Home of the BrewNosers

Sorry if this is a re-hash of an old topic but I did a quick search and didn't find anything on the forums.

In the latest issue of brew your own there is an article advocating no sparge brewing. They claim the resulting brews are more consistent and maltier, but lower efficiency. There are lots of pluses to skipping a sparge, but the article only lists three downsides 1) higher costs associated with a lower efficiency, 2) difficulties with step mashing (something a little math can solve), and 3) that most recipes are set up for sparging so you will need to play to find what works.

Since I am building (or maybe more accurately at this point, I am fantasizing about) an all grain set up, I was wondering if I could get your guys opinions on sparging (or lack of). Especially if you have done the same brews with multiple techniques. Is a sparge setup worth it if you are prioritizing flavor over price? Are there any drawbacks that he failed to mention in the article (or above)?

I guess my biggest question, for those of you who do no-sparge, is how well it handles high gravity beers? In the article, he expressly mentions 1.035-1.050 as ideal, how does it handle outside this range?

Cheers,
Graham

Gordon Strong advocates no-sparging in his latest book. Might be something to it. I think Nash would be the person with the most knowledge here.

I've constantly heard from no-sparge articles that you get a better taste for the grain - not grainer and not nesessarily maltier, just more pronounced malt flavor. I'm going to give it a whirl soon and see what comes out of it.

mr x wrote:Gordon Strong advocates no-sparging in his latest book. Might be something to it. I think Nash would be the person with the most knowledge here.

Another (slight) advantage to the no-sparge is a less complicated brew day. No heating sparge water (although you have to heat more mash water, so that may not be any real time savings), no waiting for the sparge water to drain - just mash, drain and boil.

A disadvantage would be that you need a larger mashtun to hold the grain and all your brewing water.

However, if I were to start no-sparge brewing high gravity beers, I would partigyle to compensate for the increased cost due to efficiency loss. You're first runnings (mash runnings) will be the intended recipe, recharge the mash tun with water (& maybe cap the mash with a bit more base malt) and drain that wort will be a small beer. You've just lengthened your brew day, but now you've got 2 beers instead of 1!

Yeah, I can see that. Although by the theory proposed, that gyled beer should be pretty inferior...? Would certainly be a bitch for big-ass brews - you would need a massive mlt.

mr x wrote:Yeah, I can see that. Although by the theory proposed, that gyled beer should be pretty inferior...? Would certainly be a bitch for big-ass brews - you would need a massive mlt.

'Pretty inferior' should be able to be covered up by enough hops, though I do agree, it would require a pretty big mlt for 10 gallon brewers.

Apparently Fullers still gyles - ESB & London Pride are the same grain bill, different runnings & then mixed going into the fermenter to get the proper OG.

Fullers. pfffffftttttt, what do they know.....

I just threw that in there as an interesting historical footnote... They obviously haven't learned how to cover up their mistakes with sweaty-armpit hops yet.

akr71 wrote:I just threw that in there as an interesting historical footnote... They obviously haven't learned how to cover up their mistakes with sweaty-armpit hops yet.

Muthafuckaaaaaaaaaaaaaaas!

I'm no expert on the subject but no sparge is definitely a better quality wort. The chemical composition of wort changes dramatically as it is sparged. Unwanted crap leeches out of the husks and if you have any channeling at all down through the bed it can get really nasty. Commercial brewers take the last runnings down to around 1.5 Plato or 1.006, at that point the PH is rising like crazy and the diluted wort starts filling up with tannins but this is obviously coming from the bottom of the tun. Imagine what the malt near the top of the tun is like, it's 100% spent crap that you don't want in wort so if there is the slightest bit of channeling you're pulling some nasty stuff into the wort. Of course you can monitor this to get a handle on a good sparge technique by frequently checking PH and gravity of the runnings. When I brew up sweaty hop-bombs my final runnings are in the 10 -12 Plato or 1.040 - 1.044 range so there's no hope of any nastiness coming through there It is a lot of waste though. Long story short is.... first runnings or the no sparge technique will always produce better wort which = better beer but it costs a whole lot more.

Fuck, I should be good. My final runnings refuse to go under 1.014...