Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

General Category => General Homebrew Discussion => Topic started by: brulosopher on November 30, 2015, 01:05:15 PM

Title: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on November 30, 2015, 01:05:15 PM
When it comes to making dark beers, one important consideration is how to go about using the roasted grains. Based off of a recommendation from Gordon Strong in Brewing Better Beer, I began adding roasted grains during the last 10 minutes of the mash, a technique referred to as capping the mash, believing it would lend a smoother roast character. After years of using this method, I finally did a proper xBmt, comparing it to the same beer with the roasted malts mashed the entire time. Results are in!

http://brulosophy.com/2015/11/30/roasted-grains-full-mash-vs-capped-at-vorlauf-exbeeriment-results-2/
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on November 30, 2015, 01:18:18 PM
Awesome!  And I am not surprised
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: 69franx on November 30, 2015, 01:18:23 PM
Easier sounds good to me, I will continue to mash all together as I have been doing with "proper" water treatment. Great exbeeriment Marshall
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on November 30, 2015, 01:28:05 PM
Thanks, Marshall. It's pretty interesting. I mash it all together and honestly expected the opposite, only because of the lower pH - I love the more rounded roast at 5.5 -5.6 pH for a dark beer. Regardless, this does nothing to make me want to stop mashing it all together.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: PORTERHAUS on November 30, 2015, 01:28:48 PM
I had just asked about his in another post. I'm going to look into this when I can read it fully.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on November 30, 2015, 01:50:15 PM
I've always suspected that capping the mash simply results in less extraction of colour and flavour from roasted malt and this seems to support that idea. Astringency from tannins comes from high mash pH, oversparging or high sparge pH, so perhaps people who get lower astringency from a capped mash are not treating water properly for the main mash.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dmtaylor on November 30, 2015, 03:22:45 PM
Fascinating results, especially the part about pH being only hundredths of a point different.  I shall henceforth return to full mashes for my stouts and porters, as depth of flavor and color are more important to me with these styles than the theoretical but probably non-existent "smoothness" from late capping.

I have zero constructive comments for this xBmt.  Well done.  Thank you again, Marshall.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: bengelbrau on November 30, 2015, 03:57:18 PM
Great data. I love not having to make my brew day more complicated. One question, though... did you  check OG for each batch? I have never understood why having denatured enzymes in a dark malt matters. We are, after all, interested in using the enzymes from our base malts to provide the sugars for conversion. If there are starches that could be converted in the dark malts, we are sacrificing some yield if we don't do a full mash.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: BrodyR on November 30, 2015, 04:11:32 PM
Nice experiment - final pH being similar makes sense since the roasted barley still had time to acidify the wort for 10m at the end. Wonder if the fairly different mash pH's made a difference?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: narvin on November 30, 2015, 04:26:18 PM
It's interesting that the difference in the mash for 1lb of roasted barley was that big.  Brun Water and Kai's water calculator both predict only a 0.1 drop from roasted barley with this recipe, as Kai's original findings shows that roasted actually contributes less acidity that crystal, per each *L of SRM.  Perhaps it varies by brand and type of roasted malt.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: blatz on November 30, 2015, 04:30:33 PM
It's interesting that the difference in the mash for 1lb of roasted barley was that big.  Brun Water and Kai's water calculator both predict only a 0.1 drop from roasted barley with this recipe, as Kai's original findings shows that roasted actually contributes less acidity that crystal, per each *L of SRM.  Perhaps it varies by brand and type of roasted malt.

Might have something to do with it being Simpsons which I use.  Simpson's RB is ~650L, whereas Briess for example, is only 300.  Simpson's actually smells like espresso when you stick your nose into the bag, whereas most other brands I've tried are much more subtle.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on November 30, 2015, 04:35:21 PM
Fascinating results, especially the part about pH being only hundredths of a point different.  I shall henceforth return to full mashes for my stouts and porters, as depth of flavor and color are more important to me with these styles than the theoretical but probably non-existent "smoothness" from late capping.

I have zero constructive comments for this xBmt.  Well done.  Thank you again, Marshall.

Haha, like I said, I always look forward to your constructive comments :)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dilluh98 on November 30, 2015, 04:49:57 PM
As someone has pointed out in the comments section of the brulosophy website, the difference in proton concentration, [H+], for a pH of 5.0 vs 5.3 is 5 x 10-6 mol/L. The difference for 4.16 vs 4.19 is 4.5 x 10-6 mol/L for a difference of .5 umol/L. Sub-micromolar concentration differences might be beyond the precision of the instrument. If you need convincing the equation is:

pH = -log[H+

so [H+] = 10-pH
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on November 30, 2015, 04:54:51 PM
Ya know, it seems like I keep saying it over and over in these recent Exbeeriments....but this is no surprise and something I've been saying for years.  I even posted about it in a thread here recently.  Sorry to be the "Told Ya So" curmudgeon, but what can I say?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dilluh98 on November 30, 2015, 04:55:14 PM
Or rather, this should imply that the pH drop, buffering, etc that went on during fermentation was likely similar in both beers.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: AmandaK on November 30, 2015, 05:29:50 PM
It's interesting that the difference in the mash for 1lb of roasted barley was that big.  Brun Water and Kai's water calculator both predict only a 0.1 drop from roasted barley with this recipe, as Kai's original findings shows that roasted actually contributes less acidity that crystal, per each *L of SRM.  Perhaps it varies by brand and type of roasted malt.

Might have something to do with it being Simpsons which I use.  Simpson's RB is ~650L, whereas Briess for example, is only 300.  Simpson's actually smells like espresso when you stick your nose into the bag, whereas most other brands I've tried are much more subtle.

Oooohhh... that sounds nice. Perhaps for the next dry stout (we brew it all the time - pretty sure it's the only thing we have a nitro tap for!) I'll search out Simpsons and see what's different.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brewday on November 30, 2015, 05:47:00 PM
Great data. I love not having to make my brew day more complicated.

For me, adding the dark grain late makes brewday less complicated - no water spreadsheets, no weighing salts, no varying acid additions, no pH meter, no tinkering.  If you like doing those things, great!  I don't.

I use the same water and mash pH profile with minimal additions for every beer and get consistent results, regardless of the style I'm brewing.  That, I believe, is Gordon's larger point.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: BrewingRover on November 30, 2015, 05:48:35 PM
It's interesting that the difference in the mash for 1lb of roasted barley was that big.  Brun Water and Kai's water calculator both predict only a 0.1 drop from roasted barley with this recipe, as Kai's original findings shows that roasted actually contributes less acidity that crystal, per each *L of SRM.  Perhaps it varies by brand and type of roasted malt.

Might have something to do with it being Simpsons which I use.  Simpson's RB is ~650L, whereas Briess for example, is only 300.  Simpson's actually smells like espresso when you stick your nose into the bag, whereas most other brands I've tried are much more subtle.

Oooohhh... that sounds nice. Perhaps for the next dry stout (we brew it all the time - pretty sure it's the only thing we have a nitro tap for!) I'll search out Simpsons and see what's different.

I get similar aromas from Thomas Fawcett Roast, if you can't find Simpsons. I love it in my RIS.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brewday on November 30, 2015, 05:48:59 PM
Fascinating results, especially the part about pH being only hundredths of a point different.  I shall henceforth return to full mashes for my stouts and porters, as depth of flavor and color are more important to me with these styles than the theoretical but probably non-existent "smoothness" from late capping.

I have zero constructive comments for this xBmt.  Well done.  Thank you again, Marshall.

Interesting results indeed.  I'd like to think that I would have preferred the late addition stout, but who knows?  I now intend to do a side-by-side and see for myself.

One thing I can't get past is the color difference.  It makes sense that less color translates to less roasted flavors, I'm just not experiencing that color difference when I employ this technique.  I do seem to get quicker and better clarity however.  Not sure why.  But again, I'll give the experiment a whirl for myself and decide.

Good stuff Marshall.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on November 30, 2015, 05:51:27 PM
I spent several years doing late additions, cold steeping, etc. in an attempt to smooth out my dark beers.  After several years, I realized they had become so smooth they were insipid.  I went back the other way and now even use a small amount of black patent in dark beers to get the hit of flavor I'm looking for.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: AmandaK on November 30, 2015, 05:52:02 PM
Extra anecdotal data point: I tried doing the cap the mash thing for a few brews. I never did get the deep color I wanted, so I switched back to the all in approach. Don't think I remember a difference in flavor, but the appearance was all off.

PS: I'll look for TF as well. I'm sure I can get my lhbs to order it if all else fails.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on November 30, 2015, 05:56:04 PM
Ya know, it seems like I keep saying it over and over in these recent Exbeeriments....but this is no surprise and something I've been saying for years.  I even posted about it in a thread here recently.  Sorry to be the "Told Ya So" curmudgeon, but what can I say?

No need to apologize! I want to make sure to test all this stuff out regardless of what has already been done, and I like when the data backs up what people I respect have been saying for years :)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: jeffy on November 30, 2015, 06:02:29 PM
I wonder if the experiments could be planned to have the same final parameters.  For example, plan to add salts to keep both the mash pH's the same and plan to add enough capped roast malt to make the colors equal.  After all you're trying to find out if there's a difference and you've already built in a difference.  Knowing that the pH would be low and the color would be light makes the experiment kind of pointless imho.

From what I understand, Gordon's method was not so much to smooth out the flavors, but also to simplify the main mash.  If you do one mash and add the proper salts or acids to get the pH you want, then you never would have to measure this stuff again.  Just do the main mash then add the crystal and roast malts later.  Without any of the excellent water programs used, this makes sense for a beginning all grain brewer.

I tried capping the mash several times and didn't get the colors or flavors I wanted, so I went back to the usual method.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on November 30, 2015, 06:08:20 PM
I spent several years doing late additions, cold steeping, etc. in an attempt to smooth out my dark beers.  After several years, I realized they had become so smooth they were insipid.  I went back the other way and now even use a small amount of black patent in dark beers to get the hit of flavor I'm looking for.

I've done the same on occasion, Denny. All the years I blamed my recipes I didn't realize it was a pH issue !
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: beersk on November 30, 2015, 06:10:31 PM
I prescribe to JZ's comment on one of the "Can you Brew it" episodes I heard - "Brewer's have been mashing it all together for hundreds of years, just throw it all in." That's a bit of a paraphrase, but you get the point. I've tried both methods, but I prefer the simplicity of just mashing everything together.

Thanks for the experiment, Marshall.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on November 30, 2015, 06:19:34 PM
I wonder if the experiments could be planned to have the same final parameters.  For example, plan to add salts to keep both the mash pH's the same and plan to add enough capped roast malt to make the colors equal.  After all you're trying to find out if there's a difference and you've already built in a difference.  Knowing that the pH would be low and the color would be light makes the experiment kind of pointless imho.

From what I understand, Gordon's method was not so much to smooth out the flavors, but also to simplify the main mash.  If you do one mash and add the proper salts or acids to get the pH you want, then you never would have to measure this stuff again.  Just do the main mash then add the crystal and roast malts later.  Without any of the excellent water programs used, this makes sense for a beginning all grain brewer.

I tried capping the mash several times and didn't get the colors or flavors I wanted, so I went back to the usual method.

That's definitely on the list, just like to start with the basics.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on November 30, 2015, 06:46:18 PM
From what I understand, Gordon's method was not so much to smooth out the flavors, but also to simplify the main mash.

Which it does.  But if it changes the flavor, is it worth the tradeoff?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on November 30, 2015, 06:47:21 PM
I spent several years doing late additions, cold steeping, etc. in an attempt to smooth out my dark beers.  After several years, I realized they had become so smooth they were insipid.  I went back the other way and now even use a small amount of black patent in dark beers to get the hit of flavor I'm looking for.

I've done the same on occasion, Denny. All the years I blamed my recipes I didn't realize it was a pH issue !

