"Short and Shoddy" Brewing

[BlackSands]

This was an interesting read:

 

http://brulosophy.com/2015/11/12/short-shoddy-my-1-hour-all-grain-brew-day/

 

 

I've been meaning for a while now to do an iodine test to see how long it ACTUALLY takes to fully convert a mash. Malsters specs say saccrification takes 10 minutes so I've often wondered why mash for an hour or more?

I've had similar ponderings about boil time given the number of no-boil brewers out there that seem to be producing perfectly good beer.

 

Here the 'controversial' Brulosopher does a small mash brew in 1 hour, a 15 minute no-sparge mash and a 15 minute boil, fermented with expired dry yeast!

 

Might have a go at doing a "short and shoddy" brew myself!

[Scottie]

My understanding of a 60 minute boil is to remove DMS when doing AG.

 

 

http://scottjanish.com/how-to-prevent-dms-in-beer/

[BlackSands]

My understanding of a 60 minute boil is to remove DMS when doing AG.

 

 

http://scottjanish.com/how-to-prevent-dms-in-beer/

Yeah' date=' that seems to be the main reason, though no-boil/short-boil brewers don't report any issue with DMS as was the case with this 15 minute boil. It may be more of a concern I suspect if using lager/pilsner malts... [img']unsure[/img]

[ben 10]

There is a large variety of reactions that take place during the boil.

 

If you are a member of AHB read this https://aussiehomebrewer.com/threads/10-minute-ipas-are-good-for-school-night-brewing.76190/ , if not, join up.

[BlackSands]

There is a large variety of reactions that take place during the boil.

 

If you are a member of AHB read this https://aussiehomebrewer.com/threads/10-minute-ipas-are-good-for-school-night-brewing.76190/ ' date=' if not, join up.[/quote']

 

Interesting, appears many are quite enthusiastic about shorter 30min boils: I plucked out these posts:

 

...speaking to a Pro Brewer and occasional poster on this site I was surprised to hear him say that when using a highly modified malts a short boil is enough...

 

So long as the beer didn't have heaps of very light grain (pilsner etc) then DMS isn't really an issue for modern brewers. Modern malting techniques mean that the grains are very highly modified and have very little DMS precursors.

 

Currently drinking the first of 2 of my 30 minute brew.

I got good hot break on brew day.

Bitterness is as I expected from a 15 minute addition.

The clarity is as good as any 60min+ boil that I have done.

I used my ale malt and can't detect any dms.

 

Been drinking a few different 30min pale ales lately and the head has been the same as any other beer. Nice dense thick foam and same retention as 60min beers.

 

I wouldnt try a 30min boil for a pils or munich helles but for the other ale styles I mentioned above its a great time saving method.

 

 

The testimonials suggest these short boil beers taste the same as full boil so I'm happy to give it a shot. My next brew I'll monitor the mash, aiming for say 30 mins and then do a really vigorous 30 min boil, as my first hop addition will be at 20 mins.

[ben 10]

I'd suggest you pay a fair bit of attention to MHB's posts, he links some .pdf files that have a scientific explanation of why the short boils are not a good idea.

You mention no boil brewers? I have not read of this.

How is bitterness achieved for a beer? How is the wort pasteurised??

[BlackSands]

I'd suggest you pay a fair bit of attention to MHB's posts' date=' he links some .pdf files that have a scientific explanation of why the short boils are not a good idea.[/quote']

Yeah... he seems a bit grumpy and defensive.

I could spend a lot of time pointing to good reasons why a longer boil makes the beer better' date=' not a lot of point really if people aren't listening.[/quote']

As with all these things, there's science, theory and speculation and then there's the actual beer in in a glass being tasted be a real person.

 

You mention no boil brewers? I have not read of this.

How is bitterness achieved for a beer? How is the wort pasteurised??

 

FWH. Pasterisation doesn't require a boil - just temps over72ºC as far as I understand.

 

 

 

 

 

And, I know you're a saison fan:

 

 

 

 

[ben 10]

Yeah look good luck to you but it is not something I will try.

 

[Beerlust]

The one thing that stuck in my mind about this particular subject was a comment PB2 made in a thread some time back relating to boil length & improved clarity (i.e. the longer the boil the better the clarity).

 

He actually mocked himself for doing a 90min boil on a Porter recipe (I think? ), realizing that clarity in a very dark beer isn't all that necessary.

 

I found the post interesting, educational & humorous at the same time.

 

He has a knack of doing that regularly.

 

I've been missing his posting around here of late.

 

Cheers,

 

Lusty.

[Morrie]

Does anyone know how long the commercial brewers boil for? I don't think they would boil for one minute longer than they would have to, purely for cost alone. The energy bills the commercial brewers receive must be astronomical. That alone would be an incentive to reduce boil times if they thought they could get away with it.

[BlackSands]

...boil length & improved clarity (i.e. the longer the boil the better the clarity).

Interestingly' date=' some are reporting good clarity. But remember... "no-boil" and "short boil" are two different things and the clarity issue may therefore differ. Brulosophy produced a clear beer with a 15 min boil. I'm game to try a short boil, but I think I will leave no-boil for the real enthusiasts of the technique.

 

Does anyone know how long the commercial brewers boil for?

There was mention in the thread Ben linked to where a 'pro brewer' talked about a 20 minute boil.

 

I imagine commercial brewers have a financial incentive to explore the boundaries and any opportunity to save a $ will likely be foremost in their minds.

[Beerlust]

Interestingly' date=' some are reporting good clarity. But remember... "no-boil" and "short boil" are two different things and the clarity issue may therefore differ. Brulosophy produced a clear beer with a 15 min boil. I'm game to try a short boil, but I think I will leave no-boil for the real enthusiasts of the technique.[/quote']

Although you make a fair point, I'm with Ben 10 on this one when it comes to some form of boil. As far as short boiling goes, I do it pretty regularly these days with my pale ales to preserve hop flavour with what are for the most part, very aromatic hops that I use. I don't feel this has affected clarity to any obvious degree from 60min boils that I also still do when required. I do admit I haven't tested this on the same malt, hop & yeast bill though.

 

Cheers & good brewing,

 

Lusty.

 

[BlackSands]

Interestingly' date=' some are reporting good clarity. But remember... "no-boil" and "short boil" are two different things and the clarity issue may therefore differ. Brulosophy produced a clear beer with a 15 min boil. [b']I'm game to try a short boil, but I think I will leave no-boil for the real enthusiasts of the technique.[/b]

I'm with Ben 10 on this one when it comes to some form of boil

me too!

[Otto Von Blotto]

I think the temperature plays a part in how long it takes to fully convert the mash as well, or at least get it to the level of fermentability desired. Alpha amylase works faster than beta, so if you are mashing in the beta range to get a highly fermentable wort then it needs the required time to achieve that. I'm not sure that would occur in only 10 minutes; it might convert the starches in 10 minutes but the chains may not be fully broken down yet. Mashing up in the alpha range it may do, however the wort will probably not be as fermentable as it would be if the mash was allowed to go longer. Even at mash temps favouring alpha more, the longer it mashes the more fermentable the wort will be.

 

DMS reduction isn't the only reason for long boils either. It's also about achieving a good hot break and proper separation of it from the wort post boil, which is probably partly related to the clarity Lusty mentioned. Other reasons include wort concentration in terms of SG and flavor, as well as color to a lesser degree.

 

Milds are often brewed with a 30 minute mash up in the high 60s/low 70s followed by a 30 minute boil, a quick conversion producing a lowly fermentable wort which ends up a full bodied midstrength, so it can be done shorter if the style demands it... but most styles don't. The only reason for it is trying to shorten the brew day, and if those cats are happy with their beers then that's good for them but I'm with Ben also... certainly not something I'll be trying.

 

I have heard of no boil beers but from what I've read they are restricted to maybe one or two specialty styles... it's certainly not something that is done with the more regular styles that most of us are brewing.

 

BTW, clarity with Brulosophy isn't really something that should be considered; since he fines all his beers anyway they're all gonna be clear regardless of what he's done in the brewing process (unless it's something really bad that resulted in permanent haze, which finings won't remove). All mine come out crystal clear too across all styles I brew, unless the yeast stubbornly refuses to drop out which happens occasionally. Before I began using Polyclar I did have varying levels of chill haze in my beers; some batches were quite hazy while others were very clear, and nothing was changed process-wise across them all.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[BlackSands]

I think the temperature plays a part in how long it takes to fully convert the mash as well' date=' or at least get it to the level of fermentability desired. Alpha amylase works faster than beta, so if you are mashing in the beta range to get a highly fermentable wort then it needs the required time to achieve that. I'm not sure that would occur in only 10 minutes; it might convert the starches in 10 minutes but the chains may not be fully broken down yet. Mashing up in the alpha range it may do, however the wort will probably not be as fermentable as it would be if the mash was allowed to go longer. Even at mash temps favouring alpha more, the longer it mashes the more fermentable the wort will be.[/quote']

 

I understand it follows a logarithmic law, i.e. 80% done in 20% of the time. So, I think 15-20 minutes gets you to the 80% mark and the remaining 45 minutes is really about squeezing out the last 20%. And yeah, varies according to mash temp.

