No-Sparge article in current BYO magazine -- Thoughts?

[bobbytuck]

There's a great article in the most recent BYO magazine about no-sparge brewing. I know this has been discussed to death here -- no-sparge, fly, batch, hybrid -- but a couple points in the article peaked my interest:

- The author talks about how *decreasing* efficiency actually made his session beers taste better. He mentions how his efficient 80-85% beers were sometimes watery -- thin -- and that thanks to some emails with Jamil, the author realized that perhaps his efficiency was too high -- so he aimed for a 70% instead of 85% efficiency. The result, wrote the author, was a malty taste and smell similar to grain straight out of the bag -- intense, rich, fresh.

- The way he did achieved this strong malt presence was by *increasing* the mash thickness to 2.5+ quarts per pound (as opposed to the normal 1.2 to 1.5) and essentially mashing with all the water necessary for his pre-boil (7.25 gallons ). In other words, he used 12 pounds of grain in a 9+ gallon mash to get his 7.25 pre-boil/5.5 post-boil (figuring in grain absorption and MLT dead space). He skipped the sparge entirely.

I'm doing a Winter Warmer tomorrow and plan on giving this a try. I've got 14.75 pounds of grain -- 2-row and a little bit of C60 with 5% cherrywood smoked malt. I may also throw a little bit of special roast. So I'll probably have 15 pounds total. If I'd mash at 154F with my normal 1.75quarts per pound -- and with my usual 80-85% efficiency and 60 min fly sparge -- I should get a OG (post-boil) of 1.075 .

With the no-sparge method, I'll mash with 9.6 gallons of water and -- from what I understand -- will most likely get about 65-70% efficiency. I'm hoping to get 1.048 post-boil or so from the mash. Not exactly a Winter Warmer style-wise -- at least based on the result I should get from the no-sparge -- but I'm hoping it'll be a decent session beer with a good, strong malt presence. My MLT is a 15 gallon blichmann, so I should be fine in terms of MLT size.

I'll report my results here, but I'm curious if anyone does this no-sparge/thin mash regularly. I'll mash for 90 mins (my usual) but I'm guessing I won't need the entire time (thereby cutting not only the sparge out of my brewday but also part of the mash -- maybe saving upwards of 60-75 minutes or so from my usual 7.5 hours).

A benefit here -- and one that I'm really curious to see -- is that I can measure the pre-boil OG directly from the mash (in addition to my measuring and adjusting the pH).

Anyway, any comments? Suggestions? Warnings?

(Obviously, I can increase my grain bill by 1/3 to account for the no-sparge and hit the original OG. But I'm not able to get the grain in time, so I'll just take the hit in efficiency, change the style a bit, and see what happens.)

 

[Yooper]

I enjoyed that article. I think it was Jamil Zainasheff who first suggested (at least in "public" and not in brewing texts) that a lowered efficiency (65-75%) produced a higher quality wort, at least in homebrewing.

The only issues I see with no-sparge for me would be pH issues, due to a super thin mash. I have alkaline water, and find that I can do some water adjustments pretty easily with diluting with RO water and using some salts. In a stout, I can go up to about 1.75 quarts/pound before my pH gets higher. I'd have to play around with it quite a bit to change and start doing a thinner mash, although I have mashed up to 2 quarts/pound in the past and diluted more with RO to keep my pH in range.

I'm very interested in hearing your results, and seeing if your efficiency takes such a huge hit. I'd like to hear your perceptions on whether you got a "higher quality wort", also, but unless you mashed two batches side-by-side, I don't know if you'd really be able to tell if they differed.

 

[rjsnau]

Why don't you decrease the batch size to get closer to your original SG target? That would give you the same style beer with the benefits of no sparging. Just my thought. Seems like you are changing the body of the beer more than any benefits you would get from no sparging. Plus don't forget that your hop utilization may change with a weaker beer also.

Good luck either way and let us know how it turns out. I read the same article and am interested in trying this myself!

