[duboman]

Joe

Take this FWIW, IME in entering several competitions a year for more than several years, noted astringency on a score sheet is one of the first things I dismiss. I find it to be one of the most subjective comments noted on any beer I have ever entered and know several other brewers with more experience and much better beers than mine that do the same.

Personally I feel that the flavor/sensation descriptors are so vague that many things can be described as astringent, some in fact actually desirable to the the style. My pale ale was just noted as being astringent and after having several people taste it I am pretty confident that it's just not an issue. One judge noted it as being slight, the other judge (Nationally ranked) noted no such issue.

IMVHO, unless the beer is really mouth puckering, astringency may not even be an issue.

Gary

[Joe Sr.]

Thanks. That's very possible. First time I've entered a comp so first experience with score sheets.

[duboman]

Thanks. That's very possible. First time I've entered a comp so first experience with score sheets.

honestly if this was the stout that scored a 43 I would question the comment because that's a great score!

I saw in another post this beer is going to the NHC as well? If so, you'll get some more feedback to reference.

Entering the same beer in multiple comps is really the best way to get a real handle on a beer so hats off to you on getting in the game!

[Joe Sr.]

Thanks!

The 43 was an imperial stout, not the same beer. I whipped up the smaller stout so I wouldn't be always drinking hi-test. I did to submit the small stout but was thinking I might. My dubble got the astringent comment and my old ale got a "not to style" so I was checking g inventory on what else I might submit and pulled a bottle of the stout.

The smaller stout was really dry, which I didn't remember from when it was on tap.

[denny]

I see astringency misdiagnosed so often that I'm always skeptical when I hear someone say it.

[denny]

Joe

Take this FWIW, IME in entering several competitions a year for more than several years, noted astringency on a score sheet is one of the first things I dismiss. I find it to be one of the most subjective comments noted on any beer I have ever entered and know several other brewers with more experience and much better beers than mine that do the same.

Personally I feel that the flavor/sensation descriptors are so vague that many things can be described as astringent, some in fact actually desirable to the the style. My pale ale was just noted as being astringent and after having several people taste it I am pretty confident that it's just not an issue. One judge noted it as being slight, the other judge (Nationally ranked) noted no such issue.

IMVHO, unless the beer is really mouth puckering, astringency may not even be an issue.

Gary

Gary is right on!

[mabrungard]

The lake water seems very constant, though there are times when you can smell the chlorine strongly. I believe this is seasonal perhaps when they change to chloramines. But I've never tracked it. Or it could be when there's a spike in E. coli bacteria along the lakefront. I don't know if they up the dose of chlorine at that point.

It is common for utilities that chloraminate to switch to chlorination for a short period during the year. This is often in the spring or late winter when the water has less of the reactive content that creates the cancer-causing trihalomethanes. Chlorine has much higher lethality than chloramines and switching over does give the utility a chance to 'shock' the system and reduce any stubborn organisms that were living with the chloramines. Chlorine is much more volatile than chloramine and you will smell the chlorine odor more readily when this switch is on. Most utilities only do this for maybe a month.