| |
Main
Date: 24 Jun 2006 16:38:21
From: Adam Preble
Subject: Decoction mash of thin runnings after protein rest--Belgian mashing?
|
I've been seeing this step in some books about Belgian beers. If I have
this correct, they will collect runnings after a brief protein rest,
boil the runnings, and reintroduce to get their next temperature. I
want to try this for a lambic but want to make sure I get this right.
For a lambic that I wish to start, I've settled on 40% unmalted wheat.
I suppose this could use a protein rest. I would rest 10 minutes, take
my runnings, raise that through the rest of the steps briefly (15
minutes a piece--not sure what temperatures yet), then boil. Meanwhile,
the original mash has been at a protein rest this whole time. Is this safe?
If not, I assume I go to the next step in the main mash by mashing in
boiling water while boiling the runnings to get the temperature after that.
My other target temperature if 158F for a very dextrous wort as I see
mentioned for a lambic base. And then I'd sparge at 177F or higher,
deliberately pulling some tannins.
|
|
| |
Date: 25 Jun 2006 23:30:44
From: QD Steve
Subject: Re: Decoction mash of thin runnings after protein rest--Belgian mashing?
|
"Adam Preble" <rockobonaparte@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1Udng.21934$JW5.20247@tornado.texas.rr.com...
> I've been seeing this step in some books about Belgian beers. If I have
> this correct, they will collect runnings after a brief protein rest, boil
> the runnings, and reintroduce to get their next temperature. I want to
> try this for a lambic but want to make sure I get this right.
>
> For a lambic that I wish to start, I've settled on 40% unmalted wheat. I
> suppose this could use a protein rest. I would rest 10 minutes, take my
> runnings, raise that through the rest of the steps briefly (15 minutes a
> piece--not sure what temperatures yet), then boil. Meanwhile, the
> original mash has been at a protein rest this whole time. Is this safe?
>
> If not, I assume I go to the next step in the main mash by mashing in
> boiling water while boiling the runnings to get the temperature after
> that.
>
> My other target temperature if 158F for a very dextrous wort as I see
> mentioned for a lambic base. And then I'd sparge at 177F or higher,
> deliberately pulling some tannins.
If you take a large proportion of the thin runnings and boil them you are
destroying the enzymes. With a large proportion of unmalted wheat, you need
as much enzyme activity as possible. If you take the thick portion of the
mash and boil it, it will help break down the starches, particularly in the
unmalted wheat. When re-introduced to the mash tun, the the enzymes which at
this stage are mainly present in the liquid will convert the starch to
sugar - which is of course your basic aim in mashing.
Remember also your protein rest is only activating a protein destroying
enzyme (forgot name of enzyme) and will not have any great effect on starch.
You could use the 40C - 60C - 70C mash regime boiling the thick portion of
the mash to get to the next temp rest. This is good for a protein rest plus
alpha & beta amalyse.
Steve W (in Aus)
|
| | |
Date: 26 Jun 2006 05:23:02
From: Adam Preble
Subject: Re: Decoction mash of thin runnings after protein rest--Belgian mashing?
|
QD Steve wrote:
> If you take a large proportion of the thin runnings and boil them you are
> destroying the enzymes. With a large proportion of unmalted wheat, you need
> as much enzyme activity as possible. If you take the thick portion of the
... [etc]
What you say is certainly the coventional wisdom and I would normally
have no problem with this. The thing here is I've been looking at some
of the goofy things Belgians have supposedly done in the past in making
their beers--lambics in particular. I would expect that whacking a
bunch of the enzymes in the boil would leave starches behind. However,
it sounds like this is desireable for the other microbes in this style.
As an addendum, I'm reading that the ~120F draw of mash water isn't done
really as a part of the rest. That's just the temperature the barley is
left at while the wheat gelatinizes. It hits a higher temperature when
the two are combined; I've seen 140F. I'm now unsure where/when they
propose to take some thin mash. I also don't think they're taking too
much of the liquid. It might be something between a decion and an
infusion mash.
|
| |
Date: 26 Jun 2006 14:36:54
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Decoction mash of thin runnings after protein rest--Belgian mashing?
|
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 16:38:21 GMT, <rockobonaparte@hotmail.com > wrote:
> I've been seeing this step in some books about Belgian beers. If I have
> this correct, they will collect runnings after a brief protein rest,
> boil the runnings, and reintroduce to get their next temperature. I
> want to try this for a lambic but want to make sure I get this right.
Go ahead and try it if you want, but IMO, decion mashing is going to
be a lot of extra work for very little (if any) benefit. IMO, multiple
infusion would be a lot easier and give you the same results.
> For a lambic that I wish to start, I've settled on 40% unmalted wheat.
> I suppose this could use a protein rest. I would rest 10 minutes, take
> my runnings, raise that through the rest of the steps briefly (15
> minutes a piece--not sure what temperatures yet), then boil. Meanwhile,
> the original mash has been at a protein rest this whole time. Is this safe?
Well, the definition of "safe" goes out the window with Lambics. ;)
John.
|
| |
Date: 25 Jun 2006 23:46:28
From:
Subject: Re: Decoction mash of thin runnings after protein rest--Belgian mashing?
|
Adam Preble wrote:
> I've been seeing this step in some books about Belgian beers. If I have
> this correct, they will collect runnings after a brief protein rest,
> boil the runnings, and reintroduce to get their next temperature. I
> want to try this for a lambic but want to make sure I get this right.
Are you refering to "turbid mashing"?
>From what I've read, it is a bit more complex than just the above.
There are about a dozen steps involved (+/-).
Googling "turbid mash" gets a few links to people
that have tried it and descriptions of how it is done.
I've been thinking of trying it for my next lambic,
but I haven't gotten around to it yet.
JW
|
| | |
Date: 27 Jun 2006 04:26:37
From: Adam Preble
Subject: Re: Decoction mash of thin runnings after protein rest--Belgian mashing?
|
jswatson@yahoo.com wrote:
> Are you refering to "turbid mashing"?
>>From what I've read, it is a bit more complex than just the above.
> There are about a dozen steps involved (+/-).
>
> Googling "turbid mash" gets a few links to people
> that have tried it and descriptions of how it is done.
>
> I've been thinking of trying it for my next lambic,
> but I haven't gotten around to it yet.
This sounds correct. I drew out the steps and it doesn't sound so bad
after the underlaying pattern is found. It's just a variety of
infusions with runnings pulled after each rest into an ever-increasing boil.
|
| |
Date: 28 Jun 2006 06:55:56
From: Adam Preble
Subject: Re: Decoction mash of thin runnings after protein rest--Belgian mashing?
|
Thanks to the observation that this particular style of mash is the
"turbid mash." They say it's particular to lambic brewing, and that it
isn't really necessary. The impression I got was that it was generally
particular to Belgian brewing due to tax law. They were taxed on the
size of their mash tuns, so they'd cram them as full of mash as
possible; this left little room for water. They'd then sparge as they
went in order to get a full load worth of liquor through the tun.
I would have stayed away from the process, but not I'm interested in
cranking out a full 15 gallons to fill my Sanke keg in one go. I hear a
good first-try efficiency with turbid mashing is 25 pts/lbs/gallon. For
an OG of 46 points, that means a 65% efficiency for 30 pounds of grain.
I have a 10 gallon cooler. I already know I was pushing it with 28
gallons for a normal mash, so a turbid mash sounds perfect.
The process doesn't look that bad. I'd say it's easier than a triple
decion really. I don't really get the strange temperatures though.
What happens at 113F and 130F? Why would one rest at 150F? That seems
right in between beta and alpha amalyse rests.
For reference, I am looking at the mash schedule from here:
http://www.hbd.org/brewery/library/LmbicJL0696.html
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jun 2006 13:53:26
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Decoction mash of thin runnings after protein rest--Belgian mashing?
|
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 06:55:56 GMT, <rockobonaparte@hotmail.com > wrote:
> What happens at 113F
Acid rest
> and 130F?
Protein rest
> Why would one rest at 150F? That seems right in between beta and alpha
> amalyse rests.
Not that unusual. Sacc rests between 147 to 158 are fairly typical. What
temp in that range you pick depends on what sugar profile you want. The
lower end gives you a more fermentable wort, the higher end gives you
more complex sugars and less fermentation. 150F is pretty common.
John.
|
|
