[denny]

For the big beer, I add no additional water after the mash...simply run it off and that's my boil volume. 

IIRC, you are just using a larger mash tun for your bigger beers, correct?

70 qt. for 5 gal., 152 qt. for 10+ gal.

[denny]

Denny, on adding the remaining water after the mash is complete: for my workflow this would work almost as easily as adding all the water at once, which is what I do now, so I'd be curious to know your rationale (efficiency, flavor, etc.). I think someone else in this thread mentioned doing this too.

well, it's based at least in part on the fact that it's the way I learned to do no sparge 18 years ago.  Also, I like to stay in a somewhat "normal" mash ratio range.  Now, that may be misguided, but it's my theory.  And it works.

[charles1968]

Denny, on adding the remaining water after the mash is complete: for my workflow this would work almost as easily as adding all the water at once, which is what I do now, so I'd be curious to know your rationale (efficiency, flavor, etc.). I think someone else in this thread mentioned doing this too.

well, it's based at least in part on the fact that it's the way I learned to do no sparge 18 years ago.  Also, I like to stay in a somewhat "normal" mash ratio range.  Now, that may be misguided, but it's my theory.  And it works.

Not misguided, thin mashes raise mash pH because the buffering power of the malt is weaker. You need to be careful with water treatment if you mash with the full liquor volume. Mashing thick guarantees good pH, at the cost of lower efficiency (if you skip the sparge).

[brewinhard]

Denny, on adding the remaining water after the mash is complete: for my workflow this would work almost as easily as adding all the water at once, which is what I do now, so I'd be curious to know your rationale (efficiency, flavor, etc.). I think someone else in this thread mentioned doing this too.

  Also, I like to stay in a somewhat "normal" mash ratio range.  Now, that may be misguided, but it's my theory.  And it works.

Same reasoning for me.  I don't want to thin out the mash too much for the enzymes to do their work.

[kgs]

Denny, on adding the remaining water after the mash is complete: for my workflow this would work almost as easily as adding all the water at once, which is what I do now, so I'd be curious to know your rationale (efficiency, flavor, etc.). I think someone else in this thread mentioned doing this too.

  Also, I like to stay in a somewhat "normal" mash ratio range.  Now, that may be misguided, but it's my theory.  And it works.

Same reasoning for me.  I don't want to thin out the mash too much for the enzymes to do their work.

Thanks. It would be easy enough to try, and I could do a rebrew of one of my favorites. A small change to the process. At mash temp or at higher "mash-out" temp?

[tommymorris]

So if I heat my sparge water as per my normal batch sparge procedure and then add the sparge water before draining the tun I will get a more malty beer flavor at the cost of lower efficiency?  Has anyone tried opening the gap on their mill to lower efficiency to get the same effect? Both would require extra malt in the mash to compensate for the lower efficiency.

[brewinhard]

Are you referring to the mash out water temperature? If so, that is dependent for me on the mash temp I used (and amount of water and grain in the tun).  If I mash around 150 then I will definitely heat the remaining mash out water to 196-200F or so to even get the mash up to 168-170F.  Have cold water/ice cubes on hand to bring the temp down if you go too high.

If my mash temp is 155F (or so) then I probably only heat to around 192-195F to account for the warmer mash temp already have more degrees of heat. For me, it is trial and error, taking good notes and using those numbers to adjust for future brews.

[denny]

So if I heat my sparge water as per my normal batch sparge procedure and then add the sparge water before draining the tun I will get a more malty beer flavor at the cost of lower efficiency?  Has anyone tried opening the gap on their mill to lower efficiency to get the same effect? Both would require extra malt in the mash to compensate for the lower efficiency.

I don't think it has anything to do with lower efficiency necessarily.  I'm also not sure I'd claim to get a maltier beer with no sparge.  Being subjective, that's kinda hard to quantify and AFIAK there is no empirical evidence to support that.

[tommymorris]

So if I heat my sparge water as per my normal batch sparge procedure and then add the sparge water before draining the tun I will get a more malty beer flavor at the cost of lower efficiency?  Has anyone tried opening the gap on their mill to lower efficiency to get the same effect? Both would require extra malt in the mash to compensate for the lower efficiency.

I don't think it has anything to do with lower efficiency necessarily.  I'm also not sure I'd claim to get a maltier beer with no sparge.  Being subjective, that's kinda hard to quantify and AFIAK there is no empirical evidence to support that.

I took the more malty from the first page of this thread when someone ask what types of beer benefit from no sparge. Answer was malty beers. I guess I misinterpreted that to mean no sparge makes the beer more malty.

I'll have to try no sparge to see what it does to my beer.

