Candy Sugar The Right Way (hint we've been doing it wrong)

If this is the "right" way then why is it that when we read the ingredients in the commercial syrups they don't say "Sugar + DAP + Base"?

 

That's news to me. Are you sure about that? In the U.S.A.?

 

I'm assuming you mean "aren't", and this is totally untrue. Take any product off the shelf in the supermarket that is made with acid or base for pH adjustment and you'll see that this statement is false.

I've seen a number of people claim that these syrups are made from unrefined or only partially refined sugar, but as far as I can tell this is nothing more than speculation and I've seen no real evidence to suggest that this is the case. In fact quite the opposite in that I've seen labels on these products that read something like "Ingredients: White beet sugar, water". I have yet to see a label that reads "produced from partially refined beet sugar" or "made from beet molasses", as some people seem to believe is the case.

 

I posted in the old thread a reasons I thought there might be unrefined sugars in the Dark Candi Syrup. I'm too lazy to look it up, but, IIRC it had to do with discrepencies in the posted purity data of D2 vs. D at Dark Candi Inc. Regardless, it was an ambiguity and not a definitive answer, and I would agree with HB42 that one can, at best, only speculate with the info provided

However, I don't care much about how they really do it. I want to know how I can do it, as a homebrewer, and if I cannot do it exactly the same way, I want to know what the next best thing is. My attempts using the approach published in Radical Brewing have been lackluster, so I think I'll give Ryan's approach a whirl this summer when I get back to brewing. Of course, that means I need to add a dubbel to my list of brews.

 

Actually, ryane is quite correct. If an ingredient is classified as a processing aid, then it may not have to be declared on the ingredients list. pH regulators can be classified as processing aids. Note that I don't say *are*, just can be. The appropriate regulation varies according to application and between international jurisdictions (FDA, FSANZ, EFSA, etc.)

Bases are definitely used for processes involving the caramelisation of sugars. Trust me, I'm a food technologist (/deadpan).

How candi syrup is really made, who knows. It's certainly one of the tried-and-true ways to spark discussion on a brewing forum though.

 

I also posted in the old thread. I never heard back from Homebrew42 when I disputed the validity of the D2 datasheet. Like pweiss909 and unlike the other two negatrons I am down with making tasty stuff.

I actually brewed with some sugar made by Ryan's method. Let me tell you about it.

First, I used a weak solution of Sodium Hydroxide (20mM if you are into that). This was not enough to get the pH above 9 which is where it needs to be to drive the reaction. I used yeast extract as the amino acid source. I did not use it but it is tasty with a sweet chocolate flavor. How does that compare to commercial D2 I have no idea I have only used D2 once in a Dubbel that was judged the best example of style by a panel of our peers., but that had more to do with the yeast.

Next I used a stronger solution of Sodium Hydroxide (500mM). The pH was above 11 the entire time. I made 1 pound with a 40 minute boil and another with a 20 minute boil. I am not really sure how they tasted as I was drinking IPA at the time, but I added both pounds to a split batch of Tripel. They are still in the fermenter.

I have to say that the gravity I took a few days ago at 1.030 tasted much better than last night’s 1.010 (from a 1.080 OG). It made my pupils dilate with the complex sweet flavor, that is the best way I can describe them. Last nights was just overpowered by the alcohol which I expect to subside.

I have picture but cannot figure out how to put them in this post.

 

Why does it matter if we are making it the "right" way. We just need a product that meets our needs and produces the results we want, right? If you came up with a better way for home brewers to do that in their kitchen then more power to you, but calling it the "right" way is just going to stir up the same old shit about how D2 is really made. Who the fuck cares?

 

I glanced over the old thread. And said to myself... That the poster used a figure of speech in calling something not done his way as "burned sugar". But, hey, whatever! I just kind of go my own way and kind of do my own thing... Am I trying to make D2 or candi sugar? Um. No. I'm trying to make beer. And what I do with my sugar (caramelize it) gives my beer the characteristics that I'm looking for. No DAP, nothing fancy (although I probably put in some lemon juice), just good beer!

Edit: but burned sugar? If your sugar is burning then you're just not stirring enough and your heat is probably too high. Talk to more candy makers!!!

 

There's really no way I can respond to this, if the data sheet provided by the manufacturer is invalid then I have no way of knowing, you'd have to contact them in order to dispute their published information.

 

Aha! We've happened upon an island of good sense. Bravo! There seem to be a lot of folks who are determined to eliminate the fun element from home brewing. If you want your beers to taste exactly like the commercial ones, just buy the freakin' originals. Avoid the angst and effort. I don't think copying the Mona Lisa is much fun, or enlightening. Sheesh!

 

You know, a discussion around the best way to make something does not equate to a saying people should follow said method.

I love discussions on all aspects of best practice in brewing theory. Doesn't mean I follow them in practice though.

 

ryane, anything significant associated w/ the D2 per their specs sheet to see if there's any notable variances to add more to the discussion about whether the product is made in the way they've described. (ie. mineral content on spec sheet indicates a refined sugar source which conflicts w/ notion they are working with unrefined stuff).

http://www.darkcandi.com/specs_dark2.pdf

 

you have access to equipoment (mass spec?) to determine sugar composition? fructose/sucrose/glucose

 

Put the text in reply quotes by mistake. Here it is on its own:

A mass spec probably would be the correct tool for the job when coupled with an inline HPLC and Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Ionization as the ion source (LC-MS with ACPI). Sugars aren't volatile enough to be ran on a Gas Chromatograph-Mass Spec without derivatization, and most of methods of detection using an HPLC in isolation require a very specific detector. In short, you're going to need very specific equipment, and a specialized lab or technician to analyze the sugars. I'd offer to do it, but the equipment I have access to isn't setup for this type of analysis (i.e. its all for protein sequencing analysis or separation).