quick again!

[applescrap]

2 hours and 20 minutes start to finish here is the brew log. 45-minute mash but extended cuz I stirred it. And 45 minutes boil no chill in kettle

 

[wilserbrewer]

That's about what I do, except I like to add the late hops once the wort cools a bit, say 170

 

[RM-MN]

2 hours and 20 minutes start to finish here is the brew log. 45-minute mash but extended cuz I stirred it. And 45 minutes boil no chill in kettle

You're taking too long. You could do a 30 minute mash and a 30 minute boil and cut half an hour off your brew day.

With all kidding aside, if your grains are milled finely, you really can do a 30 minute mash (maybe even a 20 minute mash, no shorter or you don't get the flavor). The bittering from the hops is about 90% complete in 30 minutes so you also could simply add a little more bittering hips or just do the no chill an get all the bittering you intended because the isomerizing of the hop oils that give the bitterness continues until the temperature gets below about 170. That's why Wilserbrewer waits until the wort cools below the 170 to add the flavor hops.:rockin:

 

[applescrap]

Thanks for the replies guys yeah that was what I was thinking wait to add flame out hops

 

[wilserbrewer]

FYI, Flame out hops are at flame out, if you wait for the wort to cool a bit that is called a hop stand.

 

[applescrap]

2hr 20 min again

Cascade smash

15pounds 2 row
1 oz 45
1oz flameout
No chilled

6oz dry hopped

 

[applescrap]

Pics

View attachment 1457067794271.jpg

View attachment 1457067805504.jpg

View attachment 1457067821461.jpg

 

[WiscBrewer]

Very quick alright! You might, though, want to take a look at the most recent Beersmith podcast. Charlie Bamforth talks about the need for a vigorous 60 to 90 minute boil to drive off flavors associated with DMS. Just a thought.

 

[RM-MN]

Very quick alright! You might, though, want to take a look at the most recent Beersmith podcast. Charlie Bamforth talks about the need for a vigorous 60 to 90 minute boil to drive off flavors associated with DMS. Just a thought.

I do a slow rolling boil for 30 minutes without DMS as do several others. Perhaps Charlie is overstating the likelihood of DMS.

 

[WiscBrewer]

I do a slow rolling boil for 30 minutes without DMS as do several others. Perhaps Charlie is overstating the likelihood of DMS.

There are probably a number of variables invoved, most of which I don't understand. When Charlie talks, I listen. Your process is working for you though, so it's hard to argue against that.

 

[pricelessbrewing]

There are probably a number of variables invoved, most of which I don't understand. When Charlie talks, I listen. Your process is working for you though, so it's hard to argue against that.

This article from Marshall over at brulosophy might be of interested to you.

I've never experienced DMS and have done 30 min boils rather often. Modern malsters are pretty awesome.

 

[WiscBrewer]

This article from Marshall over at brulosophy might be of interested to you.

I've never experienced DMS and have done 30 min boils rather often. Modern malsters are pretty awesome.

Interesting alright! Thanks for the link.

 

[applescrap]

Threw the 6 oz. In it was a lot!

Thank you for posting wisc

For such an archaic and common beverage it never ceases to amaze me how dogmatic people are. I have no idea who charlie is but he is spouting garbage. Most of this dogmatic idealism has basis only in theory not actuality yet arrogantly people pontificate the virtues of high mash vs low mash temp, boil times etc...yet in blind taste tests they couldnt tell the difference between a 148 and 160 degree mash. I am SO GLAD i saw the light before i bought a pump to recirculate.

View attachment 1457883059514.jpg

 

[Yooper]

Threw the 6 oz. In it was a lot!

Thank you for posting wisc

For such an archaic and common beverage it never ceases to amaze me how dogmatic people are. I have no idea who charlie is but he is spouting garbage. Most of this dogmatic idealism has basis only in theory not actuality yet arrogantly people pontificate the virtues of high mash vs low mash temp, boil times etc...yet in blind taste tests they couldnt tell the difference between a 148 and 160 degree mash. I am SO GLAD i saw the light before i bought a pump to recirculate.

Dr. Bamforth is very respected and a world renowned brewing professor. I would not say that he "spouts garbage". His basis is not only in theory, but indeed real life brewing applications. Plus, he's a super nice guy and really helpful to us homebrewers as well.

While many of us can give anecdotal evidence of good results, he can proof much of his "garbage" via sound chemistry and biology.

I'm excited that you love brewing quickly and love the product- and that makes it a great hobby for you. But many others brew great beer and have great products (and medals and ribbons and awards to prove it).

I would be careful to not cast aspersions on others' brewing techniques and knowledge, as I'm sure you don't like being insulted either.

 

[applescrap]

Thanks for your response yooper. Rereading it it was really nice and thoughtful

Sorry no insults intended, and let me clarify, his beliefs about BOIL TIME are inaccurate my opinion (assuming he stated longer boil times are required) and i would welcome ANY REAL data showing otherwise. I don't mean any insult by this this is just what I think. I think that specific belief is misguided. Funny that a guy in his garage essentially proved this. Brulosophy has done 2 experiments on boil time and lab tested one of them NO DMS. Marshall is an amazing and awesome nice guy who would never make the claims i am doing with his data. I am making the claims based on his data, real life experience and well just common sense. 30 minutes is a long time for something to boil what could possibly live through that.

So for thousands of years all the people that ever brewed Homebrew without hydrometers and thermometers were all hacks and didn't know what they were doing? Bet your ass the women of yore could Brew. I've seen the historical recipes they used to use the amount of steam in the water to determine Mash Temps. For the most part I can accept where everybody's coming from but it seems very few can accept where someone like I am coming from. This isn't a hobby to me its just another thing I do. I brew beer to brew it quick and cheaply that doesn't make me a hack or somebody who wants to get drunk or somebody who doesn't know what they're doing.

I disagree,
Telling people they need to mash at this and that temp, or that they need to boil for x number of minutes is not helpful information to homebrewers. We are talking homebrew not commercial, needlessly wasting time and or money to create something that requires neither is not helpful imo.

The guys at my local beer stores still think that Brew in the bag is not really all-grain Brewing. It's some sort of step into Brewing. These dogmatic beliefs fall right in line with what we are discussing. I've heard them pontificate about how certain Mash temps create certain profiles, and how long do you need to mash based on what temp excetera excetera. I am certain that they couldn't tell a difference in a beer mashed at any given temperature in a blind taste test. Just because someone is welcome to believe whatever they want doesn't mean that what they believe is actually correct. There are people here who have done iodine tests on starch conversion and have seen conversion as quickly as 15 minutes. I'm willing to bet I couldn't taste the difference between a 15 minute Mash and an hour-long Mash. How much do people really change how they brew? I do all the time in methodology and process. I'm not a bad person because I'm not married to my system. Seems to me most people want to just create rationales for over expensive systems and over lengthy processes. With all due respect let's please leave this post open for Cutting Edge Brewing techniques free of dogmatic beliefs that have no basis in provable fact.

 

[pricelessbrewing]

Marshall is an amazing and awesome nice guy who would never make the claims i am doing with his data. I am making the claims based on his data, real life experience and well just common sense. 30 minutes is a long time for something to boil what could possibly live through that.

SMM to DMS conversion is not the same as a living organism. You also have to realize that he has a very good wort chiller, and that may be a contributing variable for the lack of detectable DMS

Correct. Marshall would never say he has proven anything besides the fact that a group of people were not able to taste any differences.

So for thousands of years all the people that ever brewed Homebrew without hydrometers and thermometers were all hacks and didn't know what they were doing? Bet your ass the women of yore could Brew.

