Benefits Of A 3v Brew Rig?

[Muscovy_333]

oh, for some reason i thought i had read to the end of the thread and I hadn't - excuse my slightly out of whack post.

Thanks for linking to the article - interestingly, its been posted before when this argument has come up previously and its also more or less the only thing that ever is linked to by either people who support the general proposition that "turbid wort is bad" OR by people who believe that its not so bad as all that. its the only reasonably comprehensive paper that actually addresses the topic. And its inconclusive - there's enough in it and the material it references to build a half decent argument either way.

And thats the point - "Turbid wort is bad, its the lipids wot does it..." is trotted out as something which is self evidently true, beyond argument and of paramount importance. And thats just not so. The truth is that clear wort is, on balance, probably better than turbid wort, a bit. And thats about it.

If someone would perhaps talk reasonably about the possible quality implications, their reasonable likelihood and severity, and how they could perhaps be avoided or minimised in a situation like BIAB, that might be better recieved than the general technique put downs.

Mind you - the thing that no doubt kicked this off. Someone saying that an advantage of a multi vessel system is that it can produce clear wort whereas a BIAB system does not. Well, thats just plain true. Whether you think it matters or not is a different thing.

If people know of them, I'd still very much like to be pointed at other texts/articles that directly address the topic so i can develop my opinion (needless to say i fall onto the "not so bad" side if the argument at the moment) further.


EDIT: and as usual i take so long to type that the replies i am looking for happen while I'm doing it. Thanks BF, I've read that article before - same authors as the other one and unfortunately, roughly the same sort of "bit each way" conclusions to be drawn. But more information is more. Thanks.

Long chain fatty acids = oxidation/auto-oxidation= staling/rancidity
To add another dimension; I would argue that perhaps fatty acid composition of the grain bill/age and handling of the grain (stability of the inherent FA's), mill size and high efficiency may potentially increase or vary extraction of fatty acids into the wort.


Thus subjectively concluding that it probably has just as much to do with individual process/handling of ingredients, fermentation and storage conditions of beer, not to mention inclusion or exsisting levels of salts/minerals that are known to chelate or kerb oxidation of long chain fatty acids.

Conclusion...each to their own, their are too many important variables to beer quality to compare based on the configuration of your rig.

Perhaps the answers lie outside of the general brewing literature. Starch manufacturers/processors probably have mre sound literature when it comes to this discussion. They make a whole lot more money out of grains than beer producers and have a million more value added products using the fractions of grains.
Most beer literature i have read seems a little antequated on the chemsitry/biochemstry side of things IMHO.

Can of worms re-opened!

 

[Cocko]

Go electric.

over.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

Long chain fatty acids = oxidation/auto-oxidation= staling/rancidity
To add another dimension; I would argue that perhaps fatty acid composition of the grain bill/age and handling of the grain (stability of the inherent FA's), mill size and high efficiency may potentially increase or vary extraction of fatty acids into the wort.


Thus subjectively concluding that it probably has just as much to do with individual process/handling of ingredients, fermentation and storage conditions of beer, not to mention inclusion or exsisting levels of salts/minerals that are known to chelate or kerb oxidation of long chain fatty acids.

Conclusion...each to their own, their are too many important variables to beer quality to compare based on the configuration of your rig.

Perhaps the answers lie outside of the general brewing literature. Starch manufacturers/processors probably have mre sound literature when it comes to this discussion. They make a whole lot more money out of grains than beer producers and have a million more value added products using the fractions of grains.
Most beer literature i have read seems a little antequated on the chemsitry/biochemstry side of things IMHO.

Can of worms re-opened!

Thanks dude, but i dont really need the science explained to me - I understand it already. I'm looking for actual literature which supports the general conclusions that people draw from the science. I know its there, just not so much in the books and journals I have access to (or not that I've found anyway).

The starch guys and pure ethanol products probably do have a whack of info - but you'd assume that they'd be more interested in pure bang for buck stuff rather than in the sorts of quality/stability/flavour issues that are relevant for beverages. Worth a look though - might start nosing around in distillers books and cereal science stuff. Cheers

 

[Jay Cee]

This gave me 86% efficiency which is better or on par with my ex 3V system.

Same grain all the time ? I have found a few times that I get exceptional efficiency, but have since reviewed that and determined the grain to be responsible. JW vs MO.

Efficiency IMO is not much of an argument for one system over another. The difference between 75% & 85% in hitting targets with grain bill works out to be a few cents per bottle extra.

 

[Muscovy_333]

Thanks dude, but i dont really need the science explained to me - I understand it already.

Sorry, it was not aimed at you, just linked it to your comments as they are a sub-thread to the OP's question.

I would be looking in published cereal technology references for this sort of research, as opposed to individual scientific studies, my 2c again. I have responded to your comments for the same reason as previous.