In Theory...

[Where's Jim?]

I still consider myself new to this business but I have a curious thought and didn't even know where to begin searching so here we go.

...Say we have the following mash schedule (taken to a few extremes):

45minutes at 61degC
raise to;
45minutes at 69degC

So basically the first temperature gets the beta-amylase going and the second step gets the alpha-amylase going.

Say we have a recipe that contains;

80% Base Malt
10% Spec Malt A
10% Spec Malt B

We mash the base malt and spec malt A at 61 for 45minutes and then raise the mash to 69, add spec malt B and hold for 45minutes.

Would Spec Malt B produce more complex chains than Spec Malt A and thus provide more of it's own speciality sweetness than those produced by Spec Malt A?
OR
Would the extra time spent at the higher sacc temp make the lower sacc temp redundant?

IN A NUTSHELL;

If you add a speciality malt at the second sacc temperature will it provide a more specific sweetness to the finished beer as opposed to adding it at the start along with all of your other grains?
OR
Does this f***ing around just somehow make itself a redundant process?

OR
Feel free to shoot down the stupidity of me even contemplating this idea.


Cheers.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

[quote name='Where's Jim?' post='856877' date='Dec 20 2011, 01:56 AM']I still consider myself new to this business but I have a curious thought and didn't even know where to begin searching so here we go.

...Say we have the following mash schedule (taken to a few extremes):

45minutes at 61degC
raise to;
45minutes at 69degC

So basically the first temperature gets the beta-amylase going and the second step gets the alpha-amylase going.

Say we have a recipe that contains;

80% Base Malt
10% Spec Malt A
10% Spec Malt B

We mash the base malt and spec malt A at 61 for 45minutes and then raise the mash to 69, add spec malt B and hold for 45minutes.

Would Spec Malt B produce more complex chains than Spec Malt A and thus provide more of it's own speciality sweetness than those produced by Spec Malt A?
OR
Would the extra time spent at the higher sacc temp make the lower sacc temp redundant?

IN A NUTSHELL;

If you add a speciality malt at the second sacc temperature will it provide a more specific sweetness to the finished beer as opposed to adding it at the start along with all of your other grains?
OR
Does this f***ing around just somehow make itself a redundant process?

OR
Feel free to shoot down the stupidity of me even contemplating this idea.


Cheers.[/quote]

A - you dont get more sweetness from high temperature rests. high temperature rest produce more dextrins, which because they are unfermentable, give your beer body, mouthfeel and gravity, but which are as a matter of fact, hardly sweet at all. high temperature rest DO NOT make a beer sweeter or more malty. So what is a kind of basic assumption in your reasoning isn't actually true.

B - the temperature rests act primarily on the base malt not the specialty malt. Your specialty malt is going to mostly be quite low in extract potential in the case of say a Roasted or Chocolate malt, so there's not a whole lot for the temp rest to affect - or in the case of a crystal type malts, there will be basically no impact at all because the sugars are already converted in the grain before it hits the mash. Youg get sweetness out of crystal/cara malts because of the caramelisation of simple sugars in the grain. The caramelised sugars are (unlike dextrins) both unfermentable AND sweet. But thats there already before you mash them, so what you do in the mash will make little difference. You might make a very small difference in the highly kilned malts like ambers, browns etc - but you would be using so little of them in most circumstances that the influence of their starch degredation products on the final beer would be tiny.

Sorry dude, but the most you could manage to pay your self back for the extra mucking about with, would be a difference so small that you'd be unlikely to be able to tell it was there.

 

[Jace89]

You could always do your normal mash of around 64-69 or whatever. Then add your spec malts at mashout/sparge, I find this creates that nice layered flavoured feel to my darker ales.

 

[manticle]

The idea of mashing the base malt low for a bit, then stepping up the temp is not a redundant idea though. I do this often - 63 for 10 then 68 for 50. Can change those times around.

Some German breweries (and I believe Belgian) use short low rests followed by a high rest. Targets both sets of enzymes as you surmise but separately rather than as a compromise (as a mid 60s rest is). Full bodied mouthfeel which, while it may not be sweet as such will add to the perception of flavour in a beer as it alters the balance. However beers should attenuate as well as a beer that just mashes at 65.

Something I've been playing with and loving the results. Reading fix at the moment in which he talks about the various rest stages and the related enzymes and it makes sense.

As Thirsy said though - not much to expect from the spec malt. The only stuffing around with specs I've tried that seems to work (need to try it more but I know other brewers do it too) is adding dark roasted malts towards the end of the mash (last 10-15 mins) for a smoother result. When I tried this in an oatmeal stout I actually cold steeped overnight, brought it slowly up to sacch temp, then added the whole liquid in in the last 10 mins. More stuffing around for sure but that can be fun.

