Will it mash at pH ~5.00?

Brewer's Friend 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
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.
 
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.

upload_2019-8-8_14-4-9.png



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.
 
Smellyglove said:
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!
Click to expand...

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.
 
Robert65 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
dmtaylor said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
Smellyglove said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
Silver_Is_Money said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Smellyglove said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Smellyglove said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
deadwolfbones said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
Silver_Is_Money said:
I'm still waiting for someone to definitively prove that the old timers of yore took their mash pH sample readings at mash temperature.
Click to expand...

The following excerpt from Briggs et. al. is what we need to "trust but verify":

"The pH of mash or wort alters with the temperature. At 65˚C (149˚F) the pH of mash will be about 0.35 unit less than at 18˚C (65˚F), owing to the greater dissociation of the acidic buffer substances present. Therefore, enzymes whose pH optima are known from determination at 20˚C (68˚F) appear to have higher pH optima in the mash if this is cooled, as is usual, before pH determination. An infusion mash is best carried at pH 5.2-5.4. Consequently, the pH in the cooled wort [from this mash] will be 5.5-5.8."

https://byo.com/mr-wizard/setting-record-straight-mash-ph/
 
deadwolfbones said:
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.
Click to expand...

I once again got the pH/temp wrong. If you scroll up to see what you answered to.
 
Since the intent for this thread has been trashed already, and appears unlikely to get back on track, allow me to continue (trashing it). Unless your meter was designed to be used in conjunction with a magnetic stir bar (as for some bench models) there is also a need to do no stirring and let the meter probe sit for a few minutes in a still sample (after an initial gentle stir) so as to not get a false low pH reading from stirring error. A stirred sample will generally exhibit a noticeably lower pH reading than one allowed to sit still for a few minutes. Never trust the "stabilized" reading indicator on a pH meter.
 
Not sure how anyone thinks pH readings are done at anything but room temperature. Especially given the cost associated with burning out and having to replace a pH probe. I'll admit sampling temperature was one of the first questions I had too when I started.
 
brewbama said:
pH meters hate me. For some reason I blow a probe ~ every 10 months regardless of how carefully l store it.
Click to expand...
Have you ever tried the Hanna pHep5? I may sound like a broken record recommending it, but I'm high on it for good reason. I get a couple of years on an electrode, the junction is renewable which helps a lot, reliable and durable. Not as cheap as what Dave uses, but I think cheaper than the usual Milwaukee units and ATC for auto calibration to boot.

https://hannainst.com/hi98128-phep-ph-tester.html


(One more thing I'll add, Hanna is one of those companies I give high marks for customer service.)
 
Last edited:
This thread is informative and interesting.

One thing I'd point out though, if ones reference of success is hitting some value that agrees with some software, ones beer might not be as satisfying as brews brewed to ones own taste.

I get it, we are in early 21st century, but seems to me some are more fixated on the screens in front of their face than actual outcome of the beer they brew.

Anyway, have a good weekend and make some beer if you can.
 
..........post for deletion.............
Dland said:
This thread is informative and interesting.

One thing I'd point out though, if ones reference of success is hitting some value that agrees with some software, ones beer might not be as satisfying as brews brewed to ones own taste.

I get it, we are in early 21st century, but seems to me some are more fixated on the screens in front of their face than actual outcome of the beer they brew.

Anyway, have a good weekend and make some beer if you can.
Click to expand...

The object of this exercise is not to brew an enjoyable beer, or to hit one software's predictions (as opposed to the predictions of others). The object is to give the software developers a tool by which to calibrate their software within a region that is seldom explored. That is why it was posted to the Brew Science forum. At this juncture no one knows if any currently available software will get this one right.
 
Beer brewed to my taste is beer brewed well. pH control is essential to that outcome. I only use software when I can configure it to do for me something I'd be doing anyway. And yes, I will have a nice weekend brewing some beer. Thanks.
 
Dland said:
This thread is informative and interesting.

One thing I'd point out though, if ones reference of success is hitting some value that agrees with some software, ones beer might not be as satisfying as brews brewed to ones own taste.
Click to expand...
I think ones reference of success is understanding the importance of those values.
 
ScrewyBrewer said:
I think ones reference of success is understanding the importance of those values.
Click to expand...

I agree, which is why I bother to experiment some and test pH and other parameters. As noted in post #27, I know first hand what a low pH mash will make(specifically 4.8-4.9) and shared that data point. I don't use software to figure it out though, only trail and error and some note books.
 
Dland said:
I don't use software to figure it out though, only trail and error and some note books.
Click to expand...

I've been at this so long, for most of my brewing life there was no software, just trial and error and notebooks. The longer I keep at this, the more I find trial and error and notebooks far more reliable than software.
 
