Why are hop additions done at different times?

Yakima 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
corycorycory09

corycorycory09

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
151
Reaction score
22
Lets say a recipe calls for .5 oz amarillo added at minute 0 and .5oz added at 45 minutes.

Based on the formula provided by palmer:

http://www.howtobrew.com/section1/chapter5-5.html
f(G) = 1.65 x 0.000125^(Gb - 1)
f(T) = [1 - e^(-0.04 x T)] / 4.15

I calculate that this will add 17 IBU's to my beer.

But I can also add 17 IBU's with a single .75 oz addition at minute 0.

So what is the point in putting the hops in at different times? Why not just add all of your hops in at minute 0 and adjust the quantities down to account for the time utilization? Seems it would be cheaper and easier to do it that way...
 
After I posted I re-read your post and I think you are confusing what minute 0 is! The clock ticks down. Minute 0 is flameout. Minute 60 or 90 is the start of the boil.

Nevertheless:

Read up on bittering, flavor, and aroma hopping. The hops are added at different times to accentuate one or more of these characteristics. Adding lots of hops at flameout is popular for some very aromatic styles, and one variation to take advantage of these very late additions is called hopstanding - another thing to Google.

I am not ready to tackle Palmer's math equation, but I think you'll find that a great deal more hops are needed in order to achieve the desired bittering if they are all added late. At minute 0, you're doing flameout, and the wort will drop from boiling down to below 170F fairly quickly. As such you will only isomerize a small amount of oils from X ounces of hops. Add that same X ounces at 60 minutes, and you'll isomerize a great deal more. So it's not cheaper to add all at the end; quite the contrary.

Now if I revise this to address your intended question about adding all hops at the boil start: If you do that, you'll negate the flavor and aroma attributes of the hops and only get bittering. That's appropriate in some styles, but not too many.
 
IBUS are one thing, but flavor and scent molecules are different and will denatured if boiled too long. The accepted rule is that after 15 minutes, flavor starts to be lost and smell after 5
 
Yep, some are there for bittering and others for aroma, especially the dry hopped ones.
 
It basically depends on how much bittering, flavor or aroma you want from a given hop addition. You can tailor their contribution to the overall complexity by how much & when they're added.
 
As stated - in your question you are basing all hop characteristics on one number - IBUs. If your only goal is to maintain that IBU number, then sure, what you're suggesting would work. However, getting X IBUs via required hop additions at t=60 and getting that same X IBUs by adding the required hops at minute 0 will result in vastly different flavor profiles.

It would be an interesting side by side experiment though...do a 5gal batch of wort, and split the boil into two 2.5gal batches, set them both up for X IBUs and calculate hop volumes for each batch, one based on only boil additions, and one based on only 5min or flameout additions and do a side by side comparison. That would probably be a very educational experience.
 
Hops added at the start of a boil are used for bittering, as the alpha acids isomerize. The oils undergo chemical reactions which contribute to balancing out the sweetness of the malts.

Hops added at the end of the boil (I.e., 0), do not get isomerized and are used for aromas only.

I was listening to a BeerSmith podcast with Mitch Steele and he was not in favor of multiple hop additions. He said it's better to add at the beginning of boil for bittering and at end of boil/dry hopping for aromas.
 
I have a follow up question on this topic. Why do some recipes have addition times that look like this:

1 oz Cascade - 60 minutes
1 oz Cascade - 45 minutes
1 oz Cascade - 30 minutes
1 oz Cascade - 15 minutes
1 oz Cascade - 2 minutes
1 oz Cascade - 0 minutes

Of course that example just uses one type of hops, so in that case I wouldn't think there is any reason to have multiple additions, just one at the 60 minute mark for bittering and one near the end of the boil for flavor/aroma and then adjust the quantities of hops as required to achieve the flavor profile that you are looking for.

If you were doing different hops then different addition times would make more sense depending on how you are trying to balance the flavor/aroma/bitterness.

I don't do a lot of super hoppy beers so I have always been curious when I see this in recipes.
 
hop additions at 60 minutes for bittering is accepted practice. But to me, a 45 minute addition would be for bittering that's a bit smoother in place of 60 minute, as in my dampfbier. But 60 with 45 & 30 to me is a waste. Flavor additions from 20 minutes down to about 8 or so work well for me. 2-5 minutes are for aroma, but dry hopping gives better aroma.
 
