Caramelising First Runnings

[muckanic]

If you boil bejebuz out of the wort to reduce it your not actually caramelising the wort your either burning it or just reducing it.

As long as the boil contains enough water to generate steam, the temperature won't rise much above 100C except for some of these odd browning reactions that occur at the interface of the wort and the kettle. Once most of the water is gone, the temperature rises sharply and pyrolysis starts to happen in a big way, and that is when most cooks would consider that they are making "caramel". One signal that this is all about to happen, as someone else mentioned, is that the wort foams up. Another signal of course is the increased viscosity.

It may well be that different sugars pyrolyse differently and at different rates, which could be a justification for using some acid to promote inversion of both sucrose and maltose. Note that inversion is actually a hydrolysis reaction, ie, it requires water. There is a school of thought that the heat is enough to make hydrolysis happen anyway (to some extent) without the presence of acid. And once the water becomes scarce it is possible that a dehydration reaction could reverse the hydrolysis.

One idea I have been tossing around for a while is to try and caramelise some dextrin (corn syrup) in a bid to replicate what might be going on during decoctions. Alternatively, I guess you could boil down some first runnings at an early stage of the mash, and hope not to deplete the enzyme content too much.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

One idea I have been tossing around for a while is to try and caramelise some dextrin (corn syrup) in a bid to replicate what might be going on during decoctions. Alternatively, I guess you could boil down some first runnings at an early stage of the mash, and hope not to deplete the enzyme content too much.

In a decoction you are definitely talking maillard reactions rather than caramelizations... so I doubt you would be able to replicate it with the corn syrup thing. You are in fact probably going to have trouble replicating it at all. As I said earlier, you get different maillard products depending on the conditions - moisture, sugar, pH, protien levels, temperature....

So in a boil you aren't getting the same mix of flavour/aroma/colour compounds as you get in a malt kiln, or in a decoction or in a concentrated wort boil.

Probably not a lot more trouble actually doing a decoction - as mucking about trying to emulate the flavours of a decoction

 

[RdeVjun]

Something I meant to add, I know we're all big boys and girls at this caper, but if you have a go at this just be careful with the caramelising hey? It gets pretty darned hot that pot of sticky goo, get some on you and firstly it will smart and then you'll be left with a blister, you may also swear in ways you hadn't thought possible.
And not only that, make sure there's lots of head- space in the pot. I'm saying this because the stuff will expand dramatically before it drops down to toffee. Last night's effort alarmed me even though it was just the product of 3 litres of wort in a 12 litre pot, it frothed up to about 2/3 full at the peak, but I was driving it pretty hard though. This pic is from another site mentioned earlier and looks like it has overflowed already (RHS), so it is not really big enough, hey?

(Source)
And its got a fair bit further to go I'd say, that's a pussy boil, and it could even grow some more. So, get this bit wrong and there will be sticky goo all through your stove/ burner and again, swear in ways you hadn't thought possible.

Also, any 3-Vers ever measured the SG of first runnings? My BIAB with 3.5kg grain in about 14 litres gives me ~1.060 pretty much every time (and then I'll sparge it), I'm just wondering how that compares to different methods and whether there is enough sugar in it.

Thanks everyone for your input too BTW, its a really useful thread this one.

Edit: Spelling...

 

[Thirsty Boy]

Rde Vjun,

Here is a chart from BrewKaiser's site giving the theoretical first runnings gravity for different L:G ratios - You can see that your 4:1 ratio would be giving a maximum of 1.066 and you are at 1.060 .. so I'd say most people are running roughly equivalently effective mashes and would be getting figures not a hell of a long way from a proportionally similar figure. So my 3:1 mash "should" give me 1.085, but in reality its probably like yours and down a couple of notches at 1.076... etc etc

TB

 

[RdeVjun]

Rde Vjun,

Here is a chart from BrewKaiser's site giving the theoretical first runnings gravity for different L:G ratios - You can see that your 4:1 ratio would be giving a maximum of 1.066 and you are at 1.060 .. so I'd say most people are running roughly equivalently effective mashes and would be getting figures not a hell of a long way from a proportionally similar figure. So my 3:1 mash "should" give me 1.085, but in reality its probably like yours and down a couple of notches at 1.076... etc etc

