| |
Main
Date: 13 Dec 2006 08:21:55
From: splendidmike
Subject: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
Hey,
I just brewed the Dark Sleep Stout last night from the Joy of Homebrew.
In this recipe, he says to put the 1.5 lbs of specialty grains in cold
water in your brew pot and let them steep as it comes to a boil. Then
you boil for 5 minutes and remove the grains (I used a muslin sack).
Now, I know everyone else says don't boil your grains (usually in all
caps), so why does one of the most respected voices in homebrewing
advocate this? I followed the recipe to the letter, so I'll find out if
it's any good eventually.
Charlie also recommends using a blow-off tube (as opposed to a plastic
fermenter with head space). Is it possible he's not concerned about
releasing tannins from the boiled grains because they'll just blow off
later? That's all I can think of...
Thoughts?
Mike
|
|
| |
Date: 13 Dec 2006 10:38:47
From: The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
splendidmike wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I just brewed the Dark Sleep Stout last night from the Joy of Homebrew.
> In this recipe, he says to put the 1.5 lbs of specialty grains in cold
> water in your brew pot and let them steep as it comes to a boil. Then
> you boil for 5 minutes and remove the grains (I used a muslin sack).
>
> Now, I know everyone else says don't boil your grains (usually in all
> caps), so why does one of the most respected voices in homebrewing
> advocate this? I followed the recipe to the letter, so I'll find out if
> it's any good eventually.
>
> Charlie also recommends using a blow-off tube (as opposed to a plastic
> fermenter with head space). Is it possible he's not concerned about
> releasing tannins from the boiled grains because they'll just blow off
> later? That's all I can think of...
>
I think you'll get this from other people around here, but I'll go ahead
and say it: Papazian is pretty outdated. You'd probably do better
getting advice from a more modern text. His work provides a nice gentle
introduction to the hobby, and Charlie has done an awful lot to promote
the hobby and craft brewing in general, but there's a lot of
questionable stuff in his books -- although get rid of the gypsum and I
still brew a few of his AG recipes slightly modified.
The book for beginners to intermediate brewers most recommended around
here (and I tend to concur) is "How to Brew" by John Palmer. There is a
complete online version at http://www.howtobrew.com.
IMHO boiling specialty grains is a bad idea, no matter who advocates it.
Cheers -- m
--
(Replies: cleanse my address of the Mark of the Beast!)
Teleoperate a roving mobile robot from the web:
http://www.swampgas.com/robotics/rover.html
Coauthor with Dennis Clark of "Building Robot Drive Trains".
Buy several copies today!
|
| | |
Date: 13 Dec 2006 19:25:06
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:38:47 -0600, <mikey666@666swampgas.666com > wrote:
> splendidmike wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> I just brewed the Dark Sleep Stout last night from the Joy of Homebrew.
>> In this recipe, he says to put the 1.5 lbs of specialty grains in cold
>> water in your brew pot and let them steep as it comes to a boil. Then
>> you boil for 5 minutes and remove the grains (I used a muslin sack).
>>
>> Now, I know everyone else says don't boil your grains (usually in all
>> caps), so why does one of the most respected voices in homebrewing
>> advocate this? I followed the recipe to the letter, so I'll find out if
>> it's any good eventually.
>>
>> Charlie also recommends using a blow-off tube (as opposed to a plastic
>> fermenter with head space). Is it possible he's not concerned about
>> releasing tannins from the boiled grains because they'll just blow off
>> later? That's all I can think of...
>>
>
> I think you'll get this from other people around here, but I'll go ahead
> and say it: Papazian is pretty outdated. You'd probably do better
> getting advice from a more modern text. His work provides a nice gentle
> introduction to the hobby, and Charlie has done an awful lot to promote
> the hobby and craft brewing in general, but there's a lot of
> questionable stuff in his books -- although get rid of the gypsum and I
> still brew a few of his AG recipes slightly modified.
Yeah, he was great for the hobby back when homebrewing was really in it's
infancy in the US. Like you said, he offered a very gentle introduction
to brewing and did a great job of making it less intimidating. He has also
done a lot of work in PR type stuff and homebrew advocacy on a national
level. However, IMO, he never was a very technically knowledgable brewer.
There are many things in his books that used to be true back then, but
no longer apply due to advances in ingredients/equipment/knowledge. There
are also things in there that are just flat out bad ideas.
These days, I try to steer people away from his books as much as I can.
