Dextro-maltose

I've been going through William Younger records from the 1880s and came across a type of sugar called "DM".

Based on its use, it didn't appear to be something very dark. But the name seemed familiar. Then I twigged. CDM is Caramelised Dextro-Maltose. Logic would make DM simply Dextro-Maltose.

A quick search on the internet threw up ad advert from Duttson's, a sugar manufacturer whose name I've often seen in brewing records.

This is the ad.

These are the relevant sections of text:

"MALTO-DEXTRIN
Is a brilliant Syrup containing 84 per cent.(calculated on the dry matter) of Dextrin and Maltose, which exist as an unfermentable combination; consequently it will be found very useful for increasing the Dextrin in Beers, giving them fulness and adding to their stability.

MALTO-DEXTRIN may also be usedas a Priming, the 12 per cent. of fermentable matter which it contains is gradually split up  during Cask fermentation, creating persistent condition.

CARAMELIZED DEXTRO-MALTOSE.
C.D.M.is FREE from the acrid flavour of Caramel, therefore can be used to advantage in the production of Porter and Stout.
It is not fermentable, consequently can be added to Wort prior to fermentation.
C.D.M.is of hightinctorial power (112 lb. being capable of imparting as much colouring power as a quarter of best Black Malt). When used in  suitable proportions as a black malt adjunct produces a soft mellow Stout or Porter, unobtainable when Black Malt alone is employed.

IT IMPARTS iNCREASED PERMANENT PALATE FULLNESS, and a RICH BROWN HEAD.

C.D.M.can be profitably employed; compared with Black Malt it yields a large extract — i.e., 256 lb. (the Excise equivalent for  a quarter of Malt) gives an  extract of 74 BBEWERS’ lb.
It is sent out in casks of 1 cwt.and 2 cwt."
"Brewing and Malting Practically Considered", by Frank Thatcher, 1898, The Country Brewers' Gazette, page 161.

I'm assuming malto-dextrin and dextro-maltose are the same thing. It's use seems to have been mostly to add body. Or hard to ferment sugars which could be consumed by Brettanomyces.

It makes sense. Most of the beers where Younger used large quantities were ones where you would expect a full body: Scotch Ales and Double Stout, for example. It also explains why some of the FGs are so high.

CDM seems to have been intended to produce a beer with the colour of a Stout, but without the burnt flavour. I've mostly come across it in Porter and Stout. But also in other styles, such as Dark Mild, Brown Ale, or even Bitter.

Colouration of Beer

One of the things that drives me nuts are American home brew recipes for dark British styles, like Mild Ale, where roast malt is used to get the colour. This is a good example.*

Because that's not the way the vast majority of real examples of the style were brewed. Most Milds got their colour from sugar, usuall a combination of No. 3 invert and caramel. It's rare to find any malt darker than crystal in Mild.

That's one of the reasons I was struck by this Victorian article about colouring beer. And why you shouldn't use black malt.

"Colouration of Beer.
IT is at the time of writing well known throughout brewing circles that the majority of brewers resort to the use of black malt for the purpose of colouring beer. Now very little attention is paid as to whether the black malt used is sound, and we venture to say that the greater portion so used for this purpose is in nine cases out of ten very unsound. Take, for instance, small brewers. A quantity of black malt is received at the brewery for stout and porter brewing; the trade in black beer declines, and the question then arises, What shall we do with the remaining black malt on hand? The answer is very simple, since the conclusion arrived at is, that it will do very well for colouring purposes. It, or a portion of it, is ground and remains perhaps for months in its disintegrated state; it thus takes up moisture and very rapidly turns sour. Is there any wonder, therefore, that ten or twelve pounds of such material, mixed with grist in hopper, sprinkled over the mash before commencing to sparge, or thrown into the copper, which ever of the various methods are carried out, should have a tendency of turning the resulting beer sour, or have an effect upon its dietetic properties. We think that this question should have long ere this come to the knowledge of practical men, and our reason for this note is on account of a sample of beer lately sent us possessing a peculiar taste somewhat resembling brown paper. The beer was by no means sound, since samples placed upon the forcing tray rapidly deteriorated, yet from the details of the manipulation of the materials, combined with the water supply, cleanliness of plant, and soundness of yeast, such beer should have defied the forcing temperature of 75° F. for at least three weeks without showing any form of disease. We therefore advise brewing readers to guard against this evil, and either look to the soundness and quantity of black malt used, or, on the other hand, resort to the use of some other colouring agent, such as caramel."

It's instructive to read just how black malt was used for colouring purposes. Either esprinkled over the mash just before sparging or in the copper. I knew about the latter already. Barclay Perkins usualy added some of the black malt or roast barley to the copper when brewing Porter and Stout.

The point about the decline in the trade in Black Beer (Porter and Stout) is also interesting. AFter 1870 there's a notable decline in Porter and draught Stout outside London. In most of the provinces, Porter was dead by the time of WW I.

I'm not surprised that the author ends up recommending caramel for colouring. Though he doesn't mention one advantage of caramel: the colour it adds is predictable. Which isn't necessarily the case with black malt. Also, because it's added later in the brewing process, the anount used xcan be modified based on the colour of teh wort.




* I'm not having a go at Jamil Zainasheff. This is how people were told Mild was brewed/.

Truman Brick Lane grists 1924 - 1940

Yes, I've not done spinning words from those few tables of numbers.

This time it's the stuff that provides the fermentable materials that we're looking at. Malt, sugar and adjuncts. I've had to fiddle with the number a bit because they were specified in quarters. And a sugar quarter is only 224 lbs, as opposed to the 336 lbs of a malt quarter. So I've adjusted the sugar and caramel figures to be 336 lb quarters.

One word of caution. We've already seen how there was a big shift from Porter/Stout to Ale in Truman's output over this period. That makes trends in ingredient usage harder to spot, because the ingredients for Ale and Stout differ. In 1910, the last year for which I have Brick Lane brewing records, neither of the two Ales, X and LK, contained either black malt or caramel. While all their Porters and Stouts did.

If we combine the caramel and black malt percentages, they start at 5.14% in 1924 and fall to 3.38% in 1940. That's a fall of around 50%. But production of Porter and Stout fell by more than 100% over the same period. My conclusion? Truman had started using caramel and black malt in some of their Ales.

I think I can understand why. You will, too, when we look at how Truman's beer range changed between 1910 and 1940. Which is what we'll be doing next time.

The most obvious long-term trend is the increase in the use of sugar, rising steadily up to a peak in 1934 then falling back again a little.

Malt usage is around 75% all the way through, except for the difficult year of 1933, where it dropped just below 75%. I was surprised to see the share of maize decline. That could be connected to which styles were being brewed as some contained maize and others didn't. At least that was the case back in 1910.

Here are the tables:

Truman Brick Lane grists 1924 - 1940 (qtrs of 336 lbs)
Year	Malt	Maize	Sugar	Caramel	Black	Total
1924	36,541	2,732	4,917	865	1,530	46,586
1925	40,789.5	3,323	6,222	1,150	1,426	52,910
1926	40,707.5	3,332	6,680	1,152	1,524	53,396
1927	41,395	2,748	7,319	1,164	1,042.5	53,668
1928	40,438.5	3,019	7,641	1,054	1,204	53,357
1929	38,145	3,263.5	7,415	962	1,035	50,820
1930	41,626	2,864.5	8,917	1,124	803	55,335
1931	39,365.5	2,994	8,780	1,110	628	52,878
1932	36,450.5	3,042	8,305	1,016	692	49,506
1933	26,719.5	2,589.5	7,307	851	821.5	38,288
1934	33,364	2,557	9,086	914	928	46,848
1935	36,248.33	2,264.17	8,980	854	851.5	49,198
1936	38,543	2,434.5	9,261	936	926	52,101
1937	38,508.5	2,465	9,310	861	1,097	52,242
1938	39,372	2,478.5	9,626	964	891.5	53,332
1939	39,061.33	2,521.33	9,545	714	1,084	52,926
1940	38,756	2,320	8,961	650	1,100	51,788
Source:
Document B/THB/C/256c held at the London Metropolitan Archives

Truman Brick Lane grists 1924 - 1940 (%)
Year	Malt	Maize	Sugar	Caramel	Black	Total
1924	78.44%	5.86%	10.56%	1.86%	3.28%	100.00%
1925	77.09%	6.28%	11.76%	2.17%	2.70%	100.00%
1926	76.24%	6.24%	12.51%	2.16%	2.85%	100.00%
1927	77.13%	5.12%	13.64%	2.17%	1.94%	100.00%
1928	75.79%	5.66%	14.32%	1.98%	2.26%	100.00%
1929	75.06%	6.42%	14.59%	1.89%	2.04%	100.00%
1930	75.23%	5.18%	16.12%	2.03%	1.45%	100.00%
1931	74.45%	5.66%	16.60%	2.10%	1.19%	100.00%
1932	73.63%	6.14%	16.78%	2.05%	1.40%	100.00%
1933	69.79%	6.76%	19.08%	2.22%	2.15%	100.00%
1934	71.22%	5.46%	19.39%	1.95%	1.98%	100.00%
1935	73.68%	4.60%	18.25%	1.74%	1.73%	100.00%
1936	73.98%	4.67%	17.78%	1.80%	1.78%	100.00%
1937	73.71%	4.72%	17.82%	1.65%	2.10%	100.00%
1938	73.82%	4.65%	18.05%	1.81%	1.67%	100.00%
1939	73.80%	4.76%	18.03%	1.35%	2.05%	100.00%
1940	74.84%	4.48%	17.30%	1.26%	2.12%	100.00%
Source:
Document B/THB/C/256c held at the London Metropolitan Archives

Next time we'll be looking at which beers Truman brewed in the interwar years.

William Younger's Porter and Stout 1868 - 1869

There were some questions about William Younger's Porter and Stout grists in reaction to the last Let's Brew recipe. Today we're going to look at them in more detail and hopefully provide fuller answers.

Looking at Porters from outside London is a strange experience. I'm so used to the London way of doing things. It makes these beer look quite odd.

I mentioned in the original post that there were two obvious differences with London-brewed Porters:

1. Younger's were lower gravity
2. Younger's brewed one Porter and one Stout while London brewers had several Stouts

Looking in greater detail, there are further dissimilarities. The attenuation of Younger's Porter is low, a little either side of 60%. At the same period, Whitbread's Porter was 70-75% attenuated. And at least 7.5% ABV. While none of Younger's is even 4% ABV.

Then there are the grists. Again, the dissimilarities are striking. Younger's grists have more variation and the proportion of dark malts is higher in most cases. Younger's used amber malt but no brown malt. Amongst the London brewers it was the other way around. Younger's Porter was less heavily hopped but its Stout was hopped about the same as the London beers. (Using lbs per quarter to iron out gravity differences. Younger's Stout had 12 - 14 lbs per quarter, The London brewers - if we exclude the Export Stout - 12.5 yto 18 lbs.)

Looking at other details (anal-retentive is my middle name), Younger's boiling times were longer, but their pitching temperatures were about the same. Interestingly, Younger fermented their Porter and Stout differently to their other beers. They pitched 3 or 4º warmer and the fermentation time was shorter by a couple of days. It looks as if they are mimicing London practice in that regard.

One final point. Every single one of the Younger's beers, with the exception of the bottling Porter, was vatted. It's not as easy to tell how the London beers were treated, but I think it's safe to assume that anything with the word Runner in its name wasn't vatted.

Nothing more comes to mind so here are the tables:

William Younger Porter and Stout 1868 - 1869
Date	Year	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Attenuation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	dry hops (oz / barrel)	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)	Pitch temp	max. fermentation temp	length of fermentation (days)	pale malt	black malt	amber malt
12th Sep	1868	Bg	Porter	1046	1020	3.44	56.52%	8.00	1.45		3		61º	69º	3 + 2	92.25%	7.75%
27th Apr	1869	BS	Porter	1041	1017	3.18	58.54%	7.69	1.18		2.5	3	61º	66º	2 + 3	43.43%	13.13%	43.43%
6th Feb	1869	P	Porter	1048	1018	3.97	62.50%				2.75		62º	67º	2 + 1	67.36%	10.18%	22.45%
11th Dec	1869	BS	Porter	1042	1018	3.18	57.14%	7.50	1.46		2.5	3	61º	67º	2 + 3	67.36%	10.18%	22.45%
21st Nov	1868	DBS	Stout	1062	1014	6.35	77.42%	12.22	3.47		2	3	62º	74º	3 + 4	81.25%	5.85%	12.90%
28th Nov	1868	DBS	Stout	1064	1018	6.09	71.88%	11.43	3.33	20.00	2.25		62º	73º	3 + 3	81.95%	5.63%	12.42%
3rd Dec	1869	DBS	Stout	1066	1019	6.22	71.21%	12.76	4.11		2.5	3	61º	75º	3 + 4	76.33%	5.50%	18.17%
4th Dec	1869	DBS	Stout	1066	1020	6.09	69.70%	14.23	3.74		2.5	3	62º	74º	3 + 4	73.43%	6.17%	20.40%
15th Dec	1869	DBS	Stout	1065	1018	6.22	72.31%	13.33	3.83	17.02	2.25	3	62º	72º	3 + 4	63.97%	6.04%	29.99%
27th Dec	1869	DBS	Stout	1067	1021	6.09	68.66%	14.23	3.78		2.25	3	60º	72º	4 + 3	62.47%	6.30%	31.23%
Source:
William Younger brewing record document WY/6/1/2/21 held at the Scottish Brewing Archive
Notes:
Assuming 336 lbs for a qtr of pale malt, 254 lbs for black malt and 280 lbs for amber malt
Fermentation time is fermentation + cleansing.