I think this will help to explain the timing issue.

248754d1421226487-dme-hops-brew-beginner-needs-help-hop_utilization.jpg


Hops contribute three things, bittering, flavor and aroma and the amount of time they are in the boil impact how much of their potential they contribute.

I agree with the 45 being a waste, in fact many hoppy ipa recipe will be one bittering addition at 60 minutes, a whirlpool addition (0 minute) and dry hopping.
 
cmoewes said:
I think this will help to explain the timing issue.

248754d1421226487-dme-hops-brew-beginner-needs-help-hop_utilization.jpg


Hops contribute three things, bittering, flavor and aroma and the amount of time they are in the boil impact how much of their potential they contribute.

I agree with the 45 being a waste, in fact many hoppy ipa recipe will be one bittering addition at 60 minutes, a whirlpool addition (0 minute) and dry hopping.
Click to expand...

I just made an amarillo pale ale with additions at 30 and 13 based off this chart. With first wort hops and will dry hop.
 
cmoewes said:
I think this will help to explain the timing issue.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/attachments/f39/248754d1421226487-dme-hops-brew-beginner-needs-help-hop_utilization.jpg[/IMG

Hops contribute three things, bittering, flavor and aroma and the amount of time they are in the boil impact how much of their potential they contribute.

I agree with the 45 being a waste, in fact many hoppy ipa recipe will be one bittering addition at 60 minutes, a whirlpool addition (0 minute) and dry hopping.[/quote]

That graph has been regurgitated around the internet for years. I dislike it because it is a bit misinformative. It structure things too neatly with exact %'s and times, which are not even accurate. For example, they list 5-7 minutes as the peak of absolute aromatic potential and 20 minutes as the absolute peak of flavor. This is false information.

The above referenced graph also assumes that flavor and aroma are two very different things. It is true that aromatic oils (of which there are many) are more delicate and easily destroyed by heat, but some of them still exist when briefly boiled. Also, you cannot taste without your sense of smell; these senses go hand-in-hand and should be quite parallel when illustrated on a graph.



The below referenced graph is more accurate (I just created it):

[URL="http://imgur.com/VCmzuc7"]http://imgur.com/VCmzuc7[/URL]

[ATTACH=full]253965[/ATTACH]
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • Hop Graph.png
    Hop Graph.png
    16.4 KB · Views: 248
bobbrews said:
That graph has been regurgitated around the internet for years. I dislike it because it is a bit misinformative. It structure things too neatly with exact %'s and times, which are not even accurate. For example, they list 5 minutes as the peak of absolute aromatic potential and 20 minutes as the absolute peak of flavor. This is false information.

The above referenced graph also assumes that flavor and aroma are two very different things. It is true that aromatic oils (of which there are many) are more delicate and easily destroyed by heat, but some of them still exist when briefly boiled. Also, you cannot taste without your sense of smell; these senses go hand-in-hand and should be quite parallel when illustrated on a graph.



The below referenced graph is more accurate (I just created it):

http://imgur.com/VCmzuc7
Click to expand...

It may not provide the perfect modelling of hop usage, but I think that for many people it does provide a fairly easy starting point for understanding the complexity of hop addition timing.

In the same way that the Bohr model over simplifies the way an atom is constructed, it still provides a useful learning tool to start understanding things.
 
cmoewes said:
It may not provide the perfect modelling of hop usage, but I think that for many people it does provide a fairly easy starting point for understanding the complexity of hop addition timing.

In the same way that the Bohr model over simplifies the way an atom is constructed, it still provides a useful learning tool to start understanding things.
Click to expand...

In essence, it is still giving incorrect information.
 
bobbrews said:
In essence, it is still giving incorrect information.
Click to expand...

I think it gives a basis for understanding a complex concept. Is the model the most accurate representation? No. Is it inaccurate? I don't believe it is. Does that make it Incorrect? I don't think it does. You have to start your foundation understanding somewhere. And for many people comprehension is more critical and can provide the stepping stone to deeper understanding.

I'm trying to understand your graph a little better. So your X axis is time from -N (dry-hopping) through flame out up to 90 minutes. And you Y axis is 100-0 as a percentage of utilization of hop character. And the curves are each of the characters.

So at 90 minutes spent in the boil the hops will have contributes 100% of their potential bittering and 0% of their potential aroma and 1% of their potential flavor contributions.

What I don't follow is that your showing that the hops can only contribute, at maximum, 25% of their potential flavor and less then 5% of their potential aroma if added any point prior to flame out. And that the only way to get more than that is to add them as a dry hop addition?

I guess without the actual time scale on the x it's hard for me to follow this.

What I like on the other chart is I can look at it and see that a hop addition added to the boil for 10 minutes will contribute 15% of it's potential bittering ability, 20% of it potential flavoring ability and 90% of it's potential flavoring addition.
 
Ski12568 said:
I just made an amarillo pale ale with additions at 30 and 13 based off this chart. With first wort hops and will dry hop.
Click to expand...

bobbrews said:
That graph has been regurgitated around the internet for years. I dislike it because it is a bit misinformative. It structure things too neatly with exact %'s and times, which are not even accurate. For example, they list 5 minutes as the peak of absolute aromatic potential and 20 minutes as the absolute peak of flavor. This is false information.

The above referenced graph also assumes that flavor and aroma are two very different things. It is true that aromatic oils (of which there are many) are more delicate and easily destroyed by heat, but some of them still exist when briefly boiled. Also, you cannot taste without your sense of smell; these senses go hand-in-hand and should be quite parallel when illustrated on a graph.



The below referenced graph is more accurate (I just created it):

http://imgur.com/VCmzuc7
Click to expand...


Very cool graph. Do either of you have a formula that calculates the amount of aroma and flavor as a function of time? In a similar way to the IBU calculation palmer provides.
 
cmoewes said:
I think it gives a basis for understanding a complex concept. Is the model the most accurate representation? No. Is it inaccurate? I don't believe it is. Does that make it Incorrect? I don't think it does.
Click to expand...

It's incorrect because it asserts very specific times for optimal results. And those times/results are wrong. The 5 minute mark is not the peak of aromatic hop potential, just as the 20 minute mark is not the peak of flavor hop potential. The problem with the graph is that it tries to package a very complicated process into a neat little box so we can better understand it. Utilizing hops effectively for IPAs doesn't work that way.


cmoewes said:
I'm trying to understand your graph a little better. So your X axis is time from -N (dry-hopping) through flame out up to 90 minutes. And you Y axis is 100-0 as a percentage of utilization of hop character. And the curves are each of the characters.

So at 90 minutes spent in the boil the hops will have contributes 100% of their potential bittering and 0% of their potential aroma and 1% of their potential flavor contributions.

What I don't follow is that your showing that the hops can only contribute, at maximum, 25% of their potential flavor and less then 5% of their potential aroma if added any point prior to flame out. And that the only way to get more than that is to add them as a dry hop addition?
Click to expand...

Again, you're looking at it like an exact science with exact numbers and truths. Think of it more like a linear progression. The further you get from the 60/90 minute mark, the more hop flavor and aroma a person will be able to detect. That does not exactly mean that a 5 minute hop addition is useless or inferior to a dryhop or warm hopstand addition. A 5 minute boil addition will provide slightly different flavor/aroma, which could offer complexity. However, at the 60/90 minute mark, much of what you sense is simply bitterness.

cmoewes said:
What I like on the other chart is I can look at it and see that a hop addition added to the boil for 10 minutes will contribute 15% of it's potential bittering ability, 20% of it potential flavoring ability and 90% of it's potential flavoring addition.
Click to expand...

It doesn't work that way. The template does not take into consideration that all hops are not equal. Different hops yield different flavor/aroma and offer varying levels of alpha acids. They also have different levels oils and aromatic compounds suchs as Myrcene, Humulene, Caryophyllene, etc.

1 oz. Apollo hops added at 10 minute mark will yield drastically different results vs. 1 oz. Cascade hops or 1 oz. Kent Goldings added at the same mark, for the same beer. While you can technically make a case for a certain % of their bittering potential being used at that point, you cannot make the same case for the flavor/aroma potential.
 
corycorycory09 said:
Very cool graph. Do either of you have a formula that calculates the amount of aroma and flavor as a function of time? In a similar way to the IBU calculation palmer provides.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone does; and it will vary for the hop(s) that you are using and the flavor/aroma you wish to harness.

I can tell you this about the total usage of hops (in %'s) for popular commercial IPAs:

Legend
90-60 min - Early
45-20 min - Middle
15-0 min - Late (includes warm hopstands beyond 0 min)
5-12 days - Dryhop (includes multi-stage dryhops)

Pliny the Elder
28% early
14% middle
28% late
30% dryhop

Fat Head's Head Hunter
21% early
17% middle
28% late
34% dryhop

Ninkasi Tricerahops
19% early
12% middle
27% late
42% dryhop

Stone IPA
22% early
0% middle
44% late
34% dryhop

Kern Citra IIPA
13% early
8% middle
25% late
54% dryhop

FW Union Jack
6% early
19% middle
31% late
44% dryhop



I've done this for many commercial IPAs, but I'm sure you can see a trend starting here.

Level of importance (1 being the most important):

Dryhop = 1
Late = 2
Early = 3
Middle = 4

One exception: some outsanding IPA brewers skip middle additions altogether. However, every single one of them relies on a bittering charge following by hefty late and dryhop additions.
 
bobbrews said:
I don't think anyone does; and it will vary for the hop(s) that you are using and the flavor/aroma you wish to harness.

I can tell you this about the total usage of hops (in %'s) for popular commercial IPAs:

Legend
90-60 min - Early
45-20 min - Middle
15-0 min - Late (includes warm hopstands beyond 0 min)
5-12 days - Dryhop (includes multi-stage dryhops)

Pliny the Elder
28% early
14% middle
28% late
30% dryhop

Fat Head's Head Hunter
21% early
17% middle
28% late
34% dryhop

Ninkasi Tricerahops
19% early
12% middle
27% late
42% dryhop

Stone IPA
22% early
0% middle
44% late
34% dryhop

Kern Citra IIPA
13% early
8% middle
25% late
54% dryhop

FW Union Jack
6% early
19% middle
31% late
44% dryhop
Click to expand...

Very cool. Thanks for sharing.
 
bobbrews said:
It's incorrect because it asserts very specific times for optimal results. And those times/results are wrong. The 10 minute mark is not the peak of aromatic hop potential, just as the 20 minute mark is not the peak of flavor hop potential. The problem with the graph is that it tries to package a very complicated process into a neat little box so we can better understand it. Utilizing hops effectively for IPAs doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...

Why is packaging a complex process into a neat box to help understand it bad? I think that's my objection to your objection. The only real difference between this chart and your chart is that they label the time axis and your just sorta kinda in the ball park of reference when the additions are made.

I think that giving someone something that is very specific to illustrate a concept and once they have a grasp of that admitting that it isn't a perfect representation is far better than trying to illustrate something complex prefectly up front. The perfect is the enemy of the good and I think the old model is good.

bobbrews said:
Again, you're looking at it like an exact science with exact numbers and truths. Think of it more like a linear progression. The further you get from the 60/90 minute mark, the more hop flavor and aroma a person will be able to detect. That does not exactly mean that a 5 minute hop addition is useless or inferior to a dryhop or warm hopstand addition. A 5 minute boil addition will provide slightly different flavor/aroma, which could offer complexity. However, at the 60/90 minute mark, much of what you sense is simply bitterness.



It doesn't work that way. The template does not take into consideration that all hops are not equal. Different hops yield different flavor/aroma and offer varying levels of alpha acids. They also have different levels oils and aromatic compounds suchs as Myrcene, Humulene, Caryophyllene, etc.

1 oz. Apollo hops added at 10 minute mark will yield drastically different results vs. 1 oz. Cascade hops or 1 oz. Kent Goldings added at the same mark, for the same beer.
Click to expand...

I don't think that the expectation is that different hops with different AA and other compounds will produce the same value. That's why it's all about potential contribution of bittering, flavor and aroma.

I don't disagree that it is a complex process, in fact I always explain to people that the grain bill is the science and the hopping is the art. But even with art there are guideline you can use and for me I find that original graph to provide enough of a guide when trying to formulate a recipe that it seems to stand the test of usefulness.

Next time I am creating a new recipe I'll try using your graph when thinking about my hop schedule and maybe it will advise my process in another direction.
 
cmoewes said:
Why is packaging a complex process into a neat box to help understand it bad?

I think that giving someone something that is very specific to illustrate a concept and once they have a grasp of that admitting that it isn't a perfect representation is far better than trying to illustrate something complex prefectly up front.
Click to expand...

As humans, it is normal for us to try to comprehend things by simplifying them (and often too much). But we cannot (and do not) know everything. When no one truly understands the complete picture, then yes, it's misleading to create a graph like that with exact times and %'s for the best results. Especially when it defies common sense to anyone who knows anything about how boiling can destroy the aromatic oils in certain ingredients like parsley, cilantro, chervil, white truffles, or HOPS....

cmoewes said:
I think that's my objection to your objection. The only real difference between this chart and your chart is that they label the time axis and your just sorta kinda in the ball park of reference when the additions are made.
Click to expand...

No. The real difference is that my graph does not assert absolutes. It simply gives you a loose guide for reference. And it is based on some truth: 1) Delicate aromas/flavors boil off easily, 2) Flavor and Aroma are very closely tied together; they are not completely separate things, 3) Hop bittering potential increases and flavor/aroma decreases the longer you boil, 4) Myrcene, that piney/citrusy/fruity highly sought after hop compound we love in American IPAs boils off at 167F. Other favorable IPA compounds can hold up to boiling, but only to an extent before you can no longer detect them as a pleasurable flavor/aroma on the palate.

cmoewes said:
I don't think that the expectation is that different hops with different AA and other compounds will produce the same value. That's why it's all about potential contribution of bittering, flavor and aroma.
Click to expand...

It's easy to calculate IBU potential. You're given the AA% and the time. You can make a calculation for that since you have actual figures to work with.

It is a very different thing to assert that one can accurately calculate flavor/aroma potential. Your best answer for optimal flavor/aroma potential in an American IPA is to focus on a combination of Dryhop/Hopstand/Flameout and additions up to as much as 5-15 minutes left in the boil.
 
bobbrews said:
As humans, it is normal for us to try to comprehend things by simplifying them (and often too much). But we cannot (and do not) know everything. When no one truly understands the complete picture, then yes, it's misleading to create a graph like that with exact times and %'s for the best results.
Click to expand...

Fixed

hop_utilization2.jpg
 
cmoewes said:
Fixed
Click to expand...

No need to be cheeky. The point I'm making is obviously not registering with your highly analytical, left-sided mind.

Despite what you may continue to believe, you cannot precisely measure optimal hop flavor and aroma potential with the graph that you are so fond of. In fact, that graph isn't even close in that regard.
 
bobbrews said:
I don't think anyone does; and it will vary for the hop(s) that you are using and the flavor/aroma you wish to harness.

I can tell you this about the total usage of hops (in %'s) for popular commercial IPAs:

Legend
90-60 min - Early
45-20 min - Middle
15-0 min - Late (includes warm hopstands beyond 0 min)
5-12 days - Dryhop (includes multi-stage dryhops)

Pliny the Elder
28% early
14% middle
28% late
30% dryhop

Fat Head's Head Hunter
21% early
17% middle
28% late
34% dryhop

Ninkasi Tricerahops
19% early
12% middle
27% late
42% dryhop

Stone IPA
22% early
0% middle
44% late
34% dryhop

Kern Citra IIPA
13% early
8% middle
25% late
54% dryhop

FW Union Jack
6% early
19% middle
31% late
44% dryhop



I've done this for many commercial IPAs, but I'm sure you can see a trend starting here.

Level of importance (1 being the most important):

Dryhop = 1
Late = 2
Early = 3
Middle = 4

One exception: some outsanding IPA brewers skip middle additions altogether. However, every single one of them relies on a bittering charge following by hefty late and dryhop additions.
Click to expand...


The last point you made is the most important. Any of these hopping times are interdependent on the remaining additions...

I recently did an IPA with a 60 minute bittering addition of Columbus..

All of the remaining additions were done post boil. 4.5 oz at flameout for 30 minutes @ 180 degrees followed by another addition of 4.5 oz for an additional thirty minutes with the heat off. All for an hour long whirlpool recirculation. And then a 3 oz dry hop for 10 days.

