Joined: 12 Dec 2010 Posts: 10205 Location: Ottawa, Canada
Drinking: German Lager, Electric Hop Candy Jr, Scottish 70/-, Cali Common, Maibock, Helles, Russian Imperial Stout, Black Butte Porter
Working on: Weizen
Link Posted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 5:18 pm Post subject:
Hi Aaron,
stickyfinger wrote:
Nice write up! You might try just adding the gelatin to the primary so you don't have to rack to secondary. It works fine in my experience.
Sure - that'll work too. In a brite tank (my 5 gallon glass carboys) there will be less yeast. If someone wants to save the yeast for the next batch and is using buckets or carboys then I wouldn't recommend adding gelatine to the primary however.
Quote:
Also, do you routinely use plastic buckets to ferment?
Per my article, there's no "best" fermenter. (I get asked this all the time). People should not blindly use what I use. They should use what works best for their process, how they like to brew. This includes things like how they like to (if they like to) harvest yeast.
Plastic buckets (I find for me) are the easiest to clean. They are also inexpensive and sturdy. They do not provide a good oxygen barrier for long term storage, and easily scratched and therefore more difficult to sanitize.
For cleaning I use my spray air and spin them in the sink. I find it quick/easy and don't worry about banging things around.
I don't care about the good oxygen barrier issue as I only ferment in them. As soon as the yeast is 100% done (often including some cleanup time at the end) I rack out of the bucket into glass. During fermentation CO2 is being expelled so there's always outgassing and O2 can't affect your beer. Some commercial breweries do completely open vessel fermentation and this works for the same reason.
Quote:
Are the stories of infections all myth?
You can get an infection with any sort of fermentation vessel if you're not careful about sanitation.
If your cut deep grooves or have deep scratches in your bucket then this could possibly be an issue. Because of this plastic buckets can be harder to keep sanitary than something that doesn't scrach as easily (like stainless or glass).
Clean your cold side equipment (like buckets) immediately after use, practice good sanitation, and most importantly: Always pitch lots of healthy yeast.
One thing that people forget is that there's always "something" nasty in the air trying to get into your beer, wanting to infect it, wanting to spoil it. It's simply a race between that small amount of airborne stuff and the large amount of healthy yeast - which will get a foothold first?
Nobody brews in sterile conditions. The moment your wort exits your chiller hose it hits the air where thousands of small microbes/bacteria/etc are floating around in the air and get in contact with your wort. They start working right away on your beer, trying to infect it, trying to turn it sour. There's no avoiding this. This trick is to overpower these nasties with 1000x more healthy yeast so that it takes over and we control what happens to the wort.
I've been using buckets since the late 1980's and some of the ones I have are 20+ years old.
Joined: 04 May 2014 Posts: 172 Location: hudson valley, NY
Link Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:37 pm Post subject:
The last time I brewed a German Pils, my brewing liquor had Ca=65, Cl=34, SO4=102. I really liked the crispness that it gave to the beer. I see that it is similar to your profile, except that your chloride is a bit higher. In addition, I found that most of my friends enjoy this beer most when I use domestic Pils malt rather than German Pils malt! Most of them find the stronger flavor of the German Pils malt to be too much! I can see what they mean to an extent. I like the malty flavor, but I also enjoy this with the less malty flavor of domestic Pils malt.
Joined: 04 May 2014 Posts: 172 Location: hudson valley, NY
Link Posted: Tue May 03, 2016 3:21 am Post subject:
I'm drinking down a nice glass of German Pils right now, brewed on my E-HERMS. It tastes really nice, but the head retention is pretty bad I'd say. It has a decent head at first but then quickly dissipates. I'm wondering if I shouldn't add a dextrin malt at maybe 5% from now on? Also, Kal, is there a reason you don't use W-34/70 on this? I use that yeast on all of my lagers, and they always turn out fantastic. And, it's so easy to get a huge pitch of yeast by rehydrating more dry yeast!
Joined: 12 Dec 2010 Posts: 10205 Location: Ottawa, Canada
Drinking: German Lager, Electric Hop Candy Jr, Scottish 70/-, Cali Common, Maibock, Helles, Russian Imperial Stout, Black Butte Porter
Working on: Weizen
Link Posted: Tue May 03, 2016 1:45 pm Post subject:
stickyfinger wrote:
I'm drinking down a nice glass of German Pils right now, brewed on my E-HERMS. It tastes really nice, but the head retention is pretty bad I'd say. It has a decent head at first but then quickly dissipates. I'm wondering if I shouldn't add a dextrin malt at maybe 5% from now on?
I would go to the source and fix the issue. Adding something like dextrin malt is a crutch.
Quote:
Also, Kal, is there a reason you don't use W-34/70 on this?
You could certainly use W-34/70 instead of WLP-830. I haven't done any direct comparisons.
Joined: 04 May 2014 Posts: 172 Location: hudson valley, NY
Link Posted: Tue May 03, 2016 1:53 pm Post subject:
kal wrote:
stickyfinger wrote:
I'm drinking down a nice glass of German Pils right now, brewed on my E-HERMS. It tastes really nice, but the head retention is pretty bad I'd say. It has a decent head at first but then quickly dissipates. I'm wondering if I shouldn't add a dextrin malt at maybe 5% from now on?
I would go to the source and fix the issue. Adding something like dextrin malt is a crutch.
Quote:
Also, Kal, is there a reason you don't use W-34/70 on this?
You could certainly use W-34/70 instead of WLP-830. I haven't done any direct comparisons.
Kal
I don't see dextrin malt as a "crutch." It's just a way to boost head retention and maybe provides a touch of mouthfeel. It's a lot easier than trying to modify any other number of variables in the brewing process to increase head retention. For example, i could do a lower temperature rest to get more protein modification to increase head retention, but that takes more time.
Joined: 12 Dec 2010 Posts: 10205 Location: Ottawa, Canada
Drinking: German Lager, Electric Hop Candy Jr, Scottish 70/-, Cali Common, Maibock, Helles, Russian Imperial Stout, Black Butte Porter
Working on: Weizen
Link Posted: Tue May 03, 2016 2:09 pm Post subject:
stickyfinger wrote:
I don't see dextrin malt as a "crutch." It's just a way to boost head retention and maybe provides a touch of mouthfeel.
Mouthfeel sure, but if one brewer's adding dextrin malt like Carapils/Carafoam it to fix head retention issues they're having while others don't find the need then I'd definitely call it a bandaid fix or crutch as it really shouldn't be needed for head retention. Check out some of the videos at the end of the recipe for the thick persistent head you can get (I only use 100% pils malt).
I would be primarily concerned that it may hurt the dryness/crispness of the beer which to me is more critical than head retention (IMHO). Dextrin malts add unfermentable sugars to beer which increase sweetness (raise final gravity). It really needs to attenuate low. To quote Brewing Classic Styles:
"The key to making a great German-style Pilsener is ensuring that the beer attenuates enough to make a crisp, dry beer. If there is too much residual malt sweetness, it is going to be too sweet and heavy for a good representation of the style. It is important to avoid crystal malts or any other speciality grain that adds non-fermentable sugars to the beer, which will work against the desired crisp, dry results."
Joined: 04 May 2014 Posts: 172 Location: hudson valley, NY
Link Posted: Tue May 03, 2016 2:39 pm Post subject:
kal wrote:
Mouthfeel sure, but if one brewer's adding dextrin malt like Carapils/Carafoam it to fix head retention issues they're having while others don't find the need then I'd definitely call it a bandaid fix or crutch as it really shouldn't be needed for head retention.
I guess it depends on a lot of factors and carapils could be a way to level the playing field. Sometimes different batches of malt are better or worse at providing head retention proteins as well. Who knows.
kal wrote:
I would be primarily concerned that it may hurt the dryness/crispness of the beer which to me is more critical than head retention (IMHO). Dextrin malts add unfermentable sugars to beer which increase sweetness (raise final gravity). It really needs to attenuate low.
You might run into a fuller mouthfeel, but the sweetness is a non-issue. I haven't really found carapils at 5% to give much of a mouthfeel though, mostly just foam. I have tried going over 10% carapils in session IPAs, and it's not like they turned into this super thick beer. I'm not even sure it impacted the mouthfeel that much. I was using pretty high gypsum in those beers though, which I now realize was a mistake for session IPAs, but my point is that I wouldn't be afraid of 5% carapils. I doubt anyone would even know it was in there.
As long as the yeast ferment all of the simple sugars, it won't be sweet. I mashed this last Pils I did at 165F, and it certainly is not sweet. I just do it so that I can put in more malt but still get the same ABV on my beers. I am wondering if I might lose some head retention by mashing so high though. I'll have to see if that seems to be a re-occurring theme. I haven't made a Pils for several years, so I don't have much to compare it with.
Link Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 12:02 am Post subject:
I made this recipe some 3 months ago. Two 5gal kegs I filled. The first keg I opened one month after lagering and conditioning, the hops was off, I must say, I did not like the flavour. Now, 3 months after I opened the second keg and the taste is absolutely wonderfull. It changed a lot. Now I am sure I will make another batch.
Joined: 12 Dec 2010 Posts: 10205 Location: Ottawa, Canada
Drinking: German Lager, Electric Hop Candy Jr, Scottish 70/-, Cali Common, Maibock, Helles, Russian Imperial Stout, Black Butte Porter
Working on: Weizen
Link Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:15 pm Post subject:
For greater attenuation.
Generally speaking, a thicker mash (less water) produces a beer that is fuller/sweeter as it creates more unfermentable sugars while a thinner mash (more water) produces a thinner/dryer beer as it creates more fermentable sugars.
While most of the starch to sugar conversion will take place in the first 30-60 minutes, a longer mash maximizes conversion as the mash temperature is low (conversion takes longer at lower temperatures). Don't be afraid to go to even 3 hours on this beer. You want it dry.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
Log in
Register
User Control Panel
Private Messages
Club Memberships
Search
Memberlist
Photo Albums
Forum FAQ
Joined: 12 Dec 2010
Link
