Skipping traditional mashing?

[applescrap]

What I’m talking about is instead of heating water to 160ish and stirring in the grain and waiting 60-90 minutes. How about just adding the grains to the room temp water as you begin to heat it up? By the time you reach mash out temps would all your conversion be done? Basically u are step mashing the whole time you would normally be heating the water to your initial strike temperature is my guess.

My system is 110v 1500 watt single element so it heats slowly. Bag is in a basket above the element. Takes about an hour or two to reach 160. I would just add a recirc pump to raise temps evenly.

Basically by the time I reach my usual mash in temp I’m now actually finished mashing and can skip the normal 1-2 hour mash pause and go straight to boil?

Haha, beat you to it Man I got hammered when I started the exact same thread. I mean, makes sense right. Kill two birds with one stone. I cant recall if Marshall already had the test in the works or I asked him to try, but I think it was in the works when I asked. Anyways he tested it and the results weren't that great. It takes longer to heat up so it really didn't save time iirc and the results weren't great, but hope you try it. Man I got insulted every which way but loose iirc. Glad there are others who are thinking out the box. That's how we grow. So glad you started this and look forward to seeing where it leads. I think I called it rising mash.

 

[BandonBrewingCo]

If you like to start early why not fill the kettle the night before and plug it into a timer plug to start an hour or so before you want to mash in? That way you wake up, grab a coffee and dough in straight away.

 

[odie]

Haha, beat you to it Man I got hammered when I started the exact same thread. I mean, makes sense right. Kill two birds with one stone. I cant recall if Marshall already had the test in the works or I asked him to try, but I think it was in the works when I asked. Anyways he tested it and the results weren't that great. It takes longer to heat up so it really didn't save time iirc and the results weren't great, but hope you try it. Man I got insulted every which way but loose iirc. Glad there are others who are thinking out the box. That's how we grow. So glad you started this and look forward to seeing where it leads. I think I called it rising mash.

Hammered like the first BIABers ??? People resist new ideas and change. I don’t think anyone has mentioned actually done it before...screw It I’m doin it next batch...lol

I guess what I’m really proposing is a continuously inclining mash??? Meaning no real steps (rise, pause,rise,pause) but a slow but steady incline of temps through the temp range of each traditional “step”. My kettle the element is not in direct contact with the mash and if I recirc constantly the mash should be evenly heated without any hot spots...I think

 

[odie]

If you like to start early why not fill the kettle the night before and plug it into a timer plug to start an hour or so before you want to mash in? That way you wake up, grab a coffee and dough in straight away.

Would like to do that but don’t have a temp controller for the kettle. I have a timer so I could guess the start time to be at mash in when I’m ready. I fill the night before so I just flip the switch when I get up...after coffee n breakfast tacos I’m close to mash in anyway.

 

[Beernik]

Back to the original question,

Personally, I’d avoid the Phytase enzyme range unless I was intentionally doing an acid mash. But I don’t see much downside to mashing-in at 122F with a protein rest and doing a gradual temperature raising from there. The main problem will be repeatability. If you care about that, you’ll want to chart your temperature curve.

Also keep in mind that beta enzymes are slower than alpha enzymes. So 10 minutes between 130F and 150F is not the same as 10 minutes between 150F and 170F.

 

[odie]

Damn u Phytase...now I must google you...

I was thinking to start mashing in around 100ish and let it ride to 170 and pull the bag.

My system can’t go +20’ in 10 min...maybe 20-30 min? Guess I need do a dry run...I mean wet run...lol and time it. 10-15 pounds of grain will no doubt change the rate of temp increase as well

 

[Qhrumphf]

Reportedly (according to the book "Farmhouse Ales" at least) Brasserie Dupont mashes Saison Dupont starting cool and using a slow continuous ramp up to mash out. It can certainly be done.

But as others have said, you have other enzymes doing things in those lower temp ranges.

Basically I wouldn't try it attempting it as a timesaver. But if I wanted to try it for a Saison, or a Brut IPA, or something else that I wanted super-dry, I might give it a shot.

 

[Beernik]

The other thought I had about this idea is the conversion you get it is also going to be dependent upon the diastatic power of the grain bill. If the DP > 100L, like a pale ale or Pilsner, you probably don’t have any worries. However, like any other type of mash, if the DP is in the 70L - 90L range (like a Wit with unmalted wheat), you’ll want to slow down the rate of the temperature rise to give the enzymes more time to work.