TB

Many thanks TB, that's quite helpful!
To be honest, I was being conservative and often hit around mid- 60's, but my volumes aren't perfect, so that could just be a function of poor volume estimation. I usually measure post- boil SG once it has cooled and then adjust volume up to the target SG, with a heavier grain input sometimes it is right up to a full batch. If need be I'll increase hops levels, but in all honesty its roughly SFA as noted earlier and our senses probably aren't that good at discriminating a few IBUs anyway.
What worries me though is low fermentability of the caramelised wort, am just about to get some numbers in from the latest batches' FGs, will post them when I can but one got stuck at 20, plus a few others are finishing higher than previous versions. I've also got a few bottles of the real thing (TTL that is) to sample over the weekend, some will inevitably make it into a tube for determination and comparison! Not that TTL is the be all and end all, I'm quite happy with what's coming out with these, just some things to note.
:beer:

 

[RdeVjun]

I've also got a few bottles of the real thing (TTL that is) to sample over the weekend, some will inevitably make it into a tube for determination and comparison! Not that TTL is the be all and end all, I'm quite happy with what's coming out with these, just some things to note.

Measured TTL's FG of 1.010 or thereabouts. Anyone else tested it?

I actually learnt a lot from this exercise, last weekend I bought a few bottles from one place, a smaller boutique bottle shop, the first sample was terrific and then saw some yesterday morning at another bigger chain bottle-o so I grabbed another and sampled it last night. The first was rather good, the second was very ordinary, however they had the same BBE date so I assume they all came here to the wholesaler in the same shipment. The first was quite crisp with excellent hopping and everything I expected, the second was like Melbourne Bitter with a hint of stale aromatic hops, not really worth $7.50 a pop. The place where I got the second one is where I've seen pallets of beer largely abandoned out in the sun in the carpark, who knows for how long.
During the last week I've discovered that we have a just few bottle shops here in Toowoomba that stock TTL, Spotted Cow Cellars who have a decent and diverse range for a fairly small shop, and also a First Choice near the CBD which is like a big warehouse with a lot of wine and spirits plus pallets of megaswill, but also a token specialty beer section. I guess folks can work out which sample came from where. Oh and there's a Dan's too, but the boutique stock is tucked away in a corner and gathering dust while BBE date is often not far off, I've not been there recently to see if they've started stocking TTL.

 

[pdtnc]

My Blog has got a shed load of hits from this thread!
Thought I'd sign up and have a look around.

 

[RdeVjun]

My Blog has got a shed load of hits from this thread!
Thought I'd sign up and have a look around.

Welcome mate, you'll find just a few TTL fanciers here! Thanks for putting up your recipe and method, I for one have found it quite helpful, obviously lots of other brewers are interested too.
Got yourself a bigger pot for caramelising wort yet?
:beer:

 

[pdtnc]

TTL is a classy pint when the beer fresh and well kept

Got a few bigger pans, but that one did me.
My recipe and method was a combination of other peoples methods and suggestions.
I'll alter my recipe next time for the grains but probably leave the hopping. Maybe boil the feck out of the caramel a bit more, though that does add a while to the brewday its tempting to omit and see what the results are like.

Welcome mate, you'll find just a few TTL fanciers here! Thanks for putting up your recipe and method, I for one have found it quite helpful, obviously lots of other brewers are interested too.
Got yourself a bigger pot for caramelising wort yet?
:beer:

 

[RdeVjun]

Aye, there'll be no argument from me!
My latest batches are straight Golden Promise mashed anywhere between 65 and 69C depending on my mood, caramelise 3 litres sometimes with citric acid to invert, Fuggles for bittering, EKG and Styrian for late hops (basically as per Dr Smurto's recipe, his recipes are all brilliant BTW) which seems to be the right combination for me and with 1469 which is a superb and versatile strain if you can get it. GP with a touch of melanoidin is good too, also 1768 gives the malt a kick, sulphate is pretty important as well. Like my posts say, lately I've going really hard on the caramelising, it isn't a stroll in the park either and not for the timid.
You're lucky to get the stuff out of the cask, we only get the bottled stuff here AFAIK, and as mentioned earlier it is variable in quality. I hadn't actually tasted the original until a week ago and while I'm not necessarily trying to clone TTL, it is a pretty darned good spot to aim... :icon_drool2:
A few of your kinsmen abound around here too, am sure you guys will all get on famously, now't t'be doubtin'!
:beer:

 

[pdtnc]

Yeah, fair few friends and relatives over there too
Your link seemed to be broken btw.

