Step Mash Theory - A Technical Question

[tangent]

nice work Malnourished :beer:

 

[Hargie]

P r o d u c t S p e c i f i c a t i o n

P I L SNER MALT


Raw Material Source: German-grown two-row spring barley (2004 harvest).
Product Characteristicserfect foundation grist for all lagers. Excellent modification and
favorable protein and glucan levels. Excellent lautering properties. Provides finished beer with
substantial body and mouthfeel, as well as good foam development and head retention. Very
flexible grain with high extract efficiency for reliable lager-making in any brew house, including
pub ale systems. Yields optimum results for any process from single-step to multi-step
infusion, to decoction.Recommended Quantities: Up to 100% of total grain bill
Suitability (beer styles):
All lagers, especially Pils/Pilsner/Pilsener, low-alcohol beer, light beer, Belgian beers


WEYERMANN SPECIALTY
MALTING COMPANY
Andreas Richter⎯Quality Manager
Brennerstrae 17-19 D-96052 Bamberg, Germany
phone: +49-951-93-22-0-22 fax: +49-951-93220-922
[email protected] www.weyermann.de



....from the horses mouth , which is good enough for me.....for what it's worth I p/rest @ 50c /15 min for all my beers and i have enough medals to feel confident it works for me....and magnificent head retention every time....

 

[Malnourished]

Yeah but that says nothing about the temperature of the rests themselves.

Imagine how many medals you would've won if you made your 50C rest a 60C rest!!!

 

[Hargie]

....you reckon i might have got a second one....bugger....


...i find that they may not be neccessary, but they make enough of a difference to be worthwhile...




...i'm a 50-63-70/lagers and 50-66-72/ wheats & ales kinda guy....

 

[bugwan]

From a non-technical perspective, I've tried and tasted both (multi-step, single-step brews) and can't detect much of a difference.
That said, I had no control sample and I'm sure there was enough variation between the batches to make it very unscientific.

Take home story: if I can get an end product of the same (better?) quality for less work, then I'm all over it!

A longer brew day doesn't really worry me, as I enjoy the process, but the previous statement still stands. Enjoy whatever you do

 

[matti]

I am not too concerned about medal and even less worried that over what some else thinking about my brew. Reason with-held. hehe
SAH that I am. Just ask my partner.

But I think Step mashing is an craft brewers excuse to spend more time in the shed and get more time for drinks, hey.

Seriously though, I am very please with the debate and that we have have come to the conclusion that it is possible to go against the grain, pardon the pun, of the Mega brewers that do every thing to ensure the shareholder getting more in their pockets.

I say well said Thirsty, on the other hand Malnourished's logic, is equally sound.

:super:

 

[Thirsty Boy]

The problem with resting in the 50-55C range and 'thinning' beer is that this is right in the optimal temperature range for peptidases. This is why it's suggested that step mashes with modern malts start ~60C, but I've banged on about this so many times on this site I'll leave it at that.
I agree with your point. Step mashes can be beneficial (as long as you aren't resting in the low 50s!) because you can control proteinase and beta amylase activity in the low 60s and complete conversion easily in the high 60s/low 70s. That said, your analogy is dodgy because 99.999% of homebrewers are using these modern malts but seem to want to throw in weird rests in the 40s and 50s*. To run with it, performing an old school step infusion with modern malts that are designed for a different mash regime is akin to buying the can of Campbells soup and boiling it for three hours like you would making chicken soup from scratch. Or like flash frying chicken thighs in a hot pan, or slow-cooking chicken breast in a casserole. Blech!

*Wheat/rye beers excepted

Hey Mal - reading your post there you are spot on. I was interpreting Darren's comment on improving the million dollar tech as being about homebrewing as compared to industrial brewing in general; rather than specifically about using modern malts. and my analogy was meant to address that. After your post I see that my both my interpretation and my intent were far from clear. So my analogy indeed sucked... note to self: work on written comprehension and clear communication skills. not up to snuff.

BTW, could you please give me a quick point to the thread/s where you have "banged on about" the peptidases thing. I am completely ignorant of that to which you refer and I would like not to be. I have actually been regularly doing a 55C rest to try and create medium length protiens for head production/retention. It seems to have been working... but it also seems that I might well be doing other things to my beer that I dont know about.

I'd really appreciate a shove in the right direction in learning about this.

Thanks

Thirsty

 

[PistolPatch]

From a non-technical perspective, I've tried and tasted both (multi-step, single-step brews) and can't detect much of a difference.

There might well be no advantage to a step mash at all. Was there something that you were tryig to achieve in your lagers that you aren't getting by using a single step?.

There's a lot of science and good reading in this thread which I always enjoy. But...

I think the above quotes (there were many others as well) are good grounding quotes and I think grounding quotes, quotes that bring home brewers back to earth, are always in short supply.

