Discussion on malty German beers

[TheMadKing]

So I'm a huge German beer fan.

I love a good IPA, the odd sour, and some British styles but my true love is the malty German styles like Munich Dunkel, Maibock, Marzen, Bock, Doppelbock, etc.

Now, in all modesty, I make pretty decent beer. It's technically good meaning that there's not usually detectable flaws resulting from technique or process and rarely off flavors. When I make a German beer though, I struggle to get the incredibly refined "malty but attenuated" flavor characteristic of these styles.

I currently have a munich dunkel on tap. It's the right color, the right gravity, the right basic flavor, it's pretty tasty! But then I try it beside an imported dunkel and the malt flavor is practically non-existent.

I'm not talking about the difference between bad beer and good beer here, I'm talking about the difference between good beer and masterful beer. I frankly don't know how they retain so much malt character without making a beer that tastes sweet. Sam Adam's oktoberfest is absolutely cloying on the finish, but the initial malt flavor is about right.

So to start the discussion, I just finished reading Noonan's New Brewing Lagers book and he discusses a couple things that I think I'm going to experiment with:

1. Mashing technique. He describes mashing in around 130F and performing the Hockhurz style step mash as a way of retaining those delicate malt aromatics. He even describes mashing in with cool water and progressively heating it to the various rest temps.

I know this has been discussed in depth all over this forum, but again I'm not talking about "I use single infusion and I make good beer" because I have done that for most of my time brewing. I'm talking about making a beer that's indistinguishable (by a BJCP judge or equivalent) from Ettaler Kloster Dunkel or something similar in depth of malt without sweetness.

2. Secondary and krausening. So IMO secondary fermentation has gotten a bad rap, mostly because of John Palmer and Charlie Papazian. The original use for a secondary fermentor was not to simply clarify beer, or let it finish attenuating. According to Noonan's description the secondary fermentation was originally used in conjunction with krausening to eke out every last bit of fermentability and ensure a highly attenuated beer.

I think these two factors together play the largest role in maintaining that malty flavor.

Please do not bring up LODO techniques on this thread, that is not my intent. I minimize oxygen whenever practical and I cannot accept that this quality of beer was only developed in Germany after the invention of bottled CO2.

 

[Miraculix]

From my humble German perspective I think you are asking exactly the right questions. Now I am looking forward to somebody providing exactly the right answers as I certainly don't have them.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

The only time I ever achieved a tremendously malty Pilsner was when I let it mash at a pH of ~5.7. The ones I've mashed at pH's in the range of 5.2 to 5.4 have not came out as malty. But I did step-mash the 5.7 mash pH beer also, so perhaps that had something to do with it. Both before and since then it has all been single infusion.

So for me the question is: Did the maltiness come from the step-mashing, or from the high mash pH (or both)?

 

[TheMadKing]

The only time I ever achieved a tremendously malty Pilsner was when I let it mash at a pH of ~5.7. The ones I've mashed at pH's in the range of 5.2 to 5.4 have not came out as malty. But I did step-mash the 5.7 mash pH beer also, so perhaps that had something to do with it. Both before and since then it has all been single infusion.

So for me the question is: Did the maltiness come from the step-mashing, or from the high mash pH (or both)?

That's interesting, though based on almost unanimous literature consensus, a mash pH of 5.3 is desirable even for German beers so I would lean toward suspecting your step mash before the pH. It could be that the high pH reduced the enzyme activity to the point where more long-chain sugars remained in your wort - but that same effect could be achieved through mash temp manipulation rather than pH.

 

[cooper]

Are you testing your pH levels all throughout the process to see if you're in the recommended levels? I'm currently fiddling with this in my own brewing and thought I'd share what I have.

An example would be:
-Mash pH at room temp being 5.4 - 5.7
-Into fermenter pH of around 5.0 - 5.2
-Finished beer pH
-- around 3.8 - 4.5 for Ales
-- 3.9-4.5 for Lagers
-- Mild/Dark ales around 4.10-4.20 (Some have reported that a pH over 4.30 the hop bitterness starts to come off as "oily" and in the 4.0-4.20 range the bitterness is more clean. All of this can also depend on the yeast you are using as there are some that will provide more acid than others thus resulting in a lower or higher finished beer pH, also dry hopping will tent to increase the pH as well as a longer/warmer fermentation)

NOTE - This is only a suggestion from info I've gathered from the research I've done so please experiment for yourself and find what tastes the best for your palate and I could be completely wrong in all of this.

 

[TheMadKing]

Are you testing your pH levels all throughout the process to see if you're in the recommended levels? I'm currently fiddling with this in my own brewing and thought I'd share what I have.

An example would be:
-Mash pH at room temp being 5.4 - 5.7
-Into fermenter pH of around 5.0 - 5.2
-Finished beer pH
-- around 3.8 - 4.5 for Ales
-- 3.9-4.5 for Lagers
-- Mild/Dark ales around 4.10-4.20 (Some have reported that a pH over 4.30 the hop bitterness starts to come off as "oily" and in the 4.0-4.20 range the bitterness is more clean. All of this can also depend on the yeast you are using as there are some that will provide more acid than others thus resulting in a lower or higher finished beer pH, also dry hopping will tent to increase the pH as well as a longer/warmer fermentation)

NOTE - This is only a suggestion from info I've gathered from the research I've done so please experiment for yourself and find what tastes the best for your palate and I could be completely wrong in all of this.

I always test my mash pH at room temp using an initial calculation using Bru'n water and a calibrated Milwaukee MW-101 pH meter, but I don't normally test the pH of my finished beer. I'll check that on my Dunkel, and I could adjust that using baking soda or lactic acid to a small extent, so I'll play with that.

Thanks!

 

[cooper]

Cool! I had a Dunkel that was malty and really smooth tasting but it seemed to be lacking something and although I never tested it I suspect the final pH of the beer was a little high so I'm testing the final pH of my beer now to see where it's coming in at and comparing that to how it's tasting. Just another bit of documentation info for tracking and comparison.

 

[Vale71]

I only have one answer to your question: decoction mashing.

I spent years trying to achieve the right malt character in my German style beers by using specialty malts, this all went out the window once I tried my first decoction mash. Even a single decoction step will make so much of an impact that you'll be able to make a good malt-centered beer practically with only (the right type) of base malt.
You should try it out, it's not as complicated as it might sound and it's also loads of fun. The decoction smells so good you'll even start to salivate uncontrollably...
Nowadays I wouldn't even think of trying a Bock or Doppelbock without (at least) a double decoction mash.

 

[cooper]

I only have one answer to your question: decoction mashing.

I spent years trying to achieve the right malt character in my German style beers by using specialty malts, this all went out the window once I tried my first decoction mash. Even a single decoction step will make so much of an impact that you'll be able to make a good malt-centered beer practically with only (the right type) of base malt.
You should try it out, it's not as complicated as it might sound and it's also loads of fun. The decoction smells so good you'll even start to salivate uncontrollably...
Nowadays I wouldn't even think of trying a Bock or Doppelbock without (at least) a double decoction mash.

I'll second this as well! I once did a double decoction on a Maibock and my dad described it as the "Meat and Potatoes" beer. LOL It was intensely malty and delicious and had a really nice body even though it was well-attenuated.

 

[Jayjay1976]

I've been on a similar quest as @TheMadKing to improve the malty depth of my German beers, decoction seems like the most likely component missing from my routine. I've experimented with varying the base malts and adding crystal malts but that only resulted in overly sweet beers. I've done complicated, traditional German step mashing but that only dried them out. It makes sense to me logically that pulling a portion of the mash and boiling it will preserve some of the longer chain sugars by reducing their fermentability, while causing some caramelization and develop some maillard products that should deepen the malty flavors without excessive sweetness.

I BIAB so I'm a bit fuzzy on how to determine what volume of the mash to withdraw and how to accurately measure the thickness so I'm just going to have a go at pulling 2 gallons of stirred-up mash, boil it and see what happens.

 

[Vale71]

This is the simplest formula for calculating decoction size:

Vol_decoction = Vol_mash * (temp_target - temp_start) / (temp_boil - temp_start)

It works well with a uniform mash. Temp_boil is the temperature the decoction will have by the time you start slowly pouring it back in the mash tun and is dependent on how much cooling it'll have experienced by then. It most definitely will be somewhat lower than the actual boiling point.
I wouldn't bother with trying to adjust the decoction mash thickness and would just stir the mash and pull a decoction with the same thickness as the main mash. This is what all the large breweries do BTW. That is, unless you want to do a final decoction for mash-out, in which case you need to pull only liquid and no grains. This is really not necessary unless you're doing a 100% decoction as the liquid decoction has the least gain for the effort as no flavor gets extracted from the grains.

 

[TheMadKing]

I only have one answer to your question: decoction mashing.

I spent years trying to achieve the right malt character in my German style beers by using specialty malts, this all went out the window once I tried my first decoction mash. Even a single decoction step will make so much of an impact that you'll be able to make a good malt-centered beer practically with only (the right type) of base malt.
You should try it out, it's not as complicated as it might sound and it's also loads of fun. The decoction smells so good you'll even start to salivate uncontrollably...
Nowadays I wouldn't even think of trying a Bock or Doppelbock without (at least) a double decoction mash.

I have done a number of decoction mashes and I really haven't found that to provide the maltiness I was really after by itself. I can certainly understand it producing some maillard products, and increasing wort fermentability with munich based grists. It may indeed play a component, but then again, it may just be wishful thinking on our part since repeated brewing experiments have shown no readily obvious distinction between two identical beers brewed with decoction vs infusion mashes.

I have noticed that most of these decoction vs infusion experiments are done on pilsner and helles style beers, which rely almost exclusively on pilsen malt. I would like to see the same experiment done on a Dunkel or a Doppelbock to see if heavier darker styles show a more obvious distinction.

I BIAB as well and you can just pull off roughly 1/3 of your mash for a decoction (pull your bag up a little so you get a thick grain-heavy 1/3rd), and just add it back until you're at the right temperature in the bulk mash. Cool any leftovers with ice or cold water and add it back to the mash after you hit your step temp.

Plus that doesn't explain how some of these German breweries are achieving the same flavor without decoction mashing. Most modern breweries use hockhurz mashing instead.

 

[balrog]

I BIAB so I'm a bit fuzzy on how to determine what volume of the mash to withdraw and how to accurately measure the thickness so I'm just going to have a go at pulling 2 gallons of stirred-up mash, boil it and see what happens.

Do, oh please sir, let us know. I am in (sorry) the same bag as you, being BIAB and trying to "malt up" my Altbier.

 

[Vale71]

It may indeed play a component, but then again, it may just be wishful thinking on our part since repeated brewing experiments have shown no readily obvious distinction between two identical beers brewed with decoction vs infusion mashes.

I have noticed that most of these decoction vs infusion experiments are done on pilsner and helles style beers, which rely almost exclusively on pilsen malt. I would like to see the same experiment done on a Dunkel or a Doppelbock to see if heavier darker styles show a more obvious distinction.

Can you provide links to these experiments? I can assure you that you'd have to be blind and taste-impaired not to notice the huge difference between a 100% Pilsner beer brewed with a single infusion mash and the same beer brewed with a double decoction with 45 minutes of decoction boiling per step (it's going to be my next brew BTW). You'll be surprised at how dark your decoction has turned after 45 minutes of boiling. If you're doing a single decoction and then boiling only for a couple of minutes than you shouldn't expect much impact on taste and color, but then why bother at all?

 

[cyberbackpacker]

Interesting on the no LoDo, but a technique much discussed because of that is the use of Sauergut to manage your wort ph. That might be something to try as well, especially your kettle ph near knock-out.

Just a thought...

 

[TheMadKing]

Can you provide links to these experiments? I can assure you that you'd have to be blind and taste-impaired not to notice the huge difference between a 100% Pilsner beer brewed with a single infusion mash and the same beer brewed with a double decoction with 45 minutes of decoction boiling per step (it's going to be my next brew BTW). You'll be surprised at how dark your decoction has turned after 45 minutes of boiling. If you're doing a single decoction and then boiling only for a couple of minutes than you shouldn't expect much impact on taste and color, but then why bother at all?

http://brulosophy.com/2016/12/12/mash-methods-pt-3-decoction-vs-single-infusion-exbeeriment-results/

http://brulosophy.com/2016/04/04/si...-brudragon-collaboration-exbeeriment-results/

http://braukaiser.com/blog/blog/2009/06/16/decoction-vs-no-decoction-on-a-dunkel/

Interesting on the no LoDo, but a technique much discussed because of that is the use of Sauergut to manage your wort ph. That might be something to try as well, especially your kettle ph near knock-out.

Just a thought...

I'm choosing to discount LoDo because I've been down that rabbit hole and at the end of the day its just too contentious... It's the politics of homebrewing and the science either way is not definitive. I won't rule it out but I won't rule it in either. I inherently distrust anything people get evangelical about because if emotions are involved it isn't about the truth anymore.

I have used Saurmaltz in pilsners routinely for controlling mash pH and I haven't noticed any great effect from it, so I went back to pure lactic acid.

 

[Vale71]

I was afraid Brulosophy would come up as a source...
The second exbeeriment has nothing to do with decoction BTW.

 

[TheMadKing]

I was afraid Brulosophy would come up as a source...
The second exbeeriment has nothing to do with decoction BTW.

You're right but it is about step mashing which is what Hockhurz mashing is.

Marshall over at Brulosphy isn't perfect, but it's enough to call into question the "mindblowing effects" of decoction mashing. At the end of the day he made the same beer with a decoction mash and without and people couldn't tell the difference. You can get into the weeds with his methodology all you want, but this is homebrewing. We are talking about the law of averages here, not lab-based experiments for scientific publication.

My biggest problem with Brulosephy is that he does almost everything with a pilsner or a helles which are very light in the malty department. I think the effects of a decoction mash are more likely to be exaggerated in a more malt-forward beer... but then the dunkel experiement from Brukaiser... It's more convincing for me anyway that decoction mashing alone doesn't make a huge difference. Kai Troester is an exceptionally well-respected source of brewing knowledge.

I personally haven't be able to tell the difference between my own decoction mashed beer and beer with 4-6 ounces of melanoidin malt in a single infusion mash. Whether it makes some difference or not, you're welcome to debate. FWIW, a traditional triple decoction mash for a pilsner should only be boiling 15-20 minutes per decoction.

I really don't want this to devolve into a typical internet argument of "cite your peer reviewed scientific source or your wrong" - I'm just here to talk and to learn from other homebrewers.

I really think the key to this malt flavor we're chasing is to have a beer that tastes malty - meaning you think it's about to be sweet - but once you swallow it's highly attenuated and balanced with the hops.

Malty but attenuated is what I'm chasing - which is why I am playing with my mash style and krausening

 

[cooper]

I've also been wondering if the real difference in decoction is in using the less modified malts oppose to highly modified malts.

 

[TheMadKing]

I've also been wondering if the real difference in decoction is in using the less modified malts oppose to highly modified malts.

I would like to try a SMaSH Dunkel using 100% munich malt to test that... I'll make that my mission for this winter. A true triple decocted 100% munich dunkel vs a single infusion beer with the same recipe

 

[cooper]

I would like to try a SMaSH Dunkel using 100% munich malt to test that... I'll make that my mission for this winter. A true triple decocted 100% munich dunkel vs a single infusion beer with the same recipe

And take note of the pH readings at the mash, into fermenter, and post fermentation.

 

[Jayjay1976]

An interesting experiment would be to take 1/3 the grain bill and 1/3 the mash water and "decoct" that portion separately in a sous vide bag @210*f for an hour or more, then add to the other 2/3 of the mash at mashout time. 210 is far below caramelization temp, the bag would exclude oxygen, and perhaps this could isolate the impact that simply boiling the malt sugars has on the overall flavor profile.

 

[TheMadKing]

An interesting experiment would be to take 1/3 the grain bill and 1/3 the mash water and "decoct" that portion separately in a sous vide bag @210*f for an hour or more, then add to the other 2/3 of the mash at mashout time. 210 is far below caramelization temp, the bag would exclude oxygen, and perhaps this could isolate the impact that simply boiling the malt sugars has on the overall flavor profile.

Mashing in a sous vide bag is a really interesting concept

 

[schematix]

I really think the key to this malt flavor we're chasing is to have a beer that tastes malty - meaning you think it's about to be sweet - but once you swallow it's highly attenuated and balanced with the hops.

^^^ This is huge. Sweet beer just tastes cloying and covers up the rest of the flavors with syruppy non-sense. You'd be surprised how much better even dark lagers are when they are more attenuated. 80% AA should be your minimum target. A great IPA starts at 85% AA.

The other elephant in the room is low oxygen brewing. It's unquestionably one piece to the german lager puzzle, but does require some commitment to achieve. There are some rich bready and biscuity flavors in Munich malt for example that are very difficult to keep in the wort with standard methods, but when you manage to do it, wow you know it.

 

[RPh_Guy]

What kind of water profiles are you guys using?

 

[TheMadKing]

What kind of water profiles are you guys using?

Typically fairly soft with gypsum and CaCl additions favoring chloride, with lactic acid for mash pH adjustment to 5.3 and campden for chloramine

 

[TheMadKing]

^^^ This is huge. Sweet beer just tastes cloying and covers up the rest of the flavors with syruppy non-sense. You'd be surprised how much better even dark lagers are when they are more attenuated. 80% AA should be your minimum target. A great IPA starts at 85% AA.

The other elephant in the room is low oxygen brewing. It's unquestionably one piece to the german lager puzzle, but does require some commitment to achieve. There are some rich bready and biscuity flavors in Munich malt for example that are very difficult to keep in the wort with standard methods, but when you manage to do it, wow you know it.

I think "unquestionably" is too strong a word, but I do think it might have an effect on the staling compounds in darker malt.

To that end, I grind my grain seconds before mashing in, I do mash in carefully, I almost always first wort hop, I chill quickly, oxygenate after pitching yeast, etc.

I'm not a fan of the "all or nothing" mentality of the more evangelical followers of Lodo, or that there's some magical threshold where all is lost if you exceed that DO level.

I take every reasonable precaution without adding time or equipment to my brew day.

I just don't want this to turn into a LoDo fan thread or start an argument. I certainly think it has merit but I'm not convinced (yet) that it is the missing element to making great German beers.

 

[schematix]

I think "unquestionably" is too strong a word, but I do think it might have an effect on the staling compounds in darker malt.

To that end, I grind my grain seconds before mashing in, I do mash in carefully, I almost always first wort hop, I chill quickly, oxygenate after pitching yeast, etc.

I'm not a fan of the "all or nothing" mentality of the more evangelical followers of Lodo, or that there's some magical threshold where all is lost if you exceed that DO level.

I take every reasonable precaution without adding time or equipment to my brew day.

I just don't want this to turn into a LoDo fan thread or start an argument. I certainly think it has merit but I'm not convinced (yet) that it is the missing element to making great German beers.

You asked how to get a certain character in German beers. Everything you asked for that you’re missing is what you get with low oxygen.

Just telling you how I got all those things.

It’s unquestionable to me because I’ve gone from where you are now, to where you want to go and that was a key part of the equation.

Good luck.

 

[TheMadKing]

You asked how to get a certain character in German beers. Everything you asked for that you’re missing is what you get with low oxygen.

Just telling you how I got all those things.

It’s unquestionable to me because I’ve gone from where you are now, to where you want to go and that was a key part of the equation.

Good luck.

Would you be interested in a beer swap? Is it possible to bottle and preserve the maltiness?

 

[SanPancho]

Try viking no lox malts if you intend to bottle and age.

 

[cyberbackpacker]

I have used Saurmaltz in pilsners routinely for controlling mash pH and I haven't noticed any great effect from it, so I went back to pure lactic acid.

