So do you think that which I linked to is the right stuff?Maltose is just 2 molecules of glucose bonded together and therefore highly fermentable (its also main constituent of wort)...never used it but imagine it would be like using liquid glucose ie lightens and dries the beer adding gravity points with no non fermentable element to had to body etc
God knows but I would say not, if you look here it says its made from/ got rice in it. Good for char sui!So do you think that which I linked to is the right stuff?
Thanks for the info, the recipe is a Graham Wheeler / Roger Protz recipe for Adnams Southwold Bitter. I'm not sure why they chose to include Maltose but I would like to give it a try as per recipe anyway.I have used that syrup once before which I bought from a local chinese supermarket and from memory it turned out fine. It is very thick though , so I would try and dissolve it a bit in hot water before adding it to the boil otherwise it might stick to the element and burn.
That's my experience, too. The only think that bothers me is the use of invert sugars in mild (I make a lot of mild). No doubt the original recipes contained the invert sugar they claim and I ask myself why? Was it for the flavour or was it for economy? I've read that it was no cheaper to use invert than malt, but I'm not sure of that. In any case, do I want the flavour of invert sugar on my beer? I'm not all that sure that I do, but as it's such a pain in the bum to make, I haven't really given it much of a chance.I came to the conclusion many moons ago, that beer tastes much better, with just malted barley in the mash. The only real exception is high gravity belgian beers, where you want to make it more drinkable, by creating less mouthfeel, by adding sugar.
I'm not sure you have bought the wrong maltose. Maltose is the disaccharide of glucose and it will be hydrolised to two glucose molecules by the yeast as part of the fermentation process. Maltotriose is three glucose units and sucrose- table sugar- is one glucose unit and one fructose unit. So if you are buying pure rather than some kind of unrefined maltose, the source doesn't matter and it'll be flavourless anyway.So according to GW I have bought the wrong (rice) maltose,
But this maltose derived from maize isn't going to taste of malt, it's going to taste of maize, if anything. I think the issue is the amount of unfermentable sugars (up to 20%) which will affect the body and mouthfeel. If the maltose derived from rice is fully fermentable, just add an equivalent proportion of maltodextrin and you'll have the same stuff.hese syrups are derived from maize (corn) and they come in two basic types: high glucose and high maltose. It is not terribly important which type is used, since the end result is about the same. The important fact is that these syrups, unlike pure glucose, are not 100% fermentable. They contain about 20% non fermentable sugars and therefore do not dry and thin the beer as much as cane sugar or pure glucose would. Glucose chips are the same product in solidified form and can be used just as well.
Thanks for your input, indeed I think GW mentions the body and mouthfeel is the reason to use it, a thread on Aussie Brewer suggested one or two users struggled to get FG below 1018 though no mention of how much they used.But this maltose derived from maize isn't going to taste of malt, it's going to taste of maize, if anything. I think the issue is the amount of unfermentable sugars (up to 20%) which will affect the body and mouthfeel. If the maltose derived from rice is fully fermentable, just add an equivalent proportion of maltodextrin and you'll have the same stuff.
Apart from the fact that it is made from Corn or Rice rather than barley, it has around 20% unfermentable sugars and so leaves the beer with a bit more body than using LME, or at least that is my understanding.Am I getting something wrong or would LME be a type of maltose syrup or just a less refined version?