Will it mash at pH ~5.00?

[CascadesBrewer]

@CascadesBrewer adding sugar to wort increases alcohol and contraibutes to a thinner drier beer. This is a basic fact of brewing.

Not really related to this thread....but this is a fallacy in my book. I can see how replacing some malt with sugar might lead to a lighter body, but not how adding sugar on top of the existing grain bill will. My flawed experiment help to prove that to me. I have found mixed research about how much body alcohol adds to a beer and research that shows how much sweetness is perceived from alcohol varies from person to person.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

Mashing at 162F produces a fuller bodied beer with less alcohol. This is another basic fact of brewing.

More and more I am proving to myself that mash temp has less impact on body than it has been touted. Yes, it has a clear impact on alcohol.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

More and more I am proving to myself that mash temp has less impact on body than it has been touted. Yes, it has a clear impact on alcohol.

I agree, as I've determined (mainly via the use of either Carapils or maltodextrin) that dextrins (which arise and increase as a consequence of mashing at higher and higher temperatures) have little to more likely no impact upon body and mouthfeel, and that's why I'm going to attempt mashing at a (room temperature, or more precisely 25 degrees C.)" target of 5.5 to 5.6 pH during the mash (via mash target pH set at 5.55) as opposed to my former target of 5.4, in order to study if increased mash pH leads to better body and mouthfeel.

Of course this entire line of discussion has nothing to do with this threads intended topic of discussion.

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

You're talking about two different types of sugar. One the yeast will convert 100% of to alcohol and the other where only fermentable sugar is converted. The former promotes a thinner drier beer the latter a less thin less dry beer.

 

[Broothru]

Okay I'm done second guessing again, finally, I think. Found this (again), which contains links to several other good threads too.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/...nse-to-mash-ph-questions.638811/#post-8175675

EDIT: Yup. I've still been mashing at a pH too damn low, about 5.4, when really I should be shooting for 5.60-5.65. Now if only I don't forget this conclusion again after I brew a few more batches I should be all set! This goes a long way also to help explain why many (not all, but many) of my beers seem to have just a slight tartness that has been bugging me. There have been times I've mashed as low as 5.30-5.35, and to my knowledge, now, it is clear to me that this is quite low indeed. Too much confusion over whether the typical pH range is meant for room temp vs. mash temp! Back and forth, ugh. Now I think maybe I've finally got it straight!

And big thanks to @Robert65 for so very non-chalantly bringing this up! I think you're absolutely right!:

Thanks for tracking down the link. I must have missed it 2 years ago, but it completely lifted the fog enveloping my cranium. So just to confirm my understanding:

1. pH values (for consistency and 'scientific' measurement procedural compliance and standardization) should be referenced at Room Temperature. Also, this reduces thermal stress on the pH meter's bulb.

2. The delta between a mash temperature pH value (~150F) and a room temperature pH value (~75F) is around -0.25.

3. Therefore, a mash temp pH 5.4 = room temp pH 5.65

Conclusion: higher temperature drives measured pH 'reading' to a lower pH 'number' (more acidic), whereas the 'actual' pH measured at RT is the standardized 'value' we need to reference if we are to compare apples to apples.

Further conclusion: I've been targeting and adjusting my pH values incorrectly (0.25 too low; apples to oranges).

As a senior citizen with a sketchy history of remembering and comprehending mathy/sciencey thingies, do I finally have a handle on this stuff?

And one final question: when I plug in a desired pH value of 5.4 into Bru'n Water along with my water profiles (actual & desired) and grist bill, what pH value am I requesting (actual mash temp pH or corrected to RT standardized value pH)?

Brooo Brother

 

[deadwolfbones]

Thanks for tracking down the link. I must have missed it 2 years ago, but it completely lifted the fog enveloping my cranium. So just to confirm my understanding:

1. pH values (for consistency and 'scientific' measurement procedural compliance and standardization) should be referenced at Room Temperature. Also, this reduces thermal stress on the pH meter's bulb.

