[HoosierBrew]

On a final note (said all i can say), my only hope is new (and seasoned alike i guess) brewers take away the following from this thread:  We are not curing cancer here...we are brewing beer. At the end of the day, just enjoy what you are doing, ask questions and challenge everything. By doing so you'll free yourself to the possible, and somewhere along the journey you'll find a path you can call your own.  If whatever you do in the process of making beer works for you and you're happy with your finished product...that's all that really matters.

For the love of beer-peace out! 

^^^^^^^^^^^ Gold star, also. 

[Wort-H.O.G.]

I would hope that the goal of every brewer would be to keep an open mind, not take the "What I am doing works for me, so why try something different?" approach to brewing.  The only approach that I can think of that is more dangerous to the future of home brewing is the lemming approach of following the crowd without question.  If every home brewer took either of these approaches to home brewing, we would still be making beer from cans of Pabst Blue Ribbon malt extract and baker's yeast.

great points.  this is how brewers navigated to using stir plates, batch sparge, brulosophy lager schedule, etc....-"open mind to trying something different"

The Bruelosophy schedule is pretty much what I have been doing for the last 3-4 years. Most of what I got was from Kai's page. Comments. Go on gravity, as sometimes I start the D-rest after 4 days for a 12 P beer, or it might take 6 or more for a 20+ P beer that is fermented at 48F. Check the flavor during the D-rest, you might not need 5 days. Crash to -1C (30.2F if you are SI challanged). Give it time to clear.

Jeff- I agree on the gravity reading. first time I did it, i felt it was a tad early for day 5 to ramp up. I'm finding for me, i start the clock from first signs of fermentation, and therefore around day 6 im in the 60% attenuation range. its then i start the ramp up in temps.

[Hooper]

When I saw the start of this thread, I laughed out loud. Now 11 pages in...What an interesting read and I learned some things along the way. I guess you can't judge a book by it's cover...

[TMX]

I have read every post of this thread at least twice, and some of them up to 5-6 times.  I have had several PM conversations with Mark, and he has been very helpful in helping me understand his method.  I brew 10 gallon batches, and today I ordered 2 1 gallon jugs with poly screw caps to give his method a try.

I do not have a LBS that I care to deal with that had the jars, so less than $20 later (free shipping) I have the items I need to try something new that may improve my beer.

For some reason, if I can't get the results I am looking for, then worst case I have 2 1 gallon growlers for carrying my home brew to a friends house.

I got stale and stuck with my approach to brewing, completely going against the reason I started in the first place.  As brewers, almost everything we do gas against the grain, or is off the beaten path; being unable to accept, try, or at least contemplate a new technique is just strange to me.

I have an Irish planned for my next brew day, I will report back with the results and pics, if i can remember to take them.

Tim

[brewday]

I have read every post of this thread at least twice, and some of them up to 5-6 times.  I have had several PM conversations with Mark, and he has been very helpful in helping me understand his method.  I brew 10 gallon batches, and today I ordered 2 1 gallon jugs with poly screw caps to give his method a try.

I do not have a LBS that I care to deal with that had the jars, so less than $20 later (free shipping) I have the items I need to try something new that may improve my beer.

For some reason, if I can't get the results I am looking for, then worst case I have 2 1 gallon growlers for carrying my home brew to a friends house.

I got stale and stuck with my approach to brewing, completely going against the reason I started in the first place.  As brewers, almost everything we do gas against the grain, or is off the beaten path; being unable to accept, try, or at least contemplate a new technique is just strange to me.

I have an Irish planned for my next brew day, I will report back with the results and pics, if i can remember to take them.

Tim

Nice!  Yes, updates please.

I just pitched my second no-stir starter since this thread began.  The first was kegged this morning and I'll probably get around to sampling it by mid week.

[TMX]

@brewday

let us know your thoughts so far on the James Bond (shaken not stirred) method.....

[brewday]

The first is a 1.057 American Amber and the second is a 1.055 ESB.  I've brewed them a few times before.  Both got the Fullers strain.  I used the Mr. Malty YC to determine starter size with one smack pack.  I'm using a 5L flask, pure O2, stopper w/airlock and crashing at high krausen.  No stir plate.

I crashed the Amber starter (1.9L) at 18 hours and decanted.  I actually missed high krausen I think, judging by the braun hefe (or is that bruno hefe, eh Keith?  ) on the flask.  I have no idea what the final yeast count was, but there was a lot of yeast.  Besides, I think the point of this method is volume of viable, non-stressed yeast vs total stirred volume.  Anyway, there was a lot if yeast.  Fermentation seemed typical for the most part, though it did finish lower than usual (1.010 vs 1.012-13).  This is the Amber Ale that I referenced in another thread regarding quick turnaround time.

For the ESB today, a 1.1L starter, crashed at 13 hours, decanted and pitched 5 hours later.  This one's going to comp, which says a lot about my confidence in this method.

We'll see what happens!

[bbt95762]

I'd always thought the main point of the stir plate was to knock the CO2 out of suspension, as CO2 in the wort discourages/slows yeast growth.  Thanks for all the pointers in the thread, I'll just keep it at a slow speed.

[69franx]

Kind of neat that this got such a late reply. Looking back at the first page, it seems to be the beginnings of Mark's explanation of SNS, or at least very early in that discussion. Thanks for bringing this back to life

[bbt95762]

yah, noticed that after I'd replied - probably should have just not replied

[69franx]

No it's an awesome, life changing thread

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk

[Philbrew]

Kind of neat that this got such a late reply. Looking back at the first page, it seems to be the beginnings of Mark's explanation of SNS, or at least very early in that discussion. Thanks for bringing this back to life

Yeah, it's where SNS got its name.  On page 5 I lamely attempted some humor and posted:
"S. cerevisiae,
You should go by James Bond 007.  Shaken not stirred, you wouldn't want to bruise the yeast. :-)"

The name stuck (the SNS part).

[69franx]

Awesome. I went back and read the first and last 2 pages again. Guess I had forgotten how heated this debate was 2.5 years ago. Like I said, glad it popped. Ack up on the radar

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk