Friday, January 25, 2013

Dopplebockery

Winter in Vegas and Gordon Biersch put out an amazing Winterbock.  We all liked it so much we ate dinner there several weeks in a row, bought a growler full and refilled it.  So when for Christmas, my brewery was upgraded to 5 gallon capacity - new grain mill, mash tun, lautering cooler, wort chiller, extra food bucket and a few odds and ends I picked up after, I knew what I had to do. 

Combine those two events together and I decided to make a dopplebock.  Not sure I was thinking straight, because if I'd remembered the length of time and hassle it took to lager a Munich Dunkel last year, I might have thought better of it. 

Did a bit of digging through beerrecipes.org, beersmithrecipes.com, Homebrew Favorites, "Designing Great Beers", and "Radical Brewing" and put together a powerful triple decoction brew with almost a 12% ABV.   That's actually when I decided to build the cooler lautering tun.  The mash tun just wouldn't hold enough grain and water to get up that high. 

I used a braided hose for the filter in the bottom of the tun instead of the usual drilled PVC pipe solution.  It ended up working very well.  I was especially concerned because the mill I'd gotten (on the right below) was a Victoria instead of a roller mill and it tended to really pulverize some of the grain.  Very slight difference between not cracking the grain and ending up with dust.


I sanitized everything in the tub with bleach.  A lot cheaper than Starsan and with a good rinsing, I've never had trouble with it.  Did manage to pull my back out taking the mash tun out of the bathtub full of water to take out to the burner.  Was fine the next day though.

My whole grain bill came out to 16.5 pounds of grain - Amber malt, malted wheat, Briess malt, 2 kinds of crystal malt, chocolate malt, black patent malt, Vienna and Munich malts.  Decoction is pretty tricky and depending on who you listen to, you can really go down a rat hole and waste a bunch of time.  The first two decoctions I took, I actually ran the liquid and grain decoction through the remaining temperature rests, which took a couple hours a piece.  By the time I added them back to the tun, the temperature in the tun had dropped about 10 degrees, so I ended up back where I started.  I then consulted a different source that said to just decoct the grains and boil them and add them back in.  Then I started to make some progress and get the whole tun up to the right temperatures after three more decoctions.  I spent the whole day doing this to finally get the tun up to the final temperatures.  By then it was too late to do anything else, so it sat over night.

It had an awesome smell with all those grains.  This was also during a cold snap, so it was barely 30 degrees in the garage.  Plus I had to keep the door partially open due to the propane burner running.  The vodka I was using for minor sanitation jobs came in handy.  The next day I started sparging...and sparging.  When I finished, the final gravity was 1.13 and there was plenty of color left in the runnings.  I took another batch of sparge water and added it to the grains and let it soak really well, while I started the boil on the main batch.  When I resparged the grains I ended up with another 5 gallons at a gravity of 1.03 and still a very good color.  Later I added three pounds of Briess CBW Pure Malt Extract Non Diastatic Unhopped Traditional Dark LME to boost the gravity up. 


In the main batch, I added Hallertau hops, 3/4ths for bittering and 1/4 for aroma, but this is going to be a malt heavy brew, like it should be.  With the weather so cold, the wort chiller worked like a champ and I had the brew cooled down in no time at all.  It was still too late to mess with the other batch, so I let it soak overnight.  I didn't pitch the yeast, as while the boil was going on, I prepared a starter.  This high gravity stuff needed as much yeast as I could get, so just throwing in a tubeful wasn't going to cut it.

That was all I had of Hallertau, but I had a bunch of odds and ends of hops that would work out to about the same bitterness and aroma.   Into the second running's boil, I threw Williamette 4.8% .55 oz, Kent goldings 5.7% .4oz,  fuggles 4% .2 oz for bittering, and Centennial 8.7% .65 oz for aroma and for something a bit to my taste... half an ounce of anise.

When it came to pitching, I'd followed Palmer's recommendation for creating the starter and pouring off the top portion and only pitching the bottom third.  Seemed that both batches really took off slowly...well barely.  But I am used to using glass jugs for primaries and not being able to see how the kreusen was developing was frustrating.  I picked up another vial of yeast and the LME above.  Created another starter with less DME and pitched the whole thing into the primary batch.  The LME I put into the second batch not only to increase the gravity, but also to give the yeast something more substantial to dine upon.  When I took the lids off both buckets, the kreusen was well developed in both, so I guess I needn't have worried.  I pitched the yeast anyway and within a day, the airlock was really popping. 

The weather has really been cooperating and the garage has stayed right where I need it in the mid to high 50s.  In a few weeks, I'm going to have to chill them down to the high 30s, so I'll be commandeering one of our refrigerators.  Should be a good spring, as both of these should be ready, mid April.  I think I will have to buy another bucket and brew up a quick stout so I don't die of thirst waiting.

Saturday, January 5, 2013

Expansion time

After coming up with some recipes that came out really well, I rue that fact that I was only brewing two gallon batches.  Being the impatient type, I couldn't help popping bottles before their time, leaving an insufficient number to really enjoy when they were really ready or to share with the family.  So it was time to upgrade to 5 gallon brews.  Did a lot of digging around on the web for ready built systems, but the low end Braumeister pot is too small to brew really big, high ABV brews.  Blichman's and Ruby Street's set ups are really cool, but pricey. 

I happened to see a leftover turkey fryer from Thanksgiving on sale at the grocery store.  Seven gallon pot - not quite enough for a big brew, but I decided I could do decoction mashes and use a cooler.  We had a couple box coolers in the garage, so I rigged one up with a braided stainless steel hose to use for a lauter tun.  I also put a wort chiller and a Victoria hand mill on the Christmas list that finally arrived this week.  I already had a 7 gallon fermenting bucket and will pick up a six gallon carboy as a secondary fermenter.

The first recipe I have in mind is a Dopplebock, over 10% ABV.  It has been cool enough to ferment the lager yeast out in the garage.  14.5 lbs of grains and 1.25 quarts of water per pound meant that I won't have enough room in the fryer.  When I realized that, I decided to retrofit the cooler and do a double decoction mash.  I found a great calculator on this site that helped in determining the size of each decoction: http://feathercraft.net/decoction/

Buying the grains and refilling the propane tank next week, so I'll let you know how it goes.



Wednesday, October 31, 2012

2012 SNAFU Las Vegas Memorial Competition Part Trois

I thought I'd have to wait until next Friday before I received the score sheets with the details of my entries.  The SNAFU club president, Matt, was nice enough to scan and email all the sheets to the entrants. I've given the scores first, then the comments.

Scores:

Saison
  • Aroma:                         6/12             6/12
  • Appearance:                2/3                2/3
  • Flavor:                        11/20            9/20
  • Mouthfeel:                  3/5                3/5
  • Overall Impression:    6/10              5/10
  • Total:                         26/50            26/50
Baltic Porter -
 
  • Aroma                            4/12             7/12
  • Appearance:                   2/3                2/3
  • Flavor:                           5/20              4/20
  • Mouthfeel:                    2/5                 3/5
  • Overall Impression:      3/10              3/10
  • Total:                            14/50           19/50

  •  
    American Pale Ale -
     
  • Aroma:                           4/12                4/12          3/12
  • Appearance:                   3/3                  3/3            3/3
  • Flavor:                           10/20               5/20         5/20
  • Mouthfeel:                     2/5                   3/5            3/5
  • Overall Impression:       3/10                4/10          3/10
  • Total:                             22/50           19/50        17/50

  •  
    Munich Dunkel -
     
  • Aroma:                           7/12               9/12
  • Appearance:                   3/3                 2/3
  • Flavor:                           10/20           10/20
  • Mouthfeel:                     2/5                 3/5
  • Overall Impression:       5/10               8/10
  • Total:                           27/50             32/50

  •  
    Belgian Wit -
     
  • Aroma:                            6/12               6/12
  • Appearance:                   2/3                   2/3
  • Flavor:                            11/20            10/20
  • Mouthfeel:                     2/5                   2/5
  • Overall Impression:       6/10                5/10
  • Total:                           27/50              25/50


  • Overall I ended up with 46%; pretty average, not so bad for my first year at this.  Especially since I wasn't really targeting the styles with most of these and was brewing for my own taste.  I didn't even know about the competition till I before I started the Saison and Wit.  The judges' scoresheets were written in pencil and scanned, so there's a few cases where I'm not sure what they wrote, so I just put in ??? below.

