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] 2 3 4
1
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: International presence at HombrewCon
« on: January 11, 2017, 08:40:46 PM »
Thanks so much for the comments!
- Many commented on whether bringing beer would be possible. I travel abroad often and have brought 20 bottles of homebrew into the US with no problem (I declared them in the customs form). A corny is a bit more scary for customs, I would agree.
BUT point taken... It does not have to be beer - They can be invited to give a presentation/ participate in a round table
- @GS - Who said the same country. Every year a different country. The invitation can be made to the country homebrewer's association, who can decide how to allocate the spots (up to them). The country to be invited can be decided by lottery from a list of countries in which their homebrewers' association is interested in participating.
There can be reciprocity with American homebrewers traveling to their meeting and getting a bit of extra attention.

2
General Homebrew Discussion / International presence at HombrewCon
« on: January 11, 2017, 10:23:05 AM »
Having spoken about this topic with Gary Glass at HomebrewCon, then with a board member 2 month ago, and seeing no traction for the idea, I would like to put it out there to see if the idea gets some traction:

- My proposal was for HomebrewCon to "officially" invite homebrewers from other countries to join us at HomebrewCon. Every year, a new country will get the "official" invite, which can be something along the lines of:
- if at least 6 but no more than 10 homebrewers from your country attend HomebrewCon, commit to attend club night as a club, and bring at minimum 20 liters of homebrew for tasting, HomebrewCon will subsidize your trip by giving you a ~80% ? discount in the conference cost.
The discount can vary depending on the country (the longer the trip, the higher the discount).
Homebrew groups from other countries are encouraged to attend as "Clubs" but only one country will be invited each year.
- The details can be changed/ adapted as the board deems fit but I am sure you get the idea.

That's it. Cheers,

3
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Low oxygen brewing yield
« on: December 31, 2016, 10:44:03 AM »
What is the exact definition of yield to you?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


4
All Grain Brewing / Re: LODO Impact on Roast Flavor
« on: December 25, 2016, 10:08:08 PM »
Love the foam. Great job!

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk


5
All Grain Brewing / Re: Introduction to Low Oxygen Brewing
« on: December 22, 2016, 10:16:37 AM »
So I have a question on debugging for the experienced among you (I wasn't really sure which of these Low Oxy threads to stick this in, so I put it here):

I have done 3 batches using the LODO techniques as best as I can implement them with what I have.  The beers were:  semi-English Pale Ale, Best Bitter, Munich Helles.

For all of the beers, I can see what you are getting at with the different malt character.  The helles is the most pronounced of them, in that it was just 100% pilsner malt and it shows.  I'm not sure that the malt character that it evoked worked as nicely in the english beers, but I have much refining of the process to do. 

My question is this:  All three of the beers have this sharp character to them that I perceived as them being either too acidic or as a mineral thing (like if I used too much gypsum, which none of them had).  I posted about this after making the pale ale a couple months ago, relating it to an almost soda like sharpness (orange soda).  All of the beers were made using a mix of RO and tap water which has little in it.  Mineral additions used were CaCl to bring up the calcium and a bit of baking soda to adjust the mash pH (5.2 in all cases).  I have been using a bit lower than the recommended dosing rates for SMB from the tables, coming in around 75ppm.  The finished beer pH is normal for that kind of beer, so that doesn't seem like it should be it.  My guess is that I'm using too much SMB and getting the residual sulfur compounds causing the sharpness in the beer.  Thoughts?

As a side note (I have posted this in other threads too), the best bitter was a sulfur bomb with lots of H2S in it, but the other two don't come off as overly sulfury.

Before commenting on the SMB, I would like to understand your water adjustment better. If you use a mix of RO and tap water with little mineral content, the pH of a Helles without mineral additions would be around 5.8 to 6.0. CaCl would not change that much and bicarbonate (baking soda) assuming it dissolves well, will increase your pH further.

Unless there is an acid addition that you did not mention, your may have high mash pH and it would not be easy to trouble shoot LODO.

Can you clarify :-)





6
All Grain Brewing / Re: Introduction to Low Oxygen Brewing
« on: December 22, 2016, 10:04:49 AM »
I'm listening to the Dec. 12 episode of The Session and they are tasting off-flavors win someone from a company called Aroxa.  They train Cicerones and brewers in detecting off-flavors.  He is dosing beer with compounds and he introduces a staling compound I believe is trans- 2-noneal.   It's a compound involved in oxidation of wort.

He says breweries in the 70's thought it was from oxidation in the bottle/ packaging but is now known to be from the mash.  He says beer with more  specialty malt is less susceptible to this as the kilning process eliminates the responsible compound, an enzyme called oxygenase.  He says big breweries combat this by  using malt that was developed to not have oxygenase.

  Brewcaster Mike "Tasty" McDole asks if he's referring to hot-side aeration to which he answer is yes.  JP, another brewcaster says HSA is real but  isn't an issue for home brewers as the beer doesn't get stored for long.  Tasty seems open to the idea of HSA as an issue stating that when he brews 10G batches he usually throws some away because it gets stale.  Nice listen.  I think the beginning of the interview is about 45 minutes into the episode.
Hope you do not mind a few corrections and contributions :-)
- The enzyme is called lipoxygenase (aka LOX)
- LOX only survives kilning in Pilsner and a bit in Pale Ale malts (also US two row, I reason)
- LOX is minimal in Vienna and insignificant in Munich malts
- That is kilning temps of Munich malt denature LOX (in general)
- It follows that the rest of the malts do not have active LOX
- LOX activity decreases significantly below pH 6 and at pH 5.2 has almost no activity (that is why Kunze recommends 5.2 as a mash pH)
- Temperature dependency of LOX is similar to that of beta amylase, so infusion mashing at 152 will also help in reducing LOX activity (but will affect your beta rest...)
- not many macro breweries use no-LOX malt (yet) but some do - Google Null-Lox for a reading on LOX-less malt

7
All Grain Brewing / Re: Introduction to Low Oxygen Brewing
« on: December 19, 2016, 11:08:37 AM »
lab results are nice, but sensory tests are what matter to me. I don't care what the lab says if the beer tastes good.

The ITT test, tests if the beer is going to taste good...

tasting the beer tests if it is going to taste good.

The triangle test is designed to taste which one of the three liquids you are tasting is different.
Brülosophy does not perform a sensory evaluation designed to validate the quality of the beer.  So, they do not publish whether the beer tastes as it should.

from what I gather, they also ask the tasters if they actually liked the beer though.
In this particular experiment, the brewer himself states his beer was one-dimensional and boring.  And no, they do not ask that question, and they should not be asking it because the tasters are blinded so they do not know which one is the control beer.  There was no sensory panel or evaluation of the quality of the beer in this experiment or in the ones I have read. In fact, in one of the recent experiments, a Berliner Weisse, the brewer himself stated the beer was not very good, and that he would have scored it as a 28 (BJCP).

8
All Grain Brewing / Re: Introduction to Low Oxygen Brewing
« on: December 19, 2016, 11:02:10 AM »
lab results are nice, but sensory tests are what matter to me. I don't care what the lab says if the beer tastes good.
You make a very valid point. Indeed, the main flaw of the Brülosophy experiments is that they cannot prove that the control beer tastes good.

I reckon the multitudes of tasters, that vary in range from novice to well trained enjoying much of his beer shows us he makes good beer. I know this concept does not register to some here, since its either LODO brewing or amateur hobbyist in your opinions.

I'm glad you guys have found a nice way to brew beer that works for you, its when you discount everyone else that rubs people the wrong way.

The rules of science apply to everyone. Whether multitude of testers like or dislike the beer that someone makes is immaterial to this discussion. One should review data based on its merits or demerits and nothing else. I am telling you as a scientist what the problem with this experiment is. If you have a scientific counterargument, do make it please.

9
All Grain Brewing / Re: Introduction to Low Oxygen Brewing
« on: December 19, 2016, 10:54:51 AM »
lab results are nice, but sensory tests are what matter to me. I don't care what the lab says if the beer tastes good.

The ITT test, tests if the beer is going to taste good...

tasting the beer tests if it is going to taste good.

The triangle test is designed to taste which one of the three liquids you are tasting is different.
Brülosophy does not perform a sensory evaluation designed to validate the quality of the beer.  So, they do not publish whether the beer tastes as it should.

10
All Grain Brewing / Re: Introduction to Low Oxygen Brewing
« on: December 19, 2016, 10:47:18 AM »
lab results are nice, but sensory tests are what matter to me. I don't care what the lab says if the beer tastes good.
You make a very valid point. Indeed, the main flaw of the Brülosophy experiments is that they cannot prove that the control beer tastes good.

