Is it only transfering from the fermenter to bottles and/or kegs that negative aspects of oxidization occur? I’ve often wondered about transfering into a brew kettle when doing all grain directly from the mashtun? Aerating the wort before, during or immediately after pitching the yeast is acceptable.
Unless you’re following the full low oxygen brewing protocol (including deoxygenating all of your strike water, etc.), it’s pretty unlikely you’re going to notice any ill effects from small scale, additional oxygenation on the hot side.
That said, how are you transferring wort from the mashtun to the kettle? It’s good practice to minimize splashing, etc.
I last dumped from a pot into the bk… but it’s a stout so not Too worried. Just setting up my equipment again now, putting it in the carport… last 3 batches were under open skies and everything had to be handled manually. Hmmph… started out just showing my son in law how to brew, gave him John Palmer’s book … now I’ve got the bug again! Lol!
I agree with narcout. However, I also must say that many brewers I’ve spoken with put way too much emphasis of the elimination of oxygen in the “pre-aeration” stage of the brewing process. I don’t believe that’s necessary at all. I believe it’s far more important to put greater emphasis on minimizing oxygen post fermentation.
I’ve gotta disagree with that. Even without brewing low oxygen, there are still noticeable effects from oxygen during other processes.
totally agree
narcout said “it’s pretty unlikely you’re going to notice any ill effects from small scale, additional oxygenation on the hot side.” Emphasis on hot side.
I think that’s right. There are definitely “noticeable effects from oxygen during other processes.” But, most of those effects are from cold side oxidation if you aren’t doing low oxygen brewing (narcout’s assumption).
I’ve seen at least one instance that proves my point. It is possible on the hot side whether you brew low oxygen or not.
I don’t preboil/deaerate my water or use special equipment like a mash cap, etc. But I find that, in addition to careful, sound practice like gentle transfers and avoiding excessive stirring and splashing, using antioxidants on the hot side makes some small but noticeable difference. Every little thing adds up, so do what you can. But brutally rigorous cold side oxygen exclusion is a must.
Can you please elaborate?
I did say it was good practice to avoid HSA regardless of whether one is brewing LODO.
Okay, well I have to admit, I suffer from CRS a lot these days. HSA… that ring a bell! Lol! Well this is a stout with an SRM of about 39, but it only had an OG of 1.055, fermented(ing) with a single packet of S-04. I added 40 Ludin’s wild cherry candy drops (dissolved in hot water and chilled) to the fermenter on day six…very low activity but some has been observed. I’m hoping it’s not a total waste. I’m working on my setup some more today. I always enjoyed brewing so hoping I can get it together again… almost a ten year hiatus… :
It seems there is a great deal of discussion pertaining to Hot Side vs. Cold Side of the brewing process. Instead, shouldn’t the discussion be Pre-Aeration and Post-Fermentation? Perhaps I simply don’t understand the conversation. But we want oxygen in the wort when we pitch. Then, we work to avoid inclusion of oxygen after fermentation.
I want as much splashing as possible when I pump my wort from the BC through my plate cooler and into the fermenter; this can only help fermentation.
So why would oxygen on the hot side be of any concern? Am I missing something?
As a low Ox brewer for pale lagers, I try to avoid oxygen degradation throughout the process, but if you preboil strike water, you are pushing out O2 from the water; then if you mash in gently by underletting or slow immersion, you can limit oxygen uptake in the mashing process. Carrying that through the boil you can reduce thermal stress with a gentle boil, then introduce oxygen after chilling the wort, but only in the presence of a healthy pitch of yeast, which will quickly eliminate the O2.
It’s not about any one thing, rather the several little things that taken together, gives a freshness that is easily missed by taking no such steps.
Just my 2cents, but I notice the difference and that is how I choose to brew those styles. YMMV.
Everything that is present to oxidize and lead to stale beer post-fermentation is present at mashing-in. Given that reaction rates double for every 10°C increase in temperature, your wort can oxidize over 100x faster at mash, boil, and cooling and transfer temperatures than beer at fermentation and storage temperature. So everything you can do to mitigate the effects of oxygen on the pre-fermentation side will produce a fresher tasting wort. Rigorous exclusion of oxygen from the moment of pitching until the beer hits the glass will preserve flavor as long as possible; it’s a question of what initial product you’re preserving. Hence the low-oxygen brewhouse technology implemented by the Germans in the last 50 years to extend shelf life of their fragile export Pilsners, which are nonetheless skunked to undrinkability even before their green bottles leave the filling line… Many measures are being taken by homebrewers, including use of antioxidants and adsorbants forbidden by German custom, and their effects have experimentally been shown to be even more significant at the homebrew level, probably because of relative surface area exposure and other scale effects. Again, it’s not all or nothing, or any one thing, it’s cumulative effect. And +1 on reducing thermal stress, that may be the best bang for the buck.
Interesting, I thought a more rigorous boil was desired. I’ll have to turn my burner down and give it a try.
Yes, you did, and there’s no doubt of that. I have seenm someone have trouble with large amounts of air in their runoff lineof and the beer was badly oxidized despite the rest of the processes being good. Not conclusive, of course, but an interesting data point.
The idea of a long, vigorous boil was to drive off DMS. In fact, it takes at least 30 minutes on heat to convert the DMS precursor, SMM, into DMS, after which just a few minutes of an open boil with lots of rolling and bubbling will drive it off. BUT. It is very rare today to find a malt that contains the precursor, although it was common in the palest Pilsner malts decades ago, whence the old advice. For all other purposes you can keep the lid mostly on, allowing you to reduce the heat, and just maintain a simmer providing the good rolling circulation which you need to coagulate protein and well utilize your hops. Then lid off and blast it for a bit, there are still other volatiles fo blow off. One trick I like for this is to heat the kettle asymmetrically. This will create a lot of movement and turbulence. (Here’s an indicator: if your boil off is under 10%, even as low as 6%, you’re probably doing well on the thermal stress. Above that, and especially when you hit 12%, wort will taste stale and get staler faster.)
(I had a long brewing hiatus too, in the late 90s to early 00s, and it seemed not much had changed. In the last 10 years, it seems everything we knew has been upended!)
Rob, I haven’t found any evidence that pils malts don’t have SMM in them. Maltsters have tried to find a way to malt their barley and kiln them to a low color without still having SMM. All kinds of drying and heating schemes have been tried, but the malt with successful SMM reduction had darker color.
I’m unaware that maltsters have succeeded in that quest. SMM and DMS are still a potential problem, but I do agree that the old ways of doing things weren’t necessarily the best.
Martin, I admit it’s true that the Pils malts do still have some SMM. But what I’ve experienced, and what the maltsters indicate, is that they have greatly reduced it in most of their Pilsner malts. Maybe not the very palest, less modified ones, but these are now specialty products. Most of the Pilsner malts we encounter, and all of the other base malts, have it below the level that would justify its being a focus of attention anymore. It would be very difficult, I think, for most homebrewers to so far reduce the intensity of their boil process that they would fail to deal with the level of SMM they will find in most any malt, including pale Pilsner. The much greater problem is the danger of wort damage through over-boiling out of a misplaced fear of phantom DMS, it would seem – especially when trying to make a delicate, fresh-tasting Pilsner, which is ironically when homebrewers are most often advised to boil long and hard. As you say, DMS is a potential problem, but thermal stress is a dead certainty.
Sure wish the audio of your seminar on boiling was available, I’d really looked forward to it.