 

[RdeVjun]

Sorry about that, here's Dr Smurto's Landlord. BribieG's Superlandlord is another cracker.

 

[muckanic]

What worries me though is low fermentability of the caramelised wort, am just about to get some numbers in from the latest batches' FGs, will post them when I can but one got stuck at 20, plus a few others are finishing higher than previous versions.

Yeah, that's an aspect that doesn't receive a lot of attention. It suggests that either pyrolysed maltose isn't so fermentable for some reason, or that a dehydration reaction is occurring and is forming larger polymers out of the maltose. Either way, it conflicts somewhat with the notion of using acid to try and encourage sugar inversion (as in breakdown into smaller units) at the same time. It is interesting that there is also some brewing folklore around which suggests that decocted brews are less fermentable than the norm. Folks have speculated in the past that this could be due to beta amylase being selectively denatured by the heat, but it is also possible that it could be a caramelisation affect. Obviously, a decoction is not as viscous as a full-on caramelisation process, but it still seems to be more concentrated than a normal wort boil. Hence the need for constant stirring.

 

[pdtnc]

Sorry about that, here's Dr Smurto's Landlord. BribieG's Superlandlord is another cracker.

Interesting...
They might be worth a go, thanks

 

[Thirsty Boy]

Yeah, that's an aspect that doesn't receive a lot of attention. It suggests that either pyrolysed maltose isn't so fermentable for some reason, or that a dehydration reaction is occurring and is forming larger polymers out of the maltose. Either way, it conflicts somewhat with the notion of using acid to try and encourage sugar inversion (as in breakdown into smaller units) at the same time. It is interesting that there is also some brewing folklore around which suggests that decocted brews are less fermentable than the norm. Folks have speculated in the past that this could be due to beta amylase being selectively denatured by the heat, but it is also possible that it could be a caramelisation affect. Obviously, a decoction is not as viscous as a full-on caramelisation process, but it still seems to be more concentrated than a normal wort boil. Hence the need for constant stirring.

I thought - but now I come to think of it I am not sure why - that caramelized (pyrolyzed?) sugars were unfermentable... Mainly I suppose because crystal malt is quite unfermentable.

Generally for me I use the rule of thumb that says "sweet sugars ferment - unsweet sugars don't - except for caramelized ones which are both sweet & unfermentable"

So... which is it I wonder. Are caramelized fermentable sugars rendered at least partly unfermentable... or is it that caramelized unfermentable sugars are rendered sweeter than they were. Or do I just have it completely arse bout?

 

[RdeVjun]

My uneducated leaning is perhaps partial fermentability, at least at the scale and process I'm familiar with, i.e. not pure compounds but the wort I 'partially- caramelise'. The reason I say partial if because the whole of the wort I carmelise doesn't end up the same, it is incomplete, some gets burnt, some almost burnt, some less so. I also wonder if the real caramel is the stuff that sticks almost rock hard to the stirrer when stirring furiously close to the end, only a small amount ends up like this for me, I'd like to see more but I'm a bit of a chicken and afraid to go much further when it smokes the way it does. I guess I'd better stop being such a fairy and go even further, also getting some pictures would help... This is one pic of someone else's, mine have a similar appearance.

The repeatability side of things worries me so having objective measurements during the process would be helpful, I don't have a candy thermometer though (does look like I should get one though!) and that's why I dropped some into water way back in this thread, i.e. the 'soft ball' from cookery. This guy mentions 'hard crack' stage, maybe that's where I should aim, perhaps lowering the flame to reduce burning, also there's plenty of other useful information on his blog.

