51 replies to this topic

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

I'd also like to point out that this looks like a fair amount of work. And how does this mess up figuring out what additions to make to the mash to kep the pH in range? So many new variables arrrggggg

[Jimmy James]

I don't regularly perform decoctions but a brewing buddy and I both swear by them for certain beer styles, like Marzen and Czech Pils. Not that you can't make an awesome Marzen or BoPils w/out decoctions - people do it every day - but we do notice a difference when following a triple decoction routine. It makes the brew day very long and complicated and in general I don't derive any enjoyment from doing it. So, for the most part I just limit it to a once or twice a year kind of thing. I think the best thing to do is take a recipe you've brewed before a couple times and run through a triple decoction with that same grist, maybe dropping any carapils or specialty malts primarily used for the color and flavor you'd otherwise get from the decoction, and see how it turns out. It won't suck, and worst case you spent a few extra hours trying something new.

[VolFan]

I've done a triple decoction twice on a pils. I can't say the beer was so stellar it was worth the added work. I did it mostly just to say I have done it and experience the process. Haven't done it in about 3 yrs now.

[zymot]

I have done a few decoction mashes.One was an alt and I wanted to go all out and take a shot at the ultimate alt. Mostly for the sake of doing the old fashioned way.The other was a rye beer and I wanted to get as much maillard reactions and bread crust favors. The point was not to step mash, only induce maillard reactions. I draw some of the mash and boiled it for about 45 minutes.One was a balitic porter, again to iduce maillard reactions, not any step mashing reasons.Using decoction to step mash if you cannot do direct heating of the mash, decoction is a good way to go. You can debate the value or the necessity of doing a step mash in the first place. I agree with those who say that modern malts are modified so well, step mashing is not a benifit. Infusion mash is all you "need."I will do decoctions again, when I want to induce maillard flavors. I encourage those interested to give it a try. zymot

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

I will do decoctions again, when I want to induce maillard flavors. I encourage those interested to give it a try. zymot

couldn't performing a "boil down" of the first runnings accomplish this?

[MakeMeHoppy]

I watched the video and it was very interesting. However, that is a VERY long brew day and I can't see doing it unless it is turning an average beer into a world class beer. I mainly brew IPAs and Porters with some other styles thrown in to make it intereting. I'm not sure any of my beers would really benefit from this other than Hefeweisen or possibly Scottish Ale.

[MtnBrewer]

this is a great video - why doesn't boiling the grains extract tannins?

Because the pH is too low.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

Because the pH is too low.

what keeps it low? i missed parts of the video

[zymot]

couldn't performing a "boil down" of the first runnings accomplish this?

Maybe yes, maybe no. I know boiling down first runnings has the reputation of getting similar results as decoction, exactly how close? I have never seen any evaluation. I have not done enough of them to offer an opinion, anecdotal or scientific.I will point out that intuitively, they are two very different processes.First runnings method: You are boiling fully converted wort, sugar and water.With decoction, you pull wet grains fromm the mash, drain off the liquid. You want to leave most of the liquid in the mashtun. What you boil is mostly a thick mash of grains, grains that may not have reached full conversions. Compared to an infusion mash where the grains do not reach above ~160 deg, you are doing something drastically different - boiling grains.When I do decoctions, primarily I am doing it to get the side affect of decoction, (maillard reactions) not the benifit of step mashing.My rye beer came out as I envsisoned. I was very happy with it. This was the first rye I brewed and I have not had many other rye beers. I cannot say the decoction made a difference. (Though my next rye will also be decocted) My baltic porter, I did a decoction plus first running boil down. It has a wonderful whiskey note to it. How much can I attribute to these two processes? I can only speculate.For the homebrewer who likes to experiment or is shooting for a unique beer, decoction is a unique process, which might produce unique results.zymot

[MtnBrewer]

what keeps it low? i missed parts of the video

The mash needs to be at a pH of 5.2 remember?

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

Maybe yes, maybe no. I know boiling down first runnings has the reputation of getting similar results as decoction, exactly how close? I have never seen any evaluation. I have not done enough of them to offer an opinion, anecdotal or scientific.I will point out that intuitively, they are two very different processes.First runnings method: You are boiling fully converted wort, sugar and water.With decoction, you pull wet grains fromm the mash, drain off the liquid. You want to leave most of the liquid in the mashtun. What you boil is mostly a thick mash of grains, grains that may not have reached full conversions. Compared to an infusion mash where the grains do not reach above ~160 deg, you are doing something drastically different - boiling grains.When I do decoctions, primarily I am doing it to get the side affect of decoction, (maillard reactions) not the benifit of step mashing.My rye beer came out as I envsisoned. I was very happy with it. This was the first rye I brewed and I have not had many other rye beers. I cannot say the decoction made a difference. (Though my next rye will also be decocted) My baltic porter, I did a decoction plus first running boil down. It has a wonderful whiskey note to it. How much can I attribute to these two processes? I can only speculate.For the homebrewer who likes to experiment or is shooting for a unique beer, decoction is a unique process, which might produce unique results.zymot

That's a lot of "maybes"

[zymot]

That's a lot of "maybes"

Exactly.

[denny]

this is a great video - why doesn't boiling the grains extract tannins?

Because temp alone will not extract tannins. You need a high pH for that and the mash pH is low enough that you can boil the grains without getting tannins.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

Because temp alone will not extract tannins. You need a high pH for that and the mash pH is low enough that you can boil the grains without getting tannins.

Why won't the pH go up? From my extract days it was always a big deal to not let the steeping water temperature rise too much.note: I'm not arguing here - I'm just trying to understand what's going on.

[MakeMeHoppy]

Why won't the pH go up? From my extract days it was always a big deal to not let the steeping water temperature rise too much.note: I'm not arguing here - I'm just trying to understand what's going on.

I would bet in extract you were steeping a small amount of grains in a relatively large amount of water. I'll bet at that ratio the ph is not lowered near as much as a typical 1 lb to 1-1.5 qt water mash.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

I would bet in extract you were steeping a small amount of grains in a relatively large amount of water. I'll bet at that ratio the ph is not lowered near as much as a typical 1 lb to 1-1.5 qt water mash.

but we are talking about the decoction part, not the mash part. maybe the ratio is the same - I'm not sure.

[denny]

As far as I know, temp has no correlation to pH. What MakeMeHopphy was referring to is the tendency to steep grains in as much water as the pot will hold. Grain has a natural tendency to lower pH....the darker the grain, the more effect it has. But if you step a couple lb. of grain in several gal. of water, the grain doesn't have enough buffering capability to overcome the water pH. When you steep or mash at lower rations, however, the grain is very effective at lowering pH into an acceptable range, given that your water isn't totally wacked to begin with. So, when you pul the grain for the decoction, the pH is in a range where you won't extract tannins. To be totally, acurate, I guess I should say you won't extract tannins to a problematic amount. AFAIK, there is a slight amount of tannin extraction, but it's not much greater than it would be in a non decocted mash.

[MtnBrewer]

Why won't the pH go up?

An object at rest tends to remain at rest. In other words, to make the pH go up, you have to do something to make it go up. It won't just go up on its own.

[MtnBrewer]

As far as I know, temp has no correlation to pH.

Actually there is a correlation but it goes the other way. The higher the temperature the lower the pH. This is true of a mash but is not true in general. If you want to try it out, take a pH reading of your mash say at around 100°F and then another at room temperature. The second reading will be higher.

[ThroatwobblerMangrove]

An object at rest tends to remain at rest. In other words, to make the pH go up, you have to do something to make it go up. It won't just go up on its own.

I can see I'm going to have to figure this out on my own :frank:edit: so apparently higher temperatures accelerate tannin extraction not b/c of pH but in addition to it - is that correct?