Low Enzymatic/Cold Mash/Low alcohol beer

[Cool_Hand_Luke]

here's what i was reading last night, very interesting! has anyone ever mashed this hot? I did as high as 167F but never went above that.

https://www.brewersjournal.info/grasp-the-low-and-no-alcohol-opportunity/

Very interesting read. For those who want to read just the last page of the book here is the summary document that's at the end of the article.

 

[Miraculix]

Theoretically a good idea, but still a beer brewed with a minimum amount of malt. Resulting in a minimum amount of flavour. The amount of malt used for the cold mash is much higher, which I think might result in more flavour in general, but still keeping starch/sugar extraction at a minimum. Best of both worlds, of you are after low abv beers i guess.

 

[kmarkstevens]

I've brewed twice with spent grains (warning: long brew day) once was a 50/50 mix of spent grains and "two row", once with added enzymes. From an OG/FG perspective, both approaches work. My next step may be to find some recipes that justify the longer brew day with the spent grains.

I have come to appreciate 6 row as part of the malt bill in English style ales. A lot of Shut Up About Barclay Perkins recipes have 6-row. My test was 4 or 5 pounds of the cold soaked grains + 1# 6-row, and it all converted.

 

[Cool_Hand_Luke]

Theoretically a good idea, but still a beer brewed with a minimum amount of malt. Resulting in a minimum amount of flavour. The amount of malt used for the cold mash is much higher, which I think might result in more flavour in general, but still keeping starch/sugar extraction at a minimum. Best of both worlds, of you are after low abv beers i guess.

Fair point. Could be interesting to try a similar style using both methods. The OG for the hot mash could be bumped up slightly to get closer to the 1.5% abv that's been reported with the cold mash procedures in this thread so far to get a closer. The hot mash article was reporting 0.5%-0.8%ABV so some room to bump the grain bill up a bit to get apples to apples. I'd like to try both at some point.

Also curious what would happen if the two techniques were done together.

1. Cold mash -->
2. lauter -->
3. heat collected wort to below beta amylase range (125F) -->
4. "sparge" with near boiling water to get up to around 165F-170F -->
5. Then quickly heat the now diluted wort quickly to the 180F-187F range

 

[Miraculix]

I have come to appreciate 6 row as part of the malt bill in English style ales. A lot of Shut Up About Barclay Perkins recipes have 6-row. My test was 4 or 5 pounds of the cold soaked grains + 1# 6-row, and it all converted.

How was it taste-wise? A bit bland?

 

[kmarkstevens]

How was it taste-wise? A bit bland?

Yes, but I was shooting for a table beer. And broke my hydrometer so no easy way to figure out the OG.

Have another cold steep in the fridge right now to brew in the morning. And have a pound of 6 row ready and waiting. Tomorrow will do the cold mash, and a 6-row 2nd runnings batch. I'll prolly kitchen sink the 2nd runnings with whatever leftovers are available and add some DME if needed.

I think I'm gonna have to do a side by side test vs "upright ale" https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/any-one-brew-the-tafelbier.119428/ #12 posting

Not sure the cold brewing method ends up with a "superior" tasting low ABV beer. Hope so, but jury is out.

 

[McKnuckle]

At the risk of asking a dumb question, I just want to be totally clear on what you guys are doing:

First you're mashing cold. Then, are you A) Draining and heating just the liquid wort to ~150ºF, and discarding the grain; or B) Transferring the entire cold mash, grain and all, and heating to ~150ºF? I'm pretty sure it's the former, but want to confirm. If you heated the entire mash including the grain, I imagine it would liberate more starch and produce more conversion, resulting in something resembling a standard gravity wort.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

First you're mashing cold. Then, are you A) Draining and heating just the liquid wort to ~150ºF, and discarding the grain; or B) Transferring the entire cold mash, grain and all, and heating to ~150ºF?

http://hornbrewing.com/blog/2019/07/20/illustrated-steps-for-brewing-cold-extraction-table-beer/ matches my process for cold extraction.

 

[McKnuckle]

Well, due to all of my taps being occupied, and all of my bottles filled, I've finally found some experimentation time to give this a try.

This will be a one gallon batch, 80% pilsner, 10% Vienna, 10% Carahell, with acidulated malt added for pH. My recipe is tuned for somewhere in the 1.054 OG range.

For hops, I'm aiming for 10 IBU with equal amounts of Progress 6% AA at 30 minutes (FWH) and 10 minutes. It's a bit like Fuggle, and I have too much of it!

I chilled the water down to 44F, then moved it from the fridge to my brew room to sit overnight (10-12 hrs). I lowered a Wilser bag loaded with the grist into the water, ensured the absence of doughballs, then covered. I'll pick up in the morning.

I know I could do this very simply by just lifting the bag out, but I plan to recirculate a little over the top of the grain to clarify the wort before heating to 154F for a sacch. rest. How well that'll work, I have no idea. I am heating with an induction plate, so I'll use the lowest setting to discourage scorching.