With all due respect for what Papazian has done for our hobby, there are just
too many bad habbits that beginners can learn by trying to brew using 20 year
old information.
> The book for beginners to intermediate brewers most recommended around
> here (and I tend to concur) is "How to Brew" by John Palmer. There is a
> complete online version at http://www.howtobrew.com.
Yep, that's definitely the one I would recommend as well.
John.
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Dec 2006 11:43:59
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> > The book for beginners to intermediate brewers most recommended around
> > here (and I tend to concur) is "How to Brew" by John Palmer. There is a
> > complete online version at http://www.howtobrew.com.
>
> Yep, that's definitely the one I would recommend as well.
And make sure you get the 3rd edition! LOTS of new stuff...
--------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Dec 2006 21:12:36
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 11:43:59 -0800, <denny.g.conn@ci.eugene.or.us > wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
>
>> > The book for beginners to intermediate brewers most recommended around
>> > here (and I tend to concur) is "How to Brew" by John Palmer. There is a
>> > complete online version at http://www.howtobrew.com.
>>
>> Yep, that's definitely the one I would recommend as well.
>
> And make sure you get the 3rd edition! LOTS of new stuff...
I've got a signed copy of the 1st edition, but I really should buy
another copy of it to get the new stuff. I wonder if I could get him
to sign a 3rd edition for me. ;)
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 13 Dec 2006 13:36:45
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> I've got a signed copy of the 1st edition, but I really should buy
> another copy of it to get the new stuff. I wonder if I could get him
> to sign a 3rd edition for me. ;)
I'm sure he would...he signed mine when I bought it at NHC.
--------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 16:46:40
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net > wrote:
> With all due respect for what Papazian has done for our hobby, there are just
> too many bad habbits that beginners can learn by trying to brew using 20 year
> old information.
>
Dave Miller's old books [at least 20 years] are still good.
I still have the original white book that has since become "Dave Miller's
Homebrewing Guide" and I find it to be a pretty decent book all around. Not
that I EVER need to refer to it for anything.
>> The book for beginners to intermediate brewers most recommended around
>> here (and I tend to concur) is "How to Brew" by John Palmer. There is a
>> complete online version at http://www.howtobrew.com.
>
> Yep, that's definitely the one I would recommend as well.
>
Ditto.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 16:44:22
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty <mikey666@666swampgas.666com > wrote:
>
> IMHO boiling specialty grains is a bad idea, no matter who advocates it.
I seem to believe that the occasional crystal malt is routinely boiled for
decocted Pilsners.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| |
Date: 13 Dec 2006 22:31:05
From: Andy Davison
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Wednesday 13 December 2006 16:21, splendidmike wrote:
> Now, I know everyone else says don't boil your grains (usually in all
> caps), so why does one of the most respected voices in homebrewing
> advocate this? I followed the recipe to the letter, so I'll find out if
> it's any good eventually.
TBH I used to boil roasted barley and black malt when making extract beers.
There is a risk of tannin extraction but you get that anyway when you boil
hops so it's not something I ever bothered too much about. If you have
boiled the grains don't worry too much. Try steeping next time and put it
down to experience.
--
Andy Davison
andy [at] oiyou [dot] ukfsn [dot] org
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 04:17:12
From: Steve/Aus
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
"Andy Davison" <andydvsn@yahoo.co.uk > wrote in message
news:45808429.0@entanet...
> On Wednesday 13 December 2006 16:21, splendidmike wrote:
>
>> Now, I know everyone else says don't boil your grains (usually in all
>> caps), so why does one of the most respected voices in homebrewing
>> advocate this? I followed the recipe to the letter, so I'll find out if
>> it's any good eventually.
>
> TBH I used to boil roasted barley and black malt when making extract
> beers.
> There is a risk of tannin extraction but you get that anyway when you boil
> hops so it's not something I ever bothered too much about. If you have
> boiled the grains don't worry too much. Try steeping next time and put it
> down to experience.
> --
> Andy Davison
> andy [at] oiyou [dot] ukfsn [dot] org
You can boil carafa as they have been dehusked which is where the tannins
come from.
Steve W (in Aus)
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 09:32:29
From: Andy Davison
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Thursday 14 December 2006 04:17, Steve/Aus wrote:
> You can boil carafa as they have been dehusked which is where the tannins
> come from.
You *can* boil anything. In the UK homebrewers have traditionally boiled
specialist grains with extract. My point is that if the OP has already done
so, don't worry about it. It's better not to boil the grains but it isn't
the end of the world. There are quite a lot of tannins in hops anyway so
boiling the grains isn't the disaster that some people make it out to be.
