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 - sienabrewer

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: FYI: blind taste test
« on: March 18, 2010, 08:22:08 PM »
I agree it is good information to build upon.  I have to admit what you describe in the difference is not what I expected.  I expected a report of something tasting metalic, which is not the case.  It is interesting to hear the description being cloying because that is something I guess normally would be attributed to a bad fermentation or overuse of an ingredient.  I'm also interested in what property of can a can makes it bitter. 

Denny, if you are going to go ahead and do a larger sample I'd make one suggestion.  Do it with both BMC beer and a craft beer.  I'd be really interested if a noticeable difference is in cheap crap beer, just craft beer, both, or neither.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: What's your Favorite Style of Beer?
« on: March 15, 2010, 01:28:12 PM »
Tie between APA and brown ale

Dean, rather than surmising about analogies which may not be analogous, why don't you just do the blind triangle test and get yourself some real data?

+1, thank you. 


Besides, the bottles are DARK

cmon, now babalu, UV still gets through brown.

Based on another thread on here, someone will now suggest they should be in cans :)

Oh now that's a low blow.   Sometimes tradition just wins.  if it's been right for a couple 100 years why change it.

I don't believe picking incorrectly would be prove the point at all if you're using 10 samples.  Each time you take alcohol into your mouth your tastebuds are dulled no matter if you're eatting crackers and swishing with water or whatever you do.  There was a time when I didn't like beer all that much, or at least not until after a beer or two.

I can drink beer out of a can, but I choose not to.  After drinking a couple, I probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway.  Beside that, if it weren't true, why would so many people say the same thing often giving the same description for the flavor they are picking up?  Its like this... take a small taste of a red hot pepper, then take a big bite of the same pepper and tell me there isn't a difference.  One stings a little but its nothing memorable, the large bite you aren't apt to forget so soon.   ;)  ;D

I just can't buy into this logic.  For me it's like saying I can taste two samples of chicken and soup and pick out which one uses sea salt and which one uses regular table salt.  I'm not trying to discredit you, but it just seems so unlikely.  Can you taste the difference between Pepsi from the can and Pepsi from the 2 litre plastic bottle that have both been placed in a glass?

And to your second point about why so many people say the same thing.  It's just like the homebrewing myth that boiling in stainless steel is better than aluminum, or adding a lb of sugar to a beer makes it taste like cider.  My guess would that most of the people who believe the can myth are those who were drinking from cans back in the day before the technology improved and did away with that problem.

I think I just happen to prefer cans.  I don't buy this nonsense that cans make the beer metallic; companies worked out that issue a long time ago.  I always pour my beer in a glass when I'm home, so drinking out of a bottle is never an issue.  As far as the environmental "advantages" I waste a ton of water each time I brew so I can't exactly claim that I care for that reason either.  I just want more cans because they store better, keep the beer fresher, are easier to pack a fridge with, I can take them anywhere, and don't have to worry about them breaking.  I guess I'm just surprised that some of the bigger micros who can afford to implement cans have not done so.  The beer is going to taste the same, it's just a matter of providing me with an easier way to bring it more places. 

Our goal as a production brewery is to go to cans. Its actually fairly affordable. But, the distributors are not 100% behind it for various reasons. Not that they would turn us down, they just have reservations.

I'm interested in what those reservations might be.  I guess I'm thinking that there are so many more advantages to go the can route than glass (cheaper, more stable shelf life, more portable, overall convenience).  I was at my local beer "depot" last night for the first time in a while and I saw that Bass now comes in the can with a widget, and Brooklyn is putting their flagship lager in 16 oz tall boys.  It's not as if I have an aversion to buying craft beer now because it is in bottles, there is just something very appealing to have some good craft choices in a can.  Just think: fishing, camping, bbq, outside in general, etc. 

