Biab fwh

Has anyone done FWH with biab? If so, do you add a portion of hops when you lift the bag to drain? Also, does this replace late additions, or would you recommend a 60, 20, 10, 0 as usual plus the FWH? I want to try this, just looking for advice. Thanks.

With BIAB, the first wort hops are added when the bag is removed. FWH typically replaces the traditional 60 min hop addition.

I think what I do is sorta kinda FWH .. if the recipe calls for 60 min addition I stir a whirlpool and throw it in after I have pulled the bag and as I put the kettle on the heat. Meanwhile I squeeze the bag and when I'm done with that the wort is pretty close to 212F. I have also been doing any late additions (under 30 min) as a hop stand. I cool to 180F, whirlpool any aroma hops in and do some cleaning and sanitizing and other chores while they soak in. I give those about 30 minutes and go back to finish chilling.

Pie_Man said:

With BIAB, the first wort hops are added when the bag is removed. FWH typically replaces the traditional 60 min hop addition.

Click to expand...

+1 I think it produces a much smoother bitterness in a very high IBU IPA or DIPA I think Beersmith will calc it at 110% of a normal 60 min addition.

Thanks for info. all. So, do you guys dial the amount down a bit due to better utilization? In other words, if the recipe calls for 1 oz. @ 60, do you still use 1 oz. FWH? I love hoppy beers, but not a wicked bitterness. That's why i usually put a bunch in late or flameout. I guess i should just experiment & see what happens!! Thanks.

You can use an online ibu calculator like this one; http://www.brewersfriend.com/ibu-calculator/

FWH can be calculated as a 60 mins. boil essentially. IBU's taper off after that time.

Pie_Man said:

With BIAB, the first wort hops are added when the bag is removed. FWH typically replaces the traditional 60 min hop addition.

Click to expand...

Historically FWH replaced the late addition hops not the bittering hops. (at least according to some of the historical articles).
The term FWH has been muddled and some people mean to use the bittering hops while others mean to use the late addition hops.

You can try either way, I'm not commenting on which is better, just that FWH has become an unclear term with people meaning different things.


When i FWH in BIAB (using the late addition hops) I add them in a nylon bag after lifting the grain bag. I then do a separate dunks sparge and add in the extra wort, then add heat.
The hops don't get as much heat exposure as those using a cooler, but they do get some.

So you still use the 60 min. bittering hops & exclude the late additions? Do you get as good aroma & flavor you would from later additions this way? Just trying to wrap my head around the whole concept! Thanks.

I took my grain bag out, dunked it in the sparge pot, poured that back into the main pot, and added my nylon bag with hops while the kettle was heating up all the way through the boil, I had no boil over risk on this batch (which was also my first all-grain). It didn't even come close.

I FWH all my beers and pretty much eliminated my later boil additions and replaced them with a 30 minute hop stand after flame out. IMHO FWH makes for a smoother bitterness and the hop stand makes more flavor and aroma. I stick my FWH in the kettle right after I squeeze my grains and bring her up to boil.

I just used FWH and added as soon as the bag came out.

I've read conflicting reports on FWH, and actually BYO has an article about just that in this issue. FWH don't add flavor or aroma. They add bittering. So, I calc it in beersmith as FWH and add 20-30 minutes to the boil. I still add 30, 15, flameout, etc. I just replace the 60 with FWH and I use a little less bittering hops this way also. I think you'll use maybe 10-20% less hops for bittering by doing FWH.

In How To Brew, by Palmer, he suggests figuring your FWH as a percentage of the late hop additions. I believe he suggested using the same hops for FWH and for late additions, but I forget..

>> FWH don't add flavor or aroma. They add bittering.

That's not correct. They wont add aroma because the volatile aromatic compounds will be boiled off, but they certainly add flavor since you have hops in contact with wort for more than 60 minutes.

If hops can give flavor in 15 minutes, they can give flavor in 60+.

I think it's pretty well established that hops that boil for 60 minutes are for bittering, 30 minutes give or take are for flavoring, and 15 or less, give or take are called aroma additions. FWHs are boiled for 60 minutes, at least. So, they are going to add no more flavor than a traditional 60 minute bittering hop addition would. I don't understand why one would say to use FWH to replace mid or late boil additions..

>>I think it's pretty well established that hops that boil for 60 minutes are for bittering, 30 minutes give or take are for flavoring, and 15 or less, give or take are called aroma additions. FWHs are boiled for 60 minutes, at least. So, they are going to add no more flavor than a traditional 60 minute bittering hop addition would. I don't understand why one would say to use FWH to replace mid or late boil additions..

