[Robert]

More Bitter...

93% Pale Ale Malt
7% Caramel 40
36 IBU Brewers Gold FWH
0.75 oz/3G at 1 minute
0.75 oz/3G at steep/whirlpool
S-04 yeast

It accidentally dropped to 55F. Not sure exactly how. I think a switch on the controller was half open/closed. I notice it was starting to ferment anyway. I am raising to the mid 60’s now.

I figured there would be a half ounce of chocolate in there somewhere.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ha! Yeah this looks strangely familiar...  and mighty good.  My kind of beer.   S-04 is my new go-to,  nice to know how low it will go!

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[tommymorris]

More Bitter...

93% Pale Ale Malt
7% Caramel 40
36 IBU Brewers Gold FWH
0.75 oz/3G at 1 minute
0.75 oz/3G at steep/whirlpool
S-04 yeast

It accidentally dropped to 55F. Not sure exactly how. I think a switch on the controller was half open/closed. I notice it was starting to ferment anyway. I am raising to the mid 60’s now.

I figured there would be a half ounce of chocolate in there somewhere.

LOL

You should haul your GF down to Rocket Republic Sat to do the Homebrew Competition. First time I’ve heard of a brew it, ferment it, package it, condition it on-the-premises brew competition.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I am leaving the chocolate out for now. I am enjoyed the last one sans chocolate so I thought I would do that again.

I wanted to do the brew off but I had already signed up for a trail run race in Monte Sano. I don’t want to miss that. I may drop by after the race.

[tommymorris]

More Bitter...

93% Pale Ale Malt
7% Caramel 40
36 IBU Brewers Gold FWH
0.75 oz/3G at 1 minute
0.75 oz/3G at steep/whirlpool
S-04 yeast

It accidentally dropped to 55F. Not sure exactly how. I think a switch on the controller was half open/closed. I notice it was starting to ferment anyway. I am raising to the mid 60’s now.

I figured there would be a half ounce of chocolate in there somewhere.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ha! Yeah this looks strangely familiar...  and mighty good.  My kind of beer.   S-04 is my new go-to,  nice to know how low it will go!

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

I haven’t tried S-04 in years. I bought it because you and BrewBama like it.

[BrewBama]

More Bitter...

93% Pale Ale Malt
7% Caramel 40
36 IBU Brewers Gold FWH
0.75 oz/3G at 1 minute
0.75 oz/3G at steep/whirlpool
S-04 yeast

It accidentally dropped to 55F. Not sure exactly how. I think a switch on the controller was half open/closed. I notice it was starting to ferment anyway. I am raising to the mid 60’s now.

I figured there would be a half ounce of chocolate in there somewhere.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ha! Yeah this looks strangely familiar...  and mighty good.  My kind of beer.   S-04 is my new go-to,  nice to know how low it will go!

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

I haven’t tried S-04 in years. I bought it because you and BrewBama like it.

...and I am trying the M36 because of Tommy’s last ESB!  LOL

I think you’ll like it. It drops like a rock for crystal clear beer.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[brewsumore]

I've been watching from the sidelines for some time now.  Still really appreciate all that many of you do to make this forum interesting, informative, even cutting edge. 

Since mid-December I've brewed three 10-gal batches.  I have a German Pils lagering, and in the past week I've brewed a Kissmeyer Smoked Baltic Porter (BYO Jan/Feb 2013), and my version of a White IPA (as I told a friend, not the racist variety).  The first two went great, including home smoking pilsner malt with alder for the baltic porter.  But yesterday's brew of the Belgian Wit / American IPA hybrid, I forgot to add the FWH addition at the right time.  I caught the omission just as the wort was about to come to a boil, and just tossed in the bittering hops (13% Summit).  This error added 30 additional IBUs to the beer and per tasting the wort it's a hoppy monster.  Even though this beer is best young, I'm guessing I'll end up carbing it and tucking the 2 cornies in my wine cellar to mellow for a couple/few months.  Time will tell.

[Robert]

Curious -- how do you figure adding at the start of the boil increases bitterness?  FWH  is somewhat more efficient at extracting bitterness than a simple full boil.  But maybe not enough for the palate  to distinguish.  Anyway, glad you're enjoying cranking out the beer!

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[brewsumore]

Curious -- how do you figure adding at the start of the boil increases bitterness?  FWH  is somewhat more efficient at extracting bitterness than a simple full boil.  But maybe not enough for the palate  to distinguish.  Anyway, glad you're enjoying cranking out the beer!

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

I think I set my Pro Mash utilization for FWH as a 20 minute addition - I'd have to review that.  I have a relatively new, larger kettle (20 gal) and am still dialing in brewing process with it via recipe formulation in Pro Mash.  I had overestimated efficiency (~45% of grist was combined torrified wheat plus oats), and gotten a bit additional kettle volume, and ended up doing a 110 minute boil.  Pro Mash calculated the IBUS of a 110 minute boil of the bittering hops at ~45 IBUS, vs 16 if added as FWH.  Granted, this is sketchy.

Also part of the problem came with later hop additions.  I added some 5 minute hops, and lots of 0 minute hops.  I would have been fine had I dropped the wort temp to 170 prior to the 25 minute whirlpool hopstand.  I foolishly left it unchilled and so got more utilization than anticipated at the high (~200F) hopstand temp.  I was juggling stuff - and didn't prep enough for this beer.  I didn't find the Malwicki formula I was looking for, until after I finished the brewday.  A series of unfortunate events.  Due to the lower-than-target OG (1.054 instead of 1.060) I also suffered a BU:GU ratio imbalance.  It made me really ponder for the first time doing an all late addition hops IPA in the future.  Hopefully, what I anticipate will be a good active ferment, since using Imperial B44 Whiteout, will help blow off some of the hoppiness too.

This brew day just got away from me.  I haven't done any IPAs in a while.

[Robert]

Wherever the idea of setting FWH utilization as for 20 minutes came from (and I have heard of this notion before) it's unfounded nonsense.  If you expect, say, 25% utilization over a 60 minute boil, FWH might get you to 30% utilization.  That's why it was first done.   But there are so many other variables on the homebrew scale,  the actual difference is probably lost in the noise.   So in future you'll do well to regard FWH as identical to a full boil.  Meanwhile, RDWHAHB!

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[brewsumore]

Also, what we're talking about with FWH vs beginning-of-the-boil bittering addition is perceived bitterness vs. utilization.  It's all about the jaw-dropping pucker factor.

[Robert]

Also, what we're talking about with FWH vs beginning-of-the-boil bittering addition is perceived bitterness vs. utilization.  It's all about the jaw-dropping pucker factor.

I usually do just two hop additions in most beers:  FWH and 15 minutes.   I honestly don't find any qualitative difference in bitterness between FWH and boil additions.  But it does help to supress foaming at the start of boil, add significant aroma and flavor,  and just plain simplify my process.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[goose]

Wherever the idea of setting FWH utilization as for 20 minutes came from (and I have heard of this notion before) it's unfounded nonsense.  If you expect, say, 25% utilization over a 60 minute boil, FWH might get you to 30% utilization.  That's why it was first done.   But there are so many other variables on the homebrew scale,  the actual difference is probably lost in the noise.   So in future you'll do well to regard FWH as identical to a full boil.  Meanwhile, RDWHAHB!

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

That is the way I have been calculating it, Rob.  I normally boil everything for 90 minutes so in BeerSmith calculations I select the FWH "box" and use 90 minutes for the boil time.  I am not really convinced that I get the amount of bitterness from the FWH that BeerSmith calculates, but it seems to work fine for me.  I really need to do some more digging in the literature to see what the real consensus is, if there actually is one.

Just made a Black IPA last Sunday for an upcoming competition and used a small amount of FWH.  The last two additions were at 15 minutes and at knockout.  The bitterness seems balanced with the malt when I use this method.  A previous batch got a silver medal at a BJCP sanctioned competition last November.   Like you said, RDWHAHB.

[Robert]

I've seen the 20 minute thing in homebrew sources only.  I think somebody thought, hey this adds flavor and aroma, so it must not add bitterness, I'll count it that way.  And it got passed on.  Or something.  I want to say John Palmer did a fair bit to spread this idea, but he was probably  just a middle man. 

 There may have been a misunderstanding of the 1995 Preis and Mitter study on FWH involved.  Their methodology involved shifting a late addition to FWH, leaving the mid boil addition in place.  This may have reinforced the idea that FWH is equivalent to a late addition.   But the published results showed a ~30% increase in iso-alpha acid recovery, though tasters reported a more pleasant bitterness (which not all of us can distinguish.) 

Stan Hieronymus has called FWH "marginally" more efficient than a 90 minute boil.  Naturally, as isomerization begins around 180°F, the reason many drop the wort temperature before whirlpooling.   So probably setting your utilization at whatever you feel is the practical maximum for your form of hops and your system will give the most realistic results.


(Remember, the original reason for FWH was increased utilization.   Only recently have some suggested there may or may not be flavor and aroma implications.)

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

[narcout]

I've seen the 20 minute thing in homebrew sources only.  I think somebody thought, hey this adds flavor and aroma, so it must not add bitterness, I'll count it that way.  And it got passed on.

The explanation I usually hear is that regardless of how many IBUs the FWH addition actually adds, the quality of the bitterness is more akin to a 20 minute addition, and so people tend to calculate it that way.  I never FWH, so I have no idea how accurate a statement that is.

[dannyjed]

I got around to brewing my 300th batch today. A Belgian Triple with an OG of 1.082.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Robert]

"Old Hollybush"  Strong Mild Ale

This was, after Bitter,  the 2nd style I ever tried to brew way back when.   But I didn't know it then.   In the 80s, when colored-up, watered-down,  mid-century Mild was nearly extinct,  beers like this (really just pre-1917 style Mild it turns out) were readily available, often parti-gyled with the weak stuff (though I didn't know it.)  Confusingly,  it was always called "Old Ale," even though "old" is literally the opposite of "mild," and these beers were never aged; apparently it just meant "old fashioned," which it was.  I enjoyed the "Old Ale" style and tried to emulate it,  but not understanding it, I never really succeeded.   Now with a better grasp of the history and relationships within the Mild family,  and lots of Ron Pattinson's work to draw on, I think I can get where I was going.   Today's version:

12.6° P

Ca 104 Mg 10 Na 41 SO4 227 Cl 52

78% Chevallier pale 4.9% Amber  4.9% C77 12.2% No. 2 Invert

37 IBU (calculated in wort) 67% Cluster and Willamette FWH 33% Golding 15 minutes

Color adjusted to 14°SRM with cold-steeped black malt

S-04

(My original name for my version of the style comes from a pub,  the Holly Bush in Hampstead, where I enjoyed "Old Ale" and Modern Jazz.   I still fancy the ale, the jazz not so much.)