I'm not even sure if it was a pH issue.  I think that the shorter contact time extracts less flavor from the dark grains.  Now, that may be due to pH, but I really don't know.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on November 30, 2015, 07:03:15 PM
I spent several years doing late additions, cold steeping, etc. in an attempt to smooth out my dark beers.  After several years, I realized they had become so smooth they were insipid.  I went back the other way and now even use a small amount of black patent in dark beers to get the hit of flavor I'm looking for.

I've done the same on occasion, Denny. All the years I blamed my recipes I didn't realize it was a pH issue !

I'm not even sure if it was a pH issue.  I think that the shorter contact time extracts less flavor from the dark grains.  Now, that may be due to pH, but I really don't know.

No, I agree with you on shorter contact time/less extract.  I just meant that I used to get frustrated with dark beers, thinking the only way to make a good one was to cold steep, add at vorlauf, etc., where mashing together at a higher pH got what I was after all along.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on November 30, 2015, 07:52:44 PM
No, I agree with you on shorter contact time/less extract.  I just meant that I used to get frustrated with dark beers, thinking the only way to make a good one was to cold steep, add at vorlauf, etc., where mashing together at a higher pH got what I was after all along.

Got it!
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: blatz on November 30, 2015, 08:06:07 PM
Which it does.  But if it changes the flavor, is it worth the tradeoff?

in a few styles, perhaps.  this method helps me keep my schwarzbier from being overly porter like.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: duncan on November 30, 2015, 08:32:37 PM
Another interesting xBmt. Thanks for sharing these, Marshall!
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on November 30, 2015, 08:33:08 PM
Which it does.  But if it changes the flavor, is it worth the tradeoff?

in a few styles, perhaps.  this method helps me keep my schwarzbier from being overly porter like.

I've used Midnight Wheat in my Schwarzbier and it wasn't Porter-like at all.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: PORTERHAUS on November 30, 2015, 08:35:23 PM
I spent several years doing late additions, cold steeping, etc. in an attempt to smooth out my dark beers.  After several years, I realized they had become so smooth they were insipid.  I went back the other way and now even use a small amount of black patent in dark beers to get the hit of flavor I'm looking for.

I've done the same on occasion, Denny. All the years I blamed my recipes I didn't realize it was a pH issue !

I'm not even sure if it was a pH issue.  I think that the shorter contact time extracts less flavor from the dark grains.  Now, that may be due to pH, but I really don't know.

No, I agree with you on shorter contact time/less extract.  I just meant that I used to get frustrated with dark beers, thinking the only way to make a good one was to cold steep, add at vorlauf, etc., where mashing together at a higher pH got what I was after all along.

What mash ph do you shoot for in a dark beer with roasted grains?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on November 30, 2015, 08:37:34 PM
I spent several years doing late additions, cold steeping, etc. in an attempt to smooth out my dark beers.  After several years, I realized they had become so smooth they were insipid.  I went back the other way and now even use a small amount of black patent in dark beers to get the hit of flavor I'm looking for.

I've done the same on occasion, Denny. All the years I blamed my recipes I didn't realize it was a pH issue !

I'm not even sure if it was a pH issue.  I think that the shorter contact time extracts less flavor from the dark grains.  Now, that may be due to pH, but I really don't know.

No, I agree with you on shorter contact time/less extract.  I just meant that I used to get frustrated with dark beers, thinking the only way to make a good one was to cold steep, add at vorlauf, etc., where mashing together at a higher pH got what I was after all along.

What mash ph do you shoot for in a dark beer with roasted grains?


5.5 -5.6.  Try it sometime !
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: blatz on November 30, 2015, 08:42:30 PM
Which it does.  But if it changes the flavor, is it worth the tradeoff?

in a few styles, perhaps.  this method helps me keep my schwarzbier from being overly porter like.

I've used Midnight Wheat in my Schwarzbier and it wasn't Porter-like at all.

yeah - I did the add prior to sparge with MW on my latest run of Schwarz.  Its still lagering but ive been very happy with the initial results - just a kiss of roast aroma and flavor.  that said, this is also first time using MW in a Schwarz.

my opinion is 90% of the time when using dark roasted grains you want the intense flavors and aromas, so mash it the whole time.  for Schwarz and maybe black IPA, the capping the mash method may make sense.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: blatz on November 30, 2015, 08:46:02 PM
sparge method may also play a part in these results, no?

I capped the mash with midnight wheat for my latest Schwarz, but I fly sparge, which means that they'll be getting 45-55min contact time.  whereas a batch sparger is much less time, perhaps?

just a thought.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brewday on November 30, 2015, 09:02:00 PM
sparge method may also play a part in these results, no?

I capped the mash with midnight wheat for my latest Schwarz, but I fly sparge, which means that they'll be getting 45-55min contact time.  whereas a batch sparger is much less time, perhaps?

just a thought.

That would be my guess.  This has to come down to contact time, I would think.  Even with batch sparging people have different runoff times.  Mine are slow.

Plus this one was done via no-sparge.  When I run off full volume/no sparge I make sure to give the "capping" extra time.

Blatz, do you notice less color when you cap?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: tesgüino on November 30, 2015, 09:03:41 PM
I single batch sparge, but my method has been to add crystal malts after taking my first runnings, stir and recirculate for 15 minutes, then drain again.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: blatz on November 30, 2015, 09:19:47 PM
Blatz, do you notice less color when you cap?

hard to really say - the last time I did a Schwarz I used Carafa II, mashed the whole time. 

This time, I replaced the carafa with MW, but also shifted the munich and pils ratio.

what I can say, is that it does seem, based on memory, to be lighter by a hair than what I recall, but it is also exactly how I want it to be - black when looking at the pint indirectly when on the bar, but reddish with black edges when held to the light.

I also capped a black rye DIPA and had a similar color result.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on November 30, 2015, 09:39:08 PM
I single batch sparge, but my method has been to add crystal malts after taking my first runnings, stir and recirculate for 15 minutes, then drain again.

What's the reason for that?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: tesgüino on November 30, 2015, 10:03:59 PM
I single batch sparge, but my method has been to add crystal malts after taking my first runnings, stir and recirculate for 15 minutes, then drain again.

What's the reason for that?
I bought into Gordon's single water treatment for most beers line. I've convinced myself that the color and roast character is the same with less astringency, but never did a side-by-side, so can't make that claim.

Any time savings, one way or the other, is insignificant.

So, I guess the only reason is blind faith.  :-[



 
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: MDixon on November 30, 2015, 10:22:41 PM
My personal opinion is unless you find your beers astringent to forget all the extra steps. That being said I find very few beers are actually astringent today and most people who describe something as astringent don't understand astringency is a sensation, not a flavor. If you taste or smell astringency then you fall into the category of those who don't understand. ;)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brewday on November 30, 2015, 10:43:50 PM
I single batch sparge, but my method has been to add crystal malts after taking my first runnings, stir and recirculate for 15 minutes, then drain again.

What's the reason for that?
I bought into Gordon's single water treatment for most beers line. I've convinced myself that the color and roast character is the same with less astringency, but never did a side-by-side, so can't make that claim.

Any time savings, one way or the other, is insignificant.

So, I guess the only reason is blind faith.  :-[

If you think your beers improved, that's really what matters most.  I don't think you necessarily need to do a side-by-side to determine that.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on November 30, 2015, 10:48:14 PM
my opinion is 90% of the time when using dark roasted grains you want the intense flavors and aromas, so mash it the whole time.  for Schwarz and maybe black IPA, the capping the mash method may make sense.

I agree with this, Paul. I do add Midnight Wheat @ vorlauf in the case of the latter.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on November 30, 2015, 10:52:41 PM
My personal opinion is unless you find your beers astringent to forget all the extra steps. That being said I find very few beers are actually astringent today and most people who describe something as astringent don't understand astringency is a sensation, not a flavor. If you taste or smell astringency then you fall into the category of those who don't understand. ;)
This may sound cynical, but I think brewers sometimes think their beer tastes a certain way because of something they've read, even if that character isn't really there. The same way I think judges often misperceive certain flavors/aroma for off-flavors because it's unfamiliar to them (e.g., unique Pils malt character for DMS, UK Caramelt malt for diacetyl, etc). I could be wrong. Or just a dick ;)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dmtaylor on December 01, 2015, 01:46:01 AM
This may sound cynical, but I think brewers sometimes think their beer tastes a certain way because of something they've read, even if that character isn't really there. The same way I think judges often misperceive certain flavors/aroma for off-flavors because it's unfamiliar to them (e.g., unique Pils malt character for DMS, UK Caramelt malt for diacetyl, etc). I could be wrong. Or just a dick ;)

No, I'm the dick.  But you're right, though.  I think Novice or Recognized judges, especially, enjoy applying their newfound knowledge of off-flavors in overly creative ways.  And then some judges never seem to be able to grow out of it.  Unfortunately I've also seen a Master level judge who claimed he could pick up astringency in the aroma.  Uh, no, sorry buddy.... he lost 100% credibility with that one.  I don't care what the hell level somebody thinks he is.... that's just wrong.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Hooper on December 01, 2015, 02:05:28 AM
So...I'm thinking of doing the following mash schedule on my next 5 gal dark beer. I will add the dark grains and 1 tsp of baking soda at the start of sacc2...sacc1 would be my usual water treatment for a pale ale...what do you think?

sacc1                  0     40    145   
sacc2                  0     30    159
mash out             0     10    168
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dmtaylor on December 01, 2015, 02:55:33 AM
Too complicated.  Mash the whole thing at 150 F for 40 minutes and call it good.  You can get it up to a boil within about 30 minutes, correct?  Consider that your "mashout".
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: santoch on December 01, 2015, 04:58:08 AM
I'm with Dave.  Keep it simple.  You won't add anything with that mash schedule except hours to your brewday.
145 is beta favoring but really really slow.  159 is alpha favoring but denatures everything rather quickly.
You will still get favorable beta and alpha amylase activity at 150-ish without the extra time and hassle spent on the 2 rests.

HTH-
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: PORTERHAUS on December 01, 2015, 05:15:35 AM
5.5 -5.6.  Try it sometime !

I plan on it. On the next batch actually.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: hopfenundmalz on December 01, 2015, 09:31:37 AM
sparge method may also play a part in these results, no?

I capped the mash with midnight wheat for my latest Schwarz, but I fly sparge, which means that they'll be getting 45-55min contact time.  whereas a batch sparger is much less time, perhaps?

just a thought.
That is a good point, Gordon's system is the same as my usual set up, so yes, he fly sparges.

I used to make dark beers that Mrs. R called acrid, "Ash Tray", beers. With measurement and control of pH to 5.5-5.6 for those, that unwanted charactoristic is gone.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: AmandaK on December 01, 2015, 12:49:15 PM
I'm with Dave.  Keep it simple.  You won't add anything with that mash schedule except hours to your brewday.
145 is beta favoring but really really slow.  159 is alpha favoring but denatures everything rather quickly.
You will still get favorable beta and alpha amylase activity at 150-ish without the extra time and hassle spent on the 2 rests.

HTH-

Can confirm on the 145 slowness and the 159 (okay, 158) quickness. I am still surprised how quickly a mash can convert at 150F compared to the same mash at 145F. Will be posting my data when I get some time.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: beersk on December 01, 2015, 01:33:42 PM
So for something like black IPA, does a mash pH of 5.5 play well for the hops? I can't remember if a lower mash pH is beneficial for better hop character or not.
I mashed my current black IPA at pH 5.4 according to Bru'n water and it came out wonderfully. Mashed 11oz debittered black malt for the entire 75 minute mash at 150F.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: mabrungard on December 01, 2015, 01:40:16 PM
So for something like black IPA, does a mash pH of 5.5 play well for the hops? I can't remember if a lower mash pH is beneficial for better hop character or not.
I mashed my current black IPA at pH 5.4 according to Bru'n water and it came out wonderfully. Mashed 11oz debittered black malt for the entire 75 minute mash at 150F.

I don't expect that moving the pH to 5.5 for a hop-focused beer would be beneficial. The hops tend to get rough above 5.4. The other consideration is that black IPA seems to be only lightly focused on roast flavors and I don't think you can enhance them much.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 01, 2015, 01:46:57 PM
The other consideration is that black IPA seems to be only lightly focused on roast flavors and I don't think you can enhance them much.


+1.  Something like Midnight Wheat has little to no roast to make acrid with lower pH in the first place.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: PORTERHAUS on December 01, 2015, 03:00:47 PM
So for something like black IPA, does a mash pH of 5.5 play well for the hops? I can't remember if a lower mash pH is beneficial for better hop character or not.
I mashed my current black IPA at pH 5.4 according to Bru'n water and it came out wonderfully. Mashed 11oz debittered black malt for the entire 75 minute mash at 150F.

I don't expect that moving the pH to 5.5 for a hop-focused beer would be beneficial. The hops tend to get rough above 5.4. The other consideration is that black IPA seems to be only lightly focused on roast flavors and I don't think you can enhance them much.

I'm curious to how the mash ph effects the hops which are in the boil? Is it depending on how the mash ph carries over to effect the boil bph?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 01, 2015, 04:55:19 PM
My personal opinion is unless you find your beers astringent to forget all the extra steps. That being said I find very few beers are actually astringent today and most people who describe something as astringent don't understand astringency is a sensation, not a flavor. If you taste or smell astringency then you fall into the category of those who don't understand. ;)

THIS^^^^
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 01, 2015, 04:56:34 PM
If you think your beers improved, that's really what matters most.  I don't think you necessarily need to do a side-by-side to determine that.

Uh, yes you do...if you really want to know and not just guess.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 01, 2015, 04:57:07 PM
My personal opinion is unless you find your beers astringent to forget all the extra steps. That being said I find very few beers are actually astringent today and most people who describe something as astringent don't understand astringency is a sensation, not a flavor. If you taste or smell astringency then you fall into the category of those who don't understand. ;)
This may sound cynical, but I think brewers sometimes think their beer tastes a certain way because of something they've read, even if that character isn't really there. The same way I think judges often misperceive certain flavors/aroma for off-flavors because it's unfamiliar to them (e.g., unique Pils malt character for DMS, UK Caramelt malt for diacetyl, etc). I could be wrong. Or just a dick ;)

You are neither wrong nor a dick.  You're right on the money.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brewday on December 01, 2015, 05:16:25 PM
If you think your beers improved, that's really what matters most.  I don't think you necessarily need to do a side-by-side to determine that.

Uh, yes you do...if you really want to know and not just guess.

Respectfully, Denny, that's nonsense.  Anytime one makes a major change in process, whether it's how you make a starter, your water profile, mash program, fermentation control or handling of roasted grains, we can and should be able to decide for ourselves if it results in improvement without setting up a specific test.  Do you like the beers better than before or not?  Pretty simple.  If it's not clear, or if someone keeps telling you that what you're experiencing isn't possible, then maybe it makes sense to compare.

I've never done a side by side of my own beers, yet I can easily mark off specific changes to my brewing process that coincide with significant improvement.  Going all in on Gordon's approach to water - for all styles - is certainly one of them.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 01, 2015, 05:21:20 PM

Respectfully, Denny, that's nonsense.  Anytime one makes a major change in process, whether it's how you make a starter, your water profile, mash program, fermentation control or handling of roasted grains, we can and should be able to decide for ourselves if it results in improvement without setting up a specific test.  Do you like the beers better than before or not?  Pretty simple.  If it's not clear, or if someone keeps telling you that what you're experiencing isn't possible, then maybe it makes sense to compare.

I've never done a side by side of my own beers, yet I can easily mark off specific changes to my brewing process that coincide with significant improvement.  Going all in on Gordon's approach to water - for all styles - is certainly one of them.

With all due respect, you simply can't do that.  I've devoted years of study to this, given countless seminars about it and it was a prime point in the book "Experimental Homebrewing".  Confirmation bias just doesn't allow you to judge your own beer in any way other than a blind tasting.  Why do you think I did all those experiments?  Why do you think Marshall does his?  You say you've never done this so maybe you just don't realize how significant that impact can be.  I'm a BJCPO National judge with hundreds of beers of judging experience, yet I would never claim to be able to make a statement about the differences in beers without a blind triangle tasting.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: tesgüino on December 01, 2015, 06:37:36 PM

Respectfully, Denny, that's nonsense . . . we can and should be able to decide for ourselves . . .

With all due respect, you simply can't do that  . . . I would never claim to be able to make a statement about the differences in beers without a blind triangle tasting.
But there's another side to this. Most off us don't have the time or resources to do blind triangle tastings of every aspect of brewing. Most of us don't have the sensory training or palate to always know the difference. What we all have is the desire to make great beer that will be enjoyed by those who do. We rely on the Denny's, Marshall's and Gordon's for information that we can digest and and combine with our own experiences. I'd like to think that Gordon has done some type of blind tasting to come to his conclusions. The nature of Marshall's experiment linked to here makes it a single data point compared to Gordon's use of this technique over a broad range of beers. And when you read his explanation, it seems to be a logical conclusion. For hobby brewer, like most of us are, we have to keep an open mind to both sides of the discussion.

I brewed a black ale this past weekend and dumped the chocolate wheat in while I stirred the mash before my second runnings. For a process that added no more than 15 minutes to my brewday, it's worth the piece of mind until the experts can sort this out.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brewday on December 01, 2015, 06:54:25 PM
Denny, I admire the work that you, Drew and Marshall do.  I sincerely mean that.  But if it was a requirement to confirm every perceived improvement in my own beers by setting up a specific test, then frankly I'd stop brewing.  I'm not going to go back and do that, and I feel very strongly that certain changes I've made have resulted in better beer.  I'm sorry, you're just not going to talk me out of that.

For me this is a water thing, not a dark grain issue per say.  I haven't used the words astringent, harsh or acrid here.  World class beers are obviously made with dark grains in the mash, no question.  Again, for me this is about water.  I've personally adopted an approach to water that is consistent across all styles, regardless of dark grains.  From SRM 3 to SRM 43, my beers are better.  Period.  But I'm only talking about my beers.  I'm not telling anyone they should hold dark grains until vorlauf.  What I am saying is that in my experience it works.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread I intend to do a side by side for dark grains specifically because there are so many people saying it doesn't work.  But I've also noted that those who haven't found this method to be particularly successful, including Marshall, have fallen well short in extracting the proper color.  To me that's a key miss.  The more I read that the color wasn't there (and therefore neither were the flavors) then the more likely I am to believe that I'm handling the process differently, and the less likely I am to question my own results.  But I'll do the damn side by side!!

Here's what I'd tell people reading this:

If you're curious, try Gordon's approach to water and if you like it, adopt it.  If you don't like it, then don't.  That simple.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: mabrungard on December 01, 2015, 07:40:48 PM
There can be a level of blindness that any brewer can have for their own beer. The 'my beer is good' perception can cloud the real perceptions. I expect that the same can be said for tasters that are friends of the brewer. For that reason, unbiased and blind tasting trials including triangle tests are better tools in determining if a change is an improvement or not.

However, in the absence of that testing rigor, a relative increase in level of satisfaction with your beer still has some merit. Just recognize that there may still be improvement needed.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: PORTERHAUS on December 01, 2015, 08:28:55 PM

So for something like black IPA, does a mash pH of 5.5 play well for the hops? I can't remember if a lower mash pH is beneficial for better hop character or not.
I mashed my current black IPA at pH 5.4 according to Bru'n water and it came out wonderfully. Mashed 11oz debittered black malt for the entire 75 minute mash at 150F.

I don't expect that moving the pH to 5.5 for a hop-focused beer would be beneficial. The hops tend to get rough above 5.4. The other consideration is that black IPA seems to be only lightly focused on roast flavors and I don't think you can enhance them much.

I'm curious to how the mash ph effects the hops which are in the boil? Is it depending on how the mash ph carries over to effect the boil bph?
[/quote]
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 01, 2015, 11:44:32 PM
There can be a level of blindness that any brewer can have for their own beer. The 'my beer is good' perception can cloud the real perceptions. I expect that the same can be said for tasters that are friends of the brewer. For that reason, unbiased and blind tasting trials including triangle tests are better tools in determining if a change is an improvement or not.

However, in the absence of that testing rigor, a relative increase in level of satisfaction with your beer still has some merit. Just recognize that there may still be improvement needed.
I tend to be the other way, too critical of my own beer. I'm fine with that too. When I finally get a beer to where I can't find anything I could do to improve it, I lock in that recipe/procedure. After 3 years of brewing that has happened once. I might be about to add two more to the list. Everything else ive ever brewed needs work. The one beer I have nailed down is an APA that took about 8 iterations to finally get right.

I like the blind triangle for proving certain things. But, if I brewed beer x, then wanted to make a change, im not going to brew beer x again with out change and with change just to do a side by side or blind triangle. I already know that I wasn't happy with it as-is. But I could see doing a blind triangle side by side on something like a protein rest, just to prove if there is a difference or what that difference is.
Title: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on December 01, 2015, 11:55:57 PM

Respectfully, Denny, that's nonsense . . . we can and should be able to decide for ourselves . . .

With all due respect, you simply can't do that  . . . I would never claim to be able to make a statement about the differences in beers without a blind triangle tasting.
For hobby brewer, like most of us are, we have to keep an open mind to both sides of the discussion.

Indeed!
There can be a level of blindness that any brewer can have for their own beer. The 'my beer is good' perception can cloud the real perceptions. I expect that the same can be said for tasters that are friends of the brewer. For that reason, unbiased and blind tasting trials including triangle tests are better tools in determining if a change is an improvement or not.

However, in the absence of that testing rigor, a relative increase in level of satisfaction with your beer still has some merit. Just recognize that there may still be improvement needed.
This is fantastic, totally agreed.

I think what we're getting at here is the difference between "feeling" a certain process or ingredient change had an impact and actually being able to detect a difference. I'm skeptical by nature, I doubt everything whether I trust the source or not, myself totally included! This is what makes life interesting to me. By accepting without any evidence other than my memory that a beer I made last week tastes different than the same beer made months earlier save for a change or 2, it's just not enough to satiate my curiosity, and certainly not enough to make me feel comfortable advocating that others do what I did.

This is obviously different for others, and that's cool, I'd just like to see "do this and it'll make your beer better" morph into "here's some decent evidence beyond my anecdotal experience demonstrating this makes a difference."

But that's just me.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 01, 2015, 11:59:28 PM
I'm curious to how the mash ph effects the hops which are in the boil? Is it depending on how the mash ph carries over to effect the boil bph?


I get what you're asking, but mash pH is one of the deciding factors in the character of a beer. Even though the mash is done before the boil, it's effects carry over to the final product. Much like a mash pH on the high end helps soften the edges off of a roasty beer, or a pH on the lower end can help give a crisp, drinkable character to a lager. It all starts in the mash.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: PORTERHAUS on December 02, 2015, 12:01:51 AM
I'm curious to how the mash ph effects the hops which are in the boil? Is it depending on how the mash ph carries over to effect the boil bph?


I get what you're asking, but mash pH is one of the deciding factors in the character of a beer. Even though the mash is done before the boil, it's effects carry over to the final product. Much like a mash pH on the high end helps soften the edges off of a roasty beer, or a pH on the lower end can help give a crisp, drinkable character to a lager. It all starts in the mash.

Thanks I was hoping you would see this among the more important conversations taking place. Makes sense.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: mabrungard on December 02, 2015, 01:31:51 AM
I'm curious to how the mash ph effects the hops which are in the boil? Is it depending on how the mash ph carries over to effect the boil bph?

Mash pH is a very large determinant of kettle wort pH. Kettle wort pH is a strong player in how hops are utilized and perceived in the beer.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Whiskers on December 02, 2015, 05:47:17 AM
Blind triangle testing is far from the only valid methodology.  Like klickitatjim, I'm deeply critical of my own work.  However, when I ditched chlorinated city water I have no doubts that I could notice the lack of chlorophenol.  Didn't need a blind triangle to figure that one out.  It was incredibly obvious.  To this day I still know people who brew with city water and all of their brews show chlorophenol.  There isn't any need to side-by-side with equivalent recipes and one with chloramine city water. 
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 02, 2015, 10:34:49 AM
In my opinion there's a time and place for no blind triangle. Such as trying a new or different hop in an old tried and true recipe. I know I like my APA with cascade and centennial in the whirlpool. So if I try cascade and mandarina bavaria, with the objective being to see if I like mandarina and cascade together, then just make it and see if it's good. But if I want to prove or disprove that mandarina is better in an APA at whirlpool than at 10 minutes, and I want to know that it's true for others not just me? Triangle test it.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dmtaylor on December 02, 2015, 12:30:37 PM
Scientific experiments require discipline and effort.  Most of us just don't give a dang THAT much.  Kudos to those who do.

When I run my own experiments, I do them casually, and typically don't release them as scientific reports, so that other scientists can easily choose to refute my results even while they typically have no formal experimental results to report themselves that makes their beliefs or experience any more relevant than my own.  :P

Plus there are flaws with pretty much every experiment ever run in the history of the universe.  To declare one experiment as gospel would be extremely foolish.

Blind triangles are nice, but most of us will never bother.  And that's fine.  We don't all need to be scientists.

And, as much as some folks hate to hear this, science is NOT the only way to find truth.  It's a great tool, but it's never perfect.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 02, 2015, 07:48:13 PM
It's worth bearing in mind that science experiments can never prove a theory is true - they can only add supportive evidence. Every theory remains open to challenge. In my opinion that's the great strength of science. It doesn't claim certainty in the dogmatic way that religious or political ideologies do, and is inherently democratic.

No point doing triangle tests for things like clarity, carbonation, colour, abv - they're all easy to see or measure. But flavours/aromas are more susceptible to bias.

Having said that, I think triangle tasting tests suffer from one flaw, which is low sensitivity. See the brulosophy xbmt comparing belle saison with safbrew abbaye, for instance -only just scraped statistical significance:

"The fact 2 yeasts intended for different styles produced beers that were reliably distinguishable from each other isn’t all that surprising and confirms what most of us believe– yeast is a huge player in the beer character game. What did surprise me a bit is the number of folks who were unable to tell the beers apart, which included some very experienced craft beer drinkers. Like I mentioned earlier, I was expecting this xBmt to be a slam dunk with a huge majority of tasters accurately selecting the odd-beer-out, which wasn’t the case, significance was reached due to a single response."
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 03, 2015, 12:03:05 AM
Yes it is tempting to generalise, though to be fair quite a few people have raised that point in comments under the experiments and further tests have followed, e.g. the first fermentation temperature experiment (which found no perceptible difference in cold- and warm-fermented beers) was followed by two further fermentation temperature experiments using different yeasts & recipes.

Also it's easy to overlook what statistical significance means. You might reject a hypothesis but you haven't proven it's incorrect. You need to repeat tests to gain any confidence in claiming something is true or false.

I have more confidence in the tests that reject the null hypothesis (i.e. find a difference between the two beers) than the ones that don't, the reason being that wine and beer triangle tests are notorious for failing to find any difference. If you sip one beer quickly after another, the flavours of both are likely to mingle in your nose, and subtle smells can be fleeting sensations at the best of times.
Title: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on December 03, 2015, 12:37:23 AM
But if I want to prove or disprove that mandarina is better in an APA at whirlpool than at 10 minutes, and I want to know that it's true for others not just me? Triangle test it.
Well... it wouldn't be proving anything, just providing evidence that (1) people can distinguish one from the other and (2) a particular set of drinkers prefer one over the other. Good points, regardless!
And, as much as some folks hate to hear this, science is NOT the only way to find truth.  It's a great tool, but it's never perfect.
I'm not sure what other ways there are that come anywhere close to science,  but I certainly respect others believing things I don't... as long as they're nice :)
Title: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: tommymorris on December 03, 2015, 02:00:06 AM
For me homebrewing is more about "The best beer possible with the least effort possible while having the most fun possible" and "Relax don't worry have a homebrew".

I really like reading Brülosopher's exbeeriment results and listening to Denny's podcast. But, I don't want to conduct experiments myself.

In my day job, I conduct research (which is often validated with experimental results) and write long scientific papers. I don't want to do that with my hobby. I just want to drink the beer.

I will say, in my research community (@ work) there are authors I know and trust based on their body of work. When they publish a paper, I accept their results and learn from them. The same is true when reading about homebrewing online. There are many authors here I trust based on their body of work. I don't feel the need to independently verify their results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: PrettyBeard on December 03, 2015, 02:16:09 AM
There are other problems with the triangle thing as well.  Something as simple as pour order can have an effect.  Besides which statistical significance may rely taking into account the range human sensual detection when factoring for your P-value.

Just as an anecdote, here's some quotes from my last beer in a competition, 2 different judges on mouthfeel:

Judge 1: "Medium bodied and very creamy, 'puffy'. No alcohol warmth."
Judge 3: "Moderately low carbonation.  Low warmth, no creaminess."

Both commented on the smokey astringency, as well.  Both were the same rank.  And that's tactile which as far as I know has a good deal less variation then taste or even smell.

FYI: It was a Dunkelweizen with about 66% wheat.  Beer was carbed, by maths, to about 3.2 volumes of CO2 (2.98 volumes of cornsugar + a spoonful of table sugar).  ABV was 6.8%.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: tommymorris on December 03, 2015, 02:29:28 AM

For me homebrewing is more about "The best beer possible with the least effort possible while having the most fun possible" and "Relax don't worry have a homebrew".

I really like reading Brülosopher's exbeeriment results and listening to Denny's podcast. But, I don't want to conduct experiments myself.

In my day job, I conduct research (which is often validated with experimental results) and write long scientific papers. I don't want to do that with my hobby. I just want to drink the beer.

I will say, in my research community (@ work) there are authors I know and trust based on their body of work. When they publish a paper, I accept their results and learn from them. The same is true when reading about homebrewing online. There are many authors here I trust based on their body of work. I don't feel the need to independently verify their results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's all well and good. I would just suggest that you sample a decent amount of the experimenter's beer before you blindly trust what they say.
I think basing trust on a body of work is not blind and not perfect but it is a system that works well for me. For instance, you posted fairly thoroughly about your attempts to brew a Munich Helles. That post and your following discussion in the same thread seemed well informed. Later you sent me some guidance via PM about brewing a Marzen. In that one you quoted several texts and made good points. Between the two, I was impressed and developed a level of respect for your comments.

I would love to try your beer, but, that's difficult. Unless you want to mail me some ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: ynotbrusum on December 03, 2015, 04:08:11 AM
The ideal is attainable, but likely rarely repeatable at the home brew level.  Yeast are living organisms and rarely are exactly the same in different generations, so getting exactly repeatable results for homebrewers is simply beyond the means of most homebrewers. If you are willing to pursue your science to laboratory standards you may get to a level that satisfies your level of reproducible results, but I don't have the resources that I am willing to devote to this hobby.

And the fact that German trained Brewers accept my lagers as extremely good is sufficient for me.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dbeechum on December 03, 2015, 05:18:28 AM
Being the not as sciency experimenter of the podcast, all I can say is that I find the value in the experiments that are being discussed and communicated is several fold.


One of the things we're hoping to get with the podcast setup the way we have is active participation. These results are only generalizable if they've been performed by multiple groups. As a systems engineer, I cringe internally when I see people take as gospel the results of a single test run. Hopefully between Marshall, Denny, myself, our IGORs, etc we'll get enough people tackling a test to see if there's validity to the results across a broader pool of brewers/tasters.

As for basing your knowledge on unblind tastings - I think Denny's objection (if I'm going to put words in my co-author's/host's mouth) is to people acting as authoritative experts without the due diligence.

When we recorded today (for publication next week), one of the things we tackled was the difference in our philosophy on repeatability. I'm not obsessed with it in the same way that Marshall and Denny are so I see these questions as interesting pieces of intellectual "huh"isms and handy to know. I don't think there's a blind triangle test in all of the world to help me design a fluffernutter beer!
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: ynotbrusum on December 03, 2015, 05:29:03 AM
Keep up the good work, Drew.  And please provide clear citations, unlike the lurkers.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Whiskers on December 03, 2015, 08:21:02 AM
I think basing trust on a body of work is not blind and not perfect but it is a system that works well for me. For instance, you posted fairly thoroughly about your attempts to brew a Munich Helles. That post and your following discussion in the same thread seemed well informed. Later you sent me some guidance via PM about brewing a Marzen. In that one you quoted several texts and made good points. Between the two, I was impressed and developed a level of respect for your comments.

Thank you. At the end of the day we all still need to try things for ourselves and find what works to make the beer we like on our own systems.

We're all coming from different perspectives with different goals. The mantra of "The best beer possible with the least effort possible while having the most fun possible" (TBBPWTLEPWHTMFP) and those who preach it is just fine, but it's just another way of saying "Brew beer that's 90% as good as it could be with only 40% of the effort." I think 90% is more than good enough for most homebrewers, and let's be honest - it's better than what a lot of craft breweries make nowadays.

Some of us are trying to get as close to Augustiner, Westvleteren, New Glarus, Russian River, Hill Farmstead, take your pick - as we possibly can. I'm in this camp.

I want to be clear that I truly don't think there is anything at all wrong with following TBBPWTLEPWHTMFP. We all have work, family, and other obligations and it's unreasonable and wrong for everybody in the hobby to be expected to brew like the best pros in the world. A lot of people have a lot of fun brewing darn good beer at home simply, cheaply, and easily, and I really think that's great.

That said, for beer brewed on my own system, Following some of the advice en vogue on the internet has taken me further away from where I'm trying to go. Following advice found in the German brewing textbooks has gotten me closer. The problem is that trying to get to 100% involves making your process more complex, and that can be confusing to newbies and alienating to people who aren't going for 100%. I think that this is one of the major reasons why the guys who advocate TBBPWTLEPWHTMFP preach what they do. They want an inclusive communal environment, and that's respectable. I believe that this is good for the community as a whole! My one and only problem with this is that when the TBBPWTLEPWHTMFP is the zeitgeist, it becomes taboo to talk about what it takes to reach 100%, and sometimes it's even taboo to suggest that this ideal even exists. See the recent helles threads.

I would love to try your beer, but, that's difficult. Unless you want to mail me some ;)

Maybe at NHC.  :)


This is well phrased.  No reason to alienate the ones seeking the geeked out details.  Nothing wrong with RDW but nothing wrong with wanting to take things into the nitty gritty.  I'm solidly in the latter camp myself. 
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 03, 2015, 11:45:23 AM
I think all approaches serve well together. If science was the best way to the exclusion of all others then by now there should be several breweries using "scientifically proven" as their marketing scheme. I prefer a start with creativity, maybe a peek at what others have done, some application of tried and true technique, maybe some tweaking technique to fit my needs, thinking about what I want, thinking about what others might want, scientifically comparing and adjusting, but in the end if no one "likes" whats in the glass, who cares? If I didnt enjoy the process, whats the point?

I dont ask my friends to prove they like the beer I poured for them.

Some of us enjoy the entertainment / pass-time of the forum stuff. Some of us like to try things and see for ourselves. Some live to share what they have learned/experienced/discovered. Some like to refute all of that.

Some people, beleive it or not, dont even know we exist...
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: hopfenundmalz on December 03, 2015, 01:06:32 PM
As I write this I am in a small Bavarian town near the Czech border. I have toured a few small breweries that make excellent beer on rather primitively systems by some standards. They get yeast from other Brewers, as the don't brew enough to maintain the pitch quantities. One seed Weyermann malt, the other used base malt from a Maltster between here and Regensberg - I was not familiar with that one.

The last brewery only brews one beer - an unfiltered Dunlel. They do pretty well in competitions, with a Bronze in the last WBC, and 4 medals in the Eurostar Competition. There are pictures from the brewery tour while they were brewing on my Facebook page. The Brewery is Brāuerie Eck in Böbrach, Bayern.

My take is that the whole ingredient and procedure chain has to be correct, and you do it as you have learned on your system. The last brewery does a double decoction on a direct fired kettle, as that is the way they have been doing it, and the way his father did it.

Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brewday on December 03, 2015, 06:25:51 PM
As for basing your knowledge on unblind tastings - I think Denny's objection (if I'm going to put words in my co-author's/host's mouth) is to people acting as authoritative experts without the due diligence.

Since Denny's objection was directed at my comments, I find this statement to be both confusing and frustrating.  Care to clarify?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dbeechum on December 03, 2015, 08:52:32 PM

Since Denny's objection was directed at my comments, I find this statement to be both confusing and frustrating.  Care to clarify?

Hmm not trying to be unclear. My guess (and of course Denny will clarify) is that to Denny there's an objective quality to 'knowing a truth' and to him the only way to do that is to test. Without testing you only have your subjective truth and a lot of people act as experts on that basis.

But in reality this is a hobby with a lot of practices that will yield success and a lot of it is artistry. I think people get obsessed with the objective truth but that's why my form of brewing personality is different from Denny's and Marshall's and probably yours too.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 03, 2015, 09:03:41 PM

Since Denny's objection was directed at my comments, I find this statement to be both confusing and frustrating.  Care to clarify?

Hmm not trying to be unclear. My guess (and of course Denny will clarify) is that to Denny there's an objective quality to 'knowing a truth' and to him the only way to do that is to test. Without testing you only have your subjective truth and a lot of people act as experts on that basis.

But in reality this is a hobby with a lot of practices that will yield success and a lot of it is artistry. I think people get obsessed with the objective truth but that's why my form of brewing personality is different from Denny's and Marshall's and probably yours too.
Great way of putting it, objective vs subjective. Again, I think both are important. If you are seeking improvement its very helpful to analyze your beer with an objective view, but in the end the whole point of beer is purely subjective.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 03, 2015, 09:51:32 PM

Since Denny's objection was directed at my comments, I find this statement to be both confusing and frustrating.  Care to clarify?

Hmm not trying to be unclear. My guess (and of course Denny will clarify) is that to Denny there's an objective quality to 'knowing a truth' and to him the only way to do that is to test. Without testing you only have your subjective truth and a lot of people act as experts on that basis.

But in reality this is a hobby with a lot of practices that will yield success and a lot of it is artistry. I think people get obsessed with the objective truth but that's why my form of brewing personality is different from Denny's and Marshall's and probably yours too.
Great way of putting it, objective vs subjective. Again, I think both are important. If you are seeking improvement its very helpful to analyze your beer with an objective view, but in the end the whole point of beer is purely subjective.

Yep, except for one thing.."truth" isn't subjective.  That's opinion.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 03, 2015, 10:40:21 PM

Since Denny's objection was directed at my comments, I find this statement to be both confusing and frustrating.  Care to clarify?

Hmm not trying to be unclear. My guess (and of course Denny will clarify) is that to Denny there's an objective quality to 'knowing a truth' and to him the only way to do that is to test. Without testing you only have your subjective truth and a lot of people act as experts on that basis.

But in reality this is a hobby with a lot of practices that will yield success and a lot of it is artistry. I think people get obsessed with the objective truth but that's why my form of brewing personality is different from Denny's and Marshall's and probably yours too.
Great way of putting it, objective vs subjective. Again, I think both are important. If you are seeking improvement its very helpful to analyze your beer with an objective view, but in the end the whole point of beer is purely subjective.

Yep, except for one thing.."truth" isn't subjective.  That's opinion.
To a scientist maybe, but not in court. The engraving above the judges bench in our superior court says " Truth is the foundation of justice." I always want to add "unfortunately, we only deal with facts". Facts are objective, truth however is the subjective understanding and acceptance of the meaning of those facts. Im sure you've heard "what's true for me may not be true to you", thats how it works. We dont convict on facts... we convict on how twelve peers interpret their understanding of the facts. Truth...

In the end, the same is true and a fact about beer. Beer is to be enjoyed and perhaps interpreted by people based on their own experience. Subjectivity. If they like it, hate it, loose their minds over it, that is their truth about that beer. Some expert may have examined it and put it to the best test and received peer review, but the opinion or truth of the person with the beer in their glass is all that matters.

Fact is objective
Truth is subjective
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 03, 2015, 11:03:04 PM

Since Denny's objection was directed at my comments, I find this statement to be both confusing and frustrating.  Care to clarify?

Hmm not trying to be unclear. My guess (and of course Denny will clarify) is that to Denny there's an objective quality to 'knowing a truth' and to him the only way to do that is to test. Without testing you only have your subjective truth and a lot of people act as experts on that basis.

But in reality this is a hobby with a lot of practices that will yield success and a lot of it is artistry. I think people get obsessed with the objective truth but that's why my form of brewing personality is different from Denny's and Marshall's and probably yours too.
Great way of putting it, objective vs subjective. Again, I think both are important. If you are seeking improvement its very helpful to analyze your beer with an objective view, but in the end the whole point of beer is purely subjective.

Yep, except for one thing.."truth" isn't subjective.  That's opinion.
To a scientist maybe, but not in court. The engraving above the judges bench in our superior court says " Truth is the foundation of justice." I always want to add "unfortunately, we only deal with facts". Facts are objective, truth however is the subjective understanding and acceptance of the meaning of those facts. Im sure you've heard "what's true for me may not be true to you", thats how it works. We dont convict on facts... we convict on how twelve peers interpret their understanding of the facts. Truth...

In the end, the same is true and a fact about beer. Beer is to be enjoyed and perhaps interpreted by people based on their own experience. Subjectivity. If they like it, hate it, loose their minds over it, that is their truth about that beer. Some expert may have examined it and put it to the best test and received peer review, but the opinion or truth of the person with the beer in their glass is all that matters.

Fact is objective
Truth is subjective

I'm glad scientists don't use the legal definition of truth.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Jeffinn on December 03, 2015, 11:19:27 PM
In the end, the same is true and a fact about beer. Beer is to be enjoyed and perhaps interpreted by people based on their own experience. Subjectivity. If they like it, hate it, loose their minds over it, that is their truth about that beer. Some expert may have examined it and put it to the best test and received peer review, but the opinion or truth of the person with the beer in their glass is all that matters.

Fact is objective
Truth is subjective

Amen to that brother! :)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brewday on December 04, 2015, 01:30:46 AM
As for basing your knowledge on unblind tastings - I think Denny's objection (if I'm going to put words in my co-author's/host's mouth) is to people acting as authoritative experts without the due diligence.


Since Denny's objection was directed at my comments, I find this statement to be both confusing and frustrating.  Care to clarify?

Hmm not trying to be unclear. My guess (and of course Denny will clarify) is that to Denny there's an objective quality to 'knowing a truth' and to him the only way to do that is to test. Without testing you only have your subjective truth and a lot of people act as experts on that basis.

But in reality this is a hobby with a lot of practices that will yield success and a lot of it is artistry. I think people get obsessed with the objective truth but that's why my form of brewing personality is different from Denny's and Marshall's and probably yours too.
Great way of putting it, objective vs subjective. Again, I think both are important. If you are seeking improvement its very helpful to analyze your beer with an objective view, but in the end the whole point of beer is purely subjective.

Yep, except for one thing.."truth" isn't subjective.  That's opinion.

Clear as mud.

Denny/Drew:  Let's cut the crap.  I don't pretend to be an authoritative expert on anything.  Read through my comments again.  I'm merely saying that I made a change, and as a result my beers improved, that they went from point A to point B.  I stand by that.  That doesn't mean I'm finished trying to improve them, or that I'm finished exploring new ideas, or finished seeking the wisdom of true experts such as yourselves.  I work hard to improve my brewing.  When I believe I have accomplished that in some way, notwithstanding an absence of rigorous testing, it does not mean that I'm acting like an authoritative expert without due diligence.  That's insulting.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 04, 2015, 01:49:48 AM

Since Denny's objection was directed at my comments, I find this statement to be both confusing and frustrating.  Care to clarify?

Hmm not trying to be unclear. My guess (and of course Denny will clarify) is that to Denny there's an objective quality to 'knowing a truth' and to him the only way to do that is to test. Without testing you only have your subjective truth and a lot of people act as experts on that basis.

But in reality this is a hobby with a lot of practices that will yield success and a lot of it is artistry. I think people get obsessed with the objective truth but that's why my form of brewing personality is different from Denny's and Marshall's and probably yours too.
Great way of putting it, objective vs subjective. Again, I think both are important. If you are seeking improvement its very helpful to analyze your beer with an objective view, but in the end the whole point of beer is purely subjective.

Yep, except for one thing.."truth" isn't subjective.  That's opinion.
To a scientist maybe, but not in court. The engraving above the judges bench in our superior court says " Truth is the foundation of justice." I always want to add "unfortunately, we only deal with facts". Facts are objective, truth however is the subjective understanding and acceptance of the meaning of those facts. Im sure you've heard "what's true for me may not be true to you", thats how it works. We dont convict on facts... we convict on how twelve peers interpret their understanding of the facts. Truth...

In the end, the same is true and a fact about beer. Beer is to be enjoyed and perhaps interpreted by people based on their own experience. Subjectivity. If they like it, hate it, loose their minds over it, that is their truth about that beer. Some expert may have examined it and put it to the best test and received peer review, but the opinion or truth of the person with the beer in their glass is all that matters.

Fact is objective
Truth is subjective

I'm glad scientists don't use the legal definition of truth.
Im not certain, but in a way science does understand the difference. One beleives something to be true... hypothesis. Then goes about proving it to be a sort of fact called a theory. Its kind of similar, seems like anyway. I find ot interesting that when science has irrefutable evidence they still call it a theory. It seems science leaves room for doubt, though in our daily jargon we refer to things as "scientific" as though that leaves no room for doubt.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Phil_M on December 04, 2015, 02:00:45 AM
Im not certain, but in a way science does understand the difference. One beleives something to be true... hypothesis. Then goes about proving it to be a sort of fact called a theory. Its kind of similar, seems like anyway. I find ot interesting that when science has irrefutable evidence they still call it a theory. It seems science leaves room for doubt, though in our daily jargon we refer to things as "scientific" as though that leaves no room for doubt.

That's how I see it. If you don't believe in gravity that doesn't mean it's not there.

IDK if you'd call me a scientist or not, with half an engineering degree and a job as a senior technician.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: PrettyBeard on December 04, 2015, 03:47:21 AM
Im not certain, but in a way science does understand the difference. One beleives something to be true... hypothesis. Then goes about proving it to be a sort of fact called a theory. Its kind of similar, seems like anyway. I find ot interesting that when science has irrefutable evidence they still call it a theory. It seems science leaves room for doubt, though in our daily jargon we refer to things as "scientific" as though that leaves no room for doubt.

That's how I see it. If you don't believe in gravity that doesn't mean it's not there.

IDK if you'd call me a scientist or not, with half an engineering degree and a job as a senior technician.

Believing in gravity doesn't mean it is actually there either.  It's simply the best model we have to fit the observable phenomena.  Science is inherently subject to faith in observation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle)), and causality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#Possibility_of_retrocausality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser#Possibility_of_retrocausality)).  It is also always up for review.

In other words, interprect the data how you want, but more data points are always good.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 04, 2015, 04:54:00 AM
The analogy is getting confused. Isn't gravity a fact? What causes it or effects it may or may not be nailed down perfectly, but things with mass that get close enough to earth do fall prey to gravity. Not believing in gravity is what we call delusional. To draw it back on track, a hypothesis might be something like "i beleive the moon will fall to earth in 2 billion years". Then you gather fatcs like gravity, speed of the moon's orbit, measured decay of orbit, etc until you can change it from hypothesis to theory. Then its the job of other scientists to defeat the theory. If they cant... and the moon smashes into the earth, its a fact.

In this thread, before we wander entirely into the weeds, grain is a fact, ph is a fact, contact time is a fact, etc. If I like the beer better one way or another, or equally the same, that is truth. No matter how many people agree or disagree, its still truth. And that is why I am saying that the final end point of beer is not science, its a personal experience.

Take decoction for example, to beat that crippled horse. If science gathers facts indicating that 99.99% of people can not tell the difference, that one guy in a thousand who can tell a difference... to him, it makes a difference.  If you were considering cost as a commercial brewer, id certainty consider that my profits wont suffer by losing that one customer. But we are mostly homebrewers. Who cares. Do it Gordons way. Or dont. Do a blind triangle. Or dont. Your beer matters only to you.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dbeechum on December 04, 2015, 05:47:55 AM
That's insulting.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to be insulting, I was trying to offer my view on how process geeks like Denny think.

I find the experiments and what not being done fascinating from a perspective of trying to build up a better base of "knowledge" than what we've had in the tales and practices handed down. The experiments make the "wisdom" more trustworthy than "do it this way because that's what some dork in LA does".

Does it mean I don't brew for myself? Nah, that's way too Teutonic for me. Brew to make yourself happy, it's what I do. Seriously, Saturday I'm brewing some Saison strain experiments and my first attempt at a fluffernutter beer. One half experiment, one half "experiment"
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 04, 2015, 09:37:15 AM
Im not certain, but in a way science does understand the difference. One beleives something to be true... hypothesis. Then goes about proving it to be a sort of fact called a theory. Its kind of similar, seems like anyway. I find ot interesting that when science has irrefutable evidence they still call it a theory. It seems science leaves room for doubt, though in our daily jargon we refer to things as "scientific" as though that leaves no room for doubt.

You're very nearly right but using the words in the wrong way. Scientists never set out to prove something. Lawyers like the word proof and claim to prove guilt/innocence, but science doesn't work that way and never claims to have established certain truth. A hypothesis isn't the truth, it's a guess at what the truth might be. Experiments try to knock it down (scientists have no respect for authority, at least in theory). If it stands up, your confidence in it increases. It's it stands up after hundreds/thousands of tests, like a bridge that thousands of people have crossed, you consider it safe. But you can never actually prove it's safe and the truth is never fully established. Likewise there's no irrefutable proof that Earth orbits the Sun, that atoms exist, that gravity works on undiscovered planets, and so on, but we can be sufficiently confident about those claims to call them facts.

Back to the exbeeriments - they provide evidence that anecdotal claims made by homebrewers are likely to be, putting it politely, mistaken. The mash capping exbeeriment doesn't prove that capping the mash is a waste of time, but it certainly suggests it. If you presented the evidence to a jury and they decided capping the mash doesn't work as claimed, that might amount to legal proof would it wouldn't amount to scientific proof.

As has been pointed out lots of times, homebrewers are prone to bias. Huge amounts of it. How many times have you read that using a brew fridge/treating water/boiling 90 minutes/crash cooling/fill in blank has taken someone's beer "to the next level". The only way to test to those claims is with empirical evidence and blind tasting tests are probably the best way to do that, flawed though they might be. Subjective opinion may work a lot of the time, but it's not robust enough to back up the kinds of claims brewers keep making online.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Phil_M on December 04, 2015, 11:51:26 AM
You're very nearly right but using the words in the wrong way. Scientists never set out to prove something. Lawyers like the word proof and claim to prove guilt/innocence, but science doesn't work that way and never claims to have established certain truth. A hypothesis isn't the truth, it's a guess at what the truth might be. Experiments try to knock it down (scientists have no respect for authority, at least in theory). If it stands up, your confidence in it increases. It's it stands up after hundreds/thousands of tests, like a bridge that thousands of people have crossed, you consider it safe. But you can never actually prove it's safe and the truth is never fully established. Likewise there's no irrefutable proof that Earth orbits the Sun, that atoms exist, that gravity works on undiscovered planets, and so on, but we can be sufficiently confident about those claims to call them facts.

Perhaps I put too much faith in engineering models and testing, but I do consider a bridge like you describe to be proven safe. Take a 747 in flight and scrub it of all airspeed-it's a true statement that it will fall like a brick, at least till it builds up enough airspeed to fly again. While the models and methods of science and engineering may not be perfectly true, definitive, quantifiable test results are. If they weren't, I wouldn't have a job...
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 04, 2015, 01:18:02 PM
Perhaps I put too much faith in engineering models and testing, but I do consider a bridge like you describe to be proven safe. Take a 747 in flight and scrub it of all airspeed-it's a true statement that it will fall like a brick, at least till it builds up enough airspeed to fly again. While the models and methods of science and engineering may not be perfectly true, definitive, quantifiable test results are. If they weren't, I wouldn't have a job...

Tahoma Narrows? Absolute proof isn't possible by inductive reasoning - you can never say a bridge is 100% safe. Philosophers call this the "problem of induction". But for practical purposes you don't need absolute proof, just sufficient confidence. Most scientific research happens on the fringe of knowledge, where there are widely varying degrees of certainty. Engineering is applied science based on laws of physics that have stood the test to time and now considered fact, so engineers tend to be more certain about things than scientists.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on December 04, 2015, 02:26:08 PM
There are other problems with the triangle thing as well.  Something as simple as pour order can have an effect.  Besides which statistical significance may rely taking into account the range human sensual detection when factoring for your P-value.

Just as an anecdote...

I don't know of a data collection or statistical method that has no flaws, and I'm certain dudes like Denny, Drew, and the Brülosophy crew have never claimed the triangle test to be perfect. But it's the best we've got and what I'll continue to use until something better comes along.

And it's certainly better than anecdote.

With all due respect, using something like pour order to minimize the results seems a touch desperate, to me.
We're all coming from different perspectives with different goals. The mantra of "The best beer possible with the least effort possible while having the most fun possible" (TBBPWTLEPWHTMFP) and those who preach it is just fine, but it's just another way of saying "Brew beer that's 90% as good as it could be with only 40% of the effort." I think 90% is more than good enough for most homebrewers, and let's be honest - it's better than what a lot of craft breweries make nowadays.

Some of us are trying to get as close to Augustiner, Westvleteren, New Glarus, Russian River, Hill Farmstead, take your pick - as we possibly can. I'm in this camp.

I want to be clear that I truly don't think there is anything at all wrong with following TBBPWTLEPWHTMFP. We all have work, family, and other obligations and it's unreasonable and wrong for everybody in the hobby to be expected to brew like the best pros in the world. A lot of people have a lot of fun brewing darn good beer at home simply, cheaply, and easily, and I really think that's great.

That said, for beer brewed on my own system, Following some of the advice en vogue on the internet has taken me further away from where I'm trying to go. Following advice found in the German brewing textbooks has gotten me closer. The problem is that trying to get to 100% involves making your process more complex, and that can be confusing to newbies and alienating to people who aren't going for 100%. I think that this is one of the major reasons why the guys who advocate TBBPWTLEPWHTMFP preach what they do. They want an inclusive communal environment, and that's respectable. I believe that this is good for the community as a whole! My one and only problem with this is that when the TBBPWTLEPWHTMFP is the zeitgeist, it becomes taboo to talk about what it takes to reach 100%, and sometimes it's even taboo to suggest that this ideal even exists. See the recent helles threads.
Your opinion that simpler brewing will only get one's beer to 90% seems a bit presumptuous. I'd contend many of the non-simple practices people engage are unnecessary remnants of our less informed past. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm okay with that, but I've had very simply made beer that was more than 90%.

Your personal dedication to replicating beers that already exist is respectable, as is the way you approach doing it. Who cares what the zeitgeist is, it doesn't impact your brewing unless you allow it to. Though again, your version of 100% is completely subjective and the opinion that one can't reach that elusive point using simpler methods comes across slightly self-righteous. Imagine if someone like me said something like, "You can't make the best beer unless you do what I do!" Oh, the s***storm!

Cheers!
This is absolutely, positively huge. When I give myself blind taste tests between different batches I've made, I need to completely cleanse my palette with water and crackers or popcorn or something between sips. The flavor of a beer lingers long after I swallow it.

To be clear, they aren't blind taste tests if you're giving them to yourself and you're aware of the independent variable/s.

Clear as mud.

Denny/Drew:  Let's cut the crap.  I don't pretend to be an authoritative expert on anything.  Read through my comments again.  I'm merely saying that I made a change, and as a result my beers improved, that they went from point A to point B.  I stand by that.  That doesn't mean I'm finished trying to improve them, or that I'm finished exploring new ideas, or finished seeking the wisdom of true experts such as yourselves.  I work hard to improve my brewing.  When I believe I have accomplished that in some way, notwithstanding an absence of rigorous testing, it does not mean that I'm acting like an authoritative expert without due diligence.  That's insulting.

I don't think they're referring directly to you, but the general propensity to rely on what someone in authority says despite a significant lack of evidence, and the subsequent defensiveness when the adopted methods get called into question.

You can swear your beer has improved because of changes you made, and if to you it has, that's great! But it's subjective and based on your own anecdotal experience, which isn't an issue at all...

Until you start trying to convince others that the changes you made will improve their beer. It's this use of anecdote as fact that dudes like me are interested in moving away from. I've made it my hobby, in fact.

Getting insulted over this crap suggests perhaps a bit too much emotional investment.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 04, 2015, 02:49:43 PM
Much well said Marshall. By the way, I tried your quick ferment method with my last pair of lagers. Grain to keg in two weeks including crashing and gell fining. Worked awesome... for me. And I'll sleep just fine at night whether anyone else adopts the method or not.

But thanks for sharing that because it sure helped improve my beer
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 04, 2015, 02:55:20 PM
Much well said Marshall. By the way, I tried your quick ferment method with my last pair of lagers. Grain to keg in two weeks including crashing and gell fining. Worked awesome... for me. And I'll sleep just fine at night whether anyone else adopts the method or not.

But thanks for sharing that because it sure helped improve my beer

Same here. I read about Tasty McDole doing it and tried it, and before long Marshall was posting about it. Just works great.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 04, 2015, 03:01:49 PM
Right on. I give Marshall all the cred because thats where I saw it. As with many things... nothing new under the sun. If I recall I think Marshall credits McDole and Narziss (sp?). In any event, its MY method now!
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 04, 2015, 03:05:34 PM
And the Germans were doing it long before either of them bought their first ale pail.

For sure, I get that. I read of Tasty's method and tried it before knowing that it went back to Narziss (or earlier).
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: toby on December 04, 2015, 03:32:18 PM
Scientists never set out to prove something.

Except they do, in the more archaic sense of the word, i.e. "The exception that proves the rule" or "a mathematical proof".  ;)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Joe Sr. on December 04, 2015, 04:17:25 PM
You're very nearly right but using the words in the wrong way.

As has been pointed out lots of times, homebrewers are prone to bias. Huge amounts of it.

Something has been bothering me about this thread and the "objective" and "subjective" discussion, but the words escaped me until your post.

Denny's tests aren't an attempt at making an objective analysis of beer or process.  They're an attempt at making an unbiased analysis.

