My all grain (BIAB) no chill beers are all really bad...

[Mizz]

When I poor the wort out of the cube I leave the last litre or two, the rest is crystal clear. You can easily just make a higher gravity wort and water it back those few liters if you like.

 

[dent]

Yeah, you can often get bright wort from the kettle even using horribly turbid wort from the mash. That doesn't mean the end result is the same as using bright mash wort in the first place.

 

[slash22000]

You're giving **** to someone for making assertions (based on a lifetime of study and experience) yet here you are - a complete noob - telling people how to suck eggs. You're not in a position to be instructing anyone on anything but the simplest of brewing techniques. Stay out of the contentious ****, yeah?

I really don't want to get into a whole thing here, but just in case Bum's comment convinces people I'm wrong about temperature/pH being the cause of astringency in BIAB beer, and squeezing the BIAB bag is perfectly fine:

http://biabrewer.info/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=26#p29

"Astringent beers do not come from finely crushed or squeezed husks but come rather from a combination of high temperatures and high pH."

http://byo.com/stories/issue/item/1264-preventing-beer-slime--reducing-tannins-but-not-flavor-mr-wizard

"The two most influential factors affecting the extraction of tannins from malt into wort are pH and temperature."

http://www.essentialbrewinginabag.com/2012/06/keeping-biab-way-it-should-be-simple.html

"... pH and temperature are the causes of tannin release"

http://schoenwetterbrewing.com/brew-in-a-bag-technique/

"We have seen zero negative effects by squeezing the bag"

Etc, etc, etc. Funny how even complete noobs can use Google to learn things.

 

[Bribie G]

Completely derailed now, but possibly of interest to the OP when trying to eliminate this and that to cure his problems:

Using clear wort into the cube which then produced cold break I was interested in how cold break might affect the finished brew. So I did a side by side a few years ago and took the results to a club meeting.

Two cubes of the same recipe made on clear hot wort into two cubes.
Next day the top halves of both cubes put into fermenter one and bottom halves with all the CB into fermenter 2.

Result, basically identical beers made to resemble XXX from Castlemaine that had been available for a while.



If anything the club members preferred the cold break version as it was a bit more "meaty" than the non cold break, but most could not distinguish. No chill haze in either which might surprise Mr Palmer.
The cold break obviously just settles down into the trub, presumably it gets a bit "pickled" during fermentation.



As you can see one problem with excessive break is that it "robs" your beer volume which is probably why breweries are keen to minimise all break to avoid being roused on by the company accountants.

 

[bum]

Etc, etc, etc. Funny how even complete noobs can use Google to learn things.

Your sources, mang...

My understanding is that fine crush and squeezing makes any astringency causing agents more available. I don't recall saying temp and pH had nothing to do with it.

 

[slash22000]

May be, may be not, but every test by every experienced brewer I've ever read has said that squeezing/crush/etc had no negative effect on their finished beer. The sources I posted there are from people who know what they're talking about, and you can find similar corroborating posts in the hundreds from dozens of forums and discussion groups.

Just because I haven't done 500 side-by-side tests personally doesn't mean I'm completely ignorant. How do people learn? From experience and from other people's experience. No point in me repeating a test that's been done to death.

 

[dent]

I think there is a lot of value in these type of threads - whether the OP appreciates the derail or not is debatable. Seems there is a pretty strong consensus for the original problem anyhow.

I used to be pretty rough with my mash wort back in the day, just jam it in the kettle fast and let the whirlfloc do all the work. The beer came out bright in the glass eventually and I figured all was good. Nowadays when I endeavour to get bright wort from the mash to the kettle I brew better beers - but it is an incremental difference along with a lot of other changes over the years. I'd view the bright wort as something to attain when seeking to brew the best beer you can, but not having it won't make a **** beer.

 

[bum]

May be, may be not, but every test by every experienced brewer I've ever read has said that squeezing/crush/etc had no negative effect on their finished beer. The sources I posted there are from people who know what they're talking about, and you can find similar corroborating posts in the hundreds from dozens of forums and discussion groups.

Just because I haven't done 500 side-by-side tests personally doesn't mean I'm completely ignorant. How do people learn? From experience and from other people's experience. No point in me repeating a test that's been done to death.

