Hoch Kurtz Mash - Anyone Had Success?

[stl]

The common "English" language name for the process is "Programmed Infusion" and as some people have said its really the industry standard.
I do all my mashing this way (one of the reasons I brought myself a Braumeister), Not always that exact programme but variations on the theme.
One of my personal favourites is Pilsner Urquell, the mash program goes like this: -
20 min @ 50⁰C Mash in
20 min @ 60⁰C
30 min @ 65⁰C
20 min @ 70⁰C
10 min @ 78⁰C Mash out/Run off
[/font]

This isn't Hochkurz, which the OP is asking about -- the Hoch refers to the high mash-in temperature, i.e. skipping the traditional protein rest and going straight to the α-amylase rest which is followed by a separate β-amylase rest. The time at each rest is used to control the fermentability rather than picking a temperature in-between to balance the enzyme activity. The total mash time is also shorter, hence the kurz.

Steven.

 

[Zwickel]

This isn't Hochkurz, which the OP is asking about -- the Hoch refers to the high mash-in temperature, i.e. skipping the traditional protein rest and going straight to the α-amylase rest which is followed by a separate β-amylase rest. The time at each rest is used to control the fermentability rather than picking a temperature in-between to balance the enzyme activity. The total mash time is also shorter, hence the kurz.

Steven.

Thats right. What we have talked about is the standard mash regime.

Hoch-Kurz is a method to shorten the time by doing 2 rests only:

Hoch-Kurz-Verfahren:

Temperaturrest 62 C for 30 min
Temperaturrast 70 C for 30 min


thats all.

Cheers :icon_cheers:

 

[Fourstar]

This isn't Hochkurz, which the OP is asking about -- the Hoch refers to the high mash-in temperature, i.e. skipping the traditional protein rest and going straight to the α-amylase rest which is followed by a separate β-amylase rest.

except this is the other way around, b-amylase first, a-amylase second.

 

[Bribie G]

A lady friend of mine used to cut the 4 corners off her piece of corned beef (Zwickel, sort of an Aussie version of Sauerbraten) before putting in the pan with the bay leaves etc etc for simmering. I asked her why she did that and she said "that's the way my Mum always used to do it". Later she said, somewhat shocked by a childhood memory as we often can be when we suddenly remember something significant we have buried for years -

"My God, I remember now, Mum only had one boiling pan and it was a bit too small, so she had to cut the corners off the meat to make it fit, that means I don't need to do that anymore"

With modern lower protein malts - even trad Weyermann products etc, isn't doing a protein rest nowadays a bit like cutting the corners off the corned beef?

 

[RdeVjun]

Good point Bribie, actually that cracked me up!
Probably speaking out my *rse a bit here, but I guess in days gone by there was not much known about the actual science, but the processes worked with the materials of the day while I suppose brewers worked much of it out by centuries of trial and error, the odd innovator and perhaps some serendipity. Processes may have seemed almost magical and were followed by rote, without much understanding of why particular parts of it were important and in which circumstances they could be changed. Nowadays we have much more insight into the chemistry and also different, perhaps more reliable, raw materials so some things may indeed be redundant.
Obviously, without the enquiring minds, better understanding of the science and also being prepared to challenge traditional thinking, we'll for ever be cutting the corners off corned beef or doing perhaps unnecessary rests. I guess also that things like the BIAB revolution :blink: would never have eventuated without all of that either, we also see much resistance to innovation today and while I've enormous respect for traditional craft, I feel there's a happy medium in there somewhere which acknowledges and retains tradition but recognises the modern world we live in- being involved as we are in a craft with strong traditional links confirms that for me. ( :blink: Oh sheet, think I got a bit carried away there philosophically- sorry about that... definitely speaking out my *rse then! :huh: )

Just on the protein rest though, I'm willing to keep it to facilitate a single decoction in my low/no- specialty malt lagers, certainly not in ales though. A mashout decoction just isn't quite the same IMO, not the same effect at all and quite muted. The rest doesn't seem to have any negative effects with the lagers, using floor- malted Weyermann malt though (Bohemian Pilsner).

