Brewing Myths Caused By Chinese Whispers

[Ducatiboy stu]

Dont let Tony read that bit about POR...... :lol:

 

[bindi]

Well there's a great myth busted, thanks Wes - It was doing a search for "inverted sugar" that found me my first beer forum (Grumpy's) & the method described to produce it - I've been using the method ever since. Next time i shan't bother & hopefully will notice no difference.

cheers Ross

I have been using the same [grumpy's] method for ages I shan't bother and also hope for no difference.

 

[wessmith]

I was alsways under the impression the reason that "invert sugar" was made was primarily for colour. You can get some really nice red hues if boil at the correct temps for long enough. Great for Belgian styles. Adding a bit of citric acid during the process doesn't hurt (even if it does only invert 10%).

cheers

Darren

Darren, I think you may be confusing invert sugar with caramelised sugar when you refer to colour. One thing is for sure though, that piece on how to make candy sugar written many years ago by the "guru" up north has confused so many people. It is just plain wrong as I and others have pointed out on many, many occasions. Candy sugar or crystalline sugar is the exact opposite of invert sugar. If the addition of citric acid did what is claimed, ie cause the sugar to become an invert sugar, then you would not have a block of crystaline sugar as the result. It would remain a syrup.

Wes

 

[Batz]

sorry to go :icon_offtopic: but if moderators pull a thread for whatever reason, isn't it common courtesy to advise the poster & give him/her the reason? This seems to have been a regular occurance of late & has lead to all sorts of (hopefully daft) conspiracy theories.
I've generally recieved excellent communication from the mods on posts that i've made in the past which have caused someone to complain, even when the post hasn't been pulled - but likewise have had posts removed without so much as a word.

Cheers Ross

The moderators on this site do a fair job IMO,of course I am a moderator.
When I started I was the third moderator on the site,we mainly deleted porn or other spam type threads before we were big enough to have the systems to stop this.
Now it seems we try our best to stop internal bickering !

You can't please all of the people all of the time And time may be against each mod. to write an explanation to each poster as to why his post was pulled,usually I believe you would receive this.
Please try to remain calm We are doing our best,it's a thankless job.


Batz

 

[Darren]

Darren, I think you may be confusing invert sugar with caramelised sugar when you refer to colour. One thing is for sure though, that piece on how to make candy sugar written many years ago by the "guru" up north has confused so many people. It is just plain wrong as I and others have pointed out on many, many occasions. Candy sugar or crystalline sugar is the exact opposite of invert sugar. If the addition of citric acid did what is claimed, ie cause the sugar to become an invert sugar, then you would not have a block of crystaline sugar as the result. It would remain a syrup.

Wes

Hi Wes,

No I am not that confused. What I wrote in the previous post was that taking a little bit of cane sugar and heating it at controlled temperatures produces a colour that no grain can acheive. The "guru" up north (No not Ross, Graham Sanders mostly knew what he was talking about) was well aware that total inversion was not acheived but the colour was fabulous. His work on this subject is well worth a read especially for the budding Belgian ale brewer. A bit of citric acid can do nothing but help.

cheers

Darren

 

[wessmith]

Hi Wes,

A bit of citric acid can do nothing but help.

cheers

Darren

How?

Wes

 

[dr K]

Wes nails it !
Invert sugar is commercially (generally) a syrup.
Sucrose (no matter whether it comes fro cane or beet) is a di-saccharide. Yeast does not like eating this. The simple addition of water in the right conditions will split some or all of the sucrose into Fructose and Glucose which yeast is happy to eat. These conditions include heat, acidity and enzymes as part of the process. If you throw sucrose into your fermentor the enzymes and the falling pH will take care of it, if you throw sucrose into your boil some of the sucrose will become F and G but not all, if you boil your syrup with citic acid then even more of of your sucrose will convert but still not all.
All you are doing is giving the yeast a helping hand, whether or not it needs it is speculative.
Would it not be nice if we lived in a perfect world....

K

 

[ozpowell]

Add chilli to beer makes it crisper??? :huh: In case you haven't seen it yet....

Cheers,
Michael.

 

[lowtech]

Nup, TRUE. Yeast cant ferment sucrose and has to invert it before fermentation can begin (on the sucrose). Yeast produces the enzyme invertase to do the job which splits glucose and fructose from sucrose. Dont forget though, there will also be other fermentables available in the brew like maltose as an example.

Wes

Err...Ummm....That was sorta my point.

Yeast produces invertase to do the inverting......ergo..... adding citric acid is a waste of time and an unnecessary step for HB'ing.
Plenty of Aussie type ales with 5/10% sucrose uninverted have not led to any odd flavours for me or elicited any comments from judges in comps.
Dex, a monohydrate seems to be more suitable in a belgian gold though(read drier finish)

LT

 

[braufrau]

If the addition of citric acid did what is claimed, ie cause the sugar to become an invert sugar, then you would not have a block of crystaline sugar as the result. It would remain a syrup.

But you don't get a block of crystalline sugar .. you get toffee which is sort of glass like because the small amounts of glucose and fructose is enough to upset the stacking of the sucrose. If you don't make your toffee properly you do get crystals of sugar in it and then its sort of like licking a cats tongue.
If you see what I mean! And also ... whether you end up with syrup for making daiquiris or toffee for the school fete depends on the amount of water in the mix.

Anyway .. its good to know the 10% figure.

 

[dr K]

Dex, a monohydrate seems to be more suitable in a belgian gold though(read drier finish)

Wow..next if I ever brew a Belgian Gold I will not forget the monohydrate, hope my LHBS has some!!!
Seriously Dextrose is another way of saying Glucose, which BTW has the same chemical composition as Fructose and if you take the number of C H and O molecules in Sucrose and add 2 x H and 1 x 0 (H2O) you can split it down the middle to make Fructose and Glucose (Dextrose)..simple really.
Much of the sugar debate comes from the fact that sucrose is cheaply and readily available in supermarkets, dextrose is only found in specialty stores and is far more expensive ofttimes due to an inflated profit margin.


K

 

[Stuster]

Much of the sugar debate comes from the fact that sucrose is cheaply and readily available in supermarkets, dextrose is only found in specialty stores and is far more expensive ofttimes due to an inflated profit margin.

Really. OMFG.

You cynic you.

 

[dr K]

Really. OMFG.

Fair call !!!!!
I have yet to get up after Rolling On The Floor Laughing.....

Klutz

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

Table sugar in beer....WOW.....thats an amazing concept....

 

[winkle]

I wonder if Lion Nathan have heard of this concept

 

[boingk]

Myth: ''There isn't much you can do to improve a kit-beer''

Fact: WTF? Yes there is! One of my favourite beers happens to be a kit-based one adulterated with LDME, a tad of dextrose, Munich grain and Tettnang hops all the way. Not to mention a certain Fermentis yeast... Not much you can do? My ass, thats just an excuse for mediocrity!

EDIT: And as for table sugar being significantly cheaper than dextrose, well, sure if you call 2 bucks a kilo a bank-busting difference than I guess it is. All my dorm mates at uni who flinch when I tell them I'm drinking home brew [and would they like a glass?]...well the discussion goes like this:

Me: Yeah? What it was bad hey?
Them: Oh yeah man, not too good hey - but it messed me up! Weird taste though, it was foul.
M: Hmmm, not really harsh...bitter...kinda vegemitey was it?
T: Yeah! Thats right, thats what it tasted like.
M: Well, the guy probably just used table sugar with the kit...never turns out too well.
T: Oh, ok then... *takes a drink of my brew* ...hey not bad! Cheers!

 

[Darren]

Wes and dr K,

Its the colour you fools, its the colour. How many times do i have to say it???? Boiling sugar with water gently and controlled makes for the most brilliant reds


Wes,

Nothing wrong with a bit of citric acid in a Belgian syle ale. After all, even the Germans use acid malt 8)

cheers

Darren

 

[newguy]

Myth: Kit beers are inferior to AG. The silver medal awarded to a kit beer at MCAB X would seem to indicate otherwise. The silver in category 10 American Ale was taken by former club member David Gummer (the MCAB folks misspelled it as Grummer). The beer is based on a Brewhouse Kit with some added grains and hops.

 

[wessmith]

Wes and dr K,

Its the colour you fools, its the colour. How many times do i have to say it???? Boiling sugar with water gently and controlled makes for the most brilliant reds


Wes,

Nothing wrong with a bit of citric acid in a Belgian syle ale. After all, even the Germans use acid malt 8)

cheers

Darren

Darren, your thought processes still seem to be in catch up mode. Boiling sugar slowly with a little water leads to caramelisation - something I pointed out to you in an earlier post. Far from being fools, dr K and I are well aware of the colour benefits of caramelised sugar - be it table sugar or the malt sugars in a good crystal/cara malt. It is the caramelisation that gives you the rich red colours.

And you still haven't explained what part you think acid plays in this process.

Wes

 

[Darren]

hydrolysis