Category Archives: tastings

Bierstadt Pils Clone

Posted on by

It’s pils time again, as I continue my exploration of European lagers. The July/August 2018 issue of BYO magazine had a tasty looking clone recipe, for Bierstadt Lagerhaus’ Slow Pour Pils. Its simplicity was beautiful–pilsner malt, acidulated malt, Hallertau Mittelfrueh hops, and lager yeast. Additionally, it gave me a chance to play around with more step mashes and decoctions.

I followed the published recipe pretty closely, adjusting just slightly on my additions to ensure that the bittering hops would still hit my target of ~33 IBU. But, I then saw a correction in a later issue that the whirlpool addition should instead be a late hop addition. I figure this probably won’t mess things up too much, giving a bit more hop aroma, although also leaving slightly more potential for haze. In any case, the official recipe is posted at the BYO website.

Because I don’t have direct-fire capabilities for my mash tun, all of the steps had to be accomplished via infusions. This took a bit of creativity, but I managed reasonably well. As another wrinkle in the process, I tried for the first time a closed-transfer technique. In the past, I found that my pilsners tended to get that honey-like taste of oxidation after 6-8 weeks, which detracted from my overall enjoyments towards the end of the keg. As noted below, my attention to technique paid off pretty well!

Bierstadt Pils Clone

  • 8 lbs. Barke pilsner malt (Weyermann)
  • 0.5 lb. acidulated malt (BEST)
  • 1 oz. Hallertauer Mittelfrueh hop pellets (4.0% alpha), first wort hop and 60 minute boil
  • 1 oz. Hallertauer Mittelfrueh hop pellets (2.7% alpha), 40 minute boil
  • 1 oz. Hallertauer Mittelfrueh hop pellets (2.7% alpha), 10 minute boil
  • 1 oz. Hallertauer Mittelfrueh hop pellets (4.0% alpha), 10 minute whirlpool
  • 2 pkg. W34/70 Saflager lager yeast
  • 1 Whirlfloc tablet, 10 minute boil

Target Parameters

  • 1.048 s.g, 1.011 f.g., 4.9% abv, 33 IBU, 3.4 SRM
  • Infusion step mash with decoction
  • Water built from 8.12 gallons of RO water, with 1.6 g CaCl, 1.25 gypsum, 1 g epsom salts in 3.25 gallons of mash water, and 2.4 g CaCl, 1.9 g gypsum, 1.5 g epsom salts in 5 gallons of sparge water, to achieve -47 RA, 59 ppm Ca, 8 ppm Mg, 89 ppm SO4, 63 ppm Cl

Procedure

  • I mashed in with 2.5 gallons of water at 150° (1.054 quarts/pound of grain), aiming for a protein rest temperature of 131°. Instead, I hit 141°, and stirred frequently to get it down to 136° by the end of the 10 minute protein rest.
  • I next added 1.5 quarts of boiling water to achieve a mash rest of 144°. After 30 minutes, the temperature was down to 140°. I then added 1.5 quarts of boiling water, to hit 152°. This was below my target of 160°, so I added another 2 quarts of boiling water, to finally hit 160°. I let it sit here for 40 minutes before proceeding to the next step. In total, I added 4.5 gallons of water for the mash.
  • Next, I pulled a thin mash of 2.75 gallons, and boiled it for 10 minutes. Next, I added it back to the mash tun, to hit 168°. I let this sit for 10 minutes, vorlaufed, and collected the first runnings.
  • Next, I added 3.25 gallons of water at 180°, let it sit for 10 minutes, vorlaufed, and collected the second runnings.
  • In total, I collected 6.75 gallons of runnings with a gravity of 1.053, for 87% mash efficiency.
  • I brought the runnings to a boil, adding hops and kettle finings per the schedule. To keep bitterness closer to my calculated numbers, I removed the boil hops before adding the whirlpool charge.
  • I chilled the wort to 85°, and then transferred it to the fermenter, where it was further chilled to 49° in my fermentation chamber. I oxygenated with 60 seconds of pure O2, and then pitched the two packets of dry yeast directly.
  • Starting gravity was 1.053, with brewing on 31 August 2018. I fermented at 50°, until 25 September 2018, when I cold crashed to 36°.
  • I did a closed transfer to the keg (under CO2 pressure) on 27 October 2018.
  • Final gravity was 1.012; down from 1.053, this works out to 5.4% abv.
Boiling the decoction

Tasting Results

  • The Basics
    • 1.053 o.g., 1.012 f.g., 5.4% abv
  • Appearance
    • Brilliantly clear, light yellow beer, with a fine, white, and persistent head
  • Aroma
    • Slight spicy hop aroma, with a pleasant and gentle maltiness behind that
  • Flavor
    • Robust hop character nicely balanced against a grainy/sweet malt profile. Really nice!
  • Mouthfeel
    • Moderately dry, with a smooth finish that tilts toward the hoppy end in a gentle yet firm way.
  • Would I brew this again?
    • Absolutely! This has matured into a wonderfully drinkable, really delightful beer. I’m pleased with how such a simple recipe can produce excellent results.
  • Overall
    • 9/10

Centennial IPA

Posted on by

I’ve gotten bored with tropical fruity, citrusy, guava bomb IPAs; they’re fairly easy to nail at least half-way well, but come across as a bit one-note after awhile. I don’t have a huge interest in the hazy IPA trend, either–they’re nice to try from time to time, but I don’t really want or need a 5 gallon keg of IPA orange juice. So, it’s back to the basics for me!

Two years ago, I did a Centennial hop-centered IPA based on one of Gordon Strong’s recipes. The result was quite good, so I figured I would revisit the recipe. 

The new batch is fairly close recipe-wise to the old one, with the main change being in the yeast. I decided to give the Mangrove Jack Liberty Bell Ale (M36) a try; it’s supposed to be a strain good for English or American pale ales.

Centennial IPA

  • 9.5 lbs. 2-row pale malt (Rahr)
  • 2 lbs. Vienna malt (Great Western)
  • 0.5 lb. Caravienne malt (Weyermann)
  • 0.25 lb. Carahell malt (Weyermann)
  • 3.4 oz. acidulated malt (BESTMALZ)
  • 1 oz. Centennial hop pellets (9.3% alpha), 60 minute boil
  • 1 oz. Centennial hop pellets (9.3% alpha), 15 minute boil
  • 1 Whirlfloc tablet
  • 2 oz. Centennial hop pellets (9.3% alpha), 10 minute whirlpool
  • 3 oz. Centennial hop pellets (9.3% alpha), dry hop in keg
  • 2 pkg. Liberty Bell Ale dry yeast (Mangrove Jack’s #M36)

Target Parameters

  • 1.063 o.g., 1.012 f.g., 6.7% abv, 59 IBU, 6 SRM
  • Infusion mash to hit target of 150°, 60 minutes, batch sparge
  • Water built from 3 gallons of Claremont tap water, 3.5 gallons of RO water treated with 4.5 g gypsum, 1.5 g epsom salt, 1 g calcium chloride, to hit target of 74 Ca, 10 Mg, 14 Na, 120 SO4, 27 Cl, 129 HCO3, 47 RA.

Procedure

  • I mashed in with ~4.1 gallons of the RO water with minerals and the balance in tap water, at 161°, to hit a mash temperature of 150°.
  • After a 60 minute mash, I added 0.8 gallons of tap water at 185°, let sit for 10 minutes, vorlaufed, and collected the first runnings. Then, I added 3.5 gallons of tap water at 185°, let sit for 10 minutes, vorlaufed, and collected the second runnings.
  • In total, I collected 6.5 gallons of runnings at a gravity of 1.051, for 72% efficiency.
  • I brought the kettle to a boil, boiling for 60 minutes and adding hops per the schedule. After a full hour boil, I added the whirlpool hops and let them sit for 10 minutes before chilling, transferring to the fermenter, and pitching the yeast.
  • I brewed this batch on 18 September 2018, and fermented it at around 67°. Starting gravity was 1.058.
  • On 30 October 2018, I kegged the beer. Final gravity was 1.005, working out to 7.1% abv. The beer had a somewhat estery aroma and flavor on first taste (see below).

Tasting

  • The Basics
    • Original gravity = 1.058; final gravity = 1.005; abv = 7.1%; esimated IBU = 59
  • Aroma
    • Slight phenolic, citrusy aroma
  • Appearance
    • Fine white head that sticks around for awhile; the beer itself is light gold with a slight haze.
  • Flavor
    • This is a very hop-forward beer, with a firm but even bitterness that persists on the tongue. There’s not a ton of malt character, but that’s OK for what this is. The hops have a slightly floral and citrusy character, which is unfortunately swamped out by a bit of a “hot” phenol note.
  • Mouthfeel
    • This is a fairly dry beer. Carbonation is appropriate to style.
  • Would I brew this again?
    • The description for Liberty Bell Ale yeast mentions pear esters in the aroma, which will get out of the way of prominent hop and malt aromas. Sadly, I couldn’t disagree more. The aroma was an estery mess on this one early on–it smelled somewhat like my early homebrew batches fermented without temperature control. I checked my records on power losses at home, and couldn’t find any record of a power outage during the height of fermentation, so I suspect it’s just a flaw in the yeast strain relative to this recipe. It doesn’t really seem like an infection, either, although I suppose that’s not completely outside the realm of possibility (especially given the low finishing gravity). The off flavor has moderated a fair bit as the beer sits in the keg, but in any case, I won’t be trying this yeast strain again.
  • Overall
    • 5/10 — the off flavor overwhelms the positive features of this beer.

Beer Tasting: Cerveza de Jamaica

Posted on by

IMG_20180706_162520I kegged this batch on 12 May 2018. It has been on tap for awhile now, and I’ve really been enjoying it. Better do a tasting before it’s all gone.

Cerveza de Jamaica

  • The Basics
    • 1.048 s.g., 1.011 f.g., 4.8% abv, 11 IBU, 3 SRM
  • Appearance
    • Pours with a tall and dense pink head, which persists wonderfully as the beer is consumed. The beer itself is a purplish pink color and slightly hazy. The beer has cleared up considerably since it first went on tap.
  • Aroma
    • Hibiscus, with a bit of tartness and spice behind that.
  • Flavor
    • Tart, with a slight hibiscus note next to a smooth and subtle maltiness.
  • Mouthfeel
    • Fairly light-bodied and highly carbonated, with a medium dry finish.
  • Would I brew this again?
    • Yes! This is a wonderful beer, and perfectly refreshing for the current warm weather. In tasting opinions from other folks, it was suggested to up the hibiscus just a touch (to help it come through more distinctly in the taste) and also to add a bit more citrus character. To this end, I’m going to increase the amount of hibiscus in my next batch, and also up the citrus peel.
  • Overall
    • 9/10

Beer Tasting: Try Again Bohemian Pilsner

Posted on by

My recent version of a Bohemian pilsner has been on tap for a few weeks, and is at its peak for enjoyment. Today, I did a head-to-head with the classic flagship for the style, Pilsner Urquell.

IMG_20180707_160451

Head-to-head Bohemian pilsners! Pilsner Urquell is in the glass on the left, and my homebrew version is at right.

Try Again Bohemian Pilsner

  • The Basics
    • 1.053 s.g., 1.014 f.g., 4.2% abv, 36 IBU, 5 SRM
  • Appearance
    • Pours with a fine white head with excellent persistance. The beer itself is a golden hue, nearly an exact match for Pilsner Urquell but perhaps just a notch lighter. It is very clear, but not quite brilliant (Urquell has a slight edge here). In terms of appearance, mine is equal in color, better in head (and head retention), and needs slight improvement in clarity.
  • Aroma
    • My beer tips a little bit more towards malt prominence; there is a very slight spice note from the Saaz hops, but that’s still not quite where it should be. Urquell has the hop note perfectly, so I give it a slight edge on this count.
  • Flavor
    • Bitterness levels are not quite evenly matched between Urquell and mine; Urquell comes across as a bit more bitter. Mine has a nice malt character, but this is slightly at the expense of the hops. The malt on my homebrew is rich and bready, and the bitterness stands well against that. The finish is balanced well. Relative to Urquell, it tips more towards the malt than bitterness on the finish, and I prefer the hoppier Urquell version a bit more.
  • Mouthfeel
    • My brew has a medium body and moderate carbonation. Urquell is definitely drier than my beer, with a more extended and more bitter finish. The finish on mine is smoother yet I prefer the Urquell “bite” just a touch.
  • Would I brew this again?
    • Yes, with a few minor modifications! There is lots I like about my beer, such as the appearance and malt character. I do feel like it could be a bit drier and crisper (relative to Urquell), because the hops are just a tiny bit “flabby”. My main adjustment would be to increase the hopping, and mash at a slightly lower temperature to dry out the beer a bit. I might also try halving the melanoidin contribution; I think it might be contributing some unfermentables that keep the beer from being as dry as it might be. The Barke pilsen malt that I used in this recipe has plenty of character on its own, anyhow!
  • Overall
    • 7.5/10

IMG_20180707_155837

Blast from the Past: Gingerbread Winter Warmer 2016

Posted on by

winter_warmerLast night I pulled out a bottle of my 2016 Gingerbread Winter Warmer, and poured a snifter. Although I had kegged that beer way back in the day, I emptied the keg into a few bottles for extended aging. I figure I’ll open one a year, until the bottles are gone.

More than a year after brewing, this is a fairly enjoyable winter beer. It’s got a decent banana note, a rich, malty flavor, and a thin ivory head that disperses a few minutes after pouring. I think there might have been a little secondary fermentation in the bottle, because it seems a bit more carbonated than I remember.

We’ll do this again in a year or two!