Home Distiller

ToatyMcSpud wrote:Evening all

I'm about a year into experiencing making likker at home. I posted a topic asking what amount of amylase and diastatic enzyme one would add to a 5 gallon wash? I can only get 2-row barley here and that doesn't have enough enzyme to convert the starch into sugar.
OP...
How much Of each enzyme did you add to your wash?
Thanks

Add more barley.

Can't believe I have missed this thread.
Thanks MCH for the testing and report.
I generally use method #1.
Jimbo and I have been to Koval and this weekend I was at Journeyman of which both distillerys use the same method.

Thanks for the input Windy, interesting.
So it might make sense at least commercially to sacrifice the malt enzymes to bump the yield a little bit when using liquid enzymes anyway. They must not feel it has a terrible affect on the product.

Personally, I still like to add my malts at lower temps, just stubborn that way.

Thanks for putting in all the labor on this, MCH. Keep up the good work.

I'm a fan of the real dealio too (malt)

usually do method 1. = a pretty steady 1.062 finish 1.000

i tried method 2 today. got 1.063

mostly did this as method 1 was giving me really dry astringent tannin pucker in the mash...but it does not appear to carry over to distillate.

doing method 2 definitely reduced the tannin pucker, i'll shoot back a note after i distill it to see if it is substantially different in taste. and what the finish gravity is.

You think the higher temps with the malts you are getting unfermentables that are converted to fermentables with the enzymes in version 1 kinda like how they make light beer?

Bing-Bot wrote:You think the higher temps with the malts you are getting unfermentables that are converted to fermentables with the enzymes in version 1 kinda like how they make light beer?

dunno if you're asking me, but i think so. they must because it's finishing 1.00-1.002. Haven't had one AG go under 1 yet tho

HDNB wrote:usually do method 1. = a pretty steady 1.062 finish 1.000

i tried method 2 today. got 1.063

mostly did this as method 1 was giving me really dry astringent tannin pucker in the mash...but it does not appear to carry over to distillate.

doing method 2 definitely reduced the tannin pucker, i'll shoot back a note after i distill it to see if it is substantially different in taste. and what the finish gravity is.

Did you ever do a two step mash as per the Scottish distilleries do.
http://www.wormtub.com/distilleries/dis ... ery=Ardbeg
Mash Size 4.5 tonnes
First Water 17,000 litres at 64°C
Second Water 8,000 litres at 82°C
Third Water 17,500 litres at 90°C

I believe the 3rd water is just to wash any last bit of booze out of the grains and is then used as Water 1 in the next mash

( Thanks der Wo for sharing the link)

This mashing like the Scotts works good for crushed malted barley, but not for corn. A method with lautering three times is only practicable with grains, which are easy to lauter.

Thanks for the info, HDNB, great to hear others comparable results.
Interesting about the tannins in the mash, that was mentioned as one of the potential drawbacks of getting the malt grains so hot. Let us know what you think about carry over.

I've batch sparged bourbon style mashes with good results.
By simply adding hot water and remixing, twice, I feel like I'm getting almost everything out of the grains.
I've also done the same kind of rinse procedure post ferment to get everything out of the spent grains when fermenting on grain.

MichiganCornhusker wrote:Thanks for the info, HDNB, great to hear others comparable results.
Interesting about the tannins in the mash, that was mentioned as one of the potential drawbacks of getting the malt grains so hot. Let us know what you think about carry over.

I've batch sparged bourbon style mashes with good results.
By simply adding hot water and remixing, twice, I feel like I'm getting almost everything out of the grains.
I've also done the same kind of rinse procedure post ferment to get everything out of the spent grains when fermenting on grain.

Sounds like a good way to get the most. Prolly make the beer purist guys loose their minds lol.

I've been doing the double sparge also. When I check the SG, I get around 1.075 on the first squeeze (starting with 3# per gallon). Then the first rinse is around 1.045, and the second 1.020. The rinsing adds another gallon of water and the final SG is usually 1.060 - 1.065 at 2# per gallon. I figure the 1.045 and 1.020 indicate a lot of sugar that I wouldn't get without the sparging. But then, since I'm going to sparge, I don't kill myself squeezing the bag anymore, so you wouldn't really lose as much as that with a good pressing or bag handling protocol.

