Recipe ideas to contol mouthfeel/viscosity/palate-weight

[rootsbrew]

Recently, I had some [beer/brewery withheld!], which was mostly what I was looking for: good malt intensity, satisfyingly fresh and really dry. But, despite being bottle conditioned, it lacked that mid-palate weight I was craving.

I would like to know more about how to control the apparent viscosity (aka mouth-feel or palate weight), both in terms of method(s) and ingredients. i.e. What recipe alterations should I make in order to make a beer appear more or less viscous, in accordance with what I am trying to achieve?

Apparently, some adjuncts increase lusciousness. If so, which ones work best and which are easiest to use? Are adjuncts only possible to add to an AG brew, or can these alterations be achieved by steeping and straining the gloop into a kit-based wort?

Note: I'm quite a novice HB able to adapt kits and follow recipes but various factors prevent the opportunity to malt my own grain or perform long (> 1hr), large (> 5l) boils.

Some things spring to mind when comparing beer making to wine making...
- Alcohol: More alcohol can give a more viscous feel. But, I would prefer to aim for 4% abv because I like to have a couple of bottles and not be too cooked! And, I don't want the alcohol to be noticeable a flavour in the beer.
- Malolactic conversion: This gives a creaminess because lactic acid is less dissociative than malic acid. There isn't much malic acid in beer, so I guess one just adds something like dolce latte as a per-volume substitute to LME? Also, "malo" only really works in some cases, such as Chardonnay or tannic reds, and can cause either overly soft acidity or result in cheesy characteristics, which wouldn't be good when making beer!
- Autolysis: To make a decent sparkling wine, it is imperative for autolysis to occur. However, this (autolysis) seems a dirty word in beer making. Perhaps it is only ever used when referring to unstable autolysis, as opposed to the desired/expected effect of conditioning (storing beer in contact with lees)? Maybe someone would explain why it's always used with lots of cursing, when making beer?
- Oak: The tannins in barrels to improve mouth feel. They also impart their own flavours, which may not be suitable for beer. And, barrels are expensive!

... these are wine making things, how can this control be exercised for making beer?

[zgoda]

Oats and rye are high in beta glucans, they both add that silky feeling.

[orlando]

Torrefied wheat also adds some mouth feel and helps with head retention.

[rootsbrew]

Thanks for the suggestions.

So, adjuncts seem to be a way. A few questions about these...

- Can these adjuncts all be used in all colours of beer (gold/red/dark/etc.)?
- I have unmalted whole and flaked oats (cereal cupboard) and I can get malted husk-on oats online. Which I should be using?
- Do I need diastatic malt if using unmalted, to break down some of the starches?
- If using a kit-based recipe to make the base wort (e.g. one from the Coopers website), could I just boil up the suggested amount of adjunct and add the straied result it to the brew? As I mentioned above, a lot of grain techniques are beyond my reach at the moment but boiling up one ingredient as part of the wort, should be ok.
- Which is the easiest adjunct to use with an otherwise kit process?
- How readily does the conditioning vessel clear? (primary > conditioning > bottles)

How else can one alter a recipe to alter mouthfeel, apart from adjuncts?

- I'm hoping someone might comment on my autolysis observation too...

[boingy]

Oats and wheat are the two things that spring to mind but I'm not sure how you'd use them with a kit.

There may be other things you can do to the kits to improve them. I don't know what kits you typically do but you can vary the body and residual sugars by changing the fermentables you are adding and also the yeast. This is not quite the same as mouthfeel but may give you what you are looking for. Using spraymalt in place of some or all of the sugar and using a less attenuative yeast is worth trying. Both of these will add significantly to the costs though, so you may be better off brewing a premium two-can kit instead.

If you are already brewing the premium two can kits and are not happy with the results then it is harder to make improvements without getting into longer boils and perhaps some mashing. It might be that you have outgrown kit brewing and need to cross the border into Extract or All-Grain brewing.

Oh, and don't be afraid of naming the beer/brewery in your posts. By saying "I like Watney's Grotbucket but I'd like a bit more mouthfeel" we get a much better idea of what you want to brew.

[rootsbrew]

@boingy - thanks. plenty to think about here...

Oats and wheat are the two things that spring to mind but I'm not sure how you'd use them with a kit.

... well, I'm doing a test at the moment with 1 litre water + 20g whole oats. Just boilded them up for while and let them cool overnight. Aim is to get oat solids to become soluable enough to be mixed into a wort.
Has anyone else tried to boil up just the adjuncts and strained the gloop into a wort? Do I need diastatic ME to prevent an almighty haze?

There may be other things you can do to the kits to improve them. I don't know what kits you typically do but you can vary the body and residual sugars by changing the fermentables you are adding and also the yeast. This is not quite the same as mouthfeel but may give you what you are looking for.

Yeah, this is what I was getting at with using of dolce latte as a per volume substitute for LME. I would like to know what the options are here. Can these be used in pale/gold beer without it appearing sweet/unbalanced - if there is some residual sugar, again, what recipe tips should I take note of to add acidity or ensure full metabolism of sugars?

Using spraymalt in place of some or all of the sugar and using a less attenuative yeast is worth trying.

The yeast point is definitely work looking into. Yeast is quite a specific topic so I'll ask on the yeast board.

Unless I make a mistake withe the volumes, I only use plain sugar for priming, not in the fermenter. When I say kit, I just mean some prepared D/LME, instead of having to extract the sugars from all the grains.
Uncomplicated example might be
1.5kg Kit bitter + 1.5kg amber LME + simmered or dry hops.
Those recipes on the Coopers website are within my realm of expertise - plenty of scope to play around but not much grain bubbling!

Both of these will add significantly to the costs though, so you may be better off brewing a premium two-can kit instead.

Yeah, got a 2 can kit in the fermenter. Seems a bit odd to not have to add anything outside what's provided! I had to doctor the St. Peter's Red with a little (20g) goldings leaf hops.

If you are already brewing the premium two can kits and are not happy with the results then it is harder to make improvements without getting into longer boils and perhaps some mashing. It might be that you have outgrown kit brewing and need to cross the border into Extract or All-Grain brewing.

You may be correct about outgrowing pre-prepared ingredients, but there's a space/equipment/co-habitation problem to overcome first! I can go to the brew shop and pick up a few cans etc. and have the fermenter up-and-running all in 6 hours, which means I won't annoy others by having muslins or grain everywhere, preventing access to the kitchen. Annoying, but until I own a brewery, beer must exist around life, not the other way around!

Oh, and don't be of naming the beer/brewery in your posts. By saying "I like Watney's Grotbucket but I'd like a bit more mouthfeel"...

I'll remove it - I was going to put the name there so others could sample it in order to understand what I meant but woosed out because I was worried about potential comebacks!

...we get a much better idea of what you want to brew.

I want to brew reds and golds that have appropriate acidity and general qualities for the style but, when required, I want to be able to increase/decrease apparent-density/mouthfeel/viscosity/whatever-you-call-it. again, comparing to commercial styles, I would like to know how to achieve the difference between a true pilsner beer and an equally "bright" but more oily-textured beer - hop and flavourings remaining fairly constant.

... anyway, thanks for the help so far everyone, keep 'em coming!

[boingy]

Two things to add:

1. I stupidly missed out a word which changed the sense of what I was saying. The correct sentence is: "Oh, and don't be afraid of naming the beer/brewery in your posts". In other words, do name the beer! I've edited the post now.

2. If you can afford 6 hours to brew then you could easily brew an extract beer, complete with full boil. With organisation and practice you can brew a full mash AG beer in that time too but your first few brews will take more like 8 hours. You can even mash the night before if you so choose. But there is no getting away from the requirement for a large boiler unless you brew small volumes. If you went for an electric "burco" style boiler you are free to brew anywhere there is an electric socket. One of my mates boils in the shower cubicle so the shower fan can remove the steam, spillages go down the plug hole and because his family dislikes the smell of boiling hops.

[super_simian]

Yes, if you use unmalted adjuncts you will need a source of diastatic enzymes. If you are doing kits, try some malto-dextrin to improve mouth feel.

[Barley Water]

There are several ways to increase the mouthfeel of your beers, you guys have touched on a few of them. First of all, some brands of malt extract are less fermentable than others, it depends entirely on how the original grains were mashed by the manufacturer. It's been maybe 20 years since I've done an extract brew so unfortunately I can't advise as to which ones to use if you want more mouthfeel. From an all grain perspective thought, you would want to mash hotter if you want more body.

Ingredients are another way, as noted by others oats and flaked barley will give you a more creamy texture (but be warned they need to me mashed). Formulations with alot of crystal malts will also increase mouthfeel because the sugars are not fermentable. Certain adjuncts will work in the opposite direction though, avoid simple sugars and rice or corn, they will tend to thin out your beer. Yeast selection can also play a major role. Many British strains do not attenuate all that well and as such are great if you want to make a beer drink bigger than it is (Fuller's yeast comes to mind but there are many others). Yeast selection is of course a really important variable to consider, besides expected generation of flavor the degree of attenuation is of prime importance to both flavor and mouthfeel.

High carbonation will also make a beer seem thinner all things being equal. That's why many of the cheap American lagers taste so watery, they are really highly carbonated, relatively speaking. An extreme example of this is Duvel. That stuff is really a pretty big beer but because of high adjunct content as well as really high carbonation the stuff seems almost thin and weak (and you wonder what happened as you are face down on the floor after drinking a couple of glasses). A low gravity bitter would be terrible if highly carbonated.

It is interesting to me that when making British beers I'm almost always trying to make the beer seem bigger than it really is while when doing Belgians I generally am trying to do the exact oposite. This past weekend I made an Abbey Single. Even though the beer has an O.G. of only 1.048 I did everything I could to try and dry it and thin it out. Once I keg it I'll get it pretty fizzy which should help in that regard also. Anyhow this whole brewing game is all about balancing a bunch of variables to hopefully come up with a truely sublime product, have fun and good luck.

[timbo41]

Have been folowing thread with interest. If I may I would like to ask a question re using crystal malt to increase "mouthfeel". I have done the odd extract brew so the steep process is known to me, but I'm a bit unsure how a steep would work if adding to a kit...is there not a chance of "oversweetening" the brew? And if that is case how could that be adjusted with hops to achieve a nice balance? Normally I use beer engine to work out OG and IBU, work out the BU/GU ratio and compare it with the (john palmer?) Graph..problem solved. But you can't do that with a kit as they don't carry the IBU figure! Any ideas folks or have I missed something very obvious

[Barley Water]

Oh yes, if you add crystal malt you will definately sweeten up the beer as well as change the color. What I was trying to say was that if you add crystal malt to a grist, everything else being equal, the beer will seem bigger. Almost any action you take, be it changing ingredients or processes will cause several effects, some you want, some maybe not so much. Although you can add hops to counteract sweetness, this sometimes ends up not working out so well so you sort of have to give it a try and see how it comes out. That is one of the main advantages of all grain brewing, you have much more control over what is going on. If I wanted bigger mouthfeel, rather than adding crystal malt to the recipe, I would just increase the mash temperature increasing dextrins in the wort (which are flavorless). The orginal poster was an extract brewer though so that particular option was not open to him/her.

[rootsbrew]

Here's what I can gather so far (and a few new thoughts)...

Ingredients
Obviously, changing what goes into the wort/beer, changes how it wil eventually taste.

Water
90%+ of beer is water. Don't think it's been addressed so far, in this discussion.
- How does what's in the water to start with, like the amount of minerals or chlorine, have an effect on the texture of the beer?

Malts
There is mention that some LMEs contain more unfermentable material, some of which increases texture.
- What does one look for in an ingredient list and where (online) is this info hiding, for popular LMEs.
- For AG, is it the amount of time at higher temperatures, which produces the unfermentables?
Crystal malts alter colour and sweetness but can increase texture. Malto-dextrin is also specifically mentioned for extract brewing. Some concerns about apparent sweetness (or does it create residual glucose) this can add.
- If I were aiming to make a Gold with increase viscosity, which CM (inc. malto-dextrin) would cause the biggest change in texture? If this came at the cost of increasing residual/apparent sweetness, what might be the best hops to add some balancing acidity, without too much bitterness?
- Ditto for a Red. A bit more bitterness is acceptable, though.

Tannin and other proteins can increase texture. Though, sometimes these can create the same drying effect as black tea, which is not ideal. Some grains are reported to have a higher protein content.
- Which are they and are these available in LME form?
- How can astringency be managed when increasing tannin quotient?

Adjuncts
Adjuncts with long-chain (unfermentable) carbohydrates (? plus proteins and lipids - please confirm/reject) increase texture. Examples include oats, torrified barley, wheat... would be good to have a list of additives which remain "long", posted in the knowledge base, perhaps?
Adjuncts with short-chain (fermentable) carbohydrates (often white starches) reduce texture, in much the same way that by adding just sugar, as opposed to DME, the wort appears to thin-out the beer.

Adjuncts need partial mashing, (if not making by AG).
- Does anyone have any reports about boiling the adjunct separately to the malts, just to emulsify the desired components? Then straining remaining particles from the resultant slop, on its way into the wort?
- Why can it not be done by just putting the DMS in the fermenter, without boilng them together as well? Does the enzyme need a high temerature to activate?

Unmalted adjuncts need to be fermented with Diastatic Malts (e.g. EDME's DMS) because these have enough enzymes to break down the adjunct, as well as its own maltose.
- Please would someone confirm/reject this and, if possible, explain how and why adjuncts need to be converted? Surely, it's the unfermentables that are required?
- I'm not at all knowledgeable about AG, what's the AG equivalent to DMS, i.e. which malts have high diastatic power, or how do you increase it?
- Does anyone have any experience with how dark DMS is? Are there pale and dark varients?

Extras
There must be other ingredients that increase/decrease apparent density.
Wine makers use lactic acid, which is usually a product of malo-lactic conversion.
- What about adding something with some lactose e.g. powdered milk.
- Has anyone tried this?
- How can excess dairy aromas be prevented?

I've head of people of using citrus zests as aromomatic ingredients.
- Did the oils within add anything to the texture?
- If so, is there anything similar without adding flavour?

Yeast etc...
Clearly an important ingredient for any recipe. Some are probably able to break down bigger molecues or digest the sugar more effectively (think this is attenuation?), while other strains might polymerise/reshape molecules.
- Perhaps someone might like to start a thread on the yeast board for mouthfeel?
- Are there any other micro organisms that might increase/reduce viscosity, while keeping the beer drinkable?

Method
A recipe is more than just ingredients, it's how they're used. Wort preparation, fermentation conditions, bottling vs. kegging... etc., etc.
- All ideas welcome!
One thought, though:
- If using ingedients, which increase the amount of unfermented material in the final beer, how can a clarity be achieved?

Bubbles
Fizziness is the consequence of the recipe alterations, so I've put these notes at the end.

Quantity
From what's been said above more CO2, lessens viscosity. Less, increases viscosity. Not sure if this it's actually true but it does feel like it.
In terms of recipes, the main factor seems to be quantity of sugar (including/especially, In priming, I suppose). Longer standing once the main fermentation has completed, should allow more of the base CO2 to escape - maybe use an airlock at this stage to stop O2 interacting with beer.
- High CO2 can be used to mask "power" of beer (inc. alcohol). @Barley Water: love the Duvel comment - totally agree! BTW, the beer I wasn't going to mention was Ridgeway brewery's Bad Elf - tasty but lacked a bit of texture; yes it was quite fizzy, so that's probably why.

Size
- Does CO2 related viscosity also have something to do with bubble size? If so, what factors might alter this, apart from total CO2 and serving temperature? Re: bubble size: N2 bubbles are smaller than CO2 bubbles, hence beers given petillance with N2 can appear creamier, until phase-separation in one's mouth.
- What about lees ageing? i.e. bottle conditioning once beer is dry and phase-equilibrium has been reached. No answer yet to my question, about why beer makers only see autolysis as bad.

[super_simian]

Adjuncts need partial mashing, (if not making by AG).
- Does anyone have any reports about boiling the adjunct separately to the malts, just to emulsify the desired components? Then straining remaining particles from the resultant slop, on its way into the wort?

Doing this will give you a brew full of starch and protein, an open invitation for unwanted microbial activity. Infection in other words. Lots of extract and kit brewers who don't fully understand the science do this, but it's a total crapshoot.

