Byo Magazine - No Sparge

[hazard]

Just got latest BYO Magazine - saw an interesting article about no sparge brewing (apologies if this has been already covered - did a search and couldn't find anything). An American brewer claims to have improved the taste of his beer by swithing from fly sparging to no sparging ie mash grain in full boil volume of water. Sounds a bit like "BIAB without a Bag". Says he got the idea after tasting one of Jamil's beers at a home brew competition, and claims that this is why Jamil's beer is so good. I am sure all our BIAB brewers would agree that this works well, but if you haven't got a bag, would you try this at home? I use an esky and do batch sparging, I guess the benefit for me would be to eliminate one sparge - but then I would need a bigger esky!! Mine is only 27 litre, my boil volume is usually 28 litres (lose 56 litres during the boil) so there's no room for grain in this esky. What do you all think?

 

[eamonnfoley]

Yes, no sparge is a good way to get a rich malt character in the beer because you are lowering efficiency and leaving sugars (the harder to get, more grainy ones) in your grains that you would normally sparge out.

BIAB wont yield quite the same rich malt profile because the thin mash and draining of the bag rinses out a lot of sugar - hence the decent efficiencies experienced by BIAB brewers. You would have to reduce the L:G ratio to "simulate" no sparge brewing with BIAB.

 

[Nick JD]

I think no-sparging is the only reason that BIAB can beat 3V and other methods in comps. But maybe it isn't the sparging that's the issue ... it's the water:grain ratio that changes the flavour. No way to tell which one, so it's both.

Stands to reason that pouring hot water on mashed grains might be drawing out some undesirable flavours.

Might even be that the hallowed "clear wort" doesn't actually make sense...

Who knows - not like BIAB is second rate, but.

Jamil is not one to speak lightly about techniques - although I did hear him say once that he's going to make an all-spec-malt batch - so maybe he's just bored.

 

[argon]

I read that same article the other day, got me thinkgin about a recent experience i had with single vs double batch sparging. Link here to thread.

I have also heard Jamil bang on a little about mash efficiency and how he likes to aim for 70% because it gives him a more pleasant malt presence. When i last brewed i single sparged and giot about 70% so hopefully i note a difference to my usual double sparge 75%. And really hope i see a marked improvement last time i hit 85% and got majorly pinged at a comp for astringency (which i totally agree with)

As for no-sparge brewing, it's been around for a while... refer to Braumeister and BIAB etc. I think Thirsty Boy has done a few no-sparge brews (could even be his default process) so nothing grounbreaking really. But a nice article to keep you thinking.

 

[davo4772]

I don't think Jamil brews at home much these days.
If you listen to the Fullers ESB can you brew it episode he goes into detail about it. Also in the sparging episode of brew strong I think they spend some time discussing not sparging.

 

[Bribie G]

It could be argued that sparging is really only a 20th Century industrial process to get as much alcohol potential out of the grain as possible to keep the peasants pissed and the company accountants happy. Prior to that, a mash would be performed and the wort run off to be boiled. Then another mash to produce a smaller beer - yup the good old parti-gyle system. Note the second mash was a mash not a sparge.
WRT the liquor to grain ratio, I'd see no problem in mashing at a thicker consistency for an hour or whatever, then adding the rest of the liquor, giving a stir, and then draining all of that off to be boiled. By that stage the flavour profile would be locked in.

Interesting at the system wars the four systems all hit around the same efficiency anyway, despite two of them employing sparging. Can't remember if the BrauMeister did a wee sparge, will need to check YouTube.

 

[Paul H]

.....company accountants happy.

I believe the above is a contradiction in terms.

Cheers

Paul

 

[manticle]

I'm sure that one process isn't solely responsible for Jamil's beers being good.

Having tasted beers from a variety of systems, I don't believe that non sparge BIAB makes either inferior or superior wort to any of the other tried and true methods. It just makes wort.

Would be interesting to try (and my esky is probably big enough that I could get away with it). I might even have a crack at a full volume BIAB, No sparge in an esky and normal batch sparge brew (normal as in what I do every brew). Simple grist, single hop with 3 additions, same yeast.

 

[jayse]

This is basically my standard technique, you or at least I still mash in at a normal liquor ratio then at the end of the mash you drop all the rest of the required liquor into the tun and mix it up, recycle then drain. Its more like batch sparging really except there is only one batch, the liquor you would ussually use for the second batch gets added to the mash before you run it off rather then after you run it off.

What you end up with is all the wort for start of boil in the tun at the expected gravity, PH and volume etc, plus the grain still of course. When you seperate the grain there is no changes in gravity and PH of the wort running through, you could think of it as a little bit idiot proof to avoid extracting anything that may be astringent, hence why people might be claiming a smooth malt flavour. An added bonus is also how simple it is as long as your mash tun is large enough which 50litres ussually is just for a standard batch of beer.

 

[super_simian]

It could be argued that sparging is really only a 20th Century industrial process to get as much alcohol potential out of the grain as possible to keep the peasants pissed and the company accountants happy. Prior to that, a mash would be performed and the wort run off to be boiled. Then another mash to produce a smaller beer - yup the good old parti-gyle system. Note the second mash was a mash not a sparge.

Parti-gyle is a bit more complex than that - the different worts were run off and hopped differently (sometimes) in the boil and may have had different sugar additions, but the bit people skip over is that they were then blended to create different strength worts pre-fermentation. The practice of making separate beers from each running was pretty much dead by the mid-1700s. Also interesting is that the stereotypically tightfisted Scottish introduced the sparge to the rest of Britain!

 

[jbirbeck]

Prior to that, a mash would be performed and the wort run off to be boiled. Then another mash to produce a smaller beer - yup the good old parti-gyle system. Note the second mash was a mash not a sparge.

tell me more of this 'second mash'.

I've always done a 'sparge' for my partigyle (whether the second flooding of the mash is at mash temps or sparge temps)...will be doing it again over the weekend doing an ABW and APA. partigyle? maybe not becasue I'm not mashing anything else, just first and second runnings.

the BYO article was an interesting one. I have always ended up getting lower efficiencies for a range of reasons and when the higher efficiencies have kicked in I've been less than impressed with the beers. good chance its coincidental. But no-sparge is not something I'm about to jump on, I like my double sparge situation, but I may try it at some point. I think there have been times I have inadvertantly done it when overfilling the MT initially having been distracted by something else.