Anyone brewing with Crisp Chevallier malt?

[foxbat]

I've read lots of reviews and the taste profile looks very good to me. Can I do a single infusion mash with it and expect similar extraction to Maris Otter and do the resulting worts attenuate to the same levels as you would usually get? Any other tips regarding its use would be welcome (sending up the bat-signal to @peebee ...)

 

[Stu's Brews]

I've recently done an 'English' IPA that used Chevallier as the base malt.

Everything worked out pretty much exactly as I imagine it would have if I'd used Maris Otter or any other pale malt really.

In terms of the end product, I'm happy with it but not sure how much difference the Chevallier has actually made as it's a new recipe (needed to use up some EKG and Bramling Cross hops). Will probably do it with Maris Otter next time just to see if there is a discernible difference.

 

[Leon103]

@dan125 I think you have used it

 

[foxbat]

I've recently done an 'English' IPA that used Chevallier as the base malt.

Everything worked out pretty much exactly as I imagine it would have if I'd used Maris Otter or any other pale malt really.

In terms of the end product, I'm happy with it but not sure how much difference the Chevallier has actually made as it's a new recipe (needed to use up some EKG and Bramling Cross hops). Will probably do it with Maris Otter next time just to see if there is a discernible difference.

I've read that it's supposed to be noticeably sweeter and richer than the usual modern pale malts. Did you get any of that from your brew?

 

[Stu's Brews]

I've read that it's supposed to be noticeably sweeter and richer than the usual modern pale malts. Did you get any of that from your brew?

There is definitely a bit of sweetness, almost a bit of a honey flavour although some of that may be the EKG. I had read descriptions of marmalade type flavours but I wouldn't say its anything quite as strong as that.

 

[dan125]

@dan125 I think you have used it

Yeah... it has a nuttier sweeter taste than MO etc, I think.

 

[peebee]

I've read lots of reviews and the taste profile looks very good to me. ...

I think you've probably seen my "Victorian Bitter" thread. The key post being a review of the results it brings:

…
Flavour of Chevallier malt: This is not hairy fairy, difficult to appreciate, bit more "biscuity" or "grainy" than another malt, it's in-your-face, right gob full differences; weighty, creamy, sweetish differences you'd notice even if your tongue were cut out. It wont please the raspberry, mocha, cherrypie "porter" brigade, but others might be convinced as to why they bother with that "Maris Otter" muck (though I would miss the thinner, fizzy, colder offerings when surrounding temperature gets above 25°C). This is very malt forward, the stacks of EKG hops have had enough time to moderate and very much take the backseat. …

The first example was a "SMASH" (Chavallier barley and EKG), a clone of a Morrel's beer from 1889. The recipe was inspired by Edd Mather's work exploring old beer records, but unfortunately he's chosen to remove Web access to his work so many links in that thread won't now work.

My experiences are quite out of step with some of the reviews above, possibly because of the techniques I use; high-ish temperature mashes and dextrin adverse yeasts (like S-33 and WY-1099). I think "modern", so-called "craft brewing" techniques might result in less obvious results as recorded in the above posts (to produce the "thinner, fizzer, colder offerings" I mention).

I'm still very much a fan of Chavallier barley malt, using the stuff now almost exclusively as my preferred base malt. Even for historical clones that pre-date the discovery of Chavallier barley malt because it responds to treatments when mashing that I expect would have been normal for malts back in that time.

It does need to be handled carefully. Fast, high temperature mashes can go badly wrong! A porter I made a few months back was mashed for only 45 minutes (instead of the planned 75) at 67°C and fermented with S-33. The aim was to get a FG about 1.018 but I ended up with 1.027. It took a week for some S-04 yeast to establish itself and it then got it down to 1.012 (not what I wanted!).

Recent brews gave 75 minutes at 66°C and the first (stout) has a FG of about 1.020-22 (not confirmed yet). Using WY-1099 yeast. The second (pre-black malt Porter from 1804) is heading for a FG of high teens. Both grists contain base malts other than from Chavallier barley.

I tend to raise the mash temperature to 69°C for 30-40 minutes, "Hochkurz"-like. I've not found lower extraction rates from this malt, but the "beta-amylase" enzyme (primary maltose producer and preferring lower mash temperatures) seems to be what requires careful treatment (extended low temperature mashes). But if not using a "dextrin adverse" yeast you may not notice the potential for higher FGs.

Dextrin may not be the sole reason for the malt's "weighty" mouthfeel, but I haven't figured what else but dextrin it's contributing.

 

[Michael Burnley]

I've a Landlord clone lined up for this months brews using this.

