Jump to content

enzymes in whiskey production


georgiabooze

Recommended Posts

How do the people on this forum view the use of commercially produced enzymes, instead of the very expensive and time consuming malt method? Also how many are using sour mash?

not so well, I'm afraid.

Many consider the definition "Craft" to include DIY methods and buying stuff isn't that. Isn't alchemy more about chemistry from ground up than buying things from other alchemists? It is granted that one doesn't always have to re-invent the wheel, i.e. growing your own grain, but you should know the process of mashing and distillation.

Sour mash saves water....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sour mash saves water, regulates the pH (for both starch conversion, fermentation, and contamination control), and it also helps increase the efficiency of grain usage by returning unspent sugars and starches to the fermentation. It also helps with flavor and flavor consistency across multiple batches.

I could see a sour mash being augmented by additional enzymes to speed the process up a little (lot?). I'm on the fence regarding enzymes "out of a pail" currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll weigh in on enzyme usage. There are many bases that require enzymes for conversion that aren't normally there.... you could add distiller's malt to that base to get full conversion or you could just add enzymes. Many producers, big and small, use them. A hot and fast fermentation would not require a back-set (sour mash) and would benefit from additional, or readily available, enzymes to ensure full conversion.

A single malt sour mash just isn't pretty IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll weigh in on enzyme usage. There are many bases that require enzymes for conversion that aren't normally there.... you could add distiller's malt to that base to get full conversion or you could just add enzymes. Many producers, big and small, use them. A hot and fast fermentation would not require a back-set (sour mash) and would benefit from additional, or readily available, enzymes to ensure full conversion.

A single malt sour mash just isn't pretty IMHO.

let me get this sraight in my head. sour mash still has active enzymes in it? also a hot fast fermentation would not require a mash to be sour? the barley malt does or does not add flavor to say a bourbon mash?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A quick fermentation would have no need, strictly from the aspect of pH and bacteria, for a sour mash or back-set since there is very little time for harmful bacteria to become a problem. There is also a plethora of enzymes in barley malt to facilitate conversion without the need for this. I'm speaking from a single malt barley perspective.

Like PaulG pointed out, sour mashing also provides continuity between batches, primarily in bourbon in this case. There are other products that use this method: lambic beer for example.

Barley malt, or any grain for that matter, adds its' own character to whatever you are making/mashing/fermenting.

I guess maybe you need to clarify what, exactly, you are trying to add enzymes to... whisk(e)y is produced very differently depending on where it is made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A hot and fast fermentation would not require a back-set (sour mash) and would benefit from additional, or readily available, enzymes to ensure full conversion.

Sour mashes generally are slow fermentations. Not the best for production, but keeps the yeast stress down.

A single malt sour mash just isn't pretty IMHO.

I humbly disagree. I've tasted a couple experimental sour mash single malts that were darn tasty. Then again, perhaps my palate's fubar and I'm doomed to make lousy spirits :)

let me get this sraight in my head. sour mash still has active enzymes in it?

Yes it does. There is a constant reintroduction of new grain to replace the spent grain. It's not heated to achieve conversion. Heat isn't required, it just aids in the conversion's efficiency. In other words, you're perpetually fermenting on the grain as opposed to sparging/lautering and fermenting on the liquid wash alone. Due to the less efficient conversion, reintroducing the backset to the fermentation helps increase the utilization of the starches and unspent sugars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I humbly disagree. I've tasted a couple experimental sour mash single malts that were darn tasty. Then again, perhaps my palate's fubar and I'm doomed to make lousy spirits :)

I have yet to come across this one... perhaps yours will be my first. I was strictly speaking from my own palate as far as the "not pretty" comment. Bourbon sour mashes are outstanding, however.

The process of sparging/lautering is a good point when you talk about efficiency.... but if you ferment on the grains of a single malt mash, your conversion factor raises significantly. No need for a back-set (unless you are after the flavor element).

Great discussion!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was strictly speaking from my own palate as far as the "not pretty" comment. Bourbon sour mashes are outstanding, however.

Understood...and like I said, perhaps it's my palate that's wonky. What sort of notes left your tasting experience as "not pretty?" I'm curious to see if it might be something I hadn't either previously considered, or simply noticed. Also, I'm not quite wrapping my brain around why it can work for a Bourbon but not a single malt.

The process of sparging/lautering is a good point when you talk about efficiency.... but if you ferment on the grains of a single malt mash, your conversion factor raises significantly.

What I haven't had the opportunity to quantify yet is whether or not that's true if you don't mash at "mashing temperature" but rather at room temperature. My typical procedure has been to mash the beginning of the batch, and simply skim spent grains and replace with new at room temperature while the fermentation is under way.