 

[odie]

Reportedly (according to the book "Farmhouse Ales" at least) Brasserie Dupont mashes Saison Dupont starting cool and using a slow continuous ramp up to mash out. It can certainly be done.

But as others have said, you have other enzymes doing things in those lower temp ranges.

Basically I wouldn't try it attempting it as a timesaver. But if I wanted to try it for a Saison, or a Brut IPA, or something else that I wanted super-dry, I might give it a shot.

Interesting. I’m actually thinking trying this on a saison...why? I was digging thru my bin of yeast and found a couple saison packs and wondering where the heck I got these??? Never made one before...packs are a year old though [emoji848] toss both in and see what comes of it?

 

[mongoose33]

Damn u Phytase...now I must google you...

I was thinking to start mashing in around 100ish and let it ride to 170 and pull the bag.

My system can’t go +20’ in 10 min...maybe 20-30 min? Guess I need do a dry run...I mean wet run...lol and time it. 10-15 pounds of grain will no doubt change the rate of temp increase as well

Wow! Someone on the internet whose stock response isn't "What is Phytase?" Instead you actually own your education and google it.

 

[mongoose33]

ENOUGH TALK! Start trying some of this stuff and report back with the results!

 

[brewbama]

If you choose to do this possibly step up your temps versus setting the controller at a high temp and move thru the temps gradually. Set your controller to something like 130*F for example. When it gets there, set it to 140*F. When it gets there set it to 150*F. Etc, etc. I believe you’ll not denature your various enzymes that operate at those temps as you move thru the temps because the controller won’t let the element fire above the set temp. If you set it at a high temp the element will continue to fire to reach that higher temp which could cause problems for your ‘lower temp’ enzymes. Savvy?

 

[kh54s10]

I don't really buy all this, you'll have xxx because of zzz enzymes if you start at yyy temp. I do believe it will change the nature of the beer. For the better or worse will largely depend on the tastes of the person drinking said beer.

What I see is that the beer will be very hard is not impossible to reproduce. That would not be a problem in my case since I have only brewed the same recipe (as close as possible) with the same ingredients in the same amounts once in my 8+ years of brewing.

Repeat-ability has not been a concern for me. There are too many styles to try. Even trying the same there are almost always changes I want to make to see if I can make a recipe either better, or different.

I say go for it. You can either heat part of the way for the start, or just dough in cold. You may get the best or you may get something terrible. Though I doubt the latter.

Try it and post the results...

 

[odie]

ENOUGH TALK! Start trying some of this stuff and report back with the results!

So it shall be done!

 

[odie]

I don’t have a temp controller. Element is on or off. I’m pretty sure it will be a gradual rise if I recirc constantly.

Separate but related question...enzymes denature at certain temps...but will they “renature” if the temperature is reduced? Or is it a permanent change?

 

[odie]

Repeat-ability has not been a concern for me. There are too many styles to try. Even trying the same there are almost always changes I want to make to see if I can make a recipe either better, or different.

This is so me....

 

[brewbama]

I don’t have a temp controller. Element is on or off. I’m pretty sure it will be a gradual rise if I recirc constantly.

Separate but related question...enzymes denature at certain temps...but will they “renature” if the temperature is reduced? Or is it a permanent change?

Oh wow. A controller is a nice addition.

I don’t have a temp controller. Element is on or off. I’m pretty sure it will be a gradual rise if I recirc constantly.

Separate but related question...enzymes denature at certain temps...but will they “renature” if the temperature is reduced? Or is it a permanent change?

Permanent denature

 

[mongoose33]

Repeat-ability has not been a concern for me. There are too many styles to try. Even trying the same there are almost always changes I want to make to see if I can make a recipe either better, or different.

This is so me....

I've always wondered about this. For me, I can't judge my abilities as a brewer unless I can show that my process allows repeatability. Process is everything in brewing--without good process, the greatest recipe in the world will be crap. (And FWIW, process can't save a bad recipe, but most of the recipes we see today are decent ones).

Suppose you brew a tremendous beer (I've done that, btw, several times, and not just my view, the view of others who can tell). People want to buy my beer, a local bar owner wants to sell it. Why on earth would you not want to brew it again?

