Mash temp question

[What?BrosBrewing]

Orfy's Hobgoblin II clone calls for a 90 minute mash at 156 F. Can I get a similar result from a 60 minute mash at around 152 or 153?

 

[RCope]

I'm sure you know that mashing at higher temps will give you more unfermentable sugars, higher FG, and perhaps a fuller mouthfeel and a sweeter beer. That's probably the intention of the brewer that calls for that mash schedule.

But to answer your question, the results will indeed be "similar" with a shorter mash at lower temperature. It will be a different beer, though. How different is up for debate...Cheers!

 

[GBRbrew]

Most of your conversion is done in the first 15 to 20 minutes of the mash so going from 90 to 60 minutes won't have much of an effect but the mouthfeel will bet different at a lower temp and you get different sugars at a lower temp also that will affect the beer

 

[VikeMan]

Most of your conversion is done in the first 15 to 20 minutes of the mash so going from 90 to 60 minutes won't have much of an effect but the mouthfeel will bet different at a lower temp and you get different sugars at a lower temp also that will affect the beer

A 90 minute vs 60 minute mash can have a fairly significant effect on wort fermentabilty. It's true that conversion typically happens fairly quickly, but the more time the enzymes have to work, the more simple sugars (vs complex sugars/dextrins) will be produced.

 

[bracconiere]

damn, i'd say mash at anything between 145-158f add gluco to the fermenter and call it "starvin' goblin" instead!


but i've never been a good enough taster to tell the difference between, 145-158f for a 60 min mash.....but my hydrometer floats differently in them.....YMMV


edit: or maybe "thin goblin"

 

[dmtaylor]

I’ll wager no one could taste any difference at all.

 

[GBRbrew]

I’ll wager no one could taste any difference at all.

I'm with you on this, all other things being equal 99% of people probably cant tell the difference from a 90 minute mash to a 60 minute mash

 

[VikeMan]

I'm with you on this, all other things being equal 99% of people probably cant tell the difference from a 90 minute mash to a 60 minute mash

OP was comparing a 90 minute mash at 156 F to a 60 minute mash at around 152 or 153. Note that there was also a temperature difference. The longer mash at 156F would actually yield a roughly similar fermentability as the shorter mash at 152/153, because the two parameters are partially offsetting. In fact, the shorter mash (at 152/153F) will most likely yield a slightly more fermentable wort than the 90 minute mash at 156F. My point is that there are several parameters affecting fermentability, and it's a good idea to pay attention to all of them, because if you stack them just right (or wrong), the differences can be non-subtle.

 

[Tobor_8thMan]

Folks can't tell the difference between a malty (full body beer) and a more fermentable (light body beer)?

 

[GBRbrew]

OP was comparing a 90 minute mash at 156 F to a 60 minute mash at around 152 or 153. Note that there was also a temperature difference. The longer mash at 156F would actually yield a roughly similar fermentability as the shorter mash at 152/153, because the two parameters are partially offsetting. In fact, the shorter mash (at 152/153F) will most likely yield a slightly more fermentable wort than the 90 minute mash at 156F. My point is that there are several parameters affecting fermentability, and it's a good idea to pay attention to all of them, because if you stack them just right (or wrong), the differences can be non-subtle.

What I'm trying to tell the OP is a mash at 90 minutes at 156 will be similar to a 60 minute mash at 156, a mash at 156 for 90 minutes will not be similar to a 60 minute mash at 152 or 153. Now let's all have a hb and relax lol

 

[VikeMan]

What I'm trying to tell the OP is a mash at 90 minutes at 156 will be similar to a 60 minute mash at 156, a mash at 156 for 90 minutes will not be similar to a 60 minute mash at 152 or 153. Now let's all have a hb and relax lol

What I'm saying is that a mash at 90 minutes at 156 will not really be similar to a 60 minute mash at 156, and that a mash at 156 for 90 minutes will not be similar to a 60 minute mash at 152 or 153 (because the parameters are, in this case, partially offsetting).

Shorter mashes, all other things being equal, are less fermentable. Mash temps of 152/153, all other things being equal, are more fermentable than a mash at 156. These parameters can either offset each other, or reinforce each other. In OP's case, they partially offset.

ETA: Further reading...
http://braukaiser.com/documents/Effects_of_mash_parameters_on_attenuation_and_efficiency.pdfhttp://www.homebrewersassociation.o...pdf/2012/1616-04 Attenuation - Gregg Doss.pdf

 

[GBRbrew]

Ok so you are saying shorter mash at lower temp gives the same mouth feel and malty flavor as higher temp and longer mash. I will admit I'm a noob at this but that seems odd to me.

 

[VikeMan]

Ok so you are saying shorter mash at lower temp gives the same mouth feel and malty flavor as higher temp and longer mash. I will admit I'm a noob at this but that seems odd to me.

I'm referring to fermentability. Mouthfeel is more complicated, and not as easy to model, being somewhat subjective, and influenced by more than just sugar/dextrin profiles.

 

[Tobor_8thMan]

Most believe modern malts convert quickly. From what I've read our brewing processes are based on processes from a long time ago when the malt didn't convert as readily as today's malts.

My advice. Try it. Do a 30 minute mash. How did the beer turn out? Do a 45 minute mash. How did the beer turn out? Was the 45 minute mash different than the 30 minute mash? Do a 60 minute mash, etc.

We, as homebrewers, are not just looking to make, as some believe, inexpensive beer. We are tinkers, we are for the most part scientists, we are sometimes biologists, we are DIYers, we enjoy experimenting, we enjoy learning. Did I cover everything?

 

[Tobor_8thMan]

Interesting item to consider

 

[GBRbrew]

Most believe modern malts convert quickly. From what I've read our brewing processes are based on processes from a long time ago when the malt didn't convert as readily as today's malts.

My advice. Try it. Do a 30 minute mash. How did the beer turn out? Do a 45 minute mash. How did the beer turn out? Was the 45 minute mash different than the 30 minute mash? Do a 60 minute mash, etc.

We, as homebrewers, are not just looking to make, as some believe inexpensive beer. We are tinkers, we are for the most part, scientists, we are sometimes biologists, we are DIYers, we enjoy experimenting, we enjoy learning. Did I cover everything?

Spot on with that post. All I was trying to say is I dont think he will get the same beer with the to different mashes. Ofcourse I'm a noob so I dont know. I say try them both and see what you like more

 

[GBRbrew]

Interesting item to consider
View attachment 691213

That's way to technical for me, I'll just keep drinking beer lol

 

[Tobor_8thMan]

Others my criticize my mash schedule, but for 2 row I do a 60 minute mash. For pils malt I do a 90 minute mash. I have an eHERMS. Mash out at 168F for 10 minutes. IMO, and others whom have had my brews, I make d*mn good beer.

Would I switch to a shorter mash to save a few minutes? Nope.

 

[GBRbrew]

I would never criticize how someone makes there beer if it works for you fantastic. I think the OP wanted to know if he would get similar beers with the different mashes, I dont think he would

 

[Tobor_8thMan]

That's way to technical for me, I'll just keep drinking beer lol

Basically graph attempts to show mash temp effect on fermentability.

 

[jimyoung]

Temperature component aside (as it's been address here well), I've also heard a lot of people talk about the 60 vs 90 minute mash. For me, I basically use my refractometer (a hydrometer will work, but it's a PITA to cool that much liquid) and keep an eye on the gravity. If I get the same reading 10 minutes apart, I consider it done. FWIW, with my fine-crush BIAB, it's usually 75-90 minutes before it stabilizes.

 

[balrog]

One thing I have definitely noticed when doing beers with any darker grains, and likely it happens with lighter grains but I'm no super-taster, is that while conversion can be finished quickly, there is something about 30 vs 60 m mash that increases flavor, in my experience. I can only extrapolate that 60 vs 90 might also show an affect, altho flavor extraction is likely some sort of asymptotic response, so the amount of change is less the longer you go.

 

[RM-MN]

Orfy's Hobgoblin II clone calls for a 90 minute mash at 156 F. Can I get a similar result from a 60 minute mash at around 152 or 153?

A recipe is not a chemical formula, it is a record of what someone else did. You will not get the exact same result unless you exactly duplicate the equipment, conditions, and batch of grain as each of these will change the resulting beer. Yes you will get a similar result if you do a 60 minute mash and you will get a similar result if you do a 90 minute mash. The results from a 60 minute mash depend on the quality of the milling and if the milling is done poorly a 90 minute mash may be required. Personally, I do a 30 minute mash because of the very finely milled grain and multiple testing has showed me that that is about the minimum time to get flavor extraction. It is doubtful that your grain will be milled like mine so a 60 minute mash is recommended.

If you have a refractometer, check the gravity at different times during the mash and see when the gravity stops changing. Make sure to stir the mash well before taking a reading as the sugars will settle to the bottom first before dispersing into the mash.

 

[Nubiwan]

I'm with you on this, all other things being equal 99% of people probably cant tell the difference from a 90 minute mash to a 60 minute mash

Agree with this, but I bet you'll be getting a higher ABV from them longer mash times. Some people like this. Strange how, anecdotally at least, people have trouble discerning the same beer with different ABVs.

 

[GBRbrew]

Agree with this, but I bet you'll be getting a higher ABV from them longer mash times. Some people like this. Strange how, anecdotally at least, people have trouble discerning the same beer with different ABVs.

I've heard of overnight mashes getting 2 to 4 extra gravity points(seems like a lot of extra work) so yea you might get a slight bump in abv.

 

[Nubiwan]

I would never criticize how someone makes there beer if it works for you fantastic. I think the OP wanted to know if he would get similar beers with the different mashes, I dont think he would

Often raise my eybrows when people pass comment over the do's and donts around mash temps. Body this, thin that etc.

My first question is how good is the clone compared to the original, never mind your mash being off 3-5 degrees. I mean, how good are clone recipes other than to get you in the vicinity of what you were trying to achieve? Not sure we can scale home brew to commercial product effectively, based on gran bill and mash temps.

Taste is also another very personal experience. One mans treasure, is another mans trash. Vice versa.

So yeah, best to try it, and let us know. I honestly dont know if i could compare a beer i made maybe 6 months back, with the same grain bill mashed 3-5 degrees off the original. I very much doubt i could perceive a difference based on memory, let alone any consistent process. Likewise, I've had commercial beers that taste quite different Over time, but is that my taste, is it the beer, is it the taps in the bar, the way it is served?

Time will play havoc on taste preference and comparisons. We can all appreciate our tastes maturing, or not, over time. No way id drink the crap i drank at 18.

Without doing an actual side by side comparison, hard to say what you are tasting is different. Have certainly seen anecdotal evidence suggesting very little difference on a home brewing scale.

 

[VikeMan]

Without doing an actual side by side comparison, hard to say what you are tasting is different. Have certainly seen anecdotal evidence suggesting very little difference on a home brewing scale.

What do you mean by "on a home brewing scale?" Are you implying that mash temps make a difference in commecial beers, but somehow don't in homebrews? If so, by which laws of physics could this be true?

 

[dmtaylor]

*questions the purpose of resurrecting this weird meandering necrothread... then shrugs*

 

[Nubiwan]

Yes, big long shawshank response for a retired thread. Apologies! Thought it was more current.

 

[bracconiere]

Yes, big long shawshank response for a retired thread. Apologies! Thought it was more current.

man at least we know you're not dead, and to have that thought building up in your soul for 2 years! must have been good to vent after that much time!

 

[Ninoid]

Keep it simple as you can.
60 min is enough.

 

[bracconiere]

Keep it simple as you can.
60 min is enough.

i don't know, i can get ~10% better effec with a decocction, at 150f, then 162f.....

 

[VikeMan]

Keep it simple as you can.
60 min is enough.

At the risk of further reviving the zombie, yes, 60 minutes is generally enough (more than enough) to turn all of the starches into non starches (sugars and dextrins).

If that's the only goal, that's fine, but there's more to it than that. Wort fermentbility is a significant variable, and mash time is one (of several) of its control knobs. Sometimes, 45 minutes is better, depending on your goals. Sometimes 75 or 90 (or more) minutes. It depends on how fermentable you want the wort to be, and the longer the mash, the more fermentable it will be.

Sometimes I want to (figuratively, not really) smack Palmer upside the head for introducing the iodine "complete conversion" test to home brewers. It was well intentioned, but the story doesn't end at "complete" conversion.

 

[Ninoid]

I’ve never tried it for more than 60 minutes, but a longer mash increases the amount of tannin leading to an unpleasant bitterness in the beer.

 

[VikeMan]

I’ve never tried it for more than 60 minutes, but a longer mash increases the amount of tannin leading to an unpleasant bitterness in the beer.

Theoretically, a longer mash could/should result in extraction of more tannins, but is there any evidence that it results in a noticeable difference, given good mash/sparge pH and temperatures?

 

[doug293cz]

I’ve never tried it for more than 60 minutes, but a longer mash increases the amount of tannin leading to an unpleasant bitterness in the beer.

Where did this information originate?

Brew on

 

[oakbarn]

My 2 cents. Follow the recipe if you want THAT beer. Temp of Mash is very important. Franconia Brewery in McKinney TX will tell you all about his beers and process, but not the Mash Temp. The 60 vs 90 is a different debate. That being said, we tried to do 60 minutes Mashes and found that we were not getting our OG so we reverted to always doing a 90 minutes Mash now. What is 30 minutes when you are having fun? Tannins? Never seen one!

 

[Ninoid]

I seem to have replaced the theory. Tannin is released by increasing the temperature of the mash, and prolonged mash increases the risk of sour wort, but this is the case with a really long mash (24 hours and longer).

Beer cannot be mashed for too long, but if the wort is allowed to sit in the mash for over twenty-four hours, it may begin to sour. There is no point in leaving a beer to mash for longer than 120 minutes since most of the enzyme conversion in mashing is accomplished in the first 60 minutes of mashing. Beer mash is affected more by temperature than time.

 

[RM-MN]

The problem with really long mashes is that the temperature drops and falls below pasteurization temperature which can allow bacterial infections. Read about how caramel malts are made.

Also research enzyme activation and denaturing. With a really poor crush, the enzymes may be protected from the higher temps until activated by the gelatinization of the starches. If this is true, there may have been sufficient enzymes left to convert most of the starch. I don't own the books that would confirm that this happens so I may be incorrect.

 

[Homebrew Harry]

I'm subbing in case more pertinent info arrises in a couple of years.