    Comments:

    Saison - My comment: Added anise and I don't think people care much for anise or licorice flavors. Judges: #2 tight yeast pack on bottom of bottle, mild gushing
    • Aroma: #1 Spicy, tart, fruity esters, low sour. #2 Floral sweet nose up front with a hint of banana dn citrus. No DMS, no Diacetyl, no hop aroma detected. may sound odd, but kind of like new car.
    • Appearance: #1 Ivory lace, nice amber #2 purs light copper with moderat haze, big fluffy light tan head lingers leaving a thin layer of foam that holds indefinitely, no lacing.
    • Flavor: #1 Dry spicy very soft malt.#2 Rich malt character up front followed by a bit of sourness, citrus rind and peppery note.  Finishes a bit sweet and grainy for the style. No diacetyl, no DMS detected, Hop bitterness is light.
    • Mouthfeel: #1 Medium body, medium warmth, a little acidity  #2 light bodied, high in carbonation, finishes very dry as per style. Not much heat or creaminess, also to style.
    • Overall: #1 Tart little too much, warming, but a nice drinking beer overall.  #2 Nice light, dry easy drinker, could be a bit heavy on the phenolics, maybe start cool and ramp up w/fermentation. Showed early signs of oxidation, but not offputting. maybe try to minimize splashing and cap on foam.
     
    Baltic Porter - My comment: Added more licorice than prior batches and I'm sure that turned them off, but I'm one of the few black licorice afficiandoes. If I'd had one of the prior batches, I would have entered that instead as they had a better balance with the malts.
     
    Judges:
    #1 Bottle conditioned, foamed on opening. #2 Gusher with clumpy pour.
    • Aroma: #1 Yeasty smell up front with smooth roasty aromas underneath. #2 Yeasty, vinous, very slight roast, no hops.
    • Appearance: #1 Cloudy reddish-brown, low tan head that persists. #2 dark brown, good head retention.
    • Flavor: #1 Metallic, tinny, blood-like flavor overwhelms roast malt. (so much for putting my blood, sweat and tears into my brewing) #2 Dark fruit, no hop flavor, some alcohol, metallic, bloodlike.
    • Mouthfeel: #1 Light-medium bodied, medium carbonation  #2 Smooth, medium body, low carbonation, warming.
    • Overall: #1 From the chunky yeast slurry in the bottle to the metallic, blood-like flavor, this beer misses the mark. Only the color and head were appealling. Check your water mineral salts content or bronze fittings on your equipment. (I had put down the licorice as a special ingredient, but I'm sure that didn't make it to the judges.)  #2 Smooth drinking with a metallic aftertaste, alcohol warming, but not harsh.
     
    American Pale Ale - My comment: Not sure what would have turned them off with this; I added some coriander, but it wasn't that prominent. Dry hopped it with Cascade, but I thought it was pretty well done. Awful lot of competition in this category. However, if they allowed it to warm up too much, I'm sure it wouldn't be that good. With all the entries in this style, there is a fair chance it was sitting on the judging table for a while waiting its turn.
     
    Judges:
    • Aroma: #1 Not much hop aroma, very light grassy smell. Nice malt scent, dose have slight off aroma.  #2 First whiff - phenolic/medicine and then mellows. Expected some citrus but found none. #3 lots of yeasty phenols, no detectable hops. Light grainy character masked by off-flavors.
    • Appearance: #1 Nice amber color, off-white head, decent head retention. #2 Pale golden, clear, very good foam and bubble retention, good overall presentation. #3 Gold color, chill haze medium, foamy, white head.
    • Flavor: #1 Off tasting not very hop, but give a tart ???. #2 Tastes a bit cardboard - oxidized, not tasting citrus nor floral, very mild hops. #3 Missing the hop and malt character of a pale ale.
    • Mouthfeel: #1 Was smooth but left a wax feel in mouth. #2 good carbonation and smooth finish.  #3 CO2 level is ok, slight warmth.
    • Overall: #1 Not very good smell or taste. May need more hop at end of ???. The beer had off flavor may ?? grain or yeast.  #3 Needs improvements to process and temperature control.
     
