Interesting German Brewing PDF

SSBrew - 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I would not read too deep into this low DO manifesto. Besides being mostly anecdotal, dubious at best, much of their info is based on studies done in the 1970's by Miller and Coors that were eventually refuted. Low DO brewing is a thing and does have many benefits, but replicating the same process on a home brew scale is not practical. The breweries that do this well are not brewing low DO beer for the sake of doing so, it is just another quality control point in their overall process. And adding Na2S2O5 to beer is NOT good practice. There are so many better antioxidants out there, if you feel you need them.... and most people do not!
 
bierhaus15 said:
I would not read too deep into this low DO manifesto. Besides being mostly anecdotal, dubious at best, much of their info is based on studies done in the 1970's by Miller and Coors that were eventually refuted. Low DO brewing is a thing and does have many benefits, but replicating the same process on a home brew scale is not practical. The breweries that do this well are not brewing low DO beer for the sake of doing so, it is just another quality control point in their overall process. And adding Na2S2O5 to beer is NOT good practice. There are so many better antioxidants out there, if you feel you need them.... and most people do not!
Click to expand...

1.) Can you point (or link) to the studies by Miller and Coors and their refutations?
2.) Why is adding Na2S2O5 to beer not good practice?
3.) What antioxidants are better and should be used instead?
 
MaltMaker said:
1.) Can you point (or link) to the studies by Miller and Coors and their refutations?
2.) Why is adding Na2S2O5 to beer not good practice?
3.) What antioxidants are better and should be used instead?
Click to expand...

As someone who is always trying to achieve perfection, I am interested in this as well.


I have many many papers that refute that, but I am always open to new ideas.

For Bierhaus- Here is some of my documentation- http://www.********************/uncategorized/list-of-brewing-references/

I look forward to yours!
 
Frankly, I’m not going to take the time and dig through 50 years of WBC and MBAA material to find the papers. If you want to pay the 65 bucks for each WBC year, the material is there. That said, look at the Wallerstein papers on antioxidants and the dozens following from it, then go to the Molson/Miller work where they tested various antioxidants on aged and fresh beer. In short, antioxidants, including SMB, do have a positive effect on beer staling, but the effect is generally short lived and can cause issues with sulfur interaction with some beers. Moreover, early antioxidant studies were conducted mostly for the sake of pasteurized beer, where consumers would be drinking product up to a year after packaging. I don’t know many home brewers who pasteurize their beer, nor those who cannot gain more antioxidant benefit from having live yeast in their beer. I don’t claim to be an expert in DO/antioxidant use, but I’ve been in the industry long enough to know what is relevant to brewers less than 100,000 bbls.

Moreover, low DO mashing (not splashing, ect) is good practice, but adding SMB is not necessary for home brewers; it use skirts the more important issues like fermentation, storage, and packaging process. I think it was the Straub antioxidant paper (1989?) where it was determined that poor brewing practices negate almost all the effects of antioxidant use. If you can’t brew technically proficient beer to start, antioxidant use will not fix the base problems.

IMO, ascorbic acid and tannic acid (brewtan, ect) would be a safer and more practical antioxidant than SMB, especially when brewing Helles, where brewers go to great lengths to avoid adding sulfur to their brews.

My initial problem with the paper posted, was the almost complete lack of citations/source material. Moreover, these gems:

“You cannot make a proper Helles without employing a low oxygen brewing process.”

Please explain what a “proper” Helles is. I’ve been to many German and American breweries who make acclaimed Helles and many of them do so without SMB or intensive low DO brewing practices. In fact, most of them have good process control and mitigate DO through basic, proper brewing practices. Augustiner?

Moreover, please quantify “fresh malt flavor.” Is there an ASBC method I can use to measure what this is? How will I know I’ve lost it in the brewery when we measure our wort DO and its above 1ppm. Where is the evidence for this? Source material?
 
Looks like some coffee roasters are roasting and storing in low oxygen environments:

https://clivecoffee.com/2017/02/is-your-coffee-too-fresh/

“For our coffees, we roast them in a low oxygen environment (Loring roasters are closed systems) and all of our bags are nitrogen flushed and sealed for less than 1% residual oxygen and fitted with one-way valves allowing the CO2 to escape during the phase when the coffee is degassing. We’ve blindly cupped (sensory evaluated) coffees packaged in this low oxygen environment that were roasted 90 days before against the same coffee roasted 24 hours before and while a difference could be detected, there was not a very large delta between the two when scoring using the SCAA protocol. Aroma, flavor, acidity and sweetness are retained. However, aroma and flavor degradation is noticeable with coffees this old when stored in an environment of even 2%+ oxygen and very noticeable when stored in 20-21% oxygen (normal air).
Click to expand...
 
Cavpilot2000 said:
One additional concern I have is this:
In the original document and in several other posts here, contributors talk about sulfur bombs if the right mix of SMB isn't achieved.
Click to expand...

A lot of that talk was from me. I was doing full volume/no-sparge BIAB mashes, and using the "Strike Water" treatment level for all the water, and on top of that most of my beers then were ales using yeast that didn't clean up sulfur well.

After the guys set me straight, I've been consistently using 30mg/L for Ales and 40mg/L for Lagers without any excess sulfur smell or taste (and I'm extremely sensitive to sulfur), and making my best beers ever!
 
If i incorporate a couple of grams of Ascorbic Acid, should I adjust the (currently un-tasteable) level of SMB? Or add it in addition too?

Is there a precedent or formula or anything? I'm liking what I've been reading on the other forum about some of the commercially available anti-ox blends, and if a couple grams or so of vitamin C or tannic acid is going to make a positive difference, I'm all for it.
 
Magnus314 said:
If i incorporate a couple of grams of Ascorbic Acid, should I adjust the (currently un-tasteable) level of SMB? Or add it in addition too?

Is there a precedent or formula or anything? I'm liking what I've been reading on the other forum about some of the commercially available anti-ox blends, and if a couple grams or so of vitamin C or tannic acid is going to make a positive difference, I'm all for it.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that you would maintain the same mg/L dosages you're currently using, just split it 50/50 between SMB and AA. This effectively allows you half the amount of SMB you use in any given batch. However, you would not want to use AA without gallotannins in a system that includes copper (and/or reactive ferrous metals) in the process due to potential "super oxidizer" potential from the breakdown of the AA-metal reaction. If you don't have any copper (and/or reactive ferrous metals) in your system then it should not react and breakdown. If you are able to include gallotannins in your process then you can reduce both the SMB and AA dosage even more (only a little bit, but even a little is good).

Pick the dosage you like and the breakdown would be like this:
100% SMB
50/50% SMB/AA (systems without any reactive metals)
45/45/10% SMB/AA/Gallotannins (best oxidation protection)
 
stpug said:
My understanding is that you would maintain the same mg/L dosages you're currently using, just split it 50/50 between SMB and AA. This effectively allows you half the amount of SMB you use in any given batch. However, you would not want to use AA without gallotannins in a system that includes copper (and/or reactive ferrous metals) in the process due to potential "super oxidizer" potential from the breakdown of the AA-metal reaction. If you don't have any copper (and/or reactive ferrous metals) in your system then it should not react and breakdown. If you are able to include gallotannins in your process then you can reduce both the SMB and AA dosage even more (only a little bit, but even a little is good).

Pick the dosage you like and the breakdown would be like this:
100% SMB
50/50% SMB/AA (systems without any reactive metals)
45/45/10% SMB/AA/Gallotannins (best oxidation protection)
Click to expand...

Let me make sure I have this straight. You're saying ff I used to target 50 mg/l SMB but I switch to a SMB/AA/BB blend, I should still target a total concentration of those three at 50 mg/l, which is about 0.19 g/gal?

I was going to just shoot for reducing my SMB down to around 35 mg/l until I read this. Plan is to use the 45/45/10 blend.
 
If you use all 3 (45/45/10) and dosed it at .37g/gal you would end up with roughly 45ppm meta. If you dosed at .25g/gal you would be at 30ppm
 
Sounds great, thanks! I will be testing this soon as a 50/50 (got a swanky new 50" SS chiller cheap from Amazon for Christmas).

Anyone got a line on how to get my hands on some of the more advanced blends available to licensed brewers/ overseas?

I can get AA/SMB but everything else seems either very specific (what gallotannins?) or hard to find.
 
I gotta say, I found that pdf somewhat depressing.
I'm crazy OC about post-fermentation O2 exposure, now I find I'm barely solving half the issues :drunk:
 
TexasWine said:
Let me make sure I have this straight. You're saying ff I used to target 50 mg/l SMB but I switch to a SMB/AA/BB blend, I should still target a total concentration of those three at 50 mg/l, which is about 0.19 g/gal?

I was going to just shoot for reducing my SMB down to around 35 mg/l until I read this. Plan is to use the 45/45/10 blend.
Click to expand...

As I understand it, that would be correct. According to dosage instructions of the commercial 45/45/10 blend (SBT), it indicates a 0.19-0.38 g/gal dosage so obviously the 0.19 would be scraping the lowest level. I would assume if you have a tight system, 0.19 might be perfect. If you're not confident on tightness of your system then increasing the dosage might provide some insurance. The middle-ground might be a good starting point, and then you can see the results and adjust future batches.

day_trippr said:
I gotta say, I found that pdf somewhat depressing.
I'm crazy OC about post-fermentation O2 exposure, now I find I'm barely solving half the issues :drunk:
Click to expand...

100% agree. The PDF is a depressing read :(. Post-fermentation O2 exposure is largely negated by spunding with remaining extract; and, from what I read, to a slightly lesser degree by keg priming. Those are probably the easy solutions for that aspect.
 
rabeb25 said:
If you use all 3 (45/45/10) and dosed it at .37g/gal you would end up with roughly 45ppm meta. If you dosed at .25g/gal you would be at 30ppm
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification. I'll dose so that my SMB is around 30 ppm for ales (.25 g/gal) and 40 ppm for lagers (~.33 g/gal).
 
I joined the lowO2 brewing forums and posted some questions today - looking forward to trying it out.

Is anybody using this method for German Pils? All I see are Helles, Kolsh, NEIPA, and even some brown ales, but nobody mentioning a Pils.
 
Literally all I brew is helles, pils and dunkel. I am the beerery over here. I will head over there.
 
Reading about the use of SMB in the mash reminds me of the Heady Topper analysis that was done showing a metric ton of sulfate added. Have also read that Kimmich is highly focused on low DO in the packaged beer. Any chance sulfate would have a similar anti-ox effect as SMB in the mash?
 
GRBC said:
Reading about the use of SMB in the mash reminds me of the Heady Topper analysis that was done showing a metric ton of sulfate added. Have also read that Kimmich is highly focused on low DO in the packaged beer. Any chance sulfate would have a similar anti-ox effect as SMB in the mash?
Click to expand...

It's fairly unlikely that they are using SMB to control oxygen ingress, but I suppose it's possible. If Heady Topper is like any other NEIPA, their chlorides are much higher than their sulfates, and the sulfate level is significantly lower than a typical west coast IPA. So, I'd be interested in knowing what a "metric ton of sulfate added" means exactly, since I highly doubt they're adding 1,000,000 grams of sulfate to each batch.
 
Well hot side I doubt it. I know some of them have state of the art German made braukon systems that are already inherently low oxygen brewhouses. Cold side though I would put money on them using a product like antitoxin sb, or antiox-c.
 
joshesmusica said:
It's fairly unlikely that they are using SMB to control oxygen ingress, but I suppose it's likely. If Heady Topper is like any other NEIPA, their chlorides are much higher than their sulfates, and the sulfate level is significantly lower than a typical west coast IPA. So, I'd be interested in knowing exactly what a "metric ton of sulfate added" means exactly, since I highly doubt they're adding 1,000,000 grams of sulfate to each batch.
Click to expand...


OK, not a literal metric ton, but a full assload. Here's a link to the thread with the screen cap of their brew sheet. Way higher sulfate than chloride.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=477834
 
...We recommend a 60 minute boil, with a total evaporation of 8 to 10%. This will
most likely look more like a simmer to you than a vigorous boil...
Click to expand...

Is it more important to aim for a simmer or an 8 to 10% evaporation rate? It seems to me that the evaporation rate is just a side effect of the low intensity simmer.
 
thekraken said:
Is it more important to aim for a simmer or an 8 to 10% evaporation rate? It seems to me that the evaporation rate is just a side effect of the simmer.
Click to expand...

I believe it's the thermal stress on the wort that is key here so as not to "break down" the lipid and protein flocs the form during the hot break. At my level, keeping the vigor to a light simmer while partially covered seems to approach this goal the best, but I'm still floating around the 10% mark. I'm still learning myself so I may be off the mark a little bit too.
 
I BIAB, but incorporated a couple aspects I have learned in here on my last batch:
1. Pre-boiled my water, and mashed in very gently
2. Mash cap (no aroma noticeable during mash)
3. Hung the bag just above wort surface to drain - no squeezing on the premise that it pushes grain shmutz into the wort (got about 0.7L/Kg retention in the grain)
4. Boiled at about 8% evaporation - Hot break was the lightest in colour I have ever had, despite this grist being darker than I normally use.
5. Rapid chill and pitch onto active starter, then aerate.

So far, so good.

I apologize if I missed it, but does the effect of Antioxin SBT carry through post-boil? I have a well-pantina'd copper IC.
 
Edelst0ff said:
Be careful not to boil too low. That's not desirable either.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if this is true. With the empirical and analytical data pointing to the detriments of boiling too hard or intensely and that fact that there are some brewing systems that don't boil at all, I don't know. Reportedly, the Picobrew system only reaches to the 190F to 200F range and its the pump recirculation that provides the roiling.

I do know that the activation energy needed for hop acid isomerization is 185F. Therefore, it would seem that if you are getting any roiling from a typical boil, it may be enough.

I just finished up a Munich Dunkel that was boiled with the kettle lid almost entirely on. It required me to reduce my power setting from my typical 45%, down to 20%. I was still getting a light roiling action and my evaporative losses where down under 10%. Sipping on that beer now, I can attest that there is no DMS in it. So the nearly covered boil was OK with that respect and it was only a 60 min boil and there was a significant Pils malt percentage in the grist.

So, I'm seeing that I don't need to boil the heck out of my wort to produce good beer. I'm just wondering what the lower bound truly is.
 
I know you employed other methods of a low oxygen brewhouse as well... This (low boil) coupled with the other processes, what do you think of the beers?
 
rabeb25 said:
what do you think of the beers?
Click to expand...

I definitely need to account for that extra sulfate added by the SMB. This Dunkel is a little too dry in the finish. It also seems that my bittering level (21 IBU) is just a bit too high to allow the malt to come through well. I do like the flavor. The malt is clean. I used the Weyermann Chocolate Wheat and I'm liking the very light chocolate note, just a hint without roastiness.

This is the first day on carbonation after only a week of somewhat high temperature lagering. It's still too young to render a final verdict. My National palate is putting this beer in the low 30's today.
 
Oh, ok. So you are not spunding then? Good to hear on the other things.
 
mabrungard said:
I'm wondering if this is true. With the empirical and analytical data pointing to the detriments of boiling too hard or intensely and that fact that there are some brewing systems that don't boil at all, I don't know. Reportedly, the Picobrew system only reaches to the 190F to 200F range and its the pump recirculation that provides the roiling.

I do know that the activation energy needed for hop acid isomerization is 185F. Therefore, it would seem that if you are getting any roiling from a typical boil, it may be enough.

I just finished up a Munich Dunkel that was boiled with the kettle lid almost entirely on. It required me to reduce my power setting from my typical 45%, down to 20%. I was still getting a light roiling action and my evaporative losses where down under 10%. Sipping on that beer now, I can attest that there is no DMS in it. So the nearly covered boil was OK with that respect and it was only a 60 min boil and there was a significant Pils malt percentage in the grist.

So, I'm seeing that I don't need to boil the heck out of my wort to produce good beer. I'm just wondering what the lower bound truly is.
Click to expand...

The lower I take the boil, the more of the fresh malt flavor from the mash sticks around through the boil (and into the finished beer). I also boil with a lid mostly on and a very, very low flame and my evaporation is about 6%. I don't get any DMS.

You should try reducing your evaporation to 6-8%. 8% tastes noticeably better than 10%, and 6% tastes noticeably better than 8%, especially for light lagers.
 
mabrungard said:
I definitely need to account for that extra sulfate added by the SMB. This Dunkel is a little too dry in the finish. It also seems that my bittering level (21 IBU) is just a bit too high to allow the malt to come through well. I do like the flavor. The malt is clean. I used the Weyermann Chocolate Wheat and I'm liking the very light chocolate note, just a hint without roastiness.

This is the first day on carbonation after only a week of somewhat high temperature lagering. It's still too young to render a final verdict. My National palate is putting this beer in the low 30's today.
Click to expand...

LODO beer is going to be dryer in the finish than HIDO beer. That's why you need a small amount of caramel malt. 3-5% caramunich is about right for dunkel. For light lagers I like 2-4% caramel malt. Carahell is the standard but you'd be surprised at how nicely 2% caramunich works in a helles or pilsner.

Hopping needs to be done with a very, very light touch in these beers to let the malt through. There's a lot of wonderful, delicate, subtle malt flavor that is far too easily covered up by a few too many IBUs or a late hop addition that was just a little too large.

If you're starting with RO water, I would simply use 90 mg/l calcium chloride, and no gypsum. The SMB will provide enough sulfate.
 
techbrau said:
The lower I take the boil, the more of the fresh malt flavor from the mash sticks around through the boil (and into the finished beer). I also boil with a lid mostly on and a very, very low flame and my evaporation is about 6%. I don't get any DMS.

You should try reducing your evaporation to 6-8%. 8% tastes noticeably better than 10%, and 6% tastes noticeably better than 8%, especially for light lagers.
Click to expand...


I have been at 6% for quite some time, I really like what it brings to the table. Anything less than 60 min/6% for me and my system starts to produce DMS.
 

Similar threads

J
Best dry yeast for a German Pils?
Replies
12
Views
1K
Dog House Brew
Dog House Brew
K
Added Boil Hops at End By Accident...
Replies
16
Views
842
KookyBrewsky
K
flipster
Hello from the Bavarian alpine foothills
Replies
14
Views
632
flipster
flipster
ghettoworm
Leaky Mash Tun
Replies
20
Views
634
Bobby_M
Bobby_M
beersk
Domestic Ingredients
2
Replies
54
Views
2K
beersk
beersk
Yakima 300

Latest posts

Back
Top