The no-sparge method. Anyone do it?

[nigel31]

Hi Gals and Guys,

Been brewing (extract and partial mashes) for about a year now, and am looking to begin small (2.5- to 3-gallon) batches of all grain.

I've read a couple articles (below) on the no-sparge method; it seems to give excellent/equal results with less work/monitoring and less to go wrong temp-wise. Basically, it's adding about 20% more grain to make up where sparging would reap extra sugars for efficiency.

Anyone do this?

http://***********/stories/article/indices/9-all-grain-brewing/1407-skip-the-sparge

http://www.classiccitybrew.com/homebrew.html

If you have, I'd love to hear any possible negatives. If these guys say it works, that's good enough for me, but I'd dig some feedback from "everyday" brewers.

Cheers,
Nige

 

[broadbill]

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f36/i-love-no-sparge-brewing-140972/

 

[nigel31]

Thanks a LOT, broadbill. Just what I was looking for.

Prior to posting, I did a search in this forum on "no sparge" and "no-sparge" and this one didn't come up; at least not in the first screen. The search engine here isn't always quite right.

Great day to ya.

 

[nigel31]

On second thought and after reading the post, this wasn't quite what I was looking for, but thanks all the same. His setup's more advanced than mine and his methods are different, but he's doing the no-sparge thing indeed. Amazing how there are so few--if any--posts I can find on this here. Hmmmm.

 

[iijakii]

You can also look into BIAB topics for no-sparge information.

For what it's worth, I'm getting well over 70s efficiency-wise with a full volume (no sparge) BIAB setup -- I don't add any extra grain.

 

[Trouble_Brewing]

I've done two no-sparge batches now because I was curious about it. The first batch was a brown ale, the second a scharzbier. I got about 60% efficiency into the bk the first time, while the second one got 71%. It will take a few more batches to see what I get consistently. The OG for both beers was 1.056. I was getting around 70% with the drain and single batch sparge method.

I won't be able to make any decisions on if this makes my beer better for a while, but it did shorten the day a bit. If I can consistently get close to 70% I'll be happy assuming I get good beers out of it.

I do 2.5 gallon batches so I can brew quite frequently. To help get more mass into my 5 gallon round cooler mashtun, I like to use a water/grain ratio of between 1.5-2 qt/#. So for the Schwarzbier I mashed with 10 qt of water, then added 8 qt water at ~188F to reach mash out temp which pretty much maxes out my cooler. I stir that up and let it rest 10 minutes. I then vorlauff and drain into my bk. I usually end up topping off my boil volume with a quart or two to get to my preboil volume. That will be more for bigger beers of coarse.

 

[iijakii]

I've done two no-sparge batches now because I was curious about it. The first batch was a brown ale, the second a scharzbier. I got about 60% efficiency into the bk the first time, while the second one got 71%. It will take a few more batches to see what I get consistently. The OG for both beers was 1.056. I was getting around 70% with the drain and single batch sparge method.

I won't be able to make any decisions on if this makes my beer better for a while, but it did shorten the day a bit. If I can consistently get close to 70% I'll be happy assuming I get good beers out of it.

I do 2.5 gallon batches so I can brew quite frequently. To help get more mass into my 5 gallon round cooler mashtun, I like to use a water/grain ratio of between 1.5-2 qt/#. So for the Schwarzbier I mashed with 10 qt of water, then added 8 qt water at ~188F to reach mash out temp which pretty much maxes out my cooler. I stir that up and let it rest 10 minutes. I then vorlauff and drain into my bk. I usually end up topping off my boil volume with a quart or two to get to my preboil volume. That will be more for bigger beers of coarse.

You'll get higher efficiencies with the no-sparge method if you do full-volume mashes.

 

[Trouble_Brewing]

I thought about doing that, but I was concerned about mash pH. The water spreadsheet I use (ezwatercalculator 2.0) says it is less accurate for mash thickness above 2.4 qt/#. A full volume mash would have put it over 3.25 qt/#. I haven't been able to invest in a pH meter yet so I wanted to stay on the safer side.

 

[iijakii]

Ahh -- I haven't gotten into water formulation yet so I can't comment. That's wizardry as far as I am concerned

(my city's water report is pretty good)

 

[jkarp]

I thought about doing that, but I was concerned about mash pH. The water spreadsheet I use (ezwatercalculator 2.0) says it is less accurate for mash thickness above 2.4 qt/#. A full volume mash would have put it over 3.25 qt/#. I haven't been able to invest in a pH meter yet so I wanted to stay on the safer side.

This is why recirculating systems like my CB20 are popular among no-spargers. You can do a conventional 1-2 qt/lb mash and then recirculate the full volume for mashout.

On the other hand, the Aussies swear by brew-in-a-bag where they do 3 to even 4 qt/lb mashes and have no complaints. Never done BiaB myself that thin so I don't know what it really does to pH.

 

[Trouble_Brewing]

Yes, your setup is very slick and it's where I want to move towards as my current dream system. I just don't yet have the funds for it yet.

 

[1Mainebrew]

Ok, so no sparge brewing even in very thin mashes (>3qt/#) does not change your pH that drastically. I brew no sparge and find my beers to be ph stable, malty, never astringent (even when mashing fairly high %s of roasted grains), and quite tasty. Try it and you will find it's not as scary as you think and your wort (as all first runnings) will be the highest quality wort you will work with. I can say that vs batch sparging, my beers have gotten better since I switched to no-sparge.

 

[nigel31]

1Mainebrew: This is truly what I was hoping to hear from someone. My beers are all big on maltiness (English and Scots ales), and I'd read that the malt really comes through cleanly and that astringency's eliminated. I'm all about sweet, malty brews. Cheers, and happy (not hoppy! haha) holidays.

 

[1Mainebrew]

Glad I could help. I've brewed no sparge 2 ways: 1) multiply grain bill weight by .12 and add that to your desired boil volume which will give you your total mash volume of water. I don't even care what my qt/# ratio is with this method and they've all come out great- less efficiency, but uber tasty. And 2) mash with a normal 1.25-1.5 qt/# for desired time then add the difference in mash out/ "sparge" water at 170 F and proceed as usual. Option 1 works great for dry beers and option 2 for maltier more dextrinous beers. Take care.

 

[Trouble_Brewing]

Thanks for the great info. I'll definitely give option 1 a try. You mention that option 2 is better for maltier beers: can you elaborate on that? In other words, do you feel that you've not getting enough dextrins from the full volume mash? Did you find flavor to be of lesser quality? Just trying to get a better handle on what to expect. I really appreciate the info and the vote of confidence in going full volume for mashes.

 

[1Mainebrew]

It has to do with which enzymes prefer thinner vs thicker mashes. The thinner mash favors the enzyme that breaks down the small branches of the carbohydrate so that it becomes more fermentable. A thicker mash favors the enzyme that only breaks apart large sections of the carbohydrate leading to a less fermentable, maltier wort. However, you can manipulate option 1 for maltier beers by raising your mash temp, which also favors the enzyme that only breaks down the carbohydrate in large sections. Bottom line: you can still get a very malty wort with option 1 if you understand what is happening in the tun. Likewise you can get a very fermentable wort leading to a dry beer by dropping your mash temp even with option 2. Experiment and have fun. Guaranteed you'll make some tasty brews even with mistakes. Let me know how your next brew day goes and what you make, and of course how it comes out.

 

[1Mainebrew]

Also, Option 1 does not lead to lesser quality wort. It's delicious right out o the tun! No matter what people may tell you: It is a great way to brew!

 

[elproducto]

My problem is I'm cheap, and water is way cheaper than 20% more grain.

 

[funkswing]

Never done BiaB myself that thin so I don't know what it really does to pH.

It all depends on your water. If you have high carbonate water with pH >7.5 then a wide ratio is going to prolly leave you with a too high pH, because of the buffering capacity of your water.

If you have soft city water, you will prolly be A-OK, as the low buffering capacity will allow for the grain to set the pH.

Of course, diff. malt bills will have diff. effects on the pH.

 

[1Mainebrew]

My problem is I'm cheap, and water is way cheaper than 20% more grain.

IMHO, there are some things worth the extra money. No sparge brewing is one for me. As is buying microbrews instead of Bud, Coors, Miller, etc. Being cheap is good, but don't mess with the beer, right?

Besides, I'm simple. No sparge is simple, therefore a perfect fit. Plus, making a big beer with no sparge gives you the opportunity to make a partigyle brew that still has high quality wort and hasn't lost all its buffering capacity from multiple sparges.

I've found my efficiency with no sparge brewing is 66%. That doesn't lead to too much more grain. I'm impressed with your money-wise approach to homebrewing, its just not my MO.

This just proves that, no matter how you make your beer, the vast majority of the time it is going to come out great, and how thankful we can all be for that! No stress right? Relax and have a homebrew on your brew day and have fun, that is what this is all about.

 

[nigel31]

Well done, 1Maine.

I don't feel that homebrewing's the place to skimp (especially as malt's so inexpensive), but hey, to each his/her own, I suppose. No-sparging does seem simple, and while I've been known to get super-technical with other interests/hobbies, I prefer brewing to be less calculations, less worry, and more peaceful and relaxing.

Have you done parti-gyles, by chance? And if so, how'd the milds (or lower-ABVs) come out?

Good outlook, man. Cheers.

 

[1Mainebrew]

Hey Ni, to this point I haven't done a partigyle, but I think that is my next adventure in brewing! Let you know when I know!

 

[nigel31]

Very cool. Talk about money savings--two for one's reason enough to do the no-sparge if money's tight. I just dig the idea of brewing a big, flavorful ale and having enough left over to make a nice, well-rounded mild into the bargain.

My big 2011 move, brewing-wise, will be doing all-grain, and small all-grain batches at that. I've been doing extracts and partial mashes in 5-gallon batches. I can easily do two batches from one if I'm doing 3-gallon batches. A nice, hefty Scotch ale and a mild, malty one as well while only using one vial of yeast. Can't wait. Two brews in one day with only the work of one! And I can fool around with one of them by adding maple to the secondary (as is my wont) or even some dark rum- or bourbon-soaked oak chips. Lovely.

 

[1Mainebrew]

Make sure you make starters if you're going to split a vial of yeast.

 

[nigel31]

Oh yeah, absolutely. Always break out the stir plate and growler for starters. The more I think about splitting a batch like that, the happier I get. That'll be a helluva bottling day (~60 bottles), but oh well. Then again, if I do a mild or 60/- ale, I'll be bottling way before a wee heavy, so nix that last sentence.

 

[1Mainebrew]

So nigel and Trouble Brewing, have you tried no sparge brewing yet?

 

[nigel31]

Hi, 1Maine. Won't be brewing anymore this year, thanks. Bottled a batch last weekend (maple brown) and will be doing another today (Scotch ale with Lyle's Golden Syrup and Black Treacle and some lactose added), but I'll definitely be doing a no-sparge as my first 2011 batch. No reason for me not to--sounds just right for my philosophy. In fact, I look forward to, at some point, doing a parti-gyle as well.

 

[Trouble_Brewing]

I've done two no-sparge batches now. The first, a schwarzbier, I mashed at around 1.5 qt/#, then added the remaining water at mash-out temps. I got 71% efficiency on that batch.

Yesterday I brewed a sweet stout using nearly all of my water in the mash (3 qt/#). I got a touch over 69% efficiency on that. My efficiency using a single batch sparge was between 60-71% so it doesn't look like I'm losing anything doing no-sparge. Obviously I need to do more batches to better predict this.

We'll see how these beers turn out. It'll not really be able to make too meaningful of a quality judgement though, as both recipes are ones I've never brewed before. Still, I see no reason to go back to batch sparging on average strength beers as long as I keep getting reasonable efficiency.

 

[1Mainebrew]

So Trouble Brewing, How are those no-sparge brews treating you? Are they ready yet?

 

[Trouble_Brewing]

I've been drinking the sweet stout from the keg for a few weeks. It was initially far too sweet, but once it was fully carbed it was better. It's gotten better over the last 2 weeks.

I just kegged the schwarzbier on Monday, so I can't say yet how it turned out.

I also brewed a pale ale using no sparge. It also started out a touch sweet with a bit of 'twang' to it. I forgot to take a final gravity, but it seemed to ferment out as strong as normal. The twang has pretty much gone away and it's now nicely balanced. I dry hopped in the keg so I think it just getting enough hop flavor in there to balance it out.

I can't really make too much of an objective quality opinion yet. They've all been nice beers and I'm pretty happy with them. I'd like to try and do a side-by-side but don't know when I'll get time for that. I'm leaning towards doing this for beers where I want to accentuate or beef up the maltiness.