[BrewBama]

I believe the definition will be different for each of us. I described my version of creativity in post #12 above as “The creativity comes in thru base recipes from country of origin malts if possible and swap in/out yeast, hops, and adjuncts to shoot for different flavor profiles.”


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[EnkAMania]

Has anyone actually defined "creativity " in this thread in a way that relates to brewing?  What is creativity?  Is it throwing a load of unusual ingredients at a beer?  Is it thinking of a new way to look at process?  Something else?

I took it it be a new way to look at process.  You must have a bittering hop, brew in a bag will extract tannins, etc. 

[Big Monk]

Has anyone actually defined "creativity " in this thread in a way that relates to brewing?  What is creativity?  Is it throwing a load of unusual ingredients at a beer?  Is it thinking of a new way to look at process?  Something else?

Since creativity is incredibly subjective, i'll toss my opinion in to start it off:

Disclaimer: I am going to mention Low Oxygen brewing only to outline my definition of creativity. This is not a Low Oxygen advertisement.

From my previous post:

When I quote or link a brewing paper, I'm not advocating everything in it in the literal sense. I’m looking for the application to what we do. It’s usually there and it’s usually pretty creative.

Take the use of antioxidants in the mash for oxygen exclusion. Nowhere will you find this as used and advocated by proponents of Low Oxygen brewing in commercial brewing. No commercial brewer is dosing their mash with sulfites to try and mitigate oxygen intrusion. In the purely scientific and applied scientific sense, they don't need to. Large brewers have physics on their side with respect to the size of their vessels provide exclusion (square-cube law), closed transfers, vessel purging, inert grist milling, etc.

Using pre-boiling and antioxidants to provide an oxygen free environment to mash in is a creative use of applied science to provide an easy "hack" which allows homebrewers to replicate certain aspects of larger low oxygen brewhouses. The outcomes are equivalent, i.e. oxygen free mashing, but the paths to that environment are different.

So creativity can mean many things. Sometimes it's thinking outside the box to equalize differences in brewing systems. In this case, creativity is a byproduct of the study of brewing science and applied brewing science. 

[denny]

Sol we all have our own definitions.  Kinda makes it difficult to have a convo if we're all talking about something different, huh?

[EHall]

trying to put a definition around creativity is so stifling...

and what's with the snipe Denny?!

[Wilbur]

I agree with Brewbama. I think there's a lot of opportunity for those who aren't too hung up on Rheinheitsgebot or "beer flavored beer". I think Janish or Tonsmeire wrote about this-coriander and citra have some of the same XXXX-olools that can, with biotransformation create linalool and citrusy flavors. The study was done by Sapporo, a very "beer flavored beer" company, but they didn't limit themselves. They set a goal and let the end results dictate the process or ingredients needed to get there. That's how I define creativity. That might mean using sulfites, or secondary fermentation, or a mesh sack as a mash filter. It might be possible to be creative with an end result-creating or reinvigorating  such as milkshake beers, piwo grodziskie, or keptinis, but thats much harder to do.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2010.tb00428.x

[Slowbrew]

I'll drift into philosophy for a bit here. 

Your creativity is only limited by your imagination.  No one an internet forum can stop you from doing what you want.

If the question is "why do people give answers that seem to limit your options", well then that is a bit different.
A question was asked.  Members answered from their experience and gave advice.  Advice can be good/bad or relevant/irrelevant or useful/ridiculous (see this post for example).  How you use it is up to you which brings us right back to my first statement. 

If you ask if you should use kumquats and arsenic in an IPA you will likely be advised against it for various reasons.  No one can stop you but we can pray for your guests. 

I ask questions when that little voice inside says things like "you may not want to do that".  I often don't know why but if the mental chorus is worried, I've learned to at least consider options.

If I have, what I believe to be, a great idea and others advise against it, I still have the right to try it.

Without people being willing to go beyond the accepted norms, I'd writing this on parchment with ink and feather.  We all have the right to dare to be right.  Be bold! (but tell me if you put arsenic in your beer before I drink it, please. )

Paul

[Big Monk]

I was thinking about how I’ve contributed to this thread without really absorbing the OP...

Is the creativity of the homebrew community limited by the artificial labeling of right/wrong, do this but don't do that and the use of software and commercial brewing parameters as a guide?  Do arguments of mash pH, pH measurement temperature, mash step temperatures, water, etc... fruitfully contribute to the hobby as a whole or do they just pigeon hole things as right or wrong, my way is the best.

I think that many, myself included, track their successes and use them as a guidepost for themselves and others. That includes what they have learned from brewing science sources, applied science in their own brewery, software tweaks and hacks, methods, etc. People are naturally inclined to want to pass those perceived successes on to others, sometimes whether they want them or not. Success in this case can start to be subjective and can start to assert itself as you’ve described. Yet not all back and forth between opinionated and subjectively successful brewers is bad. A lot of good comes from shaking things up, improving, eating a little crow every now and then...

Or is it the opposite, they act as guidelines such that a motivated individual who is willing to read/research enough will be able to know what is needed to brew a good beer?  As long as they're still willing to think outside the box of parameters that has been outlined for them.

I’m inclined to say yes to this. I’ve said it a few times this week already: A homebrewer is an applied scientist whether he wants to be or not. I’ve heard many people say a brewer is like a chef and I’ve heard many say a brewer is like an engineer. The truth? Both are applied sciences, meaning you take academic knowledge and field expertise and mixed them together.

[ynotbrusum]

I don’t see excessive limitations on creativity in homebrewing.  I witnessed brewers moving from extract kits to partial mashing to all grain in a zapap bucket to a cooler with toilet braid, to 3 vessel systems, to Brew in a bag, to single vessel electric systems with stainless filter baskets to table top robotic systems to virtually 100% set it and forget it automated arrangements.  And that is just the process side.  The ingenuity of homebrewers on the ingredient and recipe side has grown exponentially.

And yet today I am brewing an ordinary bitter with a simple recipe in my kitchen using a rectangular igloo cooler with bazooka tube.

Stay creative brewers, but don’t forget what got you here!

[mdyer909]

Now there are some basic things that I always follow. And that is always good. But when it comes to ingredients I think that the sky is the limit. Except for maybe using peanut butter or chicken in a beer. LOL.

Annie Johnson makes fried chicken beer.  I've made clam chowder saison.

As a life long New Englander I have to ask.  Tomatoes in the chowder saison?

[denny]

Now there are some basic things that I always follow. And that is always good. But when it comes to ingredients I think that the sky is the limit. Except for maybe using peanut butter or chicken in a beer. LOL.

Annie Johnson makes fried chicken beer.  I've made clam chowder saison.

As a life long New Englander I have to ask.  Tomatoes in the chowder saison?

As a former northeasterner himself, Drew insisted on no tomatoes