One thing I did notice is when adding this in the Brewfather software for the recipe, the diastatic power jumps to 97 from 52 in a like for like swap with Crisp MO

 

[Hanglow]

I've used it a few times and have a pale ale on the go at the moment that has about 60% chevallier. I would always step mash it to get better attenuation and a better, less muddled malt flavour with less sweetness. For this pale ale I'm using a portion of pils malt to help in regards to that and my next planned ipa I'll be using chevallier as the main malt.

That said I've not tried it in a single infusion, only read on the various forums about it being a bit trickier to mash properly.

 

[marshbrewer]

I've used it loads. Give a really interesting full body with, as has been said, a honey like taste. Works best with a stepped mash IMHO. Needs longer mashing time to get the best out of it.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

I used it on a bitter at 40% with MO and 200g Torrefied wheat. Did a single infusion mash for 90 minutes and hopped with Challenger, First Gold and Bramling Cross. Hit all the numbers but I couldn't detect much difference to using all MO.

 

[Michael Burnley]

@jjsh how long would you say ? I can't do stepped mashing at the moment

 

[marshbrewer]

90 mins minimum on my set up.

The best mash schedule I found was;

Mash in with strike water to give a mash temp of 63° for 30 mins. Add sufficient boiling water to raise to 66° and leave for 60 mins. Add sufficient boiling water to raise to 69° and leave for 30 mins.

Sparge as usual.

I think I loosely based this on one of Edd's mashing schemes in his recipe for 1868 Tetley's XK.

 

[foxbat]

Thanks for all the info so far and yes @peebee your Victorian Bitter thread was a great source of information.

It seems that the consensus is that a step mash is needed to get the unique qualities out of it and I can't do that easily at the moment with my setup. Maybe I’ll stick to MO for my next 25kg sack.

 

[peebee]

... One thing I did notice is when adding this in the Brewfather software for the recipe, the diastatic power jumps to 97 from 52 in a like for like swap with Crisp MO

"Diastatic Power" is a relatively new parameter for malt in the home-brewing world. I use it for emulating historical brown malt; historical brown malt being well known for it's poor ability to convert (which eventually put an end to it ... that and the fire risk!). The figures available can be a bit fanciful, leading to the situation "rubbish in, rubbish out".

The other problem is "diastatic power" doesn't describe how the starch converts, only the overall speed. Chevallier barley malt converts very easily, but it's beta-amylase performance is relatively weak so you can end up with high dextrin, low maltose, wort like I ended up with (stuck at 1.027). "Diastatic Power" does not warn you of this situation.


If not willing to attempt a stepped mash (even using @jjsh's boiling water technique) you might away with with a single step of at least 75 minutes (I'd suggest 90-120 minutes) at less than the "normal" mash temperature (66-67°C, say 65°C or less). And use a yeast rated with an attenuation ability in the high-70s and 80% plus (most yeasts are). But I suspect you lose much of Chevallier barley malt's "special" qualities doing this (as suggested by some of the replies in this thread).

Note: "Hochkurz" style stepped mashes probably need a good mash recirculation system and an appreciation of how it performs ... if you only believe what the temperature probe is telling you (in say a "one-pot" system), you are being mislead!

 

[Michael Burnley]

@peebee having previously thought I needed a mash tun with a built in heat source to do stepped mashes. I will definitely have a go at the method shared by @jjsh

Thank you .... smiley face

 

[Stu's Brews]

When I used it I did a single step mash for 60 minutes at 66degC.

From the replies above it sounds like that may be a reason why I didn't get a 'stand out' difference from something like Maris Otter, although there is definitely more honey-like sweetness.

OG and FG came out at 1.052 and 1.013 which were pretty much what I was expecting but will try a step mash next time to see if that produces a more discernible difference in taste.

 

[Sadfield]

Surely, chevallier malt was the malt of choice when single infusion mashing became standard practice?

Have used it a few times at 100% of the grist, mashing at 66c for 90 minutes with no issues. These were in historical inspired beers that were hopped into 3 figure ibus and then aged on oak with Brett for a year, after the Saccharomyces had fermented out. From tasting at this point I'd say that it can take hops being thrown at it.

 

[peebee]

Surely, chevallier malt was the malt of choice when single infusion mashing became standard practice? ...

Well, you said it! Much of the time when Chevallier barley malt was king, much mashing was still done by the old multiple mash system (no sparge) and at much higher temperatures; not "single infusion". And, most importantly, for much longer and probably with much longer periods of mixing ("mashing"!).

And you probably used a dextrin happy yeast, even before adding "I'll eat anything" "Brett".

We weren't always so lazy (says me, the prime example of laziness) as to expect 60 minutes of mash will be enough.


[EDIT: Actually, it had always troubled me that Victorians got lowish FGs from high-temperature mashes, I hadn't considered their Brett infected wooden casks until unthinkingly writing out the above response.]

 

[The-Engineer-That-Brews]

if you only believe what the temperature probe is telling you (in say a "one-pot" system), you are being mislead!

You're absolutely bang on the money there