kombat
Well-Known Member
You missed the part (although it's in your quote) where he "Pulled the grain bag out" (he was doing BIAB). After that, the pot ONLY contained wort - no more grain/mash.
Taking time efficiency to ridiculous extremes 79 minute brew
- Thread starter Owly055
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
- Status
You missed the part (although it's in your quote) where he "Pulled the grain bag out" (he was doing BIAB). After that, the pot ONLY contained wort - no more grain/mash.
Ah! I thought we were talking about brewing, in a brewing forum, and didn't think I needed to have the word explained to me in a non-brewing sense.
By that definition, ALL brewing is always a decoction.
Anyway, sorry I got sucked into this. Carry on!
stpug
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,808
- Reaction score
- 767
I think Kai Troester would be reputable source on decoction mashing information. In his video here (https://youtu.be/6VcZRVw2k_o?t=266), he clearly states and demonstates how you can simply pull wort via lauter to be decocted for the mashout decoction without need to pull over any grain. Additionally, he states that there is no need to hold a conversion rest (5:25).
Again, I do not think the usage of hops in the decoction excluded it from being a "decoction".
...and, yes, I understand we're splitting hairs here
stpug
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,808
- Reaction score
- 767
See my post above. Lautered wort can be used for decoction.
kombat
Well-Known Member
Nope, that's not what you said. Here it is again:
I think it's quite a stretch to claim that "lautered wort" is "a subset of the mash." The term "subset of the mash" clearly implies a mix of grain and wort.
Also, he never "returned it to the main mash." He returned it to the rest of the wort. By this time, the "mash" was contained in a grain bag that had been removed 20 minutes earlier.
kombat
Well-Known Member
stpug, I'm not picking on you, I'm just trying to inject a little clarity into a thread where Owly's description could be better, and he's misusing well-established terms.
stpug
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,808
- Reaction score
- 767
I consider the wort a "subset of the mash" (Gavin's phrase). We differ on this point. That's okay.
You're correct. He returned the decoction to the lautered wort.
What was in the grain bad was not mash; it was spent grains
Decoction has a specific meaning in brewing. If you take a standard phrase or term, and use it for something else, it will cause confusion.
You will have fewer people interested in your posts and more arguments when you use terms in non-standard ways. If you instead use a term like hop steep or hop tea, or even use more words to describe your process, you may have less confusion.
You will have fewer people interested in your posts and more arguments when you use terms in non-standard ways. If you instead use a term like hop steep or hop tea, or even use more words to describe your process, you may have less confusion.
stpug
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2012
- Messages
- 3,808
- Reaction score
- 767
No worries. While I understand that owly's decoction could have been performed a little cleaner, to me, it was still a decoction. Otherwise, we'll need to contact Kai also to let him know that he's wrong in his video.
What he (Kai) is illustrating there is simply that the decoction to mash-out should be a thin decoction to minimize the risk of extracted starches in the last decoction remaining in the final wort.
It is simple and without disadvantage to draw wort from the mash tun at this point. If it contains grain no problem. This boiled thin mash/runnings are then returned to the main mash.
What Kai does not do nor describe as a decoction is to lauter and then boil wort and term it a decoction. The two methods, his and what the OP is descibing as a decoction are not comparable in the least.
Terminology and words are important in a written forum like HBT. Having our own unique definition of things is not helpful to future readers who may not be well versed in brewing terminology.
Incorrect terms add confusion and misinformation. I believe it's useful if forum members point these things out. It helps us all to learn collectively.
OP
OP
Owly055
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2014
- Messages
- 3,008
- Reaction score
- 686
Arguments about linguistics here are pointless, we will reach our own conclusions based on our own inclinations.
I didn't start this thread to start an argument, though I knew it would get the old ladies in a tizzy, and the usual suspects have not disappointed with the expected comments My goal really was to share a methodology I am experimenting with that incorporates non-original ideas and methods to ultimately I hope achieve a good all grain beer brewed in a sub one hour brew session. I unfortunately cannot take credit for anything original here. RM/MN originally encouraged me to experiment with extremely short mash times. Squaremile's no boil thread inspired me to try no boil........ The wort & hops decoction was my own inspiration, but it someone else thought of it first, as I found googling it, though he did not attach the term "hop decoction" to the procedure as I did his proposed procedure was identical to mine. This was also a no boil thread (not here), and he has not yet tried the procedure.