"bag handling protocol"

LOL.

After 33 years of marriage my bag handling protocol is down to a fuckin science.

Yep, Skow, those seem very much like the results I see with the rinsing.
Bag Handlers Unite!

I know there's some loss not squeezing and fighting things, just as there's some loss by not fermenting on the grain. But I typically also batch sparge and find that the amount of effort I save and almost as good SG is well justified versus the squeeze. And I destroy fewer nylon bags.

I don't wanna be the one left holdin' the bag.

I'm downsizing my foot print so will not have room fro grain in the fermenter, so I'll have to learn this sparging millarky, sounds like voodoo to me

Everything in this hobby is some kinda magic until you figure it out.

Swedish Pride wrote:I'm downsizing my foot print so will not have room fro grain in the fermenter, so I'll have to learn this sparging millarky, sounds like voodoo to me

No voodoo, pretty straight forward actually. I sparge the beers I make but squeeze the whiskeys. Why? well shit I dunno. The whiskeys are made in a 55gal barrel that isint set up for sparging. Hows that for an answer?

Ill tell you how I sparge beer, you can adapt to your recipe. Its easyflippinpeasy.

15 gal barrel with a spigot and copper pipe loop pick up filter in the bottom (slits cut every 1/2 inch with a hacksaw).
22 lbs malt, 8 gallons water at 167F get me to 155 mash in temp. (Dont mash whiskeys at 155!, 158F strike temp will get you to 147F, roughly) (wrap the barrel in an old quilt to hold temp)

After an hour or 90 minutes start draining off the liquid in the barrel. Recycle the first couple quarts until it quits running muddy (this is called vorlauf and sets the filter bed)

When you can see the top of the grain bed set up in the barrel looking dry shut off the drain, add 4 gallons more water at 170F and stir the shit out of it. Repeat vorlauf and drain until that grain bed is staring at you again. Then sparge again, 4 gallons more water at 170 same as above.

Done. Youll have 12-13 gallons of 8% sweet wort.

Cheers.

Jimbo wrote:I sparge the beers I make but squeeze the whiskeys. Why? well shit I dunno.

Because you like corn in your whiskey?

Have you ever tried sparging with you beer setup with a bourbon mash?
I know Woodshed and SS have both posted about doing similar filtering rigs.

I never was able to get the hang of it without the corn plugging everything up.

Yes I believe you are correct. Corn paste definitely does not lend itself to filtering. Its a bitch enough to get it to squeeze through a bag. Damn popeye arms after a session of that shit. Looking forward to grinding all the groceries to dust in a hammer mill and using indirect heating on the still to work the whole lot over.

HDNB wrote:usually do method 1. = a pretty steady 1.062 finish 1.000

i tried method 2 today. got 1.063

mostly did this as method 1 was giving me really dry astringent tannin pucker in the mash...but it does not appear to carry over to distillate.

doing method 2 definitely reduced the tannin pucker, i'll shoot back a note after i distill it to see if it is substantially different in taste. and what the finish gravity is.

substantial difference. i had two spirit runs with high tannin pucker in the mash. the low wines tasted good, but lets face it, they were low wines.

On the spirit run the tannins come over strong in a late heads cut. very localized.

these two spirit runs are good. but there is a dryness to them, after cuts and blending.

today ran a 1.5x of the method 2, malts in at 150 (net temp after adding) and GL. there was a bit of dry pucker in a late heads cut, but overall all hearts fractions are significantly sweeter and smoother and lack the astringent dryness that the two spirits from method 1 mashes have.
finished same/same 1.001/2 this mash got a sour smell on day 2/3 like vinegar, that eventually became funky but not putrid, no sign of infection, just the smell. (funky= earthy/wet grain silo smell)

now i'm at a crossroads. keep them separate or blend all for larger jar of goodies.

do up 3 bottles, one of each batch and one where you combine the two.
Put them in your cupboard or get a few mates over and see what one runs out first