Maximum Viscosity & Thickness in Big Stouts

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Did some searching and couldn't find a thread on this from HBT.

I'm trying to create maximum viscosity... something like Huna/Zhukov, Dark Lord, or Ten Fidy.
Not just using oats to give a little enhancement of mouthfeel... I'm talking straight up sludge in a glass.

I've been researching this a lot and came up with a few things. Curious as to people's feedback and suggestions.

- "Double mash" is essentially just using ONLY the 1st runnings off of two separate mashes, to hit target volume in the BK, right? I believe this is what the examples I listed above all do. Correct me if I'm wrong.

- High amounts of nonfermentables to build up the FG

- High amounts of Roasted Barley for mouthfeel (Is it roasted barley, or flaked barley? If flaked, does this require special mashing?) - I am not sure if this is correct, but I remember reading that the Barley gives MORE mouthfeel than rye or oats (which could also be added)

- Mash higher than usual, 154+ F. I get the concept of making longer chain sugars, but if a large % of the grist is nonfermentable anyway, will this matter?

- High FG. 1.030 as a minimum. I believe Dark Lord is 1.060+ but that may be a bit much.

- 2-3 hour boil? Increased flavor complexity from maillard reactions? Consistency changes with long reduction of wort?

I've also heard from a brewer friend that a lot of commercial breweries just use DME for this. I'm not sure if he meant MOUTHFEEL or ABV specifically, though. Would DME help mouthfeel?

Will these get someone in the ballpark of the same viscosity as the examples I listed? I know that's a lofty goal, but I think it is definitely possible to dial in.

Can provide some base recipes if needed... I've mostly been looking at Ten Fidy, Dark Lord, and Kentucky Dark Star recipes, although, admittedly KDS isn't as thick as I'd like.

Thoughts?
Suggestions?

 

[day_trippr]

I don't see "high mash temperature" in the mix.

btw, what's the target ABV? A high FG brew can be created in lots of ways, but that gets narrowed if the ABV wants to be high...

Cheers!

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

I don't see "high mash temperature" in the mix.

btw, what's the target ABV? A high FG brew can be created in lots of ways, but that gets narrowed if the ABV wants to be high...

Cheers!

Edited that in there.
I may be missing something obvious here, but I'm just curious if that's really going to matter? I get that higher temps = longer chain sugars from different amylase enzymes, but if your grist is composed of a lot of unfermentable stuff (crystal, chocolate, etc), then would that really matter?

ABV isn't as important to me as mouthfeel.
I'd be happy to make a milkshake with Huna mouthfeel at 6%

We've been trying our RIS recipes at max capacity for yeast, so it's usually around 11% or so. I'm thinking of just backing that off a bit and focusing on mouthfeel instead.

 

[Yooper]

Flaked barley is a "must have" in a stout for body and mouthfeel. Oats are "slick" and creamy and oily, and to me make a beer seem thinner so I'd use oats only if you want that creamy flavor.

Mash at 156 to 158, and use other body builders in the grainbill. I don't see a benefit to a "double mash" or an insanely high FG but I hate super sweet things as a rule.

 

[TheMadKing]

Lactose also adds body and mouthfeel. It really gives a stout that creamy milk-like texture, but it also adds a LOT of sweetness, so it needs to be used in reasonable amounts (I would say 1.5lbs/5gallons absolute maximum in a VERY sweet beer)

 

[d3track]

Chocolate rye

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Flaked barley is a "must have" in a stout for body and mouthfeel. Oats are "slick" and creamy and oily, and to me make a beer seem thinner so I'd use oats only if you want that creamy flavor.

Mash at 156 to 158, and use other body builders in the grainbill. I don't see a benefit to a "double mash" or an insanely high FG but I hate super sweet things as a rule.

So it's flaked barley and not roasted, right? Or both?

And yea, I'd assume mashing higher for fuller body, but again I wonder if it would matter if you had so many nonfermentables in the grist anyway?

With a double mash you'd only be using the thickest runnings, and then doing a long boil to make them even thicker... I could see that massively increasing mouthfeel as opposed to "diluting" it with the more watery 2nd running?
But I've never tried it so I don't really know.

Chocolate rye

That's it? Just add choc rye and instant huna viscosity??

