Homebrewers Association | AHA Forum

General Category => Equipment and Software => Topic started by: klickitat jim on January 19, 2017, 11:39:25 pm

Title: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: klickitat jim on January 19, 2017, 11:39:25 pm
Very cool podcast Denny and Drew. I am absolutely in no way surprised. Calculated IBUs only help when used as a benchmark for a specific brewer  trying to duplicate or adjust bitterness on his or her same equipment/recipe/ingredients.

Frankly, a brewer, especially homebrew, would do just as well just using grams of X hop for X time at X temp as their measuring stick. The use of IBU just implies a more precise and predictable outcome when that precision and predictability doesn't exist. Certainly not when different types of hops are substituted and only %A are considered.

Anyway- thanks for great info!
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: narcout on January 19, 2017, 11:50:20 pm
It's interesting that Tinseth is based on whole cone hops.  I had never heard that before.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: HoosierBrew on January 19, 2017, 11:53:16 pm
Yeah, pretty interesting. Good info!
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: denny on January 20, 2017, 04:42:55 pm
It's interesting that Tinseth is based on whole cone hops.  I had never heard that before.

Neither had we!  But his explanation makes sense...when he was developing his formula pellets were so bad that people didn't really use them.  Of course, because pellets break down so quickly protein coating isn't an issue for them as it is with whole hops.  I'm in contact with Glenn and we're talking about experiments to test the protein effect.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: denny on January 20, 2017, 04:49:28 pm
Very cool podcast Denny and Drew. I am absolutely in no way surprised. Calculated IBUs only help when used as a benchmark for a specific brewer  trying to duplicate or adjust bitterness on his or her same equipment/recipe/ingredients.

Frankly, a brewer, especially homebrew, would do just as well just using grams of X hop for X time at X temp as their measuring stick. The use of IBU just implies a more precise and predictable outcome when that precision and predictability doesn't exist. Certainly not when different types of hops are substituted and only %A are considered.

Anyway- thanks for great info!

Sp glad you enjoyed it, Jim!  It was cool to be able to have Glenn on the show.  I think his point is well taken...learn what you like and call that YOUR IBU scale!
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: klickitat jim on January 20, 2017, 05:08:44 pm
Frankly, I prefer low, medium low, medium, medium high, high as descriptors of bitterness rather than a number. Of course you need to use the same descriptors of hops flavor and hop aroma.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: tommymorris on January 20, 2017, 05:19:20 pm
My biggest take away is that the shape of the curves predicted by Tinseth are correct. The actual predicted IBU may not be correct.

To me that means Tinseth is still very useful. In your brewery, overtime, you learn to correlate what Tinseth predicts with the bitterness you experience and then you can use Tinseth to guide recipe design with respect to bitterness.

Where things get difficult is trying to understand bitterness from brewery to brewery since Tinseth may predict the same number for two breweries but actual bitterness, according to the Igor results, can vary significantly.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: denny on January 20, 2017, 05:48:24 pm
My biggest take away is that the shape of the curves predicted by Tinseth are correct. The actual predicted IBU may not be correct.

To me that means Tinseth is still very useful. In your brewery, overtime, you learn to correlate what Tinseth predicts with the bitterness you experience and then you can use Tinseth to guide recipe design with respect to bitterness.

Where things get difficult is trying to understand bitterness from brewery to brewery since Tinseth may predict the same number for two breweries but actual bitterness, according to the Igor results, can vary significantly.

Correct on all points. 
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: hopfenundmalz on January 21, 2017, 03:23:13 am
It's interesting that Tinseth is based on whole cone hops.  I had never heard that before.

Neither had we!  But his explanation makes sense...when he was developing his formula pellets were so bad that people didn't really use them.  Of course, because pellets break down so quickly protein coating isn't an issue for them as it is with whole hops.  I'm in contact with Glenn and we're talking about experiments to test the protein effect.
Ask him about IBU from whirlpool hops, please.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: HoosierBrew on January 21, 2017, 03:29:37 am
Ask him about IBU from whirlpool hops, please.



Yeah, I'd love to hear his feedback on that.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: curtdogg on January 21, 2017, 08:53:02 am
I want to know about this "IBU/SG ratio.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Big Monk on January 21, 2017, 12:33:42 pm
I want to know about this "IBU/SG ratio.

The BU:GU?
Title: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: BrewBama on January 21, 2017, 12:55:03 pm
I want to know about this "IBU/SG ratio.


http://beersmith.com/blog/2009/09/26/balancing-your-beer-with-the-bitterness-ratio/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: The Beerery on January 21, 2017, 01:26:59 pm
I'm over here using the real ibu formula like... Huh?!?!.. ;)

W=  B ∗ V
      1000 ∗ A ∗ U

Where W is the total weight of the hops to be used in grams, B is the desired
bitterness in IBUs, V is the final volume of post boil wort in the kettle in liters,
A is the alpha acid content of the hops (4.7% AA means that A = 0.047), and
U is the assumed hop utilization.
For example targeting 16 IBUs and assuming a utilization of 28% (i.e.
set U = 0.28 and B = 16). Utilization will vary from system to system; if your
beer ends up too bitter, try raising the utilization to 30%, and if it ends up
not bitter enough try lowering it to 25%. For example, assuming your post boil
volume is 21 liters, your hops contain 4% alpha acids, and your utilization is
28%, you would use a total of 30 grams of hops.



Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Big Monk on January 21, 2017, 02:42:02 pm
It's interesting that Tinseth is based on whole cone hops.  I had never heard that before.

Neither had we!  But his explanation makes sense...when he was developing his formula pellets were so bad that people didn't really use them.  Of course, because pellets break down so quickly protein coating isn't an issue for them as it is with whole hops.  I'm in contact with Glenn and we're talking about experiments to test the protein effect.

I'm surprised more people weren't aware of the whole hops thing.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: denny on January 21, 2017, 04:51:36 pm
Ask him about IBU from whirlpool hops, please.

Already have...he hasn't studied it.  But this is another experiment we're working on.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: dmtaylor on February 10, 2017, 02:37:05 pm
My biggest take away is that the shape of the curves predicted by Tinseth are correct. The actual predicted IBU may not be correct.

To me that means Tinseth is still very useful. In your brewery, overtime, you learn to correlate what Tinseth predicts with the bitterness you experience and then you can use Tinseth to guide recipe design with respect to bitterness.

Where things get difficult is trying to understand bitterness from brewery to brewery since Tinseth may predict the same number for two breweries but actual bitterness, according to the Igor results, can vary significantly.

Agree totally with all the above.  I finally got around to listening to this podcast.  Excellent information.

Tinseth says of Rager: "totally wrong".  I love that.   ;D

Meanwhile he admits and understands why the results from his own formula are only good to plus/minus 30%.  Gem of a guy.  Great information.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: narvin on February 10, 2017, 11:30:14 pm
I'm over here using the real ibu formula like... Huh?!?!.. ;)

W=  B ∗ V
      1000 ∗ A ∗ U

Where W is the total weight of the hops to be used in grams, B is the desired
bitterness in IBUs, V is the final volume of post boil wort in the kettle in liters,
A is the alpha acid content of the hops (4.7% AA means that A = 0.047), and
U is the assumed hop utilization.
For example targeting 16 IBUs and assuming a utilization of 28% (i.e.
set U = 0.28 and B = 16). Utilization will vary from system to system; if your
beer ends up too bitter, try raising the utilization to 30%, and if it ends up
not bitter enough try lowering it to 25%. For example, assuming your post boil
volume is 21 liters, your hops contain 4% alpha acids, and your utilization is
28%, you would use a total of 30 grams of hops.

Well, the point of Tinseth is to estimate utilization based on boil time, wort gravity and other factors, right?
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Big Monk on February 10, 2017, 11:44:04 pm
I'm over here using the real ibu formula like... Huh?!?!.. ;)

W=  B ∗ V
      1000 ∗ A ∗ U

Where W is the total weight of the hops to be used in grams, B is the desired
bitterness in IBUs, V is the final volume of post boil wort in the kettle in liters,
A is the alpha acid content of the hops (4.7% AA means that A = 0.047), and
U is the assumed hop utilization.
For example targeting 16 IBUs and assuming a utilization of 28% (i.e.
set U = 0.28 and B = 16). Utilization will vary from system to system; if your
beer ends up too bitter, try raising the utilization to 30%, and if it ends up
not bitter enough try lowering it to 25%. For example, assuming your post boil
volume is 21 liters, your hops contain 4% alpha acids, and your utilization is
28%, you would use a total of 30 grams of hops.

Well, the point of Tinseth is to estimate utilization based on boil time, wort gravity and other factors, right?

The easiest parameter to manipulate is the "time divisor" (4.15) for utilization.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: denny on February 11, 2017, 04:55:27 pm
I'm over here using the real ibu formula like... Huh?!?!.. ;)

W=  B ∗ V
      1000 ∗ A ∗ U

Where W is the total weight of the hops to be used in grams, B is the desired
bitterness in IBUs, V is the final volume of post boil wort in the kettle in liters,
A is the alpha acid content of the hops (4.7% AA means that A = 0.047), and
U is the assumed hop utilization.
For example targeting 16 IBUs and assuming a utilization of 28% (i.e.
set U = 0.28 and B = 16). Utilization will vary from system to system; if your
beer ends up too bitter, try raising the utilization to 30%, and if it ends up
not bitter enough try lowering it to 25%. For example, assuming your post boil
volume is 21 liters, your hops contain 4% alpha acids, and your utilization is
28%, you would use a total of 30 grams of hops.

Well, the point of Tinseth is to estimate utilization based on boil time, wort gravity and other factors, right?

Because Glenn only used whole hops, there is some debate about whether boil gravity or protein coating causes the reduced utilization.  I've spoken with him and our lab person to try to devise some experiments to try to get a handle on that.  He also stressed that kettle geometry was a large factor.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Pricelessbrewing on February 11, 2017, 06:28:54 pm
Because Glenn only used whole hops, there is some debate about whether boil gravity or protein coating causes the reduced utilization.  I've spoken with him and our lab person to try to devise some experiments to try to get a handle on that.  He also stressed that kettle geometry was a large factor.

Right, kettle geometry is going to affect surface area (I believe some of the oils will stick to the surface area after transferring), as well as the boil off rate. Currently tinseth uses the average gravity between preboil and postboil I believe, but the boil off rate will affect this as well and adapting tinseths formula for instantaneous gravity was one of the things I was working on before my UV-VIS testing wasn't available anymore.

I'm also curious on how fermentation affects it, testing wort IBU and fermented beer ibu. Does that impact change with attenuation, what about speed of fermentation? Does fermenting under pressure change that? How does boil pH affect it?

There are just so many variables that could play a role. :o
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: klickitat jim on February 12, 2017, 01:45:37 am
It's seems to me that this IBU thing is almost an act of futility if we try to absolutely nail it down. The ingredient is biological and inconsistent by nature. So even if we found a pristine formula that worked every time, it's still only working on the AA numbers that apply to the plug pulled for the lab, not necessarily for the ounce we have in our hands. Not to mention a big question mark on exactly how that ounce was handled. Striving for an absolute in this part of brewing, especially at our level... futile!

Then, if you send every brew to the lab for spectography, your getting a numeric value, but how are you perceiving that bitterness?

I say pick a method of estimating and stick with it then adjust in the future to taste.

Edit: sorry, I just watched 5 minutes of news and it put me in a mood. Not your fault.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: denny on February 12, 2017, 04:48:25 pm
It's seems to me that this IBU thing is almost an act of futility if we try to absolutely nail it down. The ingredient is biological and inconsistent by nature. So even if we found a pristine formula that worked every time, it's still only working on the AA numbers that apply to the plug pulled for the lab, not necessarily for the ounce we have in our hands. Not to mention a big question mark on exactly how that ounce was handled. Striving for an absolute in this part of brewing, especially at our level... futile!

Then, if you send every brew to the lab for spectography, your getting a numeric value, but how are you perceiving that bitterness?

I say pick a method of estimating and stick with it then adjust in the future to taste.

Edit: sorry, I just watched 5 minutes of news and it put me in a mood. Not your fault.

Agreed, with one minor exception.  When we sent the hops out for testing prior to sending them to the IGORs, they were really close to what they were listed as.  Not exact, but close.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: klickitat jim on February 12, 2017, 06:56:41 pm
It's seems to me that this IBU thing is almost an act of futility if we try to absolutely nail it down. The ingredient is biological and inconsistent by nature. So even if we found a pristine formula that worked every time, it's still only working on the AA numbers that apply to the plug pulled for the lab, not necessarily for the ounce we have in our hands. Not to mention a big question mark on exactly how that ounce was handled. Striving for an absolute in this part of brewing, especially at our level... futile!

Then, if you send every brew to the lab for spectography, your getting a numeric value, but how are you perceiving that bitterness?

I say pick a method of estimating and stick with it then adjust in the future to taste.

Edit: sorry, I just watched 5 minutes of news and it put me in a mood. Not your fault.

Agreed, with one minor exception.  When we sent the hops out for testing prior to sending them to the IGORs, they were really close to what they were listed as.  Not exact, but close.
So, we know those hops were close to advertised. We still don't know about all hops. Point being, seeking IBU absolute accuracy is kind of a fools errand. Close enough is close enough.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: denny on February 12, 2017, 06:58:04 pm
So, we know those hops were close to advertised. We still don't know about all hops. Point being, seeking IBU absolute accuracy is kind of a fools errand. Close enough is close enough.

Absolutely.  One thing that may help homebrewers get a bit closer to what they expect is the new packaging from YCH that includes HSI.  But like you say, it's still a SWAG.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Frankenbrew on February 12, 2017, 09:45:16 pm
I say pick a method of estimating and stick with it then adjust in the future to taste.

Quote

This is exactly what I was thinking as I read through the thread. Beersmith is my method, and it produces consistent results to my taste in my brewery. Some of my friends have commented that my IPAs aren't as bitter as I say they are, but they taste good to me. And, by the way, my friends aren't exactly boycotting my taproom on the basis of science.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: klickitat jim on February 13, 2017, 01:26:50 am
For home brewers, maybe even commercial, I think we'd be better served to use which ever calculation we choose  (sticking with one) and then when someone who is sampling the beer wants to know "how many IBUs" don't use numbers, just say low or medium low, or high, or very high, or whatever term best describes it. Or take the time to explain what is behind those pesky IBU numbers... good conversation piece.

On the other hand, telling them "47 IBUs" and hearing them say "hmmm, tastes more like 45 to me" tells you a lot about them lol
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: denny on February 13, 2017, 04:44:10 pm
For home brewers, maybe even commercial, I think we'd be better served to use which ever calculation we choose  (sticking with one) and then when someone who is sampling the beer wants to know "how many IBUs" don't use numbers, just say low or medium low, or high, or very high, or whatever term best describes it. Or take the time to explain what is behind those pesky IBU numbers... good conversation piece.

On the other hand, telling them "47 IBUs" and hearing them say "hmmm, tastes more like 45 to me" tells you a lot about them lol

Oakshire had Dana (the lab person we used) come in and take reading every 10 minutes throughout their boil.  That way they were able to develop a custom utilization curve so they know exactly how many IBU they're getting.  I imagine other breweries do the same.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: klickitat jim on February 13, 2017, 09:01:11 pm
For home brewers, maybe even commercial, I think we'd be better served to use which ever calculation we choose  (sticking with one) and then when someone who is sampling the beer wants to know "how many IBUs" don't use numbers, just say low or medium low, or high, or very high, or whatever term best describes it. Or take the time to explain what is behind those pesky IBU numbers... good conversation piece.

On the other hand, telling them "47 IBUs" and hearing them say "hmmm, tastes more like 45 to me" tells you a lot about them lol

Oakshire had Dana (the lab person we used) come in and take reading every 10 minutes throughout their boil.  That way they were able to develop a custom utilization curve so they know exactly how many IBU they're getting.  I imagine other breweries do the same.
That would be the best way. But how do you deal with the problem that most breweries don't do that? So customers are used to the beer they drink that randomly claims X IBUs, and that beer seems different than the true numbers on the new beer. And round and round we go

You don't taste mill gaps.... I don't taste IBU calculators
Title: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: BrewBama on April 15, 2019, 09:58:23 pm
I realize that the IBU number itself is based on each brewery and a correlation to what the drinker perceives. My question pertains to calculation of that number.

When I calculate in BeerSmith I get a wildly different number that in Brewer’s Friend.  I believe they both use Tinseth’s calculation but how are they 15 points apart? (I was not exact in my duplication but close enough to make the point):

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190415/f1c7c1d049d9272def31993e2c9aec99.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190415/b584f1967dd24e16f970fdb2c90de61f.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: dmtaylor on April 15, 2019, 10:19:00 pm
I realize that the IBU number itself is based on each brewery and a correlation to what the drinker perceives. My question pertains to calculation of that number.

When I calculate in BeerSmith I get a wildly different number that in Brewer’s Friend.  I believe they both use Tinseth’s calculation but how are they 15 points apart? (I was not exact in my duplication but close enough to make the point):

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190415/f1c7c1d049d9272def31993e2c9aec99.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190415/b584f1967dd24e16f970fdb2c90de61f.jpg)

Multiple things going on here:

1) Volumes -- This is the biggest one.  Your first entry in Brewer's Friend says 6.5 gallons, versus BeerSmith says 5.5 gallons.  That will have a huge effect.

2) Late hop additions in BeerSmith look way off to me.  Should be much lower in single digits, not 10 IBUs each.

3) Are you really using whole hops?  In Brewer's Friend you specify whole hops.  Not sure about what you put into BeerSmith.  But make sure those are consistent between the two softwares.

If whole hops and 6.5 gallons, I calculate about 26 IBUs.  Otherwise.... well, it depends on all 3 of those things above.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Robert on April 15, 2019, 10:41:22 pm
I brew 6.5 gallon batches with whole cone hops and have evolved my own simplified method for making IBU estimates (my palate tells my my system has  been dialed in to pretty darn good enough.)  With your recipe I would anticipate about 22 IBU in wort, leaving about 16 IBU in beer.   That's a little lower than BF, but way closer than BS.  Something just looks fishy to me with BS's numbers.  I know that doesn't answer your question, but it might help you evaluate the results.
Title: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: BrewBama on April 15, 2019, 11:06:23 pm
I agree with both of you: sumthin ain’t right. I also think at those quantities the result should be much lower than BS tells me as well which is why I poked the numbers in Brewer’s Friend to compare them.

Dave, I am using whole hops. I plan 6.5 post boil and 5.5 in the fermenter.

I want 10 IBU(s) each of the Aroma and Flavor hops.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Robert on April 15, 2019, 11:17:09 pm
The utilizations in BF look very plausible to me, with the caveat that you might get a little  bit less with the 10 minute addition, but that's quibbling over numbers we can't be exact about anyway.  And with whole cone, I completely ignore the contribution of a 1 minute addition.   If I were you, I'd just manipulate your recipe in BF until you get the values you're looking for.   It will be closer than your palate's ability to distinguish,  I bet.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: BrewBama on April 15, 2019, 11:19:25 pm
The utilizations in BF look very plausible to me, with the caveat that you might get a little  bit less with the 10 minute addition, but that's quibbling over numbers we can't be exact about anyway.  And with whole cone, I completely ignore the contribution of a 1 minute addition.   If I were you, I'd just manipulate your recipe in BF until you get the values you're looking for.   It will be closer than your palate's ability to distinguish,  I bet.

I am one step ahead of you. This is what I ended up with:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190415/68bfd8278c68e02d3481a8fdb9e14ba4.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: BrewBama on April 15, 2019, 11:29:16 pm
Ok. I found it. Some ‘IBU carry over’ box was checked. It’s within reason now.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190415/c538f1c6e49e89be05e788e54c083e73.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Robert on April 15, 2019, 11:33:49 pm
Ok. I found it. Some ‘IBU carry over’ box was checked. It’s within reason now.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190415/c538f1c6e49e89be05e788e54c083e73.jpg)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
That's still showing 5.5 gallons for the volume... or does that mean volume to the fermenter?  But but on another note, your hop schedule is starting to look pretty good.  I'm no longer a fan of super late additions.  Maybe using whole cone and gentle boils helps, but I get more flavor and aroma pushing it back from the end.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: dmtaylor on April 16, 2019, 12:11:22 am
I agree with both of you: sumthin ain’t right. I also think at those quantities the result should be much lower than BS tells me as well which is why I poked the numbers in Brewer’s Friend to compare them.

Dave, I am using whole hops. I plan 6.5 post boil and 5.5 in the fermenter.

I want 10 IBU(s) each of the Aroma and Flavor hops.

Your batch size is clearly 6.5 gallons then, regardless of how much you actually end up with in the fermenter.  Why the waste of a gallon anyway?  Is that for lost wort due to using all whole hops?
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Robert on April 16, 2019, 12:22:57 am
I agree with both of you: sumthin ain’t right. I also think at those quantities the result should be much lower than BS tells me as well which is why I poked the numbers in Brewer’s Friend to compare them.

Dave, I am using whole hops. I plan 6.5 post boil and 5.5 in the fermenter.

I want 10 IBU(s) each of the Aroma and Flavor hops.

Your batch size is clearly 6.5 gallons then, regardless of how much you actually end up with in the fermenter.  Why the waste of a gallon anyway?  Is that for lost wort due to using all whole hops?
Good question but it would be the other way around.  I used to lose at least a gallon when using pellets.  With whole cone it's less than a quart.  One (trivial) reason I went back.  But what's a gallon if you're happy with your process and its predictable.
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: BrewBama on April 16, 2019, 12:33:22 am
That’s carry over from using pellets. I’ve only used whole cone for two brews now and as I gain experience over the summer I’ll dial that in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: IBU Experimental Brewing Podcast
Post by: Robert on April 16, 2019, 12:36:39 am
That’s carry over from using pellets. I’ve only used whole cone for two brews now and as I gain experience over the summer I’ll dial that in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Had the same problem when I switched back.  I was over brewing for a while.  Better than coming up short! :)