19 replies to this topic

[CaptRon]

So I was having a conversation with an experience brewer from my Homebrew club about multi-stepped decoctions. I was under the impression that you can really benefit in certain beers (Hefewiezen I think is one) from doing multi decoction mashing at different temp rests. Well, he said that with the malts available today, multi-step decoction mashing really isn't necessary any more. So I was curious as to what the consensus here was on it and why? Does it have something to do with the acidulated malts or something or is that another topic altogether?

[zymot]

To be clear, there is multiple temp step mashes. One of the ways to achieve each step up in temps is through a decoction process.I would say, generally speaking, with modern well modified malts, any multi step mash is not necessary. Meaning you can get full conversion with a single infusion mash. I know some think that step mashing has the potential to do damage with step mashes.I know George Fix saw mashing as an extension of the malting process. If you look it that way, the maltster starts the mashing process, stops, put the grains in a bag. You buy them, crush the grains and pick up where the maltster left off. The maltser has done the stepping for you, hence the last infusion is all that is needed.Some like the step mash process because it gets them closer the old old fashioned process. I know of a couple homebrewers that do direct heat (stove top) step mashing out of habit.As for decoction mashing, it has the reputation among some as being an extra special form of step mashing. Bring grains to a boil is certainly different. I know Denny did a dynamic test to determine if decoction mash added anything to a beer. As I recall, the improvement was small, if any, and they did not conclude it was beneficial.Now my own personal 2 cents. I have done decotion mashes. Not for anticipated benefits of step mashing. I do it to induce the by product of boiling my grains. I think it adds some complexity and a different characteristic to the finished product. The idea is to induce Maillard flavors. I did a SMaSH a few weeks ago and I boiled the vienna malt to get a little something extra. It went into the bottles a couple days ago. I think I got a little something extra in my beer. (check with me in 3 weeks)zymot

[MyaCullen]

the only decoction I have tried is a single decoction at the mash out step to raise the mash to 170° F and add a little melanoiden character to a Bo-Pils, and also a Maibock.I don't really know if it made a real difference, but it was good beer.

[stellarbrew]

I was rewarded for the great extra effort and time I put forth to do a true, authentic multi-step decoction mash on my Bohemian Pilsener, in the following way: the judge found buttery flavors he attributed to diacetyl. I am very sensitive to diacetyl and I can tell you with certainty that there were was no hint of diacetyl in that beer. I am convinced that the judge picked up on the flavors contributed by the maillard reaction, and defined it as a flaw.

[MtnBrewer]

Zymot's excellent answer covers most of what you need to know. I'll only add a couple of comments.I have done several decoctions and for me it's not worth the hassle. I don't do them anymore. I've probably screwed up as many as have been successful. I'm not trying to talk you out of it, just relating my experience. YMMV.Do your protein rest at 131°F instead of 122. It's a lot easier to reach mash temps from the higher temperature protein rest. Actually this applies to any multi-step mash. Even then, it will be difficult to get all the way from 131 to 150ish. You might need an intermediate step in there. One problem you're going to run into is that when you pull a decoction, you're using mostly grain and very little water. This means that it's going to want to scorch. So you have to stir constantly to prevent that from happening.Related to that is that when you pull all that grain out of the mash, you're lowering the thermal mass of the mash quite a bit. So it's going to start losing temperature quickly. This is one case where a smaller mashtun is better. 5 gallon Rubbermaid coolers work better than Ice Cubes in this particular case because it's insulated better and it has a smaller footprint (less mash exposed to the air).Use a large kitchen strainer to pull your decoctions. This will get mostly grain and leave most of the mash liquor in the tun. The exception is if you do a mash out. In that case, you can pull a thin decoction for that step. I used to just open up the drain on the mash tun and pull off only liquid. Since it has less thermal mass, you will need more liquid than you think.

[davelew]

The best beer I ever made, a Bohemian Pilsner, was a triple decoction (50C dough-in, 60C, 70C, 75C mashout).I don't think I've done a decoction since then. It's extra work, and I have trouble being precise about it. It's tough enough to hit temps in my main batch, but when I pulled decoctions I tried to hit an amylase rest for 10 minutes before heating them to boiling, and I ended up trying to control the temperature of too many different pots at once.As a side note, my decocted beer also had a freakishly long shelf life. I attribute this in part to the boiling of the decoction driving off some oxygen earlier in the mash than I normally drive of dO2.

[zymot]

It is a big job and a hassle. You can expect your brew day to be you are going to be standing over your decoction with a big spoon stirring about 6 lbs of oatmeal.Here os Part 1 that explains decoction mashing pretty well.

[strangebrewer]

A side note is that anytime I do a multi-step decoction I get at least a 5% efficiency bump. I only do them on bock's and doppel bock's so I'm working with a larger grain bill and every time I've hit at least 80% efficiency when I normally rock out around 75%.They are a lot of work but again I only bother on specific styles and while I have no side by side comparison to make with a non-decocted mash I have always gotten great feedback from friends, family, and fellow home brewers on my bock's.

[earthtone]

I have only done a single decoction, but the flavour contribution was quite significant. It was a SMaSH also and I have never had the kind of body and complexity off a one liner malt bill before. IMO and continuing from what zymot and mtn have said, a multi-step is unnecessary given todays highly modified grains, however, I believe you can get away with a single decoction "to induce the byproduct of boiling my grains... some complexity and a different characteristic to the finished product."I would do a single again, but I doubt I would undertake a multi-step. The single decoction only added about 30 minutes to my brew day all told.

[dmtaylor]

I just tried decoction for the first time on my Vienna lager -- I did an old-fashioned 1860-style triple decoction, and it wasn't that big a deal. The key, I think, is that I only tried a 2.5-gallon batch. I think if you keep it to 2.5 to 3 gallons, it's much easier to do because you're not having to stir as much grain during the boiling phase. All in all, it only added about an extra 40 minutes or so to my regular brew day (which is about 4 hours 15 minutes, plus or minus). Keep it small, then you can whip through it with greater ease and find out if it is worth all the hassle. My Vienna lager turned out clean as a whistle -- no astringency, no off-flavors whatsoever. But it also lacks that certain spunk that I was hoping for in trying to duplicate, say, a real Negra Modelo or imported German Oktoberfest. So for me, the jury's still out as to whether decoction is really of any benefit or not. It didn't hurt, that is for sure, but is it really helpful in any way? I don't know. Yet.

[djinkc]

How do you think this compares to an extended boil for getting Malliard reaction products? I visited with a friend from LBG a few weeks ago that is a serial medal winner with old ales and barleywines. His take was forget partygyle, sparge a ton and boil for 2 - 3 hours. I tried a 2 hour with a Sticke I have fermenting now, specifically trying to enhance melanoidins. And of course some melanoidin malt went in as well. It seems easier than decocting.

[earthtone]

When I did my single decoction I boiled the decoction for 35 minutes, which is probably longer than each step in a step mash put together....maybe this is why I found a fairly significant contribution. My FG was 1.017 - fairly high IMO for a beer that was mashed at 154df for an hour, decocted and used exclusively Munich Malt to get only a 1.055 OG, so I attribute the high FG to the decoction and the development of some more complex sugars during the process.

[Jimmy James]

A side note is that anytime I do a multi-step decoction I get at least a 5% efficiency bump. I only do them on bock's and doppel bock's so I'm working with a larger grain bill and every time I've hit at least 80% efficiency when I normally rock out around 75%.They are a lot of work but again I only bother on specific styles and while I have no side by side comparison to make with a non-decocted mash I have always gotten great feedback from friends, family, and fellow home brewers on my bock's.

+1 on this. I also get better attenuation than advertised for the yeast strains I use when fermenting a triple-decocted wort. Despite the lower than anticipated FG the beers turn out great.

[denny]

Once or twice a year I still do a decoction mash just to see if I've changed my mind about what it brings to a beer. So far, I haven't.

[CaptRon]

Here is an informative wiki on decoction mashing: https://www.homebrew...Decoction_mashI hope an external link to another homebrew site is ok.After reading these comments and this wiki, I think I was confusing decoction mashing and just a multi-step mash. I could still be wrong though. :blush:Here is what I am getting from all of this data. Is decoction when you are removing some of the mash, boiling it, then returning it to the mash tun to increase the mash temp? If so wont that kill off the enzymes that are required to perform the starch/sugar conversion that we are after? And, I am assuming this is different than just a multi-stepped mash where you are direct firing your mash tun to get to the different temperature rests. So they are basically two seperate methods to get to the different tempurature rests?Just trying to learn more about this.

[MtnBrewer]

Here is what I am getting from all of these data. Is decoction when you are removing some of the mash, boiling it, then returning it to the mash tun to increase the mash temp?Yes, exactly.If so wont that kill off the enzymes that are required to perform the starch/sugar conversion that we are after?Some of them yes, but this is one reason you use a thick decoction. Most of the enzymes are left in the mash tun. It's also a good idea to pause for 10-15 minutes at around 150°F on the way up to boiling.And, I am assuming this is different than just a multi-stepped mash where you are direct firing your mash tun to get to the different temperature rests. So they are basically two seperate methods to get to the different tempurature rests?Correct. There are three ways to do a step mash:a) Direct heat, i.e., heating the mash tun via fire, a heat exchanger, steam, etc.,2) decoction, as we have discussed above and iii) infusion, i.e., heating the mash by adding hot water to it.

[zymot]

I think part of the decoction mash debate/confusion comes from the fact that you are doing two things at once, then trying to attribute results to one or the other process.a- What are the benefit(s) of doing a step mash? Regardless of how you induced the temp change(s)b- What are the benefit(s) of boiling a portion of your mash as you do in a decoction mash?It would be very very difficult for a homebrewer to do an objective test be able to assign the various possible beer attributes as a result of the processes.In the end, those who are curious should try it. Any conclusions will have to be on an empirical nature.

[Deerslyr]

And, I am assuming this is different than just a multi-stepped mash where you are direct firing your mash tun to get to the different temperature rests. So they are basically two seperate methods to get to the different tempurature rests?Correct. There are three ways to do a step mash:a) Direct heat, i.e., heating the mash tun via fire, a heat exchanger, steam, etc.,2) decoction, as we have discussed above and iii) infusion, i.e., heating the mash by adding hot water to it.

I've got a fourth and fifth one for you.(iv) I have a friend that rigged a pressure cooker with some copper piping coming out of the lid. He builds up his pressure and injects steam into the mash to raise/stabilize the mash temperature. When he does this, there are no concerns about thinning out the mash from the infusion method. (v) I have used a heat stick to raise/stabilize the mash temp as well. Yes, there is an element in contact with the grains, but I never had an issue with carmelization. I haven't used it in a while, but admittedly that is because I went conservative on the power and it has a tough time getting it up to the temps quickly. But with the right wattage, it can be used.Direct heat doesn't work to well if you are using a picnic cooler, which both my buddy and use. Decoction seems too complicated for my simple brain.

[MtnBrewer]

I've got a fourth and fifth one for you.(iv) I have a friend that rigged a pressure cooker with some copper piping coming out of the lid. He builds up his pressure and injects steam into the mash to raise/stabilize the mash temperature. When he does this, there are no concerns about thinning out the mash from the infusion method. (v) I have used a heat stick to raise/stabilize the mash temp as well. Yes, there is an element in contact with the grains, but I never had an issue with carmelization. I haven't used it in a while, but admittedly that is because I went conservative on the power and it has a tough time getting it up to the temps quickly. But with the right wattage, it can be used.Direct heat doesn't work to well if you are using a picnic cooler, which both my buddy and use. Decoction seems too complicated for my simple brain.

Those would both be examples of direct heat. In fact, I even used steam as an example in my post.

[Deerslyr]

Those would both be examples of direct heat. In fact, I even used steam as an example in my post.

Doh! I saw "direct heat" and skimmed the rest... assumed it was "direct fire".