[RPIScotty]

So if I heat my sparge water as per my normal batch sparge procedure and then add the sparge water before draining the tun I will get a more malty beer flavor at the cost of lower efficiency?  Has anyone tried opening the gap on their mill to lower efficiency to get the same effect? Both would require extra malt in the mash to compensate for the lower efficiency.

I don't think it has anything to do with lower efficiency necessarily.  I'm also not sure I'd claim to get a maltier beer with no sparge.  Being subjective, that's kinda hard to quantify and AFIAK there is no empirical evidence to support that.

I took the more malty from the first page of this thread when someone ask what types of beer benefit from no sparge. Answer was malty beers. I guess I misinterpreted that to mean no sparge makes the beer more malty.

I'll have to try no sparge to see what it does to my beer.

Guilty. That was thrown out by me.

Another case of regurgitating info passed around. A 1ˢᵗ runnings beer is a no-sparge and has a maltier flavor, no?

Maybe there is a Δ between people's understanding of the process. I myself seem to have mixed up first runnings and no-sparge on a few occasions.

A real plus for no sparge seems to be pH stability.

[tommymorris]

So if I heat my sparge water as per my normal batch sparge procedure and then add the sparge water before draining the tun I will get a more malty beer flavor at the cost of lower efficiency?  Has anyone tried opening the gap on their mill to lower efficiency to get the same effect? Both would require extra malt in the mash to compensate for the lower efficiency.

I don't think it has anything to do with lower efficiency necessarily.  I'm also not sure I'd claim to get a maltier beer with no sparge.  Being subjective, that's kinda hard to quantify and AFIAK there is no empirical evidence to support that.

I took the more malty from the first page of this thread when someone ask what types of beer benefit from no sparge. Answer was malty beers. I guess I misinterpreted that to mean no sparge makes the beer more malty.

I'll have to try no sparge to see what it does to my beer.

Guilty. That was thrown out by me.

Another case of regurgitating info passed around. A 1ˢᵗ runnings beer is a no-sparge and has a maltier flavor, no?

Maybe there is a Δ between people's understanding of the process. I myself seem to have mixed up first runnings and no-sparge on a few occasions.

A real plus for no sparge seems to be pH stability.

Re: ph stability. In this thread folks recommend mashing with a normal water to grain weight ratio to avoid ph creep due to lack of buffer when mashing with all the water at once.

[flbrewer]

After posting around the interweb, talking to some folks, etc. I've come to the conclusion that (like Denny said) that there is no evidence that no spare equates to a maltier beer. Well, back to batch sparking I go!

[charles1968]

Re: ph stability. In this thread folks recommend mashing with a normal water to grain weight ratio to avoid ph creep due to lack of buffer when mashing with all the water at once.

Mash pH is higher if you use the whole liquor volume, but that's as high as it goes - since there's no sparge, there's no risk of pH shooting up and causing tannins to dissolve into the wort.

There's a section on mash thickness and pH in this paper by kai Troester:
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://braukaiser.com/documents/effect_of_water_and_grist_on_mash_pH.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiypIz8oNXKAhXCUhQKHVRTAVcQFggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNFPB-BnWhPEw4ez1jXBfemrZQkEdw

Assuming he factored all that into the water calc on brewersfriend, you should still hit target mash pH if you use BF for water treatment.

[tommymorris]

So if I heat my sparge water as per my normal batch sparge procedure and then add the sparge water before draining the tun I will get a more malty beer flavor at the cost of lower efficiency?  Has anyone tried opening the gap on their mill to lower efficiency to get the same effect? Both would require extra malt in the mash to compensate for the lower efficiency.

I don't think it has anything to do with lower efficiency necessarily.  I'm also not sure I'd claim to get a maltier beer with no sparge.  Being subjective, that's kinda hard to quantify and AFIAK there is no empirical evidence to support that.

I took the more malty from the first page of this thread when someone ask what types of beer benefit from no sparge. Answer was malty beers. I guess I misinterpreted that to mean no sparge makes the beer more malty.

I'll have to try no sparge to see what it does to my beer.

Guilty. That was thrown out by me.

Another case of regurgitating info passed around. A 1ˢᵗ runnings beer is a no-sparge and has a maltier flavor, no?

Maybe there is a Δ between people's understanding of the process. I myself seem to have mixed up first runnings and no-sparge on a few occasions.

A real plus for no sparge seems to be pH stability.

Re: ph stability. In this thread folks recommend mashing with a normal water to grain weight ratio to avoid ph creep due to lack of buffer when mashing with all the water at once.

I am planning to try no sparge. I want to see what it does to my blonde ale.

[MDixon]

When I did a no sparge my efficiency was 64%. Normal is 85%+. We overshot the gravity as a result of the better than expected efficiency.