I have seen in some belgian recipes where both malted and unmalted wheat are used in the same recipe. What is the purpose of this? What does the use of unmalted wheat add to the beer that the malted doesn’t?
Starch. Haziness. Maybe some head formation/retention.
So, what would be a good ratio to use of malted wheat to unmalted wheat in a recipe?
1:1?
What are you trying to brew? A Wit?
You can use all malted wheat, but at higher percentages. IIRC from “Brewing with Wheat” that’s what some breweries do. IMO a short (30min)/no boil (just hot enough to sterilize) on all or part of the beer will give it a really ‘fresh’ wheat flavor and hazy appearance.
Start rant - “EVERY BELGIAN-STYLE BEER DOES NOT HAVE TO HAVE WHEAT IN IT !” - end rant >:(
I feel better now.
True, it’s not necessary, but I don’t see why any style shouldn’t have wheat in it, if you like wheat in your beers. What I find most interesting about Belgian beers is that the brewers brew to taste, not to style. Rigidly defined styles for these beers is antithetical to their heritage.
Uhm… He said “some” Belgian styles. Last I checked that doesn’t mean “every”. Most Belgian styles don’t use wheat.
[quote]Most Belgian styles don’t use wheat.
[/quote]
Exactly my point. Granted my rant was “tongue in cheek” and meant to be an attempt at humor - I do see a lot of homebrewers putting wheat malt in all Belgian inspired beers when not needed.
In fairness to wiley1 he never stated a particular type of Belgian beer so I really don’t know the end result he is seeking, but with malted / unmalted wheat in the recipe I think he is referring to Wit, or maybe Lambic.
Raw wheat gives more of a tart flavor than malted wheat. It also gives a very pale color to a beer, hence the name “wit” or white. Its almost grey. I’d use unmalted wheat in a witbier.