 

[iijakii]

Of all the flaked stuff, rye seems to give the most oilyness to me. But yeah, agree with your comment in OP about that plus mash temp etc not being enough. The trick really seems to be insanely high OG and FG with the first-runnings only from what I've been reading recently. I've brewed some great stouts but nothing that approaches the thickness on those guys. Interested to hear what others have to say.

 

[atom]

unfermentables + a high mash temp + low fementation temp. My imperial stout just finished at 1.030 and the mouthfeel is very full (that's the uncarbed gravity sample). I even used a highly attenuative yeast (007)...i assume if i used something like 002. it may have finished even higher.

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Of all the flaked stuff, rye seems to give the most oilyness to me. But yeah, agree with your comment in OP about that plus mash temp etc not being enough. The trick really seems to be insanely high OG and FG with the first-runnings only from what I've been reading recently. I've brewed some great stouts but nothing that approaches the thickness on those guys. Interested to hear what others have to say.

Yeah. that's what I'm seeing the more I research, too...
Have you tried brewing with any of those methods? Results?

unfermentables + a high mash temp + low fementation temp. My imperial stout just finished at 1.030 and the mouthfeel is very full (that's the uncarbed gravity sample). I even used a highly attenuative yeast (007)...i assume if i used something like 002. it may have finished even higher.

Yeah... we have our most recent attempt bottled, and it stopped at 1.032. It's still not near the viscosity I'm looking for. I don't think it's JUST an issue of FG, there's gotta be more to it -- for example, we didn't use flaked barley in this last recipe, just a lot of oats. 3 lbs oats and only 1.75 lbs roasted barley.

Also, in using English strains, I've noticed they tend to max out around 12% abv (that's with a VERY healthy dose of O2, and supplementing with yeast nutrient/energizer). In addition, I feel that some of the esters they give off just dont taste... "right"... in a RIS.
I get some oilyness from that strain, and when coupled with a lot of oats, it's almost diacetyl-ish to me. In addition, I get a light fruitiness that I'm not really interested in tasting in my stouts.

just my .02

 

[d3track]

That's it? Just add choc rye and instant huna viscosity??

Yup!

But rye does give a thicker, somewhat oily body to the beer.

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Just to be clear...
what is "double mashing" ?

I've read that it is the same thing as "reiterated mashing", which was explained as basically sparging with the 1st runnings instead of just hot water.
That doesn't make sense to me, as you'd lose a lot of sugars and efficiency in doing it.

I've also read that it is doing two separate mashed and using only the 1st runnings from each, collected in the boil kettle.
This method makes a lot more sense.

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

^ Follow up to that...

how would I measure out the recipe?

if I'm doing two separate mashes, would I just split the recipe in half and put half the grains/strike water/sparge water in each of the two mash tuns?

Then collect appropriate volume in the boil kettle?

 

[KyleWolf]

Just to be clear...
what is "double mashing" ?

I've read that it is the same thing as "reiterated mashing", which was explained as basically sparging with the 1st runnings instead of just hot water.
That doesn't make sense to me, as you'd lose a lot of sugars and efficiency in doing it.

I've also read that it is doing two separate mashed and using only the 1st runnings from each, collected in the boil kettle.
This method makes a lot more sense.

When you are describing "reiterated mashing" are you saying, two mash tuns, using the first runnings from mash tun #1 to sparge mash tun #2, and then using your actual sparge water to run through mash tun #1 into mash tun #2 and into boil kettle?

Or, are you saying basically you have 1 mash tun and you basically do a single gigantic vorlauf?

I only ask because I find the first method to significantly increase my efficiency on high OG batches (1.110 or higher). The second method I agree and don't have many thoughts on it.

Yup!

But rye does give a thicker, somewhat oily body to the beer.

I agree, rye adds a ton of viscosity, and somewhat oily, but that character actually works really well to add thickness to the beer.

Additionally, IMO, chocolate rye is probably the most under-rated grain out there. This grain doesn't have the astringent characters many darker grains possess and as a result, you can pile it on in your recipe for a really great chocolate flavor. (I use 1.5lb of chocolate rye in my 5 gallon 6% american stout and it is perfect.

 

[KyleWolf]

^ Follow up to that...

how would I measure out the recipe?

if I'm doing two separate mashes, would I just split the recipe in half and put half the grains/strike water/sparge water in each of the two mash tuns?

Then collect appropriate volume in the boil kettle?

You have a few options here.

I say first, assuming your two mash tuns are the same size and relative shape, I would weigh our your grain out separately (basically weigh out two separate "batches"), this could help ensure you get equal distribution of base malt and specialty grains.

Then, for your mash, each "batch" would go into a mash tun. you would then mash-in with the appropriate amount of mash-water.

Here is where an option comes in and I am not really sure which would work better.

If you calculate that using just a normal mash ratio (1.25qt water/lb grain) won't get you your needed boil volume, you can do one of two things:

1) increase your mash water volume so your first runnings (no sparge) will equal your boil volume. This will result in a thinner mash, but potentially better efficiency.

2) mash in per the norm and use a small amount of sparge water to hit your correct boil volume.

the benefit I see from option 1 is that you can use all of your sparge water to create a 2nd lower OG beer. You can obviously still do this with option 2, but I just figure the math is easier with option 1. I am not really sure which option would give you the best efficiency though.

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Well here's what I'm planning for the experiment:

2 separate mash tuns.
In EACH:
6# maris
8 oz ea of Flaked Barley, Flaked Oats, Roasted Barley, C60, Choc. (Could add some flaked wheat or choc rye here - would prob not use rye, I don't like the spiciness)

using a little over 5 gal strike water in EACH mash tun. Comes out to about 2.5 qt/lb, but I haven't seen anything that says this is a bad idea or would be counterproductive.

Will collect the first runnings of each into the boil kettle, can top up for volume if necessary.
2 hour boil.

WLP001 starter.

Thoughts? Recommendations?

Sorry to ignore all the "rye" requests. I'm not a huge fan of it. If it adds oiliness, I feel the same could be accomplished with more oats or flaked barley, right?

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

When you are describing "reiterated mashing" are you saying, two mash tuns, using the first runnings from mash tun #1 to sparge mash tun #2, and then using your actual sparge water to run through mash tun #1 into mash tun #2 and into boil kettle?

Or, are you saying basically you have 1 mash tun and you basically do a single gigantic vorlauf?

Neither, really...

I'm confused on what the ACTUAL meaning of the term "double mash" is.
If you google it, all results are REITERATED mashing, which seems to be a colossal waste, IMO. Washing the grain bed with wort isn't going to extract as many sugars as just using sparge water would (at least, I would think, scientifically speaking - I could be wrong).

"Double Mash" would make more sense if it meant - you have TWO mashes (could be in the same vessel, one after another, or in two separate vessels).
You do each mash, and collect only the first runnings in the boil kettle.

No grains are rinsed with wort. That seems wasteful (again, I could be very wrong here... would love to know for sure)

 

[KyleWolf]

Neither, really...

I'm confused on what the ACTUAL meaning of the term "double mash" is.
If you google it, all results are REITERATED mashing, which seems to be a colossal waste, IMO. Washing the grain bed with wort isn't going to extract as many sugars as just using sparge water would (at least, I would think, scientifically speaking - I could be wrong).

"Double Mash" would make more sense if it meant - you have TWO mashes (could be in the same vessel, one after another, or in two separate vessels).
You do each mash, and collect only the first runnings in the boil kettle.

No grains are rinsed with wort. That seems wasteful (again, I could be very wrong here... would love to know for sure)

This is how I have always "double mashed" when doing a beer I can not fit in a single mash tun. (the numbers given are from the last recipe I did this way, which was 11gal Imperial Stout)

For you though, I would double mash, and make it so you end up with 5-6 gallons of wort from the first runnings and then add 1-1.5gal of sparge water double-decker like I did, for a quick rinse to bring you up to volume (assuming a 2hr boil).

Also, for what it is worth, doing the reiterated mash isn't futile. Yes, sparge water will rinse grain better than first runnings, but first runnings will still pull extra sugars out of the grain bed, and it runs the benefit of not increasing your volume. It isn't hugely efficient, but it will net you a few extra gravity points, which is never bad.

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Thank you for the graphic. I'm a visual learner, so that helped a lot.

I was basically thinking exactly what you said - only I wasn't using the wort in series (wort from MT1 goes to sparge MT2. Sparge from MT1 goes to sparge MT2, then into BK, etc).


Unfortunately, this experimental brew day was a train wreck that was poorly planned and I missed a lot of targets, volume ended up waaaay off, ph was off, gravity off, etc. so I won't have any results to report. Just hoping there's a salvageable beer in the end lol

but if nothing else, it's a learning process. I'll have to go back over the software and figure out what went wrong.

