Double milled grains

[MrRook]

Using the same grainbill as last month I double milled the grains and got 1.040 instead of 1.035 when I single milled.

 

[hoppyscotty]

I guess it makes sense depending on your mill...bound to be some little blighters that get past or some small deflection of the rollers as grains clump together and prize them apart allowing some grains to get by either uncrushed or crushed to a lesser degree. Ultimately as long as whatever process you use is repeatable its all good.

 

[MashBag]

Better might be a seive?

 

[Agentgonzo]

The more you mill your grains (or the tighter the gap/harder they get crushed), the higher the efficiency (up to a point). But with it comes a higher risk of stuck sparge. If you do BIAB you can probably pulverise the grain to flour and get good results. If you double milled the grain and it worked, keep doing it!

 

[hoppyscotty]

I guess it depends if chasing efficiency is your goal. It can be a topic for 'homebrew club top trumps', but ultimately it doesn't really matter at the homebrew level.

The brulosophy exbeeriment below tested to see if grain crush had an impact on flavour and though it seemed people could identify (or guess) which beer was which somehow, but when asked about their preference in flavour it was pretty much 50/50. So make of that what you will!!

 

[The Baron]

Totally agree Hoppyscotty, this is something that some brewers usually the newer ones think they need to chase the Eff instead of learning to brew beer.
Much easier to get a consistent Eff for consistent brewing.
I get around 70 to 75% and I am quite happy with that and can write my recipes to suit

 

[hoppyscotty]

Totally agree Hoppyscotty, this is something that some brewers usually the newer ones think they need to chase the Eff instead of learning to brew beer.
Much easier to get a consistent Eff for consistent brewing.
I get around 70 to 75% and I am quite happy with that and can write my recipes to suit

Are you taunting me with your super efficient process? I'm only getting in the mid to high 60's

 

[Clarence]

Ultimately as long as whatever process you use is repeatable its all good.

Why does it have to be repeatable in order to be good?

 

[hoppyscotty]

Why does it have to be repeatable in order to be good?

Well I guess it doesn’t annd ultimately depend why you’re doing it in the first place.

If you can’t repeat a batch of beer, at least to the extent it tastes close enough to not notice a difference even if your numbers are not repeatable, then you’re just chucking in a load of ingredients and getting a random result and basically hoping for the best. How do you improve and progress if you can’t repeat a batch? Again assuming that is important to you.

 

[Agentgonzo]

How do you improve and progress if you can’t repeat a batch?

You try different things and remember what ended up with better beer.

Repeating a brew isn't important for some people. Choosing to not repeat brews doesn't immediately make someone a bad brewer, and repeating a brew doesn't automatically equate to improving or making better beer.

 

[Clarence]

OK. I see what @hoppyscotty is getting at. It's not repeatability that makes the beer good, but it's nice to be able to repeat one that has been good.
Surely this is down to keeping good records in your brewday log. This id the way to improve as it allows you to follow the effect of minor tweeks and see which ones work and which ones don't. Assuming we make several variations of the same beer of course.

 

[RichardM]

It's repeating the good bits of your technique that makes good beer. Things like, getting mash temperatures right, getting hop timings right, controlling fermentation temperatures, avoiding oxidation, conditioning etc.
If you are designing your own recipes then it's also about understanding what different grains, hops and yeast contribute.
Get those right or better each time will result in better beer without repeating a batch.

 

[Clarence]

It's repeating the good bits of your technique that makes good beer. Things like, getting mash temperatures right, getting hop timings right, controlling fermentation temperatures, avoiding oxidation, conditioning etc.
If you are designing your own recipes then it's also about understanding what different grains, hops and yeast contribute.
Get those right or better each time will result in better beer without repeating a batch.

That's not much more help than saying "doing everything right". Of course doing everything right will produce good beer.
Technique is something learned and it can't all be learned from a book. It's also about knowing how your setup works and it's limitations. Not all of us want to miniaturise the industrial processes. Let's take temperature control for example: don't control temperature to the nth degree. Work with it! Monitor, adjust and adapt. I'm mid-summer, don't make lager, make a style that suits warm fermentation and choose your yeast accordingly. Or make a delicious GPA with Lutra or similar. Make the real Pilsners with lager yeasts in the depth of winter. You'll learn a lot more about your craft this way rather than slavishly beating nature into submission.

Ingedients. How can we know our ingredients without experimenting with them? How many times have I adjusted the crystal/amber malt balance in my bitter until I discovered I really don't like much crystal at all. How can you test a hop you ve not used before without making a small batch with a standard (your standard) malt profile and only the target hop?
How would I know that, for some reason, if I use MJ-M42, my beer is likely to stink for weeks, while no other yeast does this?
This is all achieved by excitements and keeping careful notes.
So I pose the question, how are we to understand the contribution of our grains, hops and yeasts without having worked with them?
Sometimes, an experiment will show that whatever I've done hasn't produced a better beer. I'm a better beer for that.
Don't be afraid to take risks. Learn and enjoy.

 

[MashBag]

Absolutely agree. I have learnt a lot of technique not from a book or a tooby, but by experience and controlling the changes to one tweak at a time. Working with kit & ingredients, not enforcing a process regardless.

And consider... is it a mistake or a experiment when something different happens adhoc?

You never make something right the first time.

 

[The Baron]

A lot of good advice and common sense in the answers in this thread. I think all the brewers that have answered have got their own process taped to what they want.
I do not chase EFF but do like it to be consistent so just let my process become consistent to get the Eff with my setup and get between 70 to 75% which means I can write my recipes to get what I want out of a beer.
I only do a repeat beer now and again and to be honest I usually tweak it .
The brewing to the seasons and then with suitable yeasts to temp is a what I do with the Lagers done when my garage is operating at the correct temp (Autumn/Winter).
I now can extend this by using Novalager for Lager and use Kveik in the summer for IPA's etc.
Too many brewers jump into buying the latest equipment before learning to brew a more traditional way first this is where the true knowledge is gleaned.

 

[Cwrw666]

"chasing efficiency" love the way you guys are using it as an insult. So what's wrong with getting an extra brew out of a 25 kilo sack?

 

[Clarence]

Too many brewers jump into buying the latest equipment before learning to brew a more traditional way first this is where the true knowledge is gleaned.

Spot on.

"chasing efficiency" love the way you guys are using it as an insult. So what's wrong with getting an extra brew out of a 25 kilo sack?

Efficiency is in the eyes of the beer-holder. A BiB no sparge brewer is, perhaps looking for efficiency of time and effort. I'm too mean for that and get at least 1050 with 4 kg malt for a 20 litre batch. Often a bit better than that (especially with hook head lager malt) how that works out as % efficiency, I've no idea.

I now can extend this by using Novalager for Lager and use Kveik in the summer for IPA's etc.

Never used Novalager, it's still in the fridge as I got seduced by Lutra. Is it any good?

 

[The Baron]

I have used it twice Clarence and it seems ok to me. I would not say it will ever produce a lager to the true traditionalists standards but it's almost there for me.
It does need time to mature as all lagers do but not as long.
Plenty of Youtubers have given it the thumbs up watch a couple to get other opinions

 

[Clarence]

I have used it twice Clarence and it seems ok to me. I would not say it will ever produce a lager to the true traditionalists standards but it's almost there for me.
It does need time to mature as all lagers do but not as long.
Plenty of Youtubers have given it the thumbs up watch a couple to get other opinions

Do you know what, @The Baron , I've always considered brewing an authentic, crisp pils-like lager to be one of the pinnacles of the brewer's skill and one of the most difficult styles to get spot on. Indeed I love a decent lager- Urquell and Warsteiner being my favourites when a- I'm out on the lash and fancy a lager, b- I can afford it. But since I've been brewing GPAs (still referred to a pseudo-lager by some philistines on the forum) I think I prefer the stye. It's softer than a pilsner and just a tad more ale-like and it can be served either cool or chilled depending on the whims of the moment.
I've been brewing with MJ-M54 and found that works really well. I tried Lutra over the summer and I'm not sure that it wasn't even better. I'll give the Novalager a whirl before much longer.

(Of course a dash of lime cordial is an essential ingredient of any pint of the yellow stuff )

 

[MrRook]

The more you mill your grains (or the tighter the gap/harder they get crushed), the higher the efficiency (up to a point). But with it comes a higher risk of stuck sparge. If you do BIAB you can probably pulverise the grain to flour and get good results. If you double milled the grain and it worked, keep doing it!

I do BIAB and did a double mill to see if tightening the gap would be worth the hassle.