New Giveaway - Wort Monster Conical Fermeneter!

Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing > First Wort Hopping question




Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-08-2013, 08:23 PM   #21
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,113
Liked 384 Times on 292 Posts
Likes Given: 388

Default

I absolutely agree! My only point was that you should calculate it as what YOU think it tastes like, rather than what an analysis says it measures.



__________________

Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014

Denny is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-08-2013, 08:28 PM   #22
MattHollingsworth
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Samobor, Croatia
Posts: 1,596
Liked 26 Times on 25 Posts
Likes Given: 34

Default

But that doesn't work for noobs who have never done it. In that case, I think an actual data point serves a purpose. They can then adjust their notes AFTER they drink the beer and compare it to others they've brewed.

From what you've said, though, perhaps they SHOULD input 20 minutes as well to see if they feel the same.

I totally agree with your point though. And I don't think FWH is for everybody or every beer. From what I remember, you said that the bitterness is too smooth for you for an IPA. Many folks may feel that way. I think it's worth trying for sure, but I don't think people should just do stuff and not pay attention to what they're getting out of it. I like a smooth bitterness in a lot of beers myself, perhaps since I moved away from Portland 11 years ago. When I lived there, I was calibrated to a lot of really hoppy and bitter beers.



__________________
HOMEBREWING SINCE 1997
MattHollingsworth is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-08-2013, 08:46 PM   #23
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,113
Liked 384 Times on 292 Posts
Likes Given: 388

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattHollingsworth View Post
But that doesn't work for noobs who have never done it. In that case, I think an actual data point serves a purpose. They can then adjust their notes AFTER they drink the beer and compare it to others they've brewed.

From what you've said, though, perhaps they SHOULD input 20 minutes as well to see if they feel the same.

I totally agree with your point though. And I don't think FWH is for everybody or every beer. From what I remember, you said that the bitterness is too smooth for you for an IPA. Many folks may feel that way. I think it's worth trying for sure, but I don't think people should just do stuff and not pay attention to what they're getting out of it. I like a smooth bitterness in a lot of beers myself, perhaps since I moved away from Portland 11 years ago. When I lived there, I was calibrated to a lot of really hoppy and bitter beers.
Yeah, if you haven't done it before you should just pick a number and adjust it down the road if you feel you guessed wrong. But that's true of so much in homebrewing.

I find FWH to smooth to replace a bittering addition, just like I think Magnum is too smooth for APA/AIPA. Again, personal preference. I always use it in addition to a traditional 60 min. addition. I use FWH in a majority of the beers I brew, from American styles to German pils to tripel.
__________________

Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014

Denny is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-09-2013, 02:46 PM   #24
VladOfTrub
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: , Pa
Posts: 495
Liked 80 Times on 59 Posts
Likes Given: 88

Default

FWH breaks the surface tension of the water. So, a large volume of hot break proteins don't gush up and over. That's why it is used. Bittering properties, have less to do with the process. There is a difference on how much hops are used, during FWH. An infusion needs more than a decoction.

__________________
VladOfTrub is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-09-2013, 04:26 PM   #25
TrubHead
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Winter Park, FL
Posts: 303
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattHollingsworth View Post
Here's the data on those two FWH beers that had lab analysis (from Widmer Brewing).

Beer one: These were brewed in 2000, and I hand calculated 63 IBUs at the time. Beersmith shows me 67.4 (Tinseth), 69.1 (Rager). This is using 3 kinds of hops for FWH at 90 minutes.

Lab analysis shows 65.9 ibus.

If I switch those all to a 20 minute addition for purposes of calculating the ibus, it gives me 53.4 (Tinseth) and 43.3 (Rager).

Beer two: Hand calculated 49 ibus at the time in 2000. Beersmith shows 53.3 (Tinseth) and 49 (Rager). This is with one variety of hops as a 90 minute FWH.

Lab analysis showed 56.3 ibus.

Changing that to a 20 minute addition for purposes of calculating the ibus, Beersmith shows 48.6 ibus (Tinseth) and 40.4 ibus (Rager).

So, from my experience here, you can see that putting the actual time and FWH in Beersmith is far more accurate than using a 20 minute calculation.

With beer one, using Tinseth, Beersmith at 90 minutes was 1.5 ibus high whereas using the 20 minute calculation, also Tinseth, was 12.5 ibus low.

With beer two, again using Tinseth, Beersmith at 90 minutes was 3 ibus low whereas using the 20 minute calculation, also Tinseth, was 7.7 ibus low.

