OP
OP
Thunder_Chicken
Well-Known Member
It gave me the requisite IBUs per the calculator. Is there a reason you question it?
Protein and Saccharification Rest Schedule
- Thread starter Thunder_Chicken
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
It gave me the requisite IBUs per the calculator. Is there a reason you question it?
Well, because you're saying the beer is too sweet. And that probably means it's underbittered.
OP
OP
Thunder_Chicken
Well-Known Member
I agree, but how could I determine that beforehand? Absent experience the calculators are the best first guess-timate that one can make. I don't know (yet) what 33 IBUs tastes like.
The way this beer hits my tongue is first a bite of bitterness followed by a tidal wave of sweet, sticky malt. Upping bitterness would probably help, but something is screwed up in the balance and I can't quite pin it down. It is malty and it just won't quit.
Perhaps it's the crystal malt, if your recipe is accurate. It's rare for a really tasty recipe to have nearly 7% of crystal 140L- that would taste like raisins and toffee.
Try cutting the crystal malt (this is a one gallon batch, right?) to half of what you have in the recipe, and increasing the bittering hops to 60 minutes.
It's a 2.5 gallon batch.
OP
OP
Thunder_Chicken
Well-Known Member
I think it is the Crystal that is kicking my butt.
I think I need to back away from the Crystal for a while and maybe do some very simple single-grain brews. Maybe I should just brew a straight extract (I've heard that Muntons Light DME is all pale 2-row, and Northern Brewer sells Maris Otter liquid extract). A pure extract brew should ferment out about as dry as it is possible to get, right? Then once I know what the baseline is I could then start adding in specialty grains and working up to partial mash.
I think I need to back away from the Crystal for a while and maybe do some very simple single-grain brews. Maybe I should just brew a straight extract (I've heard that Muntons Light DME is all pale 2-row, and Northern Brewer sells Maris Otter liquid extract). A pure extract brew should ferment out about as dry as it is possible to get, right? Then once I know what the baseline is I could then start adding in specialty grains and working up to partial mash.
![Craft A Brew - Safale S-04 Dry Yeast - Fermentis - English Ale Dry Yeast - For English and American Ales and Hard Apple Ciders - Ingredients for Home Brewing - Beer Making Supplies - [1 Pack]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41fVGNh6JfL._SL500_.jpg)
Muntons Light DME is a mixture of English 2-row (not Maris Otter), carapils, and light crystal.
Muntons Extra Light DME is a mixture of English 2-row and carapils.
Pure extract beer styles do not ferment out as well as their partial mash or all grain counterparts. With pure extract, you have zero control on mash temp. and very low control on grain selection and %'s of those grains. If you want more dryness, extract brews require about 7-12% simple sugars and enough vigorous healthy attenuating yeast to dry out a couple points closer, and even then, they probably won't turn out as dry as a mashed AG/PM version.
Muntons Extra Light DME is a mixture of English 2-row and carapils.
Pure extract beer styles do not ferment out as well as their partial mash or all grain counterparts. With pure extract, you have zero control on mash temp. and very low control on grain selection and %'s of those grains. If you want more dryness, extract brews require about 7-12% simple sugars and enough vigorous healthy attenuating yeast to dry out a couple points closer, and even then, they probably won't turn out as dry as a mashed AG/PM version.
OP
OP
Thunder_Chicken
Well-Known Member
Isn't DME simply spray-dried wort? I thought that it was basically the product of a mash process - mixed with water, heated at rests to convert starches, and then spray dried? If they were to do a low temperature conversion, wouldn't the DME be just as dry as doing the same mash at home?
It would be convenient if maltsters illustrated their ingredients, amount of ingredients, mash time, and mash temps, but they usually don't provide this info. The grain they used to create the DME is presumably being mashed in the mid 150s for 45-60 minutes and then boiled under pressure before being spray-dried.
So say if you used 50% 2-row and 50% Extra Light DME in an IPA recipe. You would have 50% control over the final mash temperature, but it would have to be a ballpark guess considering you are using a portion of extract.
Example: If you employed a 146 F mash temp vs. the 154 F "guess" of a mash temp that the maltster possibly relied on... then on a good day, you might equalize to somewhere around a 150 F. Do you see how an extract or partial mash brewer would never get close to an all-grain brewer chose to fully mash at 146 F? Mash temp is directly related to the fermentability of the wort.
So say if you used 50% 2-row and 50% Extra Light DME in an IPA recipe. You would have 50% control over the final mash temperature, but it would have to be a ballpark guess considering you are using a portion of extract.
Example: If you employed a 146 F mash temp vs. the 154 F "guess" of a mash temp that the maltster possibly relied on... then on a good day, you might equalize to somewhere around a 150 F. Do you see how an extract or partial mash brewer would never get close to an all-grain brewer chose to fully mash at 146 F? Mash temp is directly related to the fermentability of the wort.
OP
OP
Thunder_Chicken
Well-Known Member
Let me see if I have this right - if you mash at a lower temperature (let's say 147F) vs a higher temperature (155F), both are achieving some conversion of starch to sugar from the alpha and beta amylase reactions, but the sugars produced at the higher temperature are more complex / less fermentable than those produced at the lower temperature. Is this a correct summary?
So the reason that so many kit instructions say to mash at 150+ might be a nod to the fact that the average bloke might like a maltier, sweeter, heavier bodied brew. And similarly, DME manufacturers are pitching to a similar audience.
I see now why a lot of extract recipes have added dextrose or table sugar - they are trying to get the ABV up to proper levels without relying so much on LME/DME that might have a lot of unfermentable sugars.
So how would one balance malt and hops in a recipe with added sugar? In the extreme I could have a wort of pure table sugar boiled with hops - the OG/IBU ratio might look fine but I would essentially have a very dry, low body, bitter hop tea vs. beer.
So the reason that so many kit instructions say to mash at 150+ might be a nod to the fact that the average bloke might like a maltier, sweeter, heavier bodied brew. And similarly, DME manufacturers are pitching to a similar audience.
I see now why a lot of extract recipes have added dextrose or table sugar - they are trying to get the ABV up to proper levels without relying so much on LME/DME that might have a lot of unfermentable sugars.
So how would one balance malt and hops in a recipe with added sugar? In the extreme I could have a wort of pure table sugar boiled with hops - the OG/IBU ratio might look fine but I would essentially have a very dry, low body, bitter hop tea vs. beer.
Higher temperature mash produces more alpha amylase, which ends up giving you a wort with more dextrins.
A lot of all-grain recipes use table sugar, too. In particular, most of the Belgian Strong styles use simple sugars, which in some cases can be up to 20% of fermentables. So, it's not necessarily something confined to extract brewing, although that is one method to achieve a higher apparent attenuation.
So far as balancing goes, I think it just comes down to experience, to be honest. There are too many factors to consider, such as the amount of crystal malt in the recipe, the yeast strain, the mash profile, the simple sugars, etc. I have seen several calculators that try to predict FG using all these factors, but I've never seen one that is particularly accurate in my experience. Beersmith 2 now tries to incorporate this type of stuff into its estimates, but I haven't been too impressed with them in reality. It gets in the neighborhood, I suppose...most of the time. IIRC, Beersmith v1 just assumed 75% attenuation for any yeast and any recipe.
A lot of all-grain recipes use table sugar, too. In particular, most of the Belgian Strong styles use simple sugars, which in some cases can be up to 20% of fermentables. So, it's not necessarily something confined to extract brewing, although that is one method to achieve a higher apparent attenuation.
So far as balancing goes, I think it just comes down to experience, to be honest. There are too many factors to consider, such as the amount of crystal malt in the recipe, the yeast strain, the mash profile, the simple sugars, etc. I have seen several calculators that try to predict FG using all these factors, but I've never seen one that is particularly accurate in my experience. Beersmith 2 now tries to incorporate this type of stuff into its estimates, but I haven't been too impressed with them in reality. It gets in the neighborhood, I suppose...most of the time. IIRC, Beersmith v1 just assumed 75% attenuation for any yeast and any recipe.
OP
OP
Thunder_Chicken
Well-Known Member
I've read that you can convert extracts to more fermentable wort by performing a partial mash with high Lintner grains. Is that really so that you can convert dextrins to more fermentable sugars?
Dextrins won't convert to more fermentable sugars. At least, not fermentable by saccharomyces. They don't have the appropriate places in their molecular structure for the amylase to break them apart. However, there are other sugars of various levels of fermentability in extract. I am not convinced doing a partial mash with the extract later on is going to lead to a more fermentable wort, but I suppose I wouldn't rule it out without performing an experiment.
