[ethinson]

I think the question that needs to be asked is: Why?

Why do you do boil additions that are for flavor not Alpha?  Is anything to be gained flavor wise from a 30, 15, 10, 5, or even flameout additions, that a 170* hopstand wouldn't do better?  Is there a difference in either amount of flavor or type of flavor that occurs in boil additions?

.....Aaaand go.

At least for me, the difference is equipment and technique.  I do extract/stove top.  No pumps, so I can't (or it would be a lot more difficult) for me to do all grain techniques like FWH or whirlpool hop additions without multiple kettles and a pump. 

I started out with online recipes that did additions of 60, 45, 30, 20, 10, flameout, dry hop etc.. and I've condensed that down to 60, 10, dry.  In my opinion, I still get good flavor and aroma from the short boil hops, and they do add a tiny bit of BU.  I get 85-90% of my AA from the 60 and then a small amount for the 10 min.

[MNWayne]

I do additions at 60/45/30/15/2/0 minutes, usually nothing in my fermenter. Does it make better beer? Maybe. I can't say for sure, but I like my beer, as do my friends. It makes me feel like a mad scientist adding all those hops and I'm going to continue as such.

[narvin]

I went back to a 10 minute charge in my IPA and I think it tastes way better.

+1

If anything, I think early boil additions other than a small bittering charge are out of favor.

And, to take the assertions here and twist them around, what does a whirpool accomplish that can't be done better with dry hopping (both during and after active fermentation)?

[yso191]

I went back to a 10 minute charge in my IPA and I think it tastes way better.

+1

If anything, I think early boil additions other than a small bittering charge are out of favor.

And, to take the assertions here and twist them around, what does a whirpool accomplish that can't be done better with dry hopping (both during and after active fermentation)?

The only thing I can think of is that it eliminates (in my case) 5 ounces of hop material from the fermenter while still capturing the oils.  I put 5 ounces in the whirlpool and 5 in the fermenter... 10 ounces of uncompacted hop material in a 5 gallon batch would approach the losses seen in Fresh hop beers.

[erockrph]

I went back to a 10 minute charge in my IPA and I think it tastes way better.

+1

If anything, I think early boil additions other than a small bittering charge are out of favor.

And, to take the assertions here and twist them around, what does a whirpool accomplish that can't be done better with dry hopping (both during and after active fermentation)?

In my experience, whirlpool hops give a different character than dry hops. Dry hops can't be beat for that big blast of aroma when you stick your nose in the glass, and they are at least part of the equation when looking for that "juicy" character. Whirlpool hops tend to leave more of an enduring flavor that lingers on the palate. To me, whirlpool hops seem less "fruit juice" in flavor than dry hops. Neither are strictly better than the other, but I do think they give different results.

For my part, I have moved to just one large whirlpool/hop stand addition for my IPA's - no boil or dry hops. It is as much for simplicity in the brewing process as it is for flavor, though. I don't necessarily see it as "better" than boil or dry hopping from a flavor standpoint, but it gets me a beer that I thoroughly enjoy and keeps my brewday simpler.

[homoeccentricus]

I went back to a 10 minute charge in my IPA and I think it tastes way better.

+1

If anything, I think early boil additions other than a small bittering charge are out of favor.

And, to take the assertions here and twist them around, what does a whirpool accomplish that can't be done better with dry hopping (both during and after active fermentation)?

In my experience, whirlpool hops give a different character than dry hops. Dry hops can't be beat for that big blast of aroma when you stick your nose in the glass, and they are at least part of the equation when looking for that "juicy" character. Whirlpool hops tend to leave more of an enduring flavor that lingers on the palate. To me, whirlpool hops seem less "fruit juice" in flavor than dry hops. Neither are strictly better than the other, but I do think they give different results.

For my part, I have moved to just one large whirlpool/hop stand addition for my IPA's - no boil or dry hops. It is as much for simplicity in the brewing process as it is for flavor, though. I don't necessarily see it as "better" than boil or dry hopping from a flavor standpoint, but it gets me a beer that I thoroughly enjoy and keeps my brewday simpler.

Also interested in skipping dry hopping. What do you call large?

[erockrph]

I went back to a 10 minute charge in my IPA and I think it tastes way better.

+1

If anything, I think early boil additions other than a small bittering charge are out of favor.

And, to take the assertions here and twist them around, what does a whirpool accomplish that can't be done better with dry hopping (both during and after active fermentation)?

In my experience, whirlpool hops give a different character than dry hops. Dry hops can't be beat for that big blast of aroma when you stick your nose in the glass, and they are at least part of the equation when looking for that "juicy" character. Whirlpool hops tend to leave more of an enduring flavor that lingers on the palate. To me, whirlpool hops seem less "fruit juice" in flavor than dry hops. Neither are strictly better than the other, but I do think they give different results.

For my part, I have moved to just one large whirlpool/hop stand addition for my IPA's - no boil or dry hops. It is as much for simplicity in the brewing process as it is for flavor, though. I don't necessarily see it as "better" than boil or dry hopping from a flavor standpoint, but it gets me a beer that I thoroughly enjoy and keeps my brewday simpler.