No need for a back-set (unless you are after the flavor element).

Flavor has been my primary goal...that, and the "what happens when I...?" aspect. Using backset helps to concentrate the peaty note, though it's nowhere close to sucking on a tire.

Cheers,

Paul

-the experimentificator

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said the magic words: "peaty note". Now I get why you like the setback of a single malt. That makes sense. A setback would definitely intesify those flavors. For the ones that I have tried (which are very few, I admit), the flavor profile seemed almost confused as far was what was going on. The malty/grainy base was missing that you normally would get in a single malt (and by single malt, I mean a barley-malt base only). But that's just me.... I'm sure there are others who enjoy it.

It's a neat concept and I've thought about fooling around with that process as well. Hell, we're craft distillers, why not?

As for why a backset works so well with bourbon, my perception is it has alot to do with the main ingredient: corn. It is a much different animal compared to barley malt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's spent mash, so it's spent grain and water. The yeast is dead and the alcohol is gone except for trace amounts. It's about consistency, primarily consistent pH. The big bourbon distillers tell me they don't really need it with modern technology, but they keep doing it because it's traditional and because they are loath to change anything lest they change the final product.

As for adding enzymes, their use is prohibited in Scotland, permitted in the U.S. Some of the majors use them, some don't, but always supplementally. None of the majors use enzymes instead of malt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I am real big on doing things from scratch, using naturally present enzymes, etc.; but part of what is developing in the micro-distillery movement is experimentation, develoiping new ways of doing things, products that haven't been made before. If an exceptional new product can be made through the use of enzymes, why not? I am all for it. There are grains and other raw products that don't have the enzymes naturally present that could make interesting new products. Also the use of additional enzymes in products that have low natural levels can make the process easier, and more efficient. So why not?

Enzymes are not like artificial flavors. They are found in nature. They are artificially brought into some products by the introduction of malted grains, especially barley. or rye; to add the enzymes needed to process the starches in other grains. Bourbon is made through the use of malts added to break down the starches in the corn. As far as I know you couldn't make a pure corn whiskey without the addition of enzymes.

So am I wrong? Isn't this whole micro-distilling thing about developing new ways to produce quality products?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know you couldn't make a pure corn whiskey without the addition of enzymes.

You can malt corn. Pure corn whiskey would be made with a grain bill of about 50/50 unmalted and malted corn.

...just sayin' :)

Cheers,

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So am I wrong? Isn't this whole micro-distilling thing about developing new ways to produce quality products?

Absolutely. However, there are some who are discussing using terms like "from grain to glass" on their labelling. IMHO, those who do that shouldn't use exogenous enzymes. But that's just me.

But for me, as a rule....whatever a distiller wishes to do, who the hell am I to say no? Have at it. It will result is some really interesting and tasty spirits, I am sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't formed an opinion on the use of enzymes yet, but I do have an observation/question:

How many here buy yeast as opposed to culturing their own? Is this any different?

I can appreciate the satisfaction one gains from going deeply into scratch. For me, the ultimate was personally harvesting, seasoning and milling the black walnut growing in my back yard that I used to build my own harp. I only wish I could have hand-drawn the bronze for the strings. That said, I don't think it's cheating to go to the lumberyard and pick up some fine hardwoods. I also gained a lot of pride from making another harp from purchased mahogany, but absolutely low-tech: no power tools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many here buy yeast as opposed to culturing their own? Is this any different?

I consider myself a little spoiled with White Labs in my back yard. Actually, just a few blocks from where I'm trying to set up shop. I'll be buying. That's not to say that I won't harvest the yeast from lees and make a starter between batches. My understanding is that without very controlled conditions, reusing yeast eventually leads to mutations which alter the flavor profile from the original strain. Haven't gotten that deep otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suggestion is to distill them all and let God sort them out!

If you are being called to use enzymes, do it now, so we can taste it when it's fully aged. Show me your stuff. I'm distilling mine!

Best regards,

Don

:lol:

I haven't formed an opinion on the use of enzymes yet, but I do have an observation/question:

How many here buy yeast as opposed to culturing their own? Is this any different?

I can appreciate the satisfaction one gains from going deeply into scratch. For me, the ultimate was personally harvesting, seasoning and milling the black walnut growing in my back yard that I used to build my own harp. I only wish I could have hand-drawn the bronze for the strings. That said, I don't think it's cheating to go to the lumberyard and pick up some fine hardwoods. I also gained a lot of pride from making another harp from purchased mahogany, but absolutely low-tech: no power tools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...