You're trying to refute a brewing professor and the tons of research he's undoubtedly read and written with a couple of anecdotes. That's just not how progress works. If you want to further the spread of modern brewing techniques, then do so. Run some triangle tests of your own, do testing, build a data set.

I've done 15 minute, 20, 25, 30 etc etc minute mashes up to 90 minutes. Conversion and specific gravity continues to increase for most mash conditions beyond 30 minutes. My standard is 45 minimum. I could definitely taste the difference between the 15 minute mash and a 30 minute mash. Yes most of the conversion had occurred, but gravity did not plateu. There was still starch present, and it was highly dextrinous. Not even @rm-mn the paragon of short mashes does 15 minutes anymore from what I remember.

Yes, but often times the beer they made was infected, had short shelf life, was inconsistent in the perspective of modern brewing, and until recently they did not understand WHY they did what they did. Did they make beer? Yes, without a doubt. Were they able to consistently hit their target flavor profile, or og? Not really, but they didn't have anyway to measure or describe it, and didn't really care to.

I disagree,
Telling people they need to mash at this and that temp, or that they need to boil for x number of minutes is not helpful information to homebrewers. We are talking homebrew not commercial, needlessly wasting time and or money to create something that requires neither is not helpful imo.

That's totally cool for you, a easy brewing mindset is completely fine. Most people here want to have some sort of consistency and predictability in their brews, and that requires knowledge and measurements. Mash temp determines fermentability and mouthfeel.

 

[applescrap]

1 SMM to DMS conversion is not the same as a living organism. You also have to realize that he has a very good wort chiller, and that may be a contributing variable for the lack of detectable DMS

2 Correct. Marshall would never say he has proven anything besides the fact that a group of people were not able to taste any differences.


3 You're trying to refute a brewing professor and the tons of research he's undoubtedly read and written with a couple of anecdotes. That's just not how progress works. If you want to further the spread of modern brewing techniques, then do so. Run some triangle tests of your own, do testing, build a data set.

4 I've done 15 minute, 20, 25, 30 etc etc minute mashes up to 90 minutes. Conversion and specific gravity continues to increase for most mash conditions beyond 30 minutes. My standard is 45 minimum. I could definitely taste the difference between the 15 minute mash and a 30 minute mash. Yes most of the conversion had occurred, but gravity did not plateu. There was still starch present, and it was highly dextrinous. Not even @rm-mn the paragon of short mashes does 15 minutes anymore from what I remember.

5 Yes, but often times the beer they made was infected, had short shelf life, was inconsistent in the perspective of modern brewing, and until recently they did not understand WHY they did what they did. Did they make beer? Yes, without a doubt. Were they able to consistently hit their target flavor profile, or og? Not really, but they didn't have anyway to measure or describe it, and didn't really care to.



6 That's totally cool for you, a easy brewing mindset is completely fine. Most people here want to have some sort of consistency and predictability in their brews, and that requires knowledge and measurements. Mash temp determines fermentability and mouthfeel.

Thank you so much Priceless for your thoughtful responses. I'm very grateful for the time you took in writing them and for the chance to have intellectual discourse about Brewing. I have numbered your responses so I can respond to them.

1 by mentioning chilling are you implying that people that no chill could possibly have more dms? Listen to the basic Brewing Radio podcast with Bob brews about the no chill beers he made that were ridiculously old I can't remember but I want to say 1 month 3 months and 6 months old without any ill effect. I no chill and 45 minute boil if dms was a factor why haven't I tasted it why didn't the people in two experiments with triangle tests not taste it? The lab that received the 30-minute pilsner boil clearly would have tested for DMS if it was there. Perhaps this information is inaccurate.

2 I am not Marshall and I believe he is a much gentler Soul than me and if I was in his shoes I might make the same claims to avoid conflict. As you are disputing professors and pretty much the vast majority of Brewers. As it stands I don't fear conflict and welcome the chance for Brewing discourse. Based on facts test and scientific examples.

