Mashing modern big brewery malts

[Medarius]

What ever gets you a tasty beer at the end of it all do that. There is a lot of malt to wade through in this hobby as long as your having fun and enjoying the beers is what's important me thinks. And then theres the science behind it all...

And how much time do you like to spend on your hobby? Some love tinkering in the garden for hours or working on cars for days. I love cooking and spending 4 hours brewing a double decoction is fun for me. Others put a brew together let it mash and boil without worrying about the mess. Im sure most of them make better beers than I do, but I have fun and as T said its about having fun.
just finished building a motorized mixer just for decoction mashing. )

 

[Nosybear]

Not really. It's the same reaction, it just happens slower. And there are different reaction products, as I mentioned above, that can taste like ball point pen ink. The Maillard reaction simply refers to reactions between sugars and amino acids, regardless of temperature, and can produce a number of different products.

 

[ChicoBrewer]

Maillard reaction. Yummmmmmm. Sorry couldn't help it.

 

[Ozarks Mountain Brewery]

that's just beautiful, my mouth is watering

 

[GFHomebrew]

So it's another word for darkening. The end product beer does the same thing over time or is that just purely oxidation. Oh man where's that Homebrew.

 

[thunderwagn]

@ChicoBrewer for the WIN!!

 

[KC]

It is just so full of enzymes and highly modified that step mashing, decoction, mashing low or mashing high doesn't really matter.

This idea has been floating around for years but it's way oversimplified and misleading. Not all malts are designed for supermacro instant conversion, and to assume so when designing a recipe or process is a mistake. It's impossible to germinate an entire batch of barley equally to full modification, and in many cases, it's not even desired because of unwanted tradeoffs. Every maltster's job is to determine the appropriate level of modification for each product. Every malt is different.

It's the brewer's job to understand the malt spec sheets, use the right malt for the task, and use that malt properly. Attention to these details can differentiate decent beers from good or great beers. The wide majority of homebrewers use recipes that simply call for 'two row' or make blind substitutions on the fly. Heck, a lot of pro brewers even do that. The leaves a lot on the table.

 

[KC]

I feel like you're misusing the term Maillard Reaction, that is a reaction that occurs north of 140C

Where did you get this information on maillards? Caramelization requires these high temperatures, but maillards do not. Maillard reactions are controlled by three main factors: time, temperature, and pH. Maillard browning can occur at room temperature over long periods of time (e.g. honey). They definitely occur during malt, mash, and boil which are well below 140C.

 

[thunderwagn]

Where did you get this information on maillards? Caramelization requires these high temperatures, but maillards do not. Maillard reactions are controlled by three main factors: time, temperature, and pH. Maillard browning can occur at room temperature over long periods of time (e.g. honey). They definitely occur during malt, mash, and boil which are well below 140C.

Unless Maillard reaction is clearly defined, I would venture to say that @Hawkbox is just as correct as anyone else in their OPINION of 'maillard reaction'.

 

[Nosybear]

Unless Maillard reaction is clearly defined, I would venture to say that @Hawkbox is just as correct as anyone else in their OPINION of 'maillard reaction'.

It actually is pretty clearly defined: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maillard_reaction
It's the browning reaction between sugars and amino acids. Where the article states the reaction forms poorly characterized molecules, it means that we don't know the structure of all of them. It's a large family of reactions (there are lots of sugars and amino acids) and not all pleasant (the ball-point pen flavor characteristic of melanoidin malt). Caramelization is different and does not occur in mashing or boiling - temperatures are too low.

 

[thunderwagn]

If a wiki page is what you call clearly defined. Webster's definition is different and that's my point.

 

[Nosybear]

Perhaps this one, then: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/maillard-reaction

 

[Hawkbox]

I am referencing standard cooking information and the Royal Society of Chemistry.

http://www.scienceofcooking.com/maillard_reaction.htm

http://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/Resources/kitchenchemistry/docs/SS13.doc

 

[Nosybear]

I am referencing standard cooking information and the Royal Society of Chemistry.

http://www.scienceofcooking.com/maillard_reaction.htm

http://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/Resources/kitchenchemistry/docs/SS13.doc

I see, and in the context of cooking, this is accurate. You'd never brown a cut of meat at room temperature. Melanoidin formation is another form of Maillard reactions, and I've seen a wort go from golden yellow to red in a 120-minute boil due to Maillard product formation. Key is that Maillard reactions are an entire class of reactions that happen over a variety of conditions. They're desirable in some contexts (browning meat, decoction mashing) and not in some (staling of powdered milk).

 

[Hawkbox]

That still doesn't track with how you would get a reaction from something like decoction where the temperature doesn't get high enough to cause the reaction.

 

[Mark Farrall]

This idea has been floating around for years but it's way oversimplified and misleading. Not all malts are designed for supermacro instant conversion, and to assume so when designing a recipe or process is a mistake....

So agree on the bits I've cut out about all malts not being malted the same way, but every base malt I've got access to is one fits the criteria. And yes it's oversimplified, but I don't think its misleading. It's becoming more obvious that the mashing techniques established 10s to 100s of years ago aren't as effective as they used to be because malts have changed. And to me it's becuase they rely on temperature to drive the effect.

From what I'm seeing it's time that's more important at the moment. Even termperatures that were traditionally considered high don't see drop offs in beta amalyse until way past the point that people expect. Graphs from the talk I saw had them at close to the same levels as alpha for over thirty minutes at temperatures up to 70C (158F) before they started to denature significantly. But they were still there at 60 minutes, though in far smaller amounts. So if you were expecting to get a highly unfermentable wort from a high temperature and you're doing a standard 60 minute, it's probably not going to happen and you'll need to rely on malts with more melanodins in them.

So after reading the posts there's a few exceptions, like under-modified malts, rests to extract things other than sugars (ferulic and the like) and overmodified malts. Those haven't really changed. It's the base malts that have. If you want higly fermentable you just relax and mash for as long as your patience/process allows. If you want low fermentable wort then you can try 30 minutes (after mash in), but you may be better off adding malts to get that effect rather than fiddling around with your mashing process.

And of course if you enjoy your unique mashing process nothing I'm saying affects that, because you're doing it to scratch that itch.

 

[The Beerery]

It will really blow your mind then, that mashing is NOT beer dependent, it is malt dependent.

EVERY single sack of malt you get will have a different malt analysis sheet, and should be handled differently. That is how its really supposed to go. The gelatinization temp( vz45), Kolbach, and protein % determine your mashing regimen, not the beer style.

Those who don't follow a MA sheet are mashing blind.. Which is fine for hobbyists( us) but not true professionals, missed extract applies directly to the bottom line.

Every sack of malt I get (I use Weyermann exclusively), gets logged with details needed and then the mash regimen is then tweaked to fit the malt.

I always achieve 100% conversion, because of the amount I brew it hits my bottom line as well (even though I buy commercially)
It takes some playing around with mash temps timings, but its easily done.
With my current malt, my mashing regimen looks like:
dough in 131, start heating immediately (1c/min raise)
144 for 20
147 for 10
151 for 5
163 for 30
170 for 10

100% conversion, FG of 1.006 regardless of style (however no beer of mine is allowed to hit that FG)

True mastery is not altering single infusion mashing temps ( I side with the Germans here, and think you can't make a proper beer without a step mash). If you want to be a beer wizard the real secret is mashing the beer in a way that 100% conversion is achieved, then selecting the proper yeast or leaving the proper amount of extract ( potential extract or PE) in the beer to achieve the proper body/sweetness profile. For zee Germans they actually have guidelines in the professional teachings for the proper amount of extract remaining (PE) per the style. Ranging from .5%-8%. This is fermentable sugars (PE), NOT dextrines from high mash temps. Dextrines from say a single infusion 155 mash, will lead to a higher FG, but that beer is not crisp, its muddy. Dextrines make beer muddy, PE makes beer have body/sweetness ( think PU, it has a high %~6 of PE remaining, compared to a German pilsner having the lowest amount .5%).

Moral of the story is, you should be mashing the beer at the temp/time that gets you 100% conversion. A FFT is then done to determine the FG potential of the beer, If mashed properly it will be around 1.006-7. THEN you chose a yeast that nets you the proper attenuation to style (or you halt the beer) with the proper amount there. Thereby leaving the unfermentables needed per the style brewed. A beer left to ferment out to 1.006 will be dry when it gets there. However, a beer mashed for 1.006, but halted at 1.009 (still on the dryer side), will have a nice body and sweetness (think real german helles).
Thats how zee real professionals yeast whisper.

 

[ChicoBrewer]

It will really blow your mind then, that mashing is NOT beer dependent, it is malt dependent.

EVERY single sack of malt you get will have a different malt analysis sheet, and should be handled differently. That is how its really supposed to go. The gelatinization temp( vz45), Kolbach, and protein % determine your mashing regimen, not the beer style.

Those who don't follow a MA sheet are mashing blind.. Which is fine for hobbyists( us) but not true professionals, missed extract applies directly to the bottom line.

Every sack of malt I get (I use Weyermann exclusively), gets logged with details needed and then the mash regimen is then tweaked to fit the malt.

I always achieve 100% conversion, because of the amount I brew it hits my bottom line as well (even though I buy commercially)
It takes some playing around with mash temps timings, but its easily done.
With my current malt, my mashing regimen looks like:
dough in 131, start heating immediately (1c/min raise)
144 for 20
147 for 10
151 for 5
163 for 30
170 for 10

100% conversion, FG of 1.006 regardless of style (however no beer of mine is allowed to hit that FG)

True mastery is not altering single infusion mashing temps ( I side with the Germans here, and think you can't make a proper beer without a step mash). If you want to be a beer wizard the real secret is mashing the beer in a way that 100% conversion is achieved, then selecting the proper yeast or leaving the proper amount of extract ( potential extract or PE) in the beer to achieve the proper body/sweetness profile. For zee Germans they actually have guidelines in the professional teachings for the proper amount of extract remaining (PE) per the style. Ranging from .5%-8%. This is fermentable sugars (PE), NOT dextrines from high mash temps. Dextrines from say a single infusion 155 mash, will lead to a higher FG, but that beer is not crisp, its muddy. Dextrines make beer muddy, PE makes beer have body/sweetness ( think PU, it has a high %~6 of PE remaining, compared to a German pilsner having the lowest amount .5%).

Moral of the story is, you should be mashing the beer at the temp/time that gets you 100% conversion. A FFT is then done to determine the FG potential of the beer, If mashed properly it will be around 1.006-7. THEN you chose a yeast that nets you the proper attenuation to style (or you halt the beer) with the proper amount there. Thereby leaving the unfermentables needed per the style brewed. A beer left to ferment out to 1.006 will be dry when it gets there. However, a beer mashed for 1.006, but halted at 1.009 (still on the dryer side), will have a nice body and sweetness (think real german helles).
Thats how zee real professionals yeast whisper.

I want to know more. Are there any books you can suggest for my enlightenment? in my short career I think I have some misconceptions like mashing high produces more "sweet". I really appreciate you taking the time to lay this out but I want to know more. Where can I find it? How do I "Halt" a fermentation? Sulfate? Like wine? So much to learn so little time LOL.

 

[Hawkbox]

That seems kind of obvious to me, but I'm way to lazy to put in the effort to figure out what each batch of 2-row actually means. But I grew up a farmer and I can easily tell you there are differences between years and even fields when harvesting grains.

 

[KC]

Every sack of malt I get (I use Weyermann exclusively), gets logged with details needed and then the mash regimen is then tweaked to fit the malt.

I'd love to see a BF calculator that can handle this. I use craft malts which are wildly different between batches. So much so that when it's not utilized properly, efficiency can tank in the 50-60% range and targets are off by 10 or more points. Most brewers, even professionals think it can simply be swapped into an existing boilerplate recipe.