I see where you are coming from, but Sauergut is much different than Sauermalz... I would look into it if I were you; I have appreciated it's effects. And I think it could help with what I believe is a "crispness"/well-defined maltiness of finish and character, a la the mentions of attenuation, that you are searching for. Maybe even just do a small 1 gallon batch to test.

Just an idea to try and help you get where you want to go.

 

[TheMadKing]

I see where you are coming from, but Sauergut is much different than Sauermalz... I would look into it if I were you; I have appreciated it's effects. And I think it could help with what I believe is a "crispness"/well-defined maltiness of finish and character, a la the mentions of attenuation, that you are searching for. Maybe even just do a small 1 gallon batch to test.

Just an idea to try and help you get where you want to go.

I'll test it out thanks!

I'm also curious about some of the other LoDo techniques as standalone contributors, specifically:

Higher than normal pitch rate
Lower than normal pitch temperature
Non-standard fermentation profile
Sodium in the finished water profile
Conditioning grain before milling
Preboiling water
Naturally carbonating in a keg

I'm thinking that I want to test all of these in isolation. That's just a lot of variables to change simultaneously to be able to attribute all of the change in the finished product to lower oxygen alone.

 

[techbrau]

So I'm a huge German beer fan.
...
Now, in all modesty, I make pretty decent beer. It's technically good meaning that there's not usually detectable flaws resulting from technique or process and rarely off flavors. When I make a German beer though, I struggle to get the incredibly refined "malty but attenuated" flavor characteristic of these styles.

I currently have a munich dunkel on tap. It's the right color, the right gravity, the right basic flavor, it's pretty tasty! But then I try it beside an imported dunkel and the malt flavor is practically non-existent.

I'm not talking about the difference between bad beer and good beer here, I'm talking about the difference between good beer and masterful beer. I frankly don't know how they retain so much malt character without making a beer that tastes sweet.
...
Please do not bring up LODO techniques on this thread, that is not my intent. I minimize oxygen whenever practical and I cannot accept that this quality of beer was only developed in Germany after the invention of bottled CO2.

"Please help me solve problem X! But please don't tell me to use solution Y, even though solution Y has solved problem X for hundreds of other people."

 

[Miraculix]

I just remembered that in one of bigger experiments, I compared smash to smash with 10% melanoidin malt. That really made a huge difference in maltyness and gave me what I was looking for. I guess long and very thick decoction should do almost the same.

 

[TheMadKing]

Also another update, I just emailed the Devils Backbone brewing to see if I can talk to someone about their process. Their Maibock is one of my favorite beers of all time

 

[TheMadKing]

[emoji57]

"Please help me solve problem X! But please don't tell me to use solution Y, even though solution Y has solved problem X for hundreds of other people."

Much like religion.

This is why I asked not to discuss that topic. Not because I don't believe it has merit, or because I'm not exploring it on my own, but because it is a devisive contentious subject that seems to breed nothing but personal attacks like this.

Shun the non-believer if you must, but please don't start evangelizing here. This is a conversation not a political rally.

I was just on your website though, thanks.

 

[schematix]

Low oxygen isn't religion, politics or evangelizing. It's a brewing process to get certain qualities in the finished product.

That's it.

Why it evokes emotions like this in people is totally beyond me.

 

[schematix]

Would you be interested in a beer swap? Is it possible to bottle and preserve the maltiness?

I've been a kegger since day 1 and don't even own the equipment to bottle. You're welcome to stop by whenever.

 

[TheMadKing]

I've been a kegger since day 1 and don't even own the equipment to bottle. You're welcome to stop by whenever.

Bit of a drive, but thank you for the invitation

I'll give it a shot. I already have the ability to do the hot side Lodo techniques with my current equipment. If it works, great, I'll start rolling back variables one at a time until I figure out why specifically. If not, I'll probably give it another shot before I go back to my standard peasant brewing techniques

 

[Bilsch]

I'll give it a shot. I already have the ability to do the hot side Lodo techniques with my current equipment. If it works, great, I'll start rolling back variables one at a time until I figure out why specifically.

It worked for me and I hope the same for you.