2. The delta between a mash temperature pH value (~150F) and a room temperature pH value (~75F) is around -0.25.

3. Therefore, a mash temp pH 5.4 = room temp pH 5.65

Conclusion: higher temperature drives measured pH 'reading' to a lower pH 'number' (more acidic), whereas the 'actual' pH measured at RT is the standardized 'value' we need to reference if we are to compare apples to apples.

Further conclusion: I've been targeting and adjusting my pH values incorrectly (0.25 too low; apples to oranges).

As a senior citizen with a sketchy history of remembering and comprehending mathy/sciencey thingies, do I finally have a handle on this stuff?

And one final question: when I plug in a desired pH value of 5.4 into Bru'n Water along with my water profiles (actual & desired) and grist bill, what pH value am I requesting (actual mash temp pH or corrected to RT standardized value pH)?

Brooo Brother

I'm in the same boat as you. I think you have it right.

Also, the Brewer's Friend water calculator specifically mentions that pH estimates are at 77F, so I would assume BeerSmith is the same.

 

[dmtaylor]

Yeah, you've got it right now. Son of a dammit..... we've all been targeting way too low, should enter 5.6 for all our previous 5.4's.

 

[deadwolfbones]

More on the BeerSmith estimates: http://beersmith.com/blog/2016/08/10/using-the-new-brewing-water-and-mash-ph-tools-in-beersmith-2-3/

Brad says the estimates/readings should be at room temp.

 

[Smellyglove]

While you could perform a mash at 5.0, it will invite excessive proteolysis in the wort and that could result in an overly thin beer.

Other than for an academic exercise, it doesn’t appear to be a good assessment.

Can you either provide me with one or several links explaining this, or elaborate? I tried googling but can't find anything which pinpoints this.

And, when I read for example 5.2 in Bru'n Water, is that 5.2 room or mash temp? I guess it doesn't matter as much since the actual mash pH is supposed to be that number I read, no matter if it's mash or room temp?

 

[deadwolfbones]

Can you either provide me with one or several links explaining this, or elaborate? I tried googling but can't find anything which pinpoints this.

And, when I read for example 5.2 in Bru'n Water, is that 5.2 room or mash temp? I guess it doesn't matter as much since the actual mash pH is supposed to be that number I read, no matter if it's mash or room temp?

It does matter because the pH changes with temp (as discussed above in this thread).

 

[Smellyglove]

It does matter because the pH changes with temp (as discussed above in this thread).

Yes I know. But if I measure at the reference temperature for the spreadsheet (which I don't know what is yet, room or mash?), It would be correct. And if the spreadsheet says 5.2, (and let's say it's correct in real world too) then I guess I'd be mashing at 5.2?

Do I need to take into account the pH shift of about 0.25 from room to mash-temperatures? The software gives me a green color in the pH box when I'm in the correct range. So I can only assume that whatever the reference temperature is, this is "good". It would be strange if it gave me a green color if I was 0.25 outside the recommended range?

For example. If the speadsheet says 5.2, and the reference temperature is room temp, then I guess I'd look at 4.95 at mash temperature? If the reference is mash temperature, I should be seeing 5.45 at room temp? This is confusing.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

2. The delta between a mash temperature pH value (~150F) and a room temperature pH value (~75F) is around -0.25.

Since plenty of reference information is available for both differentials, it may prove to be the case that for meters with ATC a roughly 0.25 difference is observed, and for meters without ATC a roughly 0.35 difference is observed. ???

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Yes I know. But if I measure at the reference temperature for the spreadsheet (which I don't know what is yet, room or mash?), It would be correct. And if the spreadsheet says 5.2, (and let's say it's correct in real world too) then I guess I'd be mashing at 5.2?

To my knowledge all extant mash pH assistant software presumes 25 degrees C. (77 degrees F.) for mash pH sample measurement.

 

[dmtaylor]

Yes I know. But if I measure at the reference temperature for the spreadsheet (which I don't know what is yet, room or mash?), It would be correct. And if the spreadsheet says 5.2, (and let's say it's correct in real world too) then I guess I'd be mashing at 5.2?

