Double-Wide Dubbel

With all the snow we have had recently, I must admit I have enjoyed having a rich Belgian-dubbel on tap. This is the Double-Wide Dubbel, which my friend Greg and I brewed for last year's Teach a Friend to Homebrew Day. Belgian dubbels are rich and malty ales that were traditionally brewed for Trappist monks and provided a good amount of their daily sustenance. American versions tend to be more imperial in nature, and this one is no exception. It is based on a Tommy Arthur recipe found in the book Brew Like a Monk by Stan Hieronymus. Dubbed "Double-Wide Dubbel" because it took two of us to brew the massive double batch, and it was brewed in two parking spaces outside our homebrew store, Fermentation Trap.

But, enough of the background, here are the stats and tasting notes.

Brewed: 11/7/2009

Kegged: 12/6/2009

Original Gravity: 1.076

Final Gravity: 1.014

IBU: 16

Alcohol By Volume: 7.9%

Carbonation Volume: 2.8 (15 psi at 40 degrees F)

The beer pours a deep ruby red, which contains a slightly hazy appearance. The color looks fantastic when held up to a bright light, with a thin layer of small bubbles running through the center of the ruby column. The dubbel has a thin white head that rapidly dissipates, which is not surprising, given the low hopping rate and high alcohol concentration. The aroma is very complex, with hints of raisins, dark fruit, caramel, cinnamon, cloves, and all spice. The aromatic complexity increases as the beer warms.

The dubbel's flavor is also complex. The initial part of the taste provides some of the spice hinted at in the aroma (note, this is all yeast-derived, as no spices were added to the beer). I also get a bit of a zip from what I suspect is the carbonation level, though the beer is not carbonated any more than others in my kegarator. The spice fades to a dark fruit, raisin, and honey sweetness at mid-palate. I also detect some alcohol warming at this point, though it is subtle. The end of the taste has more caramel and honey, with the sweetness lingering on the palate. The sweetness becomes cloying by the end of the pint.

I must say I like this beer, given the winter weather we have had in Central Virginia. It hides its alcohol very well and has an enjoyable complexity. However, if I made it again, I would definitely lessen some of the specialty malts and possibly lower the mash temperature. The beer could finish dryer, which would help it drink easier (though at 7.9%, this might not be a good thing). The beer is also over carbonated, as the flavor improves when I knock some of the carbonation out of it.

One other interesting thing to note is that I tried Greg's version of the dubbel and it tasted different. You could tell they came from the same base, but his had a metallic flavor that is missing in mine. We used the same wort, the same yeast, and targeted the same fermentation profile. I am always intrigued by things like this, because they clearly show that even when things are almost equal in brewing, two different brewers can produce two different results.

Oktober Fete and Fest

Oktoberfest or marzen beers are the richest of the European amber lagers. They were traditionally made in early spring and lagered in cold caves over the summer months. They would be pulled out for the fall harvest festivals, where their rich character and higher alcohol content would be appreciated by festival-goers. Oktoberfest beers are typically smooth and rich and start with malty sweetness, but finish dry enough to be drunken in quantity.

Back in Septemeber, I brewed my third attempt at making an Oktoberfest-style lager beer. My first attempt was years ago, before I understood how lager yeast worked and it did not finish fermenting out. I don't even think it should have been called a beer, though a friend of mine "adopted" the whole batch and, as far as I know, actually drank it. My second attempt, just last year, also had fermentation issues. The first pitch of yeast I used (Wyeast Bavarian Lager - 2206) turned out to be sickly and did not get off the ground almost at all. I pitched a dry lager strain on top of that to save the batch and it worked. The finished product had a fair amount of diacetyl in the flavor (buttered popcorn), but was definitely drinkable. But, it was not to style and I knew I could do better.

This year's Oktober Fete and Fest used the same grain bill as last years batch, but I used a different yeast strain (White Labs 820), which was special ordered right from the manufacturer and was VERY lively. I made a gallon starter out of it to prime it for the job. The result was easily my best yet and I have had difficulty not drinking it all quickly, as it pairs very well with food.

Here are the stats on the Oktober Fete and Fest:

Brewed: 9/12/2009

Kegged: 11/2/2009

Original Gravity: 1.059

Final Gravity: 1.013

IBU: 27

Alcohol By Volume: 6.0%
Lager Length: 31 days at 40 F

Carbonation Volume: 2.8 (15 psi at 40 degrees F)

The beer pours a clear rich amber color with a rocky white head. The head slowly fades during the pint, but leaves thick lace behind all the way down the glass. This beer is one of the clearest I have ever produced, which is likely a result of long lagering period. The aroma holds a very subtle bready malt character, but finishes with the drying quality that you find in many lagers. I do wish the Oktoberfest had a more substantial aroma, as this one is rather thin.

The initial taste is slightly bready and malty, but lacks some of the malt complexity that I like in this style. The mid-palate flavor has a nice balance between malt and hop bitterness. The taste concludes with a nice dry lager profile that makes it easy to go back for another sip. I think it is this dryness that makes the beer pair well with food and also makes it go down so easy.

The Oktober Fete and Fest received an honorable mention at the 2009 CASK Virginia Beer Blitz competition and earned a score of 33. The judges found it to be very drinkable, but found slightly more diacetyl than they would like to see, as well as it lacked some of the malt complexity they wanted up front.

I am just glad that it placed as well as it did.

Hoppy Gentleman - IPA with English Class

At the end of July, I was looking through my freezer and discovered I had accumulated a good amount of odds-and-ends hops - partially full hop bags that were left over from previous brews. Given that I brew a lot of English-based ales, it is not surprising that most of the extra hops are English in nature (herbal and floral hops, rather than the citrus or pine-like American varieties). I felt like making something hoppy, something with class and style, but something that still excited my palate. So, I thought, why not make an English IPA?

India Pale Ales generally fall into two categories, American and English. The IPA style originated in Britain, though it is not brewed much there anymore. The IPA style has been adopted by West Coast American craft brewers as the poster child of the good beer movement. While the American version is bold, higher in alcohol, aggressively bitter, and dripping with flavor, English IPAs are more subdued and balanced and have a more defined malt character. They seek to interest your palate through subtle complexity.

So, here are the stats on my Hoppy Genetleman, an IPA with English Class:

Brewed: 8/1/2009

Kegged: 8/15/2009

Original Gravity: 1.066

Final Gravity: 1.014

IBU: 51

Alcohol By Volume: 6.6%

Carbonation Volume: 2.8 (15 psi at 40 degrees F)

The beer pours a dark amber-red color, with a thick rocky head. The head stays with the beer through the pint, leaving a neat lacing on the sides of the glass. The beer has a floral nose, similar marigolds in the summer, with a hint of bitter herb in the back. The IPA has a lot of malt flavor in the early part of the taste. I get hit with an assertive fresh bread flavor that fades to dark caramel by the mid palate (hence the picture with the IPA and the homemade sourdough bread). The hops are there in the beginning of the taste, but definitely playing second fiddle. They become more prevalent in the back of the palate, and help end the beer dry, which prepares you for another taste.

I think I would like a bit more hop presence in the beginning of the taste, but I am very happy with the beer. It hides its 6.6% ABV well, so that you really don't realize its potency. I will definitely do this one again, perhaps with more late kettle hops to increase the hop flavor at first taste.

It is classy and interesting, it is a Hoppy Gentleman.

Red, White & Awesome - Dogfish Head Inspired Ale

My wife, Meghan, has been a big fan of Dogfish Head's Red & White ale since she first tried it at their Frederick brew pub several years ago. The Red & White ale is a strong Belgian wit that is supplemented by pinot noir grape juice, fermented out in stainless steel, and then aged in used pinot noir wine barrels. It is a complex and interesting beer, though it is quite strong at 10% ABV (as are most Dogfish Head beers). Given Meghan's love of this beer, I set out to make a beer using the same basic process as a gift to her.

The basic process is that I take a standard Belgian wit recipe and brew it up. I ferment it out completely, and then rack it into secondary on top of a couple of ounces of oak chips that have soaked in pinot noir wine for a few of weeks. I let it age on those chips for about a week, or until I can start to taste the oak. Then, I keg and serve it.

This is the second time I have made this recipe. The primary difference is that last time I did not get much Belgian wit character, as it was missing a solid orange citrus character. So, I doubled the orange peel this year. The other difference is that I could not find medium toast oak chips this time, so I had to use heavy French toasted ones. These tend to add a vanilla character, so I added and extra half an ounce to see if I could get oak in addition to the vanilla (I used 2.5 ounces this time, for a week).

Here are the stats for my version, which is called Red, White, & Awesome (RWA for short):

Brewed: 8/16/2009

Kegged: 9/4/2009

Original Gravity: 1.055

Final Gravity: 1.011

IBU: 21

Alcohol By Volume: 5.9% (calculated as 5.6%, assumed 5.9% from wine in chips)
Time Aged on Oak Chips: 8 days

Carbonation Volume: 2.8 (15 psi at 40 degrees F)

My wife very nicely surprised me with a bottle of Dogfish Head Red & White ale to do a comparison with the RWA. In the picture above, the RWA is the one in the Chimay-style glass. We tasted them together and here are her observations:

The Dogfish Head version has a much richer aroma, much more complex. The version I brewed has a less intense aroma. The Dogfish Head beer has a slightly darker color, though it has yeast particulate matter floating in it. The RWA ale has a bright and clean flavor, with a citrus finish. The Dogfish Head beer has a different starting flavor, one that is rounder and fuller, much like the aroma. The finish of the Dogfish Head beer is similar to the RWA ale in that they both finish dry and clean, though the RWA has a citrus finish that the Dogfish Head lacks. She says she likes the complexity of the Dogfish Head beer more than the RWA, though the bright flavors in the RWA are nice too.

I share most of her opinions, though I will build on them with the following. The RWA ale appears more cloudy, much in a true wit fashion. The Dogfish Head is more amber, though with some hop matter floating in it. I think her description of the beer aromas are dead on, as the Dogfish Head ale has is much more complex. The RWA does have a very clean and citrus-forward flavor. I don't get too much in the way of an oak flavor or that much wine character in the RWA, maybe a little bit of vanilla from the heavy toast chips. With the Dogfish Head version, I get a much more defined alcohol character, which I would expect for the ABV difference (5.9% versus 10%). I also definitely get a wine character and an oak character in the early and mid palate. I think the RWA finishes cleaner than the Dogfish Head version, and seems more drinkable.

All in all, the beers are more similar in the finish than anything else similar. However, they are not that close in taste overall. That is why I have stopped saying that RWA is a "clone" of the Dogfish Head beer. I really like the "inspired" idea, as that is what actually happened. Meghan liked the beer, as did I, so I tried to make something like it. I very much enjoyed our beer discussion about the two different ales, and was very grateful for the unexpected gift of great beer.

Cheers, honey. I love you.

Smokey Fox - Comparison and Contemplation

I have been remiss in posting tasting notes for my homebrew of late. So, I figured I would take a moment to post some thoughts on what I am calling Smokey Fox, my smoked lager brewed with grain that was smoke-malted at the Copper Fox distillery (see the post from June). This beer was an experiment for me, as I had never made a smoked beer before and had no idea what to expect from the malt from Copper Fox. I must say that this beer has again shown me that decent process will result in good beer, even if you are not familiar with specific ingredients.

Smokey Fox used a traditional German Rauchbier malt and hop profile. This is a style that originated in and around Bamberg, Germany and the distinctive smoke flavor in the beer came from the beechwood fires used to roast the grain at the end of the malting process (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rauchbier). The malt bill included the Copper Fox smoked 6-row barley, pilsner malt, Munich malt, Caramunich malt, melanoidin malt, and a pinch of black patent malt for color. The smoked malt made up about 50 percent of the total grain bill. I used hallertau hops in the beer, though you could use any German noble hop, as the hops are not the focus of the beer. Here are some stats:

Brewed: 6/28/2009

Kegged: 8/1/2009

Original Gravity: 1.052

Final Gravity: 1.014

IBU: 32

Alcohol By Volume: 4.9%

Carbonation Volume: 2.8 (15 psi at 40 degrees F)

Smokey Fox pours with a huge craggy off-white head. I was surprised at how much head this beer has, given the smoked malt in it. The beer's aroma is just slightly smokey, which increases as the beer warms. The aroma is otherwise smooth, with a very faint hint of sulfur at the end of the nose. The beer is a deep red in color, almost like the color of sunlight coming through red glass. This color did not come through very well in the picture, but it looks wonderful up close. The smoke flavor in the beer is also subdued, though it picks up as the beer warms. I also get a little biscuit and bread flavor, along with just a hint of spice. Smokey Fox finishes very clean and leaves you wanting another sip.

Knowing that I was going to eventually be reviewing Smokey Fox, I took the opportunity to pick up a classic example of a smoked beer while visiting my parents in Rochester, New York (Beers of the World is a wonderful store). I bought a bottle of Schlenkerla smoked marzen, both because they are one of the classic producers of smoked beers and because I love marzens. When comparing the two side-by-side, I was struck by their similar color; they looked almost identical. Their heads were the same color, though the Smokey Fox was thicker. That is where the similarities ended.

Compared to my beer, the smoked marzen was smokey, REALLY smokey. Its smoke aroma was intense and lovely. Think bacon cooking over a camp fire (yes, I said bacon). It was truely lovely. The smoke aroma transferred to a slightly lesser extent to the flavor. The malt in the marzen, which is usually a mainstay of the style, was completely subservient to the smoke. The smoke persisted throughout the taste, even lasting 10 seconds or more after you swallow.

I must say that I really enjoyed the Schlenkerla, but it definately wore my palate down. The smoke flavor, which I loved, kept building through out the pint. By the end, my palate was dead. I did alternate between the two beers through out this evaluation, but by contrast, the Smokey Fox tasted like a smooth malty lager, with little to no smoke flavor. I guess it is not that surprising, given the Schlenkerla's intensity. After having both, I think I would like a bit more smoke in my beer, but not that much more, as I can have several pints of Smokey Fox, but not more than one of the Schlenkerla.

I hope you enjoyed the review as much as I had writing it. Thanks to Copper Fox for the malt and the chance to do this project.

Cheers,

Tom

Dark Mild - Multi-Yeast Experiment

A little while ago, Greg, a fellow CAMRA club member, and I started talking about doing a cooperative brew. We share a number of common interests: brewing, breadmaking, cooking, kids; so it seemed a great idea to share a brewing session. We both enjoy English session ales, so we figured we would brew a dark mild, as they are not commonly available here in the U.S. and are best drunk fresh. Additionally, to make things interesting, we decided to do a yeast experiment.

I have often heard people state that the liquid yeast products that brewers pay a premium for are far superior to the dry yeast equivalents. Some things about the two yeast forms can definitely be attributed to fact. Liquid yeast strains can be designated as pure and without contamination, which means with proper sanitation, a brewer has very little chance of getting wild yeast contamination. Dry yeasts always have some wild yeast contamination as part of their manufacturing process. This is minimized, but how great is the risk of infection? Several podcasts and homebrewing magazines have done experiments on the dry versus liquid yeast packages, but Greg and I wanted to do our own.

The plan was to use one common wort source, split in half, and then to use two different yeasts to determine the yeast form's impact. Further, we wanted to use dry and liquid yeast strains that came from the same historical source. So, we picked Wyeast 1968 London ESB and Safale S-04 Dry English Ale. Both of these strains are based on the Whitbread yeast strain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitbread). This should provide us with a situation where the dry versus liquid yeast difference would be maximized, if any existed at all.

The following stats applied to both beers:
SG: 1.039 (both yeasts)
FG: 1.011 liquid, 1.012 dry
Starter Size: 1 L liquid, no starter dry (10 gram pack)
Pitching Temp: 72 F (both yeasts)
Fermentation Temp: 68 F (both yeasts)
Fermentation Length: 4 days liquid, 3 days dry

The results were extremely close. The liquid yeast beer (Duval glasses in picture) was slightly lighter in color than the dry yeast batch. The liquid yeast beer also had a slightly more definable aroma, but it came from a keg, so the aroma could well be from a slightly higher carbonation rate. The most definable difference was in the intensity and length of flavor. The liquid yeast batch's flavor lasted longer and was more intense than the dry yeast, but not by a large factor. I did not get any off flavors from the dry yeast, and I think it was quite comparable to the liquid offering.

Bottom line was that they were VERY close. Given that the dry yeast is much cheaper and it is easier to use, I think I would recommend using dry yeast when a version that has been well received by the brewing community is available.

Thanks for a great brew day and tasting, Greg. It was a lot of fun.

90 Seconds of Goodness Imperial IPA

Spring, for some unknown reason, has gotten me into a hoppy beer mood. I am normally a English session beer kind of person, if I were to pick a favorite set of styles. However, with winter starting to loose its hold over Central Virginia (compared to where I grew up in New York, winter never has a "hold" over Virginia at all), I am feeling in the mood for hops. So, when I had the opportunity to get some commercial Chico yeast from Starr Hill Brewing Company, I decided to go hog wild and make an Imperial IPA.

One of the biggest challenges that you face when doing big beer recipes is to get full attenuation. Because there is so much sugar in the wort for these beers, it is absolutely crucial that you have a HUGE slug of yeast to get the resulting beer down to a reasonable terminal gravity. If you don't, you risk having a sweet and unpalatable beer. The Starr Hill yeast samples we got were HUGE slugs of very active yeast. They gave me the perfect excuse to try one of the biggest beers I have ever contemplated (ABV of 8.5%).

This beer recipe is from a series of clone brews done by Brew Your Own Magazine. 90 Minute IPA by Dogfish Head is one of my favorite big hoppy beers. It has a great hop nose and a complex flavor, but is dangerously drinkable because it finishes dry. Even with all the alcohol, it does not leave a lot of sugar on the tongue, so you can easily finish a pint. This clone brew recipe was done in colaboration with the brewers at Dogfish Head, so I definately wanted to give it a try.

So, without further a do, here is the review:

Brewed: 2/15/2009

Kegged: 2/24/2009

Original Gravity: 1.083

Final Gravity: 1.016

IBU: ~92

Alcohol By Volume: 8.5%

Carbonation Volume: 2.8 (15 psi at 40 degrees F)

The beer pours a dark orange color with huge coarse white head. The most immediately apparent thing is the aroma. The beer is a hop aroma bomb. The aroma is complex and multi-dementional. It starts off with an herbal quality and then moves to a slightly sweet citrus orange/lemon smell. The dry hopping (2.5 ounces of amarillo, millenium, and simco) is really pronounced and I find myself just sitting and smelling the beer for a good while.

The initial flavor is a hint of sweetness. This is followed by some of the hop complexity with flavors of orange, pineapple, and mint. I then get a bit of bitter bite on the tongue, which is followed by a slickness that I attribute to the simco hops. The taste ends with a drying quality similar to belgian tripels or other very low terminal gravity belgian beers, though the IPA also has a twinge of burnt sugar. I do also get a very faint warming from the alcohol, though nothing like drinking a scotch or other whiskey.

All and all it is a very good beer, certainly my best so far this year. I took it to a homebrew tasting recently and was strongly encouraged to enter it in the National Homebrew Competition (NHC). So, we shall see how it does and what feedback I receive. Regardless, this is a beer I will definately make again.

Cheers.

Brother Brews

One of the coolest brew-related things that have happened to me this year is that my brother has started homebrewing. He first did this a while ago with a Mr. Beer kit that I gave him for Christmas. As with many Mr. Beer experiments, it did not go well and my brother did not repeat his Mr. Beer experience. I am not sure exactly what got him to try it again, but part of it is probably our repeated trips to Beers of the World, while visiting our parents in Rochester, NY. It is a great bottle shop with so many neat beers to try, as well as a homebrewing section that we would browse through. In addition to our frequent conversations about homebrewing, which I find a lot of fun and very interesting, I know that part of Jeff's interest in the hobby has been a result of finding a local homebrewing club near where he lives. The club members have provided an outlet for my brother's questions, as well as providing tasting samples and an interest in a common hobby.

Jeff was nice enough to send a sample of his first batch, an irish red, for me to taste. I appreciate it and I wanted to review it here.

The beer pours a delightful deep red color, almost scarlet. The beer is slightly cloudy, but I can still see my hand through it when the beer is held near a strong light. A frothy white head sits on top of the beer and remains while you consume the pint. It leaves a nice lacing on the sides of the glass. The beer has a very clean and neutral aroma, with a hint of caramel sweetness at the back of the nose.

The beer tastes very clean and balanced. It has a crisp malt character, somewhat akin to a german pilsner in its dry maltiness. The beer is nicely balanced with the hops and it creates a very drinkable beverage that leaves no sweetness build up on the tongue. The only recommendation I would make with the beer would be to carbonate it a bit less. The beer became more malt forward once I swirled it in the glass a bit to shake out some of the carbon dioxide. The flavor became more like some of the other irish reds I have had in the past and a little less pilsner-like. I will definitely say that I could drink several pints of this beer, which, in my opinion, is the most important judgement on a beer's quality.

Thank you for sharing, Jeff. I hope that you find as much enjoyment in this hobby as I have over the last 10 years or so. The community of homebrewers that you will interact with, both online and in person, really make this such a unique and wonderful hobby to be a part of.

Pissed Black Cat Pale Ale - Yet Again

This is the third time I have brewed a version of this pale ale. In general, I really like how it has turned out in the past. It is a beer halfway between a pale ale and an IPA. Hoppy, but not over the top. It has a nice amber/pale orange color and was the crowd favorite at Mr. Baker's Crab Fest last year.

All that aside, it did not turn out as well this time. This recipe is the first one where I tried to recreate a beer that I brewed and really liked previously. With it, I begin to understand how hard it must be to be a professional brewer, who must constantly turn out a high-quality product that varies little over time. I am also definitely not my harshest critic, so I can't imagine what a sharper tongue would do to my attempts to replicate my previous success.

I think what went wrong with the beer is hop choice. Previous versions of the beer used nugget/columbus and millenium/centennial, with the millenium/centennial turning out the best. This version used warrior and amarillo, with warrior being used for a lot of late addition hopping. I have subsuquently read that warrior is best used as a bittering hop and does not lend itself well to flavor or aroma additions. I think these hops must have clashed to create the undesirable flavors that I mention below, as I hit all of my other numbers (OG, FG, fermentation temp., fermentation time, etc.).

Regardless, here are the stats and the review . . .

Brewed: 1/17/2009

Kegged: 1/25/2009

Original Gravity: 1.048

Final Gravity: 1.012

IBU: 47

Alcohol By Volume: 4.8%

Carbonation Volume: 2.8 (15 psi at 40 degrees F)

The beer pours a crystal clear pale amber color, with a white pillowy head. The hops in this beer provide for a nice long lasting head, that follows the beer all the way down the glass, leaving a nice lacing pattern on the sides of the glass.

The beer has a strong herbal aroma too it. The aroma borders on medicinal in nature, which is not flattering to the beverage. I remember previous renditions of this recipe having a more citrus or floral scent, which I liked better. The medicinal quality of the aroma seems to strengthen as the beer warms.

There is definitely an off flavor of some sort to the beer. It is immediately present when you take your first sip and it lasts throughout the entire taste. Perhaps my mind is wandering towards our medicine cabinet, but it is vaguely reminiscent of an herbal cough drop. I am thinking about a Ricola-style cough drop, though not quite as strong. There is a biscuity flavor there too, which might be pleasant on its own, and reminds me of the previous versions of the beer. The off-flavor diminishes as you drink your pint, but that is likely due to your taste buds becoming used to it.

As I mentioned above, I think the off flavor is likely due to hop choice, particularly the warrior hops, which I used as a late addition to the kettle. My friend, Jamey, thinks the beer tastes slightly old or stale, and we have actually had some fun becoming "beer-sleuths" and trying to figure out what went wrong. I will definitely brew this one again, but next time I will go back to the original hopping regimen of millenium and centennial.

Partigyle Brewing - Trying to Get Two Beers from One Grist

Partigyle is the practice of making multiple batches of beer from one grist. This means that you mash once and run the "first runnings" off of the mash and make one "big" beer. Then you run more sparge water through the grains to get a second "small" beer. The idea is that the first beer will be of high strength and high malt character, while the second beer will be a small beer that is much milder. Historically speaking, this was done all the time, as brewers would extract as much sugar solution from each grist as they could. Partigyle is responsible for many different styles of beer that we have today, including Belgian Doubles and Tripels, English Barlywines and Milds, etc., as brewers made different strengths of what was basically, the same beer.

I had read about this practice in several books and heard about it on at least one podcast, so I wanted to give it a try. I was planning on brewing a big weizenbock and figured it would be the perfect time to try the technique, as there should be some sugar left in the grist, right? Well, it did not really work out as expected, as you will see below.

First, a review of the beers themselves.

Big Daddy Weizenbock

Brewed: 11/25/2008

Kegged: 12/6/2008

Original Gravity: 1.077

Final Gravity: 1.020

IBU: 24

Alcohol By Volume: 7.5%

Carbonation Volume: 2.5 (13 psi at 40 degrees F)

This beer was the real reason for the brew day. It is the color of dark brown, bordering on black, though deep red highlights show through if you hold the beer near a strong light. The weizenbock pours with a thick tan head that lasts for about 5 minutes as you drink it. The beer has a strong banana aroma, almost like banana bread. It also has a slight hint of clove in the aroma, but no bubblegum at all. The aromatic qualities of the beer are directly related to the yeast strain I used (hefeweizen ale - White Labs WLP 300), and it is fermentation temperature of 62 F.

The beer has a very pleasant taste, with a malt forward presentation on the tongue. I taste a little biscuit on the tip of the tongue, followed by a caramel and molasses flavor. The beer finishes with a hint of carbonation and hops, but they are definately in the background. There is a slight bit of molasses that stays on your palate before the next sip, but it does not seem to build too much as you work through the pint. Finally, there is a warming feeling from the beer. This is not any kind of hot alcohol, but a pleasant feeling in the throat that occurs several seconds after finishing a sip.

I am very happy with this beer, and I would definitely consider making it again. It is sort of like a dunkleweizen on steroids, and dunklewezien is one of my favorite beer styles. I would hope to have the beer attenuate a couple of points lower next time, but otherwise I am pleased with it and its yeast character after it had aged for about a month in the keg.

Baby Bock - Little Weizenbock

Brewed: 11/25/2008

Kegged: 12/6/2008

Original Gravity: 1.027

Final Gravity: 1.009

IBU: 14

Alcohol By Volume: 2.6%

Carbonation Volume: 2.5 (13 psi at 40 degrees F)

The small beer is a dark honey color with a thick off-white head. It has a neutral aroma, though I do detect a hint of astringency that smells vaguely of plain oatmeal. The head remains a while on this beer, as with many wheat beers.

The flavor of the small beer is definitely lacking. Thin is the word that comes to mind, though watery is also applicable. Next to its big brother it is down right plain. It also has an mildly unpleasant astringent flavor. I think this came from the fact that I tried to get all of the sugars I could from the beer. This dropped the sugar levels in the grain bed too low and I started to pull tannins out of the grain husks. There is little yeast character in the beer, but I expected that using dried California ale yeast. The hops are a little overbearing in bitterness, but otherwise clean with little herbal hop character or aroma.

The little beer is definitely that . . . little. I increased the boil time on the beer to 90 minutes with the hope of getting a higher starting gravity, but it did not happen. It seems that most of the flavor had already gone out of the grist, so the beer just tastes plain. However, it is not really bad, just uninspired. The astringency has aged a bit out of the beer, so that it is not that objectionable now.

Observations

I can see how this process was used frequently in the past. I effectively got two beers out of one set of ingredients, minus some extra hops and a package of dry yeast. However, the little beer was almost not worth the trouble. I suppose that perspective comes from the fact that I don't sell beer for a living, but this is something that I will probably not do again. If I were to consider a second partigyle, I would take the following into account:

- You should not really worry about the volume of wort for the bigger beer. Just drain your mash tun and use whatever you get. I made sure to get enough wort to make a full 5 gallon batch of the main beer. This left too little sugar for the second beer.
- Start with a larger grist than you would normally. I would definitely have added a couple of extra pounds of base malt to ensure there was sugar left for the second beer.
- Pay attention to the specific gravity coming out of your mash tun on the little beer. If the SG drops below 1.008, make sure to stop so you avoid the grain husk tannins.
- Take a pre-boil gravity of your small beer and use that to determine your hopping. Seeing how you cannot predict how much sugar will be in the small beer, if you pre-plan your hops, you could significantly over hop the little beer.
- Be happy with what you get and be glad that the sale of the little beer does not directly correspond to how much food your kids have to eat.

Review of "Tis Not the Season" Hefeweizen

I brewed this hefeweizen during Teach a Friend to Homebrew day, at the beginning of November. I have decided to call it "Tis Not the Season" Hefeweizen, because German wheat beer styles are usually served during the spring and early summer, rarely during the cold winter months. However, it was my wife's turn to pick the beer recipe, as she had not done so for several batches, and she was craving a nice hefeweizen. So, to work I went, and I was fairly pleased with the result.

Brewed: 11/1/2008

Kegged: 11/10/2008

Original Gravity: 1.043

Final Gravity: 1.012

IBU: 14

Alcohol By Volume: 4.0

Carbonation Volume: 2.5 (13 psi at 40 degrees F)

The beer pours a cloudy straw color, sort of like one of those fiber-supplement drinks you see advertised on TV. I know this is not a flattering description, but it was the first thought that came to mind. The beer has a very pillowy white head that lasts for several minutes as the beer was consumed. This is perhaps the most pillowly head on a beer I have ever made. I imagine it is due to all of the wheat that was in the grain bill.

The hefeweizen has a very pleasant smell. The smell of fresh yeast is very strong, similar to the smell you get from Starr Hill's "Love" wheat beer, which is unfiltered. There is a spicy clove smell that is fairly strong, while the banana and other tropical fruit scents sit in the background (which is just how my wife likes it, as she can't stand bananas).

After a month in the keg, the beer has definitely smoothed out. It has a very fresh flavor that is nicely balanced with the light hopping that went into the beer. At first, I was not pleased with how the beer turned out. It seemed to be too light on body and there was a unpleasant bitterness on the back of the tongue. This has faded away, leaving a very nice and refreshing beer. I taste a creamy smooth mouthfeel, along with some faint clove, banana, and pear flavors. It tastes very much like it smells. There is a small bit of residual sugar on the back of the palate, but it does not build up or get in the way as you finish a pint.

While "Tis Not the Season" for a hefeweizen, I find it very seasonal, indeed.

Merry Christmas to you and may you find time for family, friends, reflection, and good beer in this crazy holiday season.

Fun Homebrew Review: Centennial IPA - T Minus 16 months . . .

I wrote this homebrew review for a member of our homebrewing club not too long ago. It was a neat review, so I thought I would repost it here. Enjoy.

-------------------------

A friend gave me a bottle of his Imperial Centennial IPA more than a year ago now. I remember him saying that he did not know what to call it, as it really turned out a bit more like a barleywine than a true Imperial IPA. I suggested "800-pound gorilla" because the beer has so many hops in there, but my friend wisely avoided the primate reference. I also remember him saying that he wondered what would happen if the beer was laid down to age, but that it was unlikely he would do so, as he tends to drink them before letting them age. So, unbeknownst to my friend, I aged the beer and am finally getting a chance to drink it.

The beer pours an amber/red color that is almost edging on brown. The beer is very clear and I can easily see my hand through it. There is definitely carbonation in the beer, but the head is thin (about a quarter-inch thick) and course. The head lasted for about two minutes before slowly dissolving into the beer, though it left some lacing on my glass. There is a definite hop aroma to the beer, but it is rather thin. I sort of expected this, as hop flavor and aroma drop off as hoppy beers age. Many people often say you should drink IPAs and other hoppy beers quickly to get the hop presence. I also smell brown sugar, or a dark belgian candy sugar.

The IPA tastes very good. It has a definite bitter component, which nicely balances the sweetness from the imperial quality of the beer. As expected,a strong hop presence is absent from the beer. Aside from the bitterness, I don't get much hop character that I would expect in an IPA. I taste a dark sugar component, but without all of the sweetness. The beer finishes slightly sweet, but the sweetness does not really build on the tongue, so it is still easy to finish the glass.

Interestingly, the beer tastes a lot more like a belgian tripel than a barleywine, which differs from my friend's original characterization. The flavor is similar enough that I would probably classify it as a tripel, if I did not know the beer's history. The only thing that is not quite on style is that the beer has a bit more bitterness than a tripel would, so it might be an "American tripel."

Thank you for sharing your beer with me. I hope you like your "surprise review," even though I spilled the beans that I was going to write it a couple of weeks back. Cheers!

Review of "Double Down" Scottish 80/~ Ale

I must admit that this beer had me a bit concerned. As you may have already read, the day I brewed it was very eventful. Add to that experience that I have read a couple of negative reviews of the recipe I used and early tastes of the beer were a bit cloyingly sweet. However, the beer rallied nicely about a month after I brewed it and I am very happy with it right now. It is definitely a session beer and I am enjoying a pint of it right now.

Brewed: 9/20/2008
Kegged: 9/27/2008
Original Gravity: 1.050
Final Gravity: 1.018
IBU: 15
Alcohol By Volume: 4.1%
Carbonation Volume: 2.5 (13 psi at 40 degrees F)

The beer pours a brownish color with strong red highlights. It is fairly clear, when held up to a strong light, though under normal conditions, it appears opaque due to its dark color. The beer has a moderate amount of off-white head on it, which dissipates over a few minutes, leaving a light film on top of the beer. This film makes interesting patterns on the glass, as you enjoy the pint, which is called "Belgian lace." The 80/~ has a malty aroma, mixed with something nutty, maybe like toasted almonds. Hop aroma is completely absent from this beer, which is as expect from the style and lack of aroma hops.

The beer has a strong malt flavor. This is the first thing that hits your palate and lasts throughout the taste. This is a mild silky flavor in there, slightly reminiscent of an oatmeal stout, though it is much less apparent. The is no detectable bitterness to the beer, but it must be present to counteract the high final gravity of the beer. There is a slight honey flavor in the beer that probably came from the honey malt. A friend of mine says that specific flavor is something he does not like about this recipe, and I am tempted to agree. If I make the beer again, I will omit that specialty malt and go with more toasted bread flavor, probably from victory or a similar malt. The beer finishes with a slight prickle of carbonation, but leaves a hint of sweetness on the tongue.

This is the first true session beer that I have brewed. Session beers are those under 4.2% ABV and are very important in the British brewing tradition, where gathering at the pub for a couple of pints after work is the norm for the British public. If their common beer were stronger, people would be getting sloshed all the time, so the pub masters brewed milds and bitters that were session beers, i.e. beer with great taste that is refreshing, but not too strong. Brewing good beer like this is a challenge that I hope to undertake again soon.

A note about the photo: I write this post after spending the day at an apple festival with my family and the family of a good friend who is also a homebrewer. The leaves are beginning to turn and it feels like Fall. It was a great Fall day outside, clear and crisp, so I felt the need to take a picture of the beer outside, while rays of the setting sun showed the highlights in the beer, much like the highlights of the changing leaves.

American Pale Ale

I must admit that American Pale Ale (APA) has never been a favorite style of mine. It is probably the most commonly available style, with every brew pub in America making their own version. However, that said, it also allows a LOT of latitude when designing a recipe because there are so many different versions.

I was inspired to do an APA by two factors. First, the APA that I brewed for John's party this year was a huge hit. It was the keg that disappeared the fastest by a good hour or more. This in spite of the fact we had oatmeal stout on nitro tap (my personal favorite). The recipe is actually a modified version of the one I made for John's party, with different hops.

The second reason for the APA was a discussion at a CAMRA meeting a couple of months ago. One of the members was talking about mash hoping, a technique where you add hops directly to the mash. This is an excellent way to use old hops, as the technique does not really get extra bitterness out of the hops, but somehow results in greater hop mouthfeel. I really wanted to try this out and had 2 ounces of year old amarillo hops to use.

Brewed: 7/19/2008

Kegged: 8/7/2008

Original Gravity: 1.053

Final Gravity: 1.010

IBU (estimated, due to mash hopping): 48

Alcohol By Volume: 5.5%

Carbonation Volume: 2.7 (15 psi at 40 degrees F)

The beer pours an amber color, much like a dark honey. It has a chill haze at lower temperatures that vanishes as the beer warms. It has a nice off-white head, a little craggy due to all of the hops. It has a definite hop smell, more along the lines of an IPA than an APA, but not quite as citrus-heavy.

The beer tastes very hoppy. There is a fullness to the hop flavor that I have not made before, which I attribute to the mash hopping. I really have no idea how this works, but I like the end product. There is a bit of caramel on the back part of the tongue, but it is very subdued. The beer finishes very dry, as we can see with the 1.010 final gravity. This leaves the palate ready for more beer, but when I brew it again, I might increase the caramel malt a bit. The dryness is a bit out of balance and I would like a slight hint more residual sweetness. Overall, I am very happy with the product and will definitely try to brew this one again.