[Derek]

The best answer is D:

Just say no to a protein rest.  With the highly modified malts we have today, it's almost never needed and can be detrimental.  Base the decision to do a p rest on the specific malt you use, not a recipe.

Totally agree.

Martin is also correct.  Boiling a thick decoction is better than what the OP described, which is actually a thin decoction.  With thin decoction, you'll kill most of your enzymes, so conversion and attenuation may be adversely impacted.

You really need to just skip the protein rest, unless you're hell-bent on finding out just how detrimental it is with 21st century malts.

Is this homebrew specific? I've never been able to wrap my brain around the fact that so many continental brewers still step mash as a general rule. My assumption would be the difference in scale between homebrewing and commercial breweries holds the key.

Just curious. I'm a big fan of continental Belgian beers and I use malts such as Dingemans and Weyermann like many of the breweries over there.

Not looking to stir the pot (this topic always receives mixed results). I'm just curious to know if this is just detrimental on our scale.

[hopfenundmalz]

The best answer is D:

Just say no to a protein rest.  With the highly modified malts we have today, it's almost never needed and can be detrimental.  Base the decision to do a p rest on the specific malt you use, not a recipe.

Totally agree.

Martin is also correct.  Boiling a thick decoction is better than what the OP described, which is actually a thin decoction.  With thin decoction, you'll kill most of your enzymes, so conversion and attenuation may be adversely impacted.

You really need to just skip the protein rest, unless you're hell-bent on finding out just how detrimental it is with 21st century malts.

Is this homebrew specific? I've never been able to wrap my brain around the fact that so many continental brewers still step mash as a general rule. My assumption would be the difference in scale between homebrewing and commercial breweries holds the key.

Just curious. I'm a big fan of continental Belgian beers and I use malts such as Dingemans and Weyermann like many of the breweries over there.

Not looking to stir the pot (this topic always receives mixed results). I'm just curious to know if this is just detrimental on our scale.

Some German Brewers still do decoctions, and the brew house is set up for that with slurry pumps.

Other German brewers have gone to step mashes to save energy, and time.

As far as I can tell, Weyermann does not have a huge part of the malt market in Germany. They have the one maltings in Bamberg. There are other maltsters that have 3 maltings, Avangard has 4.

[Derek]

I guess the confusion may be that a rest at the upper bound of the protein range is often seen as a first step to many recipes. 132 is a common one.

Maybe it isn't correct to call that a protein rest?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dmtaylor]

I agree that it is likely a maltster thing.  Also likely to be a temperature thing.  The number I see thrown around most often for homebrewers and which I have used is 122 F.  Perhaps at 130+ F the effect is not detrimental.  Possible.

[hopfenundmalz]

An short rest at 133f is what is often recommended.
http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php?title=Infusion_Mashing

[wobdee]

Weyermann recommends a 122° rest for some of their recipes before stepping up. I use to do a short rest in that range with their malts and found the head retention less than what I wanted so I boosted up to 131° and it seems better but still lacking that good lacing. My last few batches I skipped the protein rest, still waiting to tap into those beers to see if there's a difference.

[chumley]

For beers with significant percentages of wheat and/or rye, I like the old 40-60-70 (°C) step mash schedule, and for a lot of Belgians and lagers I go with a 60-70.  But more often than not, I just do a single infusion.

[dmtaylor]

I use to do a short rest in that range with their malts and found the head retention less than what I wanted so I boosted up to 131° and it seems better but still lacking that good lacing. My last few batches I skipped the protein rest, still waiting to tap into those beers to see if there's a difference.

Please let us know your results!  I imagine you may be pleasantly surprised.

[wobdee]

I use to do a short rest in that range with their malts and found the head retention less than what I wanted so I boosted up to 131° and it seems better but still lacking that good lacing. My last few batches I skipped the protein rest, still waiting to tap into those beers to see if there's a difference.

Please let us know your results!  I imagine you may be pleasantly surprised.

Will do.