I can't figure out any reason except that the brewer is afraid to test his/her brewing skills, and by changing something, anything, it relieves them of the potential psychological damage of knowing they can't do it. And thus, they're not a very good brewer. Always brewing something new strikes me as being afraid to try it again--and not being able to achieve it.

If always having something new is the goal of brewing, why not just buy something new, and be done with it?

My 2 cents, YMMV, offer void where prohibited, and take it for what it's worth.

 

[brewbama]

I brewed a series of the same grist bill this Summer. It really helped dial in my processes and system settings. I have complete confidence in my results from a planning prediction because of that series. Plus the beers were pretty darn tasty! [emoji23]

If the OP is going to try this technique I recommend a 4-5 brew series like that to compare results.

 

[doug293cz]

I don’t have a temp controller. Element is on or off. I’m pretty sure it will be a gradual rise if I recirc constantly.

Separate but related question...enzymes denature at certain temps...but will they “renature” if the temperature is reduced? Or is it a permanent change?

Enzymes do not suddenly denature at a specific temp. The way things work is that the enzymes are denaturing at all temps, but at lower temps they may take years to denature, so for all practical purposes they aren't denaturing. At some higher temp, it may take days for the enzymes to denature - still not an issue for mash times ~1 hr. At an even higher temp, it might take hours to denature, and at an even higher temp, it might take only minutes. When we get to denaturing only taking minutes, now we are in the temp range where denaturing can affect what's happening in the mash. Take the temp even higher, and the enzymes are gone in seconds.

I have never seen an exact definition of "denaturing temp," but it should be along the lines of "at the denaturing temp, one half of the enzymes have been denatured in xx minutes" where xx is in the range of 5 to 30 minutes. So, if you arbitrarily picked a 10 minute threshold, and half the "Z" enzyme was gone in 10 minutes at 151°F, then 151°F would be the "denaturing temp" for enzyme "Z". Then for "Z", half might be denatured in 20 minutes at 145°F, or half denatured at 5 minutes at 155°F.

And, as noted previously, once denatured they cannot be reactivated by lowering the temp.

Brew on

 

[odie]

So I’m re-reading on beta and alpha...

Beta happens lower but only works the ends of molecules and the alpha works higher breaking them in half allowing beta to now work on 4 ends vs 2 ends...but is also denaturing at this point since it got into alpha temps? What helps beta also hurts it? That kinda sucks...lol

 

[kh54s10]

I've always wondered about this. For me, I can't judge my abilities as a brewer unless I can show that my process allows repeatability. Process is everything in brewing--without good process, the greatest recipe in the world will be crap. (And FWIW, process can't save a bad recipe, but most of the recipes we see today are decent ones).

Suppose you brew a tremendous beer (I've done that, btw, several times, and not just my view, the view of others who can tell). People want to buy my beer, a local bar owner wants to sell it. Why on earth would you not want to brew it again?

I can't figure out any reason except that the brewer is afraid to test his/her brewing skills, and by changing something, anything, it relieves them of the potential psychological damage of knowing they can't do it. And thus, they're not a very good brewer. Always brewing something new strikes me as being afraid to try it again--and not being able to achieve it.

If always having something new is the goal of brewing, why not just buy something new, and be done with it?

My 2 cents, YMMV, offer void where prohibited, and take it for what it's worth.

I've made the tremendous beer. I make another, different one, it is also tremendous. I have made a beer that I did again differently to try to improve, sometimes better, sometimes not. I have brewed the same beer with a change just to make it different.

I have made beers that people said "Why don't you sell this?" I have brewed beer that people said "Can I get some more?" I have made only 2 batches in 109 that I dumped. Both extreme. One stayed pea green. I did not even taste that one. A third was not so good. Very sweet. It was very high ABV and stayed very sweet, I used about 1/2 of it for cooking. Not to bad. How many bad beers have you made.

I am not afraid to test my skills. Repeat-ability is not something that I have felt a need to concentrate on. I am confident in my process and not so full of myself that if I did try to repeat a recipe and it didn't turn out that I would be "psychologically damaged". I wouldn't really care too much....

If I like over 90% of my beers, and would rate my beers better than or equal to mid priced commercial craft beers about 70-75% of the time, why do I need to repeat a recipe?

If a cook makes meals that are very good but never uses a recipe, thus cannot repeat a meal exactly, does that make them a bad cook?? I don't think so.

"If always having something new is the goal of brewing, why not just buy something new, and be done with it?"

1) Because I enjoy brewing my own beer.
2) Because 70-75% of the time I prefer my beers more than mid priced commercial craft beers.

 

[doug293cz]

So I’m re-reading on beta and alpha...

Beta happens lower but only works the ends of molecules and the alpha works higher breaking them in half allowing beta to now work on 4 ends vs 2 ends...but is also denaturing at this point since it got into alpha temps? What helps beta also hurts it? That kinda sucks...lol

Actually, beta only works on one end of a chain, and once it gets to a branch bond, it's done on that chain. Alpha cuts chains at random points, not necessarily in the middle. When an alpha cuts a chain, it creates one new chain end that beta can work on. Alpha works at beta temps, but it works faster at higher temps. Also, alpha will create very fermentable wort, given enough time. It's not as efficient at creating small sugars as is beta.

The limiting factor is the gelatinization rate, which is much slower at lower temps. Unfortunately when you get to temps where gelatinization starts happening quickly enough to be useful in a mash, you are also in the temp range where beta amylase (and also limit dextrinase) denature at significant rates. Also, smaller starch granules tend to need higher temps to gelatinize quickly, and may not gelatinize in mash time frames until you are at temps where beta denatures very quickly. In a mash you are in a race to complete gelatinization before all the enzymes are denatured.

Brew on

 

[balrog]

"Also, smaller starch granules tend to need higher temps to gelatinize quickly"

This surprises me @doug293cz

 

[balrog]

well I'll be.

http://beerandwinejournal.com/starch-v/

"When starch granules are exposed to hot water, the amorphous regions (composed of mostly amylopectin) begin to swell first. As the starch molecules begin to dissolve and are “opened up,” water molecules progressively become associated with the hydroxyl groups (—OH) on the outside of the molecule. This swelling disrupts the layered structure of the granules.

Smaller granules — which typically have higher amylose levels and more protein on their exterior — gelatinize at slightly higher temperatures than the more amylopectin-rich large granules. (And remember, most of the weight of the starch comes from large granules.)

Older studies have shown different patterns of gelatinization (with regards to how quickly large and small granules dissolve) in different barley varieties."

 

[Beernik]

The only plug I will give for ‘repeatability’ is you don’t want it necessarily because you want to make the same beer every time. You want it because repeatability = process control. If you have control and make a mediocre beer, it’s more likely to be because of the recipe, not a process mistake.

I would say, a good target would be to spend at least an hour going from 120F to 170F. That will probably give you a good mix of alpha & beta mash temps. If the time is less than an hour, it will skew to be more like an alpha mash.

 

[doug293cz]

well I'll be.

http://beerandwinejournal.com/starch-v/

"When starch granules are exposed to hot water, the amorphous regions (composed of mostly amylopectin) begin to swell first. As the starch molecules begin to dissolve and are “opened up,” water molecules progressively become associated with the hydroxyl groups (—OH) on the outside of the molecule. This swelling disrupts the layered structure of the granules.

Smaller granules — which typically have higher amylose levels and more protein on their exterior — gelatinize at slightly higher temperatures than the more amylopectin-rich large granules. (And remember, most of the weight of the starch comes from large granules.)

Older studies have shown different patterns of gelatinization (with regards to how quickly large and small granules dissolve) in different barley varieties."

I would point out that "starch granules" and "grits" are not synonymous. Grits are the chunks of crushed grain, and the grits can be made up of many starch granules. The starch granules are the inherent structure of the starch within the endosperm of the grain kernels.

Finer crush forms smaller grits, which exposes more surface area to the water so gelatinization can begin on the granules. In a larger grit, with multiple granules, the inner granules won't see much water (and can't gelatinize) until the surrounding granules are mostly gelatinized and dissolved away. This is why finer crushes gelatinize and convert faster than coarser crushes.

Brew on

 

[balrog]

Grits grains gruits black bears battlestar gallactica, oh my!

That now makes sense.

Thanks.

 

[odie]

Well my recirc pump hasn’t arrived yet so will have to wait until after my month long motorcycle odyssey is over to try it [emoji53]

 

[odie]

Pump arrived. Smaller than I expected...lol...very slow recirc I think