You are misunderstanding. The original use of First Wort Hops applied to late addition hops (last 15 minutes or so). FWH replaces the late addition flavoring hops.
Now it's also common for people to use the bittering hop as a FWH and put them in during the sparge rather than the last 60 minutes.
FWH is now an unclear term, because people are using it to mean both late addition hops and bittering hops. You can brew any way you like, but just saying FWH is no longer clear because people mean different things by it.


15 minutes of boiling will give little aroma, as most of teh volatile compounds will be lost.

60 minute boil hops do give flavor, the flavor doesn't get boiled off, just the aroma.

Odd. I just read the opposite from Ray Daniels last night. Other than Chinook and a few other hops with certain amino acid compositions, 60 minute additions rarely give flavor. He specifically says, 30 minutes is the longest for flavor additions and he often makes 4 or 5 additions after that.

FWH were used a single addition. I do it in my kolsch. You don't want hop presence, and that beer wouldn't have late additions anyway. Also, when FWH, which was lost for a long time, was employed it was done so with beers from countries that only use a single hop variety throughout the recipe. It doesn't matter whether they are now labeled as bittering, flavor, or hybrid. They didn't know the acid content of the hops. If you are Spalt or Saaz throughout the recipe, what kind of hop it's it know? I'm talking about bittering and flavor as the timings if the additions, not the modern day designation based on alpha acid compounds. Which is a misnomer anyway, because there are 6 subcategories of alpha acids anyway, the percentage if AA means less than which kind of alpha acid is dominant.

That we know call certain strains flavor hops is meaningless. If they are used for bittering at 60 minutes, I call it a bittering hop, if it's used at 30 or less I call it a flavor hop. If I'm talking about hops in a bag Ill call them high our low alpha acid hops, because I'm going to use hem for what i want. I often dry hop with Simcoe.

Palmer says to match the FWH with the variety used in your last addition at a certain percentage, not to replace your last addition. He used 15 minutes as an example. He says it replaces the 60 minute however.

Designing Great Beers has 3 great chapters on hops and their use.

What's also odd is that these 3 HBT'ers at this link are referring to their additions as bittering, flavor, and aroma. They all go in the boil. The reference to bittering, flavor and aroma are based on time, not the type of hop.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/entries/Brewing-by-the-Numbers-Part-One.html

I don't think I'm misunderstanding anything.. If you could provide some reference or source where you see FWH REPLACING late addition hops I'd like to read it.

Also, you're confused here too.. FWH do not go in in the sparge. That is mash hopping. FWH go in the kettle as soon as the wort goes into the kettle. But, the way you describe it isn't correct either. Mash hopping hops go in with the mash before sparging, not during the sparge. The are left in with the spent grains.

Here's another article that will help to clear up your confusion. https://byo.com/component/k2/item/2958-pre-boil-hopping

And the article from Palmer suggesting that the FWH be a portion of the late addition hops, BUT NOT ALL. He also refers to late addition hops as providing aroma as more of the volatile oils are boiled off. Where he is contradicted by many, including Ray Daniels, is that even though FWH are in contact with the wort longer, and the oils have more time to oxidize and isomerize into their individual iso-alpha and iso-beta compounds, those iso-beta compounds are still mostly driven off by the length of the boil. Again, some hops like Chinook maintain a very distinct flavor regardless of when they are added because of a separate sub category of alpha acids that, to be honest, I'd have to go reference my book to recall what they are called.. But, really, I would just suggest everyone buy his book. It's really the best intermediate home brew book I've read. Jamil and Palmer's books are really more geared to the beginner.

http://howtobrew.com/section1/chapter5-1.html

http://hopschart.com/ A chart like this helps to visualize it and is based in a large part on Ray Daniels book, as you can see referenced on the side.

ArcLight said:

>> FWH don't add flavor or aroma. They add bittering.

That's not correct. They wont add aroma because the volatile aromatic compounds will be boiled off, but they certainly add flavor since you have hops in contact with wort for more than 60 minutes.

If hops can give flavor in 15 minutes, they can give flavor in 60+.

Click to expand...

The flavor compounds are contained in the beta acids, and the make up of which beta acids are present in which concentrations for each individual hop, no.. Most hops used at 60 minutes do not contribute flavor.

This is why beers that are intended to have no hop flavor or aroma use a single hop addition at 60 minutes. To boil off the flavor and aroma leaving only the bittering behind. Beers again, like Kolsch, should have no hop flavor or aroma and to get the 20 or so IBU's needed are added early in the boil.

Cervid, you are the one who is mistaken, and taking things out of context.


