Brew Tips #3: Don't trust what you read online
I like saying things that I think will tick people off :)
To be fair, most of the posts you'll read online are written by home brewers who have been at this longer than you. And, if you follow their example, you will successfully end up with beer like theirs. And many will argue that deviating from their process is wrong. I've only been brewing beer less than a month and I've been researching heavily and for every "tried and true" method (except sanitation) I've seen competing arguments that simply offer different benefits or scientific articles that would appear to refute what some of these processes claim. And what good is producing the same beer someone on a forum made? More than likely you can't taste it in advance to determine if it is something you want to make.
Again, my audience for this post is the beginner who doesn't have all of the equipment (or perhaps those who have the equipment but for some reason don't want to use it [time, effort, space, etc...]). But I also wanted to point to some specific examples to drive my point home.
I've been drinking craft brewed IPA's for some time now. And the recipes I've made thus far have ZERO chance of ending up anything like the IPA's I like. No amount of aging will do it, and following most IPA recipes won't do it either. This is because traditional brewers going for a bitter beer will use a moderate amount of hops and try and get the bulk of the bittering by boiling for 60+ minutes. Then a small portion of hops will be used for less than 30 minutes and less than 15 for flavor and aroma and then dry hop (mostly for more aroma).
What these produce however is an IPA with a (relatively) harsher bitter and where the hops accentuate that a little, but aren't the star. And that is probably what a lot of people look for in an IPA. You can get good aroma, but that is largely coming from the dry hopping. If you want a huge hop flavor (as I do) you actually have to "defy conventional wisdom" and use a process some call "hop bursting". This requires massively more hops (2-3x) but almost none are put in for the full boil. Some people throw some in to help control the hot break a bit. But with this approach, those massive amounts of hops are all put in at times under the 30 minute mark. You still get something bitter, but most say it is less harsh and you get a much more hop driven flavor.
Personally, I think a lot of the experienced brewers hate hop bursting because it breaks everything they know about this sort of thing. Most seem to agree that IBU calculators don't really work properly here and the results are more volatile as well. For those that love to produce the exact same beer every single time, this kind of kicks them in the face. But, if you love what hops adds, you won't be able to get a sane brew following or modding conventional recipes. If you leave the bittering hops and increase the flavoring and aroma hops you're bound to end up with something overtly bitter in all of the wrong ways.
Another good example of misleading "knowledge" is that you shouldn't squeeze your steeping grain for risk of getting extra unwanted tannins in the wort. But, there was an article that went over the science of this. Tannin extraction is more a function of heat than squeezing. As long as the grains aren't too hot, you won't get any appreciable amount of tannins out. And if they are too hot, you're screwed anyway. But even those who don't argue the science are still somewhat superstitious and state things like "well, sure, you can squeeze them, but if you ruin the beer it's your fault". People hold onto things, and this "wisdom" is unlikely to die off any time soon. Most of the experienced brewers are set in their ways and most won't even try it. Instead they continue to advise against it.
I think that the last one I would make a point of is following directions in kits; one well known site basically tells you the directions for all kits are crap. Throw them out and follow his. Another article (by another experienced home brewer) said they took a kit beer, followed the directions more or less exactly and entered the beer in a competition and won a prize (think only things he changed were yeast and aged longer).
My point is this. If you look long enough you will find someone who agrees with just about anything you're thinking about doing and someone who will gladly accuse you of suffering brain damage for even considering it.
Above I've covered 3 different categories if inconsistencies and these aren't the only examples of each. Hop bursting is neither right now wrong. It simply throws out the old hop schedules and achieves bittering and flavor with volume. Not squeezing steeping grains is just flat out (scientifically proven) incorrect nonsense. And with regards to following instructions you can find two experts whose articles would seem to imply that they think that the other is an idiot.
For reference, "common" knowledge would side with following hop schedules that get bitterness from longer boils, not steeping the grains and (perhaps confusingly) not following kit instructions.
The "tried and true" methods the bulk of people recommend will get you solid results. However, depending on preference, they may simply not be the results which you want. And not everything they cling religiously too has any founding in reality even if a lot does. And that remainder which does make sense, isn't always explicitly necessary.
Sorry, I guess in some ways this post didn't make things any easier (not the best for a "tip" article). But then, if you want to be told exactly what to do, there are plenty of forums and sites out there for that.
To be fair, most of the posts you'll read online are written by home brewers who have been at this longer than you. And, if you follow their example, you will successfully end up with beer like theirs. And many will argue that deviating from their process is wrong. I've only been brewing beer less than a month and I've been researching heavily and for every "tried and true" method (except sanitation) I've seen competing arguments that simply offer different benefits or scientific articles that would appear to refute what some of these processes claim. And what good is producing the same beer someone on a forum made? More than likely you can't taste it in advance to determine if it is something you want to make.
Again, my audience for this post is the beginner who doesn't have all of the equipment (or perhaps those who have the equipment but for some reason don't want to use it [time, effort, space, etc...]). But I also wanted to point to some specific examples to drive my point home.
I've been drinking craft brewed IPA's for some time now. And the recipes I've made thus far have ZERO chance of ending up anything like the IPA's I like. No amount of aging will do it, and following most IPA recipes won't do it either. This is because traditional brewers going for a bitter beer will use a moderate amount of hops and try and get the bulk of the bittering by boiling for 60+ minutes. Then a small portion of hops will be used for less than 30 minutes and less than 15 for flavor and aroma and then dry hop (mostly for more aroma).
What these produce however is an IPA with a (relatively) harsher bitter and where the hops accentuate that a little, but aren't the star. And that is probably what a lot of people look for in an IPA. You can get good aroma, but that is largely coming from the dry hopping. If you want a huge hop flavor (as I do) you actually have to "defy conventional wisdom" and use a process some call "hop bursting". This requires massively more hops (2-3x) but almost none are put in for the full boil. Some people throw some in to help control the hot break a bit. But with this approach, those massive amounts of hops are all put in at times under the 30 minute mark. You still get something bitter, but most say it is less harsh and you get a much more hop driven flavor.
Personally, I think a lot of the experienced brewers hate hop bursting because it breaks everything they know about this sort of thing. Most seem to agree that IBU calculators don't really work properly here and the results are more volatile as well. For those that love to produce the exact same beer every single time, this kind of kicks them in the face. But, if you love what hops adds, you won't be able to get a sane brew following or modding conventional recipes. If you leave the bittering hops and increase the flavoring and aroma hops you're bound to end up with something overtly bitter in all of the wrong ways.
Another good example of misleading "knowledge" is that you shouldn't squeeze your steeping grain for risk of getting extra unwanted tannins in the wort. But, there was an article that went over the science of this. Tannin extraction is more a function of heat than squeezing. As long as the grains aren't too hot, you won't get any appreciable amount of tannins out. And if they are too hot, you're screwed anyway. But even those who don't argue the science are still somewhat superstitious and state things like "well, sure, you can squeeze them, but if you ruin the beer it's your fault". People hold onto things, and this "wisdom" is unlikely to die off any time soon. Most of the experienced brewers are set in their ways and most won't even try it. Instead they continue to advise against it.
I think that the last one I would make a point of is following directions in kits; one well known site basically tells you the directions for all kits are crap. Throw them out and follow his. Another article (by another experienced home brewer) said they took a kit beer, followed the directions more or less exactly and entered the beer in a competition and won a prize (think only things he changed were yeast and aged longer).
My point is this. If you look long enough you will find someone who agrees with just about anything you're thinking about doing and someone who will gladly accuse you of suffering brain damage for even considering it.
Above I've covered 3 different categories if inconsistencies and these aren't the only examples of each. Hop bursting is neither right now wrong. It simply throws out the old hop schedules and achieves bittering and flavor with volume. Not squeezing steeping grains is just flat out (scientifically proven) incorrect nonsense. And with regards to following instructions you can find two experts whose articles would seem to imply that they think that the other is an idiot.
For reference, "common" knowledge would side with following hop schedules that get bitterness from longer boils, not steeping the grains and (perhaps confusingly) not following kit instructions.
The "tried and true" methods the bulk of people recommend will get you solid results. However, depending on preference, they may simply not be the results which you want. And not everything they cling religiously too has any founding in reality even if a lot does. And that remainder which does make sense, isn't always explicitly necessary.
Sorry, I guess in some ways this post didn't make things any easier (not the best for a "tip" article). But then, if you want to be told exactly what to do, there are plenty of forums and sites out there for that.
Comments
Post a Comment