[bayareabrewer]

Don't you tire of stirring the pot?

There was ZERO negativity in the response concerning dryhopping methods.

You've now derailed another thread because you are perpetually butthurt.

And I'm about to drop the hammer.  Bryan's response could certainly have been clearer.  It's as if low O2 is the answer fore everything, even if it obscures the real answer.   But that's my opinion.  Please, let's all keep it civil.

I am agreement, Low oxygen is the answer for everything! 

I disagree.  It is not the answer for easy, fun brewing.

And it is not the answer for the vast majority of professional breweries in their quest to make the best beer...

If you could be so kind to provide us with the numbers to that, I would love to see them. Thanks.

wouldn't it be easier for you to list the breweries actually using it? You seem a little worked up. Maybe step away from the computer for a little bit and collect yourself bud.

[Kutaka]

This thread is about how to make a Heady Topper clone juicy.  The recipe provided by the kit should make hop juice.

The brewer of Heady Topper is very proud of his low DO methods, but think how extra amazing Heady Topper would be if it was made by Bitburger.   

[kramerog]

Couple methods that seem to work well for that "juicy" character.

1.) High Chloride to Sulfate ratio (Opposite of what we would typically do)
2.) Flaked wheat or oats (up to 10%)
3.) Yeast that leave a slight ester (Gigayeast Vermont Ale, Omega DIPA)
4.) Most, if not all hops added between whirlpool and dry hop (Stick with tropical fruit forward hops such as Citra, Mosaic, Galaxy, etc...)
5.) Drink fresh!!

Generally agree with above. Below is my $0.02:
1) > 100 ppm chloride
3) London Ale III is pretty typical
5) Fresh can be a long time if careful to avoid oxygen exposure once fermentation get's going.
6) Dry hopping towards the end of active fermentation and dry hopping again after active fermentation, preferably in keg.

[bayareabrewer]

This thread is about how to make a Heady Topper clone juicy.  The recipe provided by the kit should make hop juice.

The brewer of Heady Topper is very proud of his low DO methods, but think how extra amazing Heady Topper would be if it was made by Bitburger.

nothing sets off a hoppy beer better than a big sulfur bomb!!:)

[neddles]

Couple methods that seem to work well for that "juicy" character.

1.) High Chloride to Sulfate ratio (Opposite of what we would typically do)
2.) Flaked wheat or oats (up to 10%)
3.) Yeast that leave a slight ester (Gigayeast Vermont Ale, Omega DIPA)
4.) Most, if not all hops added between whirlpool and dry hop (Stick with tropical fruit forward hops such as Citra, Mosaic, Galaxy, etc...)
5.) Drink fresh!!

I made a perfectly juicy pale ale with equal parts Chinook, Columbus, Simcoe, and Centennial in the whirlpool and dry. The same varieties reported to be in Hill Farmstead's Edward. That beer was cold crashed several days and perfectly clear (as you would expect from the high floccing yeast I used, 1318) before any dry hops were introduced. Suggesting biotransformation is not the cause for these flavors, and certainly not yeast in suspension. The flavors aren't completely the same as you normally get from these hops used in the traditional way IME.

[coombre]

I've been attempting to brew hazy "juice" bombs for my past 4 brews or so and have had great results per personal preference.  I have been using Wyeast London ale III (1318) for yeast.  Ive added hops early (60) in the boil and late (10) but have gotten better results when adding them in late.  I  prefer fresh IPA's with low bitterness and have found to achieve a NEIPA type brew, just whirlpool a load of hops (I usually will cool to 160 and WP for 20 minutes) and a ton of dry hopping in primary and in keg.  I dont add any kind of fining agents and dont want to be able to see my hand or fingers through the glass.  Its been working for me.

I am no expert on the "LODO" issue but if you minimize the time for oxygen to enter the primary/secondary/keg it shouldn't be a huge issue.  However I have seen the SRM on some of my brews change significantly (looking like pond water) when using rice hulls.   

I have done both the "biotrans" and standard dry hop methods and have observed negligible results.  I dry hopped ~60-70% complete and at day 10 respectively on a 14 day brew and both have had great results for the taste and appearance.

I am however still searching for a recipe that will results in what looks like you poured tropicana orange juice in a glass reminiscent of brews from omnipollo, noble ale works, highland park— especially omnipollo!  I think it's just filters from photo software  .  Ive used combinations of 2-row, red wheat, flaked oats, flaked barley, C-40, carapils, honey malt, oat malt, Munich I and II you name it.  Any and all suggestions would be great!

just my 2 cents... cheers!

[Stevie]

I was going to post, but this is already too much of a $hitshow.

[Kutaka]

I was going to post, but this is already too much of a $hitshow.

You could read the OP and reply to the OP while disregarding everything else. 

[Big Monk]

There is a fundamentally flawed thing going on here that no one seems to want to address:

The OP asked for an opinion and one was given. It went downhill from there. Does anyone recognize why?

To the OP, there is some merit to Bryan's post if you research the methods being used at Hill Farmstead, Alchemist, etc. See through the noise and realize his opinion was meant to help you in particular, not start nonsense with other posters.

[bayareabrewer]

his post offered no valuable direct insight and instead vaguely mentioned LODO. Which is why I asked, "why not just say dry hop at high krausen". And some of the "proof" I've seen posted that show those breweries are using Kunze's methodology include seeing a copy of his book in a video and a spunding valve.

Owning a book does not equal adherence to said books methodology. I'm sure we all own some brewing books we gleam insight from and disregard other bits of information in them, and spunding valves are widely used in many breweries for reasons other than to limit oxygen ingress.

[The Beerery]

My fault for being vague to the OP:

Low Oxygen Dryhopping methods.

[Kutaka]

LODO is a lot more than just dry hopping at high krausen.  That's why he didn't just suggest dry hopping at high krausen.

However, since the OP is brewing a kit beer and is asking questions about how to make trendy "juicy beer" from a kit, one can only assume LODO is TMI for the OP right now.

If you don't think LODO is beneficial based on whatever, there is no need to be defensive every time it's mentioned.  It's a valid brewing technique that is validated by rigorous science.


 

[HoosierBrew]

If you don't think LODO is beneficial based on whatever, there is no need to be defensive every time it's mentioned.  It's a valid brewing technique that is validated by rigorous science.

Totally agree. I don't judge or care how someone brews - the whole different goals, available time, etc, thing . But those of us who are interested in the info are entitled to read it without the same redundant noise. It's become like the movie Groundhog Day played nonstop at this point. Not gonna lie - arguments (vehement or not) against ANYTHING don't carry much weight when the protester hasn't actually tried the entire process. Brew and let brew (might have been a James Bond movie title. Or not).

[Stevie]

LODO is a lot more than just dry hopping at high krausen.  That's why he didn't just suggest dry hopping at high krausen.

However, since the OP is brewing a kit beer and is asking questions about how to make trendy "juicy beer" from a kit, one can only assume LODO is TMI for the OP right now.

If you don't think LODO is beneficial based on whatever, there is no need to be defensive every time it's mentioned.  It's a valid brewing technique that is validated by rigorous science.

Basically what I was going to say but much more diplomatic.

[Kutaka]

Totally agree. I don't judge or care how someone brews - the whole different goals, available time, etc, thing . But those of us who are interested in the info are entitled to read it without the same redundant noise. It's become like the movie Groundhog Day played nonstop at this point. Not gonna lie - arguments (vehement or not) against ANYTHING don't carry much weight when the protester hasn't actually tried the entire process. Brew and let brew (might have been a James Bond movie title. Or not).

Homebrewers are generally a very sensitive bunch.  This is one of the reasons why I have a very limited attention span for homebrew forums.  If the collective had thicker skin, maybe I would disappear less often.

The basic context of this LODO acceptance problem is one camp has a brewing method validated by science and they think it makes the "best beer" because science and opinion.  They need to be reminded that the term "best beer" is not something science can determine.

The other camp makes beer they really enjoy drinking and maybe they have won some awards to validate the quality of their beer.  If they make beer that they honestly think can't be improved, then I guess I can relate to their contempt for a process they think they don't need.

I'm absolutely certain both camps believe they make great beer.  There are many, many ways to make great beer and they don't necessarily need to be supported by science.

Blanket dismissals of the LODO process doesn't invalidate it's legitimacy.  I'm semi-LODO and can't think of any reason to introduce more DO into my beer based on science and subjective taste.