I'll stick to calculating ibus using the actual time for FWH.
Per this measurement it appears FWH is closer to 28 min for those interested. Suggest performing calculations to confirm.
__________________
TrubHead is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-09-2013, 05:43 PM   #26
MattHollingsworth
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Samobor, Croatia
Posts: 1,596
Liked 26 Times on 25 Posts
Likes Given: 34

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrubHead View Post
Per this measurement it appears FWH is closer to 28 min for those interested. Suggest performing calculations to confirm.
Nope, not even close. There's no way for you to tell as you don't have the hops, AA, gravity, etc. I can give the exact data later if you want, but I don't have time at the moment.

For beer one, to get it exactly correct with Tinseth, it's 65 minutes instead of 90.

For beer two, it's not possible to get it to match perfectly as it's already maxed out at 90 minutes and is still low. So, the time would go UP, not down, except with it already being at 90, it doesn't make a difference.
__________________
HOMEBREWING SINCE 1997
MattHollingsworth is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-09-2013, 05:47 PM   #27
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,113
Liked 384 Times on 292 Posts
Likes Given: 388

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattHollingsworth View Post
Nope, not even close. There's no way for you to tell as you don't have the hops, AA, gravity, etc. I can give the exact data later if you want, but I don't have time at the moment.

For beer one, to get it exactly correct with Tinseth, it's 65 minutes instead of 90.

For beer two, it's not possible to get it to match perfectly as it's already maxed out at 90 minutes and is still low. So, the time would go UP, not down, except with it already being at 90, it doesn't make a difference.
And in the end, it doesn't really matter becasue the effects are subjective.
__________________

Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014

Denny is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-09-2013, 05:57 PM   #28
Yooper
Frau Admin
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Yooper's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Upper Michigan
Posts: 58,599
Liked 3850 Times on 2813 Posts
Likes Given: 640

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny View Post
Yeah, if you haven't done it before you should just pick a number and adjust it down the road if you feel you guessed wrong. But that's true of so much in homebrewing.

I find FWH to smooth to replace a bittering addition, just like I think Magnum is too smooth for APA/AIPA. Again, personal preference. I always use it in addition to a traditional 60 min. addition. I use FWH in a majority of the beers I brew, from American styles to German pils to tripel.
And here's something to consider (FWIW). I love magnum for bittering IPAs and APAs, and I like the amount of bitterness I get in FWH and don't use it in addition to bittering hops. I use it instead of 60 minute hops, usually.

I also like lower sulfate water in my IPAs than some others.

I'm not wrong- but it's my personal preference and it is obviously different from others. I like a smoother (but firm) bitterness, and I like a less "minerally" IPA as well.

I'd suggest to anybody to try it!
__________________
Broken Leg Brewery
Giving beer a leg to stand on since 2006
Yooper is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-09-2013, 08:24 PM   #29
TrubHead
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Winter Park, FL
Posts: 303
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattHollingsworth View Post
Nope, not even close. There's no way for you to tell as you don't have the hops, AA, gravity, etc. I can give the exact data later if you want, but I don't have time at the moment.

For beer one, to get it exactly correct with Tinseth, it's 65 minutes instead of 90.

For beer two, it's not possible to get it to match perfectly as it's already maxed out at 90 minutes and is still low. So, the time would go UP, not down, except with it already being at 90, it doesn't make a difference.
Based on the data you provided I think it's closer than you give credit. Of course gravity, AA, etc play into the calculation since IBUs are determined by such. I'll run with the 28 for the next brew and see how it turns out for empirical recording.
__________________
TrubHead is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-10-2013, 12:29 PM   #30
MattHollingsworth
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Samobor, Croatia
Posts: 1,596
Liked 26 Times on 25 Posts
Likes Given: 34

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooper View Post
And here's something to consider (FWIW). I love magnum for bittering IPAs and APAs, and I like the amount of bitterness I get in FWH and don't use it in addition to bittering hops. I use it instead of 60 minute hops, usually.

I also like lower sulfate water in my IPAs than some others.

I'm not wrong- but it's my personal preference and it is obviously different from others. I like a smoother (but firm) bitterness, and I like a less "minerally" IPA as well.

I'd suggest to anybody to try it!
I'm with you. I use FWH as my bittering hop. No other bittering hop. And I also prefer a lower sulfate for IPA. Well, not low, but let's say between 100 and 200. Once it gets over 200, it tends to get too harsh for me for an IPA, whereas it works fine for an APA.


__________________
HOMEBREWING SINCE 1997
MattHollingsworth is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First wort hopping question LizardBrew83 All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 13 11-14-2010 02:56 PM
First Wort Hopping Question briegg General Techniques 10 02-13-2010 08:22 AM
Quick easy first wort hopping question Lodovico General Techniques 22 01-21-2010 04:05 PM
Question about First Wort Hopping jacksonbrown General Techniques 9 08-09-2008 05:28 PM
First Wort Hopping vs Mash Hopping Evan General Techniques 4 07-18-2008 11:13 AM



Newest Threads