Looking at a chart, this would suggest tons of aroma, some bitterness. And no flavor except as a result of the bittering charge..

I was amazed at just how flavorful this beer is. So flavorful that all of my IPA recipes going forward will only have a first wort/60-90 minute addition & everything else will be post boil-dry hop.

True - it takes a boatload of hops but man, the flavor is out of this world because you don't destroy all of the delicate oils with heat.
 
bobbrews said:
No need to be cheeky. The point I'm making is obviously not registering with your highly analytical, left-sided mind.

Despite what you may continue to believe, you cannot precisely measure optimal hop flavor and aroma potential with the graph that you are so fond of. In fact, that graph isn't even close.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with a little cheek once in a while.

I do understand the point that you are making despite my highly analytical, left side mind. No we can't precisely calculate the optimal hop flavor and aroma characters and apply a precise formulaic way to determine what to use and when.

You however seem to be missing the point that I am making which is since we can't calculate these esoteric characteristics, in order to communicate and educate about them, we have generalize about those characteristics and sometimes use overly simplified and possible too explicit representations of the concepts to help people who don't understand the concepts start to do so.

Obviously this isn't registering in your whatever you consider the opposite of highly analytical, left side mind is.

To the OP, yes you could change the amount of hops added during your boil to produce the equivalent level of IBU based on when you added them(less hops if added at the start of the boil, more hops if added at the end of the boil).

As for your follow-up, the various timing for the addition of hops through the course of the boil allow the hop (and all their alpha acid and oils and other chemicals) to present to varying degrees different amounts of bittering, flavor and (closely associated) aroma to the beer.
 
cmoewes said:
since we can't calculate these esoteric characteristics, in order to communicate and educate about them, we have generalize about those characteristics and sometimes use overly simplified and possible too explicit representations of the concepts to help people who don't understand the concepts start to do so.
Click to expand...

Exactly, which is why the graph I created illustrates this better without being misleading at the same time.


Choose to ignore it if you wish, and create every single IPA you will ever brew based on the other graph's assertations of optimal bittering, flavor, aroma potential as follows:

90 or 60 minute bittering addition
20 minute flavor addition
5 minute aroma addition

And no further hops...


...see where that lands you.
 
bobbrews said:
Exactly, but the graph I created illustrates this better without being misleading at the same time.


Choose to ignore it if you wish, and create every single IPA you will ever brew based on the other graph's assertations of optimal bittering, flavor, aroma potential as follows:

90 or 60 minute bittering addition
20 minute flavor addition
5 minute aroma addition

And no further hops...


...see where that lands you.
Click to expand...

I see the issue, you are making the assumption that people are only capable of using a single piece of reference material when understanding a concept and lack the ability to synthesize multiple sources of information and experience when applying their knowledge in an area.

I was able to understand that there were other hopping opportunities beyond what were explicit to that graph including FWH, whirlpool/hop stand, hop rocket, dry hopping and even using a Randal to add hops (or other flavors) at the time of serving.

But point taken. If I only used that graph to inform my hop schedule and expected it to absolutely accurately calculate the bittering, flavor and aroma of my beer I would not be making the best beers I could be.
 
cmoewes said:
I see the issue, you are making the assumption that people are only capable of using a single piece of reference material when understanding a concept and lack the ability to synthesize multiple sources of information and experience when applying their knowledge in an area.
Click to expand...

No. The issue is that when a beginner or someone who doesn't understand how hops work takes a look at that graph, they obviously want 100% aroma and 100% flavor with just enough IBUs/bitterness to suit their individual palates.

I don't know anyone who says, "An IPA with 20% aroma potential and 40% flavor potential sounds good to me... let me use this chart to create my hop schedule off of those figures". Even if they were to make the mistake of using this chart to determine flavor/aroma potential, it would not yield the promised results.

Reread the title of this thread and then tell me if I am off base here.
 

Similar threads

D
First Recipe: 1 Gallon Maris Otter / Goldings SMaSH (Comments, suggestions?)
Replies
6
Views
456
Northern_Brewer
Northern_Brewer
shrews824
Hop addition question
Replies
9
Views
775
shrews824
shrews824
Zippy123
Feedback on recipe to split mash for two different beers
Replies
2
Views
492
Zippy123
Zippy123
Alan Reginato
Saaz (or