I can no longer ignore the irony of this thread. After BIAB was panned as poor practice and sites like this developed to provide some kind of evidence that it did work. Now the posters are hunting down unconventional ideas on other forums and going out to shoot them down!
Respect to Mally for having a go at trying to test the impact but a lot of this is hilarious!
Post #77 made 11 years ago
I agree (to an extent) Contrarian.
If ever anybody has a new idea or does something out of the ordinary I like to support that. There is just something about experimentation & "pioneering" that I find agreeable.
However, what I find different at the moment is that all we have asked for is some evidence of this technique, and that was lacking (hence the reason I wanted to find out for myself). I can see the irony too. However, the main difference was that the pioneers back then had to prove the method.
That's the way pioneers should work. Here is my theory, here is my evidence. You cannot just say, here is my theory, I am right you are wrong!
I have read through those links on HBT and there is more compelling "anecdotes" that it works. Even a paper from Sweden in 1982 that seems to offer support (I haven't read it fully though) here.
Pat has mentioned a few posts back that we need more testers (we shouldn't have to but
)
If ever anybody has a new idea or does something out of the ordinary I like to support that. There is just something about experimentation & "pioneering" that I find agreeable.
However, what I find different at the moment is that all we have asked for is some evidence of this technique, and that was lacking (hence the reason I wanted to find out for myself). I can see the irony too. However, the main difference was that the pioneers back then had to prove the method.
That's the way pioneers should work. Here is my theory, here is my evidence. You cannot just say, here is my theory, I am right you are wrong!
I have read through those links on HBT and there is more compelling "anecdotes" that it works. Even a paper from Sweden in 1982 that seems to offer support (I haven't read it fully though) here.
Pat has mentioned a few posts back that we need more testers (we shouldn't have to but
)
Last edited by mally on 25 Sep 2014, 15:20, edited 1 time in total.
G B
I spent lots of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I squandered
I've stopped drinking, but only when I'm asleep
I ONCE gave up women and alcohol - it was the worst 20 minutes of my life
I spent lots of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I squandered
I've stopped drinking, but only when I'm asleep
I ONCE gave up women and alcohol - it was the worst 20 minutes of my life
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Great Britain
-
Misinformation Posts About BIAB
Post #78 made 11 years ago
Thanks for the post Mally, completely agree with all of it but I can see the funny side of this too. I've read through all the old BIAB threads on ahb and they make some very interesting reading for the historically minded.
I also agree that anecdotes are not data and that a body of evidence needs to be compiled to support a hypothesis. You will get some people with a hypothesis who will test to the nth degree and others that will be happy assuming they are right regardless of the mounting evidence to the contrary.
I am no expert in brewing science or much at all as it happens but I would wonder if starch conversion is the only thing happening in the mash. I'll also be very interested in the results of your test.
I also agree that anecdotes are not data and that a body of evidence needs to be compiled to support a hypothesis. You will get some people with a hypothesis who will test to the nth degree and others that will be happy assuming they are right regardless of the mounting evidence to the contrary.
I am no expert in brewing science or much at all as it happens but I would wonder if starch conversion is the only thing happening in the mash. I'll also be very interested in the results of your test.
Post #79 made 11 years ago
I'm a visitor from HBT. My handle here is the same over there. I participated in the discussion referenced in this thread.
I'd like to ask anyone interested to attempt a read of that thread with an open mind. I hope you'll find it a very well-reasoned discussion with minimal vitriol and hate--perhaps the most offensive thing we did was to ask user "Conestoga" (here, "Rick"), to support the claims made here with anything even approaching the standard of data he asked for over there. Draw your own conclusions about his responses--in my judgment, he either ignored the inconvenient question, or outright stated that he wouldn't answer it.
You'll note his gleeful post here (my paraphrase) "I asked for a detailed, scientific write-up. Now let's watch him backpedal." That doesn't get posted by someone interested in dialog--those are the words of someone who has already drawn their conclusions and is simply trolling.
Compare the attitudes toward other brewers in this thread. Compare Rick's attitude toward other brewers over in HBT. Compare the HBT responses to Rick (Conestoga). I would say that the HBT crowd immediately saw Rick for what he was doing, called him out on it with hard questions that he couldn't answer but never attacked him personally. He responded in a way that should embarrass the members of Biabrewer.info. Those are my conclusions--please draw your own. But if one of the goals of this board is to grow and improve it's ability to help new brewers (and collect donations), I would suggest that the approach found in this thread does more harm than good. For full disclosure, I mentioned in a PM to Rick: To an outside observer, this thread makes your group look like a bunch of arseholes, more interested in tearing down other brewers and boards than contributing to the community. That's a shame, because it's a high-profile mention of BIABrewer.info over on HBT, and it probably obscures a lot of the work you're doing to help.
Is it acceptable for me to ask the same thing of the group here that Rick asked at HBT? Can someone provide a 'detailed, scientific write-up" of these two closely-held beliefs:
--Crushing grain too fine will lead to tannin extraction. Please leave pH and temperature out of it for now--as the frequently-linked-to sticky makes no mention of these two factors.
--A 90-minute mash is required. Remember, Rick's standard is a 'detailed, scientific write-up'. The thread here that collects gravity and mash times is a collection of anecdotes with zero control over variables, and while it is helpful, there's no way it can meet the standard--or even be considered data. Am I missing some other source of information?
I come with respect, and I hope you'll see that I treated your spokesman, Rick, with respect over on the HBT thread. But I hope you'll agree that you don't build up your own community by tearing down others.