 

[Muscovy_333]

Where's Jimbo,
thanks for asking the question.
I was curious of peoples thoughts on this also.

Given that tannins are not our friend can anyone confirm or deny that spec malts would be better added later in the mash, given that sugars are already in the form that we want?
I have often wondered if they need the full mash time or just a short steep/addition to the mash at the end to do their thing.
I imagine that their must be an ideal point (time/temp) where spec malts are performing their best, and it may not be a full mash time??

 

[Jace89]

From the limited experience I've had I find that adding the darker/crystal malts before I mash out is almost perfect for flavour. I find it also leave out the bitter flavour that darker malt can produce. Just recently I steeped my darker malts on the stove and added to the boil. It's fermenting at the moment but it's tasting good ore fermentation.

 

[Where's Jim?]

A - you dont get more...

B - the temperature rests...

Great reply. Cheers.

The idea of mashing the base malt low for a bit, then stepping up the temp is not a redundant idea though. I do this often - 63 for 10 then 68 for 50. Can change those times around.

Some German breweries (and I believe Belgian) use short low rests followed by a high rest. Targets both sets of enzymes as you surmise but separately rather than as a compromise (as a mid 60s rest is). Full bodied mouthfeel which, while it may not be sweet as such will add to the perception of flavour in a beer as it alters the balance. However beers should attenuate as well as a beer that just mashes at 65.

Something I've been playing with and loving the results. Reading fix at the moment in which he talks about the various rest stages and the related enzymes and it makes sense.

Do you have a link to this info? I would be keen to read up on it a bit too.

On playing with those times, I assume the lower step will always have to be somewhat shorter than the higher to leave some starches to be converted during the higher step?

 

[manticle]

[quote name='Where's Jim?' post='856948' date='Dec 20 2011, 10:33 AM']Do you have a link to this info? I would be keen to read up on it a bit too.

On playing with those times, I assume the lower step will always have to be somewhat shorter than the higher to leave some starches to be converted during the higher step?[/quote]

If you search braukaiser for hochkurz rest you will get some info. The Fix book I refer to is Brewing Science and Practice which I bought from the book depository fairly cheaply. Well worth the money. I had a pdf someone sent me but find reading whole books that way a pain in the bum and don't mind spending on good references.

My understanding is that if the low rest is too long, there will be nothing left for the dextrin rest but I don't know where the sweet spot is. I do know that you can play with the times to alter the results though.

 

[Nick JD]

The first rest (maltose rest) should be held at or around 63C (145F) and it’s length is used to control the fermentability of the wort. A good starting point for its duration is 30 min. Longer for more fermentable wort and shorter for less fermentable wort. If even higher fermentability is desired an intermediate rest at 65C (150F) can be added. Due to its large volume the mash temperature should not drop much during that rest but you may wrap the pot into blankets to stabilize the mash temp even more.

The dextrinization rest at 70-72C (158-172F) needs to be held until the mash is iodine negative but may be extended to 45-60 min. Many authors contribute head retention and mouthfeel benefits to extending this rest. Finally the mash may be raised to mash out temp and subsequently lautered.

 

[manticle]

The Fix book I refer to is Brewing Science and Practice which I bought from the book depository fairly cheaply.

Sorry: Principles of Brewing Science by Fix.

Brewing Science and practice by briggs et al is a lot more expensive.

 

[MaltyHops]

A - you dont get more sweetness from high temperature rests. high temperature rest
produce more dextrins, which because they are unfermentable, give your beer body,
mouthfeel and gravity, but which are as a matter of fact, hardly sweet at all. ...

While tidying up my collection of brewing files, came across a BABBs newsletter which
contaned a copy of an article To Mash or not to Mash Kurz / Hoch which states:

... studies at Weihenstephan State University and reports by Michael J. Lewis and
Tom W. Young (Brewing, Second edition, p.244) confirmed the following: wort
dextrins have no flavour of their own and are not viscous enough in solution to
account for the perceived (sensory) viscosity or body of beer. Something else
(the subject of current research) contributes to the perception of body in beer,
not dextrins. It is thus assumed that traditional complex mashing regimes which
were done to promote dextrin formation in order to promote body are redundant.

Any thoughts on this? Seems to contradict the common view on dextrins & mouthfeel
- or has the above been shown to be bogus?

T.

 

[manticle]

Interesting article that is swayed towards single infusion brewing (obviously).

My own, inexpert take on it is that besides the quoted study from the paragraph you have selected, there are no references - just someone's opinion that step mashing is based on erroneous theory (and decoctions etc) and that they are all a waste of time. The author also suggests adding rather horrible sulphitey things to your wort.

