[HabeasCorpus]

Unless you're involved in the malting process you don't get to see the acrospire.  It is long gone by the time the maltster is done.

Actually, that's not correct, you do see them - sometimes they are knocked off by milling and will float in the mash after stirring, but they certainly don't disappear after malting.  The acrospire will remain on the barley kernel, under the husk, until milling and throughout the mash if not broken off or crushed by mechanical process before hand.

[HabeasCorpus]

From Palmer's "What to Expect When You're Extracting" article in Zymurgy...

The most common indicator of malt modification is the Soluble to Total Protein Ratio (S/T ratio), also known as the Kolbach Index. To
generalize, a ratio of 36 to 40 percent is a less-modified malt, 40 to 44 percent is a well-modified malt and 44 to 48 percent is a highly modified malt.

Highly modified malt will not benefit from something like a protein rest.  I proved that to myself on my step mash when I used GW Munich.  Because malt is made for commercial operations and it costs them money if they have to do a complicated mash routine, most malt is made to use a single infusion.

Thank you for explaining and quantifying the S/T ratio.

So the level of modification can be associated with which temperature ranges are useful for that particular malt.

Is there a chart that spells out which rests are useful with what level of modification?

Example:

Less-Modified: Protein, Beta, Alpha
Well-Modified: Protein, Beta, Alpha
Highly-Modified: Beta, Alpha

[Big Monk]

A few things to keep in mind:

1.) You would have to really search out a malt, continental or otherwise, that is undermodified. Most malts that are these days are done so intentionally.

2.) One of the best articles we have found, and one we recommend any time this discussion comes up, is from Brauwelt and forms the basis of the recommendations we usually make about step mashing. Pay special attanetion to Part 2:

- http://www.lowoxygenbrewing.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/pkjdf.pdf ("Some Reflections on Mashing - Part 1")

- http://www.lowoxygenbrewing.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/pddvxvf.pdf ("Some Reflections on Mashing - Part 2")

These articles are great read regardless of whether you use the info or not.

3.) In my opinion, unless someone is doing a specific style that requires rests lower than Beta (β) rest temps, then anything lower than 144 ° F shouldnt be used. That of course depends on the gelatinization temps of that specific lot of malt.

4.) You really want to target specific mash schedules and temps based on the malt used not the beer style. I think people on both sides of this discussion can agree that mashing is malt specific whether you use a single infusion or a multi-step mash.

5.) With that said, targeting multiple β rest temps can be a useful tool to get the most extract out of your grain and increase fermentability (attenuation). Again, this depends largely on the malt so consult the data sheet to how it's specifications play into this.

6.) A long Alpha (α) rest temp helps preserve the body of the beer given that you will likely produce a highly fermentable beer with even a well chosen single β rest temp.

7.) The extended α rest combined with a prolonged mash out helps to bolster foam positive components.


Like all things, it's a combination of both preference and science. As many point out, the results sometimes don't justify the work for them. That's fine. For some it does and the literature is out there for them to get help effectively implementing a schedule that works for their needs.

With respect to Ken's OP:

But I am asking those of you here if you have found a good step mashing procedure that will create a bit drier finish in something like a helles or dortmunder or pilsner....At the moment I have a partial sack of Avangard Pilsner and I have an unopened 55-lb sack of Swaen Pils as well.

Sounds like you might want multiple Beta (β) rest temps. Something like:

144 ° F, 147 ° F and 149-153 ° F

Do you have the malt analysis sheets for your pilsner malts?

[denny]

Unless you're involved in the malting process you don't get to see the acrospire.  It is long gone by the time the maltster is done.

Actually, that's not correct, you do see them - sometimes they are knocked off by milling and will float in the mash after stirring, but they certainly don't disappear after malting.  The acrospire will remain on the barley kernel, under the husk, until milling and throughout the mash if not broken off or crushed by mechanical process before hand.

Can you give me an example of what malt you've seen them in?  In 22 years of homebrewing and thousands of pounds of malt, I may have seen one once.  Certainly not anything like a normal occurrence.  And don't discount Jeff's remark...his brother is a maltster and Jeff has seen plenty of malt.

[HabeasCorpus]

Can you give me an example of what malt you've seen them in?  In 22 years of homebrewing and thousands of pounds of malt, I may have seen one once.  Certainly not anything like a normal occurrence.  And don't discount Jeff's remark...his brother is a maltster and Jeff has seen plenty of malt.

Briess, Rahr, sometimes Weyermann and Great Western, basically used to (sometimes still do) get this all the time with malt from Northern Brewer.

3rd and 4th picture down:

https://imgur.com/a/5NAZL

I meant no insult to Jeff, perhaps this is a sign of "fresh" malt or on the other end of the spectrum a sign of poorly dried/malted malt?

[goose]

   The only time I do a step mash is when I brew one recipe that's ~50% rye, it starts with a glucan rest at ~112* with the intent being to reduce lautering time. It definitely is a PITA cuz the 2nd infusion even at boiling [202*] only brings the mash temp up to ~145* so I have to do a decoction to get the mash up to target. That of course is a bit of a crap shoot guessing exactly what volume to decoct. I could steal some H2O from the sparge volume to make the 2nd infusion hit target temp, but then there wouldn't be enough remaining volume to effective. Even with the glucan rest this beer takes freaking forever to lauter, I'm considering skipping the glucan rest next time I brew it to find out if it really does make a difference in lautering time. From my experience the online infusion calculators are all garbage.

I wonder why you have such troubles.  I've never had an issue even at 60% rye malt.  Are yiu using rye malt or flaked?  I'd love to get to the bottom of this.

That is a question I would like to see answered as well.  I have never had a problem using rye malt in relatively high concentrations in a mash.  Just to be safe, I will add some rice hulls when approaching 50% rye as insurance to prevent sticking the mash but have never had a problem lautering it.

[HabeasCorpus]

A few things to keep in mind:

1.) You would have to really search out a malt, continental or otherwise, that is undermodified. Most malts that are these days are done so intentionally.

2.) One of the best articles we have found, and one we recommend any time this discussion comes up, is from Brauwelt and forms the basis of the recommendations we usually make about step mashing. Pay special attanetion to Part 2:

- http://www.lowoxygenbrewing.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/pkjdf.pdf ("Some Reflections on Mashing - Part 1")

- http://www.lowoxygenbrewing.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/pddvxvf.pdf ("Some Reflections on Mashing - Part 2")

These articles are great read regardless of whether you use the info or not.

3.) In my opinion, unless someone is doing a specific style that requires rests lower than Beta (β) rest temps, then anything lower than 144 ° F shouldnt be used. That of course depends on the gelatinization temps of that specific lot of malt.

4.) You really want to target specific mash schedules and temps based on the malt used not the beer style. I think people on both sides of this discussion can agree that mashing is malt specific whether you use a single infusion or a multi-step mash.

5.) With that said, targeting multiple β rest temps can be a useful tool to get the most extract out of your grain and increase fermentability (attenuation). Again, this depends largely on the malt so consult the data sheet to how it's specifications play into this.

6.) A long Alpha (α) rest temp helps preserve the body of the beer given that you will likely produce a highly fermentable beer with even a well chosen single β rest temp.

7.) The extended α rest combined with a prolonged mash out helps to bolster foam positive components.


Like all things, it's a combination of both preference and science. As many point out, the results sometimes don't justify the work for them. That's fine. For some it does and the literature is out there for them to get help effectively implementing a schedule that works for their needs.

With respect to Ken's OP:

But I am asking those of you here if you have found a good step mashing procedure that will create a bit drier finish in something like a helles or dortmunder or pilsner....At the moment I have a partial sack of Avangard Pilsner and I have an unopened 55-lb sack of Swaen Pils as well.

Sounds like you might want multiple Beta (β) rest temps. Something like:

144 ° F, 147 ° F and 149-153 ° F

Do you have the malt analysis sheets for your pilsner malts?

What are you looking for on the malt specification sheet to determine your rest temperatures?

More-over and what no one ever talks about or even specifies is how they determine the length of time at each temperature step other than guessing and experimentation with a batch of malt?

I know I'm hi-jacking the OP's thread with all this but the terms "Modern Malt" and "Malt these days" just don't make sense in my mind.  Modern maltings have been around for 50-100 years now?  "Malt these day is purposefully under-modifed!" really?  And industrial processes back in the day didn't purposefully under-modify the malt?  The only difference is the specs coming from the breweries.  The old timers liked the under-modified malts and were accustom to working with them, but now the breweries have gotten spoiled with modern barley varieties, fast conversion times and the oh so import bottom line. /rant over

[Big Monk]

What are you looking for on the malt specification sheet to determine your rest temperatures?

For Beta rest temperatures you would be interested in the value for the Hartong Index (VZ 45 ° C) which provides a reasonable relationship to the gelatinization temperature for the malt. On the low end, a Hartong Index of 35 would roughly correlate to a gelatinization temperature of about 65 ° C (149  ° F), which means you'd be limited on your number of Beta rest temps. On the high end, a Hartong Index of 50 would roughly correlate to a gelatinization temperature of about 58 ° C (136  ° F), which means you'd be free to choose any Beta rest temps.

More-over and what no one ever talks about or even specifies is how they determine the length of time at each temperature step other than guessing and experimentation with a batch of malt?

I think initially you need to track gravity across the Beta rests for a new malt to see how the extract you are getting relates to the time you are mashing at a specific temperature but once you have that dialed you can just roll with it. Most brewers that i know doing a 2 or 3 step Beta regimem are getting the bulk of the extract content in the first (or second) rest and then a smaller amount on the second (or third) rest and a smaller amount still in the third rest.

[denny]

Mecca Grade makes an undermodified malt especially for people who want to do step mashes...

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/51cc9a75e4b0814177ba37af/t/5e5ea429fad9a465faeb8a7a/1583260722426/MGEM_Gateway.pdf

[TXFlyGuy]

Mecca Grade makes an undermodified malt especially for people who want to do step mashes...

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/51cc9a75e4b0814177ba37af/t/5e5ea429fad9a465faeb8a7a/1583260722426/MGEM_Gateway.pdf

I thought Weyermann Floor Malted Bohemian Pils was slightly under modified?

[Big Monk]

Mecca Grade makes an undermodified malt especially for people who want to do step mashes...

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/51cc9a75e4b0814177ba37af/t/5e5ea429fad9a465faeb8a7a/1583260722426/MGEM_Gateway.pdf

I think it's a misconception that the only malts that would benefit from step mashing is an undermodified malt. Regardless, the one you quoted from Mecca is far from undermodified.

[TXFlyGuy]

I just contacted the source...Weyermann.

Hoping for a response soon.

[Big Monk]

I just contacted the source...Weyermann.

Hoping for a response soon.

Just pull the specifications off their site. With a Kolbach Index between 36-44, it can be slightly under-modified on the low end. Although on the high end I see no reason to call it undermodified. That contrasts with the 40-49 of the Mecca graded Denny linked, which is a reasonably well to very modified malt.

[denny]

I just contacted the source...Weyermann.

Hoping for a response soon.

Just pull the specifications off their site. With a Kolbach Index between 36-44, it can be slightly under-modified on the low end. Although on the high end I see no reason to call it undermodified. That contrasts with the 40-49 of the Mecca graded Denny linked, which is a reasonably well to very modified malt.

Indeed!  I missed that.

[BrewBama]

If you’re looking for low S/T value, it appears Briess’ Pils and Goldpils Vienna malts would do:




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk