Messages

376

Yeast and Fermentation / Contaminate Individual Bottles on Purpose??

« on: October 12, 2010, 07:23:10 PM »

I've got an odd question.  Has anyone ever purposely tried to funkify a beer by adding a few raw grains, or otherwise introduce Lacto or wild critters, to each bottle?  Here's the deal:

I've made a saison which is done fermenting but still in primary.  It tastes very nice -- dry, firm bitterness, a little spicy, and a pleasant peach/apricot sort of fruitiness.  But in reading the BJCP style guidelines, they talk about a certain "tartness" that should be there, which I am just not getting.  The beer is good, but perhaps too clean.  It seems to be wanting a certain funk.  But while I know I could purposely induce sourness by throwing in a handful of raw grain, or by inocculating with some live Lactobacillus from yogurt, etc., I also don't really want to dedicate another fermenter and associated gaskets and hoses to Lacto or other wild beasts as I just bought new equipment.

So I had this crazy crazy thought -- what if... I were to place, say, 3 little grains of raw malt into each bottle (I will be bottling)?  The theory is that with aging, a few wild critters present in the grains might multiply, probably only slightly, but give off a litte funk in the final beer.  Is this just asking for trouble?  Will the bottles gush or explode?  Most importantly -- has anyone else ever tried anything so stupid that it actually just might work?  If nothing else, I might try it just on 4 or 5 bottles just to see what happens.

Thoughts?  Is this just a little TOO crazy??  Yeah, I know.... I'm the guy who's not afraid taking a few risks, and who thinks outside of the box, maybe too much for my own good.

377

Beer Recipes / Re: Date/Fig infused belgian dubbel

« on: October 12, 2010, 07:31:28 AM »

I can't say for sure without tasting it myself, but, I doubt it would be fair to enter as a regular dubbel -- you've significantly fruited the beer, which might put your beer at an unfair advantage, or even a disadvantage if it tastes TOO fruity.  I would enter it as a 16E Belgian specialty, and let the judges know what you all put in there, assuming you can taste it, of course.  If you can't taste a particular ingredient, then don't even mention it to them.  I've done this before where I had a spiced Biere de Garde with vanilla, nutmeg, and black pepper.  But all you could really taste was the nutmeg, so that's all I mentioned to them.  Sure enough, the judges found all sorts of nutmeg flavor but no one mentioned anything about vanilla or spiciness.  This is really key -- tell them what it tastes like so that you'll meet their expectations.  And if none of the fruit is quite obvious enough, then yeah, go ahead and enter as a regular dubbel.  But assuming it is tasting fruited, then you really should enter as 16E Belgian specialty.

378

Kegging and Bottling / Re: What is the best way to remove stubborn labels from bottles?

« on: October 12, 2010, 07:08:02 AM »

Soak for a couple of hours in plain old hot water.  Then I use the handle end of a spoon to scrape off any stubborn ones.  Takes a bit of work but not too bad.  You will occasionally encounter labels that are a royal pain in the butt and require copious amounts of labor to scrape them off.  For these, learn what they are and just throw them away and don't try to deal with them.  But the vast majority of labels come off very easy with a two hour soak in hot water.

379

All Grain Brewing / Re: Alcohol Bitterness

« on: October 08, 2010, 07:11:39 AM »

I just ran my version of an experiment, first with a 10:1 ratio of water to vodka (I used Fleischmann's vodka).  Tasted the plain tap water -- slightly sweet, with undertones of earthiness.  The 10:1 water/vodka -- whoa, that's a lot of alcohol.  And it really wasn't all that much -- if you figure it out by percent, that's approximately 10% of 40%, which is only 4% ethanol.  But holy cow, that tasted not-so-yummy on a clean morning palate.  It was a lot different than I might have expected.  It tasted pretty dry and warming, not at all sweet.  Reminded me of a bad martini.  Is it what I would call bitter?  I don't know.  Maybe, but not exactly.  I can almost see Gordon's point here, but to me it provides what I would call more "dryness" vice "bitterness".  It really is more sort of a mouthfeel thing, I think, although the flavor was there -- it tasted like bad vodka, which it is.

Then I diluted the previous mixture 50/50 with more water, thus making it only 2% alcohol.  Wow, what a difference!  The drink became much much more palatable.  At this point it was considerably more dry than plain water, again no sweetness, and still a tad of alcohol flavor, but not so distracting as before.  Bitter?  Again, I don't know.  I really think it's more a sensation and drying effect in the mouth and throat versus an actual perception of bitterness.  It's not like aspiriny bitter or hop bitterness, not to me.  Just really... dry.  A drying effect.

380

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Adding Roasted Grain Flavor post Fermentaion via steeping grains

« on: October 07, 2010, 02:13:50 PM »

I did this once to a stout that turned out more like a brown porter.  What I did to fix it?  I made a 1-gallon extract mini-batch with identical original gravity to the original beer, but then I steeped 3 times as much dark malt as I normally would.  I even added hops and boiled for at least 15 minutes, maybe 30?  I don't recall exactly.  But then this super-black mini-batch was cooled and added to the primary, and fermented out, and yes, everything turned out pretty darn good.  I got a lot more roasty flavors, and darkness, and without spending a whole lot of time on it.  I usually do all-grain, but this was the perfect chance to make a little extract batch and not goof around too much with it.  Nothing fancy, and it got the job done.

Oh, and yeah, this beer ended up being the second best of the fest at the 2010 Manitowoc Jaycees Beer Lovers Brewfest.  Thought I'd throw that in there.   

381

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: BJCP comments...APA

« on: October 07, 2010, 06:23:41 AM »

I generally agree with Dan's comments above -- nice breakdown.  Anything above the mid 30s is based very much on subjectivity, and that "WOW" factor he mentioned.  Otherwise, if you make something perfectly to style, but it doesn't have something else to make it unique, then the highest you could ever hope to get might be the upper 30s or maybe a 40.

One thing I disagree on -- mouthfeel.  I feel every beer should be a 5 by default, then subtract for anything not quite right.  So to style for mouthfeel would be a perfect 5, not a 4.

Also, I am a little more creative with the "Overall Impression" section where the beer is judged from 1 to 10.  If a beer is to style but just seems rather bland, I might give it a 5 or 6.  On the other hand, if a beer is totally NOT to style but it tastes phenomenal, I have been known to give it an 8 or 9 on many occasions, sometimes with the comment, "ICTSAD -- I could drink this stuff all day", it is so delicious.  Not to style, but again, that WOW factor.  I do not limit this section to whether it is to style or not.  I see it as a free-for-all fudge factor -- and an opportunity to provide quality feedback to improve the beer at next brewing.

382

All Grain Brewing / Re: Alcohol Bitterness

« on: October 06, 2010, 07:16:50 AM »

I think this is a good point.  I'm sure not all vodkas are the same.  Yet pure ethanol...... I don't think it's got any bitterness.  It is flavorless.  And while ethanol does make you feel funny and does strange things in your mouth, throat, and gut, I don't pick up any bitterness from it.  I don't believe it.  But perhaps Mr. Strong has more taste buds for bitterness than I, which is entirely possible.

I'll tell you what I do get, though -- After drinking a stronger beer of, say, 6.5% alcohol or higher, post-gulp, I often times pick up an aftertaste aroma of none other than Elmer's glue, and this is how I sometimes figure out that hey, there's a bit of extra alcohol kick in this beer, when otherwise you might not really be able to taste it.  But I digress.

383

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: BJCP comments...APA

« on: October 05, 2010, 05:04:21 AM »

Judging is highly subjective, especially above about 35 points.  And just because you have a Grand Master III judge, doesn't mean he knows everything or is perfect!!  I would give only a tiny smidge more credence to a GMIII than any other judge of Certified status or higher, and there are a lot of awesome Recognized judges out there as well (including myself!).  My suggestion is to not take just one guy's comments to heart, EVER.  The thing you must do is to enter the same beer into at least 3 competitions, then throw out the scoresheets from the obvious idiots (you'll know who they are -- just throw them in the trash and forget about them), and then you'll still have a handful of good comments from several different judges, and look at all their comments as a whole / on the average.  This is the very best way to get the most out of the feedback.  Otherwise, you are fretting over one guy's opinion.  And one guy... ain't perfect.  Two minds, or three or four or five or more, are much MUCH better than just one.

384

Kegging and Bottling / Re: Mini Kegs

« on: September 29, 2010, 04:57:26 AM »

Don't know yet.  I just started doing this a few months ago and unfortunately haven't been brewing a lot either.

385

Kegging and Bottling / Re: Mini Kegs

« on: September 28, 2010, 08:49:22 PM »

Here's my Heineken mini-keg system.  Maybe this is sort of what you had in mind?  Please ignore the dirty dishes in the background -- you have been warned, so shut up in advance.

http://forum.northernbrewer.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=90461&hilit=heineken

386

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Hop Tree?

« on: September 24, 2010, 09:02:08 PM »

The hop hornbeam tree does have fruits that look exactly like hops, hence the naming of the tree.  However, hops and hop hornbeam trees are not even remotely related, and there's no use trying to brew with these "hops" from the trees.  There are scientific reasons for the similar patterns of the leaflets/"flower petals", which are also formed in various other flowers including roses, sunflowers, etc.  Pine cones also have a very similar structure, but more woody rather than leafy.  Regardless of the reasons why.... it is pretty darn cool looking at one of these trees and thinking, holy cow, if only those were real hops......

387

The Pub / Re: Beer before Liquor...

« on: September 24, 2010, 04:40:33 AM »

The general rule of thumb is to quit drinking when you are sloshed.  Doesn't matter what I drink, if it's shots or wine or beer.  At the hour I find myself drunk off my ass, if I stop drinking immediately, I'm "in the clear".

388

Yeast and Fermentation / Re: The nuclear (Beano) option

« on: September 18, 2010, 06:24:19 AM »

Don't do it!!  Darn Beano.... I barely used any, like a half tablet in 3 gallons, and it destroyed two of my batches.  Never again... never EVER again.....

389

Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Yeast Starter had Zero Krausen

« on: September 17, 2010, 10:01:43 AM »

Thanks for the feedback guys.  Sounds like I just need to RDWHAHB.  Even folks who have brewed for 11 years need to do that on occasion.

390

Beer Recipes / Re: Porter vs. Stout

« on: September 15, 2010, 06:33:19 PM »

I agree that it is primarily the BJCP that made the distinction based on level of roasted barley.  There is little other basis provided for calling these styles different.

Personally, I think the two styles are nearly one and the same.  I have had porters that are as black and roasty as midnight, and likewise I have had wimpy stouts.  Go back 100-200 years, and there might have been a more obvious difference.  Or, perhaps not.  But here in the 21st century, we're just making up our own garbage.  I think what it really comes down to is, if you think it's super dark and very roasty, call it a stout.  If you make another batch that turns out a little less roasty, you can call it your porter.  And vice versa.  It seems no one out there besides self-proclaimed snobs truly know or understand the difference.  And I fail to see why we call these two different styles.  Stout is historically the son of porter.  And yet now, porter has become the neglected relative of the more-popular stout.  So call it all stout if you want it to sell.  People just aren't as interested in your porter, even if it tastes a thousand times better than Guinness, and even though Guinness is little more than a cream ale with 3% roasted barley and/or black malt.