Yet more evidence that commercial brewers do not mash at 5.2 to 5.6 pH ...

[bob1852]

Within the fields I've worked in (agricultural science/ plant pathology), it is standard to measure pH at 20C. If the measured temp isn't given, then it is expected that it was measure at 20C

It's apparently not standard in brewing...

That head brewer from Alchemist that says he targets a 5.1-5.3 pH also said that it's the mash temp pH he's referring to.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

In the book titled "Brew Like A Monk" on page 159 it is stated that the Rochefort Trappist Monastery mashes at 5.8 to 5.9 pH, and mineral acid adjusts later on in the kettle such that 5.2 pH is achieved leading into fermentation. They are rated as producing some of the worlds finest beers. They are clearly not mashing at anywhere near pH 5.1 to 5.3. The article does not mention what temperature they measure their mash pH at, but based upon 5.8-5.9 pH I would initially presume room temperature. As such they are targeting the top end of the mash pH range sighted in my OP quote. Anyone who tells you that mashing at this high of a room temperature measured pH will ruin your beer is likely to be flat out incorrect.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

It's apparently not standard in brewing...

That head brewer from Alchemist that says he targets a 5.1-5.3 pH also said that it's the mash temp pH he's referring to.

That would mean he 'effectively' targets 5.4 to 5.6 in the mash for the case of readings taken at room temperature. He is therefore targeting the bottom end of the 5.5-5.8 commercial brewing mash pH range quoted in my OP.

 

[lump42]

If you read this article it is talking (at the quoted juncture) of wort pH's measured just before fermentation is initiated. It is not discussing mash pH. It is discussing post boil and cooling pH. And pH drops during the boil.

My mistake, I misread that the first time through.

 

[lump42]

It's apparently not standard in brewing...

That head brewer from Alchemist that says he targets a 5.1-5.3 pH also said that it's the mash temp pH he's referring to.

There may be a disconnect between what the brewing scientist are measuring and what the brewer's are. EBC methods are to measure at 20C. ABSC beer is at 20C, and unfortunately their wort protocol is behind a paywall.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

There may be a disconnect between what the brewing scientist are measuring and what the brewer's are. EBC methods are to measure at 20C. ABSC beer is at 20C, and unfortunately their wort protocol is behind a paywall.

EBC standard 8.17, which specifies post lautering and all stages of sparging and/or run-off "Wort pH" (which is different from Mash pH) does state to take such "Wort pH" readings at 20 degrees C. But it is talking about pH measurements made downstream of the mash. I've searched in vain (so far at least) for either an EBC or ASBC specification for the taking of specifically a mash pH. That such has not materialized indicates to me that there is little commercial interest in establishing such a specification, and my presumption is that this is due to their more pressing concern with fine tuning downstream Wort pH pre-boil such that they achieve 5.0 - 5.2 pH as measured at 20 degrees C. post boil and cooling.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

In the textbook "Mashing and Brewing Science" by Briggs, Hough, Stevens, and Young it is stated that

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 will be 5.5-5.8.

For those referencing Briggs, there it is. Mash pH as measured at mash temperature and as extrapolated to room temperature.

 

[TheMadKing]

In the textbook "Mashing and Brewing Science" by Briggs, Hough, Stevens, and Young it is stated that



For those referencing Briggs, there it is. Mash pH as measured at mash temperature and as extrapolated to room temperature.

Reference his table 4.9 as well

As stated in my earlier post #38. That is the optimum pH if going for maximum extraction which is usually the prime goal of every commercial brewery

 

[hopjuice_71]

Head brewer of a brewery in the region told me they mash their Pils at 4.8 (not sure the temp that's read at). My jaw dropped. He said be was skeptical too, got the advice from some German brewers (don't know who), and it worked. I'm still not sure how much I believe it. It's a decent Pils though.

Honestly, this doesn't surprise me much. When you start looking into the biochemistry of alpha and beta amylase you find that their pH tolerances are quite remarkable. Both retain at least 80% of their activity between pHs of 4 and 6.5 (I posted links to research articles in some other thread.. ..can't find the post though). Somehow or another these details never made it into the enzyme activity charts, which show quite stringent pH ranges.. ..but this may have more to do with pleasant downstream pHs than getting actual conversion in the mash. I have also mashed a pilsener at a pH of ~4.8 - it converted just fine and the beer attenuated as expected.

 

[mabrungard]

Mashing at a room-temp pH in the lower end of the range (say ~5.2), does invite excessive proteolysis and the resulting beer can be a bit thinner. If you're dealing with a big beer and need to reduce body, then that lower pH target may not be a problem. For most other batches, I would not go that low for the mash. 5.4 is a pretty good target.

As you've probably heard me mention, there are beer styles that benefit from having a lower wort pH. But that can be achieved after the mash via an acid addition during or after the boil. German brewing practice does target a more normal mashing pH in the 5.4 to 5.6 range and the wort is acidified at the end of the boil to bring it into the 5.1 to 5.2 range. The higher pH helps convert and expel DMS from the wort. The pH reduction helps the yeast out and ultimately provides a crisper flavor presentation in the beer. Since I haven't heard of British brewers conducting post boil or pre-ferment acidification, I'm not too inclined that they mash at too high of a pH. But the other consideration is that typical British ale yeasts do have decent acidification capability.

To those that want to give high mash pH a try, I say go for it. But my experience is that high mashing and wort pH is the number one cause of the dull beers that we often find from homebrewers and craftbrewers that don't attend to water chemistry adjustment.

 

[dmtaylor]

Haven't we been round and round enough about this topic already?!

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/will-it-mash-at-ph-5-00.667992/page-2#post-8653242

https://byo.com/mr-wizard/setting-record-straight-mash-ph/

The trouble with all of this is, people will believe whatever the frick they want to believe, whether it's right or not.

I've spent dozens of hours thinking on all this and my conclusion is I'm going to measure at mash temperature and I'm gonna shoot for about 5.35. That's 5.6 at room temp. The conversion is 0.25 as proven by myself and many others. Which no one is gonna listen to so I don't care anymore.

 

[Robert65]

Mashing at a room-temp pH in the lower end of the range (say ~5.2), does invite excessive proteolysis and the resulting beer can be a bit thinner. If you're dealing with a big beer and need to reduce body, then that lower pH target may not be a problem. For most other batches, I would not go that low for the mash. 5.4 is a pretty good target.

As you've probably heard me mention, there are beer styles that benefit from having a lower wort pH. But that can be achieved after the mash via an acid addition during or after the boil. German brewing practice does target a more normal mashing pH in the 5.4 to 5.6 range and the wort is acidified at the end of the boil to bring it into the 5.1 to 5.2 range. The higher pH helps convert and expel DMS from the wort. The pH reduction helps the yeast out and ultimately provides a crisper flavor presentation in the beer. Since I haven't heard of British brewers conducting post boil or pre-ferment acidification, I'm not too inclined that they mash at too high of a pH. But the other consideration is that typical British ale yeasts do have decent acidification capability.

To those that want to give high mash pH a try, I say go for it. But my experience is that high mashing and wort pH is the number one cause of the dull beers that we often find from homebrewers and craftbrewers that don't attend to water chemistry adjustment.

Briggs, et al. specifies that an infusion mash should have a mash temperature pH of 5.2-5.4, room temperature 5.5-5.8, and that a decoction mash should be no lower than 5.5 mash temperature [I wonder if this is because boiling will have a degrading effect on proteins?] But British brewers do use kettle finings, and Briggs, et al., while not directly referring (that I've spotted) to kettle acidification, does acknowledge the fact that a kettle pH of 5.0 is absolutely necessary for the proper functioning of kettle finings. This at least implies that they do make some adjustments.

Meanwhile I know that every aspect of my beers of any sort, not just yield of extract but all qualities of the finished product, are superior when mashing at 5.5-5.6 (room temperature) and acidifying in the kettle. So as Dave says I'll keep believing whatever the frick. [emoji3]

 

[TheMadKing]

Haven't we been round and round enough about this topic already?!

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum/threads/will-it-mash-at-ph-5-00.667992/page-2#post-8653242

https://byo.com/mr-wizard/setting-record-straight-mash-ph/

The trouble with all of this is, people will believe whatever the frick they want to believe, whether it's right or not.

I've spent dozens of hours thinking on all this and my conclusion is I'm going to measure at mash temperature and I'm gonna shoot for about 5.35. That's 5.6 at room temp. The conversion is 0.25 as proven by myself and many others. Which no one is gonna listen to so I don't care anymore.

Wow yeah you guys did. Talk about going in circles

Great thread and thank you for posting... thats the frustrating thing about the internet these days, knowledge is gained and lost, then questioned, then “proven wrong” then “proven right” so quickly we sometimes feel like it’s hopeless when a whole new debate pops up over the same questions over and over.

My apologies to everyone and especially Silver is Money for perpetuating this madness

 

[dmtaylor]

Wow yeah you guys did. Talk about going in circles

Great thread and thank you for posting... thats the frustrating thing about the internet these days, knowledge is gained and lost, then questioned, then “proven wrong” then “proven right” so quickly we sometimes feel like it’s hopeless when a whole new debate pops up over the same questions over and over.

My apologies to everyone and especially Silver is Money for perpetuating this madness

Well, Silver did initiate this thread, so...

 

[TheMadKing]

Well, Silver did initiate this thread, so...

True, but his frustration is justified

Maybe homebrewing has reached a level of sophistication where pH needs a style specific range like sulfate/chloride ratio though?

Swag numbers:

All pH in room temp measured values, beer color independent

Sour crisp/dry thin body (berliner)- 3.2-4.0
Tart crisp/dry thin body - 4.5-5
crisp with thin body - 5.1-5.4
Moderate body- 5.2-5.5
soft with full body -5.5-5.8

Literally just off the top of my head so meaningless numbers but would something like this be a viable concept?

 

[dmtaylor]

Maybe pH needs a style specific range like sulfate/chloride ratio though?

Oh, no, let's not get started on the farce that is "the ratio"............

As for pH, I'm going to stick with 5.6 for every style for a few years. Then maybe report back if/when I'm wrong about it. Maybe.

 

[TheMadKing]

Oh, no, let's not get started on the farce that is "the ratio"............

Not to derail the thread buuuuut...


Was just listening to an episode of master brewers podcast with the head brewer of ballast point and he said something to the effect of

“Its a subtle difference and you need a ratio of 3:1 or 4:1 to make a real perceptible difference. Not only does the ratio matter but the absolute levels matter as well, so I always try to target around 120ppm of the higher of the two salts. So in a hoppy beer I shoot for 120ppm sulfate and 40ppm chloride. Lower numbers just don’t have enough effect to make a reliably measurable difference in flavor to tasters”

So I’m currently giving that a shot in my current and next few brews to see if it makes a difference that i can spot without any rigorous sensory testing

 

[lump42]

In the textbook "Mashing and Brewing Science" by Briggs, Hough, Stevens, and Young it is stated that



For those referencing Briggs, there it is. Mash pH as measured at mash temperature and as extrapolated to room temperature.

I won't argue over the pH ranges needed, but I'll hold firm that the pH should be measured at room temperature, if for no other reason but not to cause undue wear on the electrode. Then again, this could be some OCD/anal-retentive trend that has stuck with me from being a lab lackey.

 

[Robert65]

I won't argue over the pH ranges needed, but I'll hold firm that the pH should be measured at room temperature, if for no other reason but not to cause undue wear on the electrode. Then again, this could be some OCD/anal-retentive trend that has stuck with me from being a lab lackey.

We can all agree that, practically, the measurement must be taken at room temperature. Now, because it is easier on the probe. In the early days before electroconductivity based instruments, because the reactions needed to be carried out at that temperature. But the confusion comes in because we know that the room temperature measurement is just a proxy for the actual mash temperature pH reflecting actual mash chemistry. Texts that are not explicit in declaring which value they are citing are a real problem. Some you would expect to be the most rigorous like Kunze are the sloppiest in sliding between citing the two ranges without clarification. With enough experience it is easy to recognize what the author intends, but this requires discernment the average homebrewer just attempting to grasp the subject lacks. Many popular homebrew authorities who are assumed to have expertise prove to be lacking this understanding.

 

[Vale71]

Briggs, et al. specifies that an infusion mash should have a mash temperature pH of 5.2-5.4, room temperature 5.5-5.8, and that a decoction mash should be no lower than 5.5 mash temperature [I wonder if this is because boiling will have a degrading effect on proteins?]

It's most likely beacause lower PH would inhibit Maillard reactions which is something you would instead rather like to promote when doing a decoction.

 

[Vale71]

if it inhibits alpha-amylase, wouldn't that cause it to be more attenuatble? being that beta is what makes it more attenuable... or maybe i'm not understanding what you're saying?

This is a common misconception. Beta-amylase chops off fermentable sugars at the end of the glycosidic chains. Becaus of that the rate at which it operates and how effective it is also depends on the average lenght of the chains in the mash. Since alpha and beta always work together to some extent promoting alpha-amylase up to a certain PH value also indirectly promotes beta activity and thus fermentability.
In practice, increasing PH will promote both alpha and beta together until such a high value is reached that PH starts to directly inhibit beta activity, from that point upwards fermentability will start decreasing again (but conversion will be much faster). The exact values also depend on the mashing temperature and the type of malt as different types have different enzymatic makeup.
Conversely, too low a PH value will directly promote beta activity but also greatly inhibit alpha activity which will make achieving conversion slower and aslo reduce fermentability. It's possible that smaller breweries that are targeting very low PH values (lower than recommended in the literature) might be thus trying to compensate for excessive fermentability at the cost of other drawbacks such as longer conversion times and possibly reduced efficiency and lower hop extraction due to lower boil PH.

 

[Miraculix]

EBC standard 8.17, which specifies post lautering and all stages of sparging and/or run-off "Wort pH" (which is different from Mash pH) does state to take such "Wort pH" readings at 20 degrees C. But it is talking about pH measurements made downstream of the mash. I've searched in vain (so far at least) for either an EBC or ASBC specification for the taking of specifically a mash pH. That such has not materialized indicates to me that there is little commercial interest in establishing such a specification, and my presumption is that this is due to their more pressing concern with fine tuning downstream Wort pH pre-boil such that they achieve 5.0 - 5.2 pH as measured at 20 degrees C. post boil and cooling.

Just a thought:

Doesn't the mash pH @20c give you an incorrect picture on the effect the pH has on the mash?

If we take the mash pH at 20c, we don't know at which temperature the mash is, so it could be easily +-12c. This difference would result in a completely different mash pH at mashing temperature if we would compare the same 20c ph at 60c or 72c mashing temperature.
It therefore would have a different effect on the mash, depending on the actual mashing temperature.

Therefore I would suspect that the mash pH should be read at mashing temperature to really get an understanding on the effect it has on the mash.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I won't argue over the pH ranges needed, but I'll hold firm that the pH should be measured at room temperature, if for no other reason but not to cause undue wear on the electrode. Then again, this could be some OCD/anal-retentive trend that has stuck with me from being a lab lackey.

With the pH probes available to home brewers I'm in 100% agreement with measuring mash pH at 20 degrees C., but I believe that for this case the ideal pH range shift due to temperature change must be applied to the readings, and the nominal midpoint target must be shifted upward to closer to 5.6 or 5.65 as opposed to 5.4, and a new range of 5.5 to 5.8 or perhaps 5.5 to 5.9 should replace the 5.2 to 5.6 range which had formerly been presumed to be in relation to room temperature, but which is now clear to me to represent mash temperature (from the perspective of the commercial brewers).

But if one shoots for a "room temperature" targeted 5.6 or 5.65 pH during the mash, one must also acidify downstream just pre the boil step (or perhaps early on in the boil) so as to hit 5.0 to 5.2 post boil and cooling (as measured at 20 degrees C.). For this it seems from the literature that 5.2 presents a bit more lively hop presence, and 5.0 a bit more subdued hop presence, and some beers and/or personal preferences may favor either extreme, or be well suited for 5.1 pH in the middle.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

It's most likely beacause lower PH would inhibit Maillard reactions which is something you would instead rather like to promote when doing a decoction.

Adjusting pH pre-boil so as to hit a room temperature measured 5.0 to 5.2 pH post boil and cooling prevents runaway Mailiard related reactions caused by boiling higher pH worts, and thereby prevents an undesired and unexpected darkening of the final beer color during the boil.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

I will admit that bits and pieces of this theme of mine (with the help of those who spearheaded it ahead of me, such as @Robert65, who was my primary initial inspiration) have appeared across a multitude of other threads, but I felt this subject needed consolidation under a single thread for easy reference access.

