My (ahem) award winning BW uses a healthy does of C60 and Munich along with the pale malt. I think wheat might thin it a bit, which might not be bad if that's what you want.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Higher temperature sparge water dissolves more tannins and presumably more silicates. Tannins cause chill haze. Anyway I may be over obsessing on one experiment.
I was wondering if the sparge water temp could relate to the lack of clarity of the sparged batch although pH of sparge was controlled. Anyway, I didn't see the sparge temp reported.
Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk
What was the temp of the sparge?
Doesn't matter. Hotter sparge water does not extract more sugar.
My question relates to the reduced clarity of the batch sparge beer not to efficiency. I've been cold sparging for no-boil beers for some time ....
What was the temp of the sparge?
The sparge volume (8.75 gal) being much larger than the mash volume (3.75) is non-optimal efficiency wise.
I find the only 2 point gravity difference between batch and no sparge to be interesting. I expected a bigger difference in efficiency.
I too am intrigued by this. Should be at least a 10% efficiency swing in my experience if not way more. Otherwise I have to wonder if they did it right! Brings the whole thing into question.
That said, I am not at all surprised that tasters could reliably detect some difference, given the benefit of the doubt that the no sparge truly was not sparged etc.
The difference in clarity is evedent in the post fermentation, pre gelatin pictures. My first thought was chill haze or a varible with the gelatin process. But perhaps it is a yeast performance issue?
This is exactly what Budweisser does. That said, theoretically you may be breaking colloidal bonds and affecting mouth feel and body.
The author acidified the sparge water by quite a bit. I wonder if that has anything to do with the haze.
Another possible cause could be the second stirring required. I love press pot coffee and the key to a good clean press is to only swirl in the beginning and NEVER stir before the press. Maybe something similar is happening here.
I know, it isn't a rational feeling. Though I do fit squarely in your "oldschool master" mindset, so that's likely a factor.
Maybe I just need to see it sitting on the shelf at the LHBS, then I'll go out and try it...
Mostly agree with British styles as I open ferment my bitters and milds and tend to abuse the yeast a bit more than other strains. Except, I made my most recent dark mild with Brewtan B and at one week in the bottle it's better than any mild I've made previously using the same recipe, whether it's aged or not. Still waiting to hear back on someone who's used it on a hoppier style. Regardless, I'm starting to believe that there is something to this stuff for home brewers. The purported stability effects might be more important for bottlers. Hard to say without more data.
Sorry to derail the thread a bit here...
Thread derails are how we all learn around here!
That being said, I won't derail further. But as for Brewtan B, I'm torn. I'm really interested in it's affects and the results folks are getting...but at the same time I'm having a hard time "liking" adding a "chemical" to my beer. Yes, I know it's irrational, there's nothing wrong with Brewtan B at all...but there's a part of me that's bothered by it. That being said, I do use whirfloc, isinglass, gelatin, etc. I don't get it.
More line. Beer is moving too fast.
If the beer is moving too fast, couldn't I lower the psi on the regulator to slow it down? Or is the only solution to add more line? If so, how much line?