^^^ I'm thinking our brewing community will have lost something once all us analog types have died out, but I have confidence someone will figure it out how to brew old style again even if all digital knowable is lost and we are all have long passed on.

The urge for good brew is strong, and will prevail.
 
If you're brewing the same beers time after time, you should be able to dial in a good procedure. The real problem comes when you brew different recipes almost every brew and you want them to come out reasonably well without having to rebrew. That is where a reliable water chemistry program is going to be valued.
 
IME Mr. Wizard, maybe BYO in general, should be taken with the same sack of salt as Brülosophy.
 
dpeters said:
Crazy, I always check at room temp and shot for the recommended range in BrunWater. I wonder if mabrungard would care to chime in on this?
Click to expand...

Yes, a write up of this issue was posted on the Bru'n Water Facebook page quite a while ago. You may have to scroll down the page a bit to find it.
 
Robert65 said:
Thank you for the link, for those of us not on FB.
Click to expand...

The provided Facebook link makes the typical mistake of presuming that "wort pH" is one and the same as "mash pH". And since wort pH measurement is defined by EBC 8.17 as being taken at 20 degrees C., it thereby falsely presumes that mash pH is also to be measured at 20 degrees C. I have not found any reference to an EBC or ASBC standard for the taking of a "mash pH" reading.
 
Crazy. This might explain why I NEVER hit my projected pH from the online calculators when taking a reading at room temp. I have always been way higher and have had to then adjust my mash with acid (which is actually then dropping my pH too low).

My last few batches I have been taking my readings at mash temps (because I have been lazy) and have been surprised that they have been pretty close to my projected numbers from the calculator.

I never understood how people claimed they hit their numbers every time from the online calculators (to the point that they didn't even bother taking readings) and I was always so far off...live and learn.
 
kingmatt said:
Crazy. This might explain why I NEVER hit my projected pH from the online calculators when taking a reading at room temp. I have always been way higher and have had to then adjust my mash with acid (which is actually then dropping my pH too low).

My last few batches I have been taking my readings at mash temps (because I have been lazy) and have been surprised that they have been pretty close to my projected numbers from the calculator.

I never understood how people claimed they hit their numbers every time from the online calculators (to the point that they didn't even bother taking readings) and I was always so far off...live and learn.
Click to expand...

Me too. My ph readings always came out higher than Bru'n Water and EZ Water. I gave up trying to use the software after a couple batches and just dialed it in with trial and error and determined how much acid I needed after a few batches, although I do still measure every batch for data points. Haven't touched the softwares in a long time...
 
kingmatt said:
I never understood how people claimed they hit their numbers every time from the online calculators (to the point that they didn't even bother taking readings) and I was always so far off...live and learn.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with those people only if they are exactly duplicating each batch using the same water, grains and quantities. There's no getting around having to take and record mash pH measurements though. If your lucky enough to hit your target mash pH the first time then that's awesome. If further tuning is needed to get the mash pH to where you want it to be then take and record those mash pH measurements too.

Even after finalizing your recipe and water profile it doesn't hurt to confirm the mash pH every few batches as a sanity check. ezRecipe Design includes several recipes that were a direct result of following this process.
 
Last edited:
Once my kettle pH adjustment software (which is intended to essentially replace mash pH prediction software for most recipes) transitions beyond the Alpha stage I will likely open up a new thread. There are four Alpha level testers on board so far, and one independent test result is now on the books. That isn't enough to justify a new thread at this juncture.

Posted this here, to my own thread, so as to cease walking on a thread that is not related to this subject matter.
 
Last edited:
Silver_Is_Money said:
Once my kettle pH adjustment software (which is intended to essentially replace mash pH prediction software for most recipes) transitions beyond the Alpha stage I will likely open up a new thread. There are four Alpha level testers on board so far, and one independent test result is now on the books. That isn't enough to justify a new thread at this juncture.

Posted this here, to my own thread, so as to cease walking on a thread that is not related to this subject matter.
Click to expand...
@Silver_Is_Money sounds like an interesting project. I'd be included as an alpha tester too just let me know what's needed and I'm in.
 

Similar threads

Zippy123
Feedback on recipe to split mash for two different beers
Replies
2
Views
482
Zippy123
Zippy123
N
Mistake with calcium carbonate
Replies
7
Views
2K
tracer bullet
tracer bullet
natmartin
Missed Mash pH on last three brews
2
Replies
50
Views
5K
natmartin
natmartin
S
Unusually high mash pH?
Replies
6
Views
1K
swingerwc
S
S
pH Throughout the Brew
Replies
0
Views
1K
Senior Monkey
S

Latest posts

Back
Top