--
Andy Davison
andy [at] oiyou [dot] ukfsn [dot] org
|
| | | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 16:38:16
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 09:32:29 +0000, <andydvsn@yahoo.co.uk > wrote:
> On Thursday 14 December 2006 04:17, Steve/Aus wrote:
>
>> You can boil carafa as they have been dehusked which is where the tannins
>> come from.
>
> You *can* boil anything. In the UK homebrewers have traditionally boiled
> specialist grains with extract. My point is that if the OP has already done
> so, don't worry about it. It's better not to boil the grains but it isn't
> the end of the world. There are quite a lot of tannins in hops anyway so
> boiling the grains isn't the disaster that some people make it out to be.
US homebrewers used to boil them too (which is why the old Papazian book
follows that procedure). We've since learned better ;)
It's not a disaster, but it's not the best practice either. IMO, you'll
make better beer by not boiling them.
Extracting the tannins has a lot to do with both temp and pH. Usually
when you are boiling hops, you are adding the hops after you have added
the extract, and the pH of your wort is lower than that of plain water.
This helps to minimize any issues with boiling the hops. You would have
a lot more problems boiling hops in plain water.
However, the common procedure with boiling specialty grains used to be
that you would steep the grains in plain water, bring them to a boil, and
then add the extract. The difference is that the grains are being boiled
in plain water with a much higher pH. This is where the problems come from.
I still wouldn't recommend boiling grains at all, but if you added them
after the extract (like you do with hops), there would likely be
less of an issue.
John.
|
| |
Date: 13 Dec 2006 19:17:03
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On 13 Dec 2006 08:21:55 -0800, <splendidmike@gmail.com > wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I just brewed the Dark Sleep Stout last night from the Joy of Homebrew.
> In this recipe, he says to put the 1.5 lbs of specialty grains in cold
> water in your brew pot and let them steep as it comes to a boil. Then
> you boil for 5 minutes and remove the grains (I used a muslin sack).
>
> Now, I know everyone else says don't boil your grains (usually in all
> caps), so why does one of the most respected voices in homebrewing
> advocate this? I followed the recipe to the letter, so I'll find out if
> it's any good eventually.
Papazian's book was good 20 years ago. They're extremely out of date
now. He says lots of things in there that we know today are bad ideas.
Personally, I would get a different book.
John.
|
| |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 10:04:04
From: splendidmike
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
What about my theory that possible "tannin contamination" would be
decreased when using a blow-off tube as opposed to letting the krausen
settle back down into the beer? Could certain grains be more or less
troublesome when boiled? Lastly, are tannins the only "problem"
associated with boiling? Just playing devils advocate here. Thanks for
your input.
Mike
splendidmike wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I just brewed the Dark Sleep Stout last night from the Joy of Homebrew.
> In this recipe, he says to put the 1.5 lbs of specialty grains in cold
> water in your brew pot and let them steep as it comes to a boil. Then
> you boil for 5 minutes and remove the grains (I used a muslin sack).
>
> Now, I know everyone else says don't boil your grains (usually in all
> caps), so why does one of the most respected voices in homebrewing
> advocate this? I followed the recipe to the letter, so I'll find out if
> it's any good eventually.
>
> Charlie also recommends using a blow-off tube (as opposed to a plastic
> fermenter with head space). Is it possible he's not concerned about
> releasing tannins from the boiled grains because they'll just blow off
> later? That's all I can think of...
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Mike
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 18:34:57
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On 14 Dec 2006 10:04:04 -0800, <splendidmike@gmail.com > wrote:
> What about my theory that possible "tannin contamination" would be
> decreased when using a blow-off tube as opposed to letting the krausen
> settle back down into the beer?
Is there a tendency for tannins to collect in the krausen instead of in the
rest of the beer during fermentation? Not that I've ever heard of. IMO,
a blowoff wouldn't make a significant difference regarding astringency.
> Could certain grains be more or less troublesome when boiled?
Don't know, I've never seen any data that breaks it down by grain type.
It's mostly the husk, so in theory the dehusked grains (or those without
a husk) would be alright.
> Lastly, are tannins the only "problem" associated with boiling?
As far as I know.
> Just playing devils advocate here.
On the other hand, what is the advantage to boiling the grains? I don't
think there is any. We used to do it a long time ago because we just
didn't know any better. These days, I see no reason to intentionally
boil the grains.
John.
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 19:22:49
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net > wrote:
>
> On the other hand, what is the advantage to boiling the grains? I don't
> think there is any. We used to do it a long time ago because we just
> didn't know any better. These days, I see no reason to intentionally
> boil the grains.
>
Hmm ... what about decoction mashing?
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| | | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 19:59:01
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 19:22:49 GMT, <veldy71@yahoo.com > wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net> wrote:
>>
>> On the other hand, what is the advantage to boiling the grains? I don't
>> think there is any. We used to do it a long time ago because we just
>> didn't know any better. These days, I see no reason to intentionally
>> boil the grains.
>>
>
> Hmm ... what about decoction mashing?
Most of my responses are assuming we're limiting the topic to extract
with specialty grains procedures, which is what the original question
was about. The above was not meant to address decoction mashing.
However, I still wouldn't bother decoction mashing. Not because of any
concerns boiling the grains... I just don't think it provides any
significant benefit to make it worthwhile.
John.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 20:41:53
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net > wrote:
>
> However, I still wouldn't bother decoction mashing. Not because of any
> concerns boiling the grains... I just don't think it provides any
> significant benefit to make it worthwhile.
>
I guess I am making this point because it seems like there is no harm to the
fragile pilsner from boiling grain. Thus, I believe the relationship is
likely the wort gravity that the grains are being boiled in. So, the higher
the gravity, the less problem there is with tannin extraction?
That is my hypothesis anyway. So, perhaps Papazian isn't all wrong,
especially if the recipe is for a barleywine ;-) Maybe somebody brewing an
IPA doing a partial extract boil need not worry about it at all.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 21:03:33
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 20:41:53 GMT, <veldy71@yahoo.com > wrote:
> John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net> wrote:
>>
>> However, I still wouldn't bother decoction mashing. Not because of any
>> concerns boiling the grains... I just don't think it provides any
>> significant benefit to make it worthwhile.
>>
>
> I guess I am making this point because it seems like there is no harm to the
> fragile pilsner from boiling grain. Thus, I believe the relationship is
> likely the wort gravity that the grains are being boiled in. So, the higher
> the gravity, the less problem there is with tannin extraction?
Maybe, although the procedure I've seen before was to bring the grains to
a boil before adding the extract, so the gravity won't be higher for much
of that time. It's just the grains and water. Or, similarly, the pH has
something to do with it like I mentioned in another post. Another poster
also pointed out that decoctions are usually associated with lagers and the
lagering phase helps to reduce tannins.
IMO, boiling specialty grains and decoctions are really seperate topics,
although at first glance they appear similar.
> That is my hypothesis anyway. So, perhaps Papazian isn't all wrong,
> especially if the recipe is for a barleywine ;-) Maybe somebody brewing an
> IPA doing a partial extract boil need not worry about it at all.
I've had problems with it (the procedure was still fairly common when I
started brewing), and I've seen many posters on here who boiled their
grains and said that they had real astringency problems. IMO, it's
a bad procedure. I think Papazian was just echoing procedures which were
common at the time, but aren't in use anymore because we've learned alot
about homebrewing as a community in the 20 years since he wrote his book.
John.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 21:09:36
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <spam@shagg.net > wrote:
>
> IMO, boiling specialty grains and decoctions are really seperate topics,
> although at first glance they appear similar.
>
>> That is my hypothesis anyway. So, perhaps Papazian isn't all wrong,
>> especially if the recipe is for a barleywine ;-) Maybe somebody brewing an
>> IPA doing a partial extract boil need not worry about it at all.
>
> I've had problems with it (the procedure was still fairly common when I
> started brewing), and I've seen many posters on here who boiled their
> grains and said that they had real astringency problems. IMO, it's
> a bad procedure. I think Papazian was just echoing procedures which were
> common at the time, but aren't in use anymore because we've learned alot
> about homebrewing as a community in the 20 years since he wrote his book.
I agree with you entirely. I was just throwing a little confusion into it as
it helps illustrate what is actually going on rather than just learning rules
and asking why later ;-)
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 21:15:37
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 21:09:36 GMT, <veldy71@yahoo.com > wrote:
> I agree with you entirely. I was just throwing a little confusion into it as
> it helps illustrate what is actually going on rather than just learning rules
> and asking why later ;-)
Definitely. IMO, understanding the "Why" in addition to the "How" will
help make us better brewers.
John.
|
| | | | |
Date: 15 Dec 2006 09:19:30
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:
> Hmm ... what about decoction mashing?
That's what he said..there's no reason to boil the grain! ;)
-------- >Denny
--
Life begins at 60...1.060, that is.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 20:01:27
From: admin
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
splendidmike wrote:
> Lastly, are tannins the only "problem"
> associated with boiling?
Actually no, its unlikely but possible to extract starch from the
specialty grains. I see all too many steeping recipes that have
specialty grain that require mashing, and then they say Boil with the
hops . . . No as the temp rises you the starch granules swell and burst
releasing that starch into the liquor . . . Starch Haze.
Actually the swelling of the starch granules is the theory behind
Decoction mashing (And the Cereal mash in a Classic American Pilsner :)
). When you have steely 'undermodified' malt by boiling a portion of the
grain you allow the enzymes left in the mash tun access to the starch
trapped in the malt. I get ridiculously high extraction rates when I
cereal Mash, 96-97% and yet still have run off above 1.015
--
UK Homebrew List Manager
Want to join us? Send a message to subscribeme2 At uk Dash homebrew dot
info from the address you want subscribed OR Put USE
myaddress@myhost.com as the first line in the BODY of the email
NOTE Replace myaddress@myhost.com with the email address you want to
subscribe :)
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 20:45:57
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 20:01:27 GMT, <admin@not.here.ukhomebrew.info > wrote:
> splendidmike wrote:
>
>> Lastly, are tannins the only "problem"
>> associated with boiling?
>
> Actually no, its unlikely but possible to extract starch from the
> specialty grains. I see all too many steeping recipes that have
> specialty grain that require mashing, and then they say Boil with the
> hops . . . No as the temp rises you the starch granules swell and burst
> releasing that starch into the liquor . . . Starch Haze.
IMO, the problem there is that you shouldn't steep grains which require
mashing. Even without boiling you're going to get soluble starches
coming out of the grains.
John.
|
| |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 05:50:36
From: MarkMc
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
I'm an AG brewer, and never done extract+ grains etc.
But I am wondering, what's different about boiling them in this context
and in the context of a decoction? Ok, they're not pale grains, but I
can't really see their being much difference?
I suspect that the boiling advice stems from AG sparging advice - i.e
don't sparge too hot, which I think is possibly a non issue too, it's
the sparge pH that's the real concern IMO.
Cheers,
Mark
> You *can* boil anything. In the UK homebrewers have traditionally boiled
> specialist grains with extract. My point is that if the OP has already done
> so, don't worry about it. It's better not to boil the grains but it isn't
> the end of the world. There are quite a lot of tannins in hops anyway so
> boiling the grains isn't the disaster that some people make it out to be.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 17:17:07
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On 14 Dec 2006 05:50:36 -0800, <mmcnospam@yahoo.co.uk > wrote:
> I'm an AG brewer, and never done extract+ grains etc.
>
> But I am wondering, what's different about boiling them in this context
> and in the context of a decoction? Ok, they're not pale grains, but I
> can't really see their being much difference?
I suspect the pH. Tannin extraction is related to both temp and pH. The
pH of a lbs or two of steeping grains being boiled in a large volume of
water (couple gallons or more) will likely be relatively high. The pH of
the decoction is going to be a typical mash pH, which is relatively low.
> I suspect that the boiling advice stems from AG sparging advice - i.e
> don't sparge too hot, which I think is possibly a non issue too, it's
> the sparge pH that's the real concern IMO.
I believe the advice is related. I suspect that pH becomes more critical
as the temp increases. The rule of thumb about sparging too hot probably
has to do with the typical sparge pH range being safe below the
recommended temp (170F or so), but possibly problematic above it. Note,
I've never really seen any definitive statement of this, it's mostly a
personal theory at this point. IMO, it seems to make some sense though.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 16:17:30
From: Derric
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
> But I am wondering, what's different about boiling them in this context
> and in the context of a decoction? Ok, they're not pale grains, but I
> can't really see their being much difference?
Decoctions DO extract tannins... Tannins do age out somewhat...
which is why a decocted lager isn't astringent ... it ages out. I
believe this is mentioned in Noonan's lager book.
An ale that isn't going to do extensive aging would show the
astringency.
Derric
|
| | |
Date: 15 Dec 2006 09:40:31
From: Andy Davison
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On Thursday 14 December 2006 13:50, MarkMc wrote:
> But I am wondering, what's different about boiling them in this context
> and in the context of a decoction? Ok, they're not pale grains, but I
> can't really see their being much difference?
