Recommended or possible? In my experience best practice is to acidify before adding kettle finings, so around 10 minutes to knockout, and this is what is supported by the professional literature. But indeed one question raised in this thread is whether there is significant harm in acidification earlier, as apparently this seems more convenient to some (I don't understand why.) I suppose some results will be reported of anyone tries it.For a hoppy beer without Pilsner malt (or any beer without risk of DMS), dosing at preboil is recommended?
Recommended or possible? In my experience best practice is to acidify before adding kettle finings, so around 10 minutes to knockout, and this is what is supported by the professional literature. But indeed one question raised in this thread is whether there is significant harm in acidification earlier, as apparently this seems more convenient to some (I don't understand why.) I suppose some results will be reported of anyone tries it.
Calibration status - how recent? These things can drift like mad.
To more properly gauge any individual pH meters inherent pH differential one must use the very same pH meter and measure the pH at two different temperatures (room and mash) with it.
Bryan:
At what temp do you calibrate the mash pH probe?
But, generally greater displacements are not merely homebrew dogma, but attested in the scientific literature -- with the caveat that there is no universal constant (that is the homebrew dogma part,) but that the displacement is influenced by many factors (which homebrewers can't seem to get their heads around.) Would you care to speculate, Bryan, as to whether there might be something about your system that leads to a lesser displacement than is commonly observed? Your system, you'll no doubt admit, does not provide the conditions found in either conventional brewery outfits or laboratory tests.
I'll agree. The temperature effects are so damned fussy and data so scattered that given Bryan's data points above (and yes I do believe he is a very trustworthy source), now I don't know what the frick to believe anymore. Is the adjustment 0.1, 0.25, 0.18, 0.22, 0.2, 0.17..... who the frick knows. And what's more....... does it even really matter all that much!? That is the ultimate question that will never receive a consistent answer.
Thank you to Bryan for these specific new data points. And yes I'm sure you calibrate like a fiend. Personally I calibrate every time I use the thing, both before and after the brew session, that's what gives me confidence that heck at least I'm trying.
Well, I highly doubt it. Only thing being I have zero DO. DO does play a role in ORP and redox, which could alter pH, but it should have no effect on differential.
Upon dough in I target 5.25 mash temp which for me is 5.4 room temp. Once I get into beta pH will shift up a tad to around 5.29, then settle around there. That’s what’s constant for me. What’s not constant is my offset it seems to raise and lower and would be impossible to chase. So for me and my setup. This is what I do.
Fwiw (probably nothing), I’ve mashed at 5.65 (room temperature) for my last four batches instead of my usual 5.4 (room temperature), and my efficiency has suffered a significant hit. Upwards of 5 gravity points. Now, maybe that hit is worth it if it results in better beer. But it sure doesn’t seem like the enzymes are working better *for me*.
I picked the wrong series of beers to test this on (British beers). I might need to try again with Helles to get a real understanding of how beer quality is affected.
Anecdotal and unscientific for sure, but in my brewery, I’m ready to state the higher pH is less efficient (but not necessarily worse for the beer).
Fwiw (probably nothing), I’ve mashed at 5.65 (room temperature) for my last four batches instead of my usual 5.4 (room temperature), and my efficiency has suffered a significant hit. Upwards of 5 gravity points. Now, maybe that hit is worth it if it results in better beer. But it sure doesn’t seem like the enzymes are working better *for me*.
Damn, science is a harsh mistress. Thank you, @hopjuice_71, for your report. I guess I'll try going back to 5.4 and seeing if things snap back. Again, we don't want to assume efficiency correlates with better beer, so I guess I won't be convinced until I try this with Helles (my personal pinnacle of styles).
You are not alone. Last two batches I shifted up from 5.4 RT to 5.6 and took a 1p hit.
Possibly. I have seen reports that some malts can have higher gelatinization temperatures than other malts. This can affect your conversion efficiency, which then affects mash efficiency, and all other downstream efficiencies. I've been thinking that the way to deal with such malts is to raise the mash temp up to 170°F, and rest for a while, then drop the temp and add alpha amylase to complete conversion. Or, you can just accept the lower eff.Hmm, interesting. Could my gain and others losses have anything to do with type of malt?
Might be. The rate limiting step in saccharification is the gelatinization of the starch granules. Once the starch is gelatinized, the hydrolysis, catalyzed by the amylase enzymes, is pretty fast. I have not seen anything that says pH affects the gelatinization rate, but then I haven't looked. IMO optimizing pH for amylase activity is not what needs to be addressed to improve conversion efficiency. The previous has nothing to do with pH affects on beer flavor.wrt pH 5.8 - isn't that verging on the threshold of releasing tannins from husks, especially given the duration [edit: and temperature] of a typical mash?
Cheers!
....The previous has nothing to do with pH affects on beer flavor.