Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - lupulus

Pages: [1]
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 6 Common Homebrew Myths
« on: August 10, 2016, 09:56:27 AM »
...and one more comment on HSA that I am posting separately to avoid confusing my previous point.

I am sure most of you heard (podcast) or read from Gordon Strong how he adds roasted grains at the end of the mash (vorlauf).  He likes to explain the rationale by stating that it is similar to what happens to coffee when it stays in the pot for a long time.
The scientific explanation for the stale flavor of coffee seems to be oxidation (as far as I read), so it follows that Gordon thinks that if you add dark grains at the beginning of the mash, they get oxidized.
I understand Gordon tested this hypothesis at one NHC conference but I have not seen the formal results. If you trust Gordon is right about adding the dark grains at vorlauf, it seems the most likely benefit of this is avoiding oxidation of these grains.

So, this is yet another HSA/HSO topic that may benefit from further research :-)

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 6 Common Homebrew Myths
« on: August 10, 2016, 09:31:15 AM »
I agree with the postings about the Brulosophy experiment on HSA.
Normally when one plans a research study, one does a thorough literature review to learn how other experiments that studied HSA/HSO were designed, and use this review to create the best possible design to answer this question. The best review to of the effects of HSO in flavor stability is in the Handbook of Brewing, and the data reviewed there indeed find a very significant effect in the forced aging test, but not in fresh beer. Also given the effects of oxidation at mash-in reported in Künze, a better design would have been three treatments, one with extreme oxidation control (aka LODO), one with regular homebrewing practices, and one with the extreme whipping. Also, to minimize confounding factors, I would have avoided caramel malts, an estery yeast (WLP002) and a significant load of aroma hops. If I were to choose, a Helles with very low to no hop flavor or aroma will provide the researchers the best way to pick up a significant difference should there be one. And of course, do the testing with fresh and with aged beer.
As a side note, some people may suggest using an american lager as the experimental model, but I think the clean maltiness of a good helles would provide a better control beer than a pale american lager.
Another improvement I would suggest to the Brulosophy team is to at least give a BJCP score to each beer. It is more likely one will pick up a significant difference (should there be one) when your control beer is a 40 point extremely clean beer than when your control is a 25 point beer with many confounding aromas and flavors.
I do hope this reads as a constructive contribution. This was certainly my intention  :)

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 6 Common Homebrew Myths
« on: August 08, 2016, 11:49:17 AM »
Would you be so kind to expand your rationale on HSA/ HSO being included in your myth list?
Bamforth never said that HSA was not a problem, but that he needed to be convinced that it makes better beer; in an interview with John Palmer he told a story of how by controlling oxidation he changed the beer so much that customers sent the beer back. He also mentioned that there are many scientists who argue the evidence of HSO is compelling. See Künze, Narziss, and the chapter from Gresser in the Handbook of Brewing.
Personally, I am not yet convinced that HSO affects the final beer; but I judge there is enough evidence to call it an area of healthy debate in the brewing community.
Looking forward to your expanded review on the subject.  8)

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: reducing ppm hardness
« on: August 02, 2016, 09:32:40 AM »
You can reduce to about 60-80 ppm using lime treatment.

I went for a run today, and as usual I played one of the well-known podcasts, Dr Homebrew (Episode #78). The first beer was a Spruce tips IPA, and at the end of the discussion, the judges indicated that one of the things to correct was the haze of the beer. The brewer responded that the beer was not hazy, and that to mimic shipment shake his bottle every day during shipment time then when the package arrived, put it in the fridge, and that he was drinking along with the judges and the beer was clear. To this, JP admitted that the beer was probably shaken during the drive to the studio for the program. No apology, no "we should do better from now on", nothing. Many, many times in the same show judges noted haziness in the evaluated beers, but because the brewers did not do the same process as the spruce tip guy, Dr Homebrew got away with blaming the shipper.
Honestly, I was appalled that the beer was not at the judging location for at least a few days to avoid this problem and give the beer a proper evaluation.
Haze changes the beer quite a bit, sometimes for the better (weissbier, wit), sometimes for the worse, specially if the haze is not hops (eg New England IPA).
So, my question to the forum is whether there is in your view an implicit obligation that when you send a beer to be judged, to a podcast in this case but it can be a competition, the Brewing Network (or Competition Organizers) should do their best to ensure the beer is stewarded appropriately.
What say you...

General Homebrew Discussion / Dry hopping and perceived sweetness
« on: May 27, 2015, 08:54:04 AM »
Hi all,
Sorry to be perceived as beating as dead horse... I brew very dry IPAs and DIPAs. I have Pliny (Elder) clones finishing at 1.008 to 1.009, and I have always perceived a touch of sweetness that I do not perceive in other beers. Because Pliny calls for a Caramel malt (using Caraamber because it is what I get in Munich), I forced myself to keep my mouth shut about this sensation, thinking that this perceived sweetness should be from the Caraamber. And before, you say "oxidation", I bottle condition (or keg condition) IPAs and the only transfer I do, is before fermentation is completely done, so any oxygen during the transfer is theoretically absorbed by the yeast.
So, after a visit to Austin, Texas, I decided to clone Noble King, a dry hopped sour, bought a bottle, grew the culture, Fermented it for two weeks to 1.003, and dry hopped with 75g of Mittelfrüh and 75g of Mandarina Bavaria (whole hops) for a 21 liter volume. (I tasted the beer before dry-hopping and noted no sweetness at all.). Finished dry hopping and keg most of the beer with sugar at 5g/L and left it conditioning for 3 months at about 20 Celsius (68F). Chilled the keg two days ago, tapped today, and tasted the beer. It is very good, lemony sour, bretty aromas, dry hop spicy flavors, and SWEETNESS. The sweetness cannot be described as malty, it is very simple, like splenda/ stevia (no sugar coating). So, I checked for gravity to ensure the sugar added for carbonation was consumed, and the beer (degassed) was at 1.002. The important point to keep in mind, is that we are talking about a truckload of dry-hops, so please only comment if you have experience with the "truckload model". So, as Sherlock use to say, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."
Now your turn to shoot me down :-)

Dear homebrewers:
My first question/ post. I really look for this answer so please be forgiving if it is given somewhere else...
(I also sent this question to Kai but thought it may be interesting to see whether others asked themselves the same question)

I moved to Munich more than two years ago and as I brew mainly pale beers, I control the pH using acids, either lactic or citric, and a pH meter (sorry Reinheitsgebot).
The water profile in Munich is such that pre-boiling the water (before mashing) would lead to precipitation of most calcium (and magnesium?) and bicarbonate ions as calcium (and magnesium?) carbonate. Many brewers in Munich including many pros boil their water and then separate the water from the precipitate.
At the moment, I pre-boil water and separate it from the calcium carbonate precipitate. However, as I use the brew-in-a-bag method, to separate the calcium carbonate it would be more convenient for me to boil the water, have it cool down and have calcium carbonate precipitate, in the same kettle do the mashing then take the grains out boil the wort, cool it down (immersion chiller) and transfer all but the bottom residue to the fermenter. I reason that the calcium carbonate may continue to be in the bottom of the kettle throughout this process and is separated from the fermentable wort as calcium carbonate will stay with the trub in the bottom of the kettle.
In other words, my question is: Why german brewers separate the boiled water from the calcium carbonate precipitate, if you can leave the precipitate in the bottom (in brew in a bag) or leave it as a salt in a regular mash that eventually will settle as part of the trub after the normal boiling and cooling? Is it that the acidity of the mash and/ or boil will actually dissociate the calcium carbonate into ions and at least part of these ions will end up in the final beer, making it more "chalky" that it would be otherwise.

Thanks for reading and I would appreciate any comments  :)

Pages: [1]