I look forward to the day I walk into the local microbrewery, where the owner is a friend, and hand him a bottle of one hour all grain no chill ale. Not to mention the LHBS.
Everybody knows my forte is operating completely outside the box.
H.W.
I didn't start this thread to start an argument, though I knew it would get the old ladies in a tizzy, and the usual suspects have not disappointed with the expected comments My goal really was to share a methodology I am experimenting with that incorporates non-original ideas and methods to ultimately I hope achieve a good all grain beer brewed in a sub one hour brew session. I unfortunately cannot take credit for anything original here. RM/MN originally encouraged me to experiment with extremely short mash times. Squaremile's no boil thread inspired me to try no boil........ The wort & hops decoction was my own inspiration, but it someone else thought of it first, as I found googling it, though he did not attach the term "hop decoction" to the procedure as I did his proposed procedure was identical to mine. This was also a no boil thread (not here), and he has not yet tried the procedure.
I look forward to the day I walk into the local microbrewery, where the owner is a friend, and hand him a bottle of one hour all grain no chill ale. Not to mention the LHBS.
Everybody knows my forte is operating completely outside the box.
H.W.
Psylocide
Ippons for Days
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2014
- Messages
- 9,600
- Reaction score
- 5,991
Love that one.
jonny24
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2015
- Messages
- 278
- Reaction score
- 129
Whoooolllle lotta arguing over some terminology. I think by now we get what he did and what for, I don't think it really matters what we call it. Maybe in ten years we'll all be discussing our hop decoction methods.
In my mind, while we "understand" decoction to mean "removing and heating some of the mash and putting it back", that is ONLY taken from the context, or a brewing discussion, not the literal definition of decoction. From what that definition in green says, what he did was] a decoction. AND it ALMOST fits the usual brewing definition, only sans grain and with hops. Really, it fits 1.5 definitions.
Hope the beer turns out great owly!
In my mind, while we "understand" decoction to mean "removing and heating some of the mash and putting it back", that is ONLY taken from the context, or a brewing discussion, not the literal definition of decoction. From what that definition in green says, what he did was] a decoction. AND it ALMOST fits the usual brewing definition, only sans grain and with hops. Really, it fits 1.5 definitions.
Hope the beer turns out great owly!
TexasDroughtBrewery
Well-Known Member
Sub, I want to see who wins this bet... Kombat or Owl.
Are you testing to see if conversion is complete? Or is the 30 minutes experiential in nature?
Auger
Well-Known Member
I'm going to refrain from editorializing on the process, because to each their own, and if it works, more power to you. However, being an active forum member here and across a good deal of others, where I've learned a lot, I have ot take issue with this?
A major part of forum participation is explaining how and why we try new things, and how it works, so people can learn from it. If you can't express yourself in an accurate manner through a text-based environment, really, THAT is what is kind of pointless. If I post a recipe and it calls for 5 oz of dandelions and share it, and someone brews with me and says "hey those aren't dandelions, they're hops" and I say "well I call them dandelions, let's not argue linguistics, its a pointless discussion", its only pointless because I've made the whole communication so, due to my own indifference to using widely accepted language to communicate thoughts and processes.
A major part of forum participation is explaining how and why we try new things, and how it works, so people can learn from it. If you can't express yourself in an accurate manner through a text-based environment, really, THAT is what is kind of pointless. If I post a recipe and it calls for 5 oz of dandelions and share it, and someone brews with me and says "hey those aren't dandelions, they're hops" and I say "well I call them dandelions, let's not argue linguistics, its a pointless discussion", its only pointless because I've made the whole communication so, due to my own indifference to using widely accepted language to communicate thoughts and processes.
broadbill
Well-Known Member
whoa, put your sciencey questions back in your holster boy...we got us a discussion about the definition of decoction that needs rectifin'...
