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.
The best index for gelatinization temperature is the Hartong VZ 45°C on the COA. The lower this number, the higher the gelatinization temperature.
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?
Recently, I've actually been mashing lower again. This is because I do low oxygen brewing, and I've added a lower temperature rest to accommodate a less well modified malt; as I'm now mashing in below the temperature for denaturation of LOX, the lower pH is another tool for suppressing LOX activity. (One of the factors Kunze takes into consideration I determining optimal pH.) I can't say I've seen any significant hit on efficiency, but rather an increase -- but I attribute this to the temperature program, which I specifically intended to address the higher glucan level of the particular malt. Anecdotally at this point (N = very low) I think I'm getting more dramatic hot breaks (egg drop soup,) but I don't see a difference in the quality of the chilled wort vis-à-vis fining performance, as long as the pH at knockout is in the same range (5.0-5.2.)That information for base malts seemingly might make a great guide for choosing a single infusion mash temperature target. Is it available from all maltsters? My problem here is that I generally purchase only enough malt to do a batch, and the malt often comes from bulk bins with zero attached analytical info.
As you are reasonably well known for mashing at a higher target pH than most, might you offer us some insight into the benefit(s) you perceive in so doing?
Since increasing my pH to 5.5-5.6, over 3 out of the last 4 batches, I've had an average efficiency of 71%, just about my lowest ever, except for my brown ale which had 88% -- odd fluke!? Perhaps the darker malts lowered the pH when I wasn't looking? This last Sunday I just mashed a Kolsch-style at pH 5.65 (actually measured 5.4 @ mash temp 149 F), that's the highest I think I've ever gone, and my brewhouse efficiency was 70%. I also tasted the wort, and it seemed remarkably insipid and boring compared to any other wort. But I'm fermenting it as-is to see how it all turns out in the end. My other beers turned out mediocre at best... except the brown ale won a gold medal. Coincidence?! I dunno yet.
So, I must say, I'm not really liking this higher pH thing as much as I'd expected. But will continue to toy with it. I think also I might try extending my mash time from 45 minutes to perhaps 75 minutes, to see if that helps much.
The Weyermann publication titled "pH In The Brewery" offers confirmation as to why it isn't likely the best practice to mash at between 5.2 and 5.6 pH as measured at room temperature. Notice that the principle enzymes of our concern are at their peak of performance at high pH's as measured at their respective optimal temperatures. If we add a pH meter correction factor of 0.25 to better reflect these pH's at room temperature we get 5.65 to 5.85 pH as the optimal range for Beta-Amylase, and 5.85 to 6.05 as the optimal range for Alpha-Amylase. This lends support to the position behind this thread that the "ideal room temperature mash pH range" should be revised upward from the currently accepted 5.2-5.6 pH to 5.5-5.9 pH.
Are you adjusting the Wort pH to 5.0-5.2 just before boiling?
I've mentioned a few times within this and other threads that if Stan Hieronymus, the author of 'Brew Like A Monk' is correct, the Rochefort Monastery brewery in Belgium intentionally mashes at pH 5.8 to 5.9 pH. As I recall, their waters alkalinity is in the ballpark of 160 ppm, and they only acidify (targeting pH 5.2) post mash and pre-boil.
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.
Brew on
Enter your email address to join: