Can an overnight mash recover a too hot mash?

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Also before anyone asks I can guarantee the temperature of the mash didn't drop below 70C for 90minutes..
Maybe not but it's quite possible that the temperature wasn't evenly distributed through the mash so there could have been pockets where it was significantly less than 70 so the enzymes would not have been denatured.
 
It sounds as if your thermometer was dodgy. If so, it could well be that your mash temperature was a bit less than 70C.
can't be true I used a medically calibrated thermometer -/+0.2C to calibrate my other two thermometers which both were reading 70-72C the whole time. Believe me I've checked so it cannot be that.
 
Maybe not but it's quite possible that the temperature wasn't evenly distributed through the mash so there could have been pockets where it was significantly less than 70 so the enzymes would not have been denatured.
Don't think that could be the case this time either as used my drill attachment to constantly stir the mash in an attempt to reduce the temp. So this was creating some sort of mixing whirlpool everything was mixed incredibly well before each reading. Also I had a temperature probe constantly reading mash temp and again nothing below 70C.
 
I don’t think there’s much wrong here. At 70C much of the beta amylase will have been denatured - but not all. Your overnight mash has given whatever beta amylase had survived ample opportunity to work it’s way through the sugars. Alpha amylase will have been working throughout to give the beta amylase lots of nice fresh ends to chew on.

Your yeast choice will also make a difference because a high attenuating yeast is able to ferment some of the longer chain sugars.
 
Your yeast choice will also make a difference because a high attenuating yeast is able to ferment some of the longer chain sugars.

I used lallemand verdant IPA yeast under pitched slightly (-4g), however within the 0.5g-1.0g pitching levels on the dry yeast pack. I did this as I didn't want to risk wasting two packs on this beer.
 
That yeast is a very good attenuator, higher than the packet makes out, but it's not a diastaticus strain though, so I'm surprised by the outcome.

Its amazing how forgiving brewing can be. A mistake with my mash the other week left we with a mash pH of less than 5. Still was perfectly fine though.
 
That yeast is a very good attenuator, higher than the packet makes out, but it's not a diastaticus strain though, so I'm surprised by the outcome.

Its amazing how forgiving brewing can be. A mistake with my mash the other week left we with a mash pH of less than 5. Still was perfectly fine though.
I think this what I'm coming to realise and love within brewing. My negligence is accepted willingly by wort and beer 🤣
 
Last edited:
I used lallemand verdant IPA yeast under pitched slightly (-4g), however within the 0.5g-1.0g pitching levels on the dry yeast pack. I did this as I didn't want to risk wasting two packs on this beer.
That yeast has a published attenuation of 80% but can be quite a bit more. Assuming it has 80% attenuation and your OG was 1081, it should in theory give you an FG of 1016. Looks like you got 84% which is entirely plausible.
 
Great news mate and as you say, it's amazing how forgiving the beer gods can be (sometimes....)
I'm very happy to be proved wrong athumb..
Next time leave your science bitch creationism round earth bullsh*t at home. I'm a man of faith now. The devine entity has intervened. The beer god's we're happy to provide for the pure 🤣.

But in all seriousness, thanks for your input and I appreciate you taking the time to enlighten me on certain information. I believe I just got lucky with this one, as many of us do from time to time. The next challenge and time for things to go wrong is now bottling and conditioning this now 9.0% NEIPA. Finger cross the beer god's are with me on this one.
 
Hey - I agree: what actually happens in practice is seldom exactly what theory says should happen, so we just have to be flexible and adapt to the way things are turning out. I do like to have a bit of a grasp of the theory as a starting point and also just from general curiosity... but half the problem with reading stuff online is separating the 'rumour and supposition' from people who actually know what they are talking about. FWIW I have found the articles by Kai Troester ('BrauKaiser') on his WiKi definitely fall into the second camp. His Science of Mashing articles are well worth a read.
 
Hey - I agree: what actually happens in practice is seldom exactly what theory says should happen, so we just have to be flexible and adapt to the way things are turning out. I do like to have a bit of a grasp of the theory as a starting point and also just from general curiosity... but half the problem with reading stuff online is separating the 'rumour and supposition' from people who actually know what they are talking about. FWIW I have found the articles by Kai Troester ('BrauKaiser') on his WiKi definitely fall into the second camp. His Science of Mashing articles are well worth a read.
Thanks for pointing me in the direction of some resources. I'll have a nose through at some point.

I agree separating facts from anecdotal evidence is hard, further to that I find some of the science hardly applicable to the real world environment.

I put it along side some of sport science; the theory is solid and makes perfect sense, backed up by statistical analysis and peer reviews but when applied in the real world things go slightly awry. That's where I feel a lot of the experience based anecdotal stuff comes in and clouds everything as every system, process and bit of equipment differs slightly, so no hard and fast rules within the random concoction of homebrew set ups.
 
Last edited:
Totally agree. There are some factors that are, and will forever remain, outside our control; but there are others we can characterise, so that we can at least understand the effect they’re having.
Believe it or not, I’m currently in the brew-cave doing some measurements to check the temp different between my HERMS tank and the wort temperature, and the heat lost along the pipework…
image.jpg
image.jpg
 
Totally agree. There are some factors that are, and will forever remain, outside our control; but there are others we can characterise, so that we can at least understand the effect they’re having.
Believe it or not, I’m currently in the brew-cave doing some measurements to check the temp different between my HERMS tank and the wort temperature, and the heat lost along the pipework…
View attachment 66131View attachment 66132
Where else would you be? 😂
 
Totally agree. There are some factors that are, and will forever remain, outside our control; but there are others we can characterise, so that we can at least understand the effect they’re having.
Believe it or not, I’m currently in the brew-cave doing some measurements to check the temp different between my HERMS tank and the wort temperature, and the heat lost along the pipework…
View attachment 66131View attachment 66132
This looks absolutely wonderful 😍 - I see this sort of thing and just wish I had the knowledge and the time to set up and monitor such things 🤣.
 
Totally agree. There are some factors that are, and will forever remain, outside our control; but there are others we can characterise, so that we can at least understand the effect they’re having.
Believe it or not, I’m currently in the brew-cave doing some measurements to check the temp different between my HERMS tank and the wort temperature, and the heat lost along the pipework…
View attachment 66131View attachment 66132
Can tell you're an engineer 👌
 
Just thought I'd update. Did my second hydrometer reading and it's steady at its FG of 1.013 so I'm cold crashing and then bottling tomorrow morning.
 

Attachments

  • IMG20220407224441.jpg
    IMG20220407224441.jpg
    76.1 KB · Views: 16
Back
Top