    Munich Dunkel - My comment: Probably could have been a bit maltier, as I was on the low end of the ABV at 4%. Was just hoping there wouldn't be much competition, but turns out if you don't make at least a 40/50, you can't even place.
    Judges:
    • Aroma: #1 Malty sweetness and light roastiness. Light nuttiness and chocalately notes. No hop aroma.  #2 Nice malt aroma, slight chocolate, and rich winter dessert nose, in style. Slight roasty aroma.
    • Appearance: #1 Dark brown with ruby highlights, very clear, large tan head - good retention. #2 Rich ruby garnet, thick head, very creamy but overcarbonated.  (which it must have gotten just in the 3 weeks sitting at 80 degrees at the LHBS after I submitted it, because it sure wasn't before, but that only cost me a point).
    • Flavor: #1 Light Munich malt, no hop flavor noted, low bitterness, clean dry finish. But seems thin and lacking big malt flavor.  #2 Flavor leaves me wanting rore. lacks malt depth, but what is there is balanced. Choclate and caramel are appropriate but thin. No diacetyl. Flavor fades with head.
    • Mouthfeel: #1 Light body, hightly carbonated at first but later seems flat. #2 Medium to light mouthfeel, should be more. Astringency is appropriate and clean.
    • Overall: #1 Pretty beer, but lacks the big bready, malty aroma/flavor for this style. #2 Good beer, No great flaws, Easy drinking with balanced toasty caramel chocolate. Should be richer with stronger malt presence.
     
    Belgian Wit - My comment: Orange peels didn't add much flavor, maybe some off-bitterness. Probably shouldn't have used a navel orange. But I thought it came out pretty well in spite of it. Guess I need to raise my standards or use better ingredients. But will be interested in the comments on this one as well as the APA.
     
    Judges:
    •  Aroma: #1 Light sweetness with slight honey and grainy. moderate coriander with slight pepper in background. Nice low hop aroma. #2 Strong wheat aroma with hints of coriander. Belgian yeast characters. Lacks sufficient fruit, floral or sweet aromas to balance the wheat.
    • Appearance: #1 Great color, very dense mousey head, and very good head retention, ??? the ??for style. #2 Gold colar with great clarity. Huge head from pour that dissapated quickly.
    • Flavor: #1 The tartness is very forward and finish is very dry. Coriander is a little too forward. Spice flavor is more pronounced than fruitiness. #2 Spicy and tart with some typical Belgian yeast charactes. The flavor is missing a balance between the wheat and the other desired flavors. Slight hint of honey, but could use more honey flavor.
    • Mouthfeel: #1 Very light with very little creaminess, slightly ?? & thin. #2 High acidity, More body would be nice. CO2 is high (which is acceptable).
    • Overall: #1 A very refreshing beer that is slightly too tart/sour for style.  #2 Easy to drink beer that is a decent Belgian Ale but misses the style guides.
    So it looks like I have my work cut out for me, but mostly I knew going in what their flaws were.  Some just got more pronounced with sitting at the LHBS for three weeks.

    Monday, October 22, 2012

    SNAFU Las Vegas Memorial Competition Part Deux

    Well the results are in! http://snafu.brewcompetition.com/index.php

    And I'm not on them.  I had entered a Saison, a Baltic Porter, an American Pale Ale, a Belgian Wit and a Munich Dunkel.  I won't see my score sheets for two weeks, but I have a fair idea where I went wrong:

    Saison - Added anise and I don't think people care much for anise or licorice flavors.

    Baltic Porter - added more licorice than prior batches and I'm sure that turned them off, but I'm one of the few black licorice afficiandoes.  If I'd had one of the prior batches, I would have entered that instead as they had a better balance with the malts.

    American Pale Ale - not sure what would have turned them off with this; I added some coriander, but it wasn't that prominent.  Dry hopped it with Cascade, but I thought it was pretty well done.  Awful lot of competition in this category. However, if they allowed it to warm up too much, I'm sure it wouldn't be that good. With all the entries in this style, there is a fair chance it was sitting on the judging table for a while waiting its turn.

    Munich Dunkel - probably could have been a bit maltier, as I was on the low end of the ABV at 4%.  Was just hoping there wouldn't be much competition, but turns out if you don't make at least a 40/50, you can't even place.

    Belgian Wit - orange peels didn't add much flavor, maybe some off-bitterness.  Probably shouldn't have used a navel orange.  But I thought it came out pretty well in spite of it.  Guess I need to raise my standards or use better ingredients.  But will be interested in the comments on this one as well as the APA.

    So I went in with low expectations and wasn't disappointed.  Mostly I wanted some good feedback, and it will be interesting to see if my assessment above aligns with the judges.  My assessments aligned pretty well with the certified judges in the styles I judged, so I am not expecting any surprises.  I'll post those comments when I get them.

    Saturday, October 20, 2012

    SNAFU Memorial Competition Part 1

    Going to have to post a part II to this once I find out the results of the competition.  Very interesting experience.  Decided to ride my bike to the competition since they started an hour later than originally planned.  Since we had plenty of experienced judges, I was assigned to be a third judge on the categories of smoked ales and meads.  I've never tasted either, but had the BJCP guidelines app on my phone.  We were well set up in the brewhouse of Tenaya Creek Brewery with six tables set up for the judges and a small table with coffee, palate clearing snacks, etc.  Tenaya Creek turned over one of their offices for us to have laptops set up to enter results.





    Fortunately I was teamed up with a couple of guys who had judging experience and when we got to meads, we switched out our more experienced judge for one who is certified in mead.  We started off with a bourbon barrelled aged ale. Very dark, almost black, but with a good firm, long lasting dark tan head.  But the smell of bourbon was very prominent.  They didn't tell us what the gravity or ABV of the brews were, but we could tell there was a lot of bourbon in this.  The next one was loaded with bakers chocolate and bourbon and had no head at all.  Very tasty, but you really couldn't tell that it was ale.


    Then we had one that was brewed with Jamesons.  I could tell that a mile away.  Tasted like Jamesons and Kahlua - lots of coffee and Irish whiskey coming through.  We were started to get hammered by now, as much whiskey as these brews seemed to have in them.  But still flat with no carbonation.  Fortunately nothing yet with odd or off flavors, just overwhelming whiskey.  No hops or malt coming through.  We couldn't tell what brews they were starting off using as the whiskey just overwhelmed in all the entries we had.  There were two more that were on our list, but were never delivered, so if they show up, they will just be entered into the SNAFU raffle at the next meeting.

    This coming raffle will be a real crap shoot with all the left over brews being thrown in without labels.  The end of one table had all the bottles from the judging that had some left in them.  The theory was that if they had more than half left, that the judges didn't like them.  I'm not hopeful for my own entries, especially for my porter which had a strong licorice taste.  I don't know many people besides myself who like strong licorice.  Still looking forward to the criticism to see where I went wrong.

    We had to wait awhile for the certified mead judge to be able to join us.  The fellow he changed places with doesn't like wine or mead, so it's good that he switched out.  The other judge said he had brewed a number of bad meads, so at least he knew what they shouldn't taste like.  Turned out that three of the four meads we tried were all from the same brewer and he was just tweaking his recipes to see what was best.

     
    
    The first one we tried was made from green grapes and was very grapey.  Couldn't really sense the honey much, because the grapes were very strong.  The next three entries were made with 5 berries and honey.  We were guessing at least cranberry, raspberry, and strawberry.  As we went through the three entries, the berries got stronger in the second entry, but with the additon of oak chips in the last entry, were well balanced with the honey. There was no question that the addition of the oak chips helped to moderate the other flavors - sweet, dry, grapey, berry, honey.  The second entry was a bit thick like a muscatel or sherry.  The alcohol was pretty high in these entries too.  The stewards and  judges at the other end of our table were laughing at the aroma of alchohol in the oak aged brews and meads that we were judging.
     
     
    We stuck around and sampled some of the leftovers of the brews that had been judged.  There was a pretty broad spectrum in the other classifications in terms of blah versus yum.  I didn't taste any that were really off with astringent or skunky flavors.  I didn't stick around for the second round, as some of the tables/categories had a lot of entries and were still slogging through their initial reviews.  We will see how the results come out in a few weeks at the SNAFU meeting. 