Do I need to take into account the pH shift of about 0.25 from room to mash-temperatures? The software gives me a green color in the pH box when I'm in the correct range. So I can only assume that whatever the reference temperature is, this is "good". It would be strange if it gave me a green color if I was 0.25 outside the recommended range?

For example. If the speadsheet says 5.2, and the reference temperature is room temp, then I guess I'd look at 4.95 at mash temperature? If the reference is mash temperature, I should be seeing 5.45 at room temp? This is confusing.

Always assume all software and all reported numbers are always at room temperature... except that the old recommended pH ranges were too low by 0.25 and we should actually be aiming for roughly 5.6 instead of 5.3-5.4. Softwares and spreadsheets should all be basing their calculations on room temperature values... but due to widespread confusion surrounding this topic, likely will not show "green" or "good" at the new 5.6 (@room temp)... but should be! In other words, if the spreadsheet is using 5.2 to calculate salt additions, it refers to 5.2 @room temp. But if the spreadsheet has text recommending that you aim for about 5.2, which would be @room temp, this is actually wrong and you really want to be aiming closer to ~5.6!

 

[Smellyglove]

To my knowledge all extant mash pH assistant software presumes 25 degrees C. (77 degrees F.) for mash pH sample measurement.

That's my thought too. But to just cut to the chase. I can just use the pH assumption in the spreadsheet and call it a day? If it says 5.2 it is 5.2.

 

[dmtaylor]

Since plenty of reference information is available for both differentials, it may prove to be the case that for meters with ATC a roughly 0.25 difference is observed, and for meters without ATC a roughly 0.35 difference is observed. ???

Interesting question. Possibly. I am not sure. We'll need one of our resident scientists to give their thoughts.

 

[deadwolfbones]

That's my thought too. But to just cut to the chase. I can just use the pH assumption in the spreadsheet and call it a day? If it says 5.2 it is 5.2.

If you trust the software, then yes.

FWIW, I never actually test my pH and simply rely on the Brewer's Friend calculator.

 

[Smellyglove]

If you trust the software, then yes.

FWIW, I never actually test my pH and simply rely on the Brewer's Friend calculator.

Yes. I'm assuming the software is correct (doesn't have to be, but that's the assumption for the discussion). So a mash in the software of 5.2 (assuming the ref temp is room) would equal to 5.45 in the mash(ish). Sorry I'm retarded when it comes to this kinds of things.

I stopped measuring pH a while ago. The pH meter read pretty close to the software, but I started wondering if this is just a coincidence after reading the thread.

 

[deadwolfbones]

Yes. I'm assuming the software is correct (doesn't have to be, but that's the assumption for the discussion). So a mash in the software of 5.2 (assuming the ref temp is room) would equal to 5.45 in the mash(ish). Sorry I'm retarded when it comes to this kinds of things.

I stopped measuring pH a while ago. The pH meter read pretty close to the software, but I started wondering if this is just a coincidence after reading the thread.

No, I think 5.2 room temp would work out to 4.95 mash temp, per this:

• Bamforth’s range is: 5.3 to 5.8 (mashtemp) / 5.55 to 6.05 (room temp)
• Briggs’ range is: 5.2 to 5.4 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.65 (room temp)
• Kunze’s range is: 5.25 to 5.35 (mash temp) / 5.5 to 5.6 (room temp)
• Lewis’ statement: 5.2 to 5.5 (mash temp) / 5.45 to 5.75 (room temp)

FWIW, this is what I've been doing (5.2-5.3 in the calculators) for some time and my beer is perfectly fine. But I do wonder if it could be better (particularly the maltier styles) if I were shooting for 5.5-5.6 instead.

 

[Smellyglove]

No, I think 5.2 room temp would work out to 4.95 mash temp, per this:



FWIW, this is what I've been doing (5.2-5.3 in the calculators) for some time and my beer is perfectly fine. But I do wonder if it could be better (particularly the maltier styles) if I were shooting for 5.5-5.6 instead.