 

[LVBen]

I started doing no-sparge about 10 brews ago. I made one of my best beers that way, because I was trying to brew a beer as quickly as I could after reading and posting in one of those 'shortest brew day' threads. I did no-sparge and no-chill, and it took almost exactly 3 hours. I've switched back to immersion chilling, but I've been doing the no-sparge ever since. I put all of my water in up front. I put 7 gallons of water in with my entire grain bill, and then I mash. Most of my mashes have been around 2.8 quarts per pound. I get about 6 gallons of wort pre-boil and boil down to 5 gallons. It saves lots of time and I get great efficiency too (around 80%). I've done it with pale beers and some darker beers too and they all came out great.

 

[AnOldUR]

The only issues I see with no-sparge for me would be pH issues, due to a super thin mash . . . I can go up to about 1.75 quarts/pound before my pH gets higher.

Using Denny's no-sparge description you don't have to be concerned with mash thickness. You can consider a large mash-out infusion to be the same as any other infusion used to step up the temperature during your mash. Any liquid added to the mash before the first lauter is an infusion not a sparge. You get all the advantages, without the pH problems of a thin mash.

No Sparge Brewing​

As described by John Palmer in his BYO article “Skip the Sparge” (May-June 2003), a no sparge brew has the entire volume of “sparge” water added to the mash and stirred in before any runoff has taken place. Even though additional water has been added, since it’s been added to the mash before runoff has begun, we can more properly think of it as a mash infusion, rather than a sparge addition...hence the name “no-sparge”. This method is the easiest way to mash, but at the expense of poor extraction, typically 50%. The advantage, though, is that because all the sugar from the mash is in solution from the agitation of adding the water, lauter design has minimal effect.

 

[Yooper]

Using Denny's no-sparge description you don't have to be concerned with mash thickness. You can consider a large mash-out infusion to be the same as any other infusion used to step up the temperature during your mash. Any liquid added to the mash before the first lauter is an infusion not a sparge. You get all the advantages, without the pH problems of a thin mash.

Yes, I understand that. But they are talking about putting ALL of the water into the mash, and mashing thinner, not doing Denny's "no sparge" version which really seems more like a "no sparge but traditionalal mash with a mash-out" version.

I read the OP and others saying that they are mashing will ALL of the water like the BIAB people do. And having a super thin mash. I know my pH would skyrocket if I doubled up on the water in the mash.

 

[bobbytuck]

I hadn't considered the pH angle of a thinner mash. I measure my pH with a meter at dough-in and then monitor it with samples every 10 minutes or so. I brew with Chicago/Lake Michigan water and and can usually fall within 5.3 to 5.5 (at room temp) with an ounce or two of acidulated malt to a normal 10-12 pound grain bill. I tend to favor darker, roastier brews -- so the roast malt -- along with whatever caramel -- usually helps with the pH.

Up until now, I acidify my sparge water in my HLT with 88% phosphoric acid. Usually, 6ml of acid brings down 15-16 gallons of sparge water from my out-of-the-tap pH of 7.7 to 5.8. However, this is my *sparge* water -- water I add after the mash. My calculations for my mash pH are based on my normal filtered tap water for the mash. (Then I add the acidified sparge).

Here -- with this no-sparge and the 2.5+ qt/lb thin mash -- how does that specifically impact pH? I use Bru'n water, and I plan to enter a sparge of 0 gallons.

Is the main issue with a super-thin mash that the mash won't drop into your target due to the extra water? In other words, it might require additional acid malt?

(I ask because I hadn't thought of the pH issue. I haven't had time yet to see how Bru'n water adjusts. )

I read the OP and others saying that they are mashing will ALL of the water like the BIAB people do. And having a super thin mash. I know my pH would skyrocket if I doubled up on the water in the mash.

Now, when you say your pH would skyrocket, you mean that your pH won't drop as low, correct? In other words, if your pH tends to fall around 5.5 or so in a normal mash -- in a thin, no-sparge mash might only make it fall to 5.7, correct? So you might need to add additional lactic acid, phosphoric, or acidulated malt?

Adding grain to a thin can't make pH go *up* right? It just doesn't fall as far when measured. (Just want to make sure I understand this.)