Owly I completely respect trying something new and thinking outside the box. I truly hope you produce a great beer but I am concerned for Diacetyl in this beer. I have tried a no-chill beer with a similar method to yours (chill method only, not brewing method) and ended up with diacetyl. My theory is leaving it chill in the pot instead of forcing out the oxygen as per traditional no chill was my culprit. I am still pretty much a newbie and a scientist I am not, but that's my $.02
the brulosophy dudes did this a couple months ago
http://brulosophy.com/2015/11/12/short-shoddy-my-1-hour-all-grain-brew-day/
http://brulosophy.com/2015/11/12/short-shoddy-my-1-hour-all-grain-brew-day/
jmcquesten
Well-Known Member
Next will be no chill, no boil, no fermentation? You could just dump a bunch of coors light into a bottling bucket, bottle it up, and be drinking it that night.
broadbill
Well-Known Member
Yes, that is exactly where this is heading next...we will all be remarking about the "good ol' days" when we actually added yeast to wort.
Wait, this beer seems familiar... or do I just have major deja vu?
Based on that thread, it sounds like it could end up tasting sour either way things go since you never reached a conclusion for that other one before it was gone
agrazela
Well-Known Member
Well actually...
Not really, that wort was boiled 15min, not no-boiled. And it was consumed that very same night; so even of it had been no-boil, there was no time to see if it would sour unwantedly.
(And, although very much beside the point, there was no decoction, "hop-decoction," "side-boil," or whatever the hell we want to call it.
)I'm very interested to see how this goes. I'm already BIAB and no-chill (besides dunking the kettle in the utility sink of cold water--I call that "semi-chill" if that's OK with y'all), and I think I make pretty durned good brew without having invested mucho dinero in fancy mashing and chilling equipment. My last batch was an all post-boil hop addition pale (with a short boil, and just as a test of no-boiling hops, and that inspired by one of Owly's other posts), and it is very, very nice.
I think it would be fantastic if "no-boil" turns out to mean people can kick out 5gal AG (or perhaps PM) batches just using any old stovetop, and don't necessarily have to invest in big burners and propane (or 240v electric systems).
I agree that this could be a revolution as big as BIAB or no-chill. So let's get off Owly's decoction and wait and see if this thing spoils!
madcowbrewing
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2012
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 42
Well actually.......the OP did boil his for 15 minutes also. Just not the entire batch to cut time.
I applaud him in his quest. While I may never do this, for many reasons, there is sometimes a need for others to cut there time down to stay in this wonderful hobby we all have.
MrFancyPlants
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2015
- Messages
- 703
- Reaction score
- 136
I'd call it a hopdidoption. I also applaud your urge to experiment and hope the beer turns out well and good.
OP
OP
Owly055
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2014
- Messages
- 3,008
- Reaction score
- 686
I always test for conversion with short mashes. I've mashed all the way down to 10 minutes and gotten complete conversion with a fine grist, though with lower fermentability resulting in higher FG and more body, and about 1/2% lower abv if I recall correctly.
H.W.
Not sure if people are more upset at Owly for giving a defined brewing term a new meaning or breaking down preconceptions about what it means to "brew" a beer. I too am a fan of the raw ale/no-boil method, having read quite a bit about it and have two planned for upcoming brew days. This is also not a new method, having quite a bit of history behind it, so I really dig the historical aspect.
Definitely applaud the experimental spirit, and I look forward to hearing how it turns out!
Definitely applaud the experimental spirit, and I look forward to hearing how it turns out!
Fun experiment. I hope it works out, and hope you keep us posted either way!
OP
OP
Owly055
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2014
- Messages
- 3,008
- Reaction score
- 686
This brew took off like gangbusters, and is fermenting vigorously. The pitch was a very heavy top crop pitch from a previous brew, and fermentation was evident within a couple of hours. Fermentation is at the "boiling stage" which those who ferment in clear fermenters will understand. What is different is that the trub layer appears to be heavier material and very little of it is actually up in circulation compared to a typical ferment where there is no visible layer, just a muddy boiling mass of wort and trub. I'm concerned about weather it will pack down in a solid compacted layer as it should post fermentation. I just top cropped yeast from it a few minutes ago. Flavor of the wort is good, and clarity of the upper zone when I poured it into the fermenter was excellent, indicating that if nothing else, the whirlfloc I put in with the hop decoction did it's job. (Oops I used that word again ;-)
H.W.
H.W.
There have been times in various hobbies that I have tried something new and failed miserably at meeting my pre-experiment hopes/expectations.
I've never considered it wasted time. I learned something, discovered what doesn't work, and as a result I'm more educated about whatever it is I was testing.
madscientist451
Well-Known Member
I like this experiment and the idea of trying to do things in an unconventional manner. I also like the way this post has stirred up the cyber-pot.
My question to the OP: Why try to raise the temperature of the main pot of wort with the smaller amount of wort boiled with hops? Couldn't you have just put the main pot on the stove and raised its temperature while you were boiling the smaller amount? When the main pot reached 165-170, you could just shut it down, then combine the two pots later and set aside to chill overnight? I'm thinking doing what I suggest would shave a few minutes off your brew time?
FROM THE ORIGINAL POST:
"The decoction went back into the wort, which raised the wort only to about 155 again, so I put the total back on the stove top and raised the temp to 165 (with the whirlpool hops in it)."
Thanks again for posting.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Owly055
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2014
- Messages
- 3,008
- Reaction score
- 686
I like this experiment and the idea of trying to do things in an unconventional manner. I also like the way this post has stirred up the cyber-pot.
My question to the OP: Why try to raise the temperature of the main pot of wort with the smaller amount of wort boiled with hops? Couldn't you have just put the main pot on the stove and raised its temperature while you were boiling the smaller amount? When the main pot reached 165-170, you could just shut it down, then combine the two pots later and set aside to chill overnight? I'm thinking doing what I suggest would shave a few minutes off your brew time?
FROM THE ORIGINAL POST:
"The decoction went back into the wort, which raised the wort only to about 155 again, so I put the total back on the stove top and raised the temp to 165 (with the whirlpool hops in it)."
Thanks again for posting.
What you suggest is exactly what I intend to do in my next no boil brew. Using a hot plate, I will raise the temp of the main body of wort slowly to about 160 while the decoction is boiling (Oops... there is that forbidden word again ;-). My decoction will be smaller next time due to the use of pellet hops instead of leaf hops, and may be shorter as I intend to use a high alpha hop. I haven't formulated the recipe yet, but it will incorporate Magnum, Summit, Nugget, or Polaris, along with a flavor / aroma hop, so I may boil the decoction for somewhere in 5 minute range instead of 15. Reducing the decoction boil time will result in a what amounts to a zero time decoction for practical purposes, as the bag will be draining, etc and the main wort heating while this is going on. Combine this with a 10 minute inline mash, which actually takes about 15 minutes including the time to heat the mash to conversion temp, and I expect to EASILY take the all grain brew to significantly under one hour including clean up, crushing grain and pitching yeast. The key is using AG300 in the fermenter.
This is all at least 2 weeks off,, and I haven't formulated the recipe yet, but I'm leaning toward using Nugget and Mosaic, which I think would pair nicely with the spicy Nugget balancing out the complex fruity Mosaic. Here is my tentative recipe
2.5 gallon brew
OG 1.042
ABV 4.48
SRM 6.13
IBU 34
2 lb 2 row
1.5 lb Munich 10
.5 lb flaked wheat
.5 ounce Nugget and 1 ounce Mosaic @ 5 min
.5 ounce Mosaic @ whirlpool 165
Process: BIAB 10 min "inline mash"
Decoct .5 gallon of wort for hop decoction and boil 10 min
Heat main wort to 160 while decoction is being boiled
Cool over night in boil kettle & transfer and pitch in the morning, adding AG300
Allow at least 3 weeks in fermenter.
H.W.
OP
OP
Owly055
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2014
- Messages
- 3,008
- Reaction score
- 686
Primarily by taking refractometer samples and watching for gravity to plateau. I then do an iodine test for confirmation. I won't bother with the iodine on my next fast brew, as it will have AG300 in the fermenter.
H.W.
Gotcha. I hear the iodine is pretty much a waste of time as it can produce false negatives.
What do you mean by inline mashing?
(Btw see how easy it is to clear up something you don't quite understand?)
- Status
Similar threads
