sour mash and hulls

[absinthe]

ok reading on the parient site it says only wheat can be use with the grain on but other places it mentions nothing about it, SO:

What grains etc can i use for a sour mash with the hulls on?

Can i do a sour mash with sweet feed?

i am going for the cheap option, so i want to get it all from the local farm/feed supply what do you guys recomend?

[AllanD]

Ok, Barley retains it's hulls when malted, but wheat and rye do not.

So I don't know how you'd do a fermentation with hulls on the grain in the fermenter with wheat anyway... Because they don't have hulls.
When brewing Rye and wheat can both cause a "stuck runoff", but if you are doing an on-the-grain ferment as is common practice (but far from universal) in the distilling industry this is less of an issue.

When brewing the grain hulls support the settled mash and act as a porous "filter bed", generally brewers will use rice hulls to replace the missing wheat or rye hulls, but again, if you are doing an on the grain ferment this factor is not particularly important.

I can't see any reason why the specific type of grain would matter
for fermentation, Segrams Distillery (according to their own internal handbook) does on-the-grain fermentation with Barley, Rye and Corn (depending on the product they are making)


AllanD

[absinthe]

from the parent site (again) it says about the sour mash that brewing on the hulls can make a animal feed smell to the booze, not what i want. Have you had any probs with this with the sour mashes you have done? (if you have that is)

[Uncle Jesse]

no but you're going to have to experiment to be sure.

[absinthe]

so brewing on the hulls should be ok? going to the feed store tomorrow to get some grain and sweet feed, then prolly spend all day cracking it lol but i have 2 stripping runs to keep my mind going while i do that anyway

[AllanD]

According to Seagrams it is...

Corn cannot be seperated from the hulls and retain flavor
I suppose you could seperate barley after the grain has been passed through a loose roller mill for cracking.... by dropping the crushed grain
and letting the wind blow away the hulls...

Wheat and Rye it isn't a problem as the hulls seperate in the malting process.

In beer making long soaks on any grain hulls is avoided because a long soak (overnight mashing) or actually boiling on the hulls will extract an unpleasant ammount of tannin from the grain hulls.
which is why in brewing specialty grains like "crystal malt" is STEEPED, but not boiled.

I done fermentations on the grain, but only with Rye.

AllanD

[Longhairedcountryboy]

In beer making long soaks on any grain hulls is avoided because a long soak (overnight mashing) or actually boiling on the hulls will extract an unpleasant ammount of tannin from the grain hulls.

Not trying to hijack the thread but that reminded me of something I have been wondering. Will the flavor of the tannins carry through to the distillate, or will it be removed in the distilling process? I've been told it isn't a concern if the beer is to be distilled, so mashing on the grain isn't a problem. Is this true?

[Uncle Jesse]

i boil corn but not other grain mashes. i believe this is why, or at least one reason why a typical beer won't make a very good spirit. you have to boil beer for an hour or more to get the hops just right. the heat involved is counterproductive for a distillers mash.

[AllanD]

The long 60-90min post mash "boil" to get proper hop oil polymerization
in beer making is done after the "wort" is seperated from the grain-bed
so isn't the same thing...

And as far as "long soak" for distilling? the tannins (long chain phenols) that would result from long contact with the grain hulls aren't volitile so don't carry over in the distillate.

If it were a real problem commercial distillers like segrams probably wouldn't ferment on-the-grain like they do...

AllanD

[Grayson_Stewart]

.....And all the experienced folks on here would have stopped fermenting and running on grains along time ago.

[Uncle Jesse]

The long 60-90min post mash "boil" to get proper hop oil polymerization
in beer making is done after the "wort" is seperated from the grain-bed
so isn't the same thing...

And as far as "long soak" for distilling? the tannins (long chain phenols) that would result from long contact with the grain hulls aren't volitile so don't carry over in the distillate.

If it were a real problem commercial distillers like segrams probably wouldn't ferment on-the-grain like they do...

AllanD

understood but i don't think you are supposed to boil a wort for distilling. i could be wrong on that point though.

[AllanD]

Nope, as you point out. you don't boil for distilling prior to the actual act of distillation,

I'll agree that it would serve no purpose and almost certainly be undesirable for a variety of factors.

boiling would kill off the Lactic acid bacteria that are primarily responsible for "souring" the mash, though most people don't delay yeast innoculation to allow time for proper "souring" to occour.

There are other minor factors to be considered that I won't bring up here... excessive minutae:) but coagulating the suspended proteins before fermentation is "ok" when you intend to seperate them, as is normal practice in beer making, but would only serve to make more of a mess when fermenting for distillation....

AllanD

[Virginia Gentleman]

well i'm no expert, but I don't think it's a problem. If you want a super refined, extra special double secret probation whiskey, maybe but for nice drinkabale spirit, I wouldn't worry. Only way to know is to try both though

[muckanic]

An argument against boiling when distilling is that, unless a rapid wort chilling technique is employed, more dimethyl sulphide (DMS) may be produced, especially with lager malt. On the other hand, there is a reason for shooting for clarity and minimising the presence of fatty acids in the ferment - less fusel oil. Depending upon one's distillation technique, this may or may not be a problem.

[muckanic]

A closer read of George Fix's brewing science book has caused me to recant slightly. DMS is mainly a problem with lightly-kilned, 6-row malt. It is formed from SMM at temperatures greater than 70C (ie, during kilning and boiling, but possibly not during mashing). As DMS is volatile, temperature is a double-edged sword; causing more formation on the one hand, but also more rapid elimination. It is also scrubbed out during the primary ferment, especially if performed open. That is the theory, but I have found that a combination of boiling and fermenting on the grain or even trub is a rapid route to the cooked cabbage syndrome.

Re fatty acids leading to fusel oil (and also esters), it depends whether we are talking saturated (from yeast) or unsaturated (from trub). The former are what lead to the byproducts, so fermenting on the grain is not so much of an issue as is the presence of a large proportion of aged yeast. This presumably occurs with backset and other continuous fermentation approaches, unless the yeast is forced to revive by having a large proportion discarded each time.

[oldpete]

the long boil in beer is two fold, hop oil extraction and denaturating of proteins to allow for a crystal clear product. the dimethal sulfide is not a biproduct of malting, the originating chemical, S-methyl-methionine (SMM), which breaks down during the boild to make dms which is vaporized by the boil and if the wort is properly crash cooled it is eliminated, it also is a sign of a bacterial infection in your fementer usually caused by poor sanitation or a lack of a large enough pitching of yeast. the latter cause of dms is much more potant and more rancid in flavor and aroma, more of a cooked cabbage like product. so if you want to make sure you eliminate the problem, add lots of healthy yeast and try and cool the mash as fast as possible.

[muckanic]

One speculative reason in favour of boiling: flavour. Mashed beer brewers are well aware of the caramelisation effect that occurs as the boiled wort darkens. This also provokes the issue of whether whiskey recipes in general neglect the potential role of coloured malts? I suppose the answer is yes if these substances contribute any volatiles; otherwise no. Beers certainly differ in the amount of malt nose that they possess. It would be interesting to compare the differences between, say, an unhopped American lager mash and an unhopped stout or brown ale mash.

[muckanic]

Here's one opinion that is pro boiling from the main site (Preparing Wash -> Grains -> Basic Whisky Recipe):

Jack describes his new recipe ...

I found an AMAZING way to make malt whiskey Brew an all-barley malt (2-row) batch like normal; mash/rest/sparge. Rather than just cooling the sparged wort- boil it (a good strong rolling boil) for 90 minutes, then cool it with a wort chiller or a bathtub (it should be at 70 to 80F in 45 minutes).

Here is the new twist- Pour the mash into a sanitized glass carboy, sit it in the bathtub and surround it with cold water. Let it sit until ALL of the trub (the white, brain like sludge that settles out to the bottom) has finally settled out. Once the trub has ALL settled out (it must be perfect- the wort must be sparkling clear)- this can take about 4 hours, THEN siphon off the PERECTLY CLEAR wort into another fermenter (I use the stainless steel pot I boiled it in), and add your yeast and Beano.

Once fermented and cleared (about two weeks), freeze concentrate, then potstill it using the "making the cut" numbers from the corn whiskey book.

This is the BEST whiskey I have EVER HAD (my wife's family goes to Scotland to get their stuff- this is better!). Not only is it smooth from the tight middle cut, but the long boil and PERFECT trub separation (I boiled 5 gallons, I only fermented about 3- I didn't let ANY trub carry over into the fermenter. Like I said it must be perfect separation) will give you a whiseky malt flavor that is so clean and clear, the spirit's finish actually tastes like you are chewing on a grain of 2-row- It is the most amazing, soft, grainy finish (without being harsh) that you will ever try. The long boil, and the perfect separation from the sediment is what does it. Give it a try- you will never go back to malt syrup whiskey again.

[muckanic]

Continuing this on-going conversation with myself. It occurs that there may be a workaround for pot stillers concerned about the sulphide content of their hooch - treat it with a copper salt and hope that this is as effective as vapour contact with a column. Something like copper sulphate is readily available from the garden shop, and is not a Lewis acid (which may or may not matter). The protocol would be much the same as for treatment with alkali, ie, perform a stripping run, then let the distillate sit on the treatment for a couple of weeks. Anyone tried it? This is all based on the assumption that oxidised copper is required to oxidise the sulphides (rather than copper reducing those sulphides), and that the sulphate reacts similarly to natural copper tarnish, aka patina or copper carbonate.