The backset sour mash myth?

[S-Cackalacky]

The title - just being facetious.

I may get burned for this, but it's something I've wondered about for some time. The addition of backset to a grain sugarhead like UJSSM or SF seems to be considered a necessary step to creating a sour mash (wash) ferment. I'm making this post to try to find out if this is indeed the consensus among the members here.

I've always believed that the souring of the mash is a result of reusing the lees left in the fermenter along with the action of some naturally present bacteria. There are even topics here on the forums outlining procedures for develping a sour mash starter using a cracked corn/sugar/water mix. I also believe that the backset addition to subsequent ferments is basically a flavor enhancer and nothing more.

Am I correct in these assumptions, or is the backset really a necessary component in the production of a sour mash? And if so, what's the science behind it?

It's just that I keep hearing over and over that backset is a necessary component of a sour mash and don't really understand why that is. I promise I won't get pissed if contradicted - just looking for the facts.

[woodshed]

Consistency of product, pH adjustment. IMO you cannot achieve a sour mash without some backset.
Introducing an infection might do it.

[S-Cackalacky]

But Woodshed, why is that? The backset is basically an acidic pasteurized liquid with flavor. Is it the sour flavor? I kinda thought of a sour mash in the same way as a sour dough - soured, as Rock said, by the action of bacteria. If the backset is necessary for the souring, what's the science behind it? Is the acid somehow acting on the lees, or is the backset acually just imparting some of its sour flavor?

What if I don't like the flavor imparted by the backset. If I don't add it and just rely on the action of the bacteria in the lees, is it still considered a sour mash?

[woodshed]

No clue as to the science. Flavor and nose for sure.
If I pH with citric as opposed to backset everything changes. The backset adds a toasted corn smell that is quite nice.
This and the sourness carry through.
To me it is really about consistency of product from batch to batch, pH, and the recycling of a by product.
You can imagine on a large commercial scale this would be cost effective.

[Odin]

I find sour mashing to be helpful in a few things. And my procedure usually is I add like 25% backset to a new ferment. Lately a bit less, by the way. Closer to 20%. Anyhow, here it goes:
- Hot backset helps dissolve sugar better;
- Backset is sour and helps to get the total ferment to a lower ph;
- Backset is like a soup of well-boiled yeast & grain: very good nutrient source for the next generation ferment;
- Taste consistency over generations;
- Improved taste (questionable).

My experience is that, when using fresh backset right of the still to start up a new generation, the backset does not add much to the taste. At least the true "sour mash" taste that sour mash whiskey has, is not obviously present in my results. Taste does get a bit better over 3 to 4 generations, but it does not get "sour mashy" in taste. My (current) conclusion is this: that the sour mash taste comes over mostly from bacterial activity. And I know many sour mash pro distillers add bacteria on the last day of their 3 day fermentation cycle.

But there may be another solution. If you want sour mash taste. Not long ago I wanted to do a finishing run, but my low wines ... weren't enough. Yet, I still had some 20 liters of hot backset from the last strip run, just finished, in the boiler. I added the 20 liters of low wines to the 20 liters of backs-set and did a potstill finishing run on that.

Result? All the sour mash taste you could look for. In fact it was too much!

So my conclusions are that sour mashing is great to create the right environment for the new fermentation cycle to start off (nutrients, ph, etc.), but that for the real sour mash taste, you need to leave some backset in the boiler. Or add some backset to the low wines prior to the finishing run. Not 50/50 as I did, but maybe 25/75. Or add bacteria, at some stage during the ferment, but my experience is that that's hard to control. Before you know it, you have a full scale infection and you can start all over again.

Just my take on it.

Odin.

[Odin]

What if I don't like the flavor imparted by the backset. If I don't add it and just rely on the action of the bacteria in the lees, is it still considered a sour mash?

I think legally there's like a 25% norm. If it is above that, you may call it "sour mash". But then again ... who cares?

Odin.

[frunobulax]

I thought adding backset was just a cheap way for distillers to control PH with the hard water they use, to get PH in 5.3 - 5.5 range where the yeast like it
yet acidic enough to help prevent infections. I don't do any continuous ferments so I just adjust PH downwards (if needed) with 88% lactic acid.
My water is very soft so most of the time I have to raise PH by using gypsum or calcium chloride.

[Odin]

Soft water and low/high PH are not the same. Soft water means low particle per ml count on calcium. PH is something different. You want 50 to 150 ppm in calcium and lower than 6 on PH.

Regards, Odin.

[S-Cackalacky]

This is turning into a much more complicated subject than I had anticipated. I hadn't thought about the dead yeast and grain nutrients gained by adding the backset to a next gen wash. But, I'm not sure I really need that. My SF washes are taking 3 days (or less) to ferment, so extra nutrient isn't an issue. It seems that the primary benefit I'm picking up on is PH maintenance and the benefit it has for preventing infection in the next gen wash. Well, there's also the flavor component, but as I've already stated, that's something I'm really not interested in. As an alternative to backset (in the first gen), I was thinking of Brendan's method of using a sour corn starter as outlined here - http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... =3&t=46340 . I'm assuming that once the starter is introduced into the wash, it will continue to exist through subsequent gens.

Some have stated that backset is necessary for maintaining a consistent flavor profile. Well, wouldn't that depend on the flavor profile you wish to maintain? Without backset wouldn't the flavor profile introduced with a sour corn starter be the flavor consistently maintained over the course of multiple generations? I assume this would be a viable approach if the flavor profile is what is desired.

So, the conclusions I'm reaching about backset are - it adds its own particular sour/grainy flavor to a new wash, it may be useful for helping to control PH, It adds some beneficial nutrients. And, it is not absolutely necessary for developing and maintaining a generational sour mash. But, further comments could serve to change my mind about these conclusions.

[Bushman]

Well, there's also the flavor component, but as I've already stated, that's something I'm really not interested in.

I know what you are meaning and I am taking it out of context but just struck me funny!

[Jimbo]

This statement depends HEAVILY on the mineral content of the water you start with, but Ive found 20% max backset in a bourbon mash (high unmalted corn content) is about the max before things gets weird (ferment issues).

Do not use backset in all malt recipe. It just doesnt need it. Malt, when converting and fermenting, will cause pH to drop where where it needs to be. (Mother Nature is pretty smart)

If you dont like the flavor of backset Cack pick up some lactic acid at the brewshop for pH adjustments, and a syringe for measuring it. Great stuff. I use it when I dont have backset. For me takes only 1ml or cc per gallon water. Again that will depend on your water. The little 5oz bottles of 88% lactic acid are cheap, 3 or 4 bucks I think, and enough for 150 gallons of mash.

[Red Rim]

To throw another wrench in the works, I tried a few runs where I used all of the backset and added only enough water to keep the yeast alive in the fermenter. I had no fermentation issues and the flavor stayed consistent. I did this for 5 generations and didn't have any problems. I can see where the problem could develop. Next time I try this experiment, I will check the pH as I go.

[Jimbo]

To throw another wrench in the works, I tried a few runs where I used all of the backset and added only enough water to keep the yeast alive in the fermenter. I had no fermentation issues and the flavor stayed consistent. I did this for 5 generations and didn't have any problems. I can see where the problem could develop. Next time I try this experiment, I will check the pH as I go.

AG or sugarhead? I think this factors in too.

[Red Rim]

It was a corn/barley mix, however I didn't get much of the starches converted. Each subsequent batch was a sugar wash. I figured the starches were slowly being converted with each additional batch.

I wouldn't want to do this with a true all grain. Why risk messing with perfection?

[Prairiepiss]

Is backset needed for a sour mash? No.

It's just a tool that can be used to sour a mash. Something acidic to eat at the grains some.

And UJSSM and sweetfeed being sugarhead faux whiskeys. That are ment to be simple and easy. Backset is a good way to do it. Is it the proper way? Maybe not to some. But its not a true whiskey anyway. So who cares?

The beer brewing guys think sour mashing is one thing. While whiskey makers think its another. And even different whiskey makers have different ways of doing it. Who's to say who's right? As long as you are souring the mash somehow. It's a sour mash.

And truthfully Uncle Jesse simple sour mash. Isn't even a mash. It's a wash. That nothing is mashed in. This also gets many new distillers cornfused. Thinking its a mash.

[Jimbo]

And truthfully Uncle Jesse simple sour mash. Isn't even a mash. It's a wash. That nothing is mashed in. This also gets many new distillers cornfused. Thinking its a mash.

LMAO, truth. Never occured to me. So newbs, read! and read some more, and if you think youre confused now, just wait till you read some more! Damn it.

Like P says, a sour mash is just that, a soured mash. Ya need a 5.2 pH for the mashing enzymes to be happy, and bourbon recipes will not get there on their own with all that raw corn in there. So they recycle some mash, enough to get the pH down, and keep doing this day in and day out cause its a simple way to produce a billion gallons of bourbon continuously. Or for us that talk quarts and gallons, with occasional mashes, you could use backset, or you could use lactic aid, or you could use citric acid, or you could...... you get the idea.

[S-Cackalacky]

Well, there's also the flavor component, but as I've already stated, that's something I'm really not interested in.

I know what you are meaning and I am taking it out of context but just struck me funny!

Yea, I could have worded that a bit different. What I meant was, I don't like the additional flavor. Most of my experience is with SF and I just found that with backset, the flavor was a little overpowering. I once added some backset to a spirit run and found that I absolutely couldn't drink it - ended up re-distilling it. I guess I just prefer something a little more on the subtle side.

[S-Cackalacky]

This statement depends HEAVILY on the mineral content of the water you start with, but Ive found 20% max backset in a bourbon mash (high unmalted corn content) is about the max before things gets weird (ferment issues).

Do not use backset in all malt recipe. It just doesnt need it. Malt, when converting and fermenting, will cause pH to drop where where it needs to be. (Mother Nature is pretty smart)

If you dont like the flavor of backset Cack pick up some lactic acid at the brewshop for pH adjustments, and a syringe for measuring it. Great stuff. I use it when I dont have backset. For me takes only 1ml or cc per gallon water. Again that will depend on your water. The little 5oz bottles of 88% lactic acid are cheap, 3 or 4 bucks I think, and enough for 150 gallons of mash.