 

[Yooper]

(I ask because I hadn't thought of the pH issue. I haven't had time yet to see how Bru'n water adjusts. )


Now, when you say your pH would skyrocket, you mean that your pH won't drop as low, correct? In other words, if your pH tends to fall around 5.5 or so in a normal mash -- in a thin, no-sparge mash might only make it fall to 5.7, correct? So you might need to add additional lactic acid, phosphoric, or acidulated malt?

Adding grain to a thin can't make pH go *up* right? It just doesn't fall as far when measured. (Just want to make sure I understand this.)

Yes, that's what I mean. I use RO dilution and acid malt and some salts to get to a good mash pH. My sparge water is acidified with lactic acid.

You're right- the pH won't go up. It just won't go down as low.

I know that MANY brewers do BIAB with a full volume mash. I've never done it, so I don't know about any pH issues that may come about (or not).

 

[Spartan1979]

Which issue is this article in?

 

[bobbytuck]

November/December 2011.

 

[1MadScientist]

It sounds like they are talking about full volume BIAB without saying actually saying the word.

Many of us do this. I have some photos in my link below. I like BIAB a lot.

If you have good tasting water use it and their shouldn't be a problem with pH under most conditions, otherwise get your water tested and use ezwater spreadsheet... just my 2C.

EDIT: I read that the OP does this, I'm just speaking in general terms. I don't get into pH into detail, just trying to do my due diligence by testing water and using a spreadsheet.

It's an option to raise to mash out temps and also squeeze the bag/compress the grain. Let us know how it comes out.

 

[bbrim]

I've done a couple no-sparge brews recently. I got the idea from "Brewing Better Beers." I hit between 62-65%, not too terrible. I mashed with 1.5 qt/lbs and then mashed out with a pretty typical infusion. I ended up topping up with about 2G of water both times. They were small beers and among the best beers I made this summer, if not the very best. The malt character is definitely significantly improved as compared to other small beers I have made in the past. My other small beers have always had an efficiency around 85% and I think I have had noticeable tannins in a couple of them.

 

[Scooby_Brew]

The way I would set up the equipment for "no sparge" is to go without the cooler mash tun and use the boiling kettle to mash instead, similar to BIAB . Mash in the kettle without the bag and then lauter in the bottling bucket using the bag for filtering. That would be a cheap and simple set up for a beginner sort of like BIAB with lautering. Still fast cheap and easy but clearer beer and less trub in the fermenter.

Sent from my DROIDX using Home Brew Talk

 

[Reelale]

No-sparge? Is there any other way? I brew with two vessels, a BK and a mash tun, hooked together via a RIMS tube/March Pump. I can mash at whatever thickness I choose to. I just find it easiest to treat the entire volume of water and mash/recirculate the entire time. I usually mash in with 2 qts/lbs. or so. My recipes are set at 62% efficiency, and I'm usually quite close, rarely exceeding 65%. I also find no real requirement for a mash-out, as the runnings are draining into an already starting-to-boil kettle. I've found that it takes about 10-12% extra grain, as opposed to traditional sparge methods. Well worth it for me. As for the pH issues, I've found no problems with a thin mash and I do measure with a meter. As a matter of routine, I add 1% acid malt to all light beer grain bills. Dark beers take care of themselves.

 

[Yooper]

Yes, that's what I mean. I use RO dilution and acid malt and some salts to get to a good mash pH. My sparge water is acidified with lactic acid.

You're right- the pH won't go up. It just won't go down as low.

I know that MANY brewers do BIAB with a full volume mash. I've never done it, so I don't know about any pH issues that may come about (or not).

I just spent some time with the EZ water calculator spreadsheet and plugged in different mash volumes (ignoring any sparge volumes of course).

If I went from 1.5 quarts/pound to up to 3 quarts/pound, the mash pH would not change as much as I first assumed. It would change from something like 5.5 to 5.69. That's a big jump, but certainly manageable with more acid malt or more RO water and/or more salts.

I think it's definitely worth trying, and I may do that on one of my next 5 gallon batches. (I don't have a big enough MLT to do the full volume on a 10 gallon batch).

 

[wilserbrewer]

It sounds like they are talking about full volume BIAB without saying actually saying the word.