Weirdest thing was that I only collected a whopping 6 gal of wort from BOTH mash tuns. Which, doesn't work for a 2 hour boil.
And we started with 11 gal of water. 5.3 strike in each.
Not sure what happened, but that's VERY off from the Beersmith calcs
(I probably put something in incorrectly)

 

[KyleWolf]

Thank you for the graphic. I'm a visual learner, so that helped a lot.

I was basically thinking exactly what you said - only I wasn't using the wort in series (wort from MT1 goes to sparge MT2. Sparge from MT1 goes to sparge MT2, then into BK, etc).


Unfortunately, this experimental brew day was a train wreck that was poorly planned and I missed a lot of targets, volume ended up waaaay off, ph was off, gravity off, etc. so I won't have any results to report. Just hoping there's a salvageable beer in the end lol

but if nothing else, it's a learning process. I'll have to go back over the software and figure out what went wrong.

Weirdest thing was that I only collected a whopping 6 gal of wort from BOTH mash tuns. Which, doesn't work for a 2 hour boil.
And we started with 11 gal of water. 5.3 strike in each.
Not sure what happened, but that's VERY off from the Beersmith calcs
(I probably put something in incorrectly)

How much grain did you start with? I only ask because with the beer that was the base for my numbers in the graphic above, I would have only gotten 6-6.5gal of wort if I hadn't sparged.

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Recipe was:
(in EACH mash tun)
6# Maris, 0.5# each: choc, c60, roast barley, flaked oats, flaked barley, 0.25# choc rye.

5.3 gal strike water in each.
Beersmith says 1.2 gal absorption (each MT).
So, theoretically, I should've had 8.2 gal total in the boil kettle.
pre-boil vol was just barely over 6 gal.

I'm guessing Beersmith made that calculation assuming the other 1 gal it recommended for sparging? That'd make sense if each MT got 1 gal of sparge water, should hit ~8 gal pre-boil?
(That's what I ended up doing anyway, but kinda defeated the purpose of a '1st running only' experiment)

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Revisiting this...
recently had a chance to try Toppling Goliath Assassin and it just drove me back into obsessing over this "max viscosity in stouts" issue.

I've had decent luck with using WLP002, good amount of nonfermentables and flaked oats, high mash temp, and 2-3 hour boil. FG around 1.040 or so.
Takes some months to mellow out if I really push that strain into the 10-12% ABV territory, but it works.

(I also don't really understand if the 2-3 hr boil is even necessary. I get the concept of a 'reduction', like in cooking, but I'm not sure that's the ticket - you could theoretically just boil any beer for 6 hrs and have sludge if that were the case?)

Having said that - that stout turned out more in the ballpark of a Bottle Logic or Fremont stout. Not quite in the Double Barrel Huna, Toppling Goliath, Vanilla Rye arena of viscosity.

What else can it be?
I feel like the only thing I haven't (successfully) tried is doing multiple mashes and 1st runnings only.
That experiment was a disaster (that made a decent porter ultimately haha)

Is that the key? Just do several mashes and only take 1st runnings? If so, what are the water/grist ratios like on that? How would you input that into Beersmith?

Does blending play a role at some point? I know DB Huna is blended, and I think I read that some TG stouts are too...
but it would stand to reason that if blending makes a more 'viscous' beer, then you would have to have a MORE viscous beer to start with in the blending process (IE; one that is almost undrinkable due to consistency, so that it blends out to something nice when mixed).

What about yeast strains?
what are everyone's favorite yeast strains for crazy thick viscosity and mouthfeel in stouts?

Sorry to be beating this into the ground - but I'm sure we've all gotten obsessed over something in our brewing careers, and couldn't let go till we figured it out

 

[StopTakingMyUsername]

Following up on this in case anyone finds this thread later...

Did a stout brew day that got messed up, but gave me more insight.

Mashed high ~154, 2 hr boil, high FG (1.036), but FORGOT the oats

It's thinnish even at 1.036 so the oats make a HUGE difference.
Not ruling out the other things, but the oats are a major key.

Not sure if the longer boil made much difference. I'd love to do a 5 hr boil and see, but equipment limitations prevent it.

Did mostly first runnings (beersmith set to BIAB for calcs) too.

Curious as to what yeasts give the most mouthfeel in you guys experience?

 

[Skpb609]

Hello. I know I’m a little late to this but you’ve got me interested good sir. Have you had any updates to this?