer]

I apologize for that, the tone of that paper was definitely absolute. However, the paper was written as a sure fire way 100% of the time get the full Monty of all that is beer.

We took a stepped approach here at low oxygen brewing with the release of our sister paper http://www.lowoxygenbrewing.com/paper/

and our blog and forums to try and help folks use incremental (and less expensive) ways to this glorious beer.

I dont think there is anything that requires an apology.

Thanks for the link, I will give it a read before I make an attempt at LODO.

 

[Cavpilot2000]

The way the LODO pdf is written it seems like it was an all or nothing kind of thing to me. I had a hard time believing it was cut and dry so I was glad to see people varying from the guidelines and still getting improvements.

I use batch sparge mashing so that is why I have not tried it yet.

Yeah, that's how I took it at first too, but then I began to think about it like this:
Normal level exposure to oxygen pre-oxidizes your wort starting right with the mash, which will lead to reduced and muted flavors. But that's pretty much what we're all used to.
The fully paper-compliant, less than 1 ppm (ideally 0.5 ppm) is the holy grail and will unlock flavors heretofore known only from the highest quality German brewhouses.
Logically, let's say you get somewhere in between, like,say, 3ppm. Okay, that is half as much oxygen as your mash wort was previously exposed too, so you will experience half as much oxidative damage.
Okay, so in reality it may not be quite that linear, and "normal" level of exposure probably is vastly more than needed to do maximum damage (which is why adding more or vigorously whisking it won't add to the damage), but there logically has to be a point at which you get on the spectrum of reducing (not eliminating) oxidative damage.

 

[Jwin]

So, I've been pondering a mash cap for a Coleman extreme, 150qt. (See profile pic)
I plan on mounting a recirculation hose underneath the cap, just a silicon loop with holes in it. My original idea of a large silicon cutting board won't work. I'm thing of butchering an aluminum bakers sheet and putting a silicon hose, split, around the edge to seal, and a camlock or barb through it for the recirc. Is there anything else I should be thinking about here?
Now, I don't think it's going to be super tight as the sides of the cooler are sloped. I'll have to start big and Dremel down to a middle ground.
Any other ideas?
Thanks.

 

[cheesebach]

Hey guys, sorry for the lengthy post, but I’m looking to go to an electric BIAB-type setup this summer and was looking for some advice on how well some of these systems would work for low oxygen brewing. I currently do no-sparge BIAB on propane, but I’m looking to reduce some of the more tedious parts of the process, to hopefully get back some time to help with family/house stuff during the brew day.

I haven’t implemented LoDO on the hot side of my process yet, so I’m not sure what type of issues I might run into with some of the eBIAB systems out there. I do a mix of 3 and 5 gallon batches, so the systems I’m considering are those that would be compatible with that. The two that seem to fit best are the Unibrau from Brau Supply and the Grainfather. I’m open to DIY options if it would somehow enable me to build a better/more flexible system.

Below are a few of the pros/cons of each w.r.t LoDO that I can see:

Brau Supply Unibrau: https://brausupply.com/collections/biab-systems/products/unibrau-120v-5-gallon-brew-boss-automated-brew-system
Pros:
- Can mash full volume, no-sparge for both 3G and 5G batch size
- Already comes with 2x1500W elements
- Ability to fine-tune the level of boil
Cons:
- Cannot avoid some splashing when removing grain basket
- Cannot completely cover full surface of mash (the wort sitting outside the grain basket)
- Expecting lower efficiency than with the GF, since the recirculated wort isn’t forced top-to-bottom through the grain bed
- Grain bed likely won't "settle" to act as a filter, so wort will be cloudy similar to normal BIAB

Grainfather:
Pros:
- Wort gets filtered by recirculation
- Comes with a CFC (but I’m guessing it’s copper so maybe not beneficial for LoDO?)
Cons:
- Sparge required for 5G batches
- Cannot completely cover full surface of mash (the wort sitting outside the grain basket)
- Cannot avoid some splashing when removing grain basket
- Will need to add a heat stick to assist with pre-boiling strike water in reasonable time
- Boil cannot be fine-tuned (at least with the original controller, might be possible with the new one?)

Can some of the experts here chime in on how well they think either/both of these systems would work for a LoDO brew? From what I’ve read, it seems like the splashing when removing the grain basket and inability to cover the full surface area of the mash are the 2 biggest limitations of these systems from a low-oxygen standpoint. Are there any other single-vessel setups that would be a better option for low oxygen brewing?

 

[Iseneye]

I propane BIAB and thought about getting a Grainfather but based on my research and watching a youtube video I can't see it being compatible with low oxygen brewing (if someone could argue this point I would love it because it is a pretty good system). Processes I picked up are:

-recirculation mash mode results in wort falling down through a hole in the middle so oxygenation during mash
-lautering has the tube sitting high above the surface which results in lots of splashing
-comes with counterflow chiller. I haven't used one but assume the Grainfather one has copper tubing.

 

[jddevinn]

So, I've been pondering a mash cap for a Coleman extreme, 150qt. (See profile pic)
I plan on mounting a recirculation hose underneath the cap, just a silicon loop with holes in it. My original idea of a large silicon cutting board won't work. I'm thing of butchering an aluminum bakers sheet and putting a silicon hose, split, around the edge to seal, and a camlock or barb through it for the recirc. Is there anything else I should be thinking about here?
Now, I don't think it's going to be super tight as the sides of the cooler are sloped. I'll have to start big and Dremel down to a middle ground.
Any other ideas?
Thanks.

Aluminum can have fenton reactions and oxidize the same way as copper. I'd go for a different material.

 

[cheesebach]

I propane BIAB and thought about getting a Grainfather but based on my research and watching a youtube video I can't see it being compatible with low oxygen brewing (if someone could argue this point I would love it because it is a pretty good system). Processes I picked up are:



-recirculation mash mode results in wort falling down through a hole in the middle so oxygenation during mash

-lautering has the tube sitting high above the surface which results in lots of splashing

-comes with counterflow chiller. I haven't used one but assume the Grainfather one has copper tubing.

Thanks for the input - I had forgotten about that overflow pipe that the grainfather has for the mash.

Are you doing anything special in your propane BIAB process to avoid splashing the wort when you remove the bag? Do you hang the bag to dry, squeeze, or do any kind of sparge to keep efficiency at a reasonable level?

The Brau Supply system seems to me like it would likely have the same issues and limitations as standard BIAB for LoDO, so if people here are getting good results with standard BIAB, I'm guessing that could be a viable option. The only differences I can see are the stainless mesh basket vs. bag and recirculation.