 

I wonder if the efficiency of a short boil/sparge is on a par with a full boil/no-sparge mash?

[Otto Von Blotto]

The efficiency is basically worked out on SG and volume, against what it theoretically should be without any losses. I can see where you're coming from there though, with the sparging extracting more of the sugar from the grains so in theory you wouldn't have to boil it as long to get to the target OG, and with a smaller pre-boil volume to keep the post-boil volume on target.

 

It probably depends on the length of the boil though. I can't see a 10 minute boil resulting in the same overall efficiency with a sparge as a full length boil does without one. The SG just wouldn't increase enough, maybe a couple of points. A 30 minute boil may do, although I suspect you'd probably want to mash for the usual length or even a bit longer, just to be certain all conversion is done.

 

I routinely do 90 minute mashes which are split between a 65-70 minute rest at my desired mash temp followed by a 15-20 minute rest at 72C which supposedly aids in head retention. The red ale I have on tap now was done this way and is exhibiting decent head retention as well as good lacing when the glass is properly clean, so maybe it does work.

 

Another minor non brewing related thing I like about longer mashes is that it allows me to get other small tasks done while it happens, firstly cleaning the mill and maybe some mowing or whatever else.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[Morrie]

I routinely do 90 minute mashes which are split between a 65-70 minute rest at my desired mash temp followed by a 15-20 minute rest at 72C which supposedly aids in head retention. The red ale I have on tap now was done this way and is exhibiting decent head retention as well as good lacing when the glass is properly clean' date=' so maybe it does work.

Kelsey[/quote']

 

Kelsey - I'm wondering if a mash at say 66º for 60 minutes would leave any starches left for the alpha at a 72º rest? I'm thinking if the beta converted all or most of the starch then there wouldn't be any starch left for the alpha to convert to dextrins. I usually mash at 65,66 or 67 for about 90 mins and then a mash out at 76 for 10 mins.

 

Cheers - Morrie

[BlackSands]

I routinely do 90 minute mashes which are split between a 65-70 minute rest at my desired mash temp followed by a 15-20 minute rest at 72C which supposedly aids in head retention. The red ale I have on tap now was done this way and is exhibiting decent head retention as well as good lacing when the glass is properly clean' date=' so maybe it does work. [/quote']I don't know why, but head retention and lacing are actually two things I don't have a problem with except for two brews where I'd used grain that were specifically supposed to assist with head performance (cara-pils, roasted and flaked barley)!

 

As I poured the last of my red the other day I wondered why such a modestly carb'd beer was throwing up so much tight, lingering foam? Maybe it's something in the water?

 

Another minor non brewing related thing I like about longer mashes is that it allows me to get other small tasks done while it happens, firstly cleaning the mill and maybe some mowing or whatever else.

Well, that's a good point. The time is never wasted here either though I am still ultimately tied to the kitchen until brew day is over. Usually that's not an issue but last brew day SHE insisted I go shopping with her while I was right in the middle of it! "Can't you just finish it when we get back?"

[BlackSands]

And for anyone interested in following further, here everyone's favourite "brewing myth buster" expands on the "short and shoddy" experiment, where one beer is brewed with multiple short cuts implemented in the process, and then compared to the same beer done in accordance with his usual “best practices are insurance” approach:

 

http://brulosophy.com/2017/06/26/traditional-vs-short-shoddy-brewing-process-exbeeriment-results/

 

Maybe it’s true what many have speculated, that while mash length, boil duration, pitch rate, and fermentation temperature on their own may not have a perceptible impact, combining these “shoddy” practices does. Ultimately though, I was happy with both beers, and I’ll have no problem shortening my brew day now and then to keep my pipeline rolling.

[ChristinaS1]

My understanding of a 60 minute boil is to remove DMS when doing AG.

 

 

http://scottjanish.com/how-to-prevent-dms-in-beer/

Yeah' date=' that seems to be the main reason, though no-boil/short-boil brewers don't report any issue with DMS as was the case with this 15 minute boil. It may be more of a concern I suspect if using lager/pilsner malts... [img']unsure[/img]

 

As I mentioned in another thread, I have been experimenting with 30 minute partial mashes and 30 minute boils and so fa so good, but my partials are small, so that may help....One thing I have changed though is that I have stopped doing flameout additions in favour of 2 or 3 minutes additions and rapidly cooling because I read, "Rapidly cooling your wort after boiling is also important. The SMM to DMS conversion continues at temperatures well below boiling, so DMS is produced even while the wort is cooling after the boil. However, unlike the mash, DMS produced while cooling cannot be boiled off. This conversion continues even if the hot wort is vented. For every hour you have hot wort sitting around, you will produce approximately a 30% increase in DMS." http://beersmith.com/blog/2012/04/10/dimethyl-sulfides-dms-in-home-brewed-beer/

 

Perhaps no chill is a bad idea too, with short boils?

 

Cheers,

 

Christina.

[Otto Von Blotto]

I routinely do 90 minute mashes which are split between a 65-70 minute rest at my desired mash temp followed by a 15-20 minute rest at 72C which supposedly aids in head retention. The red ale I have on tap now was done this way and is exhibiting decent head retention as well as good lacing when the glass is properly clean' date=' so maybe it does work.

Kelsey[/quote']

 

Kelsey - I'm wondering if a mash at say 66º for 60 minutes would leave any starches left for the alpha at a 72º rest? I'm thinking if the beta converted all or most of the starch then there wouldn't be any starch left for the alpha to convert to dextrins. I usually mash at 65,66 or 67 for about 90 mins and then a mash out at 76 for 10 mins.

 

Cheers - Morrie

The 72C rest is a glycoprotein rest, nothing to do with converting starches into sugars. Basically all it does is release glycoproteins, which assist in head retention. I hadn't done a shitload of reading into it before I tried it, I mean it's not like it's gonna ruin the beer, but the brews that were done with these rests are starting to end up in the kegs now and there does appear to be improvement in the head retention compared to similar recipes done without this rest. My pilsners have always incorporated a rest at 72C, and they've always had decent head retention as well.

 

Despite old mate's deliberately rubbish brew day not turning out a complete disaster beer, I won't be changing anything in that regard in my own brewery. For me, how long it takes to get the beer in the keg from yeast pitching is far more important to keeping the supply up than how long it takes to brew the wort on a brew day. In my brewery it wouldn't matter if it took 3 hours or 8 hours, because due to no-chilling it doesn't go in the fermenter same day anyway.

 

Cheers

 

Kelsey

[BlackSands]

One thing I have changed though is that I have stopped doing flameout additions in favour of 2 or 3 minutes additions and rapidly cooling because I read' date=' "Rapidly cooling your wort after boiling is also important. [/quote']How rapid is 'rapid'?

 

My FO additions have been added DURING cooling. Once the temp drops below 75-80ºC I toss in my steeping hops and let them do their thing while the wort cools. Usually this is around 30 mins. By that time the wort is at around 35º, which when made up to volume is at a pitchable 22ºC.

[Wotto]

I routinely do 90 minute mashes which are split between a 65-70 minute rest at my desired mash temp followed by a 15-20 minute rest at 72C which supposedly aids in head retention. The red ale I have on tap now was done this way and is exhibiting decent head retention as well as good lacing when the glass is properly clean' date=' so maybe it does work.

Kelsey[/quote']

 

Kelsey - I'm wondering if a mash at say 66º for 60 minutes would leave any starches left for the alpha at a 72º rest? I'm thinking if the beta converted all or most of the starch then there wouldn't be any starch left for the alpha to convert to dextrins. I usually mash at 65,66 or 67 for about 90 mins and then a mash out at 76 for 10 mins.

 

Cheers - Morrie

The 72C rest is a glycoprotein rest, nothing to do with converting starches into sugars. Basically all it does is release glycoproteins, which assist in head retention. I hadn't done a shitload of reading into it before I tried it, I mean it's not like it's gonna ruin the beer, but the brews that were done with these rests are starting to end up in the kegs now and there does appear to be improvement in the head retention compared to similar recipes done without this rest. My pilsners have always incorporated a rest at 72C, and they've always had decent head retention as well.

 

 

I can attest to this. I had problems with head retention on all of my brews until I started routinely doing a mash rest at 72C. The beers with this rest in the mash schedule all have awesome head creation and retention.

[BlackSands]

Basically all it does is release glycoproteins' date=' which assist in head retention. I hadn't done a shitload of reading into it before I tried it...[/quote']

 

This may be of interest then:

 

Narziss et al' date=' though, claim 70°C rest to enrich beers with foaming glycopolypeptides. Conflicting with this, Kolbach Zastrow say that mashing at 70°C leads to reduced foam stability through an increased extraction of lipids, whilst Linko et al report that mashing at 65°C as opposed to 63°C resulted in measurable increase in foam stability.[/i']

 

The concept of glycoproteins as being strong determinants of beer foam properties has been cast into doubt by recent research by Vancraenenbroeck Devreux.

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1985.tb04359.x/pdf

 

 

[Otto Von Blotto]

That is over 30 years old it must be remembered, so there could well be more updated information on it. In any case, that looks like some good after work reading so I will have a read of it later. I do enjoy the scientific articles on brewing available on that Wiley site.