God dammit! Sorry, yes you are correct. temp up - pH down, that's my rule for this. So if I've been targeting 5.2 in the spreadsheet, does this mean that I've been mashing in a crazy low mash pH? Damn I just can't grasp this. But it gives me a green box!

 

[deadwolfbones]

It gives you a green box because most software says 5.2-5.6 is a good range. But what people are saying in this thread is that the higher end of the range actually produces better results.

 

[dmtaylor]

Wow..... the following is very telling.......

I always keep track of various parameters for every batch. One parameter is mash pH, typically measured after about the first 10-15 minutes in. These are reported at room temp, by the way. Another parameter is a normalized quality score on a 0-100 scale. I won't get into how that's determined at the moment but suffice it to say that I try to evenly distribute as many scores from 0-50 as I do from 51-100. Following is a plot of pH vs. quality score for my last, I dunno, ~100 batches.

What I am able to conclude from this new graph, which I've never done until now, is that if I mash at 5.5 @room temp (which would be about 5.25 at mash temp ~150 F), then I am extremely likely to end up with a high quality beer.

How do you like that?! I sure as hell know what to aim for now. In fact I'll even go higher to 5.6, since I only have 3 data points there currently. I imagine that part of the curve will shift upwards with more data points, but, maybe not. Maybe there truly is a ceiling, at 5.5 for me and my process, beyond which the quality goes bye-bye.

P.S. And yes, I've always rounded to the nearest 0.1 pH unit. Good enough for me.

 

[Robert65]

God dammit! Sorry, yes you are correct. temp up - pH down, that's my rule for this. So if I've been targeting 5.2 in the spreadsheet, does this mean that I've been mashing in a crazy low mash pH? Damn I just can't grasp this. But it gives me a green box!

Yes, you've been mashing crazy low. It's like Dave's been saying, the software all incorporates the same fundamental misunderstanding. Ignore the green boxes.

 

[Smellyglove]

Yes, you've been mashing crazy low. It's like Dave's been saying, the software all incorporates the same fundamental misunderstanding. Ignore the green boxes.

Right. This is messed up. I've not been bothered with thin body, or such. Why give me a green box?

But is this 100% certain? Regarding reference temperatures.

 

[Smellyglove]

Wow..... the following is very telling.......

I always keep track of various parameters for every batch. One parameter is mash pH, typically measured after about the first 10-15 minutes in. These are reported at room temp, by the way. Another parameter is a normalized quality score on a 0-100 scale. I won't get into how that's determined at the moment but suffice it to say that I try to evenly distribute as many scores from 0-50 as I do from 51-100. Following is a plot of pH vs. quality score for my last, I dunno, ~100 batches.

View attachment 639240


What I am able to conclude from this new graph, which I've never done until now, is that if I mash at 5.5 @room temp (which would be about 5.25 at mash temp ~150 F), then I am extremely likely to end up with a high quality beer.

How do you like that?! I sure as hell know what to aim for now. In fact I'll even go higher to 5.6, since I only have 3 data points there currently. I imagine that part of the curve will shift upwards with more data points, but, maybe not. Maybe there truly is a ceiling, at 5.5 for me and my process, beyond which the quality goes bye-bye.

P.S. And yes, I've always rounded to the nearest 0.1 pH unit. Good enough for me.

This is very interesting! Funny. I've been thinking 5.2 - 5.4 in the software is right where we want it. I don't do many different styles anymore, and I haven't felt that It's not "good". Darker styles I'v been targeting 5.5 or 5.6. But I know it can be better although I don't know what "better" would be. I've been brewing a lot of Hefeweizens (a lot!), and those times I've omitted the mash pH additions, I've ended up with a grainy husky tannin-ish flavor. Even though it at least 60% with no husk in the grist. Even if I do no-sparge. So the plot thickens. A person off the street would probably not notice a difference, but I do.

I've even mailed with one of the Paulaner brewers, and he said "I can't give you that information, but we are in the range of what is recommended in the litterature".. He didn't lie, as it seems like those numbers are pretty widespread.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

That's my thought too. But to just cut to the chase. I can just use the pH assumption in the spreadsheet and call it a day? If it says 5.2 it is 5.2.

I would trust but verify. Most of us (initially at least) used bits and pieces of math models from either AJ deLange or Kai Troester or DM Riffe (or all three) as our inspiration for our software. And all of those sources insist upon 25 degree C. mash pH readings.

I'm still waiting for someone to definitively prove that the old timers of yore took their mash pH sample readings at mash temperature. The pH meters available when I would have first used them (circa 1970) were tenuous analog dinosaurs of extremely great price, and I would not have wanted to ruin one by attempting something like mash temperature readings.

 

[Smellyglove]

I would trust but verify. Most of us (initially at least) used bits and pieces of math models from either AJ deLange or Kai Troester or DM Riffe (or all three) as our inspiration for our software. And all of those sources insist upon 25 degree C. mash pH readings.

I'm getting more confused by every reply I recieve now.. If 25C is the reference temperature, and the software (Bru'n Water) says 5.2 am I mashing extremely low or "good" when it says 5.2? Would this mean, if 5.2 as stated from the software, and measured at 25C, would this mean 5.45 at mash temps? I just don't get it.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I'm getting more confused by every reply I recieve now.. If 25C is the reference temperature, and the software (Bru'n Water) says 5.2 am I mashing extremely low or "good" when it says 5.2? Would this mean, if 5.2 as stated from the software, and measured at 25C, would this mean 5.45 at mash temps? I just don't get it.

You are simultaneously mashing at roughly pH 4.9 actual (at mash temperature) and 5.2 measured (at 25 degrees C.), and both values are correct. This latter part is what seems to confuse people. But there will always be more dissociated (free) hydronium ions (H+) floating around at 66 degrees C. than at 25 degrees C.

 

[deadwolfbones]

I'm getting more confused by every reply I recieve now.. If 25C is the reference temperature, and the software (Bru'n Water) says 5.2 am I mashing extremely low or "good" when it says 5.2? Would this mean, if 5.2 as stated from the software, and measured at 25C, would this mean 5.45 at mash temps? I just don't get it.

If I'm understanding everything correctly (a big if!), we've been mashing at 5.2-5.3 per the calculators when we should have been mashing at 5.5-5.6 per the calculators, for ideal results.

FWIW, I think 5.2-5.3 is probably still perfectly acceptable for styles where a lighter body/less malt presence is desirable, eg. sours and saisons. But for English ales, stouts, German styles I'm going to try the higher end in the future.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

If I'm understanding everything correctly (a big if!), we've been mashing at 5.2-5.3 per the calculators when we should have been mashing at 5.5-5.6 per the calculators, for ideal results.

FWIW, I think 5.2-5.3 is probably still perfectly acceptable for styles where a lighter body/less malt presence is desirable, eg. sours and saisons. But for English ales, stouts, German styles I'm going to try the higher end in the future.

I seem to recall that the developer of EZ Water suggested mashing at a "target" of around 5.6 pH (as measured at 25 degrees C.) from the onset. Everyone else offering mash pH prediction software settled upon 5.4 pH (as measured at 25 degrees C.) as a safe nominal midrange "target" for mash pH. It will require testing and verification to prove that 5.6 is superior to 5.4 as the target for a 25 degree C. mash sample. I'm making the switch, but I honestly think that it would be highly unfair at this early juncture for me to suggest that everyone else tag along.

I also sample no sooner than 30 minutes into the mash, and I find that mash pH generally rises with time, so the pH as read at 30 minutes will be higher than one read at 10-15 minutes, and in my experience the 60 minute mash pH sample reading is generally slightly higher still. I go so far as to suggest that samples drawn only 10-15 minutes into the mash will yield what I refer to as a "false low" pH measurement.