Very soft water / High Mash PH

[MashBag]

Agreed.
It's also probably worth doing a few runs of exactly the same recipe to experiment with the water treatment, that way, by just changing one thing you can see & taste (all the way through) the effect.

C'mon, MB, who is ever going to do that?!

Better to keep brewing the sort of beers you like and you'll soon see what effect the water treatment has.

Guy

Do you not have a house brew. I certainly do.
Perfect for change control.

[guypettigrew]

Do you not have a house brew. I certainly do.
Perfect for change control.

No. A 'house brew' would stop me trying different recipes.

There's only so much I can drink!

Tell us more MB. How much do you brew and how much do you drink? From various posts it seems as though you brew humungous amounts, as well as all the wine you make. And you still haven't said why you make 8 loaves of bread every week.

Guy

[MashBag]

I think you go through trying loads of recipes, I know I did and then find a few regulars.

There is also an argument for 'practise makes perfect' (like musicians). I have quite extensively modified the BM and my process - a control recipe was invaluable.

[clarets7]

Thank you Eric for the very comprehensive reply, it is much appreciated and is now starting to make more sense to me. I will try using 2ml of CRS in my next mash and see how that goes.

Hi Sunter, did you ever resolve your mash pH problem?
I also have very soft water, alkalinity only around 10 - 15 measured by the Salifert test. I don't have a pH meter though, and you've now got me thinking. I was worried my mash pH may be going too low with some of my recent brews that have had high salt additions, but maybe the opposite is true and my mash pH has been too high. I have a Klarstein 30L system and don't usually sparge, although often brew short and liquor back to hit volumes. Never managed to get as good efficiency with the Klarstein, even with sparging, as I did with my old three vessel setup.

[Eric]

Sunter has not logged in since April.

No sparge, full volume mashing won't match the efficient of a 3V system with sparge. A kg of grain can hold nearly a litre of wort, and with no sparge, the retained wort will have the same gravity as the beer's OG plus any unconverted starches. So, if 4 kg of grain produces a 1040 wort in such a system, 4 litres of at least 1040 wort can be held back. Obviously, if you rinse all the sugars out of the grain by sparging, then only water or very weak wort remains in the grains.

I sparge in my 25 litre Klarstein, but collect the wort in another vessel, keeping the liquor level in the Klarstein constant so the grain doesn't compact to disrupt an even liquor flow. Even so, mash efficiency won't match that of my 3V system which normally exceeds 90%.

While highest efficiency will be achieved with suitable water treatment to produce the correct pH, any difference from less suitable treatments normally isn't significant. Higher pH will more likely be noticeable by astringency from unwanted extractions, while low pH will result in worts difficult for yeast to ferment. Having the necessary equipment to avoid such problems won't guarantee perfect beer production but will detect problems that might be otherwise overlooked.

With your alkalinity and a decent addition of calcium salts to get calcium between 100 and 200ppm, it is unlikely any further liquor treatment would improve your potential mash efficiency.

[clarets7]

Maybe I'm overthinking it, I agree with everything you've said there Eric. The only thing that bugs me is the very thin mashes with a full volume mash, especially as I prefer lower ABV beers. To counteract that I have brewed stronger and liquored back, but as you say that's higher gravity wort being left behind in the spent grain. I might try your method of sparging, after all I've still got my old HLT and some pumps, might just make me feel better about it

[Eric]

Monitoring events is vastly more difficult in a single pot than in 3V, where one can measure gravity and pH of runnings as they emerge from the mash tun. I assume each kg of grain will provide 300 litre degrees of extract to determine total potential extract. Then runnings are measured by refractometer and pH meter plus volume collected and kettle gravity to calculate if the potential will be realised. If gravity of runnings falls such that it won't be achieved, sparging is stopped and wort recycled until gravity increases to obtain the required level.

That can't be readily measured in a single pot and grains lifted out of the wort to sparge will compact to keep in sugars. Having the wort outside the malt tube level with the grainbed while sparging helps release more sugars, but it isn't easy to determine how much sugar has and can be extracted during this process. Otherwise, take as long as you can afford to avoid leaving too much sugar behind.

[MashBag]

I have a friend who does a parti-gyle style mash with his klarstein. He gets on well with it, but like you say Eric... "take as long as you can afford"

[MashBag]

While highest efficiency will be achieved with suitable water treatment to produce the correct pH, any difference from less suitable treatments normally isn't significant. Higher pH will more likely be noticeable by astringency from unwanted extractions, while low pH will result in worts difficult for yeast to ferment. Having the necessary equipment to avoid such problems won't guarantee perfect beer production but will detect problems that might be otherwise overlooked.

With your alkalinity and a decent addition of calcium salts to get calcium between 100 and 200ppm, it is unlikely any further liquor treatment would improve your potential mash efficiency.

You know I am very new to water wrestling. This post helped me too.

[Eric]

You know I am very new to water wrestling. This post helped me too.

Of course, there is the other side of the coin, when the water treatment, or none at all when it is essential, produces both low efficiency and poor beer, but that isn't particularly common, most especially with British water supplies.

Calcium will lower mash pH, protect enzymes from high temperatures, deposit oxalates, aid yeast flocculation and a number of other beneficial influences, but there are some who think its presence isn't necessary, indeed harmful and produces minerally tasting beer. If they are correct, my beers must be undrinkable.

Balancing the chosen grains to the levels of calcium and alkalinity to achieve an acceptable pH is a very important step in brewing, so it is important to know what one's water supply contains and how it can be treated, plus what influence all the ingredients have, Pale malt requires low alkalinity plus decent calcium level to achieve an acceptable mash pH, unmalted grains will mostly increase mash pH, while darker grains, malt and crystal will lower pH. Without a pH meter all this is guesswork, but I've known many brewers whose guesses were remarkably good.

Sometime past, Wallybrew did a series of analyses of my water, which comes from a single source, but does vary dependent upon rainfall levels. From those I produced a series of first, second and third order equations to derive the level of each major ion from a single reading using a TDS meter. From those a spreadsheet was produced, enabling me to play with acid and salt additions to the anticipated water supply of the day. The following is a screenshot of the profile used in my recent Green Hop brew. Please don't ask for an explanation of how the individual ions were determined, but if you are familiar with spreadsheets the rest should be obvious.

UnGreen Hop.jpg (206.61 KiB) Viewed 8460 times

I use individual acids, but CRS/AMS would produce the same outcome as the mix used here, although the amounts are less as my acids are less dilute. Many Americans and their followers will tear out their hair if reading that, but the beer is a delight, not minerally in the least, but it does have beautiful delicate aroma and flavour.

Due to the recent dry period, my water on this brewday was the hardest it has ever been since I began water treatment.

[MashBag]

Not to this level of detail, but I to have setup a spreadsheet for AMS & DWB.

Murphy & Son provided me with some good documentation, some including profiles by beer style. Very useful indeed. I have used these and your info as constants. But most importantly the first brew is on.. Day 3 of fermentation.

I hold some acids here for various things including beekeeping but happy to stick with AMS at the moment.

I didn't realise water treatment was a very UK thing and our friends over the pond didn't. UK water is very good and its fair to say I was getting away with it, but imo the drought tipped it over the edge.

[Eric]

Not to this level of detail, but I to have setup a spreadsheet for AMS & DWB.

Decide alkalinity for mash liquor, measure supply water's alkalinity (Salifert test in mg/l CaCO30, subtract former from latter, then multiply by volume in litres to be treated, and divide by 183 to get ml of CRS addition.

In practice it usual to first partially treat the liquor, stir to let CO2 escape, then check remaining alkalinity to confirm your calculation.

Murphy & Son provided me with some good documentation, some including profiles by beer style. Very useful indeed. I have used these and your info as constants. But most importantly the first brew is on.. Day 3 of fermentation.

Murphy and Son are probably the oldest Brewing Consultancy in the world. They almost certainly offer advice and supply ingredients to the overwhelming majority of breweries in Britain. Their Technical Articles can be error prone, as can some of their products, as some here have experienced.

I hold some acids here for various things including beekeeping but happy to stick with AMS at the moment.

Initially using CRS is a wise choice. The rest can come with the experience gained if desired.

I didn't realise water treatment was a very UK thing and our friends over the pond didn't. UK water is very good and its fair to say I was getting away with it, but imo the drought tipped it over the edge.

Water treatment is not limited to UK, just that the weather and geology of Britain with the water supply structure means virtually every resident has access to water that can be simply treated to make good beers. That isn't universally so, and the different nature of America and their methods for food production makes their water supplies different to Britain's. This has resulted the adoption of Reverse Osmosis systems by many when those became affordable to enable production of suitable brewing liquor.

Just as for chocolate, taste in America is different to UK, and as water treatment influences taste, treatment there is different to what we traditionally accepted.

[clarets7]

I'm still very dubious about how this works with very soft water, especially after reading this from Graham's water notes: -

Differences Between This Programme And The Previous Version.
The main reason for updating this was to include carbonate in the target water calculations and add them to the preset profiles. Ignoring carbonate was intentional in the original version, because when using CRS to reduce carbonate a bit of alkalinity is left by design, and when boiling the water to remove carbonate an indeterminate amount of alkalinity is left also, because boiling does not remove it all. I assumed that it was safe to ignore carbonate for the subsequent calculations. This is fine for hard water areas, but it turned out to be a problem for people in soft water areas because their mash pH can be unstable and too low without a bit of residual alkalinity.

Is it worth getting a pH meter just to put my mind at rest? How much would a reliable one cost? Quick Google says I can get a pH and TDS meter for £14 delivered tomorrow but I'm assuming they will not be very good

[Eric]

Lots of great beers are made using soft water, but many traditional British beers of various styles and historic renown were made from hard water. I could go on and on and on, and sometimes do, but must mention the massive fault line between documented records and British opinion of British brewing and that held by some acclaimed American home brew experts. Those opinions reach our shores as do Hollywood versions of history. That isn't unusual, Winston Churchill said "History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it."

Pale Malt mashed in a typical hard water untreated will result in a pH in the order of 6, as will Lager Malt in untreated natural soft water. I know of no natural domestic water supply in UK that would produce a pH of between 5.2 and 5.6, and accordingly all UK domestic water will benefit from treatment when making pale beers.

As for alkalinity, I always mash with some alkalinity present, but for pale beers it can be quite low, particularly when adding wheat or unmalted adjuncts. Relatively modest additions of crystal malts or roasted grains allow for a greater amount of alkalinity, but whatever the amount of alkalinity, extra acid is added to sparge liquor as the buffering influence of residual sugar dwindles, and pH could otherwise rise above 5.6.

I wouldn't have thought alkalinity would be that important in truly pale beers, but certainly necessary for dark beers where mash pH could easily drop below 5. You might care to add a small amount of sodium carbonate or bicarbonate to the mash for some additional alkalinity but be aware it won't drop out during the boil as will calcium and magnesium bicarbonate.

As for a pH meter, I've certainly had my money's worth from mine. I used to spend £20 for good pH strips thirty years and more ago, when pH meters were a laboratory instrument. However, there are extra costs for storage solution, buffers and DI water (£2.50 a gallon) and the probes don't last long if abused or not properly cleaned. The meter electronics are but an everyday digital high impedance voltmeter with adjustment for range and sensitivity, it's the probe that is the vital part. As long as the buffers are good and the meter calibrates as it should, all should be well.