Festbier Head-to-Head

I’ve been wanting to do a head-to-head comparison of my festbier versus commercial examples, and finally got the chance to do so tonight. My buddy Steve stopped by, and I poured out three sampler glasses for each of us. Steve didn’t know which was which, other than that one was homebrew and two were commercial beers.

For my commercial comparison, I chose Ayinger’s October Fest-Märzen and Sierra Nevada’s Oktoberfest. Both were available at local stores, and are reasonably well regarded. I sampled the beers before and after brewing, to give me a bit of an idea what to expect in a festbier.

festbiers

Three festbiers (from left): Ayinger’s October Fest-Märzen, my Festivus Simplex, and Sierra Nevada’s Oktoberfest.

Steve and I tasted simultaneously, but I tried to avoid giving him any leading comments or critiques that might sway his opinion. Our observations are below; I transcribed his comments, but wrote down my personal observations without telling him, so as to avoid that avenue of bias.

  • We noticed that my beer has an ever so slightly lighter color, as well as a taller and more persistent head. All of the beers are quite clear.
  • Steve noted that the Ayinger version had a more prominent malty aroma. We both perceived malty sweetness and a hint of ginger in the flavor (the latter likely from the hops). I think that the maltiness is potentially from mild oxidation, which wouldn’t be a huge surprise for a beer that might have sat on a store shelf for some time after import. The malty character had that slightly cloying aspect from oxidized beers, as I experienced in an excellent seminar at the 2017 Homebrew Con.
  • The Sierra Nevada version came across as a little less carbonated to me, and Steve remarked that the flavor was a little flatter on the tongue. We both noted that the taste was less complex, and its head was not very persistent relative to the other two beers.
  • Steve described my homebrew as having a more complex taste than the Sierra Nevada version, and he preferred that mine had a less distinct after taste than the other two beers. For me, the hop aroma on mine was a touch more pronounced than in the Sierra Nevada and maybe a shade more than in the Ayinger, which I liked.
  • When asked to guess which was the homebrew, Steve guessed mine, based on the slight color difference and some intangibles in flavor. When asked which he preferred, he ranked my homebrew and the Ayinger pretty closely, with the Sierra Nevada in third place. I am biased, but I preferred my homebrew by a slight margin (although perhaps a fresh example of Ayinger would perform better), and agreed that the Sierra Nevada came in third place.

Overall, I think my festbier is definitely a contender against the two commercial varieties I sampled. It captures the style quite well, and in some ways (especially appearance, via head and head retention) exceeds the commercial examples. As I noted in my earlier tasting, I could up the maltiness just a shade. But overall, I’m pretty thrilled with how my version of a fall favorite turned out! This exercise in comparison was really educational–I’ll be trying it again for selected beers.

Beer Tasting: Festivus Simplex

Tasting time! Tasting time! For this round, I’m evaluating my festbier.

  • 20171113_174304The Basics
    • 1.056 o.g., 1.014 f.g., 5.5% abv, 21 estimated IBU, 6 SRM
  •  Appearance
    • Burnished gold and quite clear, with a thick white head that is quite persistant. Very pretty!
  • Aroma
    • Modestly malty (characterized by bready and toasty note), with a slightly spicy hop aroma.
  • Flavor
    • Gorgeously malty character that is at the forefront, with bready aspects dominating, but still quite drinkable. The bitterness is clean, moderate, and well balanced against the malt; there’s not much in the way of hop flavor, other than a slight herbal and spicy character. I feel like I could up the malt character a bit (maybe even go completely with Munich and Vienna, cutting out the pilsner malt) and the beer would be even better.
  • Mouthfeel
    • Moderate body, with a moderately high (but not effervescent) carbonation. The finish is slightly dry, but not overly so, and doesn’t linger forever.
  • Would I brew this again?
    • Absolutely! This is a really nice festbier, and falls squarely into everything I’m looking for in a drinkable fall lager. I might up the maltiness just a touch.
  • Overall
    • 9/10

20171113_174444

20171113_174253

Beer Tasting: Dark Helmet Schwarzbier

My schwarzbier has been kegged for over a month, and seems to be at its peak. Tasting time!

20170903_151314Dark Helmet Schwarzbier

  • The Basics
    • 1.046 o.g., 1.014 f.g., 4.2% abv, 26 estimated IBU, 28 SRM
  • Appearance
    • Clear brown beer with a slight ruby tinge. The head is a light tan color and persistant.
  • Aroma
    • Light chocolate aroma with a slight roastiness; very nice!
  • Flavor
    • Clean and smooth, with a nice bready maltiness backed up with a bit of roasty chocolate and slight coffee notes. There is a modest bitterness, which melds quite well with the malt.
  • Mouthfeel
    • Smooth, light, and crisp; moderate carbonation and a gentle bitterness to the moderately dry finish.
  • Would I brew this again?
    • Indeed! This beer has matured into a delicious and very drinkable lager. I feel like I nailed the style pretty well. Although we are squarely in the heat of summer, this is one dark beer that I don’t mind having around. It’s surprisingly refreshing! Overall, there is very little I would change about this beer. It’s nice to have another reliable session beer in my portfolio, too.
  • Overall
    • 10/10

Beer Tasting: Countdown IPA

20170827_131705This recipe isn’t my best IPA, but it’s a pretty darned good IPA.

  • The Basics
    • 1.064 o.g., 1.011 f.g., 7.1% abv, 68 estimated IBU, 9 SRM
  •  Appearance
    • Light copper color with a slight haze, pouring with a dense white head that leaves lacing on the side of the glass as it subsides to a persistent ivory colored blanket.
  • Aroma
    • Moderately prominent dank, piney aroma; quite nice and classic! I could up the aroma a touch, but it’s generally OK.
  • Flavor
    • This beer is dominated by a smooth, piney bitterness, backed up by a smooth and doughy malt profile.
  • Mouthfeel
    • Moderately dry, with a smooth and extended bitter finish. Carbonation is moderate and appropriate for the style.
  • Would I brew this again?
    • Probably. This is a nice, middle-of-the-road American IPA. The hops are nice, although I should I say I don’t find the CryoHops notable one way or another. I was perhaps expecting a bit more hop character from them, given they were touted as providing twice the aroma for a given mass of hop. Maybe it’s more like 1.5x? I might up the aroma a touch, with perhaps a bit more Simcoe. As usual, the general base recipe is pretty solid.
  • Overall
    • 8.5/10

Beer Tasting: Lemondrop Wheat Ale

20170704_155850I am absolutely thrilled with this beer! In fact, a little too thrilled…the keg is nearly dry. Time for a tasting, then!

Lemondrop Wheat Ale

  • The Basics
    • O.G. = 1.047; f.g. = 1.011; 4.8% abv; 4 SRM; 34 estimated IBU
  • Appearance
    • Hazy light straw color, with firm and persistent white head. When poured well, it’s like a topping of meringue. Gorgeous!
  • Aroma
    • Light citrus (slightly lemony) and slightly bready aroma
  • Flavor
    • Citrusy forefront, with a smooth and doughy middle, fading then into a lingering but pleasant bitterness.
  • Mouthfeel
    • Light body and moderate carbonation, with a medium-dry finish
  • Would I brew this again?
    • In a second! This is solidly in the running for favorite beer of 2017 so far. It’s just about the perfect summer beer–light, refreshing, and ridiculously drinkable. I’m burning through this keg at a pretty quick pace! The Lemondrop hops are a fun addition, too. Although I wouldn’t call them distinctly “lemon” in all aspects of their character (i.e. it’s not “lemon oil” or “Lemon Pledge”), they definitely have a citrus note that contributes nicely to the overall character of this beer. The only, very minor, flaw in this batch is that the finish has gotten just a touch harsh over time, likely due to the extended keg dry hopping. That’s easily fixed in the next iteration, though. I am quite pleased with just about every other aspect of this recipe; the balance between pilsner and wheat malt is perfect, and the yeast is also a true winner. WLP320 has just a touch of character, but it’s not overwhelming like European wheat beer yeasts. Also, it stays in suspension forever, which also helps with appearance and presentation. I don’t think this would be as good of a beer with a Chico strain yeast. I also think my water adjustments paid off; it’s not overly minerally in character like some of my past lighter beers.
  • Overall
    • 9.5/10