Is there a trend against crystal malts?

[Owly055]

I never said perceived sweetness wasn't important. I said that the perceived sweetness can be mitigated, and in some cases reduced almost entirely, by using the Crystal Malt at different times in the mash.

Actual sweetness DOES matter, though, as it directly impacts perceived sweetness. A sweet aroma with an astringent or acidic mouthfeel might make you think the beer is slightly sweeter, but it will still taste significantly less sweet than the same aroma paired with unfermentable polysaccharides.

I wasn't trying to get into a "food fight" here....... just to point out that perception is all that ultimately matters. Drinking beer is a complex sensory experience, and we as brewers work to enhance that experience in various ways as our own personal preferences change and those of our friends.

I'm curious about the process of adding crystal malts at different stages of the mash. I do BIAB, so there really aren't distinct "stages". I grind all my grains together and mash them together. Should I for example add CR 75 10 minutes before draining the bag? And if I did, what would the result be? Also what about steeping grains...... I've never used steeping grains. It looks to me like the conversion has already taken place.... that after all is nature reason for crystal malts.

H.W.

 

[Opiate42]

Just something I have noticed in the last few weeks being repeated. Recipes without Crystal malts. I only started brewing last year, but I remember seeing Crystal in most if the recipes I found. Is this a thing?

I dunno..... beer shouldn't have "trends". That it does makes me giggle.

If I feel like throwing some in, I do. If not... I don't.

 

[Patrick87]

Recipe?

I don't have it in front of me, but it went something like:

5.5 gallon batch (start w/ 5.5 gallons water, top off @ end for evaporation)

Steep 1lb Victory Malt for 20 minutes at ~155*F in 5.5 gallons water.

60 Min: 3lb Muntons Light DME
60 Min: 1 tablespoon Gypsum
60 Min: 1 oz Summit

10 Min: 1 oz Summit
10 Min: 4lb Muntons Light DME
10 Min: Whirlfloc tablet

0 Min/Flameout: 3 oz Falconer's Flight (hopstand at 170*F for 20 minutes)

Dry Hop: 4oz Falconer's Flight (5 days at room temp)

This one turned out to be one of, if not the best beer I've brewed to date (for my taste). It was very bitter, but had great citrusy/hoppy flavor and aroma.

 

[ArkotRamathorn]

Attenuation is just as important as malt bill. You can do a SMaSH but with poor attenuation and low amount of hops and you will get a beer thats just as 'cloyingly' sweet as a beer with a significant amount of crystal malts.

I found when I simplified a recipe for a stout with flaked rye, it was much less popular (by a significant amount, homebrew club, family, friends, SWMBO). Original recipe has 8oz each of 60L 80L and 120L, used S04 yeast and it fermented pretty dry with a mash temp in the 152F range. Second attempt I cut the crystal malts by 8oz and used a blend of 120L and British Medium Crystal. Everyone prefered the original with more crystal malts, though none said it was "sweet", and the mouthfeel was never cloying. (not to mention between the time I brewed the first batch and the 2nd batch, was about an 9 month span so I had gotten a LOT better at brewing in that time so the 2nd version I brewed much 'better' than the first batch)

 

[azazel1024]

Blonde, burnette, redhead. Different malts for different beers, just like different ladies for...oh, my wife might read this

I use crystal in probably half my beers, but I rarely use much. About 8oz per 5 gallons. Sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less. I don't think I've ever used more than a pound in 5 gallons. At least IMHO, the darker crystal malts are more my style. To me they tend to leave a bit more complexity, plum, raisin, toffee than they do caramel and sweetness. 80L is generally my "lower limit" for what I'll use more than half a pound in 5 gallons for.

What I tend to use them in are British and American ales, sometimes UK and American lagers to. I'll use a small amount (SMALL!) of Caravienne or Caramunich in some german styles, but I'll use something like 4oz in 3 gallons or less.

But it depends, sometimes I'll make a UK stout with none (going for dry, where I might use 80% 2-row, 10% Roasted barley and 10% chocolate or coffee malt) or I'll go with a "regular" UK stout where I might use 4-8oz of 80-120L and maybe switch up a pound of the 2-row for some Vienna malt, or swap out all of the base for Mild or MO/Golden Promise.

 

[masaba]

I think that the reduction of crystal malts is in direct correlation to the severe overuse of the word "cloying" when describing beer.

 

[bobbrews]

Re: Is there a trend against crystal malts?

The correct answer is: Only for American IPAs


0-5% pale crystal malt on average is typically best for this style.

