[majorvices]

I'm not about to sidetrack this thread into a trub discussion but there is as many studies saying it doesn't matter as there are that it does. I have the ability to dump it from my conicals so I dump some, but certainly not all.

For a professional brewery it would take DAYS for all the trub to settle out in the conical even with Brew Tan B. So there is no reason to sweat over a small amount.

But this thread IS about trub.  It's literally in the title. On a serious note I would love to see the studies you reference for it. I am always up for reading some good scientific studies. 

I don't know that brewtan b is going to help break settle any faster( maybe it does?),  but there are there many things a professional brewery can do with specialized equipment that we as homebrewers can't.
Cheers.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What I meant was I didn't mean for a small conversation on the detrimental effects of trub in a starter being dumped into a 5 gallon batch of beer to explode into a 20 pg rant about trub. But if it is going to go there then....

The stuff I read was at least 15 years ago. I'd have to go find it. Look, I have no doubts about your booksmarts, Bryan. You have a far better grasp of the chemistry than I do (want a job? ) All I can say is that for many years I brewed sometimes three or four 12 gallon batches a week in side by side 6.5 gallon carboys. Many, many times I removed trub from one but not the other, and in the end, honestly, I wasn't sure I could tell a difference. Least it was very hard to blindfolded. Yeah, maybe it did. Then again maybe it didn't.

I firmly believe that attention to detail is what makes good brewers great brewers and if removing trub from your starters or carboys is the attention to detail that puts you over the top you should go for it! But do yourself a favor and at least try it first, side by side, to see what difference it makes rather than just b relying on something you have read on the internet. (And by YOU I mean the forum at large, not Bryan.)

BTW: You are correct as usual. Commercial brewers do have ways to remove trub. I have a centrifuge for instance, I just haven't gotten the curiosity to hook it up yet to my kettle/chiller. But it is in the works. But there are some great little breweries making some very good beer all over the world that don't have that ability.

[The Beerery]

I'm not about to sidetrack this thread into a trub discussion but there is as many studies saying it doesn't matter as there are that it does. I have the ability to dump it from my conicals so I dump some, but certainly not all.

For a professional brewery it would take DAYS for all the trub to settle out in the conical even with Brew Tan B. So there is no reason to sweat over a small amount.

But this thread IS about trub.  It's literally in the title. On a serious note I would love to see the studies you reference for it. I am always up for reading some good scientific studies. 

I don't know that brewtan b is going to help break settle any faster( maybe it does?),  but there are there many things a professional brewery can do with specialized equipment that we as homebrewers can't.
Cheers.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What I meant was I didn't mean for a small conversation on the detrimental effects of trub in a starter being dumped into a 5 gallon batch of beer to explode into a 20 pg rant about trub. But if it is going to go there then....

The stuff I read was at least 15 years ago. I'd have to go find it. Look, I have no doubts about your booksmarts, Bryan. You have a far better grasp of the chemistry than I do (want a job? ) All I can say is that for many years I brewed sometimes three or four 12 gallon batches a week in side by side 6.5 gallon carboys. Many, many times I removed trub from one but not the other, and in the end, honestly, I wasn't sure I could tell a difference. Least it was very hard to blindfolded. Yeah, maybe it did. Then again maybe it didn't.

I firmly believe that attention to detail is what makes good brewers great brewers and if removing trub from your starters or carboys is the attention to detail that puts you over the top you should go for it! But do yourself a favor and at least try it first, side by side, to see what difference it makes rather than just b relying on something you have read on the internet. (And by YOU I mean the forum at large, not Bryan.)

BTW: You are correct as usual. Commercial brewers do have ways to remove trub. I have a centrifuge for instance, I just haven't gotten the curiosity to hook it up yet to my kettle/chiller. But it is in the works. But there are some great little breweries making some very good beer all over the world that don't have that ability.

As I said before I am not out to change what anyone does, for some reason that seems to always be pushed with responses from my posts. I literally stated at least once I am not trying to change anyone's methods, but just educate them on what trub is, and how it works. If dumping everything in is someones MOP and it works go for it. However it still doesn't stop what trub contains and what it does, that is documented science. I linked my blog article, which goes into a lot of detail and source work, of what it is and why what I do works for me. I even stated in my first post, I wouldn't be too concerned about it in a starter. But those kinds of details in my posts seem to be overlooked. I mean isn't what these posts are about, people asking for opinions on what the have found? It's fine for other to have an opinion, but when mine challenges the norm, I get raked over the coals? I don't follow.