 

[Zwickel]

With modern lower protein malts - even trad Weyermann products etc, isn't doing a protein rest nowadays a bit like cutting the corners off the corned beef?

BribieG, that theme is discussed very often, also here in German brewing boards.
I dont want to get deeper into the theory, only I can say from my own experience, there is a significant difference in beers brewed with or without protein rests.
Its not only cutted corners of the beef

For myself Ive decided to brew all my Pilseners (not wheat beers) by doing a protein rest.
from my own observations:
the foam is finer and creamier, the head stands longer, the beer is clearing itself earlier, means less trub, the taste is rounder/mellower and not at last I get a higher OG, means more yield.

So far, Im doing my 162th. brew today, of course including a protein rest. Prost :icon_cheers:

 

[Thirsty Boy]

I'm with zwickel on that one - I always do a protein rest @ 55-56 (higher than normal I know) and find it has significant effect on the foam quality of the beer. Short though... none of your 20 minutes. Mash in @ 55 and its on its way up to first conversion rest within 5mins or so - also concur with a bit of increase in extraction.

I fairly frequently do different variations of programmed step mashes, usually somewhere pretty near to the Hoch-Kurz regime, but I'm mostly up a degree or perhaps two in temp because starting at 55 gives me extra time in the lower range to begin with.

Is it necessary... probably not. But I spent all this damn time and money making a system that can do this sort of stuff easily - buggered if I'm not going to use it.

Remember - its the time at the lower rest temp that controls your fermentability. Time at the upper rest and at mashout is much less critical to the final result

 

[jbirbeck]

BribieG, that theme is discussed very often, also here in German brewing boards.
I dont want to get deeper into the theory, only I can say from my own experience, there is a significant difference in beers brewed with or without protein rests.
Its not only cutted corners of the beef

For myself Ive decided to brew all my Pilseners (not wheat beers) by doing a protein rest.
from my own observations:
the foam is finer and creamier, the head stands longer, the beer is clearing itself earlier, means less trub, the taste is rounder/mellower and not at last I get a higher OG, means more yield.

So far, Im doing my 162th. brew today, of course including a protein rest. Prost :icon_cheers:

I'm with zwickel on that one - I always do a protein rest @ 55-56 (higher than normal I know) and find it has significant effect on the foam quality of the beer. Short though... none of your 20 minutes. Mash in @ 55 and its on its way up to first conversion rest within 5mins or so - also concur with a bit of increase in extraction.

I fairly frequently do different variations of programmed step mashes, usually somewhere pretty near to the Hoch-Kurz regime, but I'm mostly up a degree or perhaps two in temp because starting at 55 gives me extra time in the lower range to begin with.

Is it necessary... probably not. But I spent all this damn time and money making a system that can do this sort of stuff easily - buggered if I'm not going to use it.

Remember - its the time at the lower rest temp that controls your fermentability. Time at the upper rest and at mashout is much less critical to the final result

+1...I'm with these guys. Protein rest is a yes for me for a few reasons...I get better head, the beer clears up better, no chill haze and well because I can

Hoch Kurtz with a short protein rest.

 

[manticle]

I've just started playing with protein rests and step mashing, including two steps in the sacch range. Have noticed good fluffy heads in the glass and a more creamy, thicker looking lacing. There's also a difference in the wort when it's produced (clearer) and a slightly better extraction efficiency.

I know the hoch kurz omits protein resting but it's somehow become relevant to this thread.

 

[Bribie G]

I was under the impression that protein rests with modern malts tended to adversely affect head, or does it work the other way round? I thought that proteins were the main heading agents? I lost my copy of "brewing practices" when my old computer died othewise I'd look up "foaming" :lol:

 

[manticle]

I had heard that too but my experience (limited) differs.

