[beersk]

I know I can perceive a difference. Even if it's subtle, it takes, what would be a good beer, to a great beer.

With all due respect, how do you know you perceive a difference? I'm not saying there isn't one, I'm just truly curious if you've done blind comparisons? I'm a huge believer in the subjectivity of preference, so what's good to one might be great to another, hence my adherence to the "to each their own" mentality.

Tradition is often an incredibly strong influence, particularly in more collectivist cultures. That and the fear of losing product/money should something go wrong are at least reasonable possibilities as to why some (not all) German brewers continue utilizing conventional methods.

Well, most of them don't decoct anymore, if that means anything...

I have not done blind tests, but I don't really feel the need to. Enzymes work best at different temperatures and a 150F rest isn't doing the best for beta and alpha enzymes. Separate rests are best. But I guess if you don't care to spend a little extra time then don't. That's why this hobby is great, we can put into it what we want to get out of it.
 

[brulosopher]

I know I can perceive a difference. Even if it's subtle, it takes, what would be a good beer, to a great beer.

With all due respect, how do you know you perceive a difference? I'm not saying there isn't one, I'm just truly curious if you've done blind comparisons? I'm a huge believer in the subjectivity of preference, so what's good to one might be great to another, hence my adherence to the "to each their own" mentality.

Tradition is often an incredibly strong influence, particularly in more collectivist cultures. That and the fear of losing product/money should something go wrong are at least reasonable possibilities as to why some (not all) German brewers continue utilizing conventional methods.

Well, most of them don't decoct anymore, if that means anything...

I have not done blind tests, but I don't really feel the need to. Enzymes work best at different temperatures and a 150F rest isn't doing the best for beta and alpha enzymes. Separate rests are best. But I guess if you don't care to spend a little extra time then don't. That's why this hobby is great, we can put into it what we want to get out of it.

I agree that's why this hobby is great!

To my empiricist mind, your "knowing" it makes a difference is really you "believing" it makes a difference, which can be... is hugely influenced by confirmation bias. Which is totally cool, I was just curious if you'd done other testing I hadn't read about.

Cheers!

[beersk]

I know I can perceive a difference. Even if it's subtle, it takes, what would be a good beer, to a great beer.

With all due respect, how do you know you perceive a difference? I'm not saying there isn't one, I'm just truly curious if you've done blind comparisons? I'm a huge believer in the subjectivity of preference, so what's good to one might be great to another, hence my adherence to the "to each their own" mentality.

Tradition is often an incredibly strong influence, particularly in more collectivist cultures. That and the fear of losing product/money should something go wrong are at least reasonable possibilities as to why some (not all) German brewers continue utilizing conventional methods.

Well, most of them don't decoct anymore, if that means anything...

I have not done blind tests, but I don't really feel the need to. Enzymes work best at different temperatures and a 150F rest isn't doing the best for beta and alpha enzymes. Separate rests are best. But I guess if you don't care to spend a little extra time then don't. That's why this hobby is great, we can put into it what we want to get out of it.

I agree that's why this hobby is great!

To my empiricist mind, your "knowing" it makes a difference is really you "believing" it makes a difference, which can be... is hugely influenced by confirmation bias. Which is totally cool, I was just curious if you'd done other testing I hadn't read about.

Cheers!

Oh yeah, I mean, I'm no scientist, I don't KNOW absolutely. But I honestly don't mind spending the extra hour for mashing. And I like what it does for my beers. My brew sessions are still about 5 hours.

[denny]

Well, most of them don't decoct anymore, if that means anything...

I have not done blind tests, but I don't really feel the need to. Enzymes work best at different temperatures and a 150F rest isn't doing the best for beta and alpha enzymes. Separate rests are best. But I guess if you don't care to spend a little extra time then don't. That's why this hobby is great, we can put into it what we want to get out of it.

If you haven't done the blind tasting, then you really don't know.  You're making an assumption based on your bias.  I'm not t=saying you shouldn't brew however you want to, but you may want to rethink your position that it makes a difference until you're sure it does.

[erockrph]

I have not done blind tests, but I don't really feel the need to. Enzymes work best at different temperatures and a 150F rest isn't doing the best for beta and alpha enzymes. Separate rests are best. But I guess if you don't care to spend a little extra time then don't. That's why this hobby is great, we can put into it what we want to get out of it.

A 150F rest isn't doing the best what? Separate rests are best at what? Why?

I get that the enzymes do different things, but none work in a vacuum. Why is it better to have alpha and beta active separately, rather than together? And how are you sure that alpha isn't having a significant effect down at beta rest range before you ramp up? Modern malts have a crap-ton of enzymatic activity, and even if it's at a lower rate there's a good chance that alpha-amylase is still gobbling away well enough just by sheer enzymatic content at beta rest temps. And frankly, alpha amylase activity will certainly improve beta amylase's effectiveness, by exposing more 1-4 bonds for beta to act on.

I think you have to be really cautious to start extrapolating scientific facts, given how complex the chemistry of wort and beer production is. You can make all the claims you want, but they are really just unproven hypotheses until you back it up with data.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

I like the information and data  Kai has written on this topic, and the citations of others work and data he uses.

The idea of "optimal enzymatic activity at temp and Ph ranges" is a key differentiation vs "best". Kai has done a great deal of research it appears, and has some good data to support it.

For me, since I decided to step my lagers- I like to follow the guidance as closely as I or my system permits. Now-is it better to do approach it this way.... My conclusions on things related to all of this are work in process-some I'm reasonably satisfied with my conclusions, and others Im still working on deciding/figuring out.

edit: for reference- for those not familiar with Kai.   
http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php?title=The_Science_of_Mashing

[klickitat jim]

I have not done blind tests, but I don't really feel the need to. Enzymes work best at different temperatures and a 150F rest isn't doing the best for beta and alpha enzymes. Separate rests are best. But I guess if you don't care to spend a little extra time then don't. That's why this hobby is great, we can put into it what we want to get out of it.

A 150F rest isn't doing the best what? Separate rests are best at what? Why?

I get that the enzymes do different things, but none work in a vacuum. Why is it better to have alpha and beta active separately, rather than together? And how are you sure that alpha isn't having a significant effect down at beta rest range before you ramp up? Modern malts have a crap-ton of enzymatic activity, and even if it's at a lower rate there's a good chance that alpha-amylase is still gobbling away well enough just by sheer enzymatic content at beta rest temps. And frankly, alpha amylase activity will certainly improve beta amylase's effectiveness, by exposing more 1-4 bonds for beta to act on.

I think you have to be really cautious to start extrapolating scientific facts, given how complex the chemistry of wort and beer production is. You can make all the claims you want, but they are really just unproven hypotheses until you back it up with data.

I have to agree on Eric's point about the complex dynamic nature of the mash, especially with high DP malts. We like to compartmentalize and simplify things, but that's only happening on paper for our linear ability to consciously think of one thing at a time. To consciously think of the mash in reality would sound like a room full of people all talking at the same time. In studying Troester's work, the part of decoction that made sense was the breaking down of more starch trapped in matrix, and then introducing those starches back to a now hotter mash so they can be converted to long chain sugars. You convert short chain in a beta rest, then decotion, then convert the new exposed starches to long chain. But I'm not very convinced that its happening very effectively, if at all, in a step mash where trapped starches aren't really exposed to the rigors of boiling and stiring.

Personally, im not experiencing much difference in my single infusion mashes between 148-152. I need to be up around 156 before I see a distinct measurable change in final gravity. (When I brew two near-identical beers with just mash temps different) I've done a grand total of two step mashes, so Im not an expert, but I didnt find that the high temp A rest did anything for residual sugars/body. Its possible if not likely that I held the B rest too long. That being said, regardless of body difference, I found no difference in flavor as compared to a single infusion. And in the end I found that 5% of Weyermann CaraHell, and acidifying with phosphoric rather than lactic, made the most positive flavor changing than any of the special techniques I had tried. (German Lagers) I also found that FWHing was the final fix for my hopping. (Water profile is a whole other thing and makes a big difference)

Summary, you can get there with ingredients

These are just my personal views. I'm not anti step mash, anti decoction, and I keep an open enough mind that I may try those techniques again some day, and may entirely change my tune.

[Wort-H.O.G.]

yep end of the day- individual perceptions and preferences will dictate everything we do-making beer or otherwise. I mash many different ways still-in hopes of finding out the best way for me and my perceptions of whats good and what I like.

You cant really argue or debate what two people perceive-neither is right or wrong..just is what it is to each. Give me a USDA Grade A cut of beef, cut it in half and smoke one low and slow, the other warmer/hot and fast. i know what I prefer and could pick it out every day of the week (yeah low and slow).  maybe my bud doesn't see, taste, smell, or get a different mouthfeel.....but I sure as heck do! I'll take the low and slow and he could care less and thinks both taste great.  that's just how it is.

[HoosierBrew]

My ales are single infused, no exceptions. Years ago I did a few step mashed lagers and decided I couldn't tell a difference for all the extra work. So up until recently I'd single infused my lagers, too. But it nagged at me that maybe I should've changed the step mash parameters (time/temp) before making any big pronouncements. So I step mashed my current helles and decided to step mash all the lagers I brew this year, experimenting with time/temp combos, so I can make a better assessment. I can honestly say that this helles is very good, but not necessarily distinguishable from a single infusion. But I'm gonna change the water profile and keep experimenting. It's fun.

[narcout]

Haven't most of the scientific facts about mashing already been proven empirically by professional scientists?  I guess I don't see much point in arguing about them.

What I think is more valuable (and more feasible for non-professional scientist homebrewers) is examining the subjective effects of different variables on actual tasters.     

[Wort-H.O.G.]

My ales are single infused, no exceptions. Years ago I did a few step mashed lagers and decided I couldn't tell a difference for all the extra work. So up until recently I'd single infused my lagers, too. But it nagged at me that maybe I should've changed the step mash parameters (time/temp) before making any big pronouncements. So I step mashed my current helles and decided to step mash all the lagers I brew this year, experimenting with time/temp combos, so I can make a better assessment. I can honestly say that this helles is very good, but not necessarily distinguishable from a single infusion. But I'm gonna change the water profile and keep experimenting. It's fun.

save  sample or two for reference!

[Wort-H.O.G.]

Haven't most of the scientific facts about mashing already been proven empirically by professional scientists?  I guess I don't see much point in arguing about them.

What I think is more valuable (and more feasible for non-professional scientist homebrewers) is examining the subjective effects of different variables on actual tasters.   

well I wouldn't subscribe to that. whats true or false today per the scientists may not be so tomorrow. variables are constantly changing- malts for instance. that's one reason I like the idea of continual process review and evaluation-modifying and observing.

[HoosierBrew]

My ales are single infused, no exceptions. Years ago I did a few step mashed lagers and decided I couldn't tell a difference for all the extra work. So up until recently I'd single infused my lagers, too. But it nagged at me that maybe I should've changed the step mash parameters (time/temp) before making any big pronouncements. So I step mashed my current helles and decided to step mash all the lagers I brew this year, experimenting with time/temp combos, so I can make a better assessment. I can honestly say that this helles is very good, but not necessarily distinguishable from a single infusion. But I'm gonna change the water profile and keep experimenting. It's fun.

save  sample or two for reference!

Oh yeah!

[narvin]

Well, I think the Belgian yeast covers up anything you'll be able to reliably tell, although 66 tastes could tell, which I thought was staggering.

Maybe, maybe not.  Most Belgian breweries step mash, and they think it makes a difference.

Now, the amount of crystal malt used in the recipe might mask any potential differences.  I think it's a bit of a busy grain bill for a blonde.

[HoosierBrew]

When I said that I didn't necessarily notice a difference in my helles in terms of the step mash, that's off of memories of the last helles I brewed - over a year and a half ago. In other words, there's no way I can say that accurately. I want to try to do a double brew day this year to assess side by side, single for one, step the other. Probably a simple, clean recipe like this helles would be as good as any to eval. May as well do it right.