On the job comment, If you were serious I am doing brewery consulting work here locally with great success. If you want I can send you references and we can work something out. 

No harm or ill will meant in my posts, just science and a little of what I have experienced in my lowly 1000 batch career(which now includes professional batches). It's all good. 

[majorvices]

And I am not disagreeing with you either! So let's not talk over each other about it. I'm only saying that use your self (and others) as a reference point too, before taking something you have read blidly. It may certainly make all the difference in the world. Like I said, I appreciate your grasp of the book knowledge. I need a good chemist at the brewery.

[The Beerery]

And I am not disagreeing with you either! So let's not talk over each other about it. I'm only saying that use your self (and others) as a reference point too, before taking something you have read blidly. It may certainly make all the difference in the world. Like I said, I appreciate your grasp of the book knowledge. I need a good chemist at the brewery.

Book knowledge is good, but book knowledge and real knowledge is king. There is not a thing I "preach" that  I have not thoroughly tested, I can promise you that, actually I pride myself on that! As I have said before, 2.5yrs ago we would all be raising overflowing mugs in our agreement. But I can't do that anymore, as everything seems to matter now.

BUT, back to the thread!

[majorvices]

I won't say you haven't gotten me thinking and rethinking my process Bryan! Good on you.

But, back to the topic, if anyone on this forum can tell the difference between the trub in a starter pitched into a 5 gallon batch, per Bryan's suggestion that he can based on personal experience and chemistry knowledge, I would be dumbfounded. And I'm not just saying "yep. I can taste it alright", I'm saying you did blind folded tasting panel and came away with actual evidence to the fact.

That would certainly blow me away and I offer you up the chance to blow my mind by doing the experiment to prove me wrong yourself and publish the findings here. Please!

[The Beerery]

I won't say you haven't gotten me thinking and rethinking my process Bryan! Good on you.

But, back to the topic, if anyone on this forum can tell the difference between the trub in a starter pitched into a 5 gallon batch, per Bryan's suggestion that he can based on personal experience and chemistry knowledge, I would be dumbfounded. And I'm not just saying "yep. I can taste it alright", I'm saying you did blind folded tasting panel and came away with actual evidence to the fact.

That would certainly blow me away and I offer you up the chance to blow my mind by doing the experiment to prove me wrong yourself and publish the findings here. Please!

You are misquoting me.

I stated it would probably not matter in a starter, but I remove hot and cold break in my main batches of wort.  Then others said they do as well. So this is not a "me" thing.  Just a FYI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[majorvices]

I won't say you haven't gotten me thinking and rethinking my process Bryan! Good on you.

But, back to the topic, if anyone on this forum can tell the difference between the trub in a starter pitched into a 5 gallon batch, per Bryan's suggestion that he can based on personal experience and chemistry knowledge, I would be dumbfounded. And I'm not just saying "yep. I can taste it alright", I'm saying you did blind folded tasting panel and came away with actual evidence to the fact.

That would certainly blow me away and I offer you up the chance to blow my mind by doing the experiment to prove me wrong yourself and publish the findings here. Please!

You are misquoting me.

I stated it would probably not matter in a starter, but I remove hot and cold break in my main batches of wort.  Then others said they do as well. So this is not a "me" thing.  Just a FYI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OK my bad. Sorry.

[majorvices]

I won't say you haven't gotten me thinking and rethinking my process Bryan! Good on you.

But, back to the topic, if anyone on this forum can tell the difference between the trub in a starter pitched into a 5 gallon batch, per Bryan's suggestion that he can based on personal experience and chemistry knowledge, I would be dumbfounded. And I'm not just saying "yep. I can taste it alright", I'm saying you did blind folded tasting panel and came away with actual evidence to the fact.

That would certainly blow me away and I offer you up the chance to blow my mind by doing the experiment to prove me wrong yourself and publish the findings here. Please!

You are misquoting me.

I stated it would probably not matter in a starter, but I remove hot and cold break in my main batches of wort.  Then others said they do as well. So this is not a "me" thing.  Just a FYI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OK my bad. Sorry.

Actually, I am a complete and utter fool here. I mistook the comments to be that the OP make a starter and was racking the starter. Now I see he was racking the wort out of the carboy to remove trub. I would also avoid using the trub from the bottom of the carboy as a starter.

I sincerely apologize to Bryan and the OP and the rest of the forum. This is what I get posting at 3:21 am.

Ended up being a good discussion anyway maybe....

[denny]

I have always tried to reduce the amount of ANY break going into my fermenters. Mainly for repitching purposes and keeping the wort as clear as possible.

But now after learning of potential issues with residual lipids in trub possibly leading to early oxidation effects I will be more likely than ever to minimize any break getting into the fermenting wort.

Yeah, my experience, too. Gonna minimize it now for even more and  better reasons.

Yet several tests show clearer, better tasting beer with it left in.

[Big Monk]

I have always tried to reduce the amount of ANY break going into my fermenters. Mainly for repitching purposes and keeping the wort as clear as possible.

But now after learning of potential issues with residual lipids in trub possibly leading to early oxidation effects I will be more likely than ever to minimize any break getting into the fermenting wort.

Yeah, my experience, too. Gonna minimize it now for even more and  better reasons.

Yet several tests show clearer, better tasting beer with it left in.

What tests are these? I'd be interested in reading these.

[denny]

What tests are these? I'd be interested in reading these.

I doubt you'd be interested.  They're taste tests by homebrewers, not from a book.  Ya know, the practical, real life stuff we really care about! 

[The Beerery]

I have always tried to reduce the amount of ANY break going into my fermenters. Mainly for repitching purposes and keeping the wort as clear as possible.

But now after learning of potential issues with residual lipids in trub possibly leading to early oxidation effects I will be more likely than ever to minimize any break getting into the fermenting wort.

Yeah, my experience, too. Gonna minimize it now for even more and  better reasons.

Yet several tests show clearer, better tasting beer with it left in.

Some food for thought...

If your beers taste better from leaving trub in, that means you are not getting enough FAN and zinc in your wort. Choosing a different mashing regimen along with using sauermalt or sauergut to acidity your wort will help this as sauergut(what sauermalt is cured with) is very high in zinc. A step mashing regimen will help with FAN and a lower mashing pH. 

But you( the proverbial you,us, we) are taking the good with the bad the bad being the known and scientifically proven Fats and lipids, to get the yeast health. 

I'm am not telling anyone how to brew here, just telling you the how's and why.  It's fascinating really.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Beerery]

What tests are these? I'd be interested in reading these.

I doubt you'd be interested.  They're taste tests by homebrewers, not from a book.  Ya know, the practical, real life stuff we really care about! 

I don't understand why this is you naysayers only argument. It has been demonstrated countless times that what I preach is book knowledge + real world testing.  These jabs don't help anything and are silly. Just because you chose to not use and immediately discredit the information doesn't mean others will.  It just shows you don't look at the links I post and form your own confirmation bias, as literally every link shows the "book knowledge" being implemented and tested with a "homebrewer "


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hopfenundmalz]

I have always tried to reduce the amount of ANY break going into my fermenters. Mainly for repitching purposes and keeping the wort as clear as possible.

But now after learning of potential issues with residual lipids in trub possibly leading to early oxidation effects I will be more likely than ever to minimize any break getting into the fermenting wort.

Yeah, my experience, too. Gonna minimize it now for even more and  better reasons.

Yet several tests show clearer, better tasting beer with it left in.

Some food for thought...

If your beers taste better from leaving trub in, that means you are not getting enough FAN and zinc in your wort. Choosing a different mashing regimen along with using sauermalt or sauergut to acidity your wort will help this as sauergut(what sauermalt is cured with) is very high in zinc. A step mashing regimen will help with FAN and a lower mashing pH. 

But you( the proverbial you,us, we) are taking the good with the bad the bad being the known and scientifically proven Fats and lipids, to get the yeast health. 

I'm am not telling anyone how to brew here, just telling you the how's and why.  It's fascinating really.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you explain how the Sauergut becomes high in zinc? I don't follow as wort I'd deficient in zinc. Where does it come from?

I did look at some pictures recently. A small family brewer in Niederbayern had picked up a big old pitch of yeast slurry from his buddy in the next town that brews more frequently. It dawned on me that it was in a galvanized tub, which would give some zinc to the yeast. Just a side story.

[Big Monk]

What tests are these? I'd be interested in reading these.

I doubt you'd be interested.  They're taste tests by homebrewers, not from a book.  Ya know, the practical, real life stuff we really care about! 

Oh Denny. Some things never change.