    Thursday, October 18, 2012

    Brewing recipe platforms

    A friend of mine was just asking me about gluten-free beers that might be available for sale since he thinks he might have a problem with consuming wheat.  That got me looking for recipes that might fit his needs, as gluten-free beers off the shelf aren't easy to find and don't have a great variety.  However; the recipes I found were very varied, although all were partial extract.  Nothing wrong with that, just thought it odd.

    Anyway, that got me thinking about our local homebrew club's competition this weekend and recipes in general....pretty much a long stream of consciousness and none of this really has much to do with where I'm going with this.

    So I started thinking about the recipes I've build recently and the experimentation I've done with various spices, herbs, fruit and other ingredients.  I was wondering if I might be better served by going back to basics.  Build some base recipes with no additives, just sticking to the basic grains, yeast and hops, then just tweak those volumes and processes until I'm satisfied that they are the best representation of the style that I can create.  Like building a sturdy beer recipe platform that I can use to launch different variations.

    Next, recreate them with one new ingredient, perhaps several times with varying amounts to determine the impact and optimum amount.  Then leave that one ingredient out and try a different one, then maybe both together.  Then maybe start over with the base and some different spices altogether.

    Obviously, this is a lot of batches, a lot of time, and experimentation effort.  I'm just wondering to what degree other craft or home brewers go through a similar process, and whether it is worth doing. Alternatively, should I just try to work it from the design side, figuring out what flavor profile I am seeking and select the necessary ingredients and work out the calculations to get me there?

    I'm hoping some of my readers will comment.

    Friday, October 12, 2012

    S.N.A.F.U. meeting

    I had to go to the SNAFU (Southern Nevada Ale Fermenters Union) meeting tonight.  Our SNAFU Memorial Competition is next weekend and I wanted to hear if there was any late breaking news.  Turns out that since I registered my Belgian Wit the week before last, the number of entries has doubled.  My entry was #72 and now there are 145 entries.  There are so many that they are going to start judging on Friday night, instead of waiting until the main event at Tenaya Creek Brewery.

    This is my first competition, so I'm mostly in it for the feedback, without much illusion of coming in first in any of my categories - Baltic Porter, Saison, Belgian Wit, Munich Dunkel and American Pale Ale. 

    Tonight pretty much confirmed my suspicions.  Our meetings are a mini-festival of sharing brews with a few garbled announcements and a raffle thrown in for formality's sake.  The first one I tried was Dogfish Head's Noble Rot.  Rot it was.  After reading the description on DH's website, http://www.dogfish.com/brews-spirits/the-brews/occasional-rarities/noble-rot.htm, it is a pretty complex combination of brewing and vinting.  It really tasted like the grapes went to vinegar. It is possible that this brew was too far past its prime.  I can't imagine they would have sent it out that way. 

    3 shiny bottlesDuring the raffle, my LBHS proprietor, Steve, won a bunch of bottles.  He popped open a Duck Rabbit schwartzbier which did not disappoint - very roast, smokey flavor.  Then our home brewers started popping open their brews.  One of our members is a former brewer at Joseph James Brewery and he poured a reddish-amber ale that was both hoppy and malty with a perfect color.  It must be a seasonal that they brew, because it's not on their website. http://www.duckrabbitbrewery.com/beers.html

    Another fellow who used to work at the LBHS and has several refrigerators full of home brew, poured his dry stout that was fairly thick and with an absolutely amazing toffee flavor.

    Then came a raspberry mead that had been aged for 14 months.  Could not taste the honey at all, as I imagine it had all fermented from the champagne yeast that brewer used.

    Finally, one other fellow produced his cherry saison, and all I can say is thank goodness it didn't carbonate well.  I sure wouldn't want my saison going up against it in the competiton.  He flash boiled and froze 4 lbs of cherries, then put them in his 5 gallon carboy with the wort.  It could have passed for a lambic, it was that good. 

    Absolutely overall the best brews passed around at a meeting, notwithstanding the Noble Rot.