 

[schmurf]

As I mentioned in a previous post, I highly recommend to this is in a separate mash vessel. There will be a chunk of sediment at the bottom you don't want to get in the boil. I use a kettle for this with an outlet about 2cm up from bottom and after the cold mash I drain to a separate kettle from where I boil the wort, leaving the sediment in the mash kettle.

 

[McKnuckle]

Yes, I’m cold steeping in a bag inside a stainless bucket with a rotating pickup tube. After vorlaufing and draining the bag, I will examine whether I can apply heat in the same bucket, or if I should drain the runoff to a separate, small kettle. I’ll be boiling in that kettle regardless. Definitely a 2V setup.

[Edit: Decided not to vorlauf, as the liquid is so starchy that the usual BIAB particulate appears to be suppressed or absent. I'm letting the bag drain slowly via gravity while I hang out on the computer with my morning espresso.]

 

[McKnuckle]

Thought I'd add a couple of photos for the benefit of anyone who wants to see what this kind of wort might look like.

1) Wort just before pitching yeast, totally clear. No, I did not pitch in that topped up gallon jug. I transferred first.
2) Starchy sediment caked on bottom of mash tun. It was not burned, and scraped up easily.
3) Wort after draining from the cold steep, before raising to sacch. temps.



I hit a PB gravity of 1.014 and OG of 1.017, or about 22% mash efficiency. Everything about the wort seems pretty normal - it smells and tastes just like it should. The cold steeped wort had a grainy, vegetal aroma. But once the liquid was raised to beta amylase temps, it began to smell like normal, with caramel aromas. The only thing is that it tastes quite bland, like a regular extremely low gravity beer might be. Time will tell.

 

[beersk]

Yeah, I think this method definitely does not favor light styles and/or beers without some kind of specialty malts. It really needs some kind of sweetness added back in to take the place of the alcohol which adds its own amount of sweetness to normal strength beers. Unless you like your beers to be really really dry, I recommend using C malts. Melanoidan malt might be good for helles/pilsner/kolsch styles. I have a pilsner about ready to go now that has Vienna and Carahell, but I'm not sure that was enough. We'll see.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Brewed a pair of batches over the weekend. 3lb malt, 67% base malt & 33% 20L using two different sets of malts. One was Canada Malting Pale Ale & Briess Crystal 20L; the other was Mecca Lamonta & Opal 22. OG was 20 / 22. If I don't follow-up in six weeks with results, feel free to "ping" me.

From my previous "cold extraction" batches, I will suggest caution when using dark roasted malts. These malts can provide flavors that may not be desirable if they are "too" intense.

Side note: There are a couple of different Pete's Wicked Ale clone that are "all-grain" and call for either 20% or 30% crystal malts. So I have an idea as to what I might be getting from the "cold extraction" batches that I brewed.

 

[McKnuckle]

I used 10% Carahell and mashed at 156-158 in an attempt to counter some of those things. I'd be happy to significantly increase the crystal and specialty malts the next time, though. It's clear that recipes formulated for this way of brewing are dialed in differently than standard, and there are barely any trailblazers to draw from. So, let's go!

 

[beersk]

I used 10% Carahell and mashed at 156-158 in an attempt to counter some of those things. I'd be happy to significantly increase the crystal and specialty malts the next time, though. It's clear that recipes formulated for this way of brewing are dialed in differently than standard, and there are barely any trailblazers to draw from. So, let's go!

You're right about that. We're kind of providing our the data at this point in time. Ten percent Carahell might be enough. They do say usage up to 30% though, so perhaps it's something that could be increased in the future.

I'd really like to try this with a hefeweizen this summer too. That and Belgian Wit I think this method would favor a lot.

 

[McKnuckle]

Just tasted the wort after 2 days fermenting. It's down to 1.010 from 1.017, or just under 1% ABV. The aroma is interestingly malty, or maybe I should say grainy, with a toffee component. The flavors I'm picking up are stronger than the original sweet wort, strangely enough. It may not be bitter enough though at 10 IBU. But it's not "piss water" (pardon the term), at least not yet.

 

[beersk]

Just tasted the wort after 2 days fermenting. It's down to 1.010 from 1.017, or just under 1% ABV. The aroma is interestingly malty, or maybe I should say grainy, with a toffee component. The flavors I'm picking up are stronger than the original sweet wort, strangely enough. It may not be bitter enough though at 10 IBU. But it's not "piss water" (pardon the term), at least not yet.

Thanks for the notes. In my Vienna lager I did someone said they thought it smelled like Captain Crunch, which I thought was kind of an interesting descriptor, but after they said that, I thought so as well. It does change the grain/malt character.

 

[kmarkstevens]

Just tasted the wort after 2 days fermenting. It's down to 1.010 from 1.017, or just under 1% ABV. The aroma is interestingly malty, or maybe I should say grainy, with a toffee component. The flavors I'm picking up are stronger than the original sweet wort, strangely enough. It may not be bitter enough though at 10 IBU. But it's not "piss water" (pardon the term), at least not yet.

YOu may want to dry hop. My first test batches all got infected. But before they did, the hop was pretty light. I have since tossed my Mr Beer fermenters - while cheap and pretty ideal for split batches, they are hard to sanitize. At least for me.

I have a 1/2 Vienna 1/2 munich with OG 1012 going right now with 34/70 lager yeast. Just 'cuz.

Throw out a topic for discussion. For the cold mash, I am of the opinion it really only makes sense if
1) tastes pretty good
2) Has an OG close to 1010

I write this because I already know how to get a decent drinking 1020 beer, and there are loads of 1030 beers. In fact, if you don't know about this most excellent Sub 1.030 beers thread, you should check it out.

Secondly, doing the cold mash uses a lot of grain unless you do a second running with added enzymes. While my first tests got infected, the 2nd running I did with 1# 6-row came out as a decent, drinkable table beer. Practically speaking, I don't necessarily want to do a second mash and batch every time.

As a different approach, I've got the grains and culturing the Windsor to do a trial with Lallemond's hot mashing technique. See how that works for a low gravity beer.

So, interested in other opinions, but seems to me cold mashing is not overly efficient or superior tasting for a 1020 beer. thoughts?

 

[McKnuckle]

I do agree with you that there's not much point to this unless it actually tastes good. The novelty alone isn't enough for me to bother. I am already able to make a nice 3.5% beer, and not willing to fight for halving that ABV if the drink doesn't also satisfy my senses.

The hot mashing technique intrigues me, too. I already routinely mash at 160F, which freaks out a lot of homebrewers. It is a nice way to create a reasonably low ABV beer with plenty of substance. In my experience, a 1.020 FG is not "sweet" if the OG is under 1.050. You can achieve that kind of low attenuation with a single infusion mash a bit over 160 and the right yeast. But 180? Wow, that's something.

 

[kmarkstevens]

Forgot one thing I want to test: cold mash with OG ~1012 and then pitch & spund in a 2.5 gallon keg with a floating dip tube. The elegance and ease if all that comes together for a decent 1% beer just might be worthwhile!

Looks like I need to brave the covid-19 situation in Seattle and support my local HBS. BTW, he is reporting brisk business as Microsoft, Amazon, Boeing and other big companies in the area are all work from home, and the the homebrewers are all taking advantage to fill their carboys.

 

[ba-brewer]

The Briess page mentioned that agitation(continuous lauter too I think) could speed up the process to an hour, maybe that would also change the flavor so it is less grainy.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

So, interested in other opinions, but seems to me cold mashing is not overly efficient or superior tasting for a 1020 beer. thoughts?

Back in reply 42, I mentioned

Cold extraction may not be the right process for brewing a traditional tasting low ABV beer.

As I've been trying different recipes with cold extraction, my emphasis has been on observing the flavors (like those mentioned in reply 108). No judgements on the outcomes yet.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

In my Vienna lager I did someone said they thought it smelled like Captain Crunch, which I thought was kind of an interesting descriptor, but after they said that, I thought so as well. It does change the grain/malt character.

That's been my observation as well.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

It's clear that recipes formulated for this way of brewing are dialed in differently than standard, and there are barely any trailblazers to draw from. So, let's go!

Would a combination of cold extraction + hot steep method (for grains) be useful for quickly identifying the flavors that are possible with the process?

 

[beersk]

That's been my observation as well.

Yeah, I tapped my low abv pilsner last night. It was 6lbs Pils malt, 12oz Vienna, 8oz Carahell for a 3 gallon batch. Like the last batch it has a sort of grain bitterness or astringency to it as noted by some members of my homebrew club. And it also has the same distinct grain character, almost like raw grain character. I'm still not sold on it yet.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

For me, "cold extraction" is similar to other new techniques or processes - it takes me a couple of batches to start seeing better results.

 

[Miraculix]

Yeah, I tapped my low abv pilsner last night. It was 6lbs Pils malt, 12oz Vienna, 8oz Carahell for a 3 gallon batch. Like the last batch it has a sort of grain bitterness or astringency to it as noted by some members of my homebrew club. And it also has the same distinct grain character, almost like raw grain character. I'm still not sold on it yet.

Maybe this technique would benefit from lowering the pH significantly.

 

[beersk]

Maybe this technique would benefit from lowering the pH significantly.

I still treated these the same I would a hot mash and added salts and lactic or phosphoric acid to adjust the pH. But perhaps they would benefit from further lowering of the pH. I'm not sure.

 

[stickyfinger]

I do agree with you that there's not much point to this unless it actually tastes good. The novelty alone isn't enough for me to bother. I am already able to make a nice 3.5% beer, and not willing to fight for halving that ABV if the drink doesn't also satisfy my senses.

The hot mashing technique intrigues me, too. I already routinely mash at 160F, which freaks out a lot of homebrewers. It is a nice way to create a reasonably low ABV beer with plenty of substance. In my experience, a 1.020 FG is not "sweet" if the OG is under 1.050. You can achieve that kind of low attenuation with a single infusion mash a bit over 160 and the right yeast. But 180? Wow, that's something.

165 works well too