Beer, as Jim has pointed out, is inherently subjective since we all taste and experience it differently.  If you wanted an objective analysis, you'd need to have a lab analysis and the usefulness of that is debatable.  Paraphrasing Denny, we drink the beer not the numbers.

I think that testing processes is great, and all you guys who do it and record it are helping all of us (or most of us).  But I also believe that Brewday is correct that there are certain improvements you can make to your process or brewing that have a clear and indisputable benefit.  That benefit may not be broadly applicable to other systems, but when you've improved your beer you generally know it.

Take the shaken, not stirred, starter approach.  Denny recorded his first experience using it and said that it he thought it produced a better Noti Brown (did I get that right?  Maybe it was a different beer) than he had made previously in many many batches.  I think that right there tells you that even though we're all biased, clear improvements are obvious.  But maybe I'm reading too much into or misremembering that experiment.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 04, 2015, 04:19:14 PM
Scientists never set out to prove something.

Except they do, in the more archaic sense of the word, i.e. "The exception that proves the rule" or "a mathematical proof".  ;)

The archaic meaning of prove is test, so the expression really means "the exception that tests the rule". It sort of sums up the scientific method, which is about using predictions to test hypotheses.

Maths is different as it uses deductive logic, not inductive logic. Yes you can prove a mathematical theorem is 100% true without problem and it will always be true. You can't do that with a scientific theory. Unless you're a lawyer. ;)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 04, 2015, 04:29:51 PM
Denny's tests aren't an attempt at making an objective analysis of beer or process.  They're an attempt at making an unbiased analysis.

Yes exactly.

Beer, as Jim has pointed out, is inherently subjective since we all taste and experience it differently.

Oft said but not necessarily true. Physiologically we're all similar. Our brains run a lot of the same circuits. There are differences between us but the similarities are probably greater. If lots of people like the same beer, it's probably more than a coincidence.

But I also believe that Brewday is correct that there are certain improvements you can make to your process or brewing that have a clear and indisputable benefit.  That benefit may not be broadly applicable to other systems, but when you've improved your beer you generally know it.

Take the shaken, not stirred, starter approach.  Denny recorded his first experience using it and said that it he thought it produced a better Noti Brown (did I get that right?  Maybe it was a different beer) than he had made previously in many many batches.  I think that right there tells you that even though we're all biased, clear improvements are obvious.  But maybe I'm reading too much into or misremembering that experiment.

Sure there are lots of things brewers can do that make measurable or perciptible improvements to beer, but there are probably at least as many things that we delude ourselves about. We overestimate our own abilities all the time, including the ability to notice a difference. Then we go online and tell people they need to buy a brew fridge/use kettle finings/ferment cold whatever because it made our beer so great.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 04, 2015, 04:43:14 PM
I think that testing processes is great, and all you guys who do it and record it are helping all of us (or most of us).  But I also believe that Brewday is correct that there are certain improvements you can make to your process or brewing that have a clear and indisputable benefit.  That benefit may not be broadly applicable to other systems, but when you've improved your beer you generally know it.



I agree with all of this. I appreciate and look forward to the results of all the testing done here. And the triangles definitely have their place, in terms of comparing different processes, ingredients, conventional wisdom. But I agree that some improvements are just pretty self-evident. Like back when I stopped pitching a single smack pack and made starters, got temp control, learned to control pH, started buying vacuum sealed hops instead of LHBS hops from the jar, etc. Those changes made drastically better beer that didn't need a verification test.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Joe Sr. on December 04, 2015, 04:45:06 PM
Beer, as Jim has pointed out, is inherently subjective since we all taste and experience it differently.

Oft said but not necessarily true. Physiologically we're all similar. Our brains run a lot of the same circuits. There are differences between us but the similarities are probably greater. If lots of people like the same beer, it's probably more than a coincidence.

Yes, but even a single individual will perceive flavors differently on different occasions depending on any number of factors (perhaps you have a cold, perhaps you're depressed, etc.).  Perhaps you can get close to objectivity with enough data points, but each individual taster in a triangle test (or whatever) is reporting their subjective experience.  For most of the analyses we're discussing, I don't think you have enough data points to eliminate the subjectivity.  But you can eliminate the bias.

Sure there are lots of things brewers can do that make measurable or perciptible improvements to beer, but there are probably at least as many things that we delude ourselves about. We overestimate our own abilities all the time, including the ability to notice a difference. Then we go online and tell people they need to buy a brew fridge/use kettle finings/ferment cold whatever because it made our beer so great.

No doubt.  I think there's a continuum from truly obvious improvements to those that maybe we think are so due to bias.  The truly obvious ones (such as not using water with chlorine) aren't ones we wind up discussing so much.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: toby on December 04, 2015, 04:47:04 PM
The archaic meaning of prove is test, so the expression really means "the exception that tests the rule". It sort of sums up the scientific method, which is about using predictions to test hypotheses.

Exactly my point.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 04, 2015, 04:49:22 PM
To a scientist maybe, but not in court. The engraving above the judges bench in our superior court says " Truth is the foundation of justice." I always want to add "unfortunately, we only deal with facts". Facts are objective, truth however is the subjective understanding and acceptance of the meaning of those facts. Im sure you've heard "what's true for me may not be true to you", thats how it works. We dont convict on facts... we convict on how twelve peers interpret their understanding of the facts. Truth...

In the end, the same is true and a fact about beer. Beer is to be enjoyed and perhaps interpreted by people based on their own experience. Subjectivity. If they like it, hate it, loose their minds over it, that is their truth about that beer. Some expert may have examined it and put it to the best test and received peer review, but the opinion or truth of the person with the beer in their glass is all that matters.

Fact is objective
Truth is subjective

I pretty much agree with all of that....although I'm glad we're not in court.  It's obvious that there are 2 ways to evaluate a beer...subjectively, as in "is this a good beer".  And objectively as in "did the change I made have an effect on the beer".  When I make a change in a beer and I want to know if it worked, I go for the latter.  When I want ot just sit down and enjoy a beer, it's the former. As I say in my seminars, there's a difference between tasting and drinking. At least for me.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: mchrispen on December 04, 2015, 04:50:57 PM
Quote
As I say in my seminars, there's a difference between tasting and drinking. At least for me.

You should really write a book about that! :)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 04, 2015, 04:54:42 PM
Quote
As I say in my seminars, there's a difference between tasting and drinking. At least for me.

You should really write a book about that! :)
[/quote

Good idea! ;)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 04, 2015, 05:27:31 PM
As many times as you both harp about this being a hobby, it's a business for you now, and you naturally have an agenda to discredit anybody who threatens your value proposition.


While it has become a business, to say that we have an agenda to discredit those who disagree is not only untrue, it's insulting.  My only agenda is to see if I can help homebrewers make better beer with less effort while having a great time doing it.  If people want to pay me to deliver that message, so be it.  But it's the message, not the money (if you knew how little it is you'd change your mind!) that's the reason for what I do.  To imply otherwise shows you have no idea of who I am.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 04, 2015, 05:35:53 PM
I find it amusing that the same people who criticize brewers that make a profit from trying to HELP brewers improve also belong to the 'Wouldn't You Like To Know' club that tells people to go find their own damn info in $200 German texts. I call BS.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: toby on December 04, 2015, 05:38:15 PM
No, you've made it your business, same as Denny and Drew. You're marketing Brulosophy branded kits and t-shirts. Denny and Drew are marketing a book. Brulosophy and Experimental Homebrewing have become products which you, Denny, and others are marketing to make money.  Providing Ninkasi award winning recipes was the value proposition that Gordon and Jamil used to market their books. "Mythbusting" has become yours. As many times as you both harp about this being a hobby, it's a business for you now, and you naturally have an agenda to discredit anybody who threatens your value proposition.

How much money do you think they're making from this?  Seriously.  Books (at least homebrewing books) are not exactly a method to get rich (even slowly) for authors, generally speaking.  It's not like there's a market for film rights.  Brewing Classic Styles: The Movie!
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 04, 2015, 05:44:18 PM
But it's the message, not the money (if you knew how little it is you'd change your mind!) that's the reason for what I do.  To imply otherwise shows you have no idea of who I am.

I got a copy so you'll get your 3 cents royalty from me. It was a fun read, more entertaining than any of my other brewing books.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Joe Sr. on December 04, 2015, 05:49:01 PM
I find it amusing that the same people who criticize brewers that make a profit from trying to HELP brewers improve also belong to the 'Wouldn't You Like To Know' club that tells people to go find their own damn info in $200 German texts. I call BS.

To be fair, I think you're tarring techbrau with the rabeb brush.

There's only one poster I've seen who is entirely churlish and acts like they have secrets no one else will ever learn.  And refuses to share anything.

I don't read every post, but I think techbrau and KitB have added constructively to a number of threads.  The other one, not so much.
Title: ;)
Post by: denny on December 04, 2015, 05:53:23 PM
But it's the message, not the money (if you knew how little it is you'd change your mind!) that's the reason for what I do.  To imply otherwise shows you have no idea of who I am.

I got a copy so you'll get your 3 cents royalty from me. It was a fun read, more entertaining than any of my other brewing books.

Thanks!  Actually it's 80 cents, so my retirement is secure!  ;)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 04, 2015, 05:56:32 PM
I find it amusing that the same people who criticize brewers that make a profit from trying to HELP brewers improve also belong to the 'Wouldn't You Like To Know' club that tells people to go find their own damn info in $200 German texts. I call BS.

To be fair, I think you're tarring techbrau with the rabeb brush.

There's only one poster I've seen who is entirely churlish and acts like they have secrets no one else will ever learn.  And refuses to share anything.

I don't read every post, but I think techbrau and KitB have added constructively to a number of threads.  The other one, not so much.

You're right, I wasn't being totally fair. It just seems there's been a lot of focus on somebody making a few bucks by trying to help brewers from people who, by and large, want to withhold most or all of their info. I do realize there have been different levels of positive interaction from some.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: Joe Sr. on December 04, 2015, 06:00:15 PM
I find it amusing that the same people who criticize brewers that make a profit from trying to HELP brewers improve also belong to the 'Wouldn't You Like To Know' club that tells people to go find their own damn info in $200 German texts. I call BS.

To be fair, I think you're tarring techbrau with the rabeb brush.

There's only one poster I've seen who is entirely churlish and acts like they have secrets no one else will ever learn.  And refuses to share anything.

I don't read every post, but I think techbrau and KitB have added constructively to a number of threads.  The other one, not so much.

You're right, I wasn't being totally fair. It just seems there's been a lot of focus on somebody making a few bucks by trying to help brewers from people who, by and large, want to withhold most or all of their info. I do realize there have been different levels of positive interaction from some.

Cool. And to be totally fair across the board, Denny shares pretty much everything here for free.  He's not saying "Don't ask me, go buy the book."

Now, I haven't bought the book so I can't say for sure that he shares everything.  But in my experience over the years, he's been pretty open.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dbeechum on December 04, 2015, 09:43:18 PM
Yeah, there's a funny thought in the world that if you've published a book, you're making a ton of money. If I calculate out all the money I've made from all of the writing/recording projects and the number of hours spent putting it all together, I'm well under the federal minimum wage for tipped employees. It equates to a mildly compensated hobby with a ton of work for me.

All I know is I like homebrewing and talking about homebrewing. It's fun and generally friendly.

You imply that your methods can make beer as good or better than any other methods, and that anybody who isn't using your methods is wasting their time and effort. Denny doesn't just imply it like you do, he pretty much comes out and says it at every opportunity.

I think this is an uncharitable read on what Denny says. He's sure as hell opinionated and isn't shy about giving his opinion and why he thinks he's right, but read our stuff and listen and you'll hear us reinforce again and again that you should brew how you want. We're just trying to present you with options that we think work best.

You want to see Denny go nanas? Watch him when I tell him about something I'm planning on brewing like the Clam Chowdah.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: BrewingRover on December 04, 2015, 09:49:09 PM
You want to see Denny go nanas? Watch him when I tell him about something I'm planning on brewing like the Clam Chowdah.

Does that have Fuggles and a triple-decoction?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: dbeechum on December 04, 2015, 09:56:26 PM
I do have it in the back of my mind to try and make a Fuggle beer that surprises Denny, but he might revolt worse than he did with the Chowdah or White Stout recipes.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: ynotbrusum on December 04, 2015, 11:22:20 PM
This really long thread has shown how homebrewers come from all kinds of backgrounds...often with the biases that inherently come from same.  We need to be mindful of the possibility, at a minimum.  I think this is much like when I tried to talk to my dad about clothing colors clashing or working well.  As a colorblind person, he appreciated the concept, but try as he might, he couldn't coordinate an outfit without assistance. 

Objectively, subjectively, proven or merely suspected, I think the discussion in this thread was well said and as long as we try to be friendly and not get too upset (or intentionally work to get others upset), the discussion has merit and furthers our collective understandings -  a good thing, I should think.  But in the great scheme of things, we should be mindful that we are limited in many ways and sometimes subject to limitations that we simply cannot personally get over/by/through and others may be able to do so.  If my neighbor doesn't detect diacetyl, his butter bomb Scotty tastes great to him and subjectively it really does; if he wants others to like it, he needs to take further measures to limit the diacetyl.  It can be measured, I suspect, objectively with some scientific device, which will help my neighbor brew better, but without the instrument, he will simply have to rely to some degree on the palates of others, however flawed that might be. 

P.S. I'm a late add dark malt guy, but I acknowledge the fact that I do so without certainty of effect.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 04, 2015, 11:24:43 PM
Really well said.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 04, 2015, 11:36:42 PM
?...late add dark malt guy? What's that got to do with this thread?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: mchrispen on December 05, 2015, 12:13:18 AM
That reminds me...

Hey Hoosierbrew, you never confirmed... that dark hair of yours - it is from a full mash, vorlauf addition or a cold steep of black malt? :) Don't lie - I think you said you have kids... so has to be some grey showing by now.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on December 05, 2015, 12:21:55 AM
If only I knew how to do the quoting thing as well as others...

I suppose there are instances where things I've said may have come across a way other than I intended. I'm not sure that's avoidable. Not to get to defensive, but I spend a considerable amount of time overtly telling people that my data is not the final word, that other methods are just as good, and to do what they enjoy most. I absolutely appreciate less time consuming processes, especially when it has no noticeable impact on the quality of my beer, but I will never insinuate that people who do it differently are wasting their time.

Because I don't care.

It doesn't bother me or hurt my feelings that people do things differently than me, I actually sort of like it. Makes things interesting.

All the talk about Brülosophy being a business got me. Not just because the whole "making money off of a hobby" argument is extremely banal, but because... well...

I'm not really profiting off of it. Allow me to briefly explain:

We (Brülosophy) are 4 dudes who publish 2 articles per week, 1 xBmt and 1 of something else, nearly all of which involve beer that we made... and paid for. At least half of all the beer we make is given away to participants. Occasionally, a shop will offer to sponsor an article by providing ingredients, I love these people, but 90% of the time we are covering the costs ourselves.

Now, I do generate some revenue off of affiliate links, nearly all of which goes to pay my guys a paltry fee for their contributions, website crap (don't even ask how much I just spent on server migration), and other non-luxury expenses.

The shirts, when I sell enough, are great, in fact it's the only source of revenue that allowed me to save enough to finally cover the aforementioned website changes.

I've amounted exactly $0.62 on ads so far today.

Care to guess how much time is invested in each article?

Brewing: 4-5 hours

Data collection: 2-5 hours usually over a few days

Writing/formatting/editing: 6-12 hours over 1-2 weeks

Responding to emails/comments/forum threads: 15+ hours per week

And what have we to show for it? I wake up at 4AM to drive 1.25 hours to a job I can barely tolerate and have to drive home from 10 hours later.

Call it what you want, but to me Brülosophy isn't a business, it's an almost self-sustaining hobby that I do because I love learning, I love homebrewing, and I love this community. If ever the opportunity arises for me to turn this into something more, you better believe I'll jump on it without hesitation! To those who view this negatively, I can't help but assume it's for reasons other than that which you openly state.

Cheers!
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 05, 2015, 12:27:11 AM
That reminds me...

Hey Hoosierbrew, you never confirmed... that dark hair of yours - it is from a full mash, vorlauf addition or a cold steep of black malt? :) Don't lie - I think you said you have kids... so has to be some grey showing by now.


Oh there is grey now, Matt. There was grey 3 years ago when that pic was taken. It just didn't show as much in that pic as in others, it was at dusk. I just chose it because it was taken @ Hofbrauhaus. But my full beard now has a s^^tload today, trust me. And a few lbs as well. No cold steep, vorlauf, or mash to hit the analogy.I am a proponent of mashing most dark grains though.   ;)


EDIT-  With my daughter getting near dating age, I'll confirm the grey popping out maybe by the minute.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: mchrispen on December 05, 2015, 01:07:52 AM
Heh... just had to bring that back up.

Daughter dating soon? This makes me happy I never had kids... not sure how I would handle that. I used to pastor a youth group of 15, 15 year old's - worlds best and most frightening prophylactic. Now seeing my 16 year old nephew once a year is more than enough! Good luck dude.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: ynotbrusum on December 05, 2015, 01:14:23 AM
Marshall - I have no problem with anyone who can seek to earn a living doing what they enjoy - indeed, that might be the ideal most people strive for in life.  I enjoy some, and maybe most of what I do for a living, but I really enjoy homebrewing and all that goes with it. 

In short - Don't let anyone deter you in your pursuits.  I don't think there is any diminishment of value in what you guys publish/say/do, just because you happen to cover a portion of your costs or even make a profit while doing your homebrewing and providing information to others.  I find great value in your commentary.  Please keep it up.

But, man, that is a long work day you have....
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 05, 2015, 01:21:32 AM
Daughter dating soon? This makes me happy I never had kids... not sure how I would handle that. I used to pastor a youth group of 15, 15 year old's - worlds best and most frightening prophylactic. Now seeing my 16 year old nephew once a year is more than enough! Good luck dude.

All good, man. She's 14, so it'll be too soon regardless, right ?.  It'll be fine.....until it isn't.  ;)
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on December 05, 2015, 01:33:19 AM

Marshall - I have no problem with anyone who can seek to earn a living doing what they enjoy - indeed, that might be the ideal most people strive for in life.  I enjoy some, and maybe most of what I do for a living, but I really enjoy homebrewing and all that goes with it. 

In short - Don't let anyone deter you in your pursuits.  I don't think there is any diminishment of value in what you guys publish/say/do, just because you happen to cover a portion of your costs or even make a profit while doing your homebrewing and providing information to others.  I find great value in your commentary.  Please keep it up.

But, man, that is a long work day you have....

Thanks, I've no plans to stop anytime soon!

I only work 4 days a week, the extra day off is more than worth the extra 2 hours.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: klickitat jim on December 05, 2015, 02:29:42 AM

Marshall - I have no problem with anyone who can seek to earn a living doing what they enjoy - indeed, that might be the ideal most people strive for in life.  I enjoy some, and maybe most of what I do for a living, but I really enjoy homebrewing and all that goes with it. 

In short - Don't let anyone deter you in your pursuits.  I don't think there is any diminishment of value in what you guys publish/say/do, just because you happen to cover a portion of your costs or even make a profit while doing your homebrewing and providing information to others.  I find great value in your commentary.  Please keep it up.

But, man, that is a long work day you have....

Thanks, I've no plans to stop anytime soon!

I only work 4 days a week, the extra day off is more than worth the extra 2 hours.
4 10s here, love it!
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: erockrph on December 05, 2015, 01:39:36 PM
Thanks, I've no plans to stop anytime soon!

I only work 4 days a week, the extra day off is more than worth the extra 2 hours.
4 10s here, love it!
I used to do 3-4 13's on a rotating schedule, but I was on my feet the whole time with no breaks. As much as I miss the extra weekdays off, I'm perfectly happy with the 7-3:30 gig I have now.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 05, 2015, 03:48:50 PM
I do have it in the back of my mind to try and make a Fuggle beer that surprises Denny, but he might revolt worse than he did with the Chowdah or White Stout recipes.

I've actually hd a couple Fuggle beers I really like.  But it was with Fuggles grown at a hop farm down the road from me, not English Fuggles.  Tasted coletely different.  That has me thinking about terrior in relation to hops.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: charles1968 on December 05, 2015, 04:22:21 PM
Could also be climate. I've grown Cascade for the last 3 years in my back garden in the UK and they've been consistently flavourless.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 05, 2015, 04:35:46 PM
Could also be climate. I've grown Cascade for the last 3 years in my back garden in the UK and they've been consistently flavourless.

Yep, although I consider that to be part of terrior.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 05, 2015, 05:01:30 PM
I do have it in the back of my mind to try and make a Fuggle beer that surprises Denny, but he might revolt worse than he did with the Chowdah or White Stout recipes.

I've actually hd a couple Fuggle beers I really like.  But it was with Fuggles grown at a hop farm down the road from me, not English Fuggles.  Tasted coletely different.  That has me thinking about terrior in relation to hops.


So were those Willamette then, Denny ? Or actual Fuggles grown here?
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 05, 2015, 05:18:40 PM
I do have it in the back of my mind to try and make a Fuggle beer that surprises Denny, but he might revolt worse than he did with the Chowdah or White Stout recipes.

I've actually hd a couple Fuggle beers I really like.  But it was with Fuggles grown at a hop farm down the road from me, not English Fuggles.  Tasted coletely different.  That has me thinking about terrior in relation to hops.

So were those Willamette then, Denny ? Or actual Fuggles grown here?


Actual Fuggles gown here.  They almost had Cascade like qualities to them.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: HoosierBrew on December 05, 2015, 05:26:48 PM
I do have it in the back of my mind to try and make a Fuggle beer that surprises Denny, but he might revolt worse than he did with the Chowdah or White Stout recipes.

I've actually hd a couple Fuggle beers I really like.  But it was with Fuggles grown at a hop farm down the road from me, not English Fuggles.  Tasted coletely different.  That has me thinking about terrior in relation to hops.

So were those Willamette then, Denny ? Or actual Fuggles grown here?


Actual Fuggles gown here.  They almost had Cascade like qualities to them.


Wow, that would be the Fuggles I'd like then. I guess the terroir partly explains why hop varieties can vary so much from year to year, vendor to vendor.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: brulosopher on December 05, 2015, 10:38:09 PM
I love domestic Fuggles, they are different imo than UK Fuggles, which I also really enjoy.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: hopfenundmalz on December 06, 2015, 12:35:19 AM
I do have it in the back of my mind to try and make a Fuggle beer that surprises Denny, but he might revolt worse than he did with the Chowdah or White Stout recipes.

I've actually hd a couple Fuggle beers I really like.  But it was with Fuggles grown at a hop farm down the road from me, not English Fuggles.  Tasted coletely different.  That has me thinking about terrior in relation to hops.

So were those Willamette then, Denny ? Or actual Fuggles grown here?


Actual Fuggles gown here.  They almost had Cascade like qualities to them.


Wow, that would be the Fuggles I'd like then. I guess the terroir partly explains why hop varieties can vary so much from year to year, vendor to vendor.
Or from farm to farm, and field to field on the same farm. Learned that at Hop School.
Title: Re: Roasted Grains: Full Mash vs. Capped At Vorlauf | exBEERiment Results!
Post by: denny on December 06, 2015, 06:31:16 PM
Or from farm to farm, and field to field on the same farm. Learned that at Hop School.

Yep.