Funny, this is exactly what I thought after reading the article. Through my laziness I have been brewing BIAB lately and have had some tasty brews. I alos think the BIAB has led me towards higher mash temps and that has also played a role in nicer brews. Since I lose about 3-4 degrees in an hour, I strike and start the mash high and let it dwindle...been working well...

 

[bobbytuck]

I just spent some time with the EZ water calculator spreadsheet and plugged in different mash volumes (ignoring any sparge volumes of course).

If I went from 1.5 quarts/pound to up to 3 quarts/pound, the mash pH would not change as much as I first assumed. It would change from something like 5.5 to 5.69. That's a big jump, but certainly manageable with more acid malt or more RO water and/or more salts.

.

Yep -- I found the same thing, Yooper. I'm using Bru'n water, but it looks like 2oz of acidulated malt should bring the mash into the 5.3 pH range (measured at room temp) despite my 9.5 gallon mash (about 3 gallons more than I'd usually mash with for 15 pounds of grain).

I'm excited to try this out tomorrow.

BTW -- I could make a smaller batch as pointed out earlier, but because I've got an electric HERMS with my 5500W heating element at the 5.5 gallon mark in my 15 gallon boil kettle, I hesitate to go any lower than 5 gallons at full boil. 5 gallons boiling like crazy will keep the element covered but any less and I risk exposing the element. If I were brewing with propane, I'd definitely make a smaller batch and attempt to hit my original gravity for my Winter Warmer.

 

[mychalg9]

Can someone elaborate on the reason for a pH change in a thinner mash? I recently read in Jamils book Brewing Classic Styles that a high-acidity wort may produce extremely bitter beer, which seems to be exactly the problem I have been having on my last few beers, only I just figured this out three days ago. I am looking for a reason why I would have such high acidity, and it may be because of a thin mash? I've only done 2 AG batches and they both seem to have this bitter problem. The last beer I mashed on the full volume (4 gal of water for my 2.5 gal recipe) and it tastes very bitter still. Is there something I could/should be doing to correct or contain my mash pH? Hopefully this makes sense enough to get a good answer that can help. Thanks in advance!

 

[mychalg9]

Oops I forgot to mention that I am doing full volume BIAB

 

[eastoak]

the best beers i've made so far have been no sparge. i was hoping the article would talk about why there is such a flavor difference but it seems to be an unknown. i'll be interested to see if more people here try this and what their experience is as far as flavor.

 

[lex990]

Why not just go biab and save yourself having to clean a mash tun if you are doing no sparge. I recently hit 75% eff on my first all grain and biab and it was super easy. Same clean up as extract time was 4.5 hrs for mash boil and clean up

 

[jkarp]

Worth pointing out that a great many of us here have been doing no-sparge brewing for years with Brutus 20 designs. This article covered much of the same territory mine did back in Nov. 09.

 

[pvtschultz]

Is it just me, or do home brewing publications intentionally discount BiaB as a legitimate brewing method? I read the entire article and all that was running through my mind the whole time was BiaB. As I see it, the only drawback to BiaB compared to traditional MT brewing methods is that you don't have a grain bed to filter the wort. Some here have devised recirculating BiaB methods but all require a pump.

 

[eastoak]

Is it just me, or do home brewing publications intentionally discount BiaB as a legitimate brewing method? I read the entire article and all that was running through my mind the whole time was BiaB. As I see it, the only drawback to BiaB compared to traditional MT brewing methods is that you don't have a grain bed to filter the wort. Some here have devised recirculating BiaB methods but all require a pump.

BYO magazine does not discount BIAB brewing but it is mostly aimed at 3 vessel brewing. http://www.byo.com/component/content/article/20/1852 there are more but this was the first one i found.

 

[Huck-E-bear]

I just read the article today and I did it for a smoked beer. This is my first attempt. With 12 lbs of grain I achieved a 1.054 gravity reading. So far so good. And a very simple method. I will let you know more as time goes on as to the malt character in the beer, and maybe I will do the calculation to see my efficiency.

 

[bobbytuck]

As a follow-up to my original post, I've tried this no-sparge method with several beers now -- and I'm finally actually tasting one finished product (with one more to come in about two weeks).