 

[dmtaylor]

Just a thought:

Doesn't the mash pH @20c give you an incorrect picture on the effect the pH has on the mash?

If we take the mash pH at 20c, we don't know at which temperature the mash is, so it could be easily +-12c. This difference would result in a completely different mash pH at mashing temperature if we would compare the same 20c ph at 60c or 72c mashing temperature.
It therefore would have a different effect on the mash, depending on the actual mashing temperature.

Therefore I would suspect that the mash pH should be read at mashing temperature to really get an understanding on the effect it has on the mash.

Excellent observation.

 

[eric19312]

I will admit that bits and pieces of this theme of mine (with the help of those who spearheaded it ahead of me, such as @Robert65, who was my primary initial inspiration) have appeared across a multitude of other threads, but I felt this subject needed consolidation under a single thread for easy reference access.

Do you think the consensus is there now to create such a thread? I still see a lot of people talking past each other.

 

[dmtaylor]

Do you think the consensus is there now to create such a thread? I still see a lot of people talking past each other.

We won't get consensus until several celebrities jump on board. Only celebrities receive respect from the masses, whether they're right or not. So far all we've got for celebrity support is Ashton Lewis and he's kind of a B-lister.

 

[Robert65]

We won't get consensus until several celebrities jump on board. So far all we've got is Ashton Lewis and he's kind of a B-lister.

Yeah he's not a real homebrew celebrity because he has an actual advanced degree in brewing science from UCD, right? Consensus amongst the likes of Bamforth, Briggs, Kunze, etc. means nothing to homebrewers. If the Brü bros got on board... [emoji38]

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Just a thought:

Doesn't the mash pH @20c give you an incorrect picture on the effect the pH has on the mash?

If we take the mash pH at 20c, we don't know at which temperature the mash is, so it could be easily +-12c. This difference would result in a completely different mash pH at mashing temperature if we would compare the same 20c ph at 60c or 72c mashing temperature.
It therefore would have a different effect on the mash, depending on the actual mashing temperature.

Therefore I would suspect that the mash pH should be read at mashing temperature to really get an understanding on the effect it has on the mash.

Technically this is spot-on, and mash pH readings should be taken at mash temperature accordingly for the highest precision. But many have observed that budget pH meters longevity is rather seriously negatively impacted by measuring at such elevated temperatures as seen within the mash, so a compensation factor "of sorts" is applied such that a mash pH reading taken at 20 degrees C. can be ballparked to what it might have been had it actually been taken at some nominal mash temperature.

The problem then becomes one of asking "What compensation factor is to be used?". Briggs states that in going from measurement at 65 C. to measurement at 18 degrees C. he observes 0.35 pH points worth of elevation. Palmer states that a similar shift in temperature results in only a 0.25 pH point rise. Sadly, this is not very good agreement. My compromise is to presume 0.30 pH points, ballpark splitting the difference.

For Briggs (if one can presume the slope of the difference in pH with temperature alteration to be linear on first approximation) the difference is one of ~0.00745 points of pH change per degree C. of measurement temperature change (or ~0.00414 pH points of difference per degree F.)

For Palmer the difference is ~0.0056 pH points per degree C, or ~0.0031 pH points per degree F.

Splitting the difference between Briggs and Palmer leads to ~0.0065 pH points change per change in measurement degree C., or ~0.0036 pH points change per change in measurement degree F.

We could come closer to a reliable compensation factor if we could resolve why Briggs witnessed 0.35 points of pH shift vs. Palmer's witnessing only 0.25 points of shift.

 

[Robert65]

Palmer and Kaminski give this formula as an approximation, using degrees Celsius:

pH (room temperature) = pH (mash temperature) + 0.0055(mash temperature - room temperature)

Maybe somebody wants to kick the tires on that.

 

[Die_Beerery]

Yeah he's not a real homebrew celebrity because he has an actual advanced degree in brewing science from UCD, right? Consensus amongst the likes of Bamforth, Briggs, Kunze, etc. means nothing to homebrewers. If the Brü bros got on board... [emoji38]

Actually he's a tool. He's a "technical" editor and "wizard"for a popular home brewing magazine. He was an editor on a paper of mine, where he argued many common knowledge things, including but not limited too, how boiling water does not deoxygenate it.