London Porter and Stout 1865 - 1871
Date	Year	Brewer	Beer	Style	OG	FG	ABV	App. Attenuation	lbs hops/ qtr	hops lb/brl	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)	boil time (hours)	Pitch temp	pale malt	brown malt	black malt	caramel	sugar
13th Jan	1868	Whitbread	K	Porter	1057.1	1016.6	5.35	70.87%	19.91	5.08	1.5	2	2	64º	79.87%	16.10%	4.03%
10th Jan	1868	Whitbread	P	Porter	1048.8	1011.9	4.87	75.57%	9.91	2.23	1.5	2	2	64º	55.58%	15.76%	5.25%		23.41%
24th Aug	1868	Whitbread	SS	Stout	1082.3	1029.9	6.93	63.64%	13.67	5.52	1.5	2	2.5	62º	72.65%	14.64%	3.66%		9.05%
24th Aug	1868	Whitbread	SSS	Stout	1101.4	1048.8	6.96	51.91%	13.67	6.80	1.5	2	2.5	62º	72.65%	14.64%	3.66%		9.05%
14th Oct	1868	Whitbread	xp S	Stout	1070.9	1023.5	6.27	66.80%	20.05	6.62	1.5	2	2	62º	79.87%	16.10%	4.03%
18th Mar	1865	Barclay Perkins	TT	Porter	1058.2	1018.5	5.25	68.20%	15.14	3.69				65.5º	83.41%	13.10%	3.49%
5th Jul	1870	Truman	Runner	Porter	1056.8	1016.6	5.31	70.73%	10.3	2.64				62º	85.34%	9.77%	4.89%
21st Dec	1870	Truman	Bottling Porter	Porter	1060.4	1013.9	6.16	77.06%	18.2	5.14				60º	86.06%	9.29%	4.65%
23rd Nov	1870	Truman	Country Runner	Porter	1062.3	1011.9	6.67	80.89%	13.7	3.53				59º	76.01%	8.21%	4.93%	10.86%
16th Mar	1871	Truman	Keeping	Porter	1067.3	1016.6	6.71	75.31%	16.5	4.84				58º	89.53%	9.67%	0.81%
6th Jul	1870	Truman	Running Stout	Stout	1072.0	1020.8	6.78	71.15%	14.0	5.03				58º	88.88%	6.95%	4.17%
4th Jul	1870	Truman	Double Stout	Stout	1079.5	1022.2	7.59	72.13%	12.5	5.14				60º	89.29%	6.98%	3.72%
4th Jul	1870	Truman	Imperial	Stout	1083.7	1023.5	7.95	71.85%	12.5	5.40				60º	89.29%	6.98%	3.72%
17th Nov	1870	Truman	Double Export Stout	Stout	1092.0	1020.8	9.42	77.41%	12.5	5.89				58º	81.28%	14.63%	4.10%
Sources:
Whitbread brewing records document numbers LMA/4453/D/09/061 and LMA/4453/D/09/062 held at the London Metropolitan Archives
Barclay Perkins brewing record document number ACC/2305/01/546 held at the London Metropolitan Archives
Truman brewing record document number B/THB/C/72 held at the London Metropolitan Archives
Notes:
Assuming 336 lbs for a qtr of pale malt, 254 lbs for black malt and brown malt

Barclay Perkins colour adjustment instructions (1925)

The title says it all.

Beer, colour, colour adjustment instructions.

Preparing beer for bottling

We're back with the Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing and their article on carbonated bottled beer.

This time, it's more of a how to.

"Preparing the Beer for Bottling.—
The beer should remain on the stools for at least three weeks before bottling, and should then be fairly bright and sound ; at the time of stooling, the barrels should be fined if required."

The light dinner ale should be dry hopped, with about three-quarters of a pound per barrel.

It is also advisable to add a little finings to the stout at time of stooling.

A beer will sometimes, after being filtered and bottled, turn dull; this is due to the change of temperature in the cellars and storing room for the bottled beer; therefore we find it best to keep the cellars and bottling stores at the same temperature, varying between 55º and 60º Fahr.

As is well known, a carbonated beer can be sent out directly it has been bottled; but it can also be kept without throwing the slightest deposit for two or three months, maintaining its character and flavour as well.

It has been said of carbonated ales that they lose all their character by being carbonated, but we maintain that a beer properly carbonated will taste as full of character as the same beer will do when bottled on the old system. The carbonation of beer by this process does not get agitated, and thereby lose its character, which is, we think, it great distinguishing feature.

The special features of carbonation of beers by this process are :—

(1.) That the beer is thoroughly impregnated and in the proper proportions with carbonic acid gas.

(2.) The process is an automatic and continuous one, and consequently the beer after carbonation does not get agitated in any way, so preventing the access of air to the bottle, points which we think cannot be claimed for any other carbonating process. "
"Journal of the Federated Institutes of Brewing, vol VIII, 1902", pages 305-306.

Carbonated beer made the right way tastes just like naturally-conditioned beer? Yeah, right. I believe you mate. I'm sure that statement's totally unconnected with you pushing this process.