SpiritedConsultant

Holstein makes great stills. May I ask why a still that was made 8-9 years ago has never been used?

It's just a high temp alpha-amylase. I have the spec, but can't figure out how to attach it here. I'll pm you. Edit: So I can't attach in the PM either... found a pdf on a retailer's site. Won't solve your beta-glucan problem, but saccharification will probably be quicker https://enzymash.biz/download/sebstarhtl.pdf

The main trouble makers in a rye mash are the beta-glucans, but xylans can also cause some problems. Unmalted rye has very little enzymatic activity, so I would suggest adding your malt at the start to benefit from its (hopefully) plentiful enzymes. Your starting temp seems a bit low to me. Malt xylanase and beta-glucanase have optimal temps of around 38 C (100 F) and 45 C (113 F) respectively, so you would probably be better off with an initial rest in this range, but they will denature at saccharification tems. SEBFlo-TL has an optimum range of 45-65 C (113-149 F), so will work at the initial temp as well. I have done several tests using both SEBFlo-TL and ViscoSEB (which contains xylanase in addition to other enzymes) individually and in combination, mostly on 100% malted rye mashes for fermentation and distillation off the grain in a traditional pot still. If you intend to lauter, I strongly recommend using both, along with something to create a filter bed. It's difficult, but doable. God help you though if your mash turns to porridge in a production-scale lauter tun - you will have lots of fun shoveling it out. If you are fermenting the grain, you should be fine with just SEBFlo-TL (3g is at the top end of the manufacturer's recommended dosage for your amount of grain, so should be fine). I would mash in at 45 C with everything, including the enzymes. Hold it there for 30 min and gently bring it up to 64 C. Hold at 64 C for an hour for saccharification. Cool and ferment. The enzymes should continue working on residual starches and beta-glucans, but you can add more enzyme to the fermentation if you are worried about viscosity. I agree CaptnKB about the water chem and grind. I found best results at a pH of 5.2. As Scrounge wrote, you probably denatured all your enzyme at 180 F (82.2 C). I don't see any need to go up that high. PM me if you need more help.

Agitation during fermentation is primarily useful if you have a highly flocculent yeast and/or a lot of solids. If you agitate in a manner that introduces additional O2, could actually reduce your yields, as the yeast will propagate at the expense of ethanol production.

At 256, you denatured your enzymes from the malt almost immediately. You need to cook adjuncts like corn separately first to gelatinize the starch, then cool it down to around 148 for the malt addition and saccharification. Use an iodine test (can purchase at a homebrew shop for cheap) to confirm this theory. If you test positive for starch, you had incomplete saccharification.

Yes. That is why you need to scale up the ratio. For example, if diluting (A) ml of spirit at (X)% ABV yields ( ml at (Y)% ABV, then (A) hl of spirit at (X)% ABV yields ( hl at (Y)% ABV. Basically, as long as you keep your ABV and dilution ratio constant, you can scale up to any batch size.

I don't have an equation handy, but there is a simply way. Just take a 100mL samle of the spirit and dilute to your desired ABV (e.g. 63%--> 46%), recording how much water you added and the total volume. Only takes a few min. Just be sure to let the solution reach equilibrium before taking final measurements. Now you can just scale that ratio up for the dilution of that product.

I don't think that "white" and "whisk(e)y" are mutually exclusive. The word "white" does not appear anywhere in § 5.22 or § 5.23 and appears only in the context of "White Russian" in BAM ch 4. Furthermore, none of these documents set a minimum time in contact with the oak unless using the "straight" designation. Thus, if your whisky is aged in manner that does not impart significant color, I see no reason why you could not call it a "white whisky." As for the new/used cask question, that is a very interesting point. What might work with your set up would be to take the spirit that you intend to age in the new charred casks and use it to briefly christen the new toasted casks, rendering them used. Then, transfer that spirit into the new charred casks for actually maturation. The standards do NOT state that bourbon or rye whiskey must be aged EXCLUSIVELY in new charred casks. Alternatively, you could do this: line up all your toasted casks. Take 200L (assuming you're using ASBs) and fill the first cask. Then, disgorge that spirit into the next cask, and so on down the line. You can then bottle that spirit as a special batch ("Ode to § 5.22") or continue to age it. As they were all used to age a beverage, they are all used casks. Do some more research on your end though, as I am a distiller, not an attorney.

In response to the OP, new barrels can (and usually are in the USA) be charred. Once a cask has been used to store a beverage, it is a used cask no matter what you do to it. This does not apply to liquids used during cooperage or used to preserve the cask prior to use (i.e. water). My reading of § 5.22 The standards of identity (quoted below for bourbon, but also applies to wheat whisky, rye whisky, malt whisky and rye malt whisky) is that one could first store the spirit in a new charred oak cask and then finish it in a used cask. I think that this might be the loophole to which McKee is referring. I cannot find any upper limit on the size of the "charred new oak containers." Thus, if you wanted to use used casks for flavor reasons but still wanted to be able to label your product "rye whisky," you could briefly "store" the spirit is a very large charred new oak container (wood:liter decreases with vol for similar casks) and then transfer to casks of your choice. "Whisky produced in the U.S. at not exceeding 80% alcohol by volume (160 proof) from a fermented mash of not less than 51 percent corn and stored at not more than 62.5% alcohol by volume (125 proof) in charred new oak containers."

I was surprised that I could not find a similar (accurate) equation online, so thought maybe others might find this useful. I recently wrote it as part of a mashing spreadsheet for a client. It allows you to calculate target Original Gravity (OG) by plugging in your target A%V and expected Final Gravity (FG). The only equations/calculator I could find used FG and OG to calculate ABV. This equation can be pasted into a spreadsheet; just substitute FG and A%V for the appropriate cells (assuming I typed it correctly here). OG=(1521600*(FG^2)+(28187*A%V*100))/((1521600*FG)+(15880*A%V*100)) I used the following 2 equations from: Brew by the Numbers by M Hall from Zymurgy Summer 1995 A%W = ((76.08)(OG-FG))/(1.775-OG) A%V = (A%W)(FG/0.794)

Really sorry for the very late reply. Thought I had posted this in my original comment: http://www.schnapsonline.eu/shop/topizym-%C3%82%C2%AE-20ml-p-644.html The price I got back in March was €13.05 per 100ml, excluding tax. I was only interested in some test batches at the time, but I'm sure the unit price drops significantly with bulk orders. I have some literature on inulin hydrolysis that I can send you if you would like. I've been meaning to do more tests on Jerusalem artichoke recipes, but haven't gotten around to it. Shoot me an email if you want the docs or just want to chat about the process. Matt

This is the only one I am aware of (I doubt they are the only ones though). They are in Germany and I remember their shipping rates being very high for the UK, so might be prohibitively expensive to ship to the US. The enzyme is commonly used in the Black Forest area to produce a spirit from Jerusalem artichoke (topinambur). What is your substrate?

I would need more information about your kit, process and ingredients, as well as the condition of your botanicals and spirit at the end of the run. Feel free to shoot me an email at spinozzi9@gmail.com

Given that it is a UK text, I think that 100 proof would be 57.15% abv. The 2:1 ratio wasn't really used in the UK.

Try tasting the botanicals after the run. Any flavor that's left is flavor that didn't go into your spirit (whether this is good or bad depends on what you are trying to achieve). Also, cut some of them open; if they are wet on the inside, you are probably getting full (or nearly so) saturation. If not, you probably need to make some adjustments. I agree that you should check right at the end of the run, but I don't think you should get near complete drying in the basket overnight.

Most "accelerated aging" that I have seen is bullshit (I am not familiar with Terressential). It is quite easy increase extraction by increasing surface area, but they is a lot more to aging than wood extraction. There is certainly nothing wrong with using this method, but calling it "accelerated aging" is either dishonest or ignorant, and people who do so should be called out on it. Aging is a very complex process that is not fully understood. It involves many processes, including, but not limited to: extraction, adsorption, polymerization, evaporation, oxidation and degradation. Aging changes a spirit, but whether that is a good or bad change depends on a myriad of variables, including the person drinking it.

Quoting from an IBD technical summary on foam. PM me if anyone wants a pdf of the whole doc. "In addition to the hydrophobic proteins, iso-alpha acids from the hops also exhibit hydrophobicity and hence make an important contribution to foam stability. The hops are thought to help bridge between the bubbles adding additional support." It should also be noted that distilling a beer produced for consumption and distilling whisky wash with hops are related but different. As you are probably aware, foam characteristics can vary widely from beer to beer, which is going to make a big impact if you try to distill it. For example, I am currently doing some trial batches of bier schnaps for a local brewer. I started with their hefeweizen, which has high protein and great head retention (as the style should). As expected, it foams like all hell and leaves a lot of residue in the still. I had to run the still quite slowly for the first third of my low wines runs to prevent puking. The hefe is only lightly hopped, but I expect that their heavily hopped IPA will actually be a lot easier to distill because it should have a lower level of foaming polypeptides. On a side note, be very careful with thick foam if you are using a packed column. These tend to be more prone to clogging, which can cause a dangerous pressure build up.

Well, it is certainly not a gin. From my reading, the exact classification would depend on how you use the hops and how you define "flavoring" as used in § 5.23, but I'm a distiller, not an attorney.

Thanks. The senflo TL looks like it will handle my Beta-glucan issue. I'll order a few oz of it A baking xylanase should work. I'm not sure how much impact the pentosans are actually having, so what to try a mash with and without. Where in NJ are you?

Barrels would not be considered new from a legal standpoint. The industry term be rejuvenated. This is typically only down for casks that have seen quite a bit of use and the aging is not the same as new. I don't know the specifics of your product, but if you're making bourbon, there's probably still plenty of character left in the wood. Assuming you are starting with good wood and good spirit, you should be able to sell them for a good price.

Hi, I'm looking to buy some beta-glucanase and pentosanase to run some small-scale rye mashing trials. I only need a few oz of each, but I can only find them in bulk. Would anyone who uses them be willing to sell me a small amount or recommend a supplier who would? Thanks, Matt

Thanks for the update. Have fun and keep at it.

It's important to consider the DP of the malt you're using. It can vary quite considerably. You can also use malted rye and/or malted wheat, which also contains the requisite enzymes and have gelatinization temps below the enzyme denature temps. In the same vein as what CDE wronte, you're probably best investing in separate cereal cooker for the corn if you have the funds. Cooling a mash is a not fun Then you can add the gelatinized corn to the other grains slowly will some cold water, thus achieving the appropriate mashing temp (~64 deg C). Its very important not to overheat your malt as it will denature the amylase.

I'm curious to know how this turned out. What enzymes and nutrient did you use? What was your yield? How did it behave in the still? And of course, what did it taste like?

That's a good point. Unfortunately, I don't have that data. I just quickly looked up the BPs of a few compounds to get rough idea of where they would congregate in the run. There are a bunch variables that could impact this. As most of the aroma compounds in hops appear to be terpenes, I would expect them to behave in a manner similar to other turpenes in this respect. I've never actually worked with hops from a distiller's perspective, but I have used quite a few other botanicals with malt distillates. From a practical perspective, once you have a general idea of what a botanical can contribute, I think the best thing you can do is experiment (that's the fun part anyway, right?). We don't even know all the flavor-active compounds in hops, let alone their physical properties or precise concentrations in various cultivars. Max, If I were you, I would get myself a tiny still (or several) that you can run on a hotplate and some GNS (dilute it). Do some trial runs to experiment with various cut-points, cultivars, macerations, etc. Then use this info to come up with some recipe trials and run those through the wee stills. It's not a perfect predictor of how the botanicals will behave on production runs, but it will give you a very good idea for minimal time and capital expenditure. This approach is good for any unfamiliar botanicals, not just hops.