I agree on all this homebrew celebrity stuff though.

Why doesn't some one go buy an industrial pH probe and put one in process and do some work? I hate all this homebrew hypothesis all the time.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Why doesn't some one go buy an industrial pH probe and put one in process and do some work? I hate all this homebrew hypothesis all the time.

I'm in generally poor health (bone marrow cancer, or more specifically polycythemia vera, once but no longer considered in the true cancer family, and now classified more properly as a myeloproliferative disorder), retired, and living on a fixed income. Here's to hoping that you already have such equipment and that you could tell us your preferred mash pH (and/or downstream Wort pH) target plus what temperature you use to take the reading, and the difference you observe between pH readings at 20 degrees C. vs say 65 degrees C.

 

[dmtaylor]

I'm in poor health (bone marrow cancer...

Man..... I was going to "Like" your post, too... Keep your chin up, and know that you are appreciated very much.

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

Why not calibrate your pH meter using solutions at 152F/66.7C and then take a pH reading at 152F/66.7C. Then calibrate your pH meter to 77F/25C and cool the sample taken previously to 77F/25C and take a reading. Then compare the high temperature pH reading to the low temperature pH reading. It seems to be the logical way to test those theories.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Man..... I was going to "Like" your post, too... Keep your chin up, and know that you are appreciated very much.

I amended my post above to reflect the current science behind my predicament. I first became aware of my predicament back in 2005 and I'm still here. But it is progressive, and one myeloproliferative disorer can mutate into another..

 

[Miraculix]

Technically this is spot-on, and mash pH readings should be taken at mash temperature accordingly for the highest precision. But many have observed that budget pH meters longevity is rather seriously negatively impacted by measuring at such elevated temperatures as seen within the mash, so a compensation factor "of sorts" is applied such that a mash pH reading taken at 20 degrees C. can be ballparked to what it might have been had it actually been taken at some nominal mash temperature.

The problem then becomes one of asking "What compensation factor is to be used?". Briggs states that in going from measurement at 65 C. to measurement at 18 degrees C. he observes 0.35 pH points worth of elevation. Palmer states that a similar shift in temperature results in only a 0.25 pH point rise. Sadly, this is not very good agreement. My compromise is to presume 0.30 pH points, ballpark splitting the difference.

For Briggs (if one can presume the slope of the difference in pH with temperature alteration to be linear on first approximation) the difference is one of ~0.00745 points of pH change per degree C. of measurement temperature change (or ~0.00414 pH points of difference per degree F.)

For Palmer the difference is ~0.0056 pH points per degree C, or ~0.0031 pH points per degree F.

Splitting the difference between Briggs and Palmer leads to ~0.0065 pH points change per change in measurement degree C., or ~0.0036 pH points change per change in measurement degree F.

We could come closer to a reliable compensation factor if we could resolve why Briggs witnessed 0.35 points of pH shift vs. Palmer's witnessing only 0.25 points of shift.

Just to complicate it a bit further, the pH scale itself is not linear but logarithmic. That's why I think a linear factor per degree might not bare the desired results.

 

[Die_Beerery]

I'm in generally poor health (bone marrow cancer, or more specifically polycythemia vera, once but no longer considered in the true cancer family, and now classified more properly as a myeloproliferative disorder), retired, and living on a fixed income. Here's to hoping that you already have such equipment and that you could tell us your preferred mash pH (and/or downstream Wort pH) target plus what temperature you use to take the reading, and the difference you observe between pH readings at 20 degrees C. vs say 65 degrees C.

Firstly, I am sorry to hear that.

Secondly, I do infact have the equipment and the data. But I am not a homebrew celebrity so no one cares what I have to say.

Thirdly, the answer will probably disappoint everyone.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Firstly, I am sorry to hear that.

Secondly, I do in fact have the equipment and the data. But I am not a homebrew celebrity so no one cares what I have to say.

Thirdly, the answer will probably disappoint everyone.

I've always considered you somewhat of a celebrity, plus I'm very impressed with your website and your approach to brewing, and I care about what you have to say. That plus I've been disappointed and gotten over it many times in my life.

 

[zebradeltaone]

He actually told you that? In that case, did he mention at what temperature they measured?

Jon Kimmich had mentioned that before in a talk he gave at a brewer's conference.