Also interested in skipping dry hopping. What do you call large?

2-4 oz/gallon (about 15-30g/L). For my IPAs I whirlpool hot (immediately after flameout) for about 45-90 minutes. I get the right quality of bitterness for my tastes with this kind of addition (firm, but not abrasive).

I don't know if this is necessarily a replacement for dry hops, but it's generally "good enough" for me. I'm just to busy/lazy to be messing around with dry hops lately. You can certainly use dry hops in addition to the whirlpool to really max out the hop character.

[homoeccentricus]

I went back to a 10 minute charge in my IPA and I think it tastes way better.

+1

If anything, I think early boil additions other than a small bittering charge are out of favor.

And, to take the assertions here and twist them around, what does a whirpool accomplish that can't be done better with dry hopping (both during and after active fermentation)?

In my experience, whirlpool hops give a different character than dry hops. Dry hops can't be beat for that big blast of aroma when you stick your nose in the glass, and they are at least part of the equation when looking for that "juicy" character. Whirlpool hops tend to leave more of an enduring flavor that lingers on the palate. To me, whirlpool hops seem less "fruit juice" in flavor than dry hops. Neither are strictly better than the other, but I do think they give different results.

For my part, I have moved to just one large whirlpool/hop stand addition for my IPA's - no boil or dry hops. It is as much for simplicity in the brewing process as it is for flavor, though. I don't necessarily see it as "better" than boil or dry hopping from a flavor standpoint, but it gets me a beer that I thoroughly enjoy and keeps my brewday simpler.

Also interested in skipping dry hopping. What do you call large?

2-4 oz/gallon (about 15-30g/L). For my IPAs I whirlpool hot (immediately after flameout) for about 45-90 minutes. I get the right quality of bitterness for my tastes with this kind of addition (firm, but not abrasive).

I don't know if this is necessarily a replacement for dry hops, but it's generally "good enough" for me. I'm just to busy/lazy to be messing around with dry hops lately. You can certainly use dry hops in addition to the whirlpool to really max out the hop character.

A 90 minute whirlpool? The Gods of Low Oxygen will throw me off the Tarpeian Rock   if I dare do this.

[ynotbrusum]

Most of my beers are FWH or 60 min, then 0 and dry hops.  I tried the cryo hops for dry hopping and really like the result, though, I must admit Denny's RIPA is about the only IPA I make anymore.

[charlie]

My hop schedule (10 gallon batch) is bittering at 60 minutes followed by an ounce each at 20, 15, 10, 5 and 0 minutes. Then I get it in the fermentors as quickly as possible.

IMHO whirlpool hops are a waste of time (and hops), and the main reason commercial brew rigs suck (you can't do late hop adds if you whirlpool). If you want alpha conversion (and I don't!) just add them earlier.

Charlie

[klickitat jim]

My hop schedule (10 gallon batch) is bittering at 60 minutes followed by an ounce each at 20, 15, 10, 5 and 0 minutes. Then I get it in the fermentors as quickly as possible.

IMHO whirlpool hops are a waste of time (and hops), and the main reason commercial brew rigs suck (you can't do late hop adds if you whirlpool). If you want alpha conversion (and I don't!) just add them earlier.

Charlie

Why can't you do late hop adds if you whirlpool? I can do hop additions any time I choose, or all of them. FWH, 60-0, whirlpool held at any temp I choose for any time I choose.

[erockrph]

I went back to a 10 minute charge in my IPA and I think it tastes way better.

+1

If anything, I think early boil additions other than a small bittering charge are out of favor.

And, to take the assertions here and twist them around, what does a whirpool accomplish that can't be done better with dry hopping (both during and after active fermentation)?

In my experience, whirlpool hops give a different character than dry hops. Dry hops can't be beat for that big blast of aroma when you stick your nose in the glass, and they are at least part of the equation when looking for that "juicy" character. Whirlpool hops tend to leave more of an enduring flavor that lingers on the palate. To me, whirlpool hops seem less "fruit juice" in flavor than dry hops. Neither are strictly better than the other, but I do think they give different results.

For my part, I have moved to just one large whirlpool/hop stand addition for my IPA's - no boil or dry hops. It is as much for simplicity in the brewing process as it is for flavor, though. I don't necessarily see it as "better" than boil or dry hopping from a flavor standpoint, but it gets me a beer that I thoroughly enjoy and keeps my brewday simpler.

Also interested in skipping dry hopping. What do you call large?

2-4 oz/gallon (about 15-30g/L). For my IPAs I whirlpool hot (immediately after flameout) for about 45-90 minutes. I get the right quality of bitterness for my tastes with this kind of addition (firm, but not abrasive).

I don't know if this is necessarily a replacement for dry hops, but it's generally "good enough" for me. I'm just to busy/lazy to be messing around with dry hops lately. You can certainly use dry hops in addition to the whirlpool to really max out the hop character.

A 90 minute whirlpool? The Gods of Low Oxygen will throw me off the Tarpeian Rock   if I dare do this.

Keep it hot and you'll minimize O2 pickup.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk