Backset Mashing

[Uncle Remus]

Last weekend after stipping off a batch of barley whiskey, I decided to try this:

In my big ole mash pot I threw in 12cups of rolled barley, 12 cups of rolled corn, 12 cups of barley chop. (sorry I usually go by weight but someone borrowed my scale so I winged it) Then I dumped about 30 litres boiling hot backset (from the barley whiskey I just finished distilling)
Stirred it up well and covered the pot.

When the temp of the mash got down to 66.5 deg C. (striking temperature) I added 8 or 10 cups or so of ground malt stirred it in, put the lid on and left it sit till morning.

In the morning I dumped it into my fermenter, added about 5 kg or so of sugar, topped the mash off with water to bring it up to about the 50ltr mark on my fermenter and added my yeast. (My yeast is a culture that I've kept alive for a few generations of mash now.)

After a couple hours it was bubbling away happily. This weekend it is still working. It has a grain crust on top and it is rolling steady. Next weekend it should be good to go.

I have no idea what it will be like...maybe it will taste like poo... I used a lot of backset. We'll soon find out BTW this is the first time I've ever used backset.

I like to try to be efficient, thats why I tried this method...rather than using more time and energy to cook a mash. Time will tell if this method is a good thing or not.

[DBM]

Sounds to me like a good recipe. If distilled right you will probably have a good whiskey.

[Uncle Remus]

We will see I guess. If I remember right, most of the stuff I read about using back set calls for only a gallon or so. This wash is about 80% backset.

One thing about it the fermentation is working like gang busters. I wasn't sure how it would work as the wash tasted horribly acidic, but obviously the yeasties are very happy. It seems have lost a lot of the acidity after a week. I'm only going by taste...if I do it again I'll get some litmus paper and check it at start and finish.

I'll run it through the pot still a couple times and see what happens. I'm hoping it will turn out good as this is an economical way to make a large mash.

[golden pond]

I use every drop of my backset, I'm on the 5th mixing today, it ran so strong on the 4th, I figured I'd try 5.

[possum]

I was using about 80-100% backset UR, and I found the results quite nice.
I can't wait to get my whiskey going again ...2-3 weeks untill I can start it back up.

Of course I was running 6gallon batches.

[Uncle Remus]

Good to know you guys have had good results I'll keep you posted.

[Rocky_Creek]

From my experiance you are going to have no probllem. Good thinking.

[AllanD]

Anyone who hasn't done it should simply add sugar to some backset and see what happens....
sugared backset usually ferments furiously....

Backset is quite acidic (which yeast like) and LOADED with all the nutrients that yeast love,
including dead yeast cells to provide protein for yeast population increase

As I understand it with rum production in the tropical regions that the overriding concern is bacterial or fungal contamination of the fermenting wash, so in most cases it's going to be distilled in 48-72hours regardless of the state of the fermentation, and they'll just add the "dunder" back into more molasses, water and yeast to avoid wasting any unfermented sugar that was in the "Dunder" (aka "spent wash").... hey, the yeast will get it next time around:)

AllanD

[muckanic]

Speaking from a brewing perspective, I would query that grain bill. Under optimum conditions, high diastatic malt is going to convert something less than its own weight of starchy adjunct to sugar. Consequently, if a higher proportion of adjuncts is used, I would have thought this will simply result in a starch build-up in the fermenter. At the end of fermentation, most of this starch will form a sediment, although some of it could wind up in the boiler and burn if one is in a hurry to distill. The adjuncts may very well add nutrients and some flavour, but it strikes me that a bit of amylase enzyme could improve efficiency here.

[Rocky_Creek]

Not entirel true on rum. There is I have recently found out about something called "high ester rum". It was developed because of high German taxes on rum. It amounts to a concentrate of rum flavor. It is made to be mixed with vodka and taste like rum. You make it by leaving the dunder in a pit or tank intentionally letting it get bacterial contamination to produce more of the rum flavor. Some producers also mix this product with light rum to get the particular flavor they are after. This process is not openly talked about by the producers because it is somewhat discusting.

[AllanD]

I suppose I should have specifically said: "WHEN dunder is used in the rum washes" which it isn't always. it's a process used to produce
heavier bodied rums (think Jamaican, like Meyer's)

Hey, the way I see it is that if a bacterial or fungal process goes wrong
on a vat of dunder being used to make some artificial flavoring it isn't a terrible loss, but if the same happens on a fermenting batch of wash and you lose the sugar (and alcohol) that's another matter entirely....

The "dunder" process for rum does involve an intentional bacterial
"souring" involving both Lactic acid producing bacteria as well as a species of acetobacter (vinegar producing), but the dunder process is mostly used to produce "heavy" and/or dark rums (Myers for example) on english speaking islands where heavy rums are more commonly made...

the purpose is to provide "free" souring to inhibit less desirable fungi and bacteria.

So the practical application mimics the function of the induced lactobacilli
souring of grain mashes in american and canadian distilleries.
(even if the intended final product is higly rectified spirit like Vodka or gin)
Yes the lactic souring takes some of the sugar that would have been available for the yeast to produce alcohol from, but it's cheaper than
either adding acid (which isn't free) or losing the whole batch to a contaminating "infection"

But you are entirely right, not all rum distilleries use the dunder in their washes.

AllanD

[Rocky_Creek]

Well I would think that some may use dunder as we use sour mash, and some use thr "treated" dunder for extra heavy, but also some add fruit. What the hell, there is more than one way to skin a cat, or make rum.

[Uncle Remus]

I ran the batch last weekend and it turned out just fine. Not really any different than my regular whiskey without backset. But the fermentation worked great and I saved some propane in the mashing process.

Golden Pond told me I probably wouldn't notice any difference for the first few mashes, and then the sour flavour would start to come through. He's right, I don't notice it on this first generation. We'll see what happens down the line.

....and that's all I got to say about that.

[muckanic]

="AllanD". So the practical application mimics the function of the induced lactobacilli souring of grain mashes in american and canadian distilleries...
Yes the lactic souring takes some of the sugar that would have been available for the yeast to produce alcohol from, but it's cheaper than
either adding acid (which isn't free) or losing the whole batch to a contaminating "infection"

The natural bacteria also provide enzymes which catalyse the reaction alcohol + acid -> ester. The esters are a desirable part of the rum flavour profile.