If beta glucans in oats behave as they do with rye (and I don’t see any reason why they wouldn’t), then they definitely make it out of the mash, but mostly denature after that at some point before making it into the glass. I’ve lautered thick, syrupy rye mashes that I couldn’t wait to taste, which ended up not nearly as full-bodied in the end.
It might be that beta glucans play a role, but if they did, I would expect using higher levels of oats would give a greater effect, and I have not seen that.
Sounds like you are chasing after this like I am about the hop flavor of pro IPAs… :cheers:
Good point about rye.
Some other info I think is relevant to this matter is that using unmalted grains will drop the pH of the mash and I am unsure as to whether the popular water/mash spreadsheets account for this. Also, it is quite possible SS is not just adding oatmeal to the mash like us homebrewers… They’re probably using steel cut and not flaked or rolled and are incorporating a separate process for them, IE a cereal mash. Maybe they conduct a cereal mash in a way it preserves more beta glucans? From what I recall a cereal mash only mashes for like 15 minutes and boiling for the same. Or, maybe there is no cereal mash at all and the oats are just boiled, lautered, and added to BOIL. After all, we are only talking 5-10% of the grain bill and I cannot imagine such a small amount of starch ruining a nearly black beer.
Actually, I had given up on it, but this thread revived it for me. It is actually my wife’s obsession; every time I brew a stout, her feedback is “not creamy enough”. So I’ve been trying to crack this one for her. After all, I’d like her to be happy with my brewing, that allows me to brew more.
Actually, I had given up on it, but this thread revived it for me. It is actually my wife’s obsession; every time I brew a stout, her feedback is “not creamy enough”. So I’ve been trying to crack this one for her. After all, I’d like her to be happy with my brewing, that allows me to brew more.[/quote]
What temp are you mashing at?
Generally in the 153-156 range when trying for sweet stouts, though looking back mash temp seems to have had less impact then I would have expected. Last stout I brewed was a dry stout, mashed at 150, and it had just as much body as my attempts at sweet.
[quote=“rebuiltcellars”]Generally in the 153-156 range when trying for sweet stouts, though looking back mash temp seems to have had less impact then I would have expected. Last stout I brewed was a dry stout, mashed at 150, and it had just as much body as my attempts at sweet.[/quot
For stouts, low temp mashes are supposed to accentuate the dryness of the roasted grains, where high mash temps are supposed to bring out more body. I think your 153-156 practice seems right on the money for a sweet stout. Mashing at 150 is still hitting above the optimal range for beta amylase enzymes, so I’m not surprised you’d still get some good body at that temp. Thanks. I was just curious.
149-150F has been shown by at least a couple researchers to produce the most fermentable wort, but these things vary with your system and individual techniques.
Don’t be afraid to go higher than 156F if you want a full body. Sierra Nevada likes to mash up around 157F. I tried 158F on a Pale Ale, once, for kicks, and thought it was interesting but had too much body for that style and the moderate bitterness I used. For a really full body, think of trying 158-162F.
Also, be careful of high carbonation levels that can make beer seem thin.
Here’s a weird data point. FG listed in the Stout book for SSOS is 1.01376. Kinda low if you ask me.
Consider there’s a chance temps will drop low enough into beta during lautering and denature all them dextrins. I am refining my process to get my runnings quickly into the kettle turned on low to keep above beta. With shortening mash time to 30 minutes and the above I shaved an hour off my brew day. Game changer for me.
Also, I think the yeast could be a factor. In my IPAs with 1056 I struggle with body and I have done 10% crystal and mashed at 160F and had dry beer. I think chico is a hungry dude and can eat dextrins. Maybe yorkshire is less aggressive?
[quote=“Slothrob”]149-150F has been shown by at least a couple researchers to produce the most fermentable wort, but these things vary with your system and individual techniques.
Don’t be afraid to go higher than 156F if you want a full body. Sierra Nevada likes to mash up around 157F. I tried 158F on a Pale Ale, once, for kicks, and thought it was interesting but had too much body for that style and the moderate bitterness I used. For a really full body, think of trying 158-162F.
Also, be careful of high carbonation levels that can make beer seem thin.[/quote]
which researchers? Greg Doss at Wyeast found that it was 153.
[quote=“Denny”][quote=“Slothrob”]149-150F has been shown by at least a couple researchers to produce the most fermentable wort, but these things vary with your system and individual techniques.
Don’t be afraid to go higher than 156F if you want a full body. Sierra Nevada likes to mash up around 157F. I tried 158F on a Pale Ale, once, for kicks, and thought it was interesting but had too much body for that style and the moderate bitterness I used. For a really full body, think of trying 158-162F.[/quote]
which researchers? Greg Doss at Wyeast found that it was 153.
SN mashes at 158 IIRC and ferments at 68.[/quote]
Narziss and Troester are two that found optimal fermentability around 149-150F.
[quote=“Slothrob”][quote=“Denny”][quote=“Slothrob”]149-150F has been shown by at least a couple researchers to produce the most fermentable wort, but these things vary with your system and individual techniques.
Don’t be afraid to go higher than 156F if you want a full body. Sierra Nevada likes to mash up around 157F. I tried 158F on a Pale Ale, once, for kicks, and thought it was interesting but had too much body for that style and the moderate bitterness I used. For a really full body, think of trying 158-162F.[/quote]
which researchers? Greg Doss at Wyeast found that it was 153.
SN mashes at 158 IIRC and ferments at 68.[/quote]
Narziss and Troester are two that found optimal fermentability around 149-150F.[/quote]
I’ve never heard that that temp was ideal for optimal fermentability. I’ve heard that it offers the best balance of alpha and beta amylase activity, but nothing about fermentability.
[quote=“deliusism1”][quote=“Slothrob”]
Narziss and Troester are two that found optimal fermentability around 149-150F.[/quote]
I’ve never heard that that temp was ideal for optimal fermentability. I’ve heard that it offers the best balance of alpha and beta amylase activity, but nothing about fermentability.[/quote]
Narziss found 149F, Troester appears to have found 150F as optimal for fermentability. Briggs cites 145F, but makes a point of saying that that value varies with technique. In Beer: A Quality Perspective Bamforth cites 65C (149F) as the point above which fermentability decreases.
It’s quite possible that the difference between these observations and Greg Doss’s observation is due to malt or technique differences or even the particular temperatures tested in a given experiment.
[quote=“Denny”][quote=“Slothrob”]
Narziss and Troester are two that found optimal fermentability around 149-150F.[/quote]
Greg examined different yeast strains at different temps using a standard wort. If you’re an AHA member I can send you a link to his study.[/quote]
I’d certainly be interested to take a look. It doesn’t seem to correlate to what I see on my system, though.
Seems like these sort of debates never include a discussion about mash pH. I think mash pH is more critical than mash temps in determining fermentability. To me, it seems like you need to ensure both pH AND temp are in proper zone to achieve what you want.
My experience is that your pH has to be WAY off to have an effect. Take a look at this chart…the pH ranges fro beta and alpha action are pretty close and even overlap.