>>Most hops used at 60 minutes do not contribute flavor.

Most hops used in a 60 minute boil are deliberately selected for their bittering. They might not have much flavor, but that doesn't mean they don't contribute flavor.


>.Odd. I just read the opposite from Ray Daniels last night. Other than Chinook and a few other hops with certain amino acid compositions, 60 minute additions rarely give flavor. He specifically says, 30 minutes is the longest for flavor additions and he often makes 4 or 5 additions after that

What Ray Daniels is saying is that it doesn't take that long to get the flavor, there is no need to go beyond 30 minutes. He's not saying that hops dont give flavor if boiled for longer than 30 minutes.


Here is an experiment for you.
Take a very flavorful hop, what ever you like.
make 2 small batches,
one where you use that for 60+ minutes, and another where you use it for 20 minutes and taste both of them.
Based on what you are saying the 60 boil should have little flavor, while the 20 minute boil will have plenty of flavor.

I'll bet you the experiment contradicts this and the 60 minute boil has as much flavor.



>>Also, you're confused here too.. FWH do not go in in the sparge. That is mash hopping. FWH go in the kettle as soon as the wort goes into the kettle.

Same thing. During the sparge when you start collecting wort, you add the hops to the collected wort, not in the mash.
You are the one who misinterpreted that, I am not talking about mash hopping.



You can put whatever hops you want in before the boil, as you are collecting wort (aka FWH) but originally that was not the bittering hips, it was the flavoring hops. (use google and you can find a 1995 article that discuses this and how older German brewers used to do FWH)
My point is it's confusing to say FWH when people mean it differently. FHW with bittering hops vs FWH with flavor addition hops. To say FWH leaves the reader unsure which hoops will be used as FWH.

You should re read what Ray Daniels wrote, because you didn't retain it.

It's funny you challenge me to do an experiment that you haven't done, assuming I haven't tasted beers that are very similar with early additions vs late additions because I have and there is a noticeable flavor difference and yes, I have done exactly that, and yes, the one with only late additions had much more flavor and aroma.. It's not even close! Sorry the term aroma may confuse you in that context, let's say presence. This is why I hop burst certain brews. You should try something like that yourself before suggesting it, because the results are differences are stark.

You're kind of talking in circles. It's really semantics at this point, but what's funny is your opinions are contradicted... Most recently in the BYO article I doubt you bothered to link to, since you already know everything about FWH.

When I google FWH, I see a lot, but not the exact article you are talking about, although here is an excerpt I did find a quote from for you.

First Wort Hopping is not a new method, but is in fact an old one from Germany that was largely forgotten until Priess, Neuremburg and Mitter published an article on it in 1995 (Brauwelt International, Vol IV, p 308). The method was originally used by brewers at the beginning of the century to enhance bitterness rather than overall flavor. Adding hops to the wort early in the sparging process reduced the Ph of the mash, which enhanced isomerization of later hop additions, increasing overall hop utilization during the boil.

Click to expand...

So, that article you speak of actually seems to back up what I am saying.. FWH are used for bittering not flavor!! That's from an article on beersmith.

Oh and.. who in the world would think you are talking about adding hops to the wort when you said you were adding it to the sparge? Once the sparge water runs through the mash it becomes wort in the boil kettle. You got your terms mixed up.

You are misstating what Ray Daniels wrote.


You also need original sources, not a quote by someone who may have written an article but could have misunderstood what they were writing about.


So you are saying that adding a flavor hop (like Cascade for example) at 60 minutes will have barely any flavor, but adding it at 15 minutes will? Did you use really do such an experiment, or are you just making this stuff up?
And you have tried this out

You are the one who started arguing with me and you have provided no quotes. I provided a link to the article you spoke about. I think you're the one misunderstanding what you read.. You don't have any links, or proof, or sources.. But I do. And they all contradict you.. Isn't that strange?

That quote I linked is from an article where the words were related either verbatim, or close enough to it that it required a source. Otherwise, it's called plagiarism. So, that counts as an original source because it is footnoted as such. I didn't link the writer's opinion, I linked the quote he lifted from said source. Still though, where are your sources or even anecdotal links? You have none and I'm really not surprised.

Cascade used at 15 minutes will provide much more flavor and a lot less bittering. If you don't understand that, you need to freshen up on hops chemistry.

Cascade is roughly 52% Myrcene, 13% Humulene, 4.5% Caryophyllene, and 6% Farnesene. The high percentage of Myrcene indicates one, this is not a noble hop, and noble hops have lower myrcene and higher Humulene. Also, Myrcene is the oil typically described as pungent. In quotations is a quote from Ray's book.

Myrcene itself rarely survives into finished beer unless the hops are added at the very end of the boil or used as a dry hop.

Click to expand...

So, the hop you unwittingly gave is actually a perfect example of what I'm talking about.. Regardless of it's advertised alpha and beta acid composition there is more to it than that. Cascade when used as a bittering hop will have more of a bittering effect and although that myrcene will oxidize and create different and more subtle flavors from linalool, gerianol, geranyl acetate, and geranyl isobutyrate, he majority of it gets boiled off.

The flavor of a beer using Cascade as only a 60 minute addition will have an incredibly different taste if compared to a beer with Cascade used late in the boil. The way the alpha and beta acids are isomerized and oxidized is what makes this so.

That info is on page 93 in case you want to read it.. Oh and, you're terminology fails you again.. Cascade is not a flavor hop, it is a dual use hop and is very often used all throughout the boil and after the boil.. Here's another good link for you, not that you'll actually follow it..

http://beerlegends.com/cascade-us-hops

The longer hops boil, the more bitterness is extracted. That is pretty much universally accepted. Daniels references that fact in Figure 9.4 of chapter 9 in Designing Great Beers. Logically speaking, to calculate FWH as a 15 minute hop addition, would ignore 45 minutes of bitterness contribution from the equation.

Many people think of FWH as replacing the bitterness, but providing a smoother, more rounded, flavor compared to the traditional 60 minute hop addition. I have done plenty of late hopped beers and several FWH beers, and they are nothing alike. I am not saying you are wrong if you think FWH replaces late flavor addition hops, but my own experience, and the experience of other brewers that I have spoken with, seems to differ from that. Additionally, Beersmith software (not that it's always correct) seems to calculate FWH like a 60 minute addition.

The term First Wort Hopping (FWH) shouldn't really beer ambiguous or confusing. When grain is separated from water, you have your first wort. If hops are added at that stage, you have first wort hopping.

Pie_Man said:

The longer hops boil, the more bitterness is extracted. That is pretty universally accepted. Daniels references that fact in Figure 9.4 of chapter 9 in Designing Great Beers. Logically speaking, to calculate FWH as a 15 minute hop addition, would ignore 45 minutes of bitterness contribution from the equation.

Many people think of FWH as replacing the bitterness, but providing a smoother, more rounded, flavor compared to the traditional 60 minute hop addition. I have done plenty of late hopped beers and several FWH beers, and they are nothing alike. I am not saying you are wrong if you think FWH replaces late flavor addition hops, but my own experience, and the experience of other brewers that I have spoken with, seems to differ from that. Additionally, Beersmith software (not that it's always correct) seems to calculate FWH like a 60 minute addition.

The term First Wort Hopping (FWH) shouldn't really beer ambiguous or confusing. When grain is separated from water, you have your first wort. If hops are added at that stage, you have first wort hopping.

Click to expand...

I can't remember where, but I recall reading that adding hops before the hot break reduces some of the bittering qualities and the hop utilization. I wonder if the hot break proteins is what binds with the harsher bittering compounds?

I've started FWH all my beers that are a 60 minute boil. I'm debating trying it on my next brew that is a 90 minute boil, but I don't know about having hops in the wort for almost 2 hours.

Have you FWH a 90 minute boil? Was it grassy at all? My next beer is a kolsch w/ECY21 and Pilsener malt, so It's a 90 minute boil. I can't decide whether to add my single addition of 1 oz of Perle at 90 or first wort. I love Kolsch and I'd hate to find out I disliked it with FWH, although I can't really think of a better beer to blend with than Kolsch..

cervid said:

Have you FWH a 90 minute boil? Was it grassy at all?

Click to expand...

I've done that once, with my most recent doppelbock. It is not at all grassy, but it's a much bigger beer to stand behind than a Kolsch. I say give it a try though, you might like the way it turns out.

>.The term First Wort Hopping (FWH) shouldn't really beer ambiguous or confusing. When grain is separated from water, you have your first wort. If hops are added at that stage, you have first wort hopping.

It's ambiguous in the sense that it doesn't refer to which hop is used as the FWH.

Some will use the bittering hop, adding it as the wort is being collected , or the bag pulled.
Others will use the late addition hops.

The recipe should specify the boil time, or indicate the hop(s) that are being used as FWH.

>>The flavor of a beer using Cascade as only a 60 minute addition will have an incredibly different taste if compared to a beer with Cascade used late in the boil. The way the alpha and beta acids are isomerized and oxidized is what makes this so.