3 I'm not trying to refute him on this subject as I don't know what he said. I'm going off what was posted above but if he said that a 90-minute boil is required to drive off dMS I am disputing that. Please feel free to post any data you have showing otherwise I would love to see it and will reconsider upon doing so. I am spreading modern Brewing techniques here on this forum. I don't need to do the research others are doing it for me, furthermore I am moving forward by experimenting on my own and trying new techniques. Most of the dialogue I have read and had with people has left me to believe that very few people try anything new or change what they are doing.

4 with all of your information why would you choose a shorter mash time? If you know gravity is going up why not wait? We are talking home brewing here what would it take to make up the difference between 30 and 90 minute mashes like $0.80 worth of grain. Like you I chose 45 seeming as a good number based on knowledge that gravity can increase a little bit over time but I have no fear of adding $0.80 more grain to make up the difference.

5 do you have some links to historical Brewing data. I will look for it myself. I believe the beer they made was good but that is just a hunch. Are the monks renowned for Brewing all these years just coming into good beer ? I've never infected a batch have you? If it was so easy to do I would have done it by now. Correct me if I'm wrong there are people who believe you don't even need to sanitize and have proven it well at least anecdotally.

6 the old predictability and consistency statement. So if I mash one beer at 155 and one at 152 there will be a difference? And not only that the difference will be so great that I need to buy a bunch of expensive equipment to make sure that I maintain an exact temperature for consistency I'm not buying that. In fact I'm not buying the mouthfeel and fermentability either as was proven in a triangle test by brulosophy. I didn't need the test because it just makes sense I mean why would it matter that much. Not in theory not in somebody's opinion but in actuality. People are winning Brew contests with passive mashing temperature control I'm sure. And mashing around 152 most people will never get ridiculous heat anyways so not even likely to fall that outside of the norm. If I'm correct the basic Brewing guys did a whole segment on remaking beers and found that home Brewers were surprisingly efficient at redoing their beers over and over just by doing the same process. What goes in your beer creates how it taste giving a modest amount of understanding. Think about the prank Silo side did about film on his beer. Why was everybody quick to jump in and tell him what they thought. Why didn't anybody trust him he Brews a lot he's on this forum. Everybody's quick to offer some piece of information they got off a radio show or in a book. Marshall just chose to test these things most of them proving irrelevant. His work has begun to open the door it's everybody's Choice whether to walk through it. But just because somebody does doesn't mean they can't make their beer with consistency and predictability. People still today as I said still think Brewing in bag is not Brewing. Many still think that a a mash needs to be thick to be good. These are my thoughts for now and I reserve the right to reconsider my considering and I'm grateful for the discourse

 

[applescrap]

Listened to the boil podcast on beersmith with dr. Bamforth, a brilliant man no disrespect meant there. He was adamant about the importance of a vigorous boil and stated the reasons why. I was just kind of flipping through right now but he said a lengthy and vigorous boil. He also said they tested many craft brew house ales and found dMS but he stated it was due to likely a simmer and no boil. I mean a monstrous batch of bulk grain in a commercial brew house that lacks any vigor in the boil would possibly create DMs more than the 10 pounds of grain bubbling away in seven gallons on my setup. We are talking home brew. I'm happy to have found a new podcast to listen to and Ill listen to all of his because I like to listen to them when I drive to work. I'm appreciative to be turned on to such a brilliant mind.

 

[pricelessbrewing]

1 by mentioning chilling are you implying that people that no chill could

Fair. I've done no chill as well and had no issues, but I've never done a short boil and no chill, nor have I tasted any done by others so I cannot comment.

2 I am not Marshall and I believe he is a much gentler Soul than me and if I was in his shoes I might make the same claims to avoid conflict. As you are disputing professors and pretty much the vast majority of Brewers. As it stands I don't fear conflict and welcome the chance for Brewing discourse. Based on facts test and scientific examples.

1 example of a taste test does not a fact make, that's not how the scientific method works.

3 I am spreading modern Brewing techniques here on this forum. I don't need to do the research others are doing it for me, furthermore I am moving forward by experimenting on my own and trying new techniques. Most of the dialogue I have read and had with people has left me to believe that very few people try anything new or change what they are doing.

If that's your goal, then you really should do these yourself. More data points are extremely helpful, hence the "IGOR" program with Beechum and Conn. As for the try anything new, I completely agree, there's a lot of brewers that get stuck in their ways and don't even consider new techniques.

5 do you have some links to historical Brewing data. I will look for it myself. I believe the beer they made was good but that is just a hunch. Are the monks renowned for Brewing all these years just coming into good beer ? I've never infected a batch have you? If it was so easy to do I would have done it by now. Correct me if I'm wrong there are people who believe you don't even need to sanitize and have proven it well at least anecdotally.

All I have off hand is what Lars' Garshol has said on his blog/book and in correspondence online. In general farmhouse brewing tradition is extremely intriguing, and produces unique styles, but is not at the same level of consistency as modern brewing. Is that better? Not necessarily. Is it different? Yes. They would brew with whatever they had available, and yes they were able to step mash vaguely hitting the right range of temps, but the fermentability of the wort was ALL over the place as a result. Not a huge issue, it's still tasty beer, but it's not consistent.


This has a lot of facets, so I'll break it down some.

6 the old predictability and consistency statement. So if I mash one beer at 155 and one at 152 there will be a difference? And not only that the difference will be so great that I need to buy a bunch of expensive equipment to make sure that I maintain an exact temperature for consistency I'm not buying that.

I mash passively as well, and that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that mashing at 148F and 158F will have a very real effect on your brews. Namely the sugar composition of the wort. Mashing high provides body and mouthfeel via a larger amount of long chain sugars ie dextrins. Mashing low provides a thinner body and high fermentability. This is a fact. Whether YOU can tell the difference or not is up to you to test and report back. I would recommend a boring beer, take a style that's mashed high (like a stout or porter) and do both. Take note of the mouthfeel and body. Then do a style that's mashed low, and do the same.

People still today as I said still think Brewing in bag is not Brewing. Many still think that a a mash needs to be thick to be good. These are my thoughts for now and I reserve the right to reconsider my considering and I'm grateful for the discourse

That is a point of view I take as well. What I usually say is that a bag is no different from a stainless braid, or a mash tun. It's just another way to filter the mash. How you use it doesn't change. You can fly sparge, batch sparge, step mash, single infusion mash, decoction, or no sparge. Do whatever you want, it's all grain.

Re: Mash thickness. I agree. I follow the school of thought that modern malsters provide plenty of diastic power, and that the main determining factor in the conversion of a mash is not the enzyme concentration (thicker is better) but the osmotic pressure (thickness 1.5-2.25 is ideal) and grain gelatiniization (the finer the crush, the faster the conversion)

 

[applescrap]

I appreciate your responses very much as you can tell i get little response. Heres dr. Bamforth on boil

http://beersmith.com/blog/2016/03/0...th-dr-charlie-bamforth-beersmith-podcast-121/

At minute 32 brad? Pins him down on time and he says "60 to 90" seems reasonable. Hes not definitive and focusing only on the "number" is like a finger pointing upwards, you see finger but no heaven. To focus on the 30 seconds about number one misses the previous 32 minutes of brewing knowledge from the professor.

As a side note i am so glad to have a 5500 watt elemnet for my 5 gallon batches because i have to clock power way down or i would literally have 3 gallons left basically i boil vigorously.

Never the less their are other considerations than dms during the boil which he elludes to with skill. He says lengthy for extract as well which is curious as we have all seen james spencers quick ales and we know that dme was boiled upon creation so requires only long boil for other mentioned reasons.

