boney wrote:Yeah, low level diacetyl may be acceptible for the style, but isn't neccessary. I'm super aware of diacetyl and personally consider it a defect in any style, so definitely not the sweetness I'm talking about.
Carbohyrates are carbohydrates. All malt has a certain amount of sweetness, it's just not sugary or saccharine. If not sweet then what? Sour? Salty? Bitter? Umami?
to be honest, i think a hint of diacetyl in a lager, esp with the Urquel strain of yeast, is nice. when i say hint, i mean only enough to compliment the floral notes of the yeast. so on a scale of 1 to 10, i'm talking a 1.5.
carbs are carbs, but not all are equal. lactose is a carbohydrate that saccharomyces cannot break down into alcohol or CO2. same with maltodextrin. some carbs are more complex than others.
there are 3 basic parts to brewing that determine how much unfermented sugar will remain: mash water temp, types of malts used, and the type of yeast used. it's my understanding that lagers are usually mashed on the high end of the spectrum in order to have some mouthfeel and leave some unfermentable sugars. that would be on the same temperate end as, for example, stouts, where you want that mouthfeel and some residual sweetness. so the sweetness you describe is perhaps the unfermentable sweetness. that plus a grain bill with 90+% fermentable grain and you don't have much true residual sugar, but some is there due to mash.
TL;DR = it's not sweet like pure sugar or like chocolate cake would be sweet, but it would be "sweet" like a loaf of bread could be described as "sweet"