BTW, that test batch I mentioned earlier, I did it when I picked up a fresh bag of GP, caramelised 2 litres out of 18, Dr Smurto's hops schedule, fermented with 1469 but has stopped firmly at 1.020. I roused it, warmed it, tried all the tricks in the book except repitching, I even put a cupful in a small erlemeyer, shook the crap out of it every so often, left it in the top of the fermenting fridge where it is a bit warmer for four days and then remeasured this morning- still 1.020. Beautiful stonefruit BTW :icon_drool2: , it is magnificent but too much of the batch is being lost to samples! I'll think about bottling it, but only after testing in an erlenmeyer again with some fresh yeast.
So, pending the outcome from that test, there's obviously something that is unfermentable in it although some other batches since have gone way below 1.020, around 1.012. And the bought product is closer to 1.010, maybe 1.011.

All very confusing... many thanks though you guys for enlightening us on the technical side of things. I'll be doing more over the coming weeks, will post pictures and findings.
:beer:

 

[Kodos]

sorry to step back a little, but one small thing in this thread has confused me... people have talked about adding citric acid to "invert" the sugars in the wort-caramelising process. I've always been of the understanding that this process is used for inverting sucrose into it's two main components, glucose and fructose, so the yeast doesn't have to do it (and secrete an odd-tasting "cidery" enzyme to do it).

If we are caramelising all-malt wort, is there much point in converting the maltose sugar? (maltose being two glucose molecules, generally consumable by the yeast) and does it even do anything?

I've even seen on some AHB threads the idea that if you're putting sucrose in a 1hr full-batch boil, the acidity of the wort and the time involved suggests this is enough to invert the small amount of sucrose present in some recipes. Indeed, many of traditional English ale recipes I've seen call for small amounts of sugar of some type (brown, cane or otherwise) and I don't often see these recipes calling for inverting. This to me suggests that "inverting" is only necessary for kit brewers trying to add sugar but avoid the dreaded cidery flavours.

If someone could explain if I'm missing something I'd greatly appreciate it, because this caramalising thread is of real interest to me.

 

[randyrob]

Has anyone else tried stir-frying it in a wok?

apparently that is the way South Australian's do it!

 

[RdeVjun]

Good point Kodos, RyanBrews (and others) seems to think inverting isn't such a brilliant idea and I'm tending to agree (his blog has lots of useful information too BTW). I tried it to see if it makes much difference or enhances the process of caramelisation, but I'm now inclined to drop it out, the last batch I did had none and it seems to be the best so far, but it is still in the fermenter and crunch time will be when I crack a bottle or two. (Hopefully, it is just :icon_drool2: ...!! )
I wonder if the cidery kit situation you mention isn't just poor temperature control during fermentation though, some few cidery K&Ks I've been given to sample have been fermented mid- 20s (as per the manufacturer's ridiculous instructions) and just dreadful. Ryan's site discusses cidery aspect too, makes a good point about Belgians with lots of sucrose that isn't inverted.

 

[BoilerBoy]

sorry to step back a little, but one small thing in this thread has confused me... people have talked about adding citric acid to "invert" the sugars in the wort-caramelising process. I've always been of the understanding that this process is used for inverting sucrose into it's two main components, glucose and fructose, so the yeast doesn't have to do it (and secrete an odd-tasting "cidery" enzyme to do it).

If we are caramelising all-malt wort, is there much point in converting the maltose sugar? (maltose being two glucose molecules, generally consumable by the yeast) and does it even do anything?

I've even seen on some AHB threads the idea that if you're putting sucrose in a 1hr full-batch boil, the acidity of the wort and the time involved suggests this is enough to invert the small amount of sucrose present in some recipes. Indeed, many of traditional English ale recipes I've seen call for small amounts of sugar of some type (brown, cane or otherwise) and I don't often see these recipes calling for inverting. This to me suggests that "inverting" is only necessary for kit brewers trying to add sugar but avoid the dreaded cidery flavours.

If someone could explain if I'm missing something I'd greatly appreciate it, because this caramalising thread is of real interest to me.

Good points, I have never added citric acid in the boiling down process for the very reasons you have mentioned that its unneccessary in a full 1hr boil with acids already being present.

The boiling of sugar with citric acid to innvert sugar as far as I can see only really benefits brewers who are using kits and extracts and not doing a full boil and the best you can hope for in this process is only a partial conversion anyway.

When I have boiled down 1st runnings I add water back into the reduced syrup to achieve the original volume of wort I started with, then added that to the rest of the sparge runnings and then proceed with boil as normal.

Cheers,
BB