Paul, FWIW I switched to a SS IC and am not having any sulfur issues, even using the antioxidant mixture. Whatever the mechanism, sulfur prone strains can sometimes be more sulfury. I posted in another thread that the strains I use almost every time are 1056, 1450, 2206, 2124, 3711, 3726, and occasionally the Trappist type strains. No sulfur issues there at all.
Bamforth has repeatedly said that pursuing HSO is a worthwhile exercise IF and ONLY IF you have the cold side process down. As far as Oxygen not being oxidative, well…
Water doesn’t have to be complex. Everyone has the ability to start with a clean slate and build simple, yet effective, brewing water profiles. I would say that the more effort you put into fermentation, the better your beer will be.
Healthy fermentation is less complex than water. Hands down less complex.
For me, “complex” is a relative term. If I don’t understand an involved process then I call it “complex” but once it becomes second nature it’s no longer complex. All grain brewing started off complex but became easy. Winterizing my sprinkler system was once a complex process but is very easy now. I once considered brewing water design complex, but it’s pretty easy for me now. To the level I need to understand these things to use them for the purpose I want, they’re all pretty easy for me - BUT they didn’t start that way for me or any person new to them.
Granted, with every one of those things, I don’t need to know all of the science behind them to use in my daily life for the purposes I desire. I know about enzymatic actions at varying temperatures, but not all of them. I know about sprinkler line and valve design, but I don’t know how electronic valves are constructed internally or the chemistry behind the polymers used. I know what levels of minerals I need to be concerned with in brewing and how to target them, but how the water constituents might interact inside a boiler at varying pressures and temperatures is foreign to me.
I disagree, and here’s why:
There are several good spreadsheets and calculators out there for water. They work well, and produce very repeatable results.
But on the fermentation side, we’re still very stuck with the “brew and see how it turns out” approach instead of a spreadsheet model. Final gravity? Total crap shoot. Banana/clove balance it a Weisbier? Going to have to likely brew several beers to dial it in. The list goes on, and we haven’t even started talking about differences between starter methods (cell count vs. vitality) and so on.
I concur. Doesn’t take much to reproduce dozens of useful water profiles. Also doesn’t take much to use the water and get solid results in the mash.
Being a yeast whisperer however…
+2. Most strains behave at least a little differently, aside from all the other factors.
Bringing up an old thread to ask a question. Unfortunately, some (all?) of these Brewers have transitioned to another platform. Maybe someone else can chime in. Here goes:
Why Kmeta or Na Meta? Will Gypsum not provide the same sulfur to create the mechanisms to create antioxidive properties? If not why not? If so, why not use gypsum vs CaCl to provide the calcium for the mash at the same time adding the sulfur?
Sulfate and sulfite is why.
Sulfite is an antioxidant(meta, so2), sulfate(s04) is not.
Beat me to it!
But yeast can turn sulfate into sulfite and excrete the sulfite, so increasing the sulfate in the water may lead to increased sulfite in the final beer. How much depends on the yeast, pitching rate, fermentation temperature, etc.
Because gypsum (calcium sulfate) simply dissociates in water into calcium and sulfate ions. Whereas sulfites such as sodium metabisulfite will react with the DO in solution (2Na2S2O5 + O2 → 2Na2SO4 + 2SO2) forming sodium sulfate and sulfur dioxide.
This is where I was heading with this question
I don’t think you want to design your process with sulfite content as the target. You should choose the sulfate, yeast, pitch rate, etc. to give the beer you want to drink. If that results in enough residual sulfite to preserve your beer than you can be happy. If it doesn’t and you want more you can add more.
I think you’re right. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.
Check my math:
Narziss specifies that keeping potassium levels under 10 ppm is optimal. This corresponds to ~30 ppm of KMeta.
Mash 5 gal = ~18927 ml, sparge 4 gal = ~15141ml
Mash .48mg/18927ml = .00002536. * 1,000,000 = 25.36 ppm
Sparge .08mg/15141ml = .00000528 * 1,000,000 = 5.28 ppm
If my math is right the point is mute: I don’t have a scale that can measure .XX mg.
Few things.
- That is for finished beer as to meet the sulfite requirements for labeling.
- Kmeta levels don’t matter, use 10, use 1000000. Oxygenation(for yeast) expels sulfite to sulfate, which makes it a moot point post boil.
- Lager yeast make more fermentation sulfite than ale.
- ppm = mg/l. You don’t need to go down to the ML. Brewing water in liters, 10mg/liter(if thats your rate).
.47-.48 grams and .07-.08 grams makes A LOT more sense than .47-.48 milligrams and .07-.08 milligrams! [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]
But the yeast derived sulfite wont last long unless your cold side handling practices are perfect as it’s the first thing to go with any oxygen ingress.
But that is exactly why you want it - not because of its taste or intrinsic value but because of its oxygen scavenging properties. If it goes away as it does its job, that’s OK.
SulfITES are antioxidants that we use in the mash, and are used prior to any yeast metabolism that will occur downstream (i.e. hot-side protection from oxidative effects during the mash). Downstream, yeast provide the protection we desire from detrimental oxidative reactions.