Users Of The "no Chiller Method"

[dubzau]

I wish I had 10 bucks for every time I'd heard a homebrewer say "such and such makes no difference"! This belief (that nothing makes a difference) is what results in so many crap homebrews - and very rarely is a home brewed beer of commercial quality. Fortunately for many home brewers, they develop a taste for off flavours - which they call simply "flavour". "I don't mind cloudy beer", you'll hear them say, "the chunky bits are "flavour""!

Well, I hate to tell you guys, but all of the little things do make a big difference. That's why most home brewed beers - including many of the ones that win prizes in comps - are just rubbish. Whether it's rehydrating yeast, aeration, pitching at the correct temp, rapidly chilling the wort - it all makes a difference!!

Then again, many people choose to believe in alternative therapies too, even when they contradict each other. Whatever works for ya!!

 

[Stuster]

Nice attitude, Bud. So you are saying the same as Darren, perhaps. All these no-chill brewers are just lazy brewers with no taste buds. Not sure if you read DJR's post above with Boots' quote. Not sure if a 40 score is good enough?

Many of the brewers who are using this method have been brewing for many years, do have prizes to show it, do have taste buds etc. I'm not sure if you've tried an ESB fresh wort kit, but these are also no-chill. The DMS issue was covered in the original thread, but basically with the malts we have here, the DMS precursor will be at levels that will give DMS below the taste threshold if you do an adequate boil, ideally 90 minutes. The cold break issue - I trust that most brewers can tell if the beer is clear or not. Of course, there is always the ever present danger of botulism. :lol:

Edit: Steps off soap box, drinks cool, refreshing no-chill beer, weakness and paralysis set in.

 

[Darren]

Stuster,

A beer entered in the class of specialty beers and as a "poor richard" would be expected to have all the faults caused by a slow chill and uncontrolled ferment.
Now I am not saying my beers are the best on this earth. What I am saying is there are enough reasons why you might make a bad beer already. Why add to it?

cheers

Darren

(Seth you are very opinionated yourself)

 

[dubzau]

Stuster,

no, what I'm saying is just what I said - that most home brew is bad beer. There are a variety of reasons for why you can get away with the no chill method, and still produce a drinkable beer, but the mechanism of cold break, chill haze, etc, is well understood. Why indulge in bad brewing practice when it is so unnecessary?

http://www.beer-brewing.com/apex/wort_cool...k_formation.htm

But in the immortal words of George Costanza, it's not a lie if you believe it's the truth. Whatever works for you.

Cheers
Bud

 

[Pumpy]

Some people just dont like change .

Save water !!

Go the No Chill!!!!


Pumpy

 

[matti]

argumentative lot are we HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE
BUD "WEISER" at it again lol
But I must agree since I began with partial I always apply the best cold break possible with my crude equipments
Here's one 4 u
I put the 20L kettle with 10-12 litre wort in sink full of chipped ice.
Drain the water and add new when its hot 2-3 times.
Brings it down to 40ish in 10 minutes rougly.
Then I syphone the wort in to chilled fermenter and simultainious add remaining liqour at 0 degrees.
Voila! 24-28 degrees in 20 minutes and a well aerated wort to pitch the yeast in.
Every one for their own.
PS. the beer taste great and never had any problem with chill haze
I also use whirlflock in boil and fining for a week prior to bottling.
matti

 

[Stuster]

most home brew is bad beer

Why are you here then? :blink:

I'm with you, Pumpy. Change is very threatening to some.

 

[DJR]

I wish I had 10 bucks for every time I'd heard a homebrewer say "such and such makes no difference"! This belief (that nothing makes a difference) is what results in so many crap homebrews - and very rarely is a home brewed beer of commercial quality. Fortunately for many home brewers, they develop a taste for off flavours - which they call simply "flavour". "I don't mind cloudy beer", you'll hear them say, "the chunky bits are "flavour""!

Well, I hate to tell you guys, but all of the little things do make a big difference. That's why most home brewed beers - including many of the ones that win prizes in comps - are just rubbish. Whether it's rehydrating yeast, aeration, pitching at the correct temp, rapidly chilling the wort - it all makes a difference!!

Then again, many people choose to believe in alternative therapies too, even when they contradict each other. Whatever works for ya!!

What the hell are you doing on a home brew forum then with an attitude like that? Just go buy a case of budweiser or something. So i guess you've made the PERFECT homebrew and are willing to share the secrets of how to make beer better than everybody?

Long live No-chill.

Short live stubborn attitudes.

I can't believe i'm feeding trolls. :unsure:

 

[matti]

Let's start a "I hate BUD weiser" fan club :huh:
Then again LETS NOT

 

[Darren]

argumentative lot are we HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE
BUD "WEISER" at it again lol
But I must agree since I began with partial I always apply the best cold break possible with my crude equipments
Here's one 4 u
I put the 20L kettle with 10-12 litre wort in sink full of chipped ice.
Drain the water and add new when its hot 2-3 times.
Brings it down to 40ish in 10 minutes rougly.
Then I syphone the wort in to chilled fermenter and simultainious add remaining liqour at 0 degrees.
Voila! 24-28 degrees in 20 minutes and a well aerated wort to pitch the yeast in.
Every one for their own.
PS. the beer taste great and never had any problem with chill haze
I also use whirlflock in boil and fining for a week prior to bottling.
matti

Is producing ice an effective way to reduce global wastages? A freezer isn't magic you know? How much water was used to drive those turbines at the power plant? Is it more efficient than the RE-USABLE water generated by cooling.

Me, I use my cooling water to clean-up after brew-day. You guys who are saving water by no-chill probably get the hose on the tun and boiler in the end of the brew-day, saving NOUGHT.

Other ideas for the uses of the brew water are, washing clothes as the water is already warm or alternatively, collect it to water your plants.

Btw matti, I can chill 65litres of boiling wort in a similar amount of time uses 150 litres of water if I am slow and lazy.

How much ice and time would it take to chill 65 litres at summer temps (30 C)? Guest Lurker?

cheers

Darren

 

[matti]

A !@#$ load mate.
Wheres that DOG?
He might give you a scientific answer.
woff woff
how long is a thread?
Is universe round?
good night you tannin drinkers

 

[goatherder]

Sorry bud, but you aren't going to get a lot of symapthy here by simply sprouting theories derived from large-scale commercial brewing practices. Homebrewing is different from macro brewing in both the process and the final product. What works for one may not work for the other and vice versa.

If you are so certain of your theories then please do us all a service and test them. Do a no-chill brew and a chill brew and compare them, side by side if possible. Tell us what you find. Other brewers here have done this, thus they are able to talk from experience. Then everyone can learn from it.

 

[Ken Man Do]

Stuster,

no, what I'm saying is just what I said - that most home brew is bad beer. There are a variety of reasons for why you can get away with the no chill method, and still produce a drinkable beer, but the mechanism of cold break, chill haze, etc, is well understood. Why indulge in bad brewing practice when it is so unnecessary?

http://www.beer-brewing.com/apex/wort_cool...k_formation.htm

But in the immortal words of George Costanza, it's not a lie if you believe it's the truth. Whatever works for you.

Cheers
Bud

Some of you guys are completely missing the point.

First off, the apparent success of no-chill does NOT mean laziness or bad practice. It simply means that perhaps we have been misinformed, somehow, someway, in regard to the necessity of rapidly cooling wort. This is obvious because too many brewers are successfully using the no-chill method! How can you not see something that is right in your face??? And how about you guys that can wort for starters. They are mini no-chill brews, and what do you see in those jars? Break material sitting below perfectly clear wort! Positive no-chill evidence right in front of your eyes!

Second, no-chill may turn out to be not "bad brewing practice", but rather good brewing practice. Properly done, there is LESS chance of infection (and less messing around with equipment).

Third, you have to admit that the motive of some naysayers is a selfish one. Those brewers who fancy themselves all-knowledgeable may well feel a threat to their status as purveyers of "expert" brewing advice. It's a human nature thing and perfectly understandable. As another poster stated, some people hate change. :blink:

 

[Gerard_M]

Why are you here then? :blink:

What the hell are you doing on a home brew forum then with an attitude like that?

I wish I had 10 bucks for every time I'd heard a homebrewer say "such and such makes no difference"!

There is the answer guys, give him $10 and he will go away!

Maybe if we give him $20 he will take Darren with him!

I am going to go have a drink of water, if there is any left.

Cheers
Gerard

I really have to learn how to use that quote thing properly!

 

[Thommo]

This thread has, in my opinion, debunked the theory that wort needs to be cooled quickly.

Then again, I don't believe HSA exists either h34r:

Thommo

 

[Murray]

So apparently this is all about open-minded no-chill brewers who happen to flame anyone who dares to voice contrary opinions? Given accusations being levelled, this seems a tad hypocritical.

 

[matti]

"the needle returned to the start of the somg and we all sing along as before" Del amitri
I suppose that a no chill method is great for ales and alike and lager and pale ales benefit more from chill break Yeah?
Duh Darren u **** stirrer
That why the world isn't flat any more and maybe GOD do exist and it is not you
matti

 

[Duff]

So apparently this is all about open-minded no-chill brewers who happen to flame anyone who dares to voice contrary opinions? Given accusations being levelled, this seems a tad hypocritical.

No. It's about open minded no-chill brewers who have used an immersion or CFC in the past, who now have tried no-chill brewing and have not detected any negative difference in quality. This is despite what a minority few (who refuse to try it - therefore not open minded) continue to maintain it is detrimental to the finished product.

 

[Maxt]

I am new to grain brewing and have only chilled using a tub of ice water.

What I want from this thread is differing opinions, but preferably from brewers who have a lot of experience, and who have (in an unbiased way), made two batches in a near identicle manner, and can comment on the similarities/differences.

To just bag each other for having a different opinion isn't all that helpful, but it seems to me that the ones who have invested the most thought and effort into TESTING their theories, are the no-chill brigade.

I think it's a bit arrogant to believe that just because a book says it's so, then other people's experience should be rubbished. To the anti no-chill squad. You have made your point. Are you going to keep harping on until everyone comes around to your way of thinking?

You remind me of those Jehovas that keep coming to your house even though you have politely listened to their ideas and told them you are not interested.

"If someone believes they are right, it doesn't make you wrong".
Ancient ACT brewing proverb

 

[matti]

I tell you a secret Maxt>>>>>

It is mainly a cosmetic thing this chilling .
If you closed your eyes and tasted one next to the other you probably wouldn't notice much of a difference.

As long as you don't get the trub from the Kettle and your husks remain in the mashfilters you'd be fine.
I am sure these no-chillers would agree.
matti