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 - morticaixavier

Pages: 1 ... 289 290 [291] 292 293 ... 517
4351
Sure they could stop buying bud if they didn't like it but they DO like it. I am just questioning WHY they like it. There is always an argument that 'if people didn't like it they wouldn't do it that way' but if I can make a product and convince lots of people they like it then I can keep making that product.

It sounds arrogant and condescending to say "You like what you like because you're brainwashed, while I like what I like because I have good taste."

I'm sure a lot of Bud drinkers think we're all pretentious suckers for paying $20 for one bottle of an infected, sour beer that's sat around in barrels for a year.

When did I say I like what I like because I have good taste? I'm just as susceptable to suggestion as the next guy.

4352
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Fermentation Temperature wih WLP028
« on: December 15, 2012, 12:54:22 PM »

very few ale yeasts will do well at 50-52 degrees.

Not relevant to 028, but I have a batch going with WY1007 at 52 and I'm getting blowoff from it.

Is that eqivalent to WLP029? That one does like it pretty cool.

4353
See it's gradual. You make gradual changes you your recipe when you DON'T want your consumers to notice. If you are doing it to pull in new customers you make the keystone "bitter beer face" ad campaign. I stick by my hypothesis that these changes are driven exclusivly by profit margins and not by quality concerns.

I am not saying that small artisinal brewers are doing it purely for the love of the thing but I am saying that the standards a company chooses to hold itself to has a lot to do with the end quality of their products. And the big boys in the industry choose to hold themselves to standards that seem more driven by profit motive than by taste.

I understand the point that customers don't necessarily ask for something, but if the products of the large conglomerates didn't meet a need, then people wouldn't buy them. No one asked for an iPod, but did Apple manipulate people into thinking they wanted one, or did they provide a product that met a need? It seems like you're saying that the big brewers are manipulating drinkers into drinking less flavorful beer (or did I misinterpret?), but I don't think they would have as much of the market as they do without meeting some kind of need.

The price of rice and corn are higher than malt, as pointed out by both August Schell and Stone Brewing's Mitch Steele in a recent interview on Basic Brewing Radio. That shoots a gaping hole through the "profit motive".

Companies (including brewers, regardless of their size) have a right to look for ways to make more money. You and I and everyone else have the right and the ability to choose or not choose their products.

I agree.  I fail to see how a gradual change indicates that there's been some nefarious long term plot by the big brewers to trick their customers into drinking something they wouldn't otherwise like.

Rather, I would bet it reflects a gradual change in consumer preferences.

Just because the big brewers are big doesn't mean they don't need to respond to the market.  US car makers learned that back in the 70s.

It's really not all that hard to make someone want something they didn't want before. happens all the time. Advertisers get paid a LOT of money to make people want something they didn't want before. However it's not black and white. Coke tried hard with 'New Coke' and failed. The people responsible for the campaign were sacked.

just because rice and corn are more expensive than malt RIGHT NOW doesn't mean that it was always or will always be true.

How many people taste beer, or coffee, or spicy food for the first time and love it right away? more often than not people continue to try things they don't really like because people they see and respect around them seem to be enjoying it.

Sure they could stop buying bud if they didn't like it but they DO like it. I am just questioning WHY they like it. There is always an argument that 'if people didn't like it they wouldn't do it that way' but if I can make a product and convince lots of people they like it then I can keep making that product.

4354
yeah, i gots to find some of their beer. i agree that it is somewhat off that corn and rice are adjuncts and that wheat and rye, oatmeal, etc get a pass.  i also believe that just because a beer hasn't had the hell hopped out of it (that sounds kind of naughty) that it isn't a good beer.

+1. nothing wrong with corn and rice in their place. I kind of like the hitacho nest red rice ale. and there are lots of low hop beers I like.

4355
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: Fermentation Temperature wih WLP028
« on: December 14, 2012, 03:45:39 PM »
If you put it in a closet at 50-52F, the yeast will stay dormant.  It's too cold. 

Is that for ale yeasts in general or WLP028 specifically? I'm mostly worried about the yeast activity driving up the temperature for the first day or two.

very few ale yeasts will do well at 50-52 degrees. I would go with the 59-61 degree option and include a tub or water to moderate swings as much as possible. Different yeasts do have different temp ranges that they 'like' (and by like I mean that produce results that WE like) I think WLP028 likes it a bit cool. It is scottish after all ;) so it probably wears a kilt in winter time. When I did a 60-/ with that yeast I set my temp control at right around 59 and kept it there and it turned out well.

4356
See it's gradual. You make gradual changes you your recipe when you DON'T want your consumers to notice. If you are doing it to pull in new customers you make the keystone "bitter beer face" ad campaign. I stick by my hypothesis that these changes are driven exclusivly by profit margins and not by quality concerns.

I am not saying that small artisinal brewers are doing it purely for the love of the thing but I am saying that the standards a company chooses to hold itself to has a lot to do with the end quality of their products. And the big boys in the industry choose to hold themselves to standards that seem more driven by profit motive than by taste.

4357
I think it might be worthwhile to examine this idea that the macros make cheap, fizzy yellow water because that's what the consumer really wants. I disagree with that idea as well. It's not how market forces work. Yes if they made a beer that actually tasted like piss that would be one thing. But as was pointed out in an article that I think was posted on here at some point, since the 1970's budweiser has reduced the amount of hops in it's beer by 2/3. It's not because the consumer demanded a less hoppy brew it's just that AB found that if they reduced the hop presence bit by bit they could trick their consumers into drinking less hoppy beer AND reduce the cost of production and thus increase profits.

Humans are alarmingly susceptable to suggestion and the macros maintain their dominance of the market by hammering their brands into our heads all the time not by maintaining the very best quality product in their segment. Quality can't drop below a certain point where the product becomes actually disgusting to the majority of it's consumers but beyond that profit margins rule.

Can you explain why the German Pilsners have lost a lot of IBUs over the same period?

many of them have been purchased by the big conglomerates haven't they? Cost of hops has gone up, focus groups show that 'most' consumers can't tell the difference or don't mind?

Has it been done as a gradual reduction as AB did? or all at once with associated marekting to tell us how the beer is now better and less bitter?

4358
I think it might be worthwhile to examine this idea that the macros make cheap, fizzy yellow water because that's what the consumer really wants. I disagree with that idea as well. It's not how market forces work. Yes if they made a beer that actually tasted like piss that would be one thing. But as was pointed out in an article that I think was posted on here at some point, since the 1970's budweiser has reduced the amount of hops in it's beer by 2/3. It's not because the consumer demanded a less hoppy brew it's just that AB found that if they reduced the hop presence bit by bit they could trick their consumers into drinking less hoppy beer AND reduce the cost of production and thus increase profits.

Humans are alarmingly susceptable to suggestion and the macros maintain their dominance of the market by hammering their brands into our heads all the time not by maintaining the very best quality product in their segment. Quality can't drop below a certain point where the product becomes actually disgusting to the majority of it's consumers but beyond that profit margins rule.

I think this might be the real differentiator between 'craft' and 'crafty' or perhaps between 'craft' and 'crap'  ;)

you average small brewery wants to make the very best beer they are able to within the contraints of the market and hope to make a solid profit from doing this (which they very often do, quality still speaks loudly to a certain segment of the market who are listening). The macros hope to maximize profit on all of their product lines period. If AB can show through focus groups, tasting panels, or what have you that Goose Island with less hops or more adjuncts, or less costly ingredients is substantially the same as Goose island with the proper amount of hops, no adjuncts (except where appropriate) and the highest quality ingredients they will do so.

so Craft = doing something for the joy and love of doing something really well and Crafty = doing something as cleverly and, sometimes, deceptivly as possible in order to maximize profit.

at least that's sort of how I see it.

4359
Yeast and Fermentation / Re: yeast starter
« on: December 13, 2012, 05:01:39 PM »
So check my thinking...

I am going to brew five gallons of Baltic Porter with an OG of 1.065 using Wyeast's 2124 lager yeast.

My limitations are that I have one stir plate and two, 2 liter flasks.

For my previous ales I have made a 1 liter starter wort to which I add the yeast packet.  My thinking is to start the same with a 1 liter wort, leave it on the stir plate for 3 days, in the fridge for 2 then decant.  Then make a 1.5 liter wort and combine that with the 1st starter (I'm assuming this will get me close to 2 liters total which makes me a bit nervous).  Then let the second step for for 3 days, 2 days in the fridge, decant and pitch into the oxygenated Baltic Porter wort.  At each step and in the boil kettle I will use the appropriate amount of yeast nutrient.

Obviously this would be a lot better/easier if I had a second stir plate or a bigger flask, but is there an easier or better way?

Steve

not sure about the math off the top of my head but check this site out. It's great for multistep starters which is an area the mrmalty does not so do well.

http://yeastcalc.com/

4360
The only reason putting a barrel limit on "craft beer" makes any sense is if you don't really want everyone to be able to enjoy "craft" beer. It's not likely, and maybe not even feasible, for small breweries to supply all of the beer in country. So if your goal is to keep "craft" beer something small and exclusive, so you can feel like a cool person for drinking it, then exclude the big makers.

What is the BA's plan when small breweries get big because people like their beer? Keeping bumping up the allowable barrels? Boston beer co and New Belgium are already big breweries in their own right.

I think it's great that small brewers are putting pressure on big brewers to make better beer.

I disagree with your idea that small breweries couldn't supply all beer drinkers. We just need more small breweries to do it. This increases employement. it also drives prices up on high quality agricultural products which benefits farmers

4361
Kegging and Bottling / Re: Dishwasher Sanitize vs. Jet Bottle Washer
« on: December 13, 2012, 02:48:48 PM »
I
P.S.  no reason to rinse iodophor

learn something new every day.
I suspect it depends how much you use. Tried some nasty-finishing beer at the last homebrewers' meeting that more experienced tasters and brewers than me (read: BJCP National) said was iodophor.

you should never rinse idophor, if you rinse it will anything less than sterile water you are just re-introducing potential contaminants. But you should make sure you dont' end up with so much that you can taste it

4362
Kegging and Bottling / Re: Dishwasher Sanitize vs. Jet Bottle Washer
« on: December 13, 2012, 01:16:19 PM »
I would still recommend "cleaning" the bottles.  I don't think a quick rinse cuts it.

You can clean the bottles with either dish soap and a bottle brush (you can hook it up to your drill for a power wash) or a 30 minute soak in hot PBW. 

I prefer the stainless jet washer to the brass one.  It's more gentle on your plumbing.

P.S.  no reason to rinse iodophor
Unless they have been sitting around unrinsed I don't get too chuffed with cleaning the bottles. I rinse well with hot water right after emptying them and then when it's time to bottle I either dunk/spray them in/with idophor/starsan if I am only bottling a couple off the keg, or put them all in the oven at 350 for 20 minutes the night before I am going to bottle. The dishwasher works too, instead of the oven if you can be confident of the temp inside.

However when my stock of reusable bottles with labels still on gets a bit high I take an evening and soak them all in hot PBW solution mainly because it makes it easier to remove the labels.

4363
Ingredients / Re: calciuim chloride post ferment
« on: December 13, 2012, 01:06:48 PM »
I haven't thought of this before, but maybe there is some merit.  Assuming that the spices added some excess tannins to the beer, it could be possible to chelate those tannins with a dose of calcium ions.  And since you wouldn't want to enhance the drying perception of the beer, sulfate is out.  So calcium chloride could be a valid option to help with this remediation. 

Do explore this effect some more.  It could work.  Your palate is as good as anyone's.  Although, I would suggest that you gather some friends and explore the effect more scientifically by performing blind triangle testing to assess the effect. 

Thanks for sharing!

Thanks Martin,

I will try to put something together.

4364
Ingredients / calciuim chloride post ferment
« on: December 13, 2012, 11:47:16 AM »
Hey All,

My christmas beer is an oatmeal raisin stout with spices this year. It's all done and in the keg and it's pretty nice except for two things;

There is a bit too much astringency, I suspect because I soaked cinnamon sticks in vodka for a month and added the vodka to the keg. I suspect this because the astringency is kind of woody, like that you might find in a wood aged beer. Although I also think the skins of the raisins might have added some tannins, they were in the beer for a couple, three weeks.

There is a touch too much tartness, I suspect from the raisins as it's kind of raisiny/grapy/fruity tartness, I don't THINK it's infected but it could be that as well I supose.

So last night I decided to do an experiment, I took a couple tiny grains of calcium chloride and dropped them right in my glass with a couple oz of beer and swirled it around and I think it helped. I think by accentuating the malt a bit more it draws attention away from the flaws a bit while still allowing those flavours that I want to be showcased. I LIKE the tart raisin and the slightly woody cinnamon, just not quite so much.

Finally to the actual question. As a ball park how much Calcium Chloride should I be thinking about adding? I can't imagine I would want more than say 5-10 grams. Is there a convienient way to use bru'n water to figure out some PPM values for the chloride based on post ferment additions? I suspect I could simply by plugging in the volume of beer in the keg and adding the salt until the ppm is where i want it.

I see recommendations for a roughly 2:1 sulfate:chloride ratio for hoppy beer, would I want to reverse this for malty beers? 1:2 sufate:chloride?

4365
[...] 

if this is straight up true...

Quote
The large brewers employ 25,000 people in their stateside brewing facilities and, undoubtedly, in cities like Milwaukee, Denver and St. Louis, these jobs are important to the local economies. But across the entire U.S., small and independent craft brewers employ more than 103,500 Americans in local, Main Street jobs.

...then it's even more reason to support your local brewery, something I think a lot of us on these beer forums already do anyway.  I suspect the language used by the author was a bit "emotive," but the sentiment would still hold provided the statistic is valid.

I was just going to post that quote.

Just ruff back of apkin math, if the 75% of the beer market in america that is controlled by the big guys were in the hands of small indie brewers that would mean around 725,000 new jobs! that's huge!

Pages: 1 ... 289 290 [291] 292 293 ... 517