 

[RdeVjun]

Is it worth distinguishing between Ale and Pils malts? For a while I did some 100% base malt ales for an experiment and protein rested as part of a decoction regime to boost the malt profile, in the end I gave it away and one reason was that they had quite poor head retention almost universally. I also do a 95% Pils/ 5% Carapils Lager with a protein rest and usually a single decoction none of which have had any such trouble at all, however there is the fly in the ointment of the spec malt.

My 2c, hope it is helpful... :unsure:

 

[manticle]

I've only done it with non british stlyes so far and all have used pils malt so you could be right.

 

[RobB]

I'm still a bit confused about the temperature going up and up and up, I thought that the idea was that the Alpha Amylase had to work first, then the Beta to chop the carb chains into shorter fermentable lengths to produce fermentables and at first glance the Hochkurtz seems to have it arse about .......

A very late response to the original post:

I used to think the same thing - that the alpha had to work first, followed by the beta - which of course doesn't fit the logic of passing through beta temps first. If I'm reading "Radical Brewing" correctly, beta doesn't need alpha, they just work differently:

"Alpha amylase works by chopping up starch molecules willy nilly, resulting in fragments of randomly varying size. Beta amylase is a fastidious nibbler, working from the end of the starch molecules and biting off one maltose sugar with every nip." - R.Mosher

Now that I understand that, I have a new source of confusion. I keep hearing that the bulk of conversion is complete within twenty minutes. I don't know if this is true or just a brewers' myth, but I have read it on a few boards. If it is true, once you've spent 20-30 minutes at beta temps, what is there left for the alpha to do at the next rest?

 

[felten]

For the protein rest it depends what temp you are aiming for, like it says on the op's link

Rest temperatures closer to 122 *F (50 *F) emphasize the generation of short length proteins (amino acids) and temperatures closer to 133 *F (55 *C) result in more medium chained proteins (good for head retention and body). Well modified modern malts, which already have higher levels of amino acids, may benefit from a protein rest closer to 133*F (55 *C) or don't require a protein rest at all.

And the majority of conversion may be done in the first 10-20m but it still isn't 100% converted, leaving it longer ensures the enzymes convert as much as possible, and ramping up the temp is one way to speed the enzymes up (as well as denaturing beta and moving to alpha's optimum temp).

Thats my understanding of it anyway.

 

[Wolfy]

....
I keep hearing that the bulk of conversion is complete within twenty minutes. I don't know if this is true or just a brewers' myth, but I have read it on a few boards. If it is true, once you've spent 20-30 minutes at beta temps, what is there left for the alpha to do at the next rest?

While enzyme activity is highest in the first 20 mins, the '20 min conversion' usually refers to a successful iodine test which 'only' tests to see if the starches have been degraded, and does test/tell what sugars have been released or the fermentability of the wort.

Beta-amylase (works best at 55C-65C) only 'works' on the ends of the amylose molecule, and is unable to 'work' close to the branch points, leaving a 'beta-amylase limit dextrin'.
Alpha-amylase (works best at 60C-70C) can 'chop up' the larger amylopectins at 'random' points - even close to the branch points.

At the first step (61C-63C) both alpha and beta are working together, alpha chopping randomly and then beta chewing off all the 'ends' (the longer you leave it the more fermentable the wort is). Above 65C beta is denatured (by a large portion) so that leaves the alpha to 'chop up' the remaining larger molecules, completing the conversion.

(That's my interpretation of J.Palmer's tree-branch-chopping analogy as applied to a step mash.)

 

[Zwickel]

Hi ho brewers,

one of the best sources for brewing knowledge is John Palmers Bible "How to brew".

http://www.howtobrew.com/section3/chapter14-1.html

The graph on this site shows very nicely the temp range where the enzymes are working best.


Cheers mates :icon_cheers:

 

[neonmeate]

you can go even hoch-er and kurz-er as detailed here: skip the 63 min rest, just do 20 mins at 67-70C, no mashout, that's it.

http://www.draymans.com/articles/arts/14.html

this does depend on the type of malt apparently, you need stuff that will withstand that temp.

there's some interesting stuff there about dextrins being untasteable and not responsible for body the way we think they are.