We can talk all day about fine technicalities but in doing this, often miss the basics.

To be honest, I have tasted as many great beers brewed by inexperienced brewers as I have of experienced brewers. (I was going to re-write that sentence but after a several minutes of recollection find that it is actually completely true.)

So, whilst talking about technicalities is fun and interesting, I think it is really important to remember the quotes above. A lot of newer AGrs will read this thread and maybe. because of it, place their attentions where it shouldn't be.

Maybe, they'll think, h! I'll do a step mash and that will balance that beer!'whereas the truth is probably that the recipe isn't balanced.

Maybe they'll think that you your mash is complete after 30 minutes because an iodine test says it is. (That's what I was told by a brewer I respected.) But, it is not as Thirsty has pointed out in this thread and as Trough Lolly answered for me in another thread after I posted some detailed figures that made me believe otherwise.

What I'm trying to say is that, for a new brewer (and many other brewers from what I have tasted!) until you find a recipe you like, then ignore the fine science. A tweak here with this and a tweak here with that will GENERALLY make not much of a difference if you have a recipe out of balance.

Let's face it, unless you have hugely controlled conditions that enable repeating two brews several times you have no possibility of telling whether a tweak is advantageous or not.

If you need to have such controlled conditions then you really should ask whether the recipe is good enough. Is that fair?

I've just been thinking about efficiency. It's another issue we all talk way too much about and I have explored it considerably. I'll keep exploring it but the more I explore (and have posted threads on it) the more I realise how we home brewers haven't even got that basic measurement right.

Should we even be discussing stuff like alpha and beta whatevers? Maybe that's what bugwan and Thirsty are hinting at?

Well I don't know but I reckon I need to hear some actual brewer's results, side by side tests, before my ears start to prick up and how many brewers have the capabilities of doing that?

Spot ya,
Pat

P.S. Yep, I know there are at least a few spelling and grammatical errors that I would normally spend a lot of time fixing but I am slowly changing my ways - lol!

 

[matti]

Should we even be discussing stuff like alpha and beta whatevers?

I think we should. It is after a technical issue regarding traditional Pilsner style beer.
Decoction and step Mashing may not be for every one, but I am certainly interested in learning more about the effect and ill effects of manipulating the modern malts.

In Australia Pilsner is not a traditional beer and it is not of commercial value to Malters or the brewing industry but well worth the discussion on a beer forum.

I am going to read up about modern malts and its properties and when I am wiser I get back to you.

But logic says that for one to achieve a heavier pilsner like Dunkel or bock in style with the original it does take a little bit more then right ingredient and right yeast.
Methods and ingredient go hand in hand I believe.

The more I learn about brewing, the more this seems true.

It aint' as easy as just putting grain in hot water and then rinse.
What about the water, ph, etc etc.

I think it is great to discuss this and in earnest I think any new AG blokes shouldn't go in blindfolded and most of them can think for themselves.
what is written here is not gospel after all and no one forces any one to take it on less reading it.

Sorry for the rant be good all
Had to put in I didn't mean to have go at anyone just it seem very harch reading it again

 

[PistolPatch]

Don't worry about the rant Matti. Rants are good!

Here's what I reckon...

pH (I adjust but several mates don't and I think I'm about to stop), filtered water (several mates filter, I used to in my early days).

Liquor to grist ratio is another one. Mmmm. Way too much mportant' stuff that often proves to be way unimportant.

And then there is the 'human factor,' just to throw you further off kilter - lol!

Ended up having a few beers with the Coopers rep here in WA tonight and he is a qualified chef. We talked about putting the same ingredients in front of 5 different chefs and whether you would see a difference in the meal produced given identical oven temps etc. He and I both reckoned you would and this is purely explicable with quantum physics.

Maybe that's why some home-cooked meals will always be better than those at a restautant?

Who knows?


Pat

Edit: Change 'a few beers'above to 'a few too many.' I suppose the mention of quantum physics makes that fairly obvious - lol.

 

[sqyre]

Thanks again for the Pm, I will be giving your recipe and method a try for the Qld case swap.

Looking forward to the taste test Andrew

Sqyre...

 

[Zwickel]

....and I will do my next batch the Australian way
Im really curious about that matter.

After all Id like to get some honest report, as I will report about my experience with a single step mash honestly

So far Ive made already 65 batches Pilsener, always the same way, so that means, I know exactly how my Pilsener turnes out, any difference in flavour Ill notice at once.

I dont see it as a competition in doing it your way or doing it my way, thats just for our personal science
Id say, theory and practise are not the same.
Lets find out by ourself.
Im here to learn more about brewing stuff, I wont say there is only one way leading to truth
and other hand, what is nicer than to make better beers than all the million dollar investing, mega swill producing industries?
evidently we can.

Cheers mates :beer:

 

[Ross]

After all Id like to get some honest report, as I will report about my experience with a single step mash honestly
So far Ive made already 65 batches Pilsener, always the same way, so that means, I know exactly how my Pilsener turnes out, any difference in flavour Ill notice at once.

Cheers mates :beer:

Really looking forward to the results Zwickel; other than the fact, if you produce in your eyes an inferior beer with single infusion, i'll be persuaded to give step mashing another try. My few attempts so far, have not produced any noticable improvements to my pallatte :unsure: .
This has been a very informative thread, but real life practical results are what really grab my interest.

cheers Ross

 

[Screwtop]

Im here to learn more about brewing stuff, I wont say there is only one way leading to truth
and other hand, what is nicer than to make better beers than all the million dollar investing, mega swill producing industries?
evidently we can.

Cheers mates :beer:

Ain't that the truth brewers!

So why don't the big breweries convert their operations to small 25 - 50 litre operations with one brewer per system, doing 3 step mashes to produce better beer. Got the picture? Of course this is an exaggeration, but it is possible for all big outfits to make better beer, but they are run be bean counters not brewers. They have to produce a product that looks like beer and tastes like beer, is packaged to match the markets perception of how beer should be packaged, and marketed to the masses in a manner which will build and maintain acceptance and consumer demand. There is so much more to beer that making it. So why don't they make better beer, if in doubt tick COST.

No matter what the science, there will be variances, some methods will work better for some and not for others due to the variance in our systems and procedures, THAT IS WHY LARGE COMMERCIAL VENTURES SO VEHEMENTLY RESTRICT AND CONTROL THEIR SYSTEMS AND PROCEDURES. When it comes to commercial breweries, due to their need to control production outputs (read profit) and quality, a number of design elements have been adopted resulting in many brewing systems/plants today which are very similar in design. Todays malts are designed around these systems and modern brewing procedures.

As for Weyermann's statement, gez it's 2007, thought that most were immune to commercial product babble and disclaimers by now. Remember it's not what they say, it's what they don't say in these statements. Very unlikely that they would make a statement such as "NO ADVANTAGE IN STEP MASHING THIS MALT" or "SINGLE INFUSION REST ONLY REQUIRED FOR THIS MALT. The product statement needs to cover all things to all brewers, remember that. Whatever procedure you use, THIS MALT"S GONNA BE FINE, MATE!

This does not mean that there will not be a discernable difference using certain procedures or equipment which may be quite different to those of the large commercial breweries.

When it comes to an experienced brewer using his individual methods and being familiar with his system. If he notices a benefit from using some method and is convinced that the additional time and effort required is worthwile, then who are we to disagree with him. Why should any of us try to tell him it isn't so because we read differently somewhere.

And besides, a man convinced against his will, will be of the same opinion still.

PS: I STEP MASH AND FLY SPARGE, HAVE TRIED OTHER WAYS, IT MAKES MY BEER CLEARER THAN OTHER METHODS AND LIFTS MY EFFICIENCY.

 

[Hargie]

... yeah well regarding the weyermann specs i said

....from the horses mouth , which is good enough for me....

....good enough for me, maybe not good enough for you , but good enough for me...



...for what it's worth , i prefer the beer i make with step mashes,etc because the extra effort is with it , to me....i've brewed over 1700 ltrs of beer at home in the last 9 months - single infusions,multi steps, decoctions, thin mashes,thick mashes etc etc etc....

...step mashes make my beer clearer, much less hazy,more attenuative, and with healthier fermentions....

...it could make your beer shit....


...enjoy your beer however you make it.... :beer:

 

[bindi]

And besides, a man convinced against his will, will be of the same opinion still.

PS: I STEP MASH AND Batch SPARGE, HAVE TRIED OTHER WAYS, IT MAKES MY BEER CLEARER THAN OTHER METHODS AND LIFTS MY EFFICIENCY.

Sorry Screwtop I changed your post to batch.
Works very well for me.

 

[Stuster]

i've brewed over 1700 ltrs of beer at home in the last 9 months

Wow. That's an amazing amount. Hope somebody's helping you out with drinking that. :lol:

I agree with you. It's up to the brewer. It's not something I'm likely to try myself, but if it's getting you what you enjoy, then that's great.

 

[Hargie]

Wow. That's an amazing amount. Hope somebody's helping you out with drinking that. :lol:

....yes mate, i get plenty of help gettin' thru all that , couldn't possibly do it all alone...

....just had a look and i have brewed about 990 ltrs for 2007 so far ....i'll brew another 45 ltrs on Saturday that will take me over 1000ltrs right on halfway thru the year......hooray...


....whoops...OT...sorry....