I'd like to ask anyone interested to attempt a read of that thread with an open mind. I hope you'll find it a very well-reasoned discussion with minimal vitriol and hate--perhaps the most offensive thing we did was to ask user "Conestoga" (here, "Rick"), to support the claims made here with anything even approaching the standard of data he asked for over there. Draw your own conclusions about his responses--in my judgment, he either ignored the inconvenient question, or outright stated that he wouldn't answer it.
You'll note his gleeful post here (my paraphrase) "I asked for a detailed, scientific write-up. Now let's watch him backpedal." That doesn't get posted by someone interested in dialog--those are the words of someone who has already drawn their conclusions and is simply trolling.
Compare the attitudes toward other brewers in this thread. Compare Rick's attitude toward other brewers over in HBT. Compare the HBT responses to Rick (Conestoga). I would say that the HBT crowd immediately saw Rick for what he was doing, called him out on it with hard questions that he couldn't answer but never attacked him personally. He responded in a way that should embarrass the members of Biabrewer.info. Those are my conclusions--please draw your own. But if one of the goals of this board is to grow and improve it's ability to help new brewers (and collect donations), I would suggest that the approach found in this thread does more harm than good. For full disclosure, I mentioned in a PM to Rick: To an outside observer, this thread makes your group look like a bunch of arseholes, more interested in tearing down other brewers and boards than contributing to the community. That's a shame, because it's a high-profile mention of BIABrewer.info over on HBT, and it probably obscures a lot of the work you're doing to help.
Is it acceptable for me to ask the same thing of the group here that Rick asked at HBT? Can someone provide a 'detailed, scientific write-up" of these two closely-held beliefs:
--Crushing grain too fine will lead to tannin extraction. Please leave pH and temperature out of it for now--as the frequently-linked-to sticky makes no mention of these two factors.
--A 90-minute mash is required. Remember, Rick's standard is a 'detailed, scientific write-up'. The thread here that collects gravity and mash times is a collection of anecdotes with zero control over variables, and while it is helpful, there's no way it can meet the standard--or even be considered data. Am I missing some other source of information?
I come with respect, and I hope you'll see that I treated your spokesman, Rick, with respect over on the HBT thread. But I hope you'll agree that you don't build up your own community by tearing down others.
Post #80 made 11 years ago
Milan37 wrote:I'm a visitor from HBT. My handle here is the same over there. I participated in the discussion referenced in this thread.
I'd like to ask anyone interested to attempt a read of that thread with an open mind. I hope you'll find it a very well-reasoned discussion with minimal vitriol and hate--perhaps the most offensive thing we did was to ask user "Conestoga" (here, "Rick"), to support the claims made here with anything even approaching the standard of data he asked for over there. Draw your own conclusions about his responses--in my judgment, he either ignored the inconvenient question, or outright stated that he wouldn't answer it.
You'll note his gleeful post here (my paraphrase) "I asked for a detailed, scientific write-up. Now let's watch him backpedal." That doesn't get posted by someone interested in dialog--those are the words of someone who has already drawn their conclusions and is simply trolling.
Compare the attitudes toward other brewers in this thread. Compare Rick's attitude toward other brewers over in HBT. Compare the HBT responses to Rick (Conestoga). I would say that the HBT crowd immediately saw Rick for what he was doing, called him out on it with hard questions that he couldn't answer but never attacked him personally. He responded in a way that should embarrass the members of Biabrewer.info. Those are my conclusions--please draw your own. But if one of the goals of this board is to grow and improve it's ability to help new brewers (and collect donations), I would suggest that the approach found in this thread does more harm than good. For full disclosure, I mentioned in a PM to Rick: To an outside observer, this thread makes your group look like a bunch of arseholes, more interested in tearing down other brewers and boards than contributing to the community. That's a shame, because it's a high-profile mention of BIABrewer.info over on HBT, and it probably obscures a lot of the work you're doing to help.
Is it acceptable for me to ask the same thing of the group here that Rick asked at HBT? Can someone provide a 'detailed, scientific write-up" of these two closely-held beliefs:
--Crushing grain too fine will lead to tannin extraction. Please leave pH and temperature out of it for now--as the frequently-linked-to sticky makes no mention of these two factors.
--A 90-minute mash is required. Remember, Rick's standard is a 'detailed, scientific write-up'. The thread here that collects gravity and mash times is a collection of anecdotes with zero control over variables, and while it is helpful, there's no way it can meet the standard--or even be considered data. Am I missing some other source of information?
I come with respect, and I hope you'll see that I treated your spokesman, Rick, with respect over on the HBT thread. But I hope you'll agree that you don't build up your own community by tearing down others.
I'll admit that my asking for evidence was a bit of a troll. That was a passing attempt to bring down the dogma that I saw (read: to open up honest debate), and you adopted it as the focal point of the discussion once I revealed my true intentions.
Ask yourself this, where did I go with the conversation after he backpedaled? Here's where I went ...
http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f244/first-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... ost6381670
That's the post that explains in full, what I am doing in the conversation. Asking me the same thing in return (provide evidence) is a bit of a straw man, because my intentions were to ask for transparency, not prove him "wrong", "flawed", or anything else. The proof is in my responding post. You tried to use your straw man to tear ME down. Sooo ...
You're correct in one regard, read the thread with an open mind. I do not regret any of that.
Last edited by Rick on 25 Sep 2014, 23:18, edited 1 time in total.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #81 made 11 years ago
"Guys, Guys, Your Both Beautiful"
If the Man who says a "20 minute mash" is Acceptable, Could he please post a "File.XLS" showing the Gravity Numbers, at least 3, so I can see your Data.
It does not need to be repeatable, but, Would be Nice, So, it would be good, If you can show us the Supporting evidence to your Observations.
If the Man who says a "20 minute mash" is Acceptable, Could he please post a "File.XLS" showing the Gravity Numbers, at least 3, so I can see your Data.
It does not need to be repeatable, but, Would be Nice, So, it would be good, If you can show us the Supporting evidence to your Observations.
Last edited by joshua on 26 Sep 2014, 01:22, edited 1 time in total.
Honest Officer, I swear to Drunk, I am Not God.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #82 made 11 years ago
Last edited by Rick on 26 Sep 2014, 01:18, edited 1 time in total.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #83 made 11 years ago
Rick, while trying to keep an open mind, I found that HBT was combatative . But ,unfortunately , at times you were too. I do believe you did show more restraint.
Hopefully some of their readers will check out our site and learn the real truth. They also need to give it a couple of days WITH an open mind. We all like to joke and have a good time here. No need for "stuffed shirts " here .
Joe
Hopefully some of their readers will check out our site and learn the real truth. They also need to give it a couple of days WITH an open mind. We all like to joke and have a good time here. No need for "stuffed shirts " here .
Joe
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #84 made 11 years ago
That's fair enough. My intentions were good and I did want RM-MN's information, but I did let them drag me into the mud a few times. Next time!
The reality now is that we are asking (and have been) for any little bit of information, so we can process it in an unbiased manner. We have gotten nothing but excuses and deflection on HBT, luckily mally was gracious enough to begin bearing the burden here. I feel any feelings of disrespect toward RM-MN in this thread was/is warranted, especially considering how he resolved the discussion. Also note the praise within this thread toward Yooper. I have recently praised Wilserbrewer, check my post history. Also, note how earlier in the thread that I realized that I might not be the best spokesperson for this site. Why bother coming here to point that out when I already did? The fact that Milan is here cherry picking negatives from these threads, makes me feel like he's now trolling us. Finally, this isn't a secret thread we were hiding in, I knowingly linked Milan to it in a PM right when mally began the experiment. All of this "gotcha"/ad hominem nonsense needs to stop.
Milan is now here demanding a "higher standard" while giving us red herrings to chase due to not seeing (or refusing to see) my intention. As shown in the link I provided in my previous post ... that is not equal to what I resolved to asking on HBT. I trolled, but I did it for good. I won't entertain his questions, seems like a waste of time to go further in this conversation until he comes down to Earth and reveals his intentions. I don't think that's too much to ask.
The reality now is that we are asking (and have been) for any little bit of information, so we can process it in an unbiased manner. We have gotten nothing but excuses and deflection on HBT, luckily mally was gracious enough to begin bearing the burden here. I feel any feelings of disrespect toward RM-MN in this thread was/is warranted, especially considering how he resolved the discussion. Also note the praise within this thread toward Yooper. I have recently praised Wilserbrewer, check my post history. Also, note how earlier in the thread that I realized that I might not be the best spokesperson for this site. Why bother coming here to point that out when I already did? The fact that Milan is here cherry picking negatives from these threads, makes me feel like he's now trolling us. Finally, this isn't a secret thread we were hiding in, I knowingly linked Milan to it in a PM right when mally began the experiment. All of this "gotcha"/ad hominem nonsense needs to stop.
Milan is now here demanding a "higher standard" while giving us red herrings to chase due to not seeing (or refusing to see) my intention. As shown in the link I provided in my previous post ... that is not equal to what I resolved to asking on HBT. I trolled, but I did it for good. I won't entertain his questions, seems like a waste of time to go further in this conversation until he comes down to Earth and reveals his intentions. I don't think that's too much to ask.
Last edited by Rick on 26 Sep 2014, 19:44, edited 5 times in total.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #85 made 11 years ago
email this guy Rick, plus there may be some information here that sheds some light on it.
At the least it should keep you all quiet for a while.
Bamforth
Yeasty
At the least it should keep you all quiet for a while.
Bamforth
Yeasty
Last edited by Yeasty on 26 Sep 2014, 18:38, edited 1 time in total.
Why is everyone talking about "Cheese"
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 50 Brews From Great Britain
-
Post #86 made 11 years ago
Rick, I do see where you were coming from. And, no, it isn't too much to ask for and honest debate on any subject, But, some sites out there have a few " Hardheads " that believe that they are the "All knowing powerful wizard of Oz. " When quite possibly they are just chuckheads who like to see their name on the screen.
Yeasty, All i can say is Dang, this Mr Bamforth makes me look like my neighbors 6 month old daughter !!!!
Yeasty, All i can say is Dang, this Mr Bamforth makes me look like my neighbors 6 month old daughter !!!!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #87 made 11 years ago
I'll state my intent clearly, and I'm happy to entertain a discussion about it. However I have no interest in disrupting this board any further than I already have.
If it is forbidden to question the conventional wisdom around here, do let me know. I understand and please accept my apologies.
My intent is to have a discussion about the limits of data and experimentation, especially when posted to web forums. Much discussion is carried out here referencing data, experimentation, and science--even in this thread mally is carrying out an experiment of his own. Much of this talk is in the context of how this is a large part of what makes this forum different from others, and allows BIABrewer.info to possess 'the truth' (as mentioned by a poster a little earlier).
My point, however, is that when we pull back the veil there is really nothing approaching valid data. This is true not just of BIABrewer.info, but also of HBT--and any other forum that claims to have figured things out.
My larger point, and this is a philosophical one, is that it is, in fact, impossible to do on a web forum. We simply don't have the tools. All of the anecdotes in the world don't add up to data. It's just too uncontrolled. Here's an anecdote for you: I brewed my Centennial Pale Ale by crushing the grain down to a fine powder and mashing for 60 minutes, BIAB. The score was a 38, best-of-show, and the judges rated it "flawless". Doesn't that completely invalidate two of the most-closely-held principles of this forum? If not, why not?
Further to this, and back to the questions I posed in my first post: the fact that no one has simply said "here you go" and pointed me to the data that supports the contentions on fine crushing and 90-minute mashes very clearly demonstrates that there is no data to show. .
I'll let Rick find some snappy meme from the web to make a point, but since he likes quotes, I'll share mine--it's kind of my code: "Bring me into the company of those who seek the truth, and deliver me from those who have found it."
Anyone else interested in a discussion, I'm happy to carry on. Like I said, if it's not kosher to question the conventional wisdom here, please do accept my apologies for the disruption.
If it is forbidden to question the conventional wisdom around here, do let me know. I understand and please accept my apologies.
My intent is to have a discussion about the limits of data and experimentation, especially when posted to web forums. Much discussion is carried out here referencing data, experimentation, and science--even in this thread mally is carrying out an experiment of his own. Much of this talk is in the context of how this is a large part of what makes this forum different from others, and allows BIABrewer.info to possess 'the truth' (as mentioned by a poster a little earlier).
My point, however, is that when we pull back the veil there is really nothing approaching valid data. This is true not just of BIABrewer.info, but also of HBT--and any other forum that claims to have figured things out.
My larger point, and this is a philosophical one, is that it is, in fact, impossible to do on a web forum. We simply don't have the tools. All of the anecdotes in the world don't add up to data. It's just too uncontrolled. Here's an anecdote for you: I brewed my Centennial Pale Ale by crushing the grain down to a fine powder and mashing for 60 minutes, BIAB. The score was a 38, best-of-show, and the judges rated it "flawless". Doesn't that completely invalidate two of the most-closely-held principles of this forum? If not, why not?
Further to this, and back to the questions I posed in my first post: the fact that no one has simply said "here you go" and pointed me to the data that supports the contentions on fine crushing and 90-minute mashes very clearly demonstrates that there is no data to show. .
I'll let Rick find some snappy meme from the web to make a point, but since he likes quotes, I'll share mine--it's kind of my code: "Bring me into the company of those who seek the truth, and deliver me from those who have found it."
Anyone else interested in a discussion, I'm happy to carry on. Like I said, if it's not kosher to question the conventional wisdom here, please do accept my apologies for the disruption.
Post #88 made 11 years ago
It's fine to question conventional wisdom, and that can happen pretty soon by the looks of it.
Your quote, in the post I linked to on HBT .. I have posted two similar (Neil deGrasse Tyson pic, and another at the end). We don't have to pretend either of us is the latter person in your quote.
Your point about data. If a compilation of brew anecdotes can be accurate enough to provide repeatable and favorable results, then it is has proven good enough for the application. Our point is that terminology has thrown a wrench in this, you even alluded to that earlier. CBT helps us all communicate with each other, and will eventually help us eliminate many more variables. So, we're trying. Improvement is the goal, not "data". I use certain words to articulate points or concepts, they really don't need to be taken literally. I'll watch myself a bit closer next time.
The reality of brewing is that it's an organic process, and clear answers to anything will be very few and far between. To think otherwise is absolutely delusional.
But hey, I'm glad you are here ... and I hope you stick around for many discussions to come.
Apologies for any insults I may have flung at you, I tend to get frustrated when I'm poorly understood.
Your quote, in the post I linked to on HBT .. I have posted two similar (Neil deGrasse Tyson pic, and another at the end). We don't have to pretend either of us is the latter person in your quote.
Your point about data. If a compilation of brew anecdotes can be accurate enough to provide repeatable and favorable results, then it is has proven good enough for the application. Our point is that terminology has thrown a wrench in this, you even alluded to that earlier. CBT helps us all communicate with each other, and will eventually help us eliminate many more variables. So, we're trying. Improvement is the goal, not "data". I use certain words to articulate points or concepts, they really don't need to be taken literally. I'll watch myself a bit closer next time.
The reality of brewing is that it's an organic process, and clear answers to anything will be very few and far between. To think otherwise is absolutely delusional.
But hey, I'm glad you are here ... and I hope you stick around for many discussions to come.
Apologies for any insults I may have flung at you, I tend to get frustrated when I'm poorly understood.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #89 made 11 years ago
Good day, This post may be off topic.....
Check this link for Data about Specific Gravity vs Mash Time.
It may help someone understand BIABrewer.INFO's position on Longer mash times....
http://www.biabrewer.info/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=1669
Decide for Yourself!!
Check this link for Data about Specific Gravity vs Mash Time.
It may help someone understand BIABrewer.INFO's position on Longer mash times....
http://www.biabrewer.info/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=1669
Decide for Yourself!!
Honest Officer, I swear to Drunk, I am Not God.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #90 made 11 years ago
Thank you for responding, Joshua. Respectfully, I would approach that thread differently--rather, as Exhibit A in my argument that data collected in this way is invalid.
While the creators of the thread attempted some control, there is no way that data can be used to predict what any single person can expect in their mash. There are just too many uncontrolled variables that can have a massive influence on the data collected, such as: fine-ness of crush, type of measurement equipment (thermometers, hydrometers, refractometers, etc), calibration of said measurement equipment, method of measurement, and on and on.
Other problems with the data: by the 23rd post, the admin was already declaring "we can already say that there is almost definitely a difference and probably a high one." This can't be ignored. It almost inevitably creates a selection bias towards those whose results match the forgone conclusion.
So many variables left so completely uncontrolled that I don't think it's rational to attempt predictions based on the information in that thread.
Quantity of data--there are (roughly, I didn't count) 55 posts with data. This is tiny--and while there are cases where you can use a small sample size, the quality of the data is critical. Pat mentioned a year ago in that thread that they had a mathematician lined up to do some analysis--I would love to hear what that guy (or gal) was able to do with the data, and if they thought it was valid, or just assumed it was.
Look up "statistical hypothesis testing" on Wikipedia for some more information. I would argue that the data is of such poor quality that it invalidates the entire test.
But you're absolutely right that everyone should decide for themselves. What do you think: How reliable are the predictions that will come from that data?
EDIT: I hope when I use terms like 'poor quality' that I don't come across as passing a value judgment on any individual. I'm only talking about numbers, not people.
While the creators of the thread attempted some control, there is no way that data can be used to predict what any single person can expect in their mash. There are just too many uncontrolled variables that can have a massive influence on the data collected, such as: fine-ness of crush, type of measurement equipment (thermometers, hydrometers, refractometers, etc), calibration of said measurement equipment, method of measurement, and on and on.
Other problems with the data: by the 23rd post, the admin was already declaring "we can already say that there is almost definitely a difference and probably a high one." This can't be ignored. It almost inevitably creates a selection bias towards those whose results match the forgone conclusion.
So many variables left so completely uncontrolled that I don't think it's rational to attempt predictions based on the information in that thread.
Quantity of data--there are (roughly, I didn't count) 55 posts with data. This is tiny--and while there are cases where you can use a small sample size, the quality of the data is critical. Pat mentioned a year ago in that thread that they had a mathematician lined up to do some analysis--I would love to hear what that guy (or gal) was able to do with the data, and if they thought it was valid, or just assumed it was.
Look up "statistical hypothesis testing" on Wikipedia for some more information. I would argue that the data is of such poor quality that it invalidates the entire test.
But you're absolutely right that everyone should decide for themselves. What do you think: How reliable are the predictions that will come from that data?
EDIT: I hope when I use terms like 'poor quality' that I don't come across as passing a value judgment on any individual. I'm only talking about numbers, not people.
Last edited by Milan37 on 27 Sep 2014, 01:34, edited 1 time in total.
Post #91 made 11 years ago
Milan37, "statistical hypothesis testing" is just like "Weather vs Climate" 55 data posts are Better than what 1 person Believes, But...
We need a few hundred mash's Data to get a Good Average.
I am making 144oz Batches + "loss" to bottle "12 packs".
I have 4 mash data for the Batches....The data is Bad after 2 hours due to Bad temperature control.
I have some data that Specific Gravity Continues to Rise up to 4 Hours, and I need many more mash's to see if this is real, or just a Fluke.
There is a problem with "Belief", and data, Much data, can be used to find "Facts", that can be verified, by anybody who tries the same Process.
Your View that the Conversion is Over at 20 minutes is a Fair Observation.....about 85% of the Conversion IS finished!!
If someone is in a hurry, they can add 15% more grain, mash for 20 minutes and hit their S.G....That's Great!!!
Efficiency is what I want, I have Time, a lot of time.
If I can raise my Current efficiency from 74% to whatever by Mashing 4-6 hours, I will be VERY happy.....Less grain per batch, saves $$$$$.
We need a few hundred mash's Data to get a Good Average.
I am making 144oz Batches + "loss" to bottle "12 packs".
I have 4 mash data for the Batches....The data is Bad after 2 hours due to Bad temperature control.
I have some data that Specific Gravity Continues to Rise up to 4 Hours, and I need many more mash's to see if this is real, or just a Fluke.
There is a problem with "Belief", and data, Much data, can be used to find "Facts", that can be verified, by anybody who tries the same Process.
Your View that the Conversion is Over at 20 minutes is a Fair Observation.....about 85% of the Conversion IS finished!!
If someone is in a hurry, they can add 15% more grain, mash for 20 minutes and hit their S.G....That's Great!!!
Efficiency is what I want, I have Time, a lot of time.
If I can raise my Current efficiency from 74% to whatever by Mashing 4-6 hours, I will be VERY happy.....Less grain per batch, saves $$$$$.
Honest Officer, I swear to Drunk, I am Not God.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #92 made 11 years ago
By the way Joshua, I posted over on your de-hulled barley thread. It appears Briess sells 2-row flour. Wouldn't that be what you are looking for?
http://www.brewingwithbriess.com/Assets ... rsMalt.pdf
http://www.brewingwithbriess.com/Assets ... rsMalt.pdf
Last edited by Milan37 on 27 Sep 2014, 04:35, edited 1 time in total.
Post #93 made 11 years ago
Milan37, it does not specify that it is Husk Free.....I hope they come out with Caramel and Roasted malt Flour too.
Single vessel no-bag brewing!!!!
Single vessel no-bag brewing!!!!
Honest Officer, I swear to Drunk, I am Not God.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #94 made 11 years ago
[EDIT: A bit of fuel on board writing the below. I'll do my next post here on coffee 
.]
I've been following this thread and also have read the one over on HBT where someone said I couldn't write.
Older members here know the lengths that some of us go to, to remain low key. We think this is mainly a good thing but it does cause some problems and I think we are seeing that in this debate. I do not like saying the following but this site was created by myself, two other pioneers and NME. NME worked out a while back that I had written almost three million words on brewing, a lot of which, most readers can't see as it is behind the scenes.
If I get time tomorrow, I am going to try and write a post about what this site is all about and why I wanted to start it and why I had no trouble starting it. I'll write that post under the name, "Pat".
This thread can teach us all. Milan can read all the posts that I have just written tonight. That is probably three hours of writing, giving detailed answers to individuals and these answers are not as good as I would normally do but I am way short on time. Btw, that is what this site is mainly about.
Milan can also remind us that this site is not laid out anywhere nearly as well as I and I'm sure others would like it to be. I'm embarrassed by it in many areas, know how to correct a lot of it but the available hours I have each week to spend (I'm pretty sure I spend over twenty hours a week here) get chewed up.
As for experiments and measurements, I have done a lot more than anyone else here or on any other forum over many years - side by side measurements. I friggin' hate taking them. I only need to take two measurements for myself so all those other measurements I have taken or those other generous brewers have taken and recorded in threads such as this are taken to serve others. Milan, many numbers, do have value when they are averaged. They help create a ball-park. This is the only site doing this. In fact, you wouldn't have the excellent ball-park figures the BIABacus has if it wasn't for me collecting and averaging numbers from a whole lot of brewers generously disturbing their brew day to measure and record numbers.
A single brewer's experience/measurements tell others probably nothing or almost nothing.
There are many examples above. mally finds no difference between a fine and normal crush on one brew. milan says his efficiency is consistent on a fine crush and that he scored best of show with a 38/50 out of a show. I have problems with both of these situations. mally will be aware of most of them, the main one being that his experiment needs to be repeated many times and it is not a side by side. With milan, I am worried that he gets consistent efficiency on varying gravity brews. Why? There are many, many other questions to ask.
Contrarion above said he found this thread hilarious and ironic. Contrarion, are you sure you read through all the old AHB threads? I'm the one that answered any negatives and my memory is that nearly all brewers were supportive of BIAB and I have always said that. How can we let one or two tossers make a difference?
There are a hundred more things to say here but for me, the most important members/brewers on this site are those who read carefully and answer others questions. If you don't like that go to Facebook.
...
I'm locking this thread until I get the time to take on board all the above. There is a lot for me to absorb, consider and prioritise.
In the meantime, two things...
1. Are there questions being asked on this forum that you can answer well?
2. When I unlock the thread, will you have really studied all the above carefully?
If so
,
PP
NOTE: This site might be entertainment to some but it costs me dearly every day.
.]I've been following this thread and also have read the one over on HBT where someone said I couldn't write
.Older members here know the lengths that some of us go to, to remain low key. We think this is mainly a good thing but it does cause some problems and I think we are seeing that in this debate. I do not like saying the following but this site was created by myself, two other pioneers and NME. NME worked out a while back that I had written almost three million words on brewing, a lot of which, most readers can't see as it is behind the scenes.
If I get time tomorrow, I am going to try and write a post about what this site is all about and why I wanted to start it and why I had no trouble starting it. I'll write that post under the name, "Pat".
This thread can teach us all. Milan can read all the posts that I have just written tonight. That is probably three hours of writing, giving detailed answers to individuals and these answers are not as good as I would normally do but I am way short on time. Btw, that is what this site is mainly about.
Milan can also remind us that this site is not laid out anywhere nearly as well as I and I'm sure others would like it to be. I'm embarrassed by it in many areas, know how to correct a lot of it but the available hours I have each week to spend (I'm pretty sure I spend over twenty hours a week here) get chewed up.
As for experiments and measurements, I have done a lot more than anyone else here or on any other forum over many years - side by side measurements. I friggin' hate taking them. I only need to take two measurements for myself so all those other measurements I have taken or those other generous brewers have taken and recorded in threads such as this are taken to serve others. Milan, many numbers, do have value when they are averaged. They help create a ball-park. This is the only site doing this. In fact, you wouldn't have the excellent ball-park figures the BIABacus has if it wasn't for me collecting and averaging numbers from a whole lot of brewers generously disturbing their brew day to measure and record numbers.
A single brewer's experience/measurements tell others probably nothing or almost nothing.
There are many examples above. mally finds no difference between a fine and normal crush on one brew. milan says his efficiency is consistent on a fine crush and that he scored best of show with a 38/50 out of a show. I have problems with both of these situations. mally will be aware of most of them, the main one being that his experiment needs to be repeated many times and it is not a side by side. With milan, I am worried that he gets consistent efficiency on varying gravity brews. Why? There are many, many other questions to ask.
Contrarion above said he found this thread hilarious and ironic. Contrarion, are you sure you read through all the old AHB threads? I'm the one that answered any negatives and my memory is that nearly all brewers were supportive of BIAB and I have always said that. How can we let one or two tossers make a difference?
There are a hundred more things to say here but for me, the most important members/brewers on this site are those who read carefully and answer others questions. If you don't like that go to Facebook.
...
I'm locking this thread until I get the time to take on board all the above. There is a lot for me to absorb, consider and prioritise.
In the meantime, two things...
1. Are there questions being asked on this forum that you can answer well?
2. When I unlock the thread, will you have really studied all the above carefully?
If so
,PP
NOTE: This site might be entertainment to some but it costs me dearly every day.
Last edited by PistolPatch on 27 Sep 2014, 22:45, edited 1 time in total.
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
-
Post #95 made 11 years ago
It's a long weekend here in Western Australia but I had to unexpectedly work today and I am working at least a half day tomorrow so I really can't afford much more time on this thread. I have though, emailed some members I respect, asking them to review this thread and try and find anything that BIABrewer.info is obviously doing wrong. I myself reviewed some parts of the site this evening, with a coffee, and I don't think I should be as embarrassed or ashamed of this site as I was. I read the introduction sections and they all seem very friendly and welcoming to me.
I do suspect that members of other sites who have been posting for a while or years on other sites may not initially understand this site as it was created to be an information site, not just another brewing forum. Here, we are not concerned about things like money (although I do get cranky that others profit from BIAB without contributing or directing people to quality information). It might be a big error but until BIABrewre.info finalises it's structure and tools to a level that I find acceptable, then that is our focus.
A few things that Milan37 and other new members may not realise that some other older members will, are the following...
1. This site is altruistic.
2. This site is revolutionary - but in a sensible and considered way.
3. This site gives total respect to new brewers.
4. To maintain respect, members must become active contributors. (I and others never seem to act on that one though
.)
5. The site was created by the main BIAB (SMS - Simultaneous Mashing and Sparging) pioneers.
6. This site's major aim is to provide a structure where new brewers can find a safe, non-confusing path into all-grain brewing. (In other words, post any new ideas that are not yet proven to be best-practice in the advanced forum.)
7. It is easy for any new member to think that all brewing sites are like this one and that this is just another one. It is not. Many answers written here take several hours to write. Please don't take them for granted.
As a little proof of some of the above, here is just one example of just some of the knowledge buried in this forum that you will find nowhere else.
...
I don't think there is any need to post any examples of the care and attention that many members here give to others. I'd like to see a lot more though. A good answer often takes several hours to write but you can also learn a lot whilst writing it.
...
For now, until we get everything falling into place, please don't concentrate on threads like this too much*. Instead, please concentrate on handing on best practices as often as you can. Any experiments, or examination of new ideas, please post in the Advanced forum thread. That is what it is for.
Pat
* I'm sure that I have done some way less than perfect posts above. In any other thread, I would say, "Just correct me," but in this thread, I think there are a lot of posts that could be improved so let's just focus on moving forward and being constructive from now on.
I'll re-open the thread within 36 hours and expect to see only the highest quality replies.
[MODNOTE: Any posts regarding mally's fine crush experiment have been copied to Fine versus Normal Crush Experiment.Please reply there.]
I do suspect that members of other sites who have been posting for a while or years on other sites may not initially understand this site as it was created to be an information site, not just another brewing forum. Here, we are not concerned about things like money (although I do get cranky that others profit from BIAB without contributing or directing people to quality information). It might be a big error but until BIABrewre.info finalises it's structure and tools to a level that I find acceptable, then that is our focus.
A few things that Milan37 and other new members may not realise that some other older members will, are the following...
1. This site is altruistic.
2. This site is revolutionary - but in a sensible and considered way.
3. This site gives total respect to new brewers.
4. To maintain respect, members must become active contributors. (I and others never seem to act on that one though
.)5. The site was created by the main BIAB (SMS - Simultaneous Mashing and Sparging) pioneers.
6. This site's major aim is to provide a structure where new brewers can find a safe, non-confusing path into all-grain brewing. (In other words, post any new ideas that are not yet proven to be best-practice in the advanced forum.)
7. It is easy for any new member to think that all brewing sites are like this one and that this is just another one. It is not. Many answers written here take several hours to write. Please don't take them for granted.
As a little proof of some of the above, here is just one example of just some of the knowledge buried in this forum that you will find nowhere else.
...
I don't think there is any need to post any examples of the care and attention that many members here give to others. I'd like to see a lot more though. A good answer often takes several hours to write but you can also learn a lot whilst writing it.
...
For now, until we get everything falling into place, please don't concentrate on threads like this too much*. Instead, please concentrate on handing on best practices as often as you can. Any experiments, or examination of new ideas, please post in the Advanced forum thread. That is what it is for.
Pat
* I'm sure that I have done some way less than perfect posts above. In any other thread, I would say, "Just correct me," but in this thread, I think there are a lot of posts that could be improved so let's just focus on moving forward and being constructive from now on.
I'll re-open the thread within 36 hours and expect to see only the highest quality replies
.[MODNOTE: Any posts regarding mally's fine crush experiment have been copied to Fine versus Normal Crush Experiment.Please reply there.]
Last edited by Pat on 29 Sep 2014, 01:55, edited 1 time in total.
Are you a "Goodwill Brewer?" Pay forward and Buy Some BIPs 
Post #96 made 11 years ago
I did ask if it was OK to question the conventional wisdom here, and received assurances that it was indeed accepted.
I've no desire to disrupt things here. I wish you all the best of luck, and good beer.
On the subject of short vs long mashes, let's see what the pro brewers say (this came up in a post on HBT):
http://discussions.probrewer.com/showth ... ght=minute
I've no desire to disrupt things here. I wish you all the best of luck, and good beer.
On the subject of short vs long mashes, let's see what the pro brewers say (this came up in a post on HBT):
http://discussions.probrewer.com/showth ... ght=minute
Last edited by Milan37 on 01 Oct 2014, 04:54, edited 1 time in total.
Post #97 made 11 years ago
Milan37,
If your interested in Caramel and Roast grain.
They can be added for 10-15 minutes before and removed at mash out since those grains are Fully Converted and all they need is the Sugar, flavor and Color washed out.
P.S. It is alright to Disrupt things......BIAB, No-Chill, Whirlpool Hopping, over night Mashing and Now 10-20 minute mashing, Fine vs, Coarse grind, are current Topics.
To join a "Fine versus Normal Crush Experiment" topic see....
http://www.biabrewer.info/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=3018
If your interested in Caramel and Roast grain.