It's a pH thing. Dark grains will give an increase in tannins. If they are
there could just claim it's a West Country Ale based on something from
Arkell's :)
--
Andy Davison
andy [at] oiyou [dot] ukfsn [dot] org
|
| | | |
Date: 15 Dec 2006 14:04:13
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
Andy Davison <andydvsn@yahoo.co.uk > wrote:
> On Thursday 14 December 2006 13:50, MarkMc wrote:
>
>> But I am wondering, what's different about boiling them in this context
>> and in the context of a decoction? ?Ok, they're not pale grains, but I
>> can't really see their being much difference?
>
> It's a pH thing. Dark grains will give an increase in tannins. If they are
> there could just claim it's a West Country Ale based on something from
> Arkell's :)
pH is a suspected factor, but gravity has also been suspected. Consider the
fact that distilled water will leach minerals faster than less pure water, of
obvious reasons, and you can see that it is likely that tannins will leach
faster in water than in wort.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 18:26:13
From:
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
> > The book for beginners to intermediate brewers most recommended around
> > here (and I tend to concur) is "How to Brew" by John Palmer. There is a
> > complete online version at http://www.howtobrew.com.
>
> Yep, that's definitely the one I would recommend as well.
>
I had seen that online version but I take it that by the
3rd published edition there are many additions to
what is online? Batch sparging was recently mentioned
as an addition between the 2nd and the 3rd.
Don
|
| | |
Date: 15 Dec 2006 18:05:08
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On 14 Dec 2006 18:26:13 -0800, <dshesnicky@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
>
>> > The book for beginners to intermediate brewers most recommended around
>> > here (and I tend to concur) is "How to Brew" by John Palmer. There is a
>> > complete online version at http://www.howtobrew.com.
>>
>> Yep, that's definitely the one I would recommend as well.
>>
>
> I had seen that online version but I take it that by the
> 3rd published edition there are many additions to
> what is online? Batch sparging was recently mentioned
> as an addition between the 2nd and the 3rd.
Yeah, I think the free online version is basically the 1st edition? If
you want the latest additions you have to buy the book.
John.
|
| |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 12:37:36
From: splendidmike
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
> How much flavor contribution are you going to get from the specialty
> grains if all you do is boil them for 5 minutes? Usually the only extra
> time steeping requires is the 30 minutes that you let the grains steep for.
> However, that's done in order to get the flavors out.
Here's what I did (i.e. what the recipe called for):
Fill the brew pot with 1.5G cold water.
Immediately put in your grains (.5lb Crystal, .5lb roasted barley, .5lb
black patent)
The grains steep as you bring the water to a boil, which took me about
25 min with the top off if I remember correctly (don't have my notes
with me).
By the time the water started to boil, the wort was already quite dark.
I removed the grains at exactly 5 minutes thanks to my stopwatch and
muslin bag.
Then added extract, DME, hops, and gypsum as per any extract recipe.
(Charlie also called for a whopping 8tsp of gypsum, but that's a topic
for another post!)
So in this example I saved 1/2 hour and having to constantly check my
thermometer to hit and maintain 150 degrees. Like I said, not a huge
deal, but over a lifetime of brewing, think of all the extra beers
I'll make with my saved time!
Mike
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 20:54:57
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On 14 Dec 2006 12:37:36 -0800, <splendidmike@gmail.com > wrote:
>> How much flavor contribution are you going to get from the specialty
>> grains if all you do is boil them for 5 minutes? Usually the only extra
>> time steeping requires is the 30 minutes that you let the grains steep for.
>> However, that's done in order to get the flavors out.
>
> Here's what I did (i.e. what the recipe called for):
>
> Fill the brew pot with 1.5G cold water.
> Immediately put in your grains (.5lb Crystal, .5lb roasted barley, .5lb
> black patent)
> The grains steep as you bring the water to a boil, which took me about
> 25 min with the top off if I remember correctly (don't have my notes
> with me).
> By the time the water started to boil, the wort was already quite dark.
> I removed the grains at exactly 5 minutes thanks to my stopwatch and
> muslin bag.
> Then added extract, DME, hops, and gypsum as per any extract recipe.
> (Charlie also called for a whopping 8tsp of gypsum, but that's a topic
> for another post!)
>
> So in this example I saved 1/2 hour and having to constantly check my
> thermometer to hit and maintain 150 degrees.
You could have done the same procedure, but taken the grains out when
it hit 170F instead of leaving them in until 5 minutes after achieving
a boil. There's really no time difference there.
Another way to do it is to use a seperate smaller pot for the grains.
Steep the grains in a second pot by themselves (could be a saucepan or
something that you probably already have in your kitchen), and while that
is going on you dissolve the extract into your main pot and bring it up to
boil. If it starts boiling before the grains are done, that's OK. When the
steeping is done, you remove the grains and combine the two worts. This is
pretty much what I do. There's no time lost because you're doing them
in parallel.
There are probably lots of ways of steeping specialty grains without
boiling them that don't slow down your brew day.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 20:44:56
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
splendidmike <splendidmike@gmail.com > wrote:
> So in this example I saved 1/2 hour and having to constantly check my
> thermometer to hit and maintain 150 degrees. Like I said, not a huge
> deal, but over a lifetime of brewing, think of all the extra beers
> I'll make with my saved time!
I guess you will never be an all-grain brewer then ;-)
Really though, I suspect charlie's advice is way off if he has you steeping
grain in water that is boiling with absolutely no wort ... in my mind, that
will extract tanins. I am curious to see how that will turn out.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 11:58:51
From: splendidmike
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
I tried it Tuesday before I even posted this! (Shoot first, ask
questions later). It's bubbling away right now...I'll report back in a
few weeks.
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> splendidmike <splendidmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The only advantage is an increased convenience factor, which is not
> > insignificant to me. Not having to steep the grains in a grain/extract
> > recipe would save me 30min-1hour (including heating-up-the-water time),
> > which admittedly is not that big of a hassle if boiling the grains for
> > 5 min would have an adverse affect on the flavor. However, if there is
> > no discernable difference in taste, then I'd love to save that time. I
> > just wonder how many people have actually had their beer ruined from 5
> > minutes of boiling the grains. I'm wondering if this isn't a tiny bit
> > of dogma that has been blown out of proportion a little bit. Or maybe
> > it's just not as important for beers as big as the Dark Sleep Stout
> > (that is, maybe the difference would be apparent in a more delicate
> > pilsner). Or maybe former nuclear scientist Charlie Papazian really
> > just didn't know what he was doing. I'm not claiming that I know any
> > more than you guys, because I certainly don't, but if I can't taste a
> > difference, I don't see that it matters. I'll let yall know how it
> > turns out!
> >
>
> Why not just try it? I doubt it would actually ruin your beer; just perhaps
> reduce its quality somewhat. Give it a try and let us know how it turns out.
>
> --
> Thomas T. Veldhouse
> Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 11:45:59
From: splendidmike
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
The only advantage is an increased convenience factor, which is not
insignificant to me. Not having to steep the grains in a grain/extract
recipe would save me 30min-1hour (including heating-up-the-water time),
which admittedly is not that big of a hassle if boiling the grains for
5 min would have an adverse affect on the flavor. However, if there is
no discernable difference in taste, then I'd love to save that time. I
just wonder how many people have actually had their beer ruined from 5
minutes of boiling the grains. I'm wondering if this isn't a tiny bit
of dogma that has been blown out of proportion a little bit. Or maybe
it's just not as important for beers as big as the Dark Sleep Stout
(that is, maybe the difference would be apparent in a more delicate
pilsner). Or maybe former nuclear scientist Charlie Papazian really
just didn't know what he was doing. I'm not claiming that I know any
more than you guys, because I certainly don't, but if I can't taste a
difference, I don't see that it matters. I'll let yall know how it
turns out!
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> On 14 Dec 2006 10:04:04 -0800, <splendidmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What about my theory that possible "tannin contamination" would be
> > decreased when using a blow-off tube as opposed to letting the krausen
> > settle back down into the beer?
>
> Is there a tendency for tannins to collect in the krausen instead of in the
> rest of the beer during fermentation? Not that I've ever heard of. IMO,
> a blowoff wouldn't make a significant difference regarding astringency.
>
> > Could certain grains be more or less troublesome when boiled?
>
> Don't know, I've never seen any data that breaks it down by grain type.
> It's mostly the husk, so in theory the dehusked grains (or those without
> a husk) would be alright.
>
> > Lastly, are tannins the only "problem" associated with boiling?
>
> As far as I know.
>
> > Just playing devils advocate here.
>
> On the other hand, what is the advantage to boiling the grains? I don't
> think there is any. We used to do it a long time ago because we just
> didn't know any better. These days, I see no reason to intentionally
> boil the grains.
