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 - klickitat jim

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 563
271
Beer Recipes / Re: Bittering addition amounts for ipa
« on: March 13, 2018, 12:59:40 AM »
True, the IBU isn't as accurate as the IMF

Before I get in trouble... back to the original intent of the thread. 1:1 BU:GU is a good starting point for IPA

272
Beer Recipes / Re: Bittering addition amounts for ipa
« on: March 13, 2018, 12:32:47 AM »
I start by deciding how much FWH I want to use (OK, you guys, don't start!  ;) )  That usually is 1-2 oz.  Then I figure out how much to use at 60 min. to get in the neighborhood of the 1:1 BU:GU ratio Jess talks about.
Is that ratio guideline for total ibus? Or just the bittering additions?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not to speak for Denny but, usually when people reffer to GU/BU its total they are talking about. 1:1 would be like 1.060 to 60 IBU.

The trouble is when it comes to high dose whirlpool additions. The science might say that no isolmerization is happening below X temp, but our mouths still translate those additions as some level of bitterness, though zero IBUs. If anyone doubts that, do a batch with no boil hops, and about 3 ounces of Simcoe at 150F for 30 min. There will be some bitterness. So, like any other ingredient, sometimes we can totally reduce hops to a numerical matrix. But experience will tell you what you like, don't like.

There are some good calcs out there that approximate the BU from whirlpool additions. We just incorporated some into our spreadsheet. Pretty simple actually, you just incorporate a modifier to the Tinseth utilization and viola.
I remember when I first started brewing, my early knowledge on hops was

1. Bitterness comes from isolmerized alpha acids. So obviously, there's no other way that hops could possibly make bitterness come into my beer. Check!

2. High alpha acid hops are for bittering. So you only can add them at 60 min, and they don't bring any flavor or aroma to my beer. Check!

3. Low alpha acid hops are for flavor only and you add them at 10 min before turning off the stove, or right as you turn off the stove for an advanced method called "Flameout". They don't add any bitterness, only flavor. Check!

4. Dry hops are the only way to get any aroma. Check!

Then I brewed a couple batches and start learning that there's more to it.

I use Brewer's Friend and it allows me to adjust utilization at whirlpool. For my tastes, experience, on my beers... I've gotten to where I glance at predicted IBU from my FWH/60 and then I ignore IBU from there on. It's all by experience and preference. When someone asks how many IBUs I say I don't know

273
All Grain Brewing / Re: Double Mash
« on: March 13, 2018, 12:15:46 AM »
Second try at double mashing. I brewed a Barleywine/Triple IPA on the 5th and another Imperial Stout the second day. Could have done them both in one day but decided to spread out the fun.

In short, my first try at double mash was not a fluke. Everything went as planned again. The only thing I did different this time is Erockrph's suggestion of 160 1st mash 148 2nd mash. We'll see if the results bear that out. If it turns out the same, well it shaved 45 min off the 1st mash. The other tweak I made was starting my fermentation cooler. Last time I fermented at 65 for 4 days then 68. This time I'm trusting Denny that 1450 goes low. I started at 60f. They were bubbling away nicely. Today I bumped it to 64f and in another 4 days I'll top out at 68f.

It's probably a few weeks out, but my next batch will be a big double-mash brew inspired by the recent activity in this thread. I'm going to brew a monster saison, using 100% of my house base malt blend (75% Weyermann Bo Pils/25% Dingeman's Pale Ale) and Belle Saison. I'm curious to see just how low of an FG I can get with Belle on a massive beer.
I'm liking the 160F first mash, 148F second mash!

I brewed a 25.7°P IIIPA 7 days ago, it's now at 6.7°P corrected!  So 1.102 to 1.027 in 7 days, and still covered in thick krausen.

6 days ago I brewed a 23.8°P Imperial Stout. It's now at 6.4°P corrected! So 1.095 to 1.025 in six days and still covered in thick krausen.

They were pitched at 60F, my normal 1200ml oxygenated starter (wy1450) made morning of brew day. On the 8th I bumped it to 64F. Yesterday I bumped it to 68F. Both samples smell lovely,  no fusels!

Thanks Erockrph!

274
Beer Recipes / Re: Bittering addition amounts for ipa
« on: March 12, 2018, 11:47:54 PM »
I start by deciding how much FWH I want to use (OK, you guys, don't start!  ;) )  That usually is 1-2 oz.  Then I figure out how much to use at 60 min. to get in the neighborhood of the 1:1 BU:GU ratio Jess talks about.
Is that ratio guideline for total ibus? Or just the bittering additions?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not to speak for Denny but, usually when people reffer to GU/BU its total they are talking about. 1:1 would be like 1.060 to 60 IBU.

The trouble is when it comes to high dose whirlpool additions. The science might say that no isolmerization is happening below X temp, but our mouths still translate those additions as some level of bitterness, though zero IBUs. If anyone doubts that, do a batch with no boil hops, and about 3 ounces of Simcoe at 150F for 30 min. There will be some bitterness. So, like any other ingredient, sometimes we can totally reduce hops to a numerical matrix. But experience will tell you what you like, don't like.

275
Homebrew Con 2018 / Re: Homebrewcon 2018 -Who is Going?
« on: March 12, 2018, 11:14:48 PM »
Max goes to PDX 

I suggest studying the Max web site. It goes everywhere. You can even get to Hood River with Grey Hound connections. You don't need a car in Portland, or surrounding villes

https://trimet.org

276
Yup. But that's cool. It's in our culture to bicker, but sometimes we should remember that we're all on the same side. Well, except people who dont like Fuggles!

I represent that remark!
Mister "dirt is cheaper"!

I'll double mash up Triple IPA with 100% brown malt and 100 IBUs of Fuggles, "Big Muddy"! Of course I'd need your feedback on every bottle

277
On the flipside, what makes us think that density is a good measure of how the beer will taste?  It is well known that different sugars taste vastly different in a finished beer, so one 1.015 beer can taste sweet and another not at all.  Add alcohol into the density equation and you aren't even measuring one thing, but a balance - hence "apparent attenuation".  So, other than knowing when your beer is done, what is it really telling you?

I've been measuring with refractometer only for a while, and it tells me just as much about the final mouthfeel of a beer as density ever did.  It also helps to measure a variety of beer (commercial, other homebrews) and get an idea of what your target is for the style.  It's like going from F to C: you're never going to make the switch if you're constantly doing conversions in your head.  Think native!
Thank you. Pretty much what I was trying to say. I'm on my way to speaking °P. I switched all of my recipes to it. Kind of forces the deal.

278
Yup. But that's cool. It's in our culture to bicker, but sometimes we should remember that we're all on the same side. Well, except people who dont like Fuggles!

279
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Maibock stuck at 1.028
« on: March 12, 2018, 04:45:27 PM »
How are you measuring gravity? With all the chatter on refractometer lately, just curious
I'm using a hydrometer.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Well, that's not the problem then. Hmmm

280
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Maibock stuck at 1.028
« on: March 12, 2018, 04:21:02 PM »
How are you measuring gravity? With all the chatter on refractometer lately, just curious

281
I did some deep diving on the interewebs this weekend, mostly threads on other forums (many I never knew existed) and some of the sources they led to.  Turns out there's a good amount of research confirming my suspicions above about many factors confounding corrections.  It seems hops alone can have an effect nearly as significant as alcohol, as can different grists, let alone all the other compounds in beer.  Much more research would be needed if it's even possible to develop reliable corrections, and the pros aren't going to do it, they don't use refractometers. We're just trying to use an instrument to measure something it wasn't designed to measure. (No I don't have all the references, you've got Google if you care.)

This looked good to me on a limited number of samples, but the more I've racked up, it looks like none of these formulas really works, which now doesn't surprise me.  If I have all the formulas in front of me (and thanks to Big Monk, I do!) I can find one of the half dozen that's fairly close.  But that just means that there's a one in six chance I can squint really hard and pretend it looks like something's working, not that it is.

So for my part, I'm back to the position that refractometers are useful pre-boil only, and I establish a correction factor for each individual batch using the saccharometer OG.  Even Terrill has said (referenced somewhere in this thread) that if you actually want to know FG (or for that matter when to spund) you really need a hydrometer.

So finally, if you're of the school of "close enough is close enough, I  don't  really need to know," why do you need any instrument at all?

  When it stops bubbling, its done!
Robert, bubbling or lack of bubbling is not reliable. Getting two readings, days apart, which are the same... much more reliable way to determine it's done. What I'm talking about as "close enough" is whether it's 1.012 SG or 1.013 SG terminal.

282
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Maibock stuck at 1.028
« on: March 12, 2018, 11:40:42 AM »
Some numbers must be off. Seems like not nearly enough malt to get 21L of that gravity

283
The last sentence of my "challenge" is worded as a question, not to be a smartie pants (well, maybe a little) but because it's entirely possible that I'm oblivious to why absolute accuracy is necessary.

284
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Darker DIPA OG 1.072 - stuck
« on: March 12, 2018, 06:42:48 AM »
There's an app for that

285
I'm really enjoying my switch to refractometer only. But I think it works so well for me because I only care about 'close enough'. I'm actually considering picking up a Hannah digital next fall, just for fun. I read Marshall's review of it, and saw that when he tested final Plato with it he used Sean's 1.040 correction factor. My first thought was OMG! He should have read this thread. But for kicks I plugged in some arbitrary numbers. If the refractometer read 18 brix starting and 8 brix final, with a correction factor of 1 the actual FG is 1.013. If the correction factor was 1.0126 (mine) it finished at 1.012. If the correction factor was 1.04 the FG is 1.012. The 3 different correction factors end up covering a pretty narrow span between a total of .2% abv. I am so grateful that to me, that is totally close enough. But, I don't spund.

For now, my $12 Chinese refractometer is getting the job done. I have not touched my hydrometer in a couple months. I probably will treat myself to the $180 digital toy in the fall. I won't need to fumble with the tiny screw driver, or trying to line up my bifocals on the eyepiece. Just push a button and enter the number to my correction app.

For folks who don't spund, but still freak out about precision, I have a challenge for you. The next time you drink a commercial beer, one you don't know the numbers on, guess what the FG is. Write it down so you can't cheat. Then measure it. If you can't consistently and accurately taste the FG within +/- 1 gravity point, why does it really matter what your instruments and math says?

Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 ... 563