The taste test is:

Beer 1 - use Cascade as a FWH

Beer 2 - use Cascade at 15 minutes, and a small amount of a bittering hop at 60 minutes - to match the bitterness of beer 1.

Or omit the bittering hop altogether.

Now compare the taste, not the bitterness.
Does the taste vary that much?

You say you have done a taste test like this, so provide the details.

If you didn't add the same amount of hops then you didn't perform the experiment correctly.
I didn't say to match IBUs, because that would require different amounts.
I said use the same amount, call it an ounce at 20 minutes vs FWH.

>.Your sparging comment confused me, as Tom O-Brien was the first home brewer credited with adding hops to the HLT. In my mind, his technique as you said is 'adding it to the sparge'. I think you're intentionally trying to obfuscate

I'm not intentionally trying to be unclear but i can see how if I said "add hops while sparging" it's not clear that I mean to teh run off being collated, and not in the mash itself.

Can you make a FWH hopped beer taste like a beer with a small 60 minute addition and a 15 minute addition? Yeah, probably. That doesn't mean that FWH additions are equivalent to 15 minute hop additions. I don't think FWH additions are necessarily equivalent to 60 minute additions in terms of flavor (that's why most people experiment with FWH), but I believe the OP was looking for a simple rule of thumb on what hop addition to substitute for the FWH hops. In my opinion, that's the 60 minute addition, in terms of bitterness, which is the unit of measurement everyone uses for hop additions. Of course bitterness units do not necessarily transfer to hop flavor and aroma, I am not debating that.

And here I am wondering if the bickering has scared off the OP into hiding in a corner asking what he did to start all this fighting...

Or he could just be drinking and not give a ****

Lol.. For the reasons you two pointed out I'm done with these forums and off too the aha. If you have a difference of opinion with the wrong person our always turns into a downward spiral. The community aspect here kind of sucks. Lots of trolls.

Moderator Note: Ironically, cervid is the only member in this thread who personally attacked and insulted another member, which is not allowed in the forums, and had his post above deleted. If you see posts that include namecalling, personal insults or attacks, please hit the report button, which looks like the triangular warning sign in the bottom right.

Aha you have to be a member though right?

skitter said:

And here I am wondering if the bickering has scared off the OP into hiding in a corner asking what he did to start all this fighting...

Or he could just be drinking and not give a ****

Click to expand...

Not hiding! Just having a cold one trying to sort this FWH stuff out. I had no idea it was so involved, but now i'm more anxious to experiment with it. Thanks for all the opinions/debate on the subject. That's what makes brewing so damn interesting! You just have to play & come up with your own conclusions i guess. I'm gonna FWH, skip the 60, and add some flameout & dryhop. Can't wait! Thanks you guys!

FB12 said:

I'm gonna FWH, skip the 60, and add some flameout & dryhop. Can't wait! Thanks you guys!

Click to expand...

That's what I do - make the 60 minute addition a FWH addition. Then do the other hop additions without any changes. I really like FWH and use it on all my hoppy American beers.

Call me crazy, but FWH to me means at dough in.

cgherrington3 said:

Call me crazy, but FWH to me means at dough in.

Click to expand...

That is what many call Mash Hopping. Beersmith even has that as a hopping technique. Different from FWH, in part because you leave the hops in the mash tun, they never get to the boil kettle. I use mash hopping in my IPAs.

ArcLight said:

>>
That's not correct. They wont add aroma because the volatile aromatic compounds will be boiled off, but they certainly add flavor since you have hops in contact with wort for more than 60 minutes.

If hops can give flavor in 15 minutes, they can give flavor in 60+.

Click to expand...

This is simply not true (as many have tried to explain to you). Most flavor-contributing compounds are also destroyed/driven off during the boil. However, you are correct that part of the late additions were traditionally shifted to FWH, but without reading up on the chemistry of FWH, I can't really say how this contributes to flavor or aroma. It may simply be that the alteration in perceived bitterness helps to accentuate or get out of the way of flavor and aroma provided by the remaining late additions, or perhaps the flavor and aroma compounds are able to bind to other compounds during FWH that prevent them from being destroyed or driven off during the subsequent boil.

I have understood FWH to add flavor and aroma due to the compound bonding at the lower temps and therefore not being able to be boiled off. Giving a smoother hop taste. I FWH, bitter, hopstand and dry hop my favorite brews


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

There was a good Basic Brewing Radio podcast about hop techniques from May 8th, 2014 comparing FWH, 60 minute additions, and mash hopping. It's worth a listen, http://www.basicbrewing.com/index.php?page=radio.