Make invert sugar or just use cane?

[olstones]

I am brewing a pub ale today and the recipe calls for invert sugar. I got 1lbs of cane sugar. Inverting is a logistical issue for me, I do not want to leave the mash or boil alone for 30 minutes to do this.

So two questions:

1) Does it make much of a difference if I just add the cane sugar to the boil?
2) How long in advance can I make the inverted sugar? And if this can be done a few hours prior to starting the brew, how do I store it? Will it harden?

 

[kev211]

It may be too late but yes you can do it well before the boil. Just dont leave it in the pot (cuz it will harden). If the recipe calls for invert sugar I would use that as it will give you a completely different character than regular sugar (sucrose) as they are two different forms of sugar. Both do the same thing as far as fermentability, but provide different outcomes as far as color, flavor, body, head retention etc are concerned. But if you're worried about timing, why not just skip making the invert sugar and use candi sugar. Literally the same thing. Candi sugar is invert sugar. The darker the candi sugar the longer its been cooked/caramelized.

 

[Calder]

If you are not looking for anything but clear sugar, just use plain sugar. I don't believe there is any difference.

Now, if you are talking about dark candi sugar. that is different.

 

[FatDragon]

If you are not looking for anything but clear sugar, just use plain sugar. I don't believe there is any difference.

Now, if you are talking about dark candi sugar. that is different.

This. Chemically they are a bit different, but unless you are cooking it past basic inversion you're essentially just adding 30 minutes for no benefit. If the recipe called for Lyle's Golden Syrup or brewer's caramel or something like that (also invert sugars but cooked longer for some maillard reactions that give color and flavor), plain cane sugar would be missing something, but if you're supposed to use clear invert sugar you can just as well use regular sugar since they're both going to ferment out completely without adding any color or flavor.

 

[z-bob]

Add cane sugar at the beginning of the boil and let it invert during the boil. If the recipe calls for the invert sugar to be near the end of the boil, you might have to increase the hops a bit.

 

[JKaranka]

I prepare batches of invert in advance and store them in 2lb jars. They come out the consistency of LME, so sometimes they need warming up a bit to be able to pour.

Definitively the darker inverts are fairly unique. They are also different from candi as invert has the impurities of raw cane sugar (molasses) and candi is based on refined sugar.

If the recipe asks for invert #1 I wouldn't hesitate to sub for raw cane sugar early in the boil. If it asks for #2/#3/#4 then you won't be able to get a replacement and you should make a batch.

 

[dmtaylor]

Yeast doesn't care if you invert the sugar or not. They see sugar, they eat it. Skip this unnecessary process.

 

[JKaranka]

Yeast doesn't care if you invert the sugar or not. They see sugar, they eat it. Skip this unnecessary process.

Are you basing that on your experience using invert #3 and #4?

 

[Soulshine2]

I agree, I've used "other sugars" for making distillates. white refined,dark and light brown sugar, molasses ,cane,powdered, its all sugar and yeast doesn't discriminate.
I just wonder what light corn syrup (such as Karo)would do

 

[dmtaylor]

Are you basing that on your experience using invert #3 and #4?

I'm basing it on biological science. If you eat a pound of cane sugar vs. a pound of invert sugar, does your urine or excrement smell or taste any different between the two afterward?

If you are after the flavor impacts from a prolonged boil, that's a totally different animal. Caramelization adds a ton of flavor. But whether the sugar is inverted or not chemically makes very little if any difference in fermentation and final beer flavor aspects. At that point you are tasting caramel, not inversion.

 

[Hanglow]

But it's not an unnecessary step if the recipe calls for a darker invert than just a straight inverted sugar. You aren't getting those flavours by chucking in some white sugar. If it is just a light invert then yeah, I'd just use white sugar too

OP, you could make and add it while the beer is fermenting if you don't have time to make it now. What's the recipe? If you don't want it to harden then just add some water to it once it's reached the colour you want - 15% of the weight would do

edit - oops just saw you'll allready have made the beer. What did you do in the end?

 

[IslandLizard]

There are 2 fundamentally different approaches to "converting" sugar.

Sugar inversion is splitting the sucrose (sugar) molecule into a glucose and a fructose molecule by heating or boiling in water. This process is accelerated when a catalysts is added, such as an acid. This process adds flavor and aroma to the sugar (syrup). To get caramelization the sugar needs to be fairly concentrated or heated/boiled for extended time.
Most components created this way are highly fermentable.

Allegedly Candi sugar is (partially) inverted sugar, but since inverted sugar resists crystallization, I wonder how those huge candi sugar crystals are formed.

On the other hand, caramel syrup is made by boiling sugar in an alkaline environment using amino acids (e.g., DAP, beer wort) to create melanoidins through maillard reactions. Because of the higher heat and sugar concentrations involved, caramelization (pyrolization) also takes place, adding flavor and aroma. Many of those components are not fermentable by yeast.

 

[JLump]

This guy has some very good videos on this subject. He also explains the difference between invert sugar and Belgian candi sugar.

 

[zipster222]

Yeast cells make a very efficient enzyme (invertase) that splits sucrose into glucose and fructose. They synthesize it whenever the glucose level is low and stick it into their cell wall just in case there is some sucrose around. They cannot tell the difference whether you invert the sugar or they do. In any case, they will metabolize these simple sugars completely leaving no traces.

 

[rayg]

The distinction between invert sugar and sucrose is not meaningful
in the context of brewing. "Invert" sugar is the product of the hydrolysis
of sucrose to glucose and fructose. Glucose is what brewers know
as "corn sugar" or dextrose. Fructose is "fruit sugar". Since a
sucrose molecule is just a glucose molecule connected to a fructose
molecule, when you break them in two you get a 50:50 mixture of
the two sugars:

Maltose is just two glucose molecules connected, when you hydrolyze them
by the same process as above, you get two molecules of glucose (aka "corn sugar",
or dextrose). Boiling acidic wort breaks down these types of sugars,
called "disaccharides" because they are two sugar molecules connected together.
"High fructose corn sugar" is just a mix of glucose and fructose
but instead of it being a 50:50 mixture, it's a 40:60 mixture of glucose:fructose.
And yes, all that stuff about high fructose corn sugar being bad for you
is nonsense. It's bad for you only in the sense that a large amount of
any sugar is bad for you, and it's easy to ingest a lot of it by drinking lots
of soda, but there is nothing inherently bad about it.

The only flavor difference is due to impurities in sugar such as brown sugar,
molasses, demerara etc. Nothing to do with the sugars themselves.

Ray

 

[Hanglow]

Except the british brewing sugars are known as Liquid Brewers Invert No1, Liquid Brewers Invert No 2 etc depending on colour so in that regard there is a meaningful distinction between them and other sugars Although I know what you are saying, the yeast doesn't care

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Would not the typical process of inverting sugar leave behind caramalized products which will add noticeable flavor to your beer? The higher the caramelization, the stronger the flavor impact.

 

[MrAverageGuy]

Well - chemistry doesn't lie I guess, but I have a can of Lyle's Golden Syrup - this thread has inspired me to brew a pub ale. I have to believe the resulting flavor will be slightly different!

 

[rayg]

Except the british brewing sugars are known as Liquid Brewers Invert No1, Liquid Brewers Invert No 2 etc depending on colour so in that regard there is a meaningful distinction between them and other sugars Although I know what you are saying, the yeast doesn't care

Here's the data sheet for Liquid Brewer's Invert No. 1, from the manufacturer:

Note the words "light brown". It's the stuff causing the light brown color
that gives the flavor, in other words, the impurities in the sugar. You will
also notice at the bottom the fact that not all of the product is fermentable. So another way of saying it is, the stuff that's causing the brown color is also the stuff that is non-fermentable and is also the stuff responsible for the flavor that it adds. The "invert" part of it has nothing to do with it.

Rayg

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

So from this I presume that I could caramalize sugar in a frying pan without tossing in any form of citric acid (to induce inversion) and caramalize it and get the same flavor effect as for invert sugar.

 

[JKaranka]

So from this I presume that I could caramalize sugar in a frying pan without tossing in any form of citric acid (to induce inversion) and caramalize it and get the same flavor effect as for invert sugar.

I guess someone has to run some experiments. Invert sugars of different grades have been used in the brewing industry for at least a hundred fifty years. Plus lots of different variants and commercial sugar products. There must be a reason, specially when back in the day they would have been much more expensive than malted barley.

Some of the stuff to look at: Degree of inversion, impurities, caramelization. Currently they all come together in an invert and it's hard to know which one has what impact, specially relative to other sugars and caramels.

 

[Weezy]

Yeast metabolize both just fine. As was said, the only advantage to using an invert is for flavor contribution of darker ones. There's certainly nothing wrong with doing it, but don't sell it as something it's not to new people that come on here looking for guidance.

On a commercial scale, there's probably an advantage to using a liquid version. Especially historically.