- Why can it not be done by just putting the DMS in the fermenter, without boilng them together as well? Does the enzyme need a high temerature to activate?

I'm assuming DMS in this instance refers to diastatic malt extract? If enzymatic activity is not halted by boiling PRE fermentation, the enzymes will continue to work during the ferment, until there is nothing left to work on. This is why distillers don't boil (and sometimes ferment "on the grain") - to get the highest possible yield of alcohol. As brewers, we want something left, which is just one reason we boil.

Unmalted adjuncts need to be fermented with Diastatic Malts (e.g. EDME's DMS) because these have enough enzymes to break down the adjunct, as well as its own maltose.
- Please would someone confirm/reject this and, if possible, explain how and why adjuncts need to be converted? Surely, it's the unfermentables that are required?

For mouth feel, it's all about the beta-glucans and long chain carbs. Adjuncts which contribute beta-glucans also contain starches, which need to be broken down for yeast to be able to use them. Starch in beer is a no-no.

Extras
There must be other ingredients that increase/decrease apparent density.
Wine makers use lactic acid, which is usually a product of malo-lactic conversion.
- What about adding something with some lactose e.g. powdered milk.
- Has anyone tried this?
- How can excess dairy aromas be prevented?

Plenty of beers use lactose. Look up milk stout.

[rootsbrew]

Thanks Simian
Some good info about adjuncts. Any chance you'd clarify the bits I've asked about?

Adjuncts need partial mashing, (if not making by AG).
- Does anyone have any reports about boiling the adjunct separately to the malts, just to emulsify the desired components? Then straining remaining particles from the resultant slop, on its way into the wort?

Doing this will give you a brew full of starch and protein, an open invitation for unwanted microbial activity. Infection in other words. Lots of extract and kit brewers who don't fully understand the science do this, but it's a total crapshoot.

Fair enough. Note to self: always cook up adjuncts with malt. I can see that a cooling bucket of protein would be an invitation for bugs. The main reason I ask is I cannot cook up everything at once - insufficient volume in pots/pans!

- Why can it not be done by just putting the DMS in the fermenter, without boilng them together as well? Does the enzyme need a high temerature to activate?

I'm assuming DMS in this instance refers to diastatic malt extract? If enzymatic activity is not halted by boiling PRE fermentation, the enzymes will continue to work during the ferment, until there is nothing left to work on. This is why distillers don't boil (and sometimes ferment "on the grain") - to get the highest possible yield of alcohol. As brewers, we want something left, which is just one reason we boil.

Unmalted adjuncts need to be fermented with Diastatic Malts (e.g. EDME's DMS) because these have enough enzymes to break down the adjunct, as well as its own maltose.
- Please would someone confirm/reject this and, if possible, explain how and why adjuncts need to be converted? Surely, it's the unfermentables that are required?

For mouth feel, it's all about the beta-glucans and long chain carbs. Adjuncts which contribute beta-glucans also contain starches, which need to be broken down for yeast to be able to use them. Starch in beer is a no-no.

Yeah, sorry - just after posting I realised it was a bit ambiguos but DMS had the same meaning in the next line, where it was explained.

OK, so, diastatic enzymes can convert large molecules to glucose, starting with the simplest, starch. The aim is to keep the largest molecules, i.e. beta-glucans (protein?) and cellulose (?), to provide mouthfeel. Therefore, one must arrest the enzymes, while the texture-assciated molecules still exist (which the yeast cannot act on). However, I'm at a loss as to how the diastatic enzymes can act on the starch, if the mixture (of DMS + Adjunct) is just going to get boiled up straight away denaturing all the enzymes. Surely, it takes a moment to work?

Extras
...lactose question...

Plenty of beers use lactose. Look up milk stout.

Shall do. Thanks. Wonder if it can be got away with in paler beers?

[super_simian]

Well, diastatic extract is something I have only ever heard of in very old brewing books (pre 1980) and is non-existent here in Australia, to the best of my knowledge. Without going to drag up one of aforementioned ancient tomes, I seem to recall the extract and adjuncts had to sit for a period of time, comparable to a mash of sorts. And I wouldn't use lactose in a paler beer.