Electric Brewing Supply 30A BCS Giveaway!


Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > General Techniques > Why not FWH on every APA and IPA
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-04-2013, 01:52 AM   #21
greatschmaltez
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 303
Liked 14 Times on 13 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Great discussion so far guys. The reason I posted the question initially is in books I've read (Strong, Fix) they talk about all the pros of FWH like its the best thing ever. I have not had extensive practice with FWH and when I do (dos XX guy), I usually combine it with a bitter addition as well so maybe maybe I'm not seeing the full loss of the "hop slam" or "bite" that is characteristic of the popular IPAs.

Based on this discussion, I can see where FWH and FWH/bitter combination may fit for some apa/ipa/and even Americans BW (I got a 39 on my last comp with a BW that I combo FWH/bittered... Horn toot). But I think I'm convinced that sometimes you just want bittering.

__________________
greatschmaltez is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-04-2013, 09:45 PM   #22
tknice
HBT_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
tknice's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 362
Liked 10 Times on 9 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theveganbrewer View Post
FWH allows hop polyphenols to attach to the hot break and fall out at the beginning of the boil. It leaves a higher IBU beer with less bitterness. Bitterness is more about polyphenol perception than alpha acids. You can have a higher IBU beer taste less bitter than a lower one because of this FWH effect and what it does to the polyphenols.

So you are essentially muting the bitterness perception of your hops. You could get a similar effect by just boiling less bittering hops. Hence why he said it was like wasting hops.
I don't find the oils fall out with the hot break. On the contrary, most of the aromatic oils being insoluable, will usually evaporate during the boil. Steeping these hops early gives them more time to oxidize and you end up with more during the boil. I like to use low alphas for FWH and find they change the aroma slightly and smooth out the harsher bitterness notes resulting in a beer that I can really pick out different hop characteristics.

If the only point here is preserving hop "punch", then I guess I have to agree with you.
tknice is offline
EyePeeA Likes This 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-05-2013, 01:37 AM   #23
Early8
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: South eastern, PA
Posts: 46
Liked 7 Times on 4 Posts

Default

Great thread!

As I have recently enjoyed Hills Farmstead Edward and Abner, and I see that these have IBU values which are ALOT greater than I expect to taste, does this suggest that they use FWH rather than bittering additions for the base bitterness? Those beers seem so hop forward to me that I am wondering what I can do to achieve that kind of brew. I am still quivering thinking about them. I have been pushing my hops forward in pursuit of this softer, more hop forward profile. Or is it just " the water" that makes them what they are?

It never occurred to me prior to this thread that FWH might be part of it.

__________________
Early8 is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-05-2013, 02:20 PM   #24
Piratwolf
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Va Beach, VA
Posts: 2,119
Liked 127 Times on 119 Posts
Likes Given: 82

Default

For what it's worth, I also FWH almost everything--APA, IPA, saison, porter, tripel, etc. When I want over-the-top hoppiness in every aspect, however, I FWH and do a traditional 60min addition, then massive late hop charges (usually 10-0min) and a 15-30min hot stand after flameout.

This yields amazing hop character in every area of the experience.

__________________
Piratwolf: "I've heard that Belgian Blondes can be "panty droppers" but they're not particularly high IBU nor cheap."

jmendez29: Haha! I get it! :ban:
Wait. You're not talking about beer, right?
You're talking about beer. That could have been a whole lot more fun.
Piratwolf is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-07-2013, 09:49 AM   #25
Boy
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mt Hood, Oregon
Posts: 349
Liked 18 Times on 13 Posts

Default

My experience is that since the FWH amounts to less bittering and more smoothness in flavor it is sometimes beneficial to add a small amount at 60min. for a little bite. I brewed a IIPA at 9% with 100 IBUs and it was incredibly smooth to the point it was almost an IPA but knocked you out. A little bite will slow you down a bit and give the perception of more bittering. I now add around .25-.50oz at 60min just to give a little bite on top of all the other hops.

I FWH hop all my beers, but frankly I believe that a pale, IPA, or IIPA really needs to have a FWH no matter what to bring out even more hop flavors.

__________________
Boy is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-07-2013, 03:40 PM   #26
EyePeeA
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 293
Liked 22 Times on 21 Posts
Likes Given: 8

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy View Post
but frankly I believe that a pale, IPA, or IIPA really needs to have a FWH no matter what to bring out even more hop flavors.
There are way more top rated commercial hoppy APA's, IPA's, and IIPA's on the market that don't rely on it. We can confirm this from dozens of clone recipes, brewer websites, emails, and podcasts.

