# Mash And Boil



## beermonster17 (11/3/11)

Hi fellow brewers,
i'm still new to the all grain and looking at recipies and am wondering what difference mashing and boiling for 60 mins is as opposed to mashing and boiling for 90 mins. Does this convert more sugars from the grain and does this increase the bittering of the beer to boil longer. i'm sure there is a link to explain the great mysteries out there, help would be greatly appreiciated cheers,
beermonster17.


----------



## bignath (11/3/11)

Hi beermonster, (love your name by the way..)

the way your post reads sounds a little bit like your confusing some processes. It sounds like you think mashing and boiling are the same thing, or a combined process?? More than happy to be corrected though buddy, it's just how it reads to me.
Anyway, just in case you have got it a little muddled, mashing and boiling are completely separate processes done in separate vessels unless your doing BIAB.

Mashing is the process of soaking the grains in hot water to extract sugars that will make up your "wort".

You won't convert any more sugars just by mashing longer. You will get different flavour profiles by mashing at different temps, but not necessarily longer. Most sugars will converted after around 30mins anyway, but we tend to leave it for an hour just to be sure.

Boiling (as it implies) is taking this "wort" and boiling it. There is a step in between if you are doing traditional mash brewing which is called "sparging" and this is the process that eventually removes the wort from the grain that you have "mashed".

How long into the boil you add the hops, affects the bitterness. The longer you boil 'em the more bitter (to a point) your resulting wort will be. I would say most brewers probably do a 60min boil, with 90 minutes being a good amount of time to do a lager/pilsner type of boil as this reduces the likelihood of certain off flavours being produced. 
If you want to boil for 60min and do a typical bittering addition, add the hops at the start of the boil and let it go for an hour. If you want the same/similar bitterness but in a 90min boil, add the hops 30min after the start of the boil.
The more advanced brewers, or brewers who want the utmost accuracy over their beers, will sometimes go with the flow and adjust their boil time on the fly so to speak as they may be chasing a specific gravity level in the kettle.

My apologies if this post is stuff you already know, but it sounded to me like you had a few things that needed clarification.

Cheers mate,

Nath


----------



## Crusty (11/3/11)

beermonster17 said:


> Hi fellow brewers,
> i'm still new to the all grain and looking at recipies and am wondering what difference mashing and boiling for 60 mins is as opposed to mashing and boiling for 90 mins. Does this convert more sugars from the grain and does this increase the bittering of the beer to boil longer. i'm sure there is a link to explain the great mysteries out there, help would be greatly appreiciated cheers,
> beermonster17.



60 vs 90 is really a personal thing & I think most people these days mash for 60mins & boil for 60mins.
If you strike in with a lower temperature, maybe a 90min mash would be better suited to ensure complete conversion. At higher strike in temps, conversion of course will happen quicker & a 60min infusion is more than enough time for complete conversion.
A 90min boil may be needed to boil off excess volumes to make sure you hit your target OG. Some people reckon DMS is better driven off with a longer boil but a fairly vigorous boil for 60mins will also take care of that.
I would stick with a 60min mash & 60min boil for pretty much everything unless you are aiming for a super huge ABV beer with a large grain bill.

Nath beat me to it.


----------



## marksfish (11/3/11)

the mash is to convert the starch in the malt into sugar by enzymes, most mash for 60 min but some mash for 90 min (myself included) just to be sure. if using ale malt or extract a 60 min boil will do the job but if using a pilsner malt a 90-100 min boil is used to drive of d.m.s an off flavor in beer.


----------



## felten (12/3/11)

Enzyme activity is affected by the temperature, the higher it is the faster they will convert, so it is recommended if you are mashing at a low temperature to extend the rest (90m or more) to ensure complete conversion, like crusty said.

As for the boil time, it is recommended to do a 90m boil with pilsner and lightly kilned malts because they contain more SMM, the precursor to DMS which you want to remove from the wort via boiling. link on DMS and its half life here.


----------



## MHB (12/3/11)

Mashing longer is an interesting question, some mash programs go a lot longer than 90 minutes, the longest I have ever run took around 4 hours and there are very good reasons to do this.

There are something like 27 enzymes that can act on a grist, we mostly talk about Amylase and that's by far and away the most important, you will also hear reference made to Phytase, Glucanase, Protease and some others, these tend to be killed (denatured) if you mash in, in the mid 60's but they can be very important if you have a lot of un/under modified grain or a lot of wheat in your grist.

Although all or most of the starch may be "Saccharified" in the first 20-30 minutes, you won't have the right ratio of fermentable and unfermentable sugars, the sweet water will be rich in dextrins and if you fermented it you would get a very full bodied wort and an out of balance beer.

Boiling likewise is more complex than just getting the Alpha acid isomerised, you are as mentioned above trying to strip out some undesirable volatiles, another important function of wort boiling is to reduce the soluble protein in the wort, with modern well modified malt this is relatively easy to achieve in 60 minutes (for Ale anyway) if however you are using an older variety like Maris Otter you will see immense benefits to a 120 minute boil. I think it's worth doing a MO ale and drawing samples at 60,90 and 120 minutes (just a couple of hundred mills in a jar) and having a look and taste to see how much difference it makes.

As is so often the case there is not going to be a single "Right" answer, there are pros and cons to each decision, if you keep making choices based on whether or not the ingredient or the process will improve the beer, rather than on is it cheaper or easier, the quality of your beer will improve.

MHB


----------



## pcmfisher (12/3/11)

MHB said:


> Although all or most of the starch may be "Saccharified" in the first 20-30 minutes, you won't have the right ratio of fermentable and unfermentable sugars, the sweet water will be rich in dextrins and if you fermented it you would get a very full bodied wort and an out of balance beer.



Is that regardless of mash temperature?
How would different mash temperatures affect the out of balanceness :huh: caused by a short mash?


----------



## Bribie G (12/3/11)

Inspired by Dave Line's old book "Brewing beers like those you buy" and his famous instructions "Mash for 90 minutes, or overnight"  I did an overnight mash last year with a TTL and it turned out fine. However I don't do it as a rule because of the extra power and time required to get the temp back up next day.
However it's a good lurk to have up your sleeve if you are caught out on a brewday and something urgent pops up.


----------



## beermonster17 (12/3/11)

felten said:


> Enzyme activity is affected by the temperature, the higher it is the faster they will convert, so it is recommended if you are mashing at a low temperature to extend the rest (90m or more) to ensure complete conversion, like crusty said.
> 
> As for the boil time, it is recommended to do a 90m boil with pilsner and lightly kilned malts because they contain more SMM, the precursor to DMS which you want to remove from the wort via boiling. link on DMS and its half life here.




thanks for all the good advice guys with the recipie i'm trying it's the dr smurtos landlord ale which says mash for 90 and boil for 90 do you think this needs to be a 90 min boil as that would increase the whole brew day by a fair bit cheers,
beermonster.


----------



## goomboogo (13/3/11)

I've just looked the Dr's recipe in the data base and see the base malt is Maris Otter. I will assume this is what you intend to use. If so, a 90 minute boil is highly recommended. Have another look at MHB's post and in particular the paragraph about Maris Otter.

I agree with idea that these choices should be made on the basis of whether it improves the quality of the beer rather than being what is easier or cheaper. If a 60 minute boil is what you desire then there are other possibilities for base malt that may be preferable to the Maris Otter. But then it won't be the beer in the original recipe. Choices are many and only you can make them. After all, it is your beer.


----------



## beermonster17 (14/3/11)

goomboogo said:


> I've just looked the Dr's recipe in the data base and see the base malt is Maris Otter. I will assume this is what you intend to use. If so, a 90 minute boil is highly recommended. Have another look at MHB's post and in particular the paragraph about Maris Otter.
> 
> I agree with idea that these choices should be made on the basis of whether it improves the quality of the beer rather than being what is easier or cheaper. If a 60 minute boil is what you desire then there are other possibilities for base malt that may be preferable to the Maris Otter. But then it won't be the beer in the original recipe. Choices are many and only you can make them. After all, it is your beer.




I've decided to try a 60 min boil and a 90 min and compare the results when i have finished thanks again for the help will keep you posted. On the subject of DMS does this just effect the taste or does this add to a bad hangover effect?


----------



## goomboogo (14/3/11)

The effects of DMS present in finished beer are described variously as cooked vegetables, creamed corn, cabbage, amongst others. So yes it can have an effect on flavour at the right levels. Theses levels differ depending on an individual's perceptive threshold for such compounds. Although, if you're using Maris Otter and have a vigorous boil (60 or 90 minute) I don't think you will run into too many issues with DMS.


----------



## MHB (14/3/11)

DMS is only a problem for Lager/Pilsner malt, the more intensive kilning given to Ale malt breaks down or ejects the precursors.

Maris Otter is an Ale malt so I think you can forget all about DMS.

Still reckon you should do a 90/120 with Maris, shite if your going to lash out and buy one of the most expensive and most highly regarded malts on earth treat it right, whats an extra half hour or even an hour when it comes to beer.

MHB


----------



## Thirsty Boy (14/3/11)

interesting MHB - I've really not played a lot with MO. But I am starting to brew with more high quality imported malts at the moment and so i might give the 120min boil a go with my next English ale. Thanks.

TB


----------



## [email protected] (14/3/11)

Interesting comment about the MO, i just used it for the first time , only did a 60min boil and i am not really that impressed with the clarity of the beer
compared to previous base malts using the same process. In the future i think i may try 120min boil.
The taste however is great, MO has a real depth to it when the beer warms up a bit after serving.


----------



## MHB (14/3/11)

MO is an old malt variety (perhaps the last of them), I never was happy with the way MO beers presented, always fairly turbid so I modelled the old 400 minute brew cycle and what do you know stunning clarity and a beautiful honey gold colour.

90/120 is the cutting the corners version; but not too many.

I'm thinking I'll get myself a 1Kg of Heritage Crystal 10Kg of Floor Malted Maris, a shed load of EKG plugs and do myself a no holds barred Luddite Pale Ale, about 1.065, 35-40 EBC and IBU, Ringwood yeast, run it through the hop-back and serve on a hand pull

MHB


----------



## [email protected] (14/3/11)

MHB said:


> I'm thinking I'll get myself a 1Kg of Heritage Crystal 10Kg of Floor Malted Maris, a shed load of EKG plugs and do myself a no holds barred Luddite Pale Ale, about 1.065, 35-40 EBC and IBU, Ringwood yeast, run it through the hop-back and serve on a hand pull
> 
> MHB



:icon_drool2: :icon_drool2: :icon_drool2:


----------



## asis (15/3/11)

I also recently used MO for the first or maybe second time ever. 
I was at MHB complaining about the clarity of the beer that had been kegged for about 10 days. First thing Mark asked was did I use MO and how long did I boil for. I had mashed for 90 mins and boiled for 90 mins and the beer literally looks like dam water  . It has been in the kegs for 3 weeks now with no improvement. Luckily it tastes fine. :mellow:


----------



## gregs (15/3/11)

I have been reading this thread with interest and dont have any answer; but I have used MO on 5 occasions in 2 different beers.

Three of them being Docs Yard Glass Session Lite and two of them being a Landlord clone.

Each time I have used MO I find that it kind of dough balls in the mash tun, leaving the very small dough balls dry in the centre and knocking the usual 80% efficiency a little lower, I have to stir the bejesus out of it to try and get it wet. But disregarding this, the beers have been hazier than other malts I have used. The mash and boil times were 60 min.

Do you think that if MO doesnt convert as easily (due to having trouble getting the entire mash wet)that this may contribute to haze of some description?


----------



## MHB (15/3/11)

No I think Maris converts just fine, it just cracks differently to other malts. It really is an antique variety and hasn't had the benefit of hundreds of generation of selective breading (in the modern sense anyway).

A one size fits all approach to milling malt can turn around and bite you on occasions, personally a very coarse crack works for me, just a bit finer than a floating mash and a bucket full of patience.

MHB


----------



## gregs (15/3/11)

Yeah the milling of malt is defiantly as you say; not a one size fits all. My mill is a precision made 4 inch stainless roller job and I have found that malts do crush differently. And I find that MO is harder to wet in the mash, but maybe I need to use patience.


----------



## Ross (15/3/11)

We use Maris Otter virtually every day in our brewery & only boil for 60 minutes - The beers ALL have excellent clarity.
I've had problems with Bairds MO in the long distant past but never with Fawcett's, which is why it's the only MO we use.

Ross


----------



## bradsbrew (15/3/11)

Ross said:


> We use Maris Otter virtually every day in our brewery & only boil for 60 minutes - The beers ALL have excellent clarity.
> I've had problems with Bairds MO in the long distant past but never with Fawcett's, which is why it's the only MO we use.
> 
> Ross


Well that answers the puzzle for me. I was thinking I havn't had any hazy problem with MO and my marga is set reasonable fine but yeah I have only used the Fawcett's.

Cheers


----------



## [email protected] (15/3/11)

Interesting again. I did not use TF MO, but i have used some of their other base malts a few times now and they have all by far (to me anyway) been my best beers in terms of clean flavours and overall clarity.


----------



## peaky (15/3/11)

Ross said:


> We use Maris Otter virtually every day in our brewery & only boil for 60 minutes - The beers ALL have excellent clarity.
> I've had problems with Bairds MO in the long distant past but never with Fawcett's, which is why it's the only MO we use.
> 
> Ross



Ross, 

Do you think a 60min boil would work ok for Simpson's MO? I've never used MO before and I have a bag of Simpson's arriving soon. I'm guessing a 90min boil wouldn't hurt but if it's not really necessary....

Cheers


----------



## MHB (15/3/11)

If you are going to go the extra expense of using Maris it would be the floor malted, so that's the Fawcett. Over the years people have had lots of problems with turbidity from MO, being floor malted there is going to be some variation; it may be a batch to batch issue, a combination of local water chemistry and the grain... whatever the cause, a longer mash/boil certainly fixes the problem.

If you are getting good results without the extra work, great, but if you have an issue or just want to see if there is a difference try a 90/120 cycle and see what happens.

MHB


----------



## bradsbrew (15/3/11)

Ross said:


> We use Maris Otter virtually every day in our brewery & only boil for 60 minutes - The beers ALL have excellent clarity.
> I've had problems with Bairds MO in the long distant past but never with Fawcett's, which is why it's the only MO we use.
> 
> Ross






bradsbrew said:


> Well that answers the puzzle for me. I was thinking I havn't had any hazy problem with MO and my marga is set reasonable fine but yeah I have only used the Fawcett's.
> 
> Cheers






MHB said:


> If you are going to go the extra expense of using Maris it would be the floor malted, so that's the Fawcett. Over the years people have had lots of problems with turbidity from MO, being floor malted there is going to be some variation; it may be a batch to batch issue, a combination of local water chemistry and the grain... whatever the cause, a longer mash/boil certainly fixes the problem.
> 
> If you are getting good results without the extra work, great, but if you have an issue or just want to see if there is a difference try a 90/120 cycle and see what happens.
> 
> MHB


Thought I'd better add that I now mash for 90 and boil for at least 90. Good info BTW MHB

Cheers


----------



## Bribie G (15/3/11)

MHB - I take it that the bittering hop addition would still be 60 mins or would you go the 90 mins with that as well?

I've recently gone onto 75 mins for all boils, with the first 15 to let it settle down and get trucking then add the hops for 60 mins. Despite the ravages of Anna Bligh, boiling in an urn isn't expensive - about the same as running a fan heater - so it's just time really.


----------



## bradsbrew (15/3/11)

BribieG said:


> MHB - I take it that the bittering hop addition would still be 60 mins or would you go the 90 mins with that as well?
> 
> I've recently gone onto 75 mins for all boils, with the first 15 to let it settle down and get trucking then add the hops for 60 mins. Despite the ravages of Anna Bligh, boiling in an urn isn't expensive - about the same as running a fan heater - so it's just time really.



:icon_offtopic: Bribie have you tried FWHing? I have recently changed to a hopping regime of FWH , 15 or 10 min hop then cube hopping. I have found the bitterness is *not* so harsh/astringuent.

Brad

added one word makes a big difference.


----------



## Bribie G (15/3/11)

:icon_offtopic: harsh and astringent with FWH or with cube hopping?

I recently did a version of Manticle's Youngs Special London Ale and cube hopped with 45g of Progress. It's not a pleasant beer, something really out of balance, a sort of ISO twang, almost like a kit twang - the malt is fine. I tipped the last third of the keg. Got a couple of bottles in the archive, I'd welcome your opinion at BABBs if you are going to the March meeting. I don't cube hop any more, I use the argon method.


----------



## bradsbrew (15/3/11)

BribieG said:


> :icon_offtopic: harsh and astringent with FWH or with cube hopping?
> 
> I recently did a version of Manticle's Youngs Special London Ale and cube hopped with 45g of Progress. It's not a pleasant beer, something really out of balance, a sort of ISO twang, almost like a kit twang - the malt is fine. I tipped the last third of the keg. Got a couple of bottles in the archive, I'd welcome your opinion at BABBs if you are going to the March meeting. I don't cube hop any more, I use the argon method.


Sorry mate. Was meant to be* not* so harsh/astinguent. Using FWH compared to 60min boil with no chill method I find that bitterness tends to be less harsh with FWH

Cheers


----------



## Bribie G (15/3/11)

Seeing as all my bittering hops are pellets then it's just a case of chucking them in as soon as the Bag is hoisted.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (15/3/11)

MHB said:


> No I think Maris converts just fine, it just cracks differently to other malts. It really is an antique variety and hasn't had the benefit of hundreds of generation of selective breading (in the modern sense anyway).
> 
> A one size fits all approach to milling malt can turn around and bite you on occasions, personally a very coarse crack works for me, just a bit finer than a floating mash and a bucket full of patience.
> 
> MHB



Jeez MHB, its not that ancient - it was introduced sometime in the 60s IIRC and came out of research at a plant breeding institute ... Hardly what the Babylonians were making their beer out of.

It stopped being popular there for a while - maybe there were issues with it in the past because it was only being grown in small lots and the chance to be picky about the malting quality of the barley wasn't there. Different maltsters might have had better supply contracts and the choice of better quality raw material?? Which might explain it cracking differently... Small maltster, lower end of the malting quality spectrum, smaller average kernal size, cracks more poorly for a given mill setting? 

Speculation only.


----------



## Bribie G (15/3/11)

Graham Wheeler reckons that if every UK beer that claims to be made from MO was actually _made_ from it, Britain would be endless waving fields of Maris Otter from horizon to horizon


----------



## gregs (16/3/11)

BribieG said:


> Graham Wheeler reckons that if every UK beer that claims to be made from MO was actually _made_ from it, Britain would be endless waving fields of Maris Otter from horizon to horizon




That sounds like King Island beef, every restaurant in Australia has it on the menu and the Island is just a speck on the map with a breading stock you could count on your fingers and toes.

Anyhow back on topic, even though I find MO a little harder to wet in the mash I still think it is one of the great malts to have in your kit.


----------



## Punkal (16/3/11)

Vic45 that brings up a good question. What % of Maris Otter grain do you (retailers) have to have in your malted grain to call it Maris Otter? and how much of that malted grain do you have to have in a beer to say it has been made with Maris Otter?


----------



## MHB (16/3/11)

Punkal said:


> Vic45 that brings up a good question. What % of Maris Otter grain do you (retailers) have to have in your malted grain to call it Maris Otter? and how much of that malted grain do you have to have in a beer to say it has been made with Maris Otter?



There are two separate questions there so...

What % of Maris Otter grain do you (retailers) have to have in your malted grain to call it Maris Otter?
100%
When we (as Retailers) buy Maris or any other grain (read hop and yeast to for that matter) it comes in a bag labelled with the contents, the same bag you get if you buy by the bag.
There never has been any suggestion that any unethical trade practices are going on at the farm, malting, distribution or retail level of the industry.
Personally I would be extremely careful about even hinting that anything untoward was going on without some very strong evidence, each delivery comes with laboratory reports and in the case of English malts you could track it back to the farm if you really wanted to. Likewise some of the US hops have the farmers name on the 5Kg package, all have type Alpha, often Beta and where grown.


how much of that malted grain do you have to have in a beer to say it has been made with Maris Otter?
More than 0%
If a package says made *with*... it's pretty much open season
On the other hand made *from* mean only the ingredients listed are used.

I think what is being alluded to is that many brewers use *some* Maris in their beer, but the impression is given that the beer is all Maris. In part I suspect this happens when the marketing/advertising department gets hold of the label. If a label said made with English Crystal Malt, you wouldn't assume that that was the only malt in the beer.

MHB


----------



## DJR (16/3/11)

MHB said:


> [/size]On the other hand made *from* mean only the ingredients listed are used.



"Made from" vs "Made from only" perhaps as well as another distinction? I can see Made From still being used to represent more than 0%


----------



## Punkal (16/3/11)

MHB, I should have probably used maltsters instead of relaters, it was only a quick replay to Vic45's comments "A Melbourne maltster told me there is twice as much maris otter sold as there is grown." 

I simply asked what % of grain there needs to be in a brand for it to be called that name... according to the comments by Vic45 that would appear to be 50%... 

If you would like me to remove my comment from (retailers) and change it to (maltsters) i can do that, it appears it has stuck a nerve... 

Maybe i need to put a extra line in my sig block saying don't take anything i say serious or maybe just copy something from a EULA...


----------



## warra48 (23/3/11)

MHB said:


> Mashing longer is an interesting question, some mash programs go a lot longer than 90 minutes, the longest I have ever run took around 4 hours and there are very good reasons to do this.
> 
> There are something like 27 enzymes that can act on a grist, we mostly talk about Amylase and that's by far and away the most important, you will also hear reference made to Phytase, Glucanase, Protease and some others, these tend to be killed (denatured) if you mash in, in the mid 60's but they can be very important if you have a lot of un/under modified grain or a lot of wheat in your grist.
> 
> ...



Brewed an Amber Ale today. 92% TF Maris Otter, 7% mixed Crystal, 1% Chocolate. Mashed 2 hours at 66C, and did a 120 minute boil.
Never ever, in 4 years of brewing, have I had such clear wort into the fermenter. It looked really clear, almost bright, no haze whatsoever. The wort pre-boil tasted absolutely gorgeous, and clean as a whistle. I have good hopes for this brew.

I know it's only a single batch, but it definitely tends to support the information from MHB. I'll be following this regime for future brews made with the balance of this sack of TFMO.


----------



## wessmith (23/3/11)

Just a bit of info to pass on - you MUST maintain a good level of calcium in your English style brews to ensure good flocculation in the kettle and also good attenuation in your ferment. All English brewers practice this in accordance with their water profiles. And for the record, I have never had a problem with wort clarity OR final beer clarity with floor malted MO. Look up the water profiles for the UK regions and think about adding in some CaCl2 in the kettle - say 4g/100ltrs

Wes


----------



## Brad Churchill (23/3/11)

Would be interested to hear how this one compares with others you have done once it has had 4 - 6 weeks to condition.

Cheers

Brad



warra48 said:


> Brewed an Amber Ale today. 92% TF Maris Otter, 7% mixed Crystal, 1% Chocolate. Mashed 2 hours at 66C, and did a 120 minute boil.
> Never ever, in 4 years of brewing, have I had such clear wort into the fermenter. It looked really clear, almost bright, no haze whatsoever. The wort pre-boil tasted absolutely gorgeous, and clean as a whistle. I have good hopes for this brew.
> 
> I know it's only a single batch, but it definitely tends to support the information from MHB. I'll be following this regime for future brews made with the balance of this sack of TFMO.


----------



## manticle (23/3/11)

BribieG said:


> :icon_offtopic: harsh and astringent with FWH or with cube hopping?
> 
> I recently did a version of Manticle's Youngs Special London Ale and cube hopped with 45g of Progress. It's not a pleasant beer, something really out of balance, a sort of ISO twang, almost like a kit twang - the malt is fine. I tipped the last third of the keg. Got a couple of bottles in the archive, I'd welcome your opinion at BABBs if you are going to the March meeting. I don't cube hop any more, I use the argon method.



Manticle is not happy to have his name associated with this particular beer that Bribie tipped out. Manticle thinks BribieG should try the recipe exactly as written (no cube hopping, no progress).

Manticle is also very interested in the idea of longer boils for MO as MO is one of my favourite malts. Just bought some TF for a landlord homage attempt so I'll extend my usual 75 minute boil to 100+ minutes.


----------



## MHB (23/3/11)

Wes
So another 40 ppm CaCl2 into the kettle on top of what would be considered reasonable for the mash? Im generally looking for ~150 ppm of Calcium at the start for UK ales.

Oh fork it the spammers are back
See ya
Mark


----------



## manticle (26/3/11)

manticle said:


> Just bought some TF for a landlord homage attempt so I'll extend my usual 75 minute boil to 100+ minutes.



Made a landlord clone today using abovementioned TF golden promise. Mashed for about 100 minutes (intended 90 but got caught at the shops) then boiled for about the same (100-105).

Wort from the tun was the cloudiest I've seen and despite more vorlaufing than usual, I couldn't seem to clear it. Loads of proteinaceous material in the tun that took longer than usual to settle.

Post boil wort was similar - loads of fluffy break material at the bottom with the hop debris but the wort still seemed hazy.

Next time I'll try boiling for 120-150 minutes and see if that makes any difference.

It will be interesting to see how the no-chilled wort clears up when cooler.


----------