They can be added for 10-15 minutes before and removed at mash out since those grains are Fully Converted and all they need is the Sugar, flavor and Color washed out.
P.S. It is alright to Disrupt things......BIAB, No-Chill, Whirlpool Hopping, over night Mashing and Now 10-20 minute mashing, Fine vs, Coarse grind, are current Topics.
To join a "Fine versus Normal Crush Experiment" topic see....
http://www.biabrewer.info/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=3018
Honest Officer, I swear to Drunk, I am Not God.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #98 made 11 years ago
Thanks Joshua. That's my approach with specialty grains, and I find it works well--although I don't do a mash out, I do add them in at the end of the mash. Check out the link I posted--at least a few pro brewers going with 20-minute mashes, and at least one says "The malt that's in use worldwide is modified enough that enzyme conversion is done within a matter of a few minutes" (emphasis mine).
Last edited by Milan37 on 01 Oct 2014, 06:07, edited 1 time in total.
Post #99 made 11 years ago
Milan37,
"The malt that's in use worldwide is modified enough that enzyme conversion is done within a matter of a few minutes", sounds like a "belief" as of Now.
We need MANY people trying 20 minute mashes, with gravity points checked every few minutes, and then Compared to the Standard PPG/LDK data figured by many equations, that seem as "Facts".
People have been Brewing since 1181 AD at Weihenstephan Abbey, in Germany.
Their Data and processes, are what most people have Done for quite a while.
We need Much more DATA and Less OPINIONS.
Bring on the DATA!!!!
"The malt that's in use worldwide is modified enough that enzyme conversion is done within a matter of a few minutes", sounds like a "belief" as of Now.
We need MANY people trying 20 minute mashes, with gravity points checked every few minutes, and then Compared to the Standard PPG/LDK data figured by many equations, that seem as "Facts".
People have been Brewing since 1181 AD at Weihenstephan Abbey, in Germany.
Their Data and processes, are what most people have Done for quite a while.
We need Much more DATA and Less OPINIONS.
Bring on the DATA!!!!
Honest Officer, I swear to Drunk, I am Not God.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #100 made 11 years ago
I think we can see that link for what it is worth though, Joshua. That link reinforces my position on this entire matter.
If a new brewer comes to a forum and asks a question about mash times, the narrative should shift ...
From: ... "well, I see conversion is as little as 8 minutes. Many of us have had great results, look through my many posts to see. Try for yourself, start over because I refuse to document anything for anyone to build upon." (paraphrased, but not very far off from RM-MN)
To: Many home (and pro) brewers using modern, well modified malts have shown favorable results with shorter mash times under the following contexts ... yada yada. 1.050 OG SMaSH APA/Briess USA 2-row milled fine as possible with typical corona mill/X-water profile/5.35Mash pH at room temp/15 minutes, something or other ... more details ... etc ...
Next, I know some great brewers that have used Joe White Traditional Ale malt, and had consistently poor efficiency issues, so maybe that's not an ideal candidate for further experimenting. Stick to the big name base malts like Briess, Weyermann, Great Western, Thomas Fawcett, etc etc ...
Maris Otter has shown 4% less efficiency due to lower diastatic power in some breweries(reference Milan's link). We need more "data" on Rye, Wheat, Golden Promise, Pearl Malt, Continental Pils ... etc etc
Longer mash times may help break down longer chain sugars in certain temp ranges, which may be favorable for A,B,C beers. However, X,Y,Z beers fermented with brettanomyces may favor shorter mash times to allow for higher number of complex sugars for the brett to consume during extended fermentation in secondary, etc, etc. This may produce a funkier product, depends on personal preference. (talking out of my ass here, but it sprung to mind and seems like a reasonable consideration).
Just a more abstract way of presenting the idea would be nice, just to keep new brewers from seeing it as a "magic pill". Throwing in some caveats is all I ask.
If a new brewer comes to a forum and asks a question about mash times, the narrative should shift ...
From: ... "well, I see conversion is as little as 8 minutes. Many of us have had great results, look through my many posts to see. Try for yourself, start over because I refuse to document anything for anyone to build upon." (paraphrased, but not very far off from RM-MN)
To: Many home (and pro) brewers using modern, well modified malts have shown favorable results with shorter mash times under the following contexts ... yada yada. 1.050 OG SMaSH APA/Briess USA 2-row milled fine as possible with typical corona mill/X-water profile/5.35Mash pH at room temp/15 minutes, something or other ... more details ... etc ...
Next, I know some great brewers that have used Joe White Traditional Ale malt, and had consistently poor efficiency issues, so maybe that's not an ideal candidate for further experimenting. Stick to the big name base malts like Briess, Weyermann, Great Western, Thomas Fawcett, etc etc ...
Maris Otter has shown 4% less efficiency due to lower diastatic power in some breweries(reference Milan's link). We need more "data" on Rye, Wheat, Golden Promise, Pearl Malt, Continental Pils ... etc etc
Longer mash times may help break down longer chain sugars in certain temp ranges, which may be favorable for A,B,C beers. However, X,Y,Z beers fermented with brettanomyces may favor shorter mash times to allow for higher number of complex sugars for the brett to consume during extended fermentation in secondary, etc, etc. This may produce a funkier product, depends on personal preference. (talking out of my ass here, but it sprung to mind and seems like a reasonable consideration).
Just a more abstract way of presenting the idea would be nice, just to keep new brewers from seeing it as a "magic pill". Throwing in some caveats is all I ask.
Last edited by Rick on 01 Oct 2014, 07:28, edited 1 time in total.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America
-