Flavoring is not a reason to FWH anyway IMO. It is one technique out of many that is used it to gain a smoother bitterness.
__________________
EyePeeA is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-11-2013, 11:57 PM   #27
Pappers_
Moderator
HBT_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Pappers_'s Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,832
Liked 955 Times on 678 Posts
Likes Given: 2025

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greatschmaltez View Post
I've read a lot on this technique and am trying to come up with a scenario that I would not want to eliminate a 60 (or 90) minute hop bitterness addition and instead get my bittering IBUs from FWH additions. Everything I've read, this type of addition give more flavor and aroma (along with the appropriate bitterness) than bittering additions at the beginning of the boil. Any good counter points?
I like the results of first wort hopping in both AIPAs and APAs and use it pretty much 100% of the time now.

Another technique you might try that I really like in AIPAs is mash hopping - throw an ounce or two of Chinooks, Amarillo or Summit into your mash tun with the grain bill.
__________________
http://www.singingboysbrewing.com

My wife's book "Uncovering Lives: Discovering One Immigrant Generation's Secrets and Lives of Forgiveness, Grace and Healing"
Pappers_ is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-12-2013, 08:55 AM   #28
Boy
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mt Hood, Oregon
Posts: 349
Liked 18 Times on 13 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EyePeeA View Post
There are way more top rated commercial hoppy APA's, IPA's, and IIPA's on the market that don't rely on it. We can confirm this from dozens of clone recipes, brewer websites, emails, and podcasts.

Flavoring is not a reason to FWH anyway IMO. It is one technique out of many that is used it to gain a smoother bitterness.
I really hate to be pedantic on this but I can name numerous beers on the commercial market that have won awards that I still don't like because they are overly bitter and not enough hops.

With the advent of hop bursting, breaks in cooling for more hop flavor, and FWH/Dry hopping more and more in commercial beers it would seem to say that a new style and technique is starting to take hold. Getting away from simple bitterness and pushing towards hop flavor. Hence the FWH for smooth bittering and more flavor I believe should be encouraged regardless of what current breweries are doing. They have their set recipes and can't really change. Not a valid reason for Home brewers and others to not push the limits.
__________________
Boy is offline
Krovitz Likes This 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-12-2013, 12:44 PM   #29
billl
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,932
Liked 277 Times on 234 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

"With the advent of hop bursting, breaks in cooling for more hop flavor, and FWH/Dry hopping more and more in commercial beers it would seem to say that a new style and technique is starting to take hold. "

To be double pedantic - none of those things are remotely new.

"They have their set recipes and can't really change."

Seriously? This isn't even close to true. Russian River puts out several of the highest rated hop forward beers and readily admit to frequently changing their recipes. Pretty much every other brewer has seen their IPA recipes creep upward in both bitterness and hop aroma over the last decade. Maybe bud light doesn't change their recipe often, but pretty much all the craft breweries adapt their brews to match evolving tastes.

__________________
billl is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-12-2013, 01:00 PM   #30
EyePeeA
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 293
Liked 22 Times on 21 Posts
Likes Given: 8

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy View Post
I really hate to be pedantic on this but I can name numerous beers on the commercial market that have won awards that I still don't like because they are overly bitter and not enough hops.
What you personally "do not" like and what the majority of people "do" like are two different things. Pliny the Elder is not overly bitter nor is it lacking hops; just the opposite in fact. This is proven not only by mass third party opinion, but also by the actual lab tested IBUs and amount of actual hops used in the recipe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy View Post
With the advent of hop bursting, breaks in cooling for more hop flavor, and FWH/Dry hopping more and more in commercial beers it would seem to say that a new style and technique is starting to take hold. Getting away from simple bitterness and pushing towards hop flavor. Hence the FWH for smooth bittering and more flavor I believe should be encouraged regardless of what current breweries are doing.
Hop bursting is not an advent for American IIPAs anymore than the arrival of the style itself. Many commercial breweries have been flooding their IIPAs with plenty of late hop additions for quite some time now. They tend not to hold back on any of the other additions either. This style is all about the hops and it should be rather evident.

FWH isn't adding any more flavor than a bittering addition of equal weight would. It does however offer a smoother bitterness. But I have never come across a FWH IPA that tasted more orangey or grapefruity than a comparable recipe of otherwise the same simple grist and clean yeast.

FWH'ing IPA's is more of a homebrewer preference. It seems to be very well liked here at HBT, but it is not particularly taking hold in the commercial market for IPAs.... or come to think of it, even in the BeerAdvocate forums --> http://beeradvocate.com/community/th...hopping.69035/

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy View Post
They have their set recipes and can't really change. Not a valid reason for Home brewers and others to not push the limits.
This is completely misguided.
__________________
EyePeeA is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply



Quick Reply
Message:
Options
Thread Tools