Once again I appreciate your comments and look forward to getting to know you more. I wish i had the go to test but i dont need to as i trust what i have read thus far. My 5500 watt element for 45 minutes isnt going to create anything off. I would do a 15 minute boil but would rather do 30 as 15 minutes of my life isn't that big of a deal.

My newest thing is massive dry hopping as opposed to anything else

 

[applescrap]

Agreed a filter is a filter.

A final thought the last stout I brewed had chocolate coffee and oatmeal in it and it would be hard to taste much past that especially because the chocolate is oily

 

[pricelessbrewing]

Agreed a filter is a filter.

A final thought the last stout I brewed had chocolate coffee and oatmeal in it and it would be hard to taste much past that especially because the chocolate is oily

Yes, unfortunately the best candidate recipes for variable testing are often a little boring. Don't want too complex a flavor profile that might muddle the results and limit any noticeable differences.

 

[RM-MN]

SMM to DMS conversion is not the same as a living organism. You also have to realize that he has a very good wort chiller, and that may be a contributing variable for the lack of detectable DMS

Correct. Marshall would never say he has proven anything besides the fact that a group of people were not able to taste any differences.



You're trying to refute a brewing professor and the tons of research he's undoubtedly read and written with a couple of anecdotes. That's just not how progress works. If you want to further the spread of modern brewing techniques, then do so. Run some triangle tests of your own, do testing, build a data set.

I've done 15 minute, 20, 25, 30 etc etc minute mashes up to 90 minutes. Conversion and specific gravity continues to increase for most mash conditions beyond 30 minutes. My standard is 45 minimum. I could definitely taste the difference between the 15 minute mash and a 30 minute mash. Yes most of the conversion had occurred, but gravity did not plateu. There was still starch present, and it was highly dextrinous. Not even @rm-mn the paragon of short mashes does 15 minutes anymore from what I remember.

Yes, but often times the beer they made was infected, had short shelf life, was inconsistent in the perspective of modern brewing, and until recently they did not understand WHY they did what they did. Did they make beer? Yes, without a doubt. Were they able to consistently hit their target flavor profile, or og? Not really, but they didn't have anyway to measure or describe it, and didn't really care to.



That's totally cool for you, a easy brewing mindset is completely fine. Most people here want to have some sort of consistency and predictability in their brews, and that requires knowledge and measurements. Mash temp determines fermentability and mouthfeel.

You are correct in that I no longer do a very short mash but it isn't because of the lack of conversion. While the reading on my refractometer would continue to rise with more time in the mash, at the end of the boil it didn't make any difference in the OG whether I mashed for 10 minutes or 45 minutes. What did matter was flavor. Doing identical (best as I could) with a 10 minute mash and a 20 minute mash, the OG would come out nearly identical but the flavor was missing on the 10 minute mash. I want beer with flavor which is the reason that most of my beers would be considered dark beers by my friends. Mashing too short seemed to eliminate the flavors.

 

[RM-MN]

This article from Marshall over at brulosophy might be of interested to you.

I've never experienced DMS and have done 30 min boils rather often. Modern malsters are pretty awesome.

Beer is made from barley, hops, water, and yeast. 3 of those are living organisms or the fruits thereof and are grown in different conditions in different areas. If you compare the alpha and beta acids of hops from different areas and from different year's crops you will be able to see some of the variations that can cause. Barley can vary too, between the variety, location, weather, and harvest conditions you may get quite different beers. At some point the barley may have the exact conditions to create a great amount of SMM and in that case, a short, weak boil can end up with DMS. I do the 30 minute boils and haven't seen evidence of DMS either but if I get malt that has the large amount of SMM so I get DMS in my beer, I will increase the boil time to compensate for that.

 

[applescrap]

Here it is 11 days later 7 Days primary three days dry-hopped Force carb now cold the next day, juicy! I suck at at racking

View attachment 1458094173820.jpg