Gulpitdarn
Regular.
I wonder if anyone has mashed and then without removing grains, immediately fermented? An experiment I think I'd like to try... any reason why I shouldn't?
Mash n' Ferment!
- Thread starter Gulpitdarn
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
MyQul
Chairman of the Bored
Urm, why? It would certainly ferment, but you'd just end up with alcoholic porridge
Gulpitdarn
Regular.
Sorry I didn't put that across properly... I meant to ferment on the grains and then remove to grains after fermenting is done. The brew would be like fermenting on a huge crud.
strange-steve
Quantum Brewer
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 6,027
- Reaction score
- 5,798
Would you be skipping the boil also?
MyQul
Chairman of the Bored
As steve alludes to, if you boiled with all the grains in there , you'd have astringent beer porridge, because of all the tannins in the grain husks
Gulpitdarn
Regular.
Hmmmm didn't think about the boil how about taking the grains out for the boil and then to put them back in for the ferment? Sorry if all this sounds stupid but I do like looking at things from different angles. Experimenting.
MyQul
Chairman of the Bored
I reckon you'd have at least 50%-75% trub porridge
MyQul
Chairman of the Bored
What would putting the grains back in acheive, other than more work?
Nothing wrong with experimentation. If noone experimented we'd still be drinking beer without hops in it
I thought one reason wort is boiled is to sterilise it. Reintroducing grain may introdude all sorts of bugs and that may end up infecting the brew.
Sadfield
Landlord.
You'd then be sterilising the wort from the mash, and recontaminating it with the bacteria filled grains you added back in. Also, you'll be adding back lots of undesirable things that normally get precipitated out in the hot and cold break.
You say that like it's a bad thing!
MyQul
Chairman of the Bored
I think you may get the cheesy smell taste come into play is it Lactobillus? some of the more scientific members will know what I am referring to and corrrect as to the proper name I would also think you probably would get astringency but by all means do say a small batch 1 gall etc and report back the results. No venture no gain
strange-steve
Quantum Brewer
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 6,027
- Reaction score
- 5,798
While I admire the out of the box thinking I'm not sure you're on to a winner here.
Gulpitdarn
Regular.
I value the comments very much! but hey... I'm gonna have a go. Like the Baron says, " do say a small batch 1 gall etc and report back the results. No venture no gain" and you can all say "I told you so" 
Told you so Lol
thought I would get the first one in
thought I would get the first one in
Sadfield
Landlord.
Isovaleric acid, IIRC from Lactobacillus consuming sugars in the presence of oxygen. The OPs mash should be hot enough to at least pasteurise everything, so any contamination should be reduced as long as fermentation takes off.
As you say, I'd expect some astringency and husky, grain flavours. Probably, some phenolic notes and a slight Yoghurt tang.
What about mashing, removing the grain for the boil and then putting the grain into the hot wort when the boil is finished, to sterilise it and then try to chill down quickly?
Either way, if it was a good idea, I'm sure we'd all be doing it already
. But why not try, hey.
Drunkula
Landlord.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2017
- Messages
- 2,617
- Reaction score
- 2,331
This idea has made me laugh dementedly. I love doing stuff for the sake of it but what is the final goal here? At the end would you bottle the porridge or strain away the booze? A porridge bottle bomb would be a pure delight. I've had gushers from getting bits of hop in a bottle - grains and husks, wow, what they could get up to I don't know.
Similar threads