General Homebrew Discussion / Why don't more microbrews start canning?
« on: March 10, 2010, 07:55:35 PM »
As I was making my list of top 20 beers for Zymurgy yesterday I couldn't help but wish that many of them were in cans.  So it got me thinking, why is it that breweries have not invested in canning some of their flagship beers?  Is it because it just costs too much, would be too much of an initial investment?  I kind of scratch my head as to why some of the larger micros (if they can still be called that), i.e Sam Adams, Sierra Nevada, etc. have not put at least their most popular labels in a can yet.  I would think, aside from the novelty of it, this would increase the possibility of more people buying it.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Describe cloyingly sweet for me
« on: March 09, 2010, 08:51:24 PM »
Ok, then I would not describe my most recent porter as any of the things cited above.  I'm thinking the beer just has a good deal of body.  My father-in-law described the beer as being "thick" but with really good flavor.  I detect a bit of sweetness, but nothing that I would describe as over the top of maple syrup like.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Favorite Scoresheet Comment
« on: March 09, 2010, 08:16:55 PM »
I'll offer something that just made me laugh and prove how subjective beer sensory perception is.  Two comments, from two different judges, from the same competition, judging the same beer:  (1) Good, long lasting head retention, perfect for style, good carbonation; (2) Head quickly receded, exhibits very low carbonation for the style. 

I submitted only two bottles, one of which had to be for the BOS round.  Being that this beer didn't make the BOS round they clearly were pouring from the same bottle. 

General Homebrew Discussion / Describe cloyingly sweet for me
« on: March 09, 2010, 08:12:09 PM »
I read often that people try to avoid, use ingredients to prevent, or otherwise do something to avoid beers being "cloyingly sweet".  Can someone describe what this is for me because I think it may have happened in my most recent porter.  What does is come from, where could I have gone wrong?  Personally, I think it was because my beer did not attenuate enough, could this be a reason?

Zymurgy / Re: Zymurgy Magazine?
« on: March 03, 2010, 02:25:04 PM »

I have to say, or ask that is...If the distribution of the magazine is based on paid subscriptions how
does that translate to additional cost to the AHA/printing company? Is it based on potential revenue lost
by distribution to LHBS's where the issues are available to purchase?

If I hand my copy over to my non-member friend did the AHA just lose money? Even though I am a member.

I'm just trying to understand the cost and revenue process for publications. I have never really thought about it.

This was my first thought too.  How much money is the AHA spending in addition to the dues the individual member pays to receive the magazine?  I can understand removing the magazine from book stores and shops and distributing it solely to members only.  I'll offer my opinion, which is simple.  After spending all day in front of a computer working, the last thing I want to do when I go home is read my hobby magazines (I have a few)....on a computer.  Aside from supporting homebrewing through my dues, I can honestly say the magazine (in paper) is why I subscribe.  I honestly have no problem paying a bit more if that would be the case.  However, if the magazine were to go to online only I would in all likelihood let my membership run out..

I only brew ales, so from my perspective a cream ale is the hardest.  The easiest I think is an amber.  My reasing is that, while I agree a porter or stout can mask off flavors, darker beers can easily be overdone with too much acrid bitterness.  Use a couple to many ounces of RB or BP and you have made one undrinkable beer.  An amber on the other hand can take a healthy dose of hops or caramel malts and still be pleasant, while masking off flavors. 

The Pub / Re: Help Save Colorado Beer Culture
« on: February 19, 2010, 08:10:12 PM »
It allows the grocery chains to control what goes on the shelf, therefore, locking out the small breweries.  It basically would allow the grocery chains the power to control choice by not allowing the smaller guys to compete.  If they cannot even get their product on the shelf (i.e. because they don't have enough money to influence the chains) they are doomed to fail. 

Commercial Beer Reviews / Re: Great Lakes Variety Pack
« on: January 05, 2010, 12:18:58 AM »
I haven't had the variety pack, but I have had some of their beers.  Most recent was the Elliot Ness, a Vienna Lager, and it was very good.  I usually get one beer from that brewery, but a different style every time I go to the beer store.  Not one beer has disappointed me yet.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]