20 lb of sugar and a jar of yeast nutrient

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I also made a batch of #5, the color was spot on when tested on foil but it looked totally black in the jar. I added a pound of it to a dubbel a week into primary fermentation; the resulting beer has a wonderful aroma of raisins and hazelnuts and the distinctive flavors of luxardo cherries and toffee without even a hint of burnt sugar bitterness. The residual sweetness was a big concern for me, I didn't want to end up with a sugary sweet mess but the way it turned out seems perfect to my palate. I have put up about two dozen bottles to age.

This weekend I'm cooking up a double batch of #5 and canning it for use in the near future, it's truly wonderful stuff.
 
Jayjay1976 said:
I also made a batch of #5, the color was spot on when tested on foil but it looked totally black in the jar. I added a pound of it to a dubbel a week into primary fermentation; the resulting beer has a wonderful aroma of raisins and hazelnuts and the distinctive flavors of luxardo cherries and toffee without even a hint of burnt sugar bitterness. The residual sweetness was a big concern for me, I didn't want to end up with a sugary sweet mess but the way it turned out seems perfect to my palate. I have put up about two dozen bottles to age.

This weekend I'm cooking up a double batch of #5 and canning it for use in the near future, it's truly wonderful stuff.
Click to expand...

How did you measure your 1# of syrup? I made about 2# but really only need about .5# for my current recipe. Just weigh out 0.5# of the syrup and add it? (Seems like an easy question, but my mind just isn't getting it.)
 
Squad1Guy said:
How did you measure your 1# of syrup? I made about 2# but really only need about .5# for my current recipe. Just weigh out 0.5# of the syrup and add it? (Seems like an easy question, but my mind just isn't getting it.)
Click to expand...
Yeah i just poured it into a bowl that was sitting on a digital scale and then dunked the whole thing in the hot wort to dissolve all of it out of the bowl.
 
Travis K. Jansen said:
I wanted to report back as well. I used the recipe for the sugar #5 and came up what I thought was some really dark candi sugar and it had a lot of great dark fruit flavor that we talk about with this stuff. I brewed it up into a Westy 12 clone, but unfortunately, it seems to have lightened up in the fermenter and several samples have shown that it did not impart enough of the dark fruit flavors we desire for this. In the end, it'll result in a great Triple, but for me, this was a failed experiment leading me to believe that when I need that flavor profile or something that dark, I'm better off purchasing D-180. So sad, I had high hopes since the rocks came out really dark and tasty.
Click to expand...
Interesting. About 15 months ago I made a quad/BDSA (based on the traditional Westy 12 clone) with the #5, a long boil, and some wort reduction for added complexity, and it fell short of the mark as well. It's too strong and complex to be a dubbel, too dark and the wrong flavor profile to be a tripel, but it doesn't have the chewy caramels of a proper quad. Lots of cherry and other stone fruit flavors (I named it Cherry Juice Quad), but not enough backbone. Body and backbone of a tripel, stone fruit flavors of a quad. I might have to rename it: Cherry Juice Belgian 3.5.

Whenever I've brought up this sugar with people who know about these things, the consensus has been that it's a very different animal from Belgian candi. I don't know enough myself or remember enough from those conversations to say why that is or what we should be doing differently, but the point is that I'm pretty sure you're right: we're not coming anywhere close to a D-180 with this method. I'm not sure we're even reaching D-90 levels of complexity really. I like this stuff, but there's a limit to what we can do with this method.
 
Agreed. Just need to pony up the cash for d180 I guess.

Funny, the way you describe yours is almost exactly what mine is like. A bit if a Belgian purgatory, if you will. Oh well!
 
Last edited:
What the Belgians are doing on a commercial scale CAN'T be magic. We're just missing a bit of key info to unlock their process. I'm not experienced enough to comment on the differences, but for chrissakes, it's a matter of sugar + heat. My first stab at this yielded astounding results, and I'm a total newb. This isn't rocket science, monks do it. I'm totally hooked.
 
Jayjay1976 said:
What the Belgians are doing on a commercial scale CAN'T be magic. We're just missing a bit of key info to unlock their process. I'm not experienced enough to comment on the differences, but for chrissakes, it's a matter of sugar + heat. My first stab at this yielded astounding results, and I'm a total newb. This isn't rocket science, monks do it. I'm totally hooked.
Click to expand...
Not sure about the monks, but does CSI boil in a vacuum maybe? Otherwise, maybe it's a matter of volume: my one experience cooking a large batch (15 kilos, I think) was wildly different from a small stovetop batch, so it's possible that you need a much longer heating process (which happens more naturally with a big batch) to get the same level of complexity as the big guys get.

The syrup I've made by following the recipe in the original post makes a delicious syrup that matches the color and flavor descriptions given, but it's a far cry from something like D-180.
 
made the #5 last night. Turned out fantastic! I kept the burner a little below medium and brought it up to 290f when the water evaporated(Approx 20 mins). I added DAP @ 240F and didnt stir till i added water at 290F. I turned the burner down after that and kinda played with it to keep it between 240-285. Brought it up to 285 about 3 times very gently and it has no burnt taste at all. I was a little nervous about this and i am very pleased with how it turned out. Saved a ton of money!! Going to make several others. Thanks to all for the input
 
15200967870211977338210.jpg
 
So i made another batch of #5 last night and compared it to D-180. Both me and my neighbor chose the homemade over the D-180 in a blind taste. The D-180 had good fruit notes, but lacked the depth of the homemade. The homemade had similar plum/raisin flavor but went much deeper with what i thought was somewhat coffee & chocolate. It had a slight taste of burnt sugar like the topping of creme brulee, which i found to be delicious. Thanks again for all the help. About to start making a lot of belgian candi
 
Has anyone tired to brew a beer primarily with this syrup? I mean, use the syrup as the base, add some specialty grains, hops, yeast... might be an interesting, maybe disgusting experiment?
 
Darthbrewder said:
Has anyone tired to brew a beer primarily with this syrup? I mean, use the syrup as the base, add some specialty grains, hops, yeast... might be an interesting, maybe disgusting experiment?
Click to expand...
Almost sounds like youre suggesting a modified rum recipe. I made the westy 12 recipe from the CSI f]thread which was basically just 2 row and this I believe. It turned out fantastic. So this can def be the star of show
 
ten80 said:
I used left-over wort from a beer brew as a source of nitrogen. I just added wort instead of water during the process. It's easy to save 1L of wort by freezing it in a plastic bottle. You can decant off the trub from what is left in the bottom of your boil kettle after brewing. I never waste any wort!
Click to expand...

Good man yourself. Finding DAP is a pain in the hole where I am so will try this next brewday and report back!
 
Received my new Grainfather last month and wanted to brew my favorite recipe the RocheMontfort dubbel ( Brasserie Montfort is the name of my home brewery ) .Nice plum and raisin flavor.

IMG_2264.JPG
 
Could someone please help me with my last production of candi syrup ? So far I produced the deep amber version 4 times ( included a 150 kg sugar version ) and the results have always been excellent. Yesterday I wanted to produce the light ( 260 F ) version for a belgian tripel recipe. Everything went smoothly until the final step ( adding 3/4 cup of water in order to stop the boil and reach the softball stage 240 F ) then it crystallized when I transfered to preheated mason jars. Could someone pleas explain what went wrong ? Is my candi syrup batch ruined ( I doubt it ). What should I do to uncrystallize it on brew day ?

Jacques
IMG_2559.JPG
 
Others can speak to why it crystallized better than I can, but it's not ruined, it's still very usable and the taste should be the same.

On brew day just soak the whole jar in some hot water before you need to pour it in to the boil. That should loosen it up enough do it will pour out. If not just use a spoon and scoop it out.
 
I always use hot wort or water (depending on if I'm adding it in the boil of the fermenter) to soak every last bit of sugar out of the jar when I add it to a batch, whether or not it's crystallized. Assuming the crystallized sugar isn't one big crystal, you could scoop out the majority and then melt the last bit that way. If it is one big crystal, do what @bolus14 said and soak the jar in hot water until the sugar melts enough to pour or dump it out of the jar.
 
Thank you bolus14 and FatDragon for the suggestiions. I"ll soak the jars in hot water ( I'm brewing tomorrow ) . Now about why it crystallize, I found an interesting article who suggests to add some lemon juice , 1/2 tbsp for each cup of sugar. " The citric acid in lemon juice hydrolyzes the sucrose molecules into glucose and fructose as you heat the sugar. The water in the lemon juice is also part of this process. This mixture of monosaccharides is much less crystalline in the same way that most mixtures are less crystalline than pure substances "
 
I brewed yesterday and soaked the 2 masons jas in boiling water for about 45 minutes. Worked fine. Thank's again.

Jacques
 
Just followed instructions exactly for the double cooked type. Went well but at some point it became too burnt sugar tasting. Now tastes quite si sour, burnt toast..
Used beet sugar. I think the proportions of fructose maltose must vary, and possibly the amount of dap.
Will try a version cooked cooler and report back.
 
IMG-20181017-WA0007.jpg
divrack said:
Just followed instructions exactly for the double cooked type. Went well but at some point it became too burnt sugar tasting. Now tastes quite si sour, burnt toast..
Used beet sugar. I think the proportions of fructose maltose must vary, and possibly the amount of dap.
Will try a version cooked cooler and report back.
Click to expand...
I tried that one ( double cooked ) too but to me ( just my personal opinion here ) the burnt taste was overdone. So I'll stick to the Mahogany (300F) recipe. 2 weeks ago I made some 80kg of candi syrup in Brasil at the "cervejaria Bodebrown" owned by my good friend Samuel Cavalcanti.
 
Last edited:
Sucrose is made up of a fructose and glucose (not maltose). Chemically, refined beet sugar is the same as refined cane sugar, I doubt you'd notice a difference. In the raw (with impurities) there would be differences.
 
eimar said:
View attachment 596035
I tried that one ( double cooked ) too but to me ( just my personal opinion here ) the burnt taste was overdone. So I'll stick to the Mahogany (300F) recipe. 2 weeks ago I made some 80kg of candi syrup in Brasil at the "cervejaria Bodebrown" owned by my good friend Samuel Cavalcanti.
Click to expand...
WOW! Now that is a legit environment for candy sugar development!!!
Me personally, I love the 290f flavor profile for dubbels and quads.
 
Gnomebrewer said:
Sucrose is made up of a fructose and glucose (not maltose). Chemically, refined beet sugar is the same as refined cane sugar, I doubt you'd notice a difference. In the raw (with impurities) there would be differences.
Click to expand...
Sorry that's what I meant, was late..
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25124655
And
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25308166
Suggest there are differences.
Also if you talk to experienced pastry chefs, some of them tell you that caramelization happens differently.
I'm not at all sure why this is, I know fructose caramelizes at a much lower temperature so wondered if there is some discrepancy in the way the disaccharide breaks down or of there is some fructose in beet. Probably not I suppose but I've heard it suggested as an explanation.
Anyway my data seems to confirm the finding that there are differences. I will try again with cane sugar today and play science. I might even put some in my Erlenmeyer flask and swish it about for no reason other than SCIENCE!!.
 
divrack said:
Sorry that's what I meant, was late..
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25124655
And
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25308166
Suggest there are differences.
Also if you talk to experienced pastry chefs, some of them tell you that caramelization happens differently.
I'm not at all sure why this is, I know fructose caramelizes at a much lower temperature so wondered if there is some discrepancy in the way the disaccharide breaks down or of there is some fructose in beet. Probably not I suppose but I've heard it suggested as an explanation.
Anyway my data seems to confirm the finding that there are differences. I will try again with cane sugar today and play science. I might even put some in my Erlenmeyer flask and swish it about for no reason other than SCIENCE!!.
Click to expand...
Ok, so couldn't get refined cane sugar so I ditched my plan fora side by side science tastic experiment and went with my usual cooks approach mixing educated guesses with "sensory data". (Eyes and nose to non scientists.
Probably because it was unrefined there were some problems with it foaming and recrystaizing at about 260 as you can see at the beige droplet. I added some cold water and stirred and it cleared as it came back up to temperature.
Fructose starts to caramalise much earlier than glucose which starts at around 260 and as this is the point at which I observed the most change I decided to keep cooling with water and reheating to around this point to avoid burnt flavours and coax out as much flavour as possible constantly smirking and tasting the syrup to avoid burnt flavours. As soon as I detected harsh notes I added water taking it back to somewhere around 240.
Highest i went up to was around 275 on the second reheat.
Plum gave way to cherry/maraschino which have way to a woody smokiness which reminded me of childhood saunas in Finland.
Scared of making the same mistake as yesterday I would add water again and again to take the temp back down, but all stages of heating changed the flavour.
Finally I percieved that the plum flavour was disappearing so i stopped, but when I added the syrup toa little water and tasted it out was still there in a big way along with the woodier notes and some inviting sharpness.
Reassured that it wasn't burning I took it back up to about 270 and dropped it to 240 again. In all it was probably about6 cycles. Tastes pretty great. Looks similar to the double cooked recipe that ended up too burnt tasting but is more translucent and red rather than brown/black.
Also mixed both syrups in water which is interesting. The burnt sugar as an interesting edge that might do well in a porter or stout replacing black malt.
IMAG0017.jpg
IMAG0016.jpg
 
divrack said:
Ok, so couldn't get refined cane sugar so I ditched my plan fora side by side science tastic experiment and went with my usual cooks approach mixing educated guesses with "sensory data". (Eyes and nose to non scientists.
Probably because it was unrefined there were some problems with it foaming and recrystaizing at about 260 as you can see at the beige droplet. I added some cold water and stirred and it cleared as it came back up to temperature.
Fructose starts to caramalise much earlier than glucose which starts at around 260 and as this is the point at which I observed the most change I decided to keep cooling with water and reheating to around this point to avoid burnt flavours and coax out as much flavour as possible constantly smirking and tasting the syrup to avoid burnt flavours. As soon as I detected harsh notes I added water taking it back to somewhere around 240.
Highest i went up to was around 275 on the second reheat.
Plum gave way to cherry/maraschino which have way to a woody smokiness which reminded me of childhood saunas in Finland.
Scared of making the same mistake as yesterday I would add water again and again to take the temp back down, but all stages of heating changed the flavour.
Finally I percieved that the plum flavour was disappearing so i stopped, but when I added the syrup toa little water and tasted it out was still there in a big way along with the woodier notes and some inviting sharpness.
Reassured that it wasn't burning I took it back up to about 270 and dropped it to 240 again. In all it was probably about6 cycles. Tastes pretty great. Looks similar to the double cooked recipe that ended up too burnt tasting but is more translucent and red rather than brown/black.
Also mixed both syrups in water which is interesting. The burnt sugar as an interesting edge that might do well in a porter or stout replacing black malt.View attachment 596105 View attachment 596106
Click to expand...
Forgot to add that I reduced the amount of dap to 2 teaspoons in the second version as the first lot tasted too acidic. Also the dap is Young's yeast nutrient which has amonium sulphate in as well. No idea how this would affect things.
 
I tackled my first attempt at this syrup for an upcoming Caramel Amber Ale, and it didn't go quite right. lol

I'm assuming my candy thermometer is inaccurate, but anyway... I was aiming for the 290F version, making a half batch, so halved all the ingredients.

Initial boil, as I approached around 270F or so, I thought to myself that it was looking like a nice deep red, maybe I should stop, but decided to continue to 290F.

I then added the prescribed water, stirring until it was all dissolved, and at that point it looked quite dark... varying to my eyes between a VERY dark red to a black, maybe a bit of dark, DARK brown.

I reheated until the thermometer was just shy of 240, then cooled in a cold water bath for a few moments, then poured into a mason jar.

The resulting "syrup" is actually fudge, a soft brick in the jar, it's malleable, but just barely. And it's the color of dark peanut butter. o_O All of the red, and black, that I saw as it was boiling disappeared once cooled.

I'm still going to use it, as the taste is quite good... I'm still picking up the described caramel, raisin, plum, etc. I'll have to reheat the jar in a hot water bath to get it out for brew day, but I'm sure it'll work fine.

Any ideas on what happened?

I would say my thermometer is off, and I was actually at too high of a temperature (overshooting the second boil to 240F would explain the solid nature of the final product, rather than a syrup)... but if I was too hot through the process, I also would have expected black 'fudge'... not peanut butter coloured fudge.
 
So I couldn't live with my failed first attempt, so did another batch.

I used a different pot, one that is a little smaller diameter, so the syrup had more depth... not sure if that mattered.

I also used slightly higher heat, as the first one, I was super careful and it took quite a while to reach temps, and I didn't want this 2nd attempt to take as long.

I heated to about 250F, at which point I noticed the top of the solution was starting to crystallize, as it was boiling. Colour was still a light amber color. At about 260F it was really looking chunky, still an amber color, so I used a spoon to slightly stir it and was shocked to find that the solution was really dense, like pretty much all of the water had boiled off. I quickly added a couple table spoons of water, and stirred it in, and then saw that the bottom of the solution was almost black... I'm gathering maybe the higher heat I used had boiled off the water too quick and so it wasn't able to mix itself up with proper convection.

Anyway, I quickly poured in the rest of the second water addition, and stirred it all up, and it ended up a great color! Dark, brown, with a bit of a red tinge when the light shines through it. I'd call it a burnt umber.

So reheated again, but this time I stopped once a drop from a spoon onto a room temp surface stayed as a drop, rather than flattening. I think it was around 225 or 230F when I stopped.

The resulting syrup is still liquid, which is what I wanted the first time, will be way easier to use than my previous peanut butter fudge chunk. In the jar it looks black, but in smaller amounts it is that nice burnt umber color.

The taste on this second attempt is different too. I can't decide which of the two attempts I prefer, but I'll use the 2nd attempt in the beer, and maybe the fudge chunk as a coffee sweetener. :)
 

Attachments

  • 20181220-IMG_2104.jpg
    20181220-IMG_2104.jpg
    533.8 KB · Views: 148
  • 20181220-IMG_2105.jpg
    20181220-IMG_2105.jpg
    529.2 KB · Views: 147
Once it gets past amber you need to go really slow. It's the time spent at those amber temps that yields flavor and complexity, IOW, keeping it at 240-260F for half an hour or an hour gives most flavor and only darkens slightly compared to going to higher temps any sooner.

A tall, narrow, thick bottomed pot is best IMO as it evaporates slower and has less surface exposed to direct heat (the bottom) where most darkening (burning, pyrolysis) takes place. The melanoidin reactions we're after happen within the foaming and bubbling medium. I keep adding a half tablespoon of cold water at a time when I see the foaming change appearance. Even with a Thermapen, readings in that syrupy medium are not all that exact, they tend to vary widely wherever the readings are taken. So take a few in different places and average them in your mind.
I keep putting a drop on a piece of aluminum foil every 3-5 minutes to keep track of progress.

Once the amber stage has completed to your satisfaction, you can let the temps rise slowly by slowing down or decreasing the water additions.

2 or 3 pounds of sugar seems to work best for me, anything less ended up darkening too fast before getting good flavor. That's why I think the bubbling medium needs ample volume to do it's magic, and lower temps for longer times helps with that.

D-90 is very attainable, much higher takes experience
I did get some (unintended) darker syrup one time that actually tasted really good. It has the color of "D-120-140" and doesn't taste burnt.

I always add the syrup to fermenting beer after the peak is over, when fermentation starts to slow down a bit. It will kick up again. I do not use secondaries!
 
divrack said:
Ok, so couldn't get refined cane sugar so I ditched my plan fora side by side science tastic experiment and went with my usual cooks approach mixing educated guesses with "sensory data". (Eyes and nose to non scientists.
Probably because it was unrefined there were some problems with it foaming and recrystaizing at about 260 as you can see at the beige droplet. I added some cold water and stirred and it cleared as it came back up to temperature.
Fructose starts to caramalise much earlier than glucose which starts at around 260 and as this is the point at which I observed the most change I decided to keep cooling with water and reheating to around this point to avoid burnt flavours and coax out as much flavour as possible constantly smirking and tasting the syrup to avoid burnt flavours. As soon as I detected harsh notes I added water taking it back to somewhere around 240.
Highest i went up to was around 275 on the second reheat.
Plum gave way to cherry/maraschino which have way to a woody smokiness which reminded me of childhood saunas in Finland.
Scared of making the same mistake as yesterday I would add water again and again to take the temp back down, but all stages of heating changed the flavour.
Finally I percieved that the plum flavour was disappearing so i stopped, but when I added the syrup toa little water and tasted it out was still there in a big way along with the woodier notes and some inviting sharpness.
Reassured that it wasn't burning I took it back up to about 270 and dropped it to 240 again. In all it was probably about6 cycles. Tastes pretty great. Looks similar to the double cooked recipe that ended up too burnt tasting but is more translucent and red rather than brown/black.
Also mixed both syrups in water which is interesting. The burnt sugar as an interesting edge that might do well in a porter or stout replacing black malt.View attachment 596105 View attachment 596106
Click to expand...


It looks good. thank you for sharing your experiment.
 
eimar said:
Interesting, how do you make the wort? just with water and malt extract ? O.G. of the wort ?
Click to expand...
I usually save a quart or 2 out when I brew a Belgian or other beer I need syrup for. It leaves a little more headspace which can be welcome at that time.

If I'm using them in a few days I store them in the fridge, otherwise in the freezer. I also use the saved wort to dilute the syrup(s) so I can pour them into the fermenter more easily and do so when fermentation has slowed down a bit. That also tops up my (plastic bucket) fermenter somewhat so I'll actually get 5 gallons in my keg, later.

Only use light to (dark) amber wort. Don't use highly hopped or dark, roasty wort for syrups!

But yeah, you could use DME, or LME. I prefer Amber wort that has some crystal/cara in it.
I've been thinking of adding an amino acid mix for even more complexity in the Maillard reactions. Haven't found a source yet. No, Marmite won't do, but a little MSG might. It doesn't need much.

Wort gravity is usually 1.060-1.080, but I've used higher, more pre-condensed wort too. When you heat the sugar and wort, water evaporates first, condensing it basically until you reach your syrup's first cooking temperature stage.

I really like the light pink syrup generated early by the lower temps. You can cook that low and slow for 30 minutes and keep the light color by adding a few drops of water every minute or so. That's my "D-2" I use wherever light candi syrup or plain sugar can be used.
 
I just wanted to update my attempts at the syrup as per the OP recipe.

As I stated earlier, my first attempt turned into a solid, barely malleable, mass of peanut butter-looking fudge.

I was going to keep it in the fridge and use as a coffee syrup or similar, but realizing it was going to be a pain in the butt to use (hard to scoop) I decided to try redissolving it and turning it back into a syrup.

I warmed up the jar in a hot water bath until I was able to get most of it scooped out into a pot, used a bit of hot water in the jar to get the rest out, then added that sugar water into the pot with the rest of the lumps, added a little more water, and re-heated to dissolve it all. Then I reheated back up to about 225F then took off the heat.

It turned it from looking like a slightly dark, solid, peanut butter brick, into a thick, but pourable, syrup, with a beautiful dark red color.

So, in case it helps anyone else, if you overshoot the second heating step, and the product hardens up to much, you can re-dissolve it and it should be fine.

Really interesting how it is this dark, rich red while in a syrup form, but heating it up too much then letting it harden turns it into a dull brown color.

The flavour difference between this one and my more successful second attempt is really interesting too.

The 2nd one, the one that I did "right", has a nice caramel flavour, paired with some bright, fruity, sweetness... I'd almost call it a 'bright' sweetness.

The 1st attempt, that I recooked, has a similar caramel flavour, but the accompanying sweetness is more mellow and subdued, and no real fruit notes.
 
IslandLizard said:
Only use light to (dark) amber wort. Don't use highly hopped or dark, roasty wort for syrups!

But yeah, you could use DME, or LME. I prefer Amber wort that has some crystal/cara in it.
I've been thinking of adding an amino acid mix for even more complexity in the Maillard reactions. Haven't found a source yet. No, Marmite won't do, but a little MSG might. It doesn't need much.

Wort gravity is usually 1.060-1.080, but I've used higher, more pre-condensed wort too. When you heat the sugar and wort, water evaporates first, condensing it basically until you reach your syrup's first cooking temperature stage.

I really like the light pink syrup generated early by the lower temps. You can cook that low and slow for 30 minutes and keep the light color by adding a few drops of water every minute or so. That's my "D-2" I use wherever light candi syrup or plain sugar can be used.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the details.
 
I just completed a second round of this, and I love the product. I've been adding 1/2 Tbs. of DME and I like the product better, but it keeps crystalizing.

Based on what I've read here I have 3 ideas about how to deal with this, and I was wondering if anyone has tried them.

1) Take sugar syrup to 290 before dropping it down to around 240 and adding DAP then.

2) Adding cream of tartar and taking to 260-275 and holding in that range for 20 minutes before dropping temp and adding DAP.

3) Using a percentage of Dextrose instead of sugar to help keep it shelf-stable.

Thoughts?
 

Similar threads

TheMadKing
Invert Sugar Disagreement
Replies
35
Views
2K
bobtheUKbrewer2
B
I
Blueberry wine sulphur smell
Replies
12
Views
517
Ibrew2
I
K
Wine that tastes like clear Rum! (Killer Kilju Recipe)
Replies
0
Views
1K
KiljuBrew
K
T
mocha frappucino milk sout or imperial milk stout
Replies
6
Views
1K
Kickass
K
superpig0
Mead Recipe Concern
Replies
2
Views
552
Dan O
Dan O
CornyKegs 300

Latest posts

Back
Top