My own experience (which I could make at least as well referenced as that article with some brewing text that suggests differently) suggests that decoctions and step mashing do make a difference and that including a high rest after a short low rest (sacch) gives a full bodied mouthfeel. May not be dextrins I grant but something in the high 60s is working for me, German breweries and belgian breweries.

 

[Thirsty Boy]

Yeah, I know about that article - its probably true. But high temp mashes are higher in dextrins, "common" wisdom is that its the dextrins that give you the body etc and mashes targeted towards dextrin production do have more body even though they dont think its the dextrins doing it.

So for now I'll stick with the model thats served to help brewers target their beers for quite a while now, and I'll worry about whats technically responsible for it once the boffins at weihenstephan have a culprit to point their fingers at. Plus - i really dont want to go and re-learn all my mashing theory, that'd just be a pain in the bum.

 

[Thefatdoghead]

I actually cold steeped overnight, brought it slowly up to sacch temp, then added the whole liquid in in the last 10 mins. More stuffing around for sure but that can be fun.
[/quote]

I found the cold steep method the easiest and I do notice the smoother flavour from the dark malts added in the last 15mins than when I started out steeping in the start of boiling. I only think it's easier because I don't have to **** around with muzlin etc and I can just throw the liquid in at the end. I am going to try more steeping at mash out though just to see how the malts change through the process

 

[Muscovy_333]

Interesting article that is swayed towards single infusion brewing (obviously).

My own, inexpert take on it is that besides the quoted study from the paragraph you have selected, there are no references - just someone's opinion that step mashing is based on erroneous theory (and decoctions etc) and that they are all a waste of time. The author also suggests adding rather horrible sulphitey things to your wort.

My own experience (which I could make at least as well referenced as that article with some brewing text that suggests differently) suggests that decoctions and step mashing do make a difference and that including a high rest after a short low rest (sacch) gives a full bodied mouthfeel. May not be dextrins I grant but something in the high 60s is working for me, German breweries and belgian breweries.

I know this will drive a few people nuts...but it is a forum...
In support of the above; starch is derived predominantly of 2 different types of carbohydrate "chains" and each is made up of shitloads (scientific term) of single glucose monomers joined together. One is branched like a tree, the other is a single chain. The diastase enzymes (2 enzymes) work on differrent parts of the branches and single chains to cut the chains into shorter lengths. Maltose is 2 glucose monmers joined together and it is the fermentable (dextrin) part. Anything esle is considered Non-fermentable and thus the ratio of the fermetable/non-fermentable can be selected for.

If you know what you are doing and have good control on your process you can select the "composition" of this ratio and significantly modify the properties of your beer using time/tempertature and in process testing and monitoring. As a reference point, starches may contain from hundreds to hundreds of thousands of glucose monomers in one chain, hence if you know how you could do a pretty good job of achieving your own nirvana.

If your half way there you will have struck a process that is giving you the outcome that you want and you can reproduce or adapt with trial and error as most of us do..(body, sweetness, abv)

Manticle is further down this path than I as I'm not at controlled step mash yet, but his experience strongly reflects the theory for sure.

 

[the_new_darren]

I was always under the impression that the barley was malted to suit the mashing profile of the "major" end user and that you can bugger around with mashing rests etc and actually not acheive a single thing (being that HBers are not generally the "major" end user.

Also the effects of a given mash regime will differ aross different companies malts?

tnd

 

[AndrewQLD]

I was always under the impression that the barley was malted to suit the mashing profile of the "major" end user and that you can bugger around with mashing rests etc and actually not acheive a single thing (being that HBers are not generally the "major" end user.

Also the effects of a given mash regime will differ aross different companies malts?

tnd

Not sure I follow Darren, those two comments seem to contradict each other. Can you elaborate a bit please.

Andrew

 

[Nick JD]

I was always under the impression that the barley was malted to suit the mashing profile of the "major" end user and that you can bugger around with mashing rests etc and actually not acheive a single thing (being that HBers are not generally the "major" end user.

Also the effects of a given mash regime will differ aross different companies malts?

tnd

So if I mash one batch at 62C and another at 70C, uisng the same malt ... I'll get the same beer?

Bollocks.

 

[felten]

If we bought grain from darren this wouldn't happen, it would be cheaper and fresher too.

 

[the_new_darren]

If you mash Bairds Pale malt and Galaxy at 65 then you will get completely different beers is what I am saying, so "optimising" your mashing profile will only be applicable for that particular maltsters malt.

Undermodified malts will likely benefit a protein rest where fully modified malts not necessarily so.

Slightly less than fully modified, different results again.

tnd