11
All Grain Brewing / Re: Introduction to Low Oxygen Brewing
« on: December 19, 2016, 10:43:16 AM »
We can learn something from most experiments, including this one. Here is what I noticed in the Brülosophy experiment:
1.  Results- last paragraph: "both beers were one dimensional and boring, though notably clean with no detectable off-flavors". I think that it is part of a reasonable experimental design that your control beer is a very good to excellent beer, and the recipe, when well brewed and with good ingredients, should be able to lead to a very good pale ale. If the author's comment is correct, then the control beer was no an adequate media to test a hypothesis. Suggestion for the future: enter the beer in a competition or have 2 BJCP judges score the beer to validate the testing media; I suggest a score of 35 or higher for the control beer.
2. Paragraph just before results: "beers were ... remarkably similar in color". I think a similar color suggests that the oxidation has already taken place (the author mentions this possibility in the discussion). 
Both these points support what we already know about oxidation in the cold side.
Next steps I would personally suggest would be to:
- Ensure the quality of the control beer
- Use spunding or keg conditioned beer as your control
- Compare with sanitizer/ CO2 emptied keg, with normal-air keg and with splashing (start with splashing which should provide the biggest difference).

12
All Grain Brewing / Re: LODO Impact on Roast Flavor
« on: December 18, 2016, 11:28:51 AM »
In summary, isn't this technique a technique designed to minimize oxidation of the dark grains? Wouldn't LODO brewing allow the addition of the dark grains together with the rest of the grains, while avoiding the oxidation effects or an early addition in a normal mash?

Thoughts? Comments?

No.  It's designed to make it so you don't have to take their effect pH into account.
Apologies for being slow, Denny. Are you saying that the reason that Gordon has stated in books/ podcasts that the dark grains at vorlauf is to modify pH?
In Brewing Better Beer p43-44, Gordon only state flavor reasons for adding dark grains at vorlauf. I never recall him mentioning pH as a reason. I think we can all agree that adding dark grains at vorlauf will lower pH, but this a consequence of the method not the reason for doing it.  In fact, for those mashing at 5.2, a large dark grain addition at vorlauf may lower boil pH too much, affecting hop utilization and other processes during the boil, so for those not sparging (which will counteract to some extent the pH lowering effect of the dark grains), it may be easier to start with the dark grains at the beginning of the mash to avoid lowering pH at the end (by adding the dark grains). Another possibility is to counteract the pH effect of the dark grains at vorlauf with a pinch of calcium hydroxide, but one will have to take pH readings until this process is fine-tuned.

13
All Grain Brewing / Re: LODO Impact on Roast Flavor
« on: December 18, 2016, 11:00:16 AM »
In summary, isn't this technique a technique designed to minimize oxidation of the dark grains? Wouldn't LODO brewing allow the addition of the dark grains together with the rest of the grains, while avoiding the oxidation effects or an early addition in a normal mash?

Thoughts? Comments?

No.  It's designed to make it so you don't have to take their effect pH into account.
Apologies for being slow, Denny. Are you saying that the reason that Gordon has stated in books/ podcasts that the dark grains at vorlauf is to modify pH?

14
All Grain Brewing / Re: LODO Impact on Roast Flavor
« on: December 17, 2016, 05:23:07 PM »
Absolutely. None of the flavors I used to get from black malts exist anymore( burnt, harsh, ashy,etc). However it is much more intense, but fresh and clean.

I like hearing this, but what about a beer like my upcoming Dunkel where there is the small color adjustment with Carafa - ie., a beer where you don't want the roast intensified even if it's more pleasant? I just want to hit color accurately without extra roast in a beer like this. Am I overthinking on such a small addition?
Carafa Special or Sinamar will give you color without much roast flavor. 150g Carafa Special II should do for a Dunkel in a 5 gallon batch. You will not see any roasted flavor from this addition in a LODO beer. I am also adding color with 150g of Caramunich II. Beer got a 44 in a German beer comp and placed 2nd.

15
All Grain Brewing / Re: LODO Impact on Roast Flavor
« on: December 17, 2016, 04:23:06 PM »
I am a bit late to this topic... I reviewed the thread but have not found a similar comment so apologies if this was mentioned/ discussed.

Martin's hypothesis (see page 1) that beer with dark grains may not benefit from LODO is counterintuitive to me.
One independent observation that supports the opposite argument is the one made famous by Gordon Strong that dark beers benefit greatly by adding the dark grains (roasted, dark caramels) at vorlauf. Gordon likes to make the analogy of "burnt" coffee effect for dark grains added at the beginning of the mash; and as far as I understand, the "burnt" coffee effect is an oxidation effect.

In summary, isn't this technique a technique designed to minimize oxidation of the dark grains? Wouldn't LODO brewing allow the addition of the dark grains together with the rest of the grains, while avoiding the oxidation effects or an early addition in a normal mash?

Thoughts? Comments?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4