Any homebrewers out there??? This new machine is amazing

[Noodle]

http://www.morebeer.com/products/picobrew-zymatic-machine.html

It almost is like cheating (some might think it is). And no, I'm not a shill for these people and have no plans to drop $2,000 on this system.

Imagine making a 2.5 gallon batch of beer like you make a cup of coffee with a Keurig. You put in your grains, hops and water, set the program you want to run for your mash and hop additions, and you end up with a keg of boiled wort ready to ferment. It's ridiculous, and based on the reviews really works great. 3-3.5 hours and all you need to do is load up the ingredients, push a button and walk away.

Sure it's only 2.5 gallons rather than the traditional 5 (or 10 for some people), but I actually like the idea of smaller batches. My next batch of homebrew will be a breakfast stout. Great beer, however, I will then have 5 gallons (2 cases) of it to finish. It's not exactly a session beer (and right now I only have one keg).

For those who are not homebrewers, this is not one of the Mr. Beer contraptions that your brother-in-law bought you for Christmas. Even if you are brewing with malt extract (like I do) it takes at least 2 hours of work to make a 5 gallon batch of beer. Unless you have an outdoor propane burner (highly recommended), it stinks you your house even the next day. Brew with all grain (no extract) and you will might get a little better beer, but you're looking at 4-5 hours of work, at a minimum, along with tons of gear to clean afterwards.

And for those who are not yet brewing their own beer, why not?!?!? If nothing else you will save money on beer. My typical 5 gallon batch costs around $25-$35 worth of ingredients (malt extract, grains, hops and yeast). That comes out to $2.81-$3.93 per six pack. And your beer will be great, even the first try, as long as you use fresh ingredients (and, perhaps, you find someone with a little experience to help out the first time). The equipment is also not that expensive to get started. You can probably do it for around $50 if you already have a stockpot that's at least 4-5 gallons.


s

This post was edited on 4/13 9:44 AM by Noodle

 

[mjvcaj]

Do you think it tastes as good?

Perhaps my friends that experiment have tried to get too creative, but I have yet to experience the same level of satisfaction from a homebrew vs. craft.

To me, I have taste ADHD. Variety is key and I am rarely interested in making larger batches, so the idea of a Keurig type system is highly appealing. However, when I look at the costs and more importantly, the opportunity cost, I'll probably stick with sixers and 22s from my local liquor stores.

 

[Noodle]

Re: Do you think it tastes as good?


I think that homebrew definitely CAN taste as good as commercial craft beers, but that obviously depends on the brewer (especially the brewer's level of experience). Off flavors can happen for a variety of reasons, especially the fermentation conditions. It took me a while to figure out, for example, that even small changes in temperature can have a significant impact on the end results. Lagers and very light pale ales are the least forgiving. I couldn't brew anything close to a Budweiser or Miller (not that I would want to) no matter how hard I tried. A lot of people also can get way too creative for their own good, trying to add so many different types of grains and hops that they all get lost or produce unintended results.

For example, I bet at least 1/3 of homebrewers do not know that chocolate malt was named because of its color rather than anything related to the flavor it provides. A lot of people assume that it will give their stouts and porters a nice chocolaty flavor and end up with a subpar beer due to the burnt flavor from using way too much chocolate malt. I also just recently figured out that a small amount of smoked malt can really give a pleasant sweetness to stouts and and porters, without any real smokiness (at least not that most people will detect).

As for that brewing system, it's way too expensive for me to ever consider purchasing.

 

[Hank Reardon]

Homebrew can certainly taste as good as...

...commercial beer. It can also be horrific.

Case in point. A couple of years ago when Zombie Dust became popular (or more specifically, Citra hops became the IT hops) our homebrew club had a Citra Pale Ale brew off of sorts. 8 or 9 different guys brewed Citra Pale Ales which were all blindly taste tested together, along with actual Zombie Dust slipped in (also blind). The Zombie Dust finished 4th in the voting among the 25 or 30 guys there.

So yeah, any particular homebrew can well be the equivalent of commercial beer.

However most aren't, because the brewer either doesn't know what he's doing, or simply lacks the sort of precise controls that a commercial brewer would have, particularly with regards to temperature control and yeast management. (The latter is also why it is hard for a homebrewer to replicate even his greatest triumphs, as he simply doesn't have sufficient control of the variables.)

The contraption in the original post is interesting, though I'm still a little confused as to exactly how it performs all of the steps...separating the grain from the wort before boiling, for example. Nevertheless even if it worked great it seems to remove what most homebrewers enjoy, which is the process. Great beer can be had everywhere a lot easier than brewing it yourself. You brew it yourself because you enjoy doing so. If something is going to 100% automate that, why bother? Just head to the liquor store.





This post was edited on 4/13 2:16 PM by Hank Reardon

 

[Noodle]

If you are still actively brewing, I highly recommend....

Randy Mosher's new book: http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Homebrew-Complete-Brewing-Delicious/dp/1452105510/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1428948629&sr=8-1&keywords=randy+mosher

It's really, really good

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

My buddy and I made a Fat Tire clone just to try out some new. . .

Equipment and it turned out pretty damn close. I'm sure you can never fully clone a beer as the big brewers probably have digitally controlled temperatures and everything, but it was still good.

We also made a black IPA with a little cayenne slipped in that was awful good too.

 

[Noodle]

Re: My buddy and I made a Fat Tire clone just to try out some new. . .

The most significant difference between commercial breweries and homebrewers is repeatability--can you make two batches of the same beer that taste exactly the same. In fact, commercially brewing a beer like Budweiser is a lot harder than brewing a beer like Fat Tire because of the need for producing identical batches of a light beer, on a large scale, at multiple breweries.

(Also, a lot of homebrewers have temperature control just as good as some commercial breweries, whether you're talking about mash temperatures or fermentation temperatures.)

As for cloning another beer, that's hard for even commercial breweries to pull off as there are so many variables at play. The biggest one, perhaps, is the yeast strain. Without the exact same strain of yeast, it is all but impossible to precisely clone someone else's beer. Water chemistry is also critical to beer flavor and trying to clone a beer. In fact, a lot of breweries treat their water by reverse osmosis first--not to purify it, but to take everything out and then add back in precise quantities of the stuff they just took out in order to achieve the precise (and repeatable) water chemistry they want for a particular beer. I can buy RO water for homebrewing, but I have no way to know the chemistry of the water used to make Fat Tire. Also, even little things like the size and shape of the fermentation tank can change the flavor of the final product. Bass found this out in the early 1980s when they made a change in their fermentation system.

While I can't precisely clone Fat Tire, I can make a beer which tastes just as good, if not better.

 

[Hank Reardon]

Exactly

Excellent points.

There was a podcast from the Brewing Network called "Can You Brew It" where they'd interview the head brewer from a commercial brewery who would share the recipe for a specific beer, then the guys would brew it trying to clone the commercial example. They'd then try them side by side and announce whether they'd "cloned" it.

They almost always announced it cloned but I get the idea that they were being pretty generous with their interpretation of "cloned." I personally came darn close with the Green Flash West Coast IPA recipe that the brewer from Green Flash provided. I'm not sure I'd call it a 100% clone but it was the best IPA I'd ever made (and it won Gold everywhere I entered it) and I still use the base recipe as a starting point for most IPA's I make.

Great point about the water too. I use RO water and build it up with gypsum, calcium carbonate, salts, etc. I'm not trying to clone a particular water, but different types of beer work better with different water chemistry. I have maybe 6 stock water recipes.

And yeah, brewing an American Light Lager is probably the toughest challenge for a homebrewer. There is nowhere to hide in a beer like that.

 

[twenty02]

Homebrew can certainly taste as good as...

...commercial beer. It can also be horrific.

Case in point. A couple of years ago when Zombie Dust became popular (or more specifically, Citra hops became the IT hops) our homebrew club had a Citra Pale Ale brew off of sorts. 8 or 9 different guys brewed Citra Pale Ales which were all blindly taste tested together, along with actual Zombie Dust slipped in (also blind). The Zombie Dust finished 4th in the voting among the 25 or 30 guys there.

So yeah, any particular homebrew can well be the equivalent of commercial beer.

However most aren't, because the brewer either doesn't know what he's doing, or simply lacks the sort of precise controls that a commercial brewer would have, particularly with regards to temperature control and yeast management. (The latter is also why it is hard for a homebrewer to replicate even his greatest triumphs, as he simply doesn't have sufficient control of the variables.)

The contraption in the original post is interesting, though I'm still a little confused as to exactly how it performs all of the steps...separating the grain from the wort before boiling, for example. Nevertheless even if it worked great it seems to remove what most homebrewers enjoy, which is the process. Great beer can be had everywhere a lot easier than brewing it yourself. You brew it yourself because you enjoy doing so. If something is going to 100% automate that, why bother? Just head to the liquor store.





This post was edited on 4/13 2:16 PM by Hank Reardon

I'm planning on doing a clone ZD this weekend ( extract). Love citra hops...by far my favorite style is an aggressively citra hopped IPA/DIPA.


Any recommendations? I don't think I'll have the room to do a full boil....should I do a half and then top with water in fermenter? Or make two half batches?

 

[mike41703]

I'm planning on doing a clone ZD this weekend ( extract). Love citra hops...by far my favorite style is an aggressively citra hopped IPA/DIPA.


Any recommendations? I don't think I'll have the room to do a full boil....should I do a half and then top with water in fermenter? Or make two half batches?

I usually use a 3 gal. stockpot then top it off with ice(from a filtered supply) in a 5 gal. bucket to cool it quickly. Then top with water(also filtered). I think that works pretty well. I often start with a Sierra Nevada pale ale and then switch up the hops or how much I dry hop it with. Haven't tried a dust clone yet. Good luck!

 

[mike41703]

http://www.morebeer.com/products/picobrew-zymatic-machine.html

It almost is like cheating (some might think it is). And no, I'm not a shill for these people and have no plans to drop $2,000 on this system.

Imagine making a 2.5 gallon batch of beer like you make a cup of coffee with a Keurig. You put in your grains, hops and water, set the program you want to run for your mash and hop additions, and you end up with a keg of boiled wort ready to ferment. It's ridiculous, and based on the reviews really works great. 3-3.5 hours and all you need to do is load up the ingredients, push a button and walk away.

Sure it's only 2.5 gallons rather than the traditional 5 (or 10 for some people), but I actually like the idea of smaller batches. My next batch of homebrew will be a breakfast stout. Great beer, however, I will then have 5 gallons (2 cases) of it to finish. It's not exactly a session beer (and right now I only have one keg).

For those who are not homebrewers, this is not one of the Mr. Beer contraptions that your brother-in-law bought you for Christmas. Even if you are brewing with malt extract (like I do) it takes at least 2 hours of work to make a 5 gallon batch of beer. Unless you have an outdoor propane burner (highly recommended), it stinks you your house even the next day. Brew with all grain (no extract) and you will might get a little better beer, but you're looking at 4-5 hours of work, at a minimum, along with tons of gear to clean afterwards.

And for those who are not yet brewing their own beer, why not?!?!? If nothing else you will save money on beer. My typical 5 gallon batch costs around $25-$35 worth of ingredients (malt extract, grains, hops and yeast). That comes out to $2.81-$3.93 per six pack. And your beer will be great, even the first try, as long as you use fresh ingredients (and, perhaps, you find someone with a little experience to help out the first time). The equipment is also not that expensive to get started. You can probably do it for around $50 if you already have a stockpot that's at least 4-5 gallons.


s

This post was edited on 4/13 9:44 AM by Noodle

I've got a keg with a burner for this process but I've never used it yet. I've always been worried about controlling the temperature when steeping the grains. Have you done it this way before? Is it difficult to control the temp?

 

[twenty02]

I usually use a 3 gal. stockpot then top it off with ice(from a filtered supply) in a 5 gal. bucket to cool it quickly. Then top with water(also filtered). I think that works pretty well. I often start with a Sierra Nevada pale ale and then switch up the hops or how much I dry hop it with. Haven't tried a dust clone yet. Good luck!

Thanks...that's probably the direction I go, as I don't have the equipment or setup at this point to do a full boil. And with a hopped up IPA I'm hoping it won't really matter.

My goal is to make a good Permanent Funeral clone....which seems to be basically an Imperial ZD from what I've read. Not sure if I could just take the ZD recipe and add some sugar to get the ABV up (well I know that would do it, but not sure it would give me what I wanted).Anyway, figured I'll try the ZD, and if that turns out decent go from there.

 

[mike41703]

Thanks...that's probably the direction I go, as I don't have the equipment or setup at this point to do a full boil. And with a hopped up IPA I'm hoping it won't really matter.

My goal is to make a good Permanent Funeral clone....which seems to be basically an Imperial ZD from what I've read. Not sure if I could just take the ZD recipe and add some sugar to get the ABV up (well I know that would do it, but not sure it would give me what I wanted).Anyway, figured I'll try the ZD, and if that turns out decent go from there.

Let me know how it turns out. And I tend to think you're right about not really needing to do the full boil with a hoppy IPA. My friends and I have never done the full boil and they taste pretty darn good. Then again, maybe I'm missing out. I gotta find out if Noodle has any secrets with the full keg steeping/boiling method.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

http://www.morebeer.com/products/picobrew-zymatic-machine.html

It almost is like cheating (some might think it is). And no, I'm not a shill for these people and have no plans to drop $2,000 on this system.

Imagine making a 2.5 gallon batch of beer like you make a cup of coffee with a Keurig. You put in your grains, hops and water, set the program you want to run for your mash and hop additions, and you end up with a keg of boiled wort ready to ferment. It's ridiculous, and based on the reviews really works great. 3-3.5 hours and all you need to do is load up the ingredients, push a button and walk away.

Sure it's only 2.5 gallons rather than the traditional 5 (or 10 for some people), but I actually like the idea of smaller batches. My next batch of homebrew will be a breakfast stout. Great beer, however, I will then have 5 gallons (2 cases) of it to finish. It's not exactly a session beer (and right now I only have one keg).

For those who are not homebrewers, this is not one of the Mr. Beer contraptions that your brother-in-law bought you for Christmas. Even if you are brewing with malt extract (like I do) it takes at least 2 hours of work to make a 5 gallon batch of beer. Unless you have an outdoor propane burner (highly recommended), it stinks you your house even the next day. Brew with all grain (no extract) and you will might get a little better beer, but you're looking at 4-5 hours of work, at a minimum, along with tons of gear to clean afterwards.

And for those who are not yet brewing their own beer, why not?!?!? If nothing else you will save money on beer. My typical 5 gallon batch costs around $25-$35 worth of ingredients (malt extract, grains, hops and yeast). That comes out to $2.81-$3.93 per six pack. And your beer will be great, even the first try, as long as you use fresh ingredients (and, perhaps, you find someone with a little experience to help out the first time). The equipment is also not that expensive to get started. You can probably do it for around $50 if you already have a stockpot that's at least 4-5 gallons.


s

This post was edited on 4/13 9:44 AM by Noodle

Who cares if it's cheating? The result is beer. The ends justify the means.

 

[Noodle]

Let me know how it turns out. And I tend to think you're right about not really needing to do the full boil with a hoppy IPA. My friends and I have never done the full boil and they taste pretty darn good. Then again, maybe I'm missing out. I gotta find out if Noodle has any secrets with the full keg steeping/boiling method.

In my experience you really need to do a full boil (or as close to one as you can get) in order to extract enough alpha acids from the hops to reach 60+ IBU's. I know there is at least one study that said otherwise, but that's not been my experience. Of course I've made plenty of great beers using a partial boil in the days before I had a burner and 10 gallon pot. Doing a full boil on an electric stove is nearly impossible (and silly to even try). One thing I do with extract is to only add a portion of the extract (say 2-3 lbs) at the beginning of the boil. I do not add the rest until the last 20 minutes or so. This reduces carmelization and scorching of the malt, which leads to overly dark beer and sometimes a burnt flavor. Just make sure you take the pot off of the stove/burner when you add the malt late, as it will tend to sink to the bottom at first. I also believe that having at least some of the malt in their for the entire boil will improve hop utilization.

 

[mike41703]

In my experience you really need to do a full boil (or as close to one as you can get) in order to extract enough alpha acids from the hops to reach 60+ IBU's. I know there is at least one study that said otherwise, but that's not been my experience. Of course I've made plenty of great beers using a partial boil in the days before I had a burner and 10 gallon pot. Doing a full boil on an electric stove is nearly impossible (and silly to even try). One thing I do with extract is to only add a portion of the extract (say 2-3 lbs) at the beginning of the boil. I do not add the rest until the last 20 minutes or so. This reduces carmelization and scorching of the malt, which leads to overly dark beer and sometimes a burnt flavor. Just make sure you take the pot off of the stove/burner when you add the malt late, as it will tend to sink to the bottom at first. I also believe that having at least some of the malt in their for the entire boil will improve hop utilization.

How critical is it to keep the grains at 155-160 deg during the steeping process in a full boil? I find it pretty easy on my 3 gal stockpot on the electric stove but thought it might be a little more difficult with a flame..? I will probably have to wait to try the full boil until the spring with the weather the way it is now in northern IN.

 

[twenty02]

In my experience you really need to do a full boil (or as close to one as you can get) in order to extract enough alpha acids from the hops to reach 60+ IBU's. I know there is at least one study that said otherwise, but that's not been my experience. Of course I've made plenty of great beers using a partial boil in the days before I had a burner and 10 gallon pot. Doing a full boil on an electric stove is nearly impossible (and silly to even try). One thing I do with extract is to only add a portion of the extract (say 2-3 lbs) at the beginning of the boil. I do not add the rest until the last 20 minutes or so. This reduces carmelization and scorching of the malt, which leads to overly dark beer and sometimes a burnt flavor. Just make sure you take the pot off of the stove/burner when you add the malt late, as it will tend to sink to the bottom at first. I also believe that having at least some of the malt in their for the entire boil will improve hop utilization.

Excuse me if this is a newb question....but what about doing two half boils? Beyond the obvious of taking a lot longer, is there anything wrong with this?

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

http://www.morebeer.com/products/picobrew-zymatic-machine.html

It almost is like cheating (some might think it is). And no, I'm not a shill for these people and have no plans to drop $2,000 on this system.

Imagine making a 2.5 gallon batch of beer like you make a cup of coffee with a Keurig. You put in your grains, hops and water, set the program you want to run for your mash and hop additions, and you end up with a keg of boiled wort ready to ferment. It's ridiculous, and based on the reviews really works great. 3-3.5 hours and all you need to do is load up the ingredients, push a button and walk away.

Sure it's only 2.5 gallons rather than the traditional 5 (or 10 for some people), but I actually like the idea of smaller batches. My next batch of homebrew will be a breakfast stout. Great beer, however, I will then have 5 gallons (2 cases) of it to finish. It's not exactly a session beer (and right now I only have one keg).

For those who are not homebrewers, this is not one of the Mr. Beer contraptions that your brother-in-law bought you for Christmas. Even if you are brewing with malt extract (like I do) it takes at least 2 hours of work to make a 5 gallon batch of beer. Unless you have an outdoor propane burner (highly recommended), it stinks you your house even the next day. Brew with all grain (no extract) and you will might get a little better beer, but you're looking at 4-5 hours of work, at a minimum, along with tons of gear to clean afterwards.

And for those who are not yet brewing their own beer, why not?!?!? If nothing else you will save money on beer. My typical 5 gallon batch costs around $25-$35 worth of ingredients (malt extract, grains, hops and yeast). That comes out to $2.81-$3.93 per six pack. And your beer will be great, even the first try, as long as you use fresh ingredients (and, perhaps, you find someone with a little experience to help out the first time). The equipment is also not that expensive to get started. You can probably do it for around $50 if you already have a stockpot that's at least 4-5 gallons.


s

This post was edited on 4/13 9:44 AM by Noodle

There's another device called The Grainfather that's a good bit cheaper and appears to do the same thing.

 

[mike41703]

Excuse me if this is a newb question....but what about doing two half boils? Beyond the obvious of taking a lot longer, is there anything wrong with this?

You would need to make sure you split your ingredients precisely I would guess otherwise I don't see why you couldn't. The limiting factor for me would be that I only have one stockpot. You would need to do them simultaneously because it's critical to get it cooled and capped for fermentation asap to avoid bacterial contamination.

 

[Noodle]

I've got a keg with a burner for this process but I've never used it yet. I've always been worried about controlling the temperature when steeping the grains. Have you done it this way before? Is it difficult to control the temp?

If you are asking about steeping grains to be used with an extract-based recipe, it's a lot easier than you think. I use a 10 gal SS pot and a Bayou Classic propane burner, and it's pretty easy to maintain temperature for the time needed for steeping. Keep the lid on and periodically check the temperature. If it drops a little too low, simply fire up the burner briefly.

Also, keep in mind that that there is a difference between "steeping" grains and a "partial-" or "mini-mash." Steeping grains refers to when you are simply trying to extract sugars and various flavors from specialty grains such as crystal malt that have already been converted (i.e., their starches have been converted into usable sugars). Mashing, on the other hand, is when you are using grains (e.g., 2-row malt, Vienna malt, oats, etc.) that have not had their starches fully converted into sugars.

For steeping, temperature control is not all that important. Just keep it below 170 and above 140, for 15-20 minutes. Also, you can steep in quite a bit of water without a problem, and the more water you have the easier it is to maintain its temperature. (If you put a pot of 1 gallon of water at 170F and a pot of 3 gallons of water at 170F outside and come back in 30 minutes, the 3 gallon pot will be warmer.) At the same time, it obviously takes longer to bring 3 gallons of water to a boil than it does 1 gallon. But that gives you an easy way to steep grains. Just put the grains in a bag and toss it in the pot while you are bringing your 3-5 gallons of water up to boil and pull them when the water hits about 170. That will usually give you enough steep time (or just heat your water a little slower between 140 and 170, or turn off the heat at 150-160, if you need a little more steep time).

In the case of mashing (partial/mini-mash), on the other hand, temperature control is more important. In addition, you should only use about 1/2 gallon of water per pound of grain. Use too much water and you won't have a high enough concentration of the enzymes needed for conversion of starches into sugars. The enzymes come from the grains themselves, with some having much higher amounts of enzymes than others. For example, oats have no enzymes so you have to steep them with some 2-row or 6-row malt. Your target temperature and mash time will vary greatly depending on what you are making. Now, if you want to do some multistep (temperature) mash or the infamous triple decoction using a keg or SS pot and a burner, good luck my friend. But, for an ordinary single infusion mash using, say a gallon of water at 150-160F for 45-60 minutes, I think you will find it pretty easy to do (unless, I suppose, it's the middle of January and you're outside in 10 degree weather).

Again, if you are only using specialty grains that do not require a mash (crystal malt, CaraPils, chocolate malt, etc.), temperature control is not all that important. Just stay below 170F, and shoot for 15-20 minutes in the 140-165 range. If you heat up 3 gallons of water to 165F, turn off the heat and toss in your bag of grains and cover, I'd be willing to bet that your water will still be above 145 after 10-15 minutes. At most, you might need to crank the burner back on once or twice for a couple of minutes.

Here's more on steeping v. mashing: http://byo.com/malt/item/1582-what-...-basically-involve-soaking-grain-in-hot-water?

And here's a nice malt chart that shows which grains need a mash: http://www.homebrewtalk.com/wiki/index.php/Malts_Chart

 

[Noodle]

How critical is it to keep the grains at 155-160 deg during the steeping process in a full boil? I find it pretty easy on my 3 gal stockpot on the electric stove but thought it might be a little more difficult with a flame..? I will probably have to wait to try the full boil until the spring with the weather the way it is now in northern IN.

See my lengthy post above. Since switching to a propane burner from an electric stove, I have actually found it be a lot easier with the burner, as I can easily control the size of the flame. Also, with a burner you have a better heat distribution in the water. Electric stoves, especially those with an exposed coil heating element rather than a glass top, deliver heat in a more localized manner compared to a propane burner. But, I think the most important factor to keep in mind is that if you are truly only steeping the grains rather than mashing, maintaining a precise temperature is not all that critical.

 

[twenty02]

You would need to make sure you split your ingredients precisely I would guess otherwise I don't see why you couldn't. The limiting factor for me would be that I only have one stockpot. You would need to do them simultaneously because it's critical to get it cooled and capped for fermentation asap to avoid bacterial contamination.

I had read somewhere that you could do a split boil, one after the other. Some said you could even do the 2nd half the next day.

 

[mike41703]

See my lengthy post above. Since switching to a propane burner from an electric stove, I have actually found it be a lot easier with the burner, as I can easily control the size of the flame. Also, with a burner you have a better heat distribution in the water. Electric stoves, especially those with an exposed coil heating element rather than a glass top, deliver heat in a more localized manner compared to a propane burner. But, I think the most important factor to keep in mind is that if you are truly only steeping the grains rather than mashing, maintaining a precise temperature is not all that critical.

good info.

I don't/haven't bothered with the more complicated mashing process. I seem to get good product and enjoy the simpler method. But, I'm all in for trying a full boil next spring. Thanks.

 

[Noodle]

Excuse me if this is a newb question....but what about doing two half boils? Beyond the obvious of taking a lot longer, is there anything wrong with this?

The only thing wrong is that it would be a real pain in the butt. As Mike said, it could also increase your risk of infection, but I doubt there would be that great of a risk assuming you follow the usual precautions.

 

[mike41703]

I had read somewhere that you could do a split boil, one after the other. Some said you could even do the 2nd half the next day.

Wow, the next day? I haven't heard of anything like that, but I'm not an expert by any means, either. The stuff I've read overly freaks out about contamination and chilling the wort as quickly as possible. If I split it into two days I'm sure I'd screw it up.

 

[twenty02]

Wow, the next day? I haven't heard of anything like that, but I'm not an expert by any means, either. The stuff I've read overly freaks out about contamination and chilling the wort as quickly as possible. If I split it into two days I'm sure I'd screw it up.

Here's what I saw.

https://byo.com/mead/item/1505-the-texas-two-step-method

Probably will try your ice method, along with the late extract method Noodle mentioned, this first time around.

 

[mjvcaj]

Slightly off-topic, but what are your thoughts @Noodle on the beer industry's consolidation? If SAB and Inbev come together, it will likely spur more and more consolidation. The larger "micro" or independent brewers are going to be gobbled up relatively aggressively (i.e. Ballast Point for $1B announced this week).

 

[Noodle]

Here's what I saw.

https://byo.com/mead/item/1505-the-texas-two-step-method

Probably will try your ice method, along with the late extract method Noodle mentioned, this first time around.

I can't see how that method would increase the chance for infection since it calls for pitching the yeast the first day, and adding boiled wort on day 2. However, you really need to make sure that the temperature of the second half of the wort is as close as possible to the temperature of the first half since you're adding the yeast on day 1. Yeast is very sensitive to temperature variations, and adding a bunch of hot or cold wort on the second day could very easily shock the yeast into going temporarily dormant (or worse). Keep your yeast happy, and your beer will turn out better.

 

[Noodle]

Slightly off-topic, but what are your thoughts @Noodle on the beer industry's consolidation? If SAB and Inbev come together, it will likely spur more and more consolidation. The larger "micro" or independent brewers are going to be gobbled up relatively aggressively (i.e. Ballast Point for $1B announced this week).

Not yet sure what to think of all of it, but I certainly am impressed by Ballast Point getting $1B--geesh! I do think we'll see more deals like that as the large players fight to get a toehold in the higher end craft beer market. Up until recently they have not really done so. I suppose it's an indicator that the big players are finally throwing in the towel and admitting that the craft beer market is not going away and that they're better off joining in rather than trying to fight it.

Also, if they're smart, the larger foreign brewers are already looking at acquiring brewers like Anderson Valley, Rogue, etc. Duvel has already done this, and I suspect similar European brewers will try to do the same in order to gain U.S. market share through acquisition rather than their flagship European brands. Duvel is a great beer, but I think it's market share in the U.S. will be stagnant, at best, for the foreseeable future.

 

[mjvcaj]

Not yet sure what to think of all of it, but I certainly am impressed by Ballast Point getting $1B--geesh! I do think we'll see more deals like that as the large players fight to get a toehold in the higher end craft beer market. Up until recently they have not really done so. I suppose it's an indicator that the big players are finally throwing in the towel and admitting that the craft beer market is not going away and that they're better off joining in rather than trying to fight it.

Also, if they're smart, the larger foreign brewers are already looking at acquiring brewers like Anderson Valley, Rogue, etc. Duvel has already done this, and I suspect similar European brewers will try to do the same in order to gain U.S. market share through acquisition rather than their flagship European brands. Duvel is a great beer, but I think it's market share in the U.S. will be stagnant, at best, for the foreseeable future.

I agree. Much easier to broaden your product portfolio via acquisition than new product development, particularly given the intense competition, abundance of options and established branding of some of the elite "craft" names.