Messages

16

All Grain Brewing / Re: Brewing with Unmalted Wheat

« on: June 13, 2012, 10:59:15 AM »

Picture oatmeal. How easy is it to extract liquid from cooked oatmeal? I really wouldn't recommend using a high amount of unmalted wheat without a glucan rest, with or without rice hulls.

Good mental picture.  Thanks for the advice!

17

All Grain Brewing / Re: Brewing with Unmalted Wheat

« on: June 13, 2012, 10:54:20 AM »

There are really two, related issues when using unmalted wheat, relating to wort composition and mash kinetics. The first is affected by protein, the other is affected by beta-glucan. Wheat starch is used as a glue, because beta-glucans are really sticky. So a large amount of beta-glucans may cause a slow or stuck mash.

The first issue, having too much protein, may result in haze or stability issues in the finished beer.

I think acceptable levels of beta-glucans and protein will depend on your particular brewing setup. Almost everyone could get away with maybe 10-15% unmalted wheat and a single-infusion under otherwise "normal" circumstances. When using large amounts (40%+) then the two issues I mentioned may become a big deal.

I suppose I really wouldn't be interested in going over 10-15% unmalted wheat anyway.  Any higher percentage of wheat I could use malted. 

But, devil's advocate, I don't usually have any trouble with stuck sparges and if I were concerned with it I could always throw in some rice hulls.  So, as to the second point of haze and stability.  Let's say I was doing a Belgian White and intended to drink this batch quickly and often.  If I wanted to mess around with a higher amount of unmalted wheat with a single infusion, this would be the style to give it a whirl?

18

All Grain Brewing / Brewing with Unmalted Wheat

« on: June 13, 2012, 09:39:06 AM »

I have only ever used malted wheat to date, but would like to give unmalted wheat a spin.  I've been reading Brewing with Wheat and it seems like without fail European brewers who use unmalted wheat as a portion of their grist do at the minimum a protein rest.  But when I came to a breakdown of Allagash's White  they use a portion of unmalted wheat (unspecified amount) but do a single infusion mash around 154 F (give or take a degree, I don't exactly remember).  From listening to Jamil Show podcasts in the past with Ron Jeffries, I know that Jolly Pumpkin also uses unmalted grains with single infusion mashes, but usually in small amounts/percentages. 

So I am wondering who has tried both ways, protein rest and single infusion, with unmalted wheat and what the experiences are?  Is it ok in small amounts to not do a protein rest?  In large amounts?  No amount at all?  Any and all comments welcome. 

19

All Grain Brewing / Re: protein rest... 122F or 133F?

« on: May 29, 2012, 05:33:50 AM »

According to Gordon Strong's book, "Brewing Better Beer" protein rests work in the range 104* to 140* F, but is most active between 122* and 131* F.  When I do a protein rest, it is normally at 131* F for 10-15 minutes.

I believe Gordon Strong also recommends the rest be done around 131 F (or close enough) as opposed to 122 F because in better modified malts the lower temp can destroy proteins that are useful for body and head retention. 

20

Other Fermentables / Re: Mead and Medicinal Flavors

« on: May 10, 2012, 09:56:17 AM »

Thanks for some good direction!

21

Other Fermentables / Mead and Medicinal Flavors

« on: May 10, 2012, 05:09:49 AM »

So I made a mead a while back (year ago) where I underpitched and probably didn't use enough yeast nutrient.  It had a really strong medicinal/cough syrup like flavor that I assumed was a result of underpitching/lack of nutrients that has taken almost a year to start to fade. 

To my surprise, however, I got a commercial example from a local winery that tasted twice as medicinal/cough syrupy as mine.  Confused I tried another mead from a company that specializes in mead here in Michigan.  The medicinal notes were not nearly as pronounced as in mine, or the first commercial example, but they were still pretty evident.  I've searched the internet for explanations, but while I've come across other people who have noted the same issue, the responses were lacking.

Is all mead cursed to have these flavors to some degree? Or will proper fermentation take care of it?  Or am I just crazy?

22

Zymurgy / Re: "New Rules of Brewing Water" - Same as the old rules?

« on: April 26, 2012, 09:11:34 AM »

Very new to the concept of paying attention to my water.  My practice has been to pour from my tap and add half a campden tablet.  But I have recently started taking readings of my mashes with pH strips. 

When it comes to "rules for brewing water" I've tried listening to the Brew Strong podcasts and Palmer loses me quick.  Should I just be concerned with my mash being in a 5.2 to 5.5 range and how to adjust to get there?  Or do I need really need to know how to "spice" the water as John Palmer talks about? 

23

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Burn(er)ing Question

« on: April 25, 2012, 09:55:31 AM »

I use the SQ14 from Bayou Classic and have been very pleased with it so far.  Got it for less than $50 about 8 months ago.  For me, it is a good compromise between power, noise, and fuel consumption.  It is sold at Amazon and also Home Depot.

One thing to keep in mind is the size.  Not all of them fit a keggle without a supplemental grate of some sort if that's what you use.  That's another reason I chose the SQ14.  It fits a keggle perfectly with no modifications.

Good luck!

I don't use a keggle.  My current brew kettle is 16 inches in diameter, which I assume would be ok with the 13 inch diameter of the sp10 if I went with that. But my next purchase I intend to make is a kettle with a 19 inch diameter.  In my mind I feel like that would still be stable on top of 13 inches, but am I off base with that? 

24

General Homebrew Discussion / Burn(er)ing Question

« on: April 25, 2012, 06:35:55 AM »

I'm sure this topic has come up a lot, so apologies, but is there any reason not to go cheap (50 dollar range) as opposed to some of the more expensive options?  These are two I am looking at right now:

http://www.midwestsupplies.com/homebrewing-equipment/boiling-equipment/burners/king-kooker.html

http://www.amazon.com/Bayou-Classic-SQ14-Single-Outdoor/dp/B0009JXYQ4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1335360454&sr=8-2

Thank you for any input.

25

All Grain Brewing / Re: Question About Batch Sparging

« on: April 22, 2012, 10:33:34 AM »

You basically did a no-sparge.  It won't cause any issues other than the efficiency might have been a little lower than if you'd batch sparged.  Either way works fine but you're efficiency will be somewhat higher with batch sparging than no sparging.  With batch sparging (or fly sparging) you're rinsing more sugars out of the grains.

Thank you!

26

All Grain Brewing / Question About Batch Sparging

« on: April 22, 2012, 10:18:28 AM »

So I know that if you mash too thin you lower the efficency of the enzymes (or something along those lines) and mess with the conversion of starches to fermentable sugars.  So I get why you wouldn't mash 9 pounds of grain with, say, 10 gallons of water. 

However, yesterday I was making a mild with under 9 pounds of grain and I mashed with 3.5 gallons of water.  When I went to collect my first runnings it was stuck, and I thought the small amount of water in my 70 qt cooler might have something to do with it (first time I've ever had it stuck).  So, I added the water I had intended to sparge with, stirred and waited 10 minutes and collected my 6.5 gallons to boil with no problem.  I took a ph reading at room temp from a little bit of the runnings collected at the beginning and a little collected at the end and according to my strip they both tested between 5.0 and 5.4. 

Will this cause any issues?  And if not, what is reason behind collecting your first runnings, adding the sparge water and then waiting before collecting the rest of your wort? 

27

All Grain Brewing / Re: Hazelnut extract question

« on: January 11, 2012, 12:43:49 PM »

My experience with extracts is that there is no standard concentration.  If you are using the kind you add to coffee (in the .75 liter bottles) then that is WAY different than the tiny bottles.  The stuff that I have, one DROP (measured from a pipette) is IMO too much for a PINT.  Probably ok for 22oz bomber.  So at 20 drops/ml and 40 pints per keg, that's at most 40 drops (more like 30).  A tablespoon is 15ml (that's 300 drops)!  Start out small, you can always add more.

In Jamil's recipe for Chocolate Hazelnut Porter he says much the same thing.  I guess it can vary dramatically from extract to extract.  Starting small and working up seems like a good way to go. 

28

All Grain Brewing / Re: Efficiency: How Good is Too Good

« on: January 10, 2012, 09:11:00 AM »

Thanks for the responses!

29

All Grain Brewing / Efficiency: How Good is Too Good

« on: January 10, 2012, 09:01:46 AM »

So, I recently did Jamil Zainasheff's hazelnut chocolate porter, using maris otter as the base malt.  I batch sparged in a 70 qt coleman cooler and collected 6.5 gallons and collected 5 gallons after it was all said and done for the fermenter.  The gravity reading was well above what the recipe stated.  When I calculated the efficiency after, it was almost 82%.  Is that too high?  I've heard that too high of an efficiency can be a bad thing, as you may be extracting things from your mash that are undesirable. 

30

All Grain Brewing / Re: Sparge Water Temperature and pH

« on: August 28, 2011, 01:00:47 PM »

But, after reading a comment from Denny the other day who said he heats his sparge water up to 185F (or something along those lines) I was confused.  So I looked into Denny's batch sparging tutorial.  It makes reference to doing a mash out, but also makes reference to getting the grain bed to 165F to 168F during the sparging process, but doesn't really explain why.  I understand a mash out is to stop enzymatic activity.  But once that has been done, what is the benefit of raising the grain bed temp to 165F to 168F during *edit* sparging?  I'm sorry for the very long winded question, but I want to understand as much as possible.

I'll try to clarify things a bit....I used to believe in a mashout for 2 reasons.  One was to stop the enzymatic activity and "fix" the fermentability of the wort.  The other was that it would reduce the viscosity of the wort and improve the runoff.  I've since found that in order to denature enzymes you need to hold 170F for 20 min.  I've never done that, and I suspect not many homebrewers do, either.  In addition, I realized that you're bringing the wort to a boil very quickly with batch sparging, so you don't even really need to worry about denaturing enzymes (the boil obviously does that  To the second point, I realized that even if raising the temp really did reduce viscosity (and I question the extent to which that really happens), you got no benefits from it.  I tried sparging with cooler water and didn't really see any change in efficiency or fermentability.  In reality, even if I added 190F water, the grain bed still rarely reached 170.  These days, I don't worry about a mashout step per se, but sparge with water that's at least 190F.  That in effect gives me a beta/alpha step mash, which I think does increase my efficiency a bit by promoting fuller conversion in the mash.

And while it may or may not matter in this instance, keep in mind that John is almost always speaking of fly sparging, not batch sparging.

Thank you! That clarified a lot for me in one post.  It sounds like adding sparge water that is heated to 190F is the most efficient thing in terms of actual benefit based on the options.  Thanks again.