[HoosierBrew]

Okay, okay, the experiment should be easy enough.  Maybe I'll run it for my next batch.  Basically I'll need to do two small batches back to back in one day, then use the same yeast for both, side by side.  Then I can have Manty Malters club members do the triangle test.  We currently have 4 BJCP'ers including one National (and I am Certified), if that gives any extra credibility.  Yeah, I'll plan on it.  Experiment design: Two back to back batches, one with the gap way open on my mill for a goal efficiency of 65-75%, and another with the gap tight with a goal of 90%.  Grain bills will be exactly the same percentage-wise, just more mass of grain used for the low efficiency batch, and less mass for the high efficiency.  I'm an engineer so I can figure out all the math.

Okay, okay..... for what it's worth, it will be a sort of American barleywine style.  Actually I'm not exactly sure what to make of the style... it's a Category 23 recipe that I just came up with.  But that's what I'm brewing next.  So there you go.  Stay tuned in a few months.  I'm actually maybe committing to doing this.  Maybe. 

Apologies to Joe T for the apparent hijack.  I'll start another thread later, then link it here if I remember.  (Joe T..... my brother's name is Joe T......)

Awesome.  That's the spirit    And obviously a barleywine would definitely be a good style to judge for differences in malt quality and fullness, too.

EDIT - Agreed on a hop bomb being a bad one to judge.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

Okay, okay, the experiment should be easy enough.  Maybe I'll run it for my next batch.  Basically I'll need to do two small batches back to back in one day, then use the same yeast for both, side by side.  Then I can have Manty Malters club members do the triangle test.  We currently have 4 BJCP'ers including one National (and I am Certified), if that gives any extra credibility.  Yeah, I'll plan on it.  Experiment design: Two back to back batches, one with the gap way open on my mill for a goal efficiency of 65-75%, and another with the gap tight with a goal of 90%.  Grain bills will be exactly the same percentage-wise, just more mass of grain used for the low efficiency batch, and less mass for the high efficiency.  I'm an engineer so I can figure out all the math.

Okay, okay..... for what it's worth, it will be a sort of American barleywine style.  Actually I'm not exactly sure what to make of the style... it's a Category 23 recipe that I just came up with.  But that's what I'm brewing next.  So there you go.  Stay tuned in a few months.  I'm actually maybe committing to doing this.  Maybe. 

Apologies to Joe T for the apparent hijack.  I'll start another thread later, then link it here if I remember.  (Joe T..... my brother's name is Joe T......)

EDIT: Ack, no.... I can't do a strong ale like that for this experiment, it might take too long to age.  I dunno.  I'll have to check the gravity on it again, I can't remember what it was.  Otherwise I'll do something else.  Something simpler.  Without a lot of hops.  I really hate it when people run experiments testing for subtle flavor differences but then they brew a jacked up IIPA where you can't even feel your taste buds.  The right way to do this is a good malty style with ~30 IBUs, something middle of the road.  I'll figure something out.  Maybe that Sam Adams Boston Ale clone... yeah, now that's the ticket...... yes, I said Boston ALE, not Lager.  I'll do the Lager some other time.  I'm in the mood for the ALE.

i think boston ale would be perfect for this test.

[HoosierBrew]

as far as my taste buds know, im making the best beer i've ever made, and for many reasons and perhaps in spite of higher efficiency.

That's my experience, too.  I started out AG brewing getting maybe 65% at best. A few equipment changes over the years, but mostly dialing in my system and skills to accuracy and repeatability. I'm making the best beer I've ever made while getting, by comparison, much better efficiency. So between 65 and 80% the beer is only better. No watery, inferior malt character. But the anecdotes about getting a maltier beer by no-sparging persist (ie., lower efficiency). Looking forward to getting some good data.

[Joe T]

No worries, Dave. I didn't ask a question or even have a point, for that matter. I shared an observation that pretty much everyone here already considers common knowledge. Happy to start the conversation that gave you motivation!
In response to your theory that the starch doesn't contribute much flavor, but the flavor comes from the hulls, I have another suggestion for an experiment to prove/disprove this. When I double-crush(coarse, then fine) it leaves the hulls mostly intact. These hulls could be separated by winnowing and added to a grist. So you could brew a batch with say 10# and an identical batch with 10# plus the hulls from maybe 5#. Personally, I think it would have the same flavor impact of adding rice hulls(nothing) but I might be wrong. Maybe.

[dmtaylor]

Now that would really make it conclusive, Joe.  Nice idea.  I'll leave that one for someone else to winnow.

[denny]

i know just the guy who may want to take this one on..Marshall.

Yeah, I was gonna suggest it to him.

[denny]

I'd suggest a fairly light style.  That's the way I'd approach it.

[brewsumore]

So Denny, is it mash efficiency that is achieved at 100% by SN, rather than the more comprehensive brewhouse efficiency?

My understanding is that high mash efficiency isn't that unusual, but brewhouse efficiency is a different number, difficult to achieve above 90%, and not desirable for the reasons stated by DM Taylor, essentially less flavorful beer.

Granted, my knowledge of any differences between mash efficiency and brewhouse efficiency is not enough to weigh in competently.

I wish I could provide solid references, but I do know that over the years this issue has been debated a number of times (including in brewing books?) with a common hypothesis being that beer flavor suffers once brewhouse efficiency gets too high (maybe +90%?)

My intuition tells me that I am about where I want to be at ~78% brewhouse efficency for 1.055 beers, and more or less going higher or lower OG.

In other words, I think DMTaylor's comment on % of sugars vs. other components from your grain bill means that you will lose desired flavor/malty components if there is minimal malt in your grain bill when achieving 95% brewhouse efficiency.

[denny]

So Denny, is it mash efficiency that is achieved at 100% by SN, rather than the more comprehensive brewhouse efficiency?

My understanding is that high mash efficiency isn't that unusual, but brewhouse efficiency is a different number, difficult to achieve above 90%, and not desirable for the reasons stated by DM Taylor, essentially less flavorful beer.

Granted, my knowledge of any differences between mash efficiency and brewhouse efficiency is not enough to weigh in competently.

I wish I could provide solid references, but I do know that over the years this issue has been debated a number of times (including in brewing books?) with a common hypothesis being that beer flavor suffers once brewhouse efficiency gets too high (maybe +90%?)

My intuition tells me that I am about where I want to be at ~78% brewhouse efficency for 1.055 beers, and more or less going higher or lower OG.

In other words, I think DMTaylor's comment on % of sugars vs. other components from your grain bill means that you will lose desired flavor/malty components if there is minimal malt in your grain bill when achieving 95% brewhouse efficiency.

I believe it is brewhouse efficiency.  I'll see if I can verify that, but my froend who used to work there no longer does.