The results are fantastic -- better than I'd hoped. The malt character is definitely something I've never had in any of my brews -- big and malty and definitely unlike anything I've gotten with my fly-sparging. It's actually exactly like the article suggested -- rich, explosive malt. It's fascinating, actually, to get this kind of character from a homebrew -- especially when it's nicely balanced with the hops and not at all "overly malty."

It feels weird to mash so thin with 2.8 to 3 qts/lb -- especially when I'm used to using 1.5 qts/lb or thereabouts -- but the thin mash definitely doesn't impact the overall flavor or mouthfeel of the beer. It's nice to take gravity readings directly from the mash. I mashed for 90 mins, no mash-out. pH at mash-in was a bit higher -- around 5.8 -- so I ended up using a tiny, tiny bit of 88% phosphoric acid to bring the reading down to 5.45. I was targeting anywhere from 5.4 to 5.5 at room temp -- so this worked well.

In terms of efficiency, I managed about 62% with this method on an eHERMS system with constant mash recirc. I usually get anywhere from 75 to 85% with fly-sparging -- so the efficiency hit meant (in the case of a smoked ale -- my first no-sparge attempt -- using 85% 2-row, 10% cherrywood, 5% C60) using 1.3X more grain in order to hit my desired grav reading of 1.065. Ended up around 1.017 with 2 weeks @ 62F with Safale-05. I guesstimated the 1.3X additional grain (based on reading and the suggestions in the article) -- and simply multiplied each grain by 1.3 to get the new totals.

Two thumbs up for this method. Biggest single flavor improvement in my beer since I started monitoring pH!

 

[1MadScientist]

Oops I forgot to mention that I am doing full volume BIAB

It's not your full volume BIAB, I do that too!

Look into testing your water, using ezwater and you will probably find you need to add some calcium chloride and epsom salt.

A higher acidic pH does accenuate the bittering hops, based on the style beer you are talking about, look at bringing your water into the 'balanced' range using ezwater.

 

[-TH-]

Chalk up another satisfied customer to the no sparge method. Tasted my first one after only a couple days in the keg and wow tastes great. I did it no-mash-out as well so my mash was thin at 2.6 qt/lb (9.75 gal starting water -> 8 gal preboil -> 6 gal post boil -> 5.5 gal cooled and in fermentor), but ezwater still predicted pH dead nuts at 5.5 :rockin:.

Effeciency was bad - 58%, but it was only in 60's prior - I suspect crush at LHBS because others there have same issue, in fact LHBS is getting a new commercial-model mill this month for this reason. I'm thinking about doing a mashout next time simply because I can't heat all my water at once anyway and this way I could heat the second amount of water while mashing. I'm wondering (without searching at all yet) what the benefits (if any) of a mash-out would be...

 

[Reelale]

Chalk up another satisfied customer to the no sparge method. Tasted my first one after only a couple days in the keg and wow tastes great. I did it no-mash-out as well so my mash was thin at 2.6 qt/lb (9.75 gal starting water -> 8 gal preboil -> 6 gal post boil -> 5.5 gal cooled and in fermentor), but ezwater still predicted pH dead nuts at 5.5 :rockin:.

Effeciency was bad - 58%, but it was only in 60's prior - I suspect crush at LHBS because others there have same issue, in fact LHBS is getting a new commercial-model mill this month for this reason. I'm thinking about doing a mashout next time simply because I can't heat all my water at once anyway and this way I could heat the second amount of water while mashing. I'm wondering (without searching at all yet) what the benefits (if any) of a mash-out would be...

The only real benefit of a mash-out in no-sparge would be the viscosity of the wort at the higher temperature, IMO. Might increase efficiency up to a point. I don't bother with them anymore. My recipes are formulated for 62% efficiency and I sometimes hit 67%. Good enough for me.

 

[cadarnell]

I'm pretty new to this, but i do BIAB with a mashout and have been getting 75%-ish eff. for the last several batches ... I do it on my stovetop and sometimes I have to top off, but even then I seem to get over 70% eff. .... I have the grain double crushed.