Membership questions? Log in issues? Email info@brewersassociation.org

Author Topic: Kentucky Common & Apple?  (Read 2590 times)

Offline klickitat jim

  • I must live here
  • **********
  • Posts: 8604
Re: Kentucky Common & Apple?
« Reply #15 on: July 19, 2015, 06:47:46 am »
So you're suggesting that they didn't do a sour mash, but somehow got a tartness from adding rod shaped bacteria to the fermentation? Thats just crazy talk!

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10678
  • Milford, MI
Re: Kentucky Common & Apple?
« Reply #16 on: July 19, 2015, 07:08:54 am »
Some beer historians have said that one reference in Wahl and Henius is the only one. Other editions of Wahl and Henius don't have it.

I think we can agree that a 4% beer with moderate hop rates can go off in the trade. Was it brewed to be sour?

Hey, I have had sour pints of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale at a local bar (I don't go there anymore due to filthy tap lines).





« Last Edit: July 19, 2015, 04:44:30 pm by hopfenundmalz »
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Offline MDixon

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2313
Re: Kentucky Common & Apple?
« Reply #17 on: July 19, 2015, 09:34:27 am »
I have both the 1901 (same as 1902) and 1908 versions of W&H mentioning KY Common (one is the actual book, one is a scan). The early version simply had a brief description of the style.

Rod shaped bacterium would be lactobacillus.

I don't see it as an issue. There were Louisville breweries making Berliner Weiss, it ain't much of a stretch to believe yeast having lacto could have made it into a KY Common.

It's not a popularity contest, it's beer!

Offline dmtaylor

  • Official Poobah of No Life. (I Got Ban Hammered by Drew)
  • *********
  • Posts: 4723
  • Lord Idiot the Lazy
    • YEAST MASTER Perma-Living
Re: Kentucky Common & Apple?
« Reply #18 on: July 19, 2015, 11:41:20 am »
I still disagree with the assertion a KY Common was never historically tart. While I agree with the Brown Cream ale, a sour mash version adds a nice low tart complexity.

You're the man, Dix.  Those BJCP nerds are, well... nerds.  I loved your recipe with the sour mash.
Dave

The world will become a much more pleasant place to live when each and every one of us realizes that we are all idiots.

Offline tworudysbrew

  • 1st Kit
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Kentucky Common & Apple?
« Reply #19 on: July 20, 2015, 05:56:47 pm »
Great advice all, and I learned some stuff too - Thanks.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Offline hopfenundmalz

  • Global Moderator
  • I must live here
  • *****
  • Posts: 10678
  • Milford, MI
Re: Kentucky Common & Apple?
« Reply #20 on: July 20, 2015, 06:02:57 pm »
Great advice all, and I learned some stuff too - Thanks.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It is your beer do what you want to get there. The rest was just the nerds being nerds.

Edit - was a professional nerd.
Jeff Rankert
AHA Lifetime Member
BJCP National
Ann Arbor Brewers Guild
Home-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

S. cerevisiae

  • Guest
Re: Kentucky Common & Apple?
« Reply #21 on: July 20, 2015, 07:14:37 pm »
The interesting thing is that chip casks were employed. That treatment was usually reserved for clearing  powdery non-flocculent lager strains.  It's use in clarifying Kentucky Common leads me to believe that the ale strains employed were more than likely non-flocculent (bacteria are non-flocculent).  I am curious if descendents of these strains are still alive and well somewhere in Kentucky.   

Offline MDixon

  • Brewmaster General
  • *******
  • Posts: 2313
Re: Kentucky Common & Apple?
« Reply #22 on: July 21, 2015, 05:45:41 am »
Since we are geeking out about KY Common, two more interesting tidbits are:

-The breweries listed in the research paper - Butchertown Brewery and Oertel's were the same brewery.



So the grists came from one brewery, granted from two different years, but it doesn't surprise me neither does an excellent treatise on their yeast since both were one and the same.


-The beer listed in the BJCP Guidelines as the commercial example has showed up tart:

http://insiderlouisville.com/promote_to_slide_deck/oertels-beer-returns-louisville-way-apocalypse-brew-works/
Quote
At about 4 percent alcohol by volume, it’s drinkable and pleasant – lightly tart, almost leaning toward a light sourness, but not quite getting there.


AND


It's not a popularity contest, it's beer!