19 Nov
2003
19 Nov
'03
8:25 p.m.
Years ago the fellow who put together the brewing research and training
department at the University of California advocated non-sparge brewing.
I can't remember his name -- I'm having a senior moment -- but I'm sure
a lot of you do, so help me out here.
Anyway, his theory was that an extremely loose mash (something more like
malt soup) favored rapid and efficient conversions at much more easily
controlled temperatures. At mash-out the liquid is simply drained off.
This greatly reduced the tannins leached from the grain husks, and there
was very little unconverted starch in the unfiltered runoff.
The big advantage of his system was the reduction in mash time and
control over the mash temperature. I think the entire mash required only
twenty minutes or less, and of course there was no sparge time after
mash-out.
If I could remember the name, I'm sure his papers could be found on the
Internet.
John Reese
On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 09:08, jvoosen(a)usfamily.net wrote:
Last weekend I brewed up an all grain Nut Brown Ale.
After heating the water to 175 degrees I poured it into my 6 gal plastic lautertun bucket
and wraped it in blankets to save heat for one hour.
Yes, I did use the famous "Phil's Floating Phalse Bottom" however,
learning from a bad previous brew session (as we all know, Phil's floats and plugs up
with grain), this time I used a Muslin Grain Bag (As they say on the Dodge truck
commercial "SWEET!").
As the afternoon was passing too quickly, I decided to bypass the sparging and drain my
liquid back into my brew pot. The liquid was a great golden brown color.
My question is "What are the drawbacks in the beer when bypassing the sparging
stage?"
Thanks in advance!
Jim Voosen
Stillwater, Mn
------ http://USFamily.Net/info - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------