55 replies to this topic

[Brauer]

I look at it this way, there is always detectable tannin in beer and the less you sparge the less tannin you extract. Whether that is oversparging depends on your taste. One test is to make a beer from just second runnings. I believe that Fullers Chiswick Bitter is a second running beer, and I find it very tannic.

[positiveContact]

Yes, you can. But it's harder to do than fly sparging.  You would need to add a very large amount of sparge water in relation to the amount of grain or have very alkaline water.  In a "normal" brewing situation, that won't happen.

 

"normal" AKA not Ken's water.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Big Nake]

I have shifted to a thinner mash (with more water) and a smaller sparge for this reason. I also tattooed Brauer's advice (on my hand) of acidifying my sparge water as it heats so it's in the mid-to-upper 5s before I add it to the grains for the sparge. This has produced some very good gold beer with my 100% filtered tap water. As I type this, I am drinking this latest helles which came out so nicely. It's clear, smooth, balanced and delicious. The weird thing with my water is that it has all of this bicarb (138ppm) but then the pH is only 6.6. About 1 to 1½ milliliters of lactic acid in 3½ gallons gets the pH from 6.6 to around 5.5 and this has changed some things around here for sure. As far as the 'oversparging' a batch sparge thing goes, I think I'm out of the woods on that one.

[neddles]

I look at it this way, there is always detectable tannin in beer and the less you sparge the less tannin you extract. Whether that is oversparging depends on your taste. One test is to make a beer from just second runnings. I believe that Fullers Chiswick Bitter is a second running beer, and I find it very tannic.

Seems like you are pretty sensitive to tannins, no? Have you tried reducing them with any of the clarifying agents that will also reduce the tannic load in the beer?

[Steve Urquell]

Seems like you are pretty sensitive to tannins, no? Have you tried reducing them with any of the clarifying agents that will also reduce the tannic load in the beer?

You don't have to be very sensitive to tannins to get it from Fuller's partigyled beers. I had a London Pride awhile back and it was like straight up drinking iced tea after eating cranberry sauce.

[neddles]

You don't have to be very sensitive to tannins to get it from Fuller's partigyled beers. I had a London Pride awhile back and it was like straight up drinking iced tea after eating cranberry sauce.

Funny description. That's interesting. I don't have ready access to any Fuller's beers. In fact I have only ever had one of their beers. Shoot, I though they were supposed to be a world class operation? My only experience with tannins in beer is from when I didn't know what I didn't know and could not produce a good tasting pale to amber beer. They were all grainy and husky with a soapy bitterness and some mild drying/tannic mouthfeel. So glad those days are gone.

[Steve Urquell]

Shoot, I though they were supposed to be a world class operation?

I was thinking that exact same thing after posting last night and how that wouldn't be accepted in a quality craft beer over here. Maybe oversparging is done at many breweries over the pond and that is an accepted flaw? Kind of like our macro-lagers and DMS-->Bud Light, I'm looking at you.

[Brauer]

Seems like you are pretty sensitive to tannins, no? Have you tried reducing them with any of the clarifying agents that will also reduce the tannic load in the beer?

I've never tried those, but I notice a distinct improvement in my beer once it drops clear. That may be from tannins dropping out. I'm extremely happy with the beers I'm making, even the sparged beer, but I think the no sparge beers are better. My German lagers have that malt richness that seems typical there and rare here, and my dark beers have reduced astringincy. I get good efficiency and the difference in cost is trivial at my scale.Some German brewers go so far as to remove the husks from the mash, since high tannin levels are such an unacceptable flaw, there. I think it has become the flavor of those Fullers beers, I haven't noticed it as particularly common in British beer, but not many are partigyle.

[Brauer]

Seems like you are pretty sensitive to tannins, no? Have you tried reducing them with any of the clarifying agents that will also reduce the tannic load in the beer?

It occurs to me that some of my tannin sensitivity is that I make pretty dry beers, often in the 1.008 to 1.010 FG range. 1.012 would be high for me. Combined with my preference for low OG (1.048 is pretty much my high end), there isn't much residual sugar to hide tannins.

[Brauer]

I should have said that I can't remember the last time I made a beer over 1.012 FG, not that I consider 1.012 to be high.

Edited by Brauer, 04 November 2014 - 03:53 PM.

[Big Nake]

I should have said that I can't remember the last time I made a beer over 1.012 FG, not that I consider 1.012 to be high.

You and I are similar in that my 'strong beers' are around 5.5% or so. A lot of homebrewing information fails to mention that there are many differences between small and big beers and the approach to brewing them. I don't really want to have a bunch of 8% beer laying around... not my thing.

[Humperdink]

You and I are similar in that my 'strong beers' are around 5.5% or so. A lot of homebrewing information fails to mention that there are many differences between small and big beers and the approach to brewing them. I don't really want to have a bunch of 8% beer laying around... not my thing.

Preach.

[neddles]

It occurs to me that some of my tannin sensitivity is that I make pretty dry beers, often in the 1.008 to 1.010 FG range. 1.012 would be high for me. Combined with my preference for low OG (1.048 is pretty much my high end), there isn't much residual sugar to hide tannins.

That seems to make sense. I also wonder (and maybe you know) if certain malts are prone to contribute more tannins to the finished beer. Every saison I have made has finished under 1.008 but none have been tannic to my tongue. They have all been largely pils malt though.

[Brauer]

You and I are similar in that my 'strong beers' are around 5.5% or so. A lot of homebrewing information fails to mention that there are many differences between small and big beers and the approach to brewing them. I don't really want to have a bunch of 8% beer laying around... not my thing.

3.8-4.5I have a dozen bottles or so of excellent 8-12% beer, down in my cellar, that I got because I was interested in it or someone gave it as a gift because they knew I liked beer. A lot of it is ~ 5 years old, because it rarely get's touched. We usually break out a bottle or three around the holidays. That usually reminds me that I shouldn't be drinking 10% beer.

 

Unfortunately, that sometimes has a cost. I recently opened a 2 year old Fuller's KBS and it was ropey. 

 

That seems to make sense. I also wonder (and maybe you know) if certain malts are prone to contribute more tannins to the finished beer. Every saison I have made has finished under 1.008 but none have been tannic to my tongue. They have all been largely pils malt though.

6-row comes to mind. Munich might be more tannic, in the grainy way, which might be part of why it is more flavorful, but it is probably the most effective malt at lowering pH, so it may do more to reduce tannin levels. 

[HVB]

 

Unfortunately, that sometimes has a cost. I recently opened a 2 year old Fuller's KBS and it was ropey. 

 

Damn, Fullers ripped of Founders

 

So was it infected with Pedio?

[Brauer]

Damn, Fullers ripped of Founders :PSo was it infected with Pedio?

Oops, had Fullers on the brain. The infected beer was a Founders. Pedio seems probable.