"Modern" malts - what changed?

[The_Professor]

......I’m sure you are a super smart guy (especially since you call yourself the professor), but it wasn’t you that made the situation that you could make great malt, you did this on the backs of all those people before you that learned how and then further you have the benefit of putting it all together in a way that you can afford and relatively easily execute that that same exact man of your intelligence, virtue and industriousness had absolutely no chance of executing to the level you have in 1950...

Since I don't call myself "the professor" you may have flipped a bit on the wrong pseudonym

So, AZCoolerBrewer, in regards to "...you did this on the backs of all those people before you..."; this would be why all modern brewers worship Ninkasi to this day.

 

[bracconiere]

This. The single most definitive technology in modern malting, in my view, is the use digital controllers in kilns and other equipment. Being able to dial a number, "387F", and actually hit that temperature accurately and hold it consistently within 1 degree fahrenheit is nothing short of divine wizardry. From that digital precision controlling otherwise ancient processes, a whole host of techniques are open to the hobbyist market, from the manufacturers on down to the homebrew homesteaders. You can see this trend finally seeping into the brewing community itself with the use of electric kettles. Sitting in your driveway with a gas ring blazing away under a keggle is one of my favorite things, but I'm equally in love with my 8 gallon electric kettle that can get 7.5 gallons of water from 55F to 190F in under 45 minutes, and hold it there, all as I gaze out at the slush and snow.

as far as kilning and temp, my 200ohm mod for my oven probe, and a infrared thermometer helped me be able to make light beer again!

 

[lowtones84]

Does somebody have a more specific answer other than "more scientific techniques" for what makes modern malt "well modified" though? What exactly made it so that we don't need to be doing step mashes anymore, where 100 (maybe even 50?) years ago they would have to?

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Does somebody have a more specific answer other than "more scientific techniques" for what makes modern malt "well modified" though? What exactly made it so that we don't need to be doing step mashes anymore, where 100 (maybe even 50?) years ago they would have to?

Botany?

A better understanding between acrospire development, it's interplay with starch reserves and enzymes.

 

[maisch]

Does somebody have a more specific answer other than "more scientific techniques" for what makes modern malt "well modified" though? What exactly made it so that we don't need to be doing step mashes anymore, where 100 (maybe even 50?) years ago they would have to?

STOP!!!

Step mashes never had to be done. They were never a requirement. The British have been doing single infusion for hundreds of years.

Step mashing evolved as the science of mashing evolved. Tests were done to determine what was happening at the various temperatures and how each temperature could be used to its fullest.

Step mashing has nothing to do with malt modification but rather making use of certain properties of the malt at each temperature. Ferulic acid rest, Protein rest, Beta rest, Alpha rest, etc... None of those care about malt modification.

Grow the acrospires such that they're 75%-100% the length of the kernel and you've got "well modified" malt.
I'll say it again, "Grow the acrospires such that they're 75%-100% the length of the kernel and you've got "well modified" malt!"

That's really all there is to it. No magic involved.

The OP is correct in stating that "modern malts" and all terms referencing that phrase are fallacies.

Other posters are correct in stating that the ability to accurately maintain artificial temperature constraints was a huge step forward such that industrial malt operations could make large quantities of well modified malt (i.e. malt that was not over-modified (acrospires grows longer than kernel length) or under-modified (acrospires length was < 75% the length of the kernel)).

Step mashing isn't going to help over or under modified malts. Decoction mashing may help under modified malts by breaking cell walls through boiling but that's about it.

Why there's so much misunderstanding about such a simple topic is beyond me and why it keeps being repeated and misrepresented is also mystery.

 

[lowtones84]

Step mashes never had to be done. They were never a requirement. The British have been doing single infusion for hundreds of years.

Step mashing evolved as the science of mashing evolved. Tests were done to determine what was happening at the various temperatures and how each temperature could be used to its fullest.

Step mashing has nothing to do with malt modification but rather making use of certain properties of the malt at each temperature. Ferulic acid rest, Protein rest, Beta rest, Alpha rest, etc... None of those care about malt modification.

Grow the acrospires such that they're 75%-100% the length of the kernel and you've got "well modified" malt.
I'll say it again, "Grow the acrospires such that they're 75%-100% the length of the kernel and you've got "well modified" malt!"

Why there's so much misunderstanding about such a simple topic is beyond me and why it keeps being repeated and misrepresented is also mystery.

Ahh that makes total sense. It often does come down to misinformation being spread I suppose. Thanks!

 

[Big Monk]

STOP!!!

Step mashes never had to be done. They were never a requirement. The British have been doing single infusion for hundreds of years.

Step mashing evolved as the science of mashing evolved. Tests were done to determine what was happening at the various temperatures and how each temperature could be used to its fullest.

Step mashing has nothing to do with malt modification but rather making use of certain properties of the malt at each temperature. Ferulic acid rest, Protein rest, Beta rest, Alpha rest, etc... None of those care about malt modification.

Grow the acrospires such that they're 75%-100% the length of the kernel and you've got "well modified" malt.
I'll say it again, "Grow the acrospires such that they're 75%-100% the length of the kernel and you've got "well modified" malt!"

That's really all there is to it. No magic involved.

The OP is correct in stating that "modern malts" and all terms referencing that phrase are fallacies.

Other posters are correct in stating that the ability to accurately maintain artificial temperature constraints was a huge step forward such that industrial malt operations could make large quantities of well modified malt (i.e. malt that was not over-modified (acrospires grows longer than kernel length) or under-modified (acrospires length was < 75% the length of the kernel)).

Step mashing isn't going to help over or under modified malts. Decoction mashing may help under modified malts by breaking cell walls through boiling but that's about it.

Why there's so much misunderstanding about such a simple topic is beyond me and why it keeps being repeated and misrepresented is also mystery.

THANK YOU!!!

Well said and you spared me having to type it up myself.

I challenge anyone to state when the last time they used undermodified malt was.

Here’s a clue: Never.