I was just reading some stuff about how distillers use no boil and lacto fermenters for sour wort production. I'm certain that the old distillers weren't intentionally souring their wort, but the traditional process yielded some souring due to poor practices... But we all like the end product.

 

[dmtaylor]

Many (most?) brewers just enjoy tinkering and making things more difficult, without knowing or caring if their extra labor adds any value whatsoever.

Personally, I'm a lazy skeptic. If I decide a process or ingredient is of questionable value, I don't use it. Somehow, I still manage to make really good beer. I also run experiments sometimes, when I get around to it. In my opinion, this one is among the bottom-most interesting of all proposed experiments I have seen.

To each his own. If this is all fun, more power to ya. Brewing should be about two goals, right? Good tasty brews, and fun. If you're finding both of those, then you've succeeded.

Cheers.

 

[jessup]

I may be biased but candi syrup always rounds out my beers far more than table sugar ever did. Def either make it yourself or buy mine at a reasonable cost!

 

[Hanglow]

Here's the data sheet for Liquid Brewer's Invert No. 1, from the manufacturer:

Note the words "light brown". It's the stuff causing the light brown color
that gives the flavor, in other words, the impurities in the sugar. You will
also notice at the bottom the fact that not all of the product is fermentable. So another way of saying it is, the stuff that's causing the brown color is also the stuff that is non-fermentable and is also the stuff responsible for the flavor that it adds. The "invert" part of it has nothing to do with it.

Rayg

Well quite, but going back to the op who stated that his recipe called for invert sugar and your statement - "The distinction between invert sugar and sucrose is not meaningful in the context of brewing." It is meaningful in that it is part of his recipe, which he asked about and knowing what type it is important. Which is all I was saying.

we've probably scared him off now

 

[rayg]

Well quite, but going back to the op who stated that his recipe called for invert sugar and your statement - "The distinction between invert sugar and sucrose is not meaningful in the context of brewing." It is meaningful in that it is part of his recipe, which he asked about and knowing what type it is important. Which is all I was saying.

we've probably scared him off now

Well, if I scared him off maybe he should not be brewing? Honestly I don't
understand the willingness of the brewing community to foster these old wives tales/suburban myths of brewing. Someone earlier in this thread wrote that invert sugars have been part of brewing for over 100 years...of course, because inversion is only caused by high heat, and this also caramelizes the sugars, which is where the flavor components originate.
Inverting sugar occurs whenever you boil your wort...in other words, every brew! Tell you what...take some sugar, add a little water, heat it until it liquefies...then put it in your brew...you will have your own style of beer!

Ray

 

[JKaranka]

They didn't invert during the brew. They invested into lots of different invert sugars and used them in different combinations in different beers. Going back to at least the 1880s if not the 1840s.

http://barclayperkins.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/refined-sugar-vs-invert-sugar.html

 

[rayg]

They didn't invert during the brew. They invested into lots of different invert sugars and used them in different combinations in different beers. Going back to at least the 1880s if not the 1840s.

http://barclayperkins.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/refined-sugar-vs-invert-sugar.html

Sorry if it sounded like I was saying that. What I'm saying is that they've been used for so long because they are different types of caramelized sugars, not because they been inverted. I wish these manufacturers would just drop the "invert" on the label and instead call them by grade of darkness or some proprietary name.

So you can't duplicate these things by just dumping some pure cane sugar
in the boil. The way to experiment would be to heat and caramelize pure sugar with varying amounts and types of molasses, caramel or brown sugar added, say 3-5% by weight relative to the pure sugar. Otherwise I would just stick to the commercially available ones the recipes call for.

Rayg

 

[rayg]

There must be a reason, specially when back in the day they would have been much more expensive than malted barley.

The process of heating raw cane sugar to dissolve it in water, then heating
to drive off some of the water, then cooling to crystallize pure sugar out of
solution, inverts some of the sugar. It's the leftovers in the supernatant that
makes both molasses and the invert sugar, and they are the waste product, so to speak, from the process. I don't think the waste material is more expensive from the original seller. Other resellers may package it as something special and charge more, but the expensive stuff should be the pure crystalline sugar.

Ray

 

[rhys333]

I had always assumed that invert was 100% fermentable, but I see from comments above that may not be so, particularly for darker versions. My brewing software suggests the same.

Can anyone confirm from experience the approximate fermentability of #2 (amber) invert made from turbinado sugar? I plan to use this at about 9% of my fermentable in what I'm calling a English Summer Ale, and want to make sure I get the desired amount of body and sweetness in the final beer.