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 - narcout

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 108

Did you say mill? This is German, many craft breweries have these. Sierra Nevada, Bells, Firestone Walker to name three. I remember from Sierra Nevada Beer Camp back in 2009, they said they were milling under N2.

There is quite a bit in that marketing brochure about minimizing contact with oxygen.

The paper advocates pitching yeast first and then oxygenated/aerating to a target of 8ppm DO.

Shouldn't whether or not the process works be the only thing that matters?  What is the relevance of another brewer's opinion or how commercial breweries operate?

This should be tested the same way as everything else - brew the beer (following the instructions exactly as written with no shortcuts or substitutions) and set up a blind triangle test.

Given the zeal to prove these guys wrong, the best tasting panel would include people who aren't aware of the background and aren't biased against the GBF crew.

Edit - this is one my must see list. Several have said they make the best Pilsner they have had.

That is so cool; I never saw that page of the wiki before.

I don’t see how these process changes can be rejected based on the past actions or the attitude of the people who suggested them but other changes require blind triangle tastings and consideration of p values to make that determination.

We could come up with a thousand different hypotheses about why this is bunk (and maybe it is), but seriously – why not just try it if you're interested?

The mini mash test requires only SMB, mason jars, and maybe 2 hours of time.  I just ordered some SMB.  I’m going to give it a shot and post my results in a separate thread. 

NB flat rate shipping to CA is pretty slow, so I probably won’t be able to do it until the weekend after next.

Where are you seeing that in the paper?

I don't like the taste of wort, but I'd be interested in trying it to see if I can tell a difference.

It's not in the paper, but it has been suggested on the German Brewing Forum by the folks who authored the paper. 

There is a mini-mash test outlined that involves a side by side mash of a few ounces of grain in mason jars.  The only additional equipment needed for that would be the sodium metabisulfite (assuming you have jars).  You could then do a blind triangle tasting of the worts.  It wouldn't require much time, is no one interested in even that?

To me, it reads more like a recipe with a detailed guide on how to brew it than a scientific paper that requires peer review.

It seems like people are bending over backwards to discredit processes they haven't actually tried.  What's the value in that?

If you don't want to try it, don't try it.  It's really not a big deal either way.

We are happy to announce the re-opening of the German Brewing Forum. We look forward to seeing you over there and viewing our latest announcement.


That is a very interesting paper you all have put together; I really enjoyed reading it. 

Beer Recipes / Re: Belgian Red X
« on: April 25, 2016, 09:39:54 AM »
Well, I got it done.

From my previous experience with Red X, I knew it was more acidic than Bru'n Water would project so I targeted a mash pH in Bru'n Water of 5.54.  Actual mash pH was measured at 5.34.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Rube Goldberg Part Two
« on: April 24, 2016, 03:04:33 PM »

There are DO meters and digital refractometers available that are not outside the range of a homebrewer's budget.
Oh yeah?

Some of the folks on the German Brewing forum recommended this DO meter (it's $250):

Morebeer sells a digital refractometer for $199, and there other models available I've seen people using.

I don't have personal experience with any of these, but I've been thinking about the DO meter.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Pics of recent brews?
« on: April 23, 2016, 04:52:52 PM »
I was comparing my Belgian Strong Golden (on the right) against Pranqster (on the left).

They are actually pretty similar in flavor, but the Pranqster is more carbonated and more phenolic.  It's also a bit darker which makes me wonder if the grain bill is more than just pilsner malt and sugar. 

I plan to pick up some Duvel and Damnation for further comparison. 

There are DO meters and digital refractometers available that are not outside the range of a homebrewer's budget.

Sounds like a lot of fun

  • They exclusively use "the Andechs strain" from BSI and pitch a metric ton of it. 4 full 1/2BBL kegs, harvested off the cone of another fully fermented bier, is pitched into a 60BBL fermenter. We pitched a full 1/2BBL keg of 2nd generation yeast ("the best yeast generation") into the 15 BBL fermenter above.

Did they measure the DO?  If so, do you know what they target?

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Decoction help?
« on: April 22, 2016, 11:19:18 AM »
I think the "half the Pilsner" is what threw me. I thought that I would mash the entire grist, pull a portion after protein rest, boil it and return it to mash in order to push the temp to the 149. Can someone give me their step by step interpretation of these directions? Thanks!

I believe your interpretation of the directions is correct.  "Half the pilsner malt" means the portion of the mash you pull for decoction should include half of the grains being mashed (and you would be mashing the entire grist).

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32 ... 108