Especially if you're choosing to ignore an equivalent amount of posts (not evidence - opinions and experiential observations) that say the exact opposite.

I don't even give a **** about astringency as an issue. Not sure why you're trying to paint me as the bad guy on this issue. I don't even believe most people really know what it tastes like.

 

[Lord Raja Goomba I]

I think there is a lot of value in these type of threads - whether the OP appreciates the derail or not is debatable. Seems there is a pretty strong consensus for the original problem anyhow.

I used to be pretty rough with my mash wort back in the day, just jam it in the kettle fast and let the whirlfloc do all the work. The beer came out bright in the glass eventually and I figured all was good. Nowadays when I endeavour to get bright wort from the mash to the kettle I brew better beers - but it is an incremental difference along with a lot of other changes over the years. I'd view the bright wort as something to attain when seeking to brew the best beer you can, but not having it won't make a **** beer.

I think we mostly all agree that it's likely an infection. All the symptoms point to this. Having an infection isn't necessarily poor sanitisation (though it can be). Something gets into your brew wall, and that's it.

On a slightly similar idea - I watched a cheese show the other day and they made a hard cheese (not sure if it was cheddar or something of that nature). The room the cheddar was aged in, had been 'painted' with mould many moons ago. The cheesemaker believed that this gave their cheese its uniqueness. She also made the point that if she were setting up from scratch now, she couldn't set up a room with those sort of parameters (food hygiene nazis), but because it had been done a long time ago, it was fine.

Moral I got? Mould (or any microorganism), can hang on for a long time. If it's the microorganism you want, all well and good. If it isn't, it can be hard to budge.

Since the problem has been solved, that the thread has been derailed, shouldn't upset the OP. I think there are a few of us that like seeing how these things pan out and seeing good discussion on the extra bits we don't always do.

For the record, some of my processes would make others roll their eyes. But in line with bum's comment - I at least know why I make these processes (usually a short cut) and the potential risks of doing so (or at least the debate surrounding them - s/a Bribie's cold break piccy).

 

[WarmBeer]

For the record, some of my processes would make others roll their eyes.

I drink before dough-in. Sometimes before crushing the grain.

My "processes" are more guidelines...

 

[Lord Raja Goomba I]

I drink before dough-in. Sometimes before crushing the grain.

My "processes" are more guidelines...

That's the one process I don't do. Had a few wee issues with it like "how did that wort get into that fermenter and did I put yeast in it?"

Or waking up with an angry SWMBO because theres' dried sticky wort all over the floor.

 

[Mizz]

About to put some vanilla beans in the porter that's currently fermenting. Just cut em open and chuck em in? I've heard soak am in vodka?

 

[Lord Raja Goomba I]

If you're really worried about infections, chuck them in the micro until they're hot. I do that with any post boil additions of stuff, just to make sure.

A bit like using the micro to sterilise the glass my yeast is about to rehydrate in.

 

[Nick JD]

i'm sorry, but a mash filter is not a huge ball of malt squeezed poorly. I spent $130k on one about 2 weeks ago and I have a fare grasp on the machinery in question...

You got ripped off. Spotlight charge way less than that for their swiss voile.

 

[Mizz]

Does that work? I've read that a microwave wont sterilise anything unless its got water in it?

 

[Mizz]

The vanilla beans would have some water content i suppose..

 

[Lord Raja Goomba I]

Does that work? I've read that a microwave wont sterilise anything unless its got water in it?

You're probably right - I've never had an adjunct inspired infection though. It's one of those "if it works, I won't change it" sort of things. I will admit that I have no clue as to whether it's best practice.

 

[Nick JD]

You're probably right - I've never had an adjunct inspired infection though. It's one of those "if it works, I won't change it" sort of things. I will admit that I have no clue as to whether it's best practice.

It'll sterilise a kitten pretty quickly. Then again kittens are 90% water, 10% evil.

 

[Lord Raja Goomba I]

I thought at 90% water with a coating, the kitten would explode?

 

[mattdean4130]

It'll sterilise a kitten pretty quickly. Then again kittens are 90% water, 10% evil.

Are you sure that's not the other way around?

And are you basing this on science, or your own personal experience? Because if it's personal experience rather than science then i don't think it counts for much in this thread.