 

[MattyIce]

I think that the reduction of crystal malts is in direct correlation to the severe overuse of the word "cloying" when describing beer.

Another trend I noticed haha

 

[thegreatmaibockaddict]

i rarely use crystal or other specialty grains in ANY beer. Using high quality Maris Otter in most of my Ales (Not Belgian or German) makes crystal malt unnecessary as you want to taste the malt without distraction of specialty grains. Quality pale ale malts and german pils, munich, and vienna malt, ditto, as style appropriate.

Crystal has a place in certain specific recipes like a Red Ale or Brown ale, but not in IPA's, Pale Ales, Porters, Stouts, even ESB. If you use a really nice base malt it is totally unncessary. Crystal malt is very useful though in adding character to extract brews, and I am not talking about that at all.

If you are using cheap base malt, you do need to compensate for malt flavor by using crystal (Briess anyone?). I have never liked the flavor of Briess or other inexpensive American base malts so I don't use them.

And for those who just like hop tea, whatever....

 

[slym2none]

I don't have it in front of me, but it went something like:

5.5 gallon batch (start w/ 5.5 gallons water, top off @ end for evaporation)

Steep 1lb Victory Malt for 20 minutes at ~155*F in 5.5 gallons water.

60 Min: 3lb Muntons Light DME
60 Min: 1 tablespoon Gypsum
60 Min: 1 oz Summit

10 Min: 1 oz Summit
10 Min: 4lb Muntons Light DME
10 Min: Whirlfloc tablet

0 Min/Flameout: 3 oz Falconer's Flight (hopstand at 170*F for 20 minutes)

Dry Hop: 4oz Falconer's Flight (5 days at room temp)

This one turned out to be one of, if not the best beer I've brewed to date (for my taste). It was very bitter, but had great citrusy/hoppy flavor and aroma.

Thanks, man!

 

[dfhar]

It seems like it's cool to hate on crystal. I agree with Yooper, though - it's like cooking with salt!

I don't put any crystal malt in my helles or kolsch, but I wouldn't brew an ESB without it! 90% golden promise and 10% medium crystal makes a wonderful English bitter.

 

[Billy-Klubb]

when I cook, I start with 3 lbs of salt and end up with one taco.

 

[marcownz747]

I wasn't trying to get into a "food fight" here....... just to point out that perception is all that ultimately matters. Drinking beer is a complex sensory experience, and we as brewers work to enhance that experience in various ways as our own personal preferences change and those of our friends.

I'm curious about the process of adding crystal malts at different stages of the mash. I do BIAB, so there really aren't distinct "stages". I grind all my grains together and mash them together. Should I for example add CR 75 10 minutes before draining the bag? And if I did, what would the result be? Also what about steeping grains...... I've never used steeping grains. It looks to me like the conversion has already taken place.... that after all is nature reason for crystal malts.

H.W.

Crystal malt goes through a conversion process before being kilned. The process isn't as efficient as mashing, and there will still be some polysaccharides left. Adding the Crystal Malt into a high diastatic power mash will help to convert any of those remaining starches, and will help to break down any larger sugars. The higher the diastatic power and the longer the mash, the fewer of these sugars will be left.

Steeping crystal malt has become a pretty popular thing for extract brewers as, in principle, crystal malt is already converted. The fact is, though, the conversion of crystal malt isn't nearly as effective as a proper mash schedule.

The effect of adding crystal to a decent power and length mash results in lighter aroma (as many aromatic compounds are cooked off or denatured in a boil), lighter sweetness (as more of the larger sugars/starches are broken down), and a thinner (and slightly more astringent) mouthfeel, as the compounds which create the aroma of crystal malt tend to be astringent without the presence of any sugar. This is why using caramelized table sugar in a dry wine creates a burnt aroma, rather than a caramel one. The sugars are 100% fermented, leaving only maillard products.

Steeping crystal malt (the most common way I've seen crystal used) creates a much more intense aroma, leaves residual starches and non-fermentable sugars, and creates a thicker, sweeter beer.

This can be demonstrated by doing two beers side by side. Same recipe. With one, add the Crystal during the mash. With the other, steep the Crystal with the hops during the last 15-30 minutes of the boil. You'll see a very clear difference, assuming your Diastatic power is high enough (in your first brew) to convert all of the starches in the mash.

 

[mbobhat]

It can be tempting overdo that's all. Less is more is always a good mantra when making a grain bill. And if all you want is color and a dry finish, you can boil your wort full boil for longer than an hour and get the same affect.

 

[Owly055]

Crystal malt goes through a conversion process before being kilned. The process isn't as efficient as mashing, and there will still be some polysaccharides left. Adding the Crystal Malt into a high diastatic power mash will help to convert any of those remaining starches, and will help to break down any larger sugars. The higher the diastatic power and the longer the mash, the fewer of these sugars will be left.

Steeping crystal malt has become a pretty popular thing for extract brewers as, in principle, crystal malt is already converted. The fact is, though, the conversion of crystal malt isn't nearly as effective as a proper mash schedule.

The effect of adding crystal to a decent power and length mash results in lighter aroma (as many aromatic compounds are cooked off or denatured in a boil), lighter sweetness (as more of the larger sugars/starches are broken down), and a thinner (and slightly more astringent) mouthfeel, as the compounds which create the aroma of crystal malt tend to be astringent without the presence of any sugar. This is why using caramelized table sugar in a dry wine creates a burnt aroma, rather than a caramel one. The sugars are 100% fermented, leaving only maillard products.

Steeping crystal malt (the most common way I've seen crystal used) creates a much more intense aroma, leaves residual starches and non-fermentable sugars, and creates a thicker, sweeter beer.

This can be demonstrated by doing two beers side by side. Same recipe. With one, add the Crystal during the mash. With the other, steep the Crystal with the hops during the last 15-30 minutes of the boil. You'll see a very clear difference, assuming your Diastatic power is high enough (in your first brew) to convert all of the starches in the mash.

I agree with this ........... Your original comment suggested introducing crystal malts to the mash at different points....... not during the boil as compared to during the mash. I will definitely try separating my crystal and steeping it for 15 minutes in the boil as opposed to mashing it. Experiments have been done with with crystal malts in the mash itself which suggest that a great deal of conversion will take place in the mash. Steeping rather than mashing is a method worth playing with.

H.W.

 

[MattyIce]

Crystal malt goes through a conversion process before being kilned. The process isn't as efficient as mashing, and there will still be some polysaccharides left. Adding the Crystal Malt into a high diastatic power mash will help to convert any of those remaining starches, and will help to break down any larger sugars. The higher the diastatic power and the longer the mash, the fewer of these sugars will be left.

Steeping crystal malt has become a pretty popular thing for extract brewers as, in principle, crystal malt is already converted. The fact is, though, the conversion of crystal malt isn't nearly as effective as a proper mash schedule.

The effect of adding crystal to a decent power and length mash results in lighter aroma (as many aromatic compounds are cooked off or denatured in a boil), lighter sweetness (as more of the larger sugars/starches are broken down), and a thinner (and slightly more astringent) mouthfeel, as the compounds which create the aroma of crystal malt tend to be astringent without the presence of any sugar. This is why using caramelized table sugar in a dry wine creates a burnt aroma, rather than a caramel one. The sugars are 100% fermented, leaving only maillard products.

Steeping crystal malt (the most common way I've seen crystal used) creates a much more intense aroma, leaves residual starches and non-fermentable sugars, and creates a thicker, sweeter beer.

This can be demonstrated by doing two beers side by side. Same recipe. With one, add the Crystal during the mash. With the other, steep the Crystal with the hops during the last 15-30 minutes of the boil. You'll see a very clear difference, assuming your Diastatic power is high enough (in your first brew) to convert all of the starches in the mash.

Rockin post! Thank you.

It can be tempting overdo that's all. Less is more is always a good mantra when making a grain bill. And if all you want is color and a dry finish, you can boil your wort full boil for longer than an hour and get the same affect.

Does a longer boil affect fermentability?

 

[funnelweb]

Why not just chill out a bit with Mr Mosher himselfes? Listen and Learn:

http://beersmith.com/blog/2014/05/1...ewing-with-randy-mosher-beersmith-podcast-81/

Br Folke

 

[mbobhat]

Rockin post! Thank you.



Does a longer boil affect fermentability?

I am going to say not as much as say a lb of crystal malt would do unless you boil it forever into molasses. You aren't really carmelizing the sugars on a massive scale but are producing maillard reactions which produce the color and I'm sure wil affect the taste a bit. Plus just boiling longer you have diluted your sugar concentration so it is isn't like doing a decoction, where you take a large portion of the mash without the liquid and boil it for a bit.

 

[balrog]

when I cook, I start with 3 lbs of salt and end up with one taco.

When i have a taco, i put the salt on the margarita glass

 

[Turkeyshot]

When I make a Pale Ale I like to put about 5-10% of Crystal Malt in my grain bill. Which is probably why I like Deschutes Mirror Pond Ale so much.

 

[Owly055]

In reaction this thread, I decided to see if I could brew a decent beer with no malts except crystal malts. A one gallon brew with 2 ounces each of cr60 and cr120, and 4 ounces of carapils..... along with one pound of table sugar. The idea being that the sugar would leave the beer dry, as it ferments out 100% (more or less) and leaves no flavor. The crystals and carapils would compensate by adding some body and sweetness. I did a brief mash using amylase to convert any unconverted starches in the crystal. The mash was done BIAB by heating slowly from 130F to 160F in about 30 minutes.

This is a truly radical beer...... The wort of course tastes quite sweet due to the sugar, but this will quickly change. The flavor is good, but due to the relatively sweeter taste of sucrose compared to maltose, it's difficult to pin down what the finished beer will taste like. It will of course be dark and the caramel flavors of the crystal malt will probably stand out, but the sweetness they provide will not have the backdrop of the unfermentable sugars of base malts behind them. They are "the whole show". I hopped with Zythos to 35 IBU. OG is 1.055, SRM 12.8, and ABV should be somewhere a bit below 6%

This is a really cheap experiment........ Well under $2 for a one gallon brew total cost for fermentables and hops. A quickie experiment.


H.W.

 

[Yooper]

In reaction this thread, I decided to see if I could brew a decent beer with no malts except crystal malts. A one gallon brew with 2 ounces each of cr60 and cr120, and 4 ounces of carapils..... along with one pound of table sugar. The idea being that the sugar would leave the beer dry, as it ferments out 100% (more or less) and leaves no flavor. The crystals and carapils would compensate by adding some body and sweetness. I did a brief mash using amylase to convert any unconverted starches in the crystal. The mash was done BIAB by heating slowly from 130F to 160F in about 30 minutes.

This is a truly radical beer...... The wort of course tastes quite sweet due to the sugar, but this will quickly change. The flavor is good, but due to the relatively sweeter taste of sucrose compared to maltose, it's difficult to pin down what the finished beer will taste like. It will of course be dark and the caramel flavors of the crystal malt will probably stand out, but the sweetness they provide will not have the backdrop of the unfermentable sugars of base malts behind them. They are "the whole show". I hopped with Zythos to 35 IBU. OG is 1.055, SRM 12.8, and ABV should be somewhere a bit below 6%

This is a really cheap experiment........ Well under $2 for a one gallon brew total cost for fermentables and hops. A quickie experiment.


H.W.

With no base malt at all, I'd probably not call this "beer". Probably I'd call it a sugar wine, with some crystal malt for flavor.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Is there a trend, I hope so. I say good riddance to crystal. Caramel is where it's really at.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

With no base malt at all, I'd probably not call this "beer". Probably I'd call it a sugar wine, with some crystal malt for flavor.

Why?

Crystal is, technically, malted barley.

I've done what he is proposing, minus the cane sugar. It still makes beer, albeit not a very good one.

 

[JonM]

Someone accidentally did that a while ago and posted about it. IIRC, the wort was jet black and unfermentable. I'll see if I can find the thread.

 

[ArkotRamathorn]

Someone accidentally did that a while ago and posted about it. IIRC, the wort was jet black and unfermentable. I'll see if I can find the thread.

Could you presumably throw a *bunch* of bugs in there like pedio/lacto/brett, wouldn't this combination eventually be able to eat through the "unfermentables"?

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Someone accidentally did that a while ago and posted about it. IIRC, the wort was jet black and unfermentable. I'll see if I can find the thread.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=208361&page=3

 

[JonM]

That's a good one, but the one I'm thinking of was a "why does my wort look so dark?" thread followed by "what was your recipe?" followed by "12 pounds of C60. Is that bad?"

I searched around and couldn't find it. Oh well.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

That's a good one, but the one I'm thinking of was a "why does my wort look so dark?" thread followed by "what was your recipe?" followed by "12 pounds of C60. Is that bad?"

I searched around and couldn't find it. Oh well.

Ahh, I have not seen that one.

I too was surprised by the fermentability of crystal malts as i was not expecting much based on the information of the time. the flavor result was just not something I enjoyed.

 

[AK7007]

Haven't had a chance to read all of this yet, but I'll say - is this a good topic for a featured article? These crystal threads come up often, with dissenting opinions on either side. Would be nice to see a full write up, with each side giving examples of why they like/dislike crystal in various applications. Probably co-written even. Just throwing it out there.

 

[MattyIce]

Haven't had a chance to read all of this yet, but I'll say - is this a good topic for a featured article? These crystal threads come up often, with dissenting opinions on either side. Would be nice to see a full write up, with each side giving examples of why they like/dislike crystal in various applications. Probably co-written even. Just throwing it out there.

Maybe yes, maybe no. I see it as more of a micro-trend. Right now it seems cool to tell everyone you are not using any crystal in a particular recipe than it is to simply not use them.

Just like the "cloying" term thrown around willy nilly lately. I can honestly say I have tasted ONE beer that I would describe as cloying...It was a 22% abv flat eisbock. It almost had the consistency of teriyaki sauce haha. Strangely enough, I see most uses of cloying outside of the HBT world to not involve food/beverage at all.

 

[JKaranka]

I just think you need to justify using crystal malt, like any other ingredient. Most beers don't need it.

 

[bobbrews]

Just like the "cloying" term thrown around willy nilly lately. I can honestly say I have tasted ONE beer that I would describe as cloying...It was a 22% abv flat eisbock. It almost had the consistency of teriyaki sauce haha. Strangely enough, I see most uses of cloying outside of the HBT world to not involve food/beverage at all.

Not sure where the confusion lies with the word: Cloying.

It's a very descriptive word for a beer that is way too sweet given the style... especially for inherently dry & bitter styles where residual sweetness is not desired.

Syrupy and sticky IPAs...yuck... Drinkability suffers massively because of that.

 

[Turkeyshot]

I just think you need to justify using crystal malt, like any other ingredient. Most beers don't need it.

But why do you need to justify it at all. If the addition of crystal malt adds to the overall flavor of the beer whether or not you can pick it out as an ingredient, it is the overall taste that makes the beer. Just as in using multiple spices in cooking where you may not taste each individual spice, but it contributes to the finished product as a whole.

 

[Owly055]

Why?

Crystal is, technically, malted barley.

I've done what he is proposing, minus the cane sugar. It still makes beer, albeit not a very good one.

I believe this is actually very different from what you describe.

The cane sugar allows the use of very little crystal..... only 4 ounces. This is an amount you might find an an ordinary beer..........a pound of crystal in 5 gallons is not unheard of. The use of sugar adds no sweetness or body, unlike base malts.......... That character must all come from the crystal. This is quite distinctly different from simply using 100% crystal malt to achieve the OG, which is going to result is a cloyingly sweet beer. When you use crystal in an ordinary beer, it's added on top of what the base malt lends....... There is no base malt in this case. I'm not at all sure what you can use for a comparison. Definitely it does not equate to anything I've done before, or to the brews being offered for comparison. One poster referred to it as "sugar wine"..... because the main fermentable is sugar. The predominant flavors are crystal malt and hops. In the end it will be "beer"...... It will have the distinctive malty / hoppy character of beer.


H.W.

 

[dfhar]

Except you might get something dominated by funky off flavors from the yeast, because your base of sugar doesn't include all of the normal yeast nutrients found in base malt.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

I believe this is actually very different from what you describe.

The cane sugar allows the use of very little crystal..... only 4 ounces. This is an amount you might find an an ordinary beer..........a pound of crystal in 5 gallons is not unheard of. The use of sugar adds no sweetness or body, unlike base malts.......... That character must all come from the crystal. This is quite distinctly different from simply using 100% crystal malt to achieve the OG, which is going to result is a cloyingly sweet beer. When you use crystal in an ordinary beer, it's added on top of what the base malt lends....... There is no base malt in this case. I'm not at all sure what you can use for a comparison. Definitely it does not equate to anything I've done before, or to the brews being offered for comparison. One poster referred to it as "sugar wine"..... because the main fermentable is sugar. The predominant flavors are crystal malt and hops. In the end it will be "beer"...... It will have the distinctive malty / hoppy character of beer.


H.W.


H.W.

You will find, I expect as I did, that the sweetness/flavor contribution is heavily dependent on the roasting level of the crystal used. The lower lovibond crystals did not result in a cloying beer, nor did they result in a terrible beer IMO. Just not a good beer, IMO.

 

[Owly055]

Except you might get something dominated by funky off flavors from the yeast, because your base of sugar doesn't include all of the normal yeast nutrients found in base malt.

That's worth considering.......... Are those nutrients destroyed in the kilning process when crystal is made?

H.W.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

That's worth considering.......... Are those nutrients destroyed in the kilning process when crystal is made?

H.W.

I don't think they are destroyed but given the ratio to sugar they would be lacking.

 

[Owly055]

I don't think they are destroyed but given the ratio to sugar they would be lacking.

So, it would behoove me to pitch pretty heavily, because the reproductive phase is the worst for off flavors........... Right?

H.W.