I am certain this has been beaten to death, but please allow me to provide some info…
After watching a YouTube presentation by the former Head Brewer at Bass Ale, and current QC Specialist for Sierra Nevada, we discovered the technique being employed might not support foam, and stability.
The yeast is many generations old. Well past 10, maybe past 20.
Our mash procedure is a multiple step infusion mash, starting at 122, then 148, 156, and finally 170F.
This is what I am told is causing our foam to dissipate, rather quickly. Next brew (for competition) will be a brand new yeast, and a single step infusion mash. Hope that helps!
Yuengling has very good foam stability. I hope we can achieve this!
Yeah, unless you specifically have undermodified malt like Crisp Hana or Rahr North Star pils (to name 2) a rest at 122 will likely reduce rather than increase foam. And that article I provided a link to a while back talks about the relationship between yeast health and foam.
If you believe the Czechs, they argue that a good head of foam “seals in” the flavors, carbonation, and freshness of the beer underneath it by way of being a barrier to atmospheric oxygen, thus keeping the beer’s flavor fresher for longer. IMO this logic is dubious–atmospheric oxygen doesn’t ruin a beer in the 20-30 minutes it takes to finish it. That said, the Czechs have been brewing beer for far longer than I have been and know way more about it than I.
For me, a nice layer of foam on a beer is more about the texture it brings, not so much flavor. And indeed a good head of foam is pretty to look at.
A rest at 122ish is rather old-school. If you insist on a protein rest, try one in the mid-130s using an undermodified base malt. In principle, this will favor the breakdown of large proteins into medium-sized proteins, which are the kind you want for body and head retention. In practice, YMMV quite a bit.
The Dutch claim the same thing, as the bartender will pour the glass of beer, with foam over-flowing, and then “seal” the glass with a knife. It is an interesting show to watch. But I doubt it impacts flavor.
I have been using several malts, with Floor Malted Bohemian Pilsner being one used frequently. I even followed Weyermann’s explicit instructions on mashing, a multi-step mash.
Mash (Infusion): Mash in at 62°C (145°F), hold this temperature, 63°C (145°F) and rest for 30 min, hold another break at 68°C (154°F) for 10 minutes, rise up the temperature to 72°C (162°F) and rest for 15 min. Mash out by 78°C (172°F)
But Weyermann does recommend decoction for a Pilsner.
Hello Bel Air Brewing , Thanks or your mail.
It´s great to hear you like our malt so much to brew all your beers with Weyermann® malt. All our Weyermann® malt are well modified for protein and starch. You can brew with all our basemalts in infusion way, no need for decoction. We recommend decoction for pilsner kind of beers.
I added 2 nice recipes from our library to show how to use our malts in infusion way. Happy brewing with Weyermann® malts
The foam issue does not exist so much with my beers on tap. So, it must have been a bottling issue. With carbonation a bit on the low side. Next time the kegs will be bumped up in CO2 level before we bottle.
I have found that a multistep mash of 145 and then a long rest at 160-162 helps with foam. However, spunding seems to help even more. My theory is you can only make foam once. Every transfer/agitation/force carbonation has diminishing returns. I really feel my lagers have improved tremendously since I started spunding.
My understanding, from watching the Bamforth video, is that carbonation is involved in foam formation but not in foam persistence. If you are forming foam but it is not lasting then you have enough foam-positive compounds but too many foam-negative compounds. If your kegged beer is fine, I would look at the cleaning regimen for your bottles and beer gun. Perhaps you are getting some slight contamination there that is killing the foam.
The so called “protein rest” is really not a protein rest. Very little proteolysis takes place for a number of reasons, lack of enzymes and with highly modified malt, most of the proteolysis has been completed. Instead, the 120-130F rest is a beta glucan rest. This is straight from Dr. Bamforth. Beta glucan is more of a problem than protein anyway and it’s not uncommon for malt to have slightly elevated levels of b-glucan. If you want the benefits of a b-glucan rest, use exogenous enzymes, they can work as high as 160F or more. I use them in my RIMS system, it increases flow and often improves overall extraction. It has no detrimental affects on head retention. Here:
The health of the yeast has a big impact on head stability and higher carbonation levels can help with the head as well.
My bottles are hyper clean, so do not think that was an issue. The Beergun? Maybe. I will take better care with it next go around.
The carbonation was certainly part of the problem.
Doing a swirl test with a glass of beer, there is plenty of foam. And out of the tap, especially on the first pour, thick foam will be there. But just like with a Budweiser, it will dissipate faster than desired. This is more common with my lighter beers, Pils, Festbier, etc.
The darker beers seem to do better.
without quoting anyone and writing this very quickly:
-i have “successful” amounts of head on the vast majority of my beers
-keep everything clean/free of oil/dirt (a KISS system helps doing this )
-i have tried special/stepped mashes over time and i can distinctly remember the last one i did was a hochkurz and the head on that beer was abysmal.
-i do single infusion mashes at about ~150F and i generally get good head depending on the grist
-no need for crystal/carapils/flaked oats/barley. its so tempting to say “they help” in size/stability but the beers i’ve made with some of the most impressive heads have been truly 100% base malt (including acidulated malt)
-more hops result in larger head in my opinion
-frankly, the higher the CO2 volume the more enhanced a decently stable head will be. the “secret” to the head in a lot of belgian beers imho is becuase they have 3.5+ vol CO2. it’s a no-brainer.
i dont care too much about head anymore because its just me drinking my beer, and i’ve been doing low co2 level beers for a while now
edit: lol just checked and duvel is apparently 4.25 vol CO2. that is insane, but that is kind of the beer i think of when it comes to “massive head every time”. there is no mystery to it. if duvel was carbed to say 2.0, i would imagine it would visually look like a typical pale lager.
Please help…what is the BJCP definition of stable foam?
Here are three pictures of my wife’s Festbier, that won her 1st place.
The first photo is the initial pour, on draft:
Foam stability in competitions means the average time to judge a beer, so 3-4 minutes typically for me.
Realize that in competition if you make it to BOS, it could be a half hour or a little more.
Thanks for the responses! Honestly, just looking to improve our brewing. It is an area where we got dinged on appearance, so looking at all possible solutions to do better next time.
The North Texas Homebrewers cleaned up this year at the Bluebonnet. My brewing friend and part owner of Bel Air wants to go back next year and see if we can “clean up”. I just laughed when he said that!
My conclusion is that the problem is in my bottling. We never bottle, except for a very rare competition, or giving beer to the neighbors. So I have my work cut out for me!
Your beers look great, and I have no doubt they taste great as well. Congrats on your homebrewing success!
I recently splurged and bought a Lukr side-pull faucet. Where I used to work, this was the only kind of faucet we had in the taproom. I was sold on it right away. I didn’t realize until recently how readily available they were to the homebrew market. It creates a great foam texture. Not cheap though :-\
Cool, Lukr is in my favorite country to have a beer! Crazy expensive, however. I could never talk my wife into a $400 faucet!
My efforts will be directed at the bottling process, with more attention to carbonation, and sanitation. Just bought 100 oxygen absorbing bottle caps. Have not used these before, but they state the beer will remain fresh for up to 6 months.
Pretty interesting. At the halfway mark, it has settled down quite a bit.
Sent my beer foam photos to a BJCP judge for the Bluebonnet. He said nothing wrong at all. But he looked at my scoresheets, where head dissipation and carbonation were noted. He and I came to the same conclusion…my problem is in the bottling process.
)