Thanks Jimbo. I think I'll try Brendan's sour corn starter first. I think I'm done with SF for awhile. I want to try UJSSM and see how it goes with the starter. I would like to try an AG sour mash at some point, but don't really have the facilities to work with it. I have plans to do an Uncle Remus Rice Vodka which is kind of a hybrid mash/sugarhead. I'm thinking I can get the rice cooked without boiling - use boiled water from my still boiler to steep the rice for a couple of hours before adding the enzymes. Anyway, that's the plan - might work, might not.

But, back on topic - I'm still only seeing the backset as a sour flavor and NOT something that contributes to a true souring process, as does a lacto starter. I'm not sure my original point has been put to rest yet.

[IrishEnigma]

What about if you used all backset? Then just fill what was vaporised with water. How would this affect the sour/taste if it would even work?

[Jimbo]

But, back on topic - I'm still only seeing the backset as a sour flavor and NOT something that contributes to a true souring process, as does a lacto starter. I'm not sure my original point has been put to rest yet.

My perspective is quite the opposite, at least with bourbons. The backset just helps me hit the pH needed for the mash enzymes to be happy. I dont notice a difference in the flavor of the bourbon if I use backset or lactic acid.

[S-Cackalacky]

And truthfully Uncle Jesse simple sour mash. Isn't even a mash. It's a wash. That nothing is mashed in. This also gets many new distillers cornfused. Thinking its a mash.

LMAO, truth. Never occured to me. So newbs, read! and read some more, and if you think youre confused now, just wait till you read some more! Damn it.

Like P says, a sour mash is just that, a soured mash. Ya need a 5.2 pH for the mashing enzymes to be happy, and bourbon recipes will not get there on their own with all that raw corn in there. So they recycle some mash, enough to get the pH down, and keep doing this day in and day out cause its a simple way to produce a billion gallons of bourbon continuously. Or for us that talk quarts and gallons, with occasional mashes, you could use backset, or you could use lactic aid, or you could use citric acid, or you could...... you get the idea.

You see Jimbo, this further confuses my understanding of this. Is it the acid that causes the souring of the mash or is it bacteria (lacto) that causes the souring of the mash? So, could it be that the action of the lacto bacteria produces lacto acid which is the actual agent of the souring process? In that case, it would make sense that the acid in the backset and NOT its sour flavor would contribute to the souring process. But then, that makes little sense either, because any wash needs a pretty tight PH range to even maintain fermentation. So, if my first gen starts out at an acceptable PH (somewhat acidic), then why isn't the first gen soured?

Where the hell is Dunder (God bless him) when you need him?

[Jimbo]

Cack. Sour means low ph, acidic. Thats all. Youre just reading too much into it. Just like sour soil needs some lime to sweetin it up (raise the ph). Enzymes need 5.2 ph to work well. Water is 7. Malt has the ability to drop ph. After all its the malt that has the enzymes. Mother nature is no dummy. But 80% corn bourbons no got the smarts yet. So your mash needs help.

[S-Cackalacky]

Cack. Sour means low ph, acidic. Thats all. Youre just reading too much into it. Just like sour soil needs some lime to sweetin it up (raise the ph). Enzymes need 5.2 ph to work well. Water is 7. Malt has the ability to drop ph. After all its the malt that has the enzymes. Mother nature is no dummy. But 80% corn bourbons no got the smarts yet. So your mash needs help.

Well hell, why aint that in the friggin' glossary - would've saved us all a lot of typin'.

[woodshed]

Odin and I are on the same page when it comes to backset in the boiler. A thread exists somewhere.
A mash heavy to the sour side takes to the wood very well.

[bearriver]

Low Ph = Sour

I regularly use PH down for gardening. On one occasion it was on my hands transferred to the food I was eating. It was pucker your butt hole sour, that's for damned sure. An extreme experience. One bite and I started freaking out over safety concerns...

Protective gloves for me since then

[S-Cackalacky]

I've been wondering about this whole thing since I first started making the SF recipe. Now, I'm singing a verse of the Halaluya Chorus and feeling a little like my avatar.

Thanks folks for setting me straight.

[woodshed]

Keep in mind I do not do sugar heads SC.
And our preferences may be vastly different. Love this craft.

[S-Cackalacky]

Keep in mind I do not do sugar heads SC.
And our preferences may be vastly different. Love this craft.

Damn Woodshed, for some reason that sounds mildly errotic, but just to be clear - that's not my preference either.

[woodshed]

Just trying to represent in the best light.
My erotica begins and ends with my wife.

[goose eye]

Just throwing money away and flaver you don't use it.
Please boys ain't smart enough to know why it works only it do work.
gotta let it sit a while or it gonna caramelized your suger.
that a taste that ain't suppose to be there. They use it all.
after 3 times they starting again.

So I'm tole