Hi there,
we discussed the using and classification of Brown and Amber Malt. If you want to use Bru’n’Water with these malts classification is a problem. I think Martin Brungard is not right when he says Brown Malt is a basic malt, because this malt has no enzyms. The color is not the argument. He wrotes in another post:
Because Brown Malt etc. has no enzyms its usage can be tricky – roasted or not roasted is a question of the correct pH level.
So my question is: Is Brown and Amber malt really a basic malt? Or is it like a crystal malt which has also no enzyms and therefore contains no fermentable sugar?
Brown and amber malts are not crystal or caramel malts, they have not been processed in the same way as those types (stewed and saccharified.) They are in fact roasted malts, produced by roasting base malts, in the same way as chocolate, black, or other Röstmalz/Carafa types are produced. But they have been only very lightly roasted as compared with, for example, Carafa types, and so they may not have anywhere near the same level of acidity as these darker roast malts. Perhaps for this reason they might be better modeled as base malts in predicting their effect on mash pH. I am sure Martin will address your question, he is a regular and helpful participant in this forum.
Thank you for this explanation. I think you are right that the lower acidity is a reason in comparison to chocolate malt etc…
I have read that there is a difference between historic Brown Malt in former times and modernized Brown Malt. Historical Stout from 1890 -1949 uses up to 30% of Brown and Amber Malt in the mash, nowadays only 5-10% are recommended. The shops in the UK will classify them as roasted malts. Classification of these malts are really complicate…
So my question is: Is Brown and Amber malt really a basic malt? Or is it like a crystal malt which has also no enzyms and therefore contains no fermentable sugar?
Both Brown and Amber malts are basically more highly kilned versions of base malts. The kilning process has denatured their enzymes, so they can’t self convert their starches to sugars. Normal base malts are capable of self conversion and, in most cases, have enough diastatic power to convert other malts as well. Neither contains any fermentable sugars. They must be mashed in order to convert their starches into sugars.
Unlike the other malts, Crystal/Caramel malts have had their starches converted during processing, so mashing is not required.
As you can see from the descriptions above, your Amber and Brown malts are much more closely related to base malts.
Yes, brown and amber malts are roasted more than a pale malt. But they’re not roasted enough to bring it to the acidity that’s modeled for the typical roast grains such as black, roast, or chocolate. So they shouldn’t be modeled as Roast grains in Bru’n Water. I find that they model reasonably well as Base malt with their reported color rating.
I would never consider using Brown Malt as a base in any beer. However, I like using Brown Malt in my porters as a matter of historical value and I love the flavor addition, but only to the extent of about 8% of my grain bill. That said, and understanding the addition Brown Malt gives to a brew, I can easily see a brewer using as much as 30% in a stout.
On this subject, I think it’s the conclusion that counts.
A brewing colleague once did a series of tests with the acidity of brown and amber malt:
“I once measured the pH values of a series of test mashes in distilled water. Amber malt von Brewferm (150 EBC) and Fawcett (125 EBC) had a pH value of 4.86 and 4.83 respectively and Brown malt von Fawcett (185 EBC) had a pH value of 4.72. The roasted malts I tested (between 650 and 1150 EBC) had an average pH value of 4.63, i.e. only slightly more acidic.”.
Doesn’t that speak more in favour of defining brown and amber malts as roasted malt?
The differences between base malt and roasted malt are not insignificant. Bru’n’Water says at 100% brown malt as base malt pH 4,44, as roasted malt pH 1,37.
That’s true but in my point of view it is not the point. The main topic is the acidity isn’t it?
I’m working with Warminster Brown Malt 100-120 EBC. Amber malt is 38-60 EBC.
I have decided to use brown and amber as roasted malt in Bru’n’Water as well as in my recipe program (Kleiner Brauhelfer). Why?
On the one hand, modern brown malt has only the name in common. However, it no longer contains so many active enzymes and has virtually no diastatic power.
Secondly, tests with distilled water under laboratory conditions have shown that the acidity of brown (125 EBC, Fawcett) and amber malt, pH 4.83 and pH 4.86, respectively, is similarly low to that of carafa or chocolate malt (650 EBC), pH 4.63.
Very practical: brown and amber malt are weak roasted malts. In Bru’n’Water, you can safely specify them as roasted malt, but then you have to add acid to the mash afterwards, while the definition as base malt corresponds more to real values.
Maybe Martin can consider this in the next version of Bru’nWater?
Thank you all
Radulph
Edit: Sorry, I have no calculator for converting EBC to Lovibond.
For brown ales I’ve treated brown malt as a base malt in Bru’n Water and have been delighted with the results.
I usually use about 70% Special ale Ale malt, 16% Munich Malt, and 8% brown malt, and then I’ve been experimenting with the remainder of the grain bill.
I always wondered why most water calculators allow you to input the Lovibond rating of caramel malts but don’t allow the same for roasted/kilned malts.
I considered simply inputting them as caramel malts just so I could specify color. However, I don’t know if the saccharification process that caramel malts undergo has implications for pH beyond the level of kilning. Can anyone weigh in on the chemistry of that?
Surely Biscuit malt at 30 L, for example, is more acidic than a base malt? Or Special Roast at, at 50 L.