On enzymes

[Boda Getta]

I use SEBStar and on occasion have done mashes using only enzymes and no malted grain. That has raised a question in my mind: If no malted grain is used, is it still an All Grain mash, does the quality suffer if no malted grain and only enzymes are used. Does any of the Bourbon distilleries use liquid enzymes>
Inquiring minds want to know.

BG

[der wo]

I think all Bourbon distilleries use them. Their grain bill is normally extreme low on malted grains (between 5 and 14%), no way to convert all starches in an economically acceptable time frame without adding enzymes.
Yes, also without any malted grain, it's still all grain.

Here a few quotes I copy&pasted a few years ago:

http://www.alcademics.com/2014/10/enzym ... ey-do.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow
In other spirits, enzymes are added, which saves the malting step or speeds the natural reaction with enzymes naturally present. This is true in bourbon (from corn), in other spirits from grain (like vodka), and for potato vodka.
Most bourbon mashbills (recipes) contain a certain portion of malted barley. This is because the malted barley provides the rest of the batch with enzymes needed to break down the material into simpler sugars. However, in modern times many (if not all) major bourbon producers also add enzymes to the corn, wheat/rye, and malted barley mashbill to speed things up.

http://www.im-biotech.com/enzymes/alcohol-beverages/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow
In view of these advantages, it is hardly surprising that commercial enzymes have replaced malt in all but the most conservative parts of the distilling industry.

http://www.straightbourbon.com/forums/a ... 12542.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow
For the making of scotch whiskey, the use of enzymes derived from any source other than malt is prohibited. Not so in the United States, although most beverage distillers use them supplementally, with malt, and not exclusively like Tuthilltown does. Most American whiskey distillers don't use them at all, but some do.
Although any grain can be malted, the enzymes in barley malt are particularly effective, so that in a mash that is just 10 percent malt enough enzymes are produced to convert all of the starch, hence most bourbon mash bills are about 10 percent malt.
You can mathematically calculate how much malted barley you need to convert a batch of mash into starch ... and that number used to be about 14% (like Maker's uses today) ... However, modern technology has kicked in with the advent of Gibb malt (malt that was treated with Gibberelich acid (sp?) during the malting process) this malt has significantly higher enzymatic power ... so only 8% to 10% is required for starch to sugar conversion ... typically, the saved percentage of the mash bill goes to corn to cut costs further. If you want to go a step further, distillers have dropped the malt to 5% by using Gibb malt with supplemental enzymes from the lab.
I don't know of any major US distiller using less than 5% malt of some kind ... probably because of taste profile issues ensuing from the total absence of barley in the mash bill.
Gibb malt is just regular barley malt that gets treated with Gibberellic acid. Gibberellic acid is a naturally occurring hormone found in plants that stimulates the cells of germinating seeds to produce mRNA molecules that code for hydrolytic enzymes ... like those responsible for breaking starches into sugars ... In layman's terms, Gibberellic acid enduces the barley to produce extra starch breaking enzymes during the malting process.
Many distilleries have studied the use of Gibb malt and concluded that it provides little or no taste difference in their product. In fact, most, but not all, commercial bourbon distilleries make use of Gibb malt now.
So, the reduction from say 14% to 8% barley in a mash bill could result in a lowering of a few flavor essences by a percent or two ... probably not noticable to the average bourbon drinker.
Similarly, one might argue that an additional malted barley drop from 8% to 5% by making up the difference with added enzymes would also go unnoticed. Going all the way to zero would certainly be noticed ... and I don't know any large scale distillery that uses less than 5% malt in its mash bill.

[still_stirrin]

I use SEBStar and on occasion have done mashes using only enzymes and no malted grain. That has raised a question in my mind: If no malted grain is used, is it still an All Grain mash, does the quality suffer if no malted grain and only enzymes are used. Does any of the Bourbon distilleries use liquid enzymes>
Inquiring minds want to know.

BG

If you use only grains in your mashbill, whether malted, or raw, or flaked, or cracked, or crimped, or any other “buzz word”, it IS still an all grain recipe.

Malting grains simply prepares them for conversion of starch to sugars. Even unmalted grains have enzymes in them. It is simply that the starches are simply still bound up as long carbohydrate chains. Gelatinization and malting breaks those long chains preparing them for conversion.

Using liquid enzymes indeed assists the starch to sugar conversion because of the concentration of them in the mash. And, because of the way you control the mashing temperatures, the conversion to fermentable sugars may be more thorough and the ferment will be more attenuate (dry when done).

Do the use of liquid enzymes affect the flavor....well, possibly. But not because “of” their use, rather because of “how” you use them. A dryer finishing beer will have a lighter flavor simply because some of the residual carbohydrates and non-fermentable sugars in a less attenuate ferment contribute to the fuller flavor.

And remember, what comes out of your still reflects what you put into it.

As to the use of liquid enzymes in commercial distilleries, without doubt, some do. But because of the cost of liquid enzymes usage at the scale that large distilleries produce, it is less opportune, since their mash controls and processes are quite adept at extraction of fermentables from their mashes. They simply don’t need to use liquid enzymes.
ss

[zapata]

I think the defining characteristic is that the All in all grain refers to fermentables. So basically, "no sugar, syrup or extracts" would be a better name for them. Etymologically we get the phrase all grain from the realm of beer brewing where for 40 years it has basically meant "no sugar or malt extract".

In fact, of course the all in all grain must refer to the fermentables only and can not refer to all ingredients. If you could use nothing other than grain to make whiskey you'd get no further than making flour!
Feel free to add water, yeast, enzymes, salts, acids, bases, even nutrients and call it all grain.

[TDick]

I think all Bourbon distilleries use them. Their grain bill is normally extreme low on malted grains (between 5 and 14%), no way to convert all starches in an economically acceptable time frame without adding enzymes.

I feel a little bitch slapped!
In my experience malting wheat is easy, barley not so much.
But it is still either an extra step to malt your own or an extra cost to buy barley malt.
And since I use Alpha Amalyse as a safeguard, is there any reason to fool with malting.
I ASSuME specialty malts will add flavor to whiskeys, but will toasting unmalted barley get similar results?

I'm not sure how to take this information!

DumbAss Gorilla.jpg (5.97 KiB) Viewed 2017 times

[der wo]

I think a good Bourbon without any malted barley will taste still like a good Bourbon. 5% malt will have an impact on the taste, but not much. HD Google search Bourbon grain bills will give you this "5-14%". It's not like the cheap Bourbons have 5% and the expensive ones 14%. I think, since their grain bills are well-known, they wouldn't dare to lower the malt content. Bad publicity. And for big companies it's very important to produce always exactly the same taste. The people want what they are used to drink.