>
>
> John.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 21:02:31
From: T.J. Higgins
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
In article <1166125559.636093.148680@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >, splendidmike wrote:
>The only advantage is an increased convenience factor, which is not
>insignificant to me. Not having to steep the grains in a grain/extract
>recipe would save me 30min-1hour (including heating-up-the-water time),
>which admittedly is not that big of a hassle if boiling the grains for
>5 min would have an adverse affect on the flavor. However, if there is
>no discernable difference in taste, then I'd love to save that time.
Another option is to steep overnight at room temperature. Put your
specialty grains in a container of warm tap water the night before you
brew. You'll save the 30-60min steeping time on brew day, and you'll
have no tannin worries. You'll still get some starch haze, though.
--
TJH
tjhiggin.at.hiwaay.dot.net
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 20:07:54
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On 14 Dec 2006 11:45:59 -0800, <splendidmike@gmail.com > wrote:
> The only advantage is an increased convenience factor, which is not
> insignificant to me. Not having to steep the grains in a grain/extract
> recipe would save me 30min-1hour (including heating-up-the-water time),
> which admittedly is not that big of a hassle if boiling the grains for
> 5 min would have an adverse affect on the flavor.
How much flavor contribution are you going to get from the specialty
grains if all you do is boil them for 5 minutes? Usually the only extra
time steeping requires is the 30 minutes that you let the grains steep for.
However, that's done in order to get the flavors out.
After that, removing the grains and boiling, or just boiling with everything
still in there doesn't seem like any significant time difference to me. I'm
not sure where you see the time savings is coming from?
> but if I can't taste a difference, I don't see that it matters.
If you can't taste a difference, than it doesn't matter. All that's
important is what tastes good to you.
> I'll let yall know how it turns out!
Look for astringency in the final beer, that's how it'll most likely
show up.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Dec 2006 19:47:58
From: Thomas T. Veldhouse
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
splendidmike <splendidmike@gmail.com > wrote:
> The only advantage is an increased convenience factor, which is not
> insignificant to me. Not having to steep the grains in a grain/extract
> recipe would save me 30min-1hour (including heating-up-the-water time),
> which admittedly is not that big of a hassle if boiling the grains for
> 5 min would have an adverse affect on the flavor. However, if there is
> no discernable difference in taste, then I'd love to save that time. I
> just wonder how many people have actually had their beer ruined from 5
> minutes of boiling the grains. I'm wondering if this isn't a tiny bit
> of dogma that has been blown out of proportion a little bit. Or maybe
> it's just not as important for beers as big as the Dark Sleep Stout
> (that is, maybe the difference would be apparent in a more delicate
> pilsner). Or maybe former nuclear scientist Charlie Papazian really
> just didn't know what he was doing. I'm not claiming that I know any
> more than you guys, because I certainly don't, but if I can't taste a
> difference, I don't see that it matters. I'll let yall know how it
> turns out!
>
Why not just try it? I doubt it would actually ruin your beer; just perhaps
reduce its quality somewhat. Give it a try and let us know how it turns out.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
|
| |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 14:44:22
From: splendidmike
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
Just siphoned the Dark Sleep Stout into a secondary fermenter, and I am
extremely happy with it so far. The half-baked tasted just fine to me -
no out of place astringency. If anything, it might be a little too
sweet for some palates, but I like a hefty malt profile. I think I
might have to go with Charlie on this recipe, even down to the 8tsp of
gypsum. I do, however, like the idea of letting the grains steep while
coming to boil and then removing them at 170 degrees...seems safe and
convenient.
Thanks for the lively input!
Mike
|
| | |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 16:07:53
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
On 16 Dec 2006 14:44:22 -0800, <splendidmike@gmail.com > wrote:
> might have to go with Charlie on this recipe, even down to the 8tsp of
> gypsum.
How does he know how much gypsum you need without having any idea what
your local water is like? He must be psychic!
John.
|
| |
Date: 18 Dec 2006 12:31:22
From: splendidmike
Subject: Re: boiling grains ala Papazian?
|
it's true! he knew that i had very soft water!
m
John 'Shaggy' Kolesar wrote:
> On 16 Dec 2006 14:44:22 -0800, <splendidmike@gmail.com> wrote:
> > might have to go with Charlie on this recipe, even down to the 8tsp of
> > gypsum.
>
> How does he know how much gypsum you need without having any idea what
> your local water is like? He must be psychic!
>
>
> John.
|
|
