[Big Monk]

EDIT: I don't recall you asking but since you have now: With my current setup I would have absolutely no reason to have to use it.

In other words, no more reason to doubt or scoff than people who haven't preboiled and used SMB. This silly, manufactured 'turf war' is beyond me. We all brew beer. I plan to try (to the limits of my system) to use this method. Why wouldn't I? We don't all need to agree, but the forum to forum flame wars are tired. As is the 'my way is the only right way' crap.

Hey man, no ill will intended. You pressed for answers and I gave them.

[HoosierBrew]

EDIT: I don't recall you asking but since you have now: With my current setup I would have absolutely no reason to have to use it.

In other words, no more reason to doubt or scoff than people who haven't preboiled and used SMB. This silly, manufactured 'turf war' is beyond me. We all brew beer. I plan to try (to the limits of my system) to use this method. Why wouldn't I? We don't all need to agree, but the forum to forum flame wars are tired. As is the 'my way is the only right way' crap.

Hey man, no ill will intended. You pressed for answers and I gave them.

Ok, Derek. No ill will at all. All good.

[tommymorris]

EDIT: I don't recall you asking but since you have now: With my current setup I would have absolutely no reason to have to use it.

In other words, no more reason to doubt or scoff than people who haven't preboiled and used SMB. This silly, manufactured 'turf war' is beyond me. We all brew beer. I plan to try (to the limits of my system) to use this method. Why wouldn't I? We don't all need to agree, but the forum to forum flame wars are tired. As is the 'my way is the only right way' crap.

Hey man, no ill will intended. You pressed for answers and I gave them.

The RPIScotty account still exists. Why not use that one? and why did you erase all your old posts? Some of them were quite helpful like the summary of shaken not stirred.

[Big Monk]

The RPIScotty account is not active.

[stpug]

I'd love to give Brewtan B a shot - even if it's name is kinda dorky - then again, so is 'LODO' (using my best Keanu accent) - if it were more readily available.  One day, for sure.

As for low o2 brewing, I've done several batches and they were markedly different from the non-low o2 methods I used to regularly perform.  While the results were quite different, they were not favorable to the beers brewed (3 ales, 1 lager).  The lager performed and tasted fine, the ales suffered from the process.  In some regard, it was almost too much of a raw barley malt character - the malt I liked, the "raw" I didn't.  No worries though folks, I'll keep whacking away at until something changes <- that's the story of my life

[The Beerery]

I think its time to get some facts straight..

Lodo- I absolutely HATE the acronym. Its low oxygen brewing. Low oxygen brewing is nothing new and predates Brewtan. Just because one chooses to not educate themselves on macro brewing techniques of the last 50 years doesn't make them go away. All the big names in technical brewing literature talk about oxygen from milling to packaging and its ill effects. A simple google search on that last line should net you quite the plethora of results.

Brewtan- for brewtan to work properly it needs to chelate heavy metals in low oxygen situations. They reasons you guys are seeing partial results is because of your oxygen pickup at packaging, due to improperly purged kegs, and allowing your beers to drop all yeast. So your minimal pick up at those stages, were causing the fenton reactions in those beers. Fermenting beer is basically devoid of all O2, so these reactions can't happen UNTIL YOU INTRODUCE OXYGEN. So it works, and you see a difference, however it is NOT going to make the beers pop with fresh malt because you lost that in the mash tun. Thats not a "flame" I really want you to think about that. Brewtan in the mash tun is not going to help you in regards to the fresh malt either, because you already have way too much oxygen in solution anyways.

So before I go any further, I want to stop and point out that when we released this paper the number 1 problem with it was that HSA is false and what is done on the commercial scale does not matter at home. People went out of their way to try and prove this. But then enters brewtan, and suddenly attitudes about this change as they saw results... I think it these people who were staunchly against this should man up and say they were wrong.

So let me surmise what the German IT flavor bases is. Fresh lingering malt. What we do know is that malt is a pretty neat little antioxidant itself, albeit with not as much reduction power as say meta. The problem with the malt as your sole reducer is that the sacrifice of the fresh malt flavor. The malt phenol's (fresh lingering malt, like chewing on a handful of fresh grain) can be released almost immediately at mashing temps to try and seek out that o2, once those are used up (seconds to minutes, again at mash temps), your fresh malt flavor is gone. That is a documented fact. So I hate to sound like a broken record but if this Elusive German flavor is what you seek, if you are NOT brewing like our paper indicates, it is infact wrong. There is NO scientific way you are achieving fresh malt flavors brewing with water that has not been deoxygenated, its just not possible. This is of course one of the very many proper german brewing techniques, but its quite the important one. I brewed wrong for 14 years, I will be the first to admit and its ok to admit it.

I had much more typed out but got sidetracked and don't really have the motivation anymore. 

Edit: Removed the nugget due to poor attitudes.

[Phil_M]

What's most interesting to me is that it calls out low protein/lower modification malt as being helpful. Really wondering if we might see some maltings start to produce malt that is less modified.

[homoeccentricus]

While looking for the source of the 'nugget' (which I did not find) I stumbled upon this paper from dem Meister himselbst (from 1986):

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1986.tb04421.x/epdf

[The Beerery]

What's most interesting to me is that it calls out low protein/lower modification malt as being helpful. Really wondering if we might see some maltings start to produce malt that is less modified.

No, because then you spend too much time in mash tun and oxygen pick up is much more detrimental.

[The Beerery]

While looking for the source of the 'nugget' (which I did not find) I stumbled upon this paper from dem Meister himselbst (from 1986):

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1986.tb04421.x/epdf

Crazy huh!?? Who woulda thunk.


The source "nugget" is this.

https://www.vlb-berlin.org/kunze

[Big Monk]

From a strictly experimental POV, the flaw will be in the difficulty isolating where the benefit of BTB comes in.

It won't be conclusive to say that BTB benefits you anywhere in the process pre-packaging.

So at a high level it is helpful in improving packaged beer but won't supplant process changes from dough in on through packaging.

[denny]

What's most interesting to me is that it calls out low protein/lower modification malt as being helpful. Really wondering if we might see some maltings start to produce malt that is less modified.

I really doubt it.  Commercial breweries don't want to have to mess with that if they don't have to.  That's why there's a preponderance of highly modified malt.

[Phil_M]

What's most interesting to me is that it calls out low protein/lower modification malt as being helpful. Really wondering if we might see some maltings start to produce malt that is less modified.

I really doubt it.  Commercial breweries don't want to have to mess with that if they don't have to.  That's why there's a preponderance of highly modified malt.

True, but I can't help and think that breweries are also going to want to set themselves apart from the rest as much as they can. Might not be a bad way to do it.

[zwiller]

Thanks for posting that nugget!!!

[HoosierBrew]

Good info posted. Thanks.