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 - goschman

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 139
196
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 10 point FG difference
« on: November 25, 2015, 08:39:14 AM »
Why in the world did you change your recipe if batch one was so good?

I did not change the recipe but I did tweak my mash parameters. Batch 1 had not fully come together in the bottle yet so I couldn't reliably judge it. I was worried it would be too dry at 1.010. I had to get Batch 2 brewed in time to be ready by xmas.

EDIT - batch 2 had slightly less brown sugar by % than batch 1.

197
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 10 point FG difference
« on: November 25, 2015, 08:36:37 AM »
Regardless of the causes, let's say it's done.

What differences should I expect?

198
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 10 point FG difference
« on: November 25, 2015, 08:34:41 AM »
Baffling.

Why would fermentation stall?  Did you mess with temperatures during those first two weeks?  Cool it down too early and settle out your yeast before they were done?

Could there have actually been contamination in Batch 1???  I doubt it, but, it could explain a difference.

If there is contamination it is the best contamination ever that I hope to reproduce!

As far as fermentation, I kept it in the low 60s until activity began to slow, ramped it up to 70F for a few days, then took my first FG reading after letting it naturally come back down to ambient temp in the mid 60s for a few days. EDIT - Original pitch was 2 packets of US05 into 1.078 wort...plenty



199
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 10 point FG difference
« on: November 25, 2015, 08:30:21 AM »
Okay, is it calibrated?  Does it read 1.000 in plain water at 60-70 F?

It reads 1.001 @ 60F. I subtract 1 point from all of my readings.

Maybe the wort wasn't aerated enough? Again, I followed my same 'aeration' process as usual so it should be similar to Batch 1 in that way.

200
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 10 point FG difference
« on: November 25, 2015, 08:28:39 AM »
See my EDIT above, repeated here:

EDIT: 2) Your final gravity readings are wrong.  How did you measure those?

Hydrometer @ 63F. The same hydrometer that was used to measure Batch 1

201
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: 10 point FG difference
« on: November 25, 2015, 08:24:58 AM »
Are you positive that Batch 2 was done fermenting?  How long was it at the final gravity, and at what temperature?

I just can't believe it was done.

My guess is one of two things are going on:

1) Your mash thermometer is not calibrated.

2) You bottled too early and Batch 2 will all be gushers or explosive.

Hope I'm wrong about the second point.

It is done. It was in the fermenter for 4 weeks with unchanged FG for about 2 weeks. I took my first hydrometer reading at 2 weeks and assumed it wasn't done. I added more yeast, roused the settled yeast, and warmed the beer up to 70F. No change.

The fermentation results I got for batch 2 was actually more of what I was originally expecting when designing this beer.

202
General Homebrew Discussion / 10 point FG difference
« on: November 25, 2015, 08:17:13 AM »
I have brewed a particular batch twice with a few procedural changes that I will note. Batch 1 had an OG of 1.078 and a FG of 1.010 (87% attenuation, 8.9% ABV). Batch 2 had an OG of 1.078 and a FG of 1.020 (74% attenuation, 7.7% ABV).

This is basically a baltic porter with slight procedural changes between the 2 batches. I wanted to decrease the alchohol slightly by raising the FG to make it more appropriate for the style. I decided to decrease the mash length and raise the mash temperature in attempt to achieve this.

Batch 1: 3 hour mash starting at 148F that probably dropped to or below 146F by the end. I was out running errands thus the long mash. There is also about 3% brown sugar to promote some fermentability. I was very surprised to say the least to get 87% attenuation. US05 is the yeast.

Batch 2: 2 hour mash starting at 152F and I assume stayed above 148F. I decreased the amount of sugar as my efficiency was slighty higher to hit my OG of 1.078. No other changes were made.

Batch 1 obviously produced a much more fermentable wort. I am disappointed with Batch 2 and was hoping for a FG between the 2 results I got. Batch 1 is probably the most complex and delicious beer I have ever brewed and I am not sure how Batch 2 can stack up. Batch 2 was bottled yesterday so I won't be able to do a decent side by side for a few weeks. Maybe somehow I will get lucky and it will be better?

Other than a fuller, sweeter beer what differences should I expect? My fear is that although Batch 2 will have less ABV, it will be less drinkable with a syrupy sweetness to it. I am giving these away which is why I am concerned. The good thing is that most people are more apt to drink a 7.7% vs 8.9% ABV beer. A lot of the people who will be receiving one might have been scared away by the ABV level. Has anyone experienced something similar and what were your impressions?

203
Beer Recipes / Re: 20% Munich + 4% caramunich too much for a stout?
« on: November 25, 2015, 07:42:05 AM »
I have a dark beer finishing up now that is 85% munich light. It's way too early to tell but from the sample but I am surprised that it is not more malty.

204
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Primary for 5 weeks?
« on: November 25, 2015, 07:40:14 AM »
 5 weeks is not an issue. As far as how long I would think 8 weeks or more depending on OG/ABV

205
Beer Recipes / Re: redeveloping American Wheat recipe
« on: November 25, 2015, 07:30:31 AM »
I really like Red Wheat and Weyermann Bohemian Pilsner

Even if the judges still aren't happy, they will both up the overall quality of your beers.

Thanks. I will see what I can find. I am pretty loyal to my LHBS and I don't think they carry either of those malts. They carry Weyermann specialty malts but not base malts I believe.

206
Beer Recipes / Re: 20% Munich + 4% caramunich too much for a stout?
« on: November 25, 2015, 07:27:31 AM »
I think it looks good but I would consider upping the amount of munich light, swapping it for dark, or both upping the amount and swapping to dark.

207
I too see the value for specific brewers. I can't myself imagine spending more than I spend on a batch. I enter competitions mainly to get feedback but understand how this could be better.

208
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Pics of recent brews?
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:55:56 PM »
Yum! What do the IBUs calculate at for that one? I am trying to get my APA to stradle the line between APA and IPA in ABV and IBUs

54 smooth as silk IBU  ;D

EDIT: and FWIW, this is one of my favorite hop blends. Ive converted quite a few APA and IPA haters with this lineup.

The APA you helped me with turned out fabulous so I don't doubt it.

209
Hmmm...why not just submit into a competition? $7 an entry seems much more affordable...

We wanted to provide another channel for brewers to get feedback on their beers. We love competitions (and enter them frequently), but there are a few inherent problems we felt we could address.

For one, competitions occur on a particular date so you have to arrange your brew calendar around them. We think there's value in an on-demand service that accommodates your schedule rather than the other way around.

Also, competition feedback is usually minimal out of necessity. There are so many beers to judge and so little time to spend on each one. Our service allows the judge the luxury of spending more time with each brewer's beer.

Lastly, unlike competitions, we provide a way for brewers to submit recipe and process information for the judge to look at while evaluating the beer. This allows the judge to provide specific and actionable feedback that is deeper than what you receive in competition score sheets.

Got ya. So instead of learning on your own how to make a beer better, you are basically paying a consultant to tell you how to do it?

210
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: Pics of recent brews?
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:36:10 PM »
Yum! What do the IBUs calculate at for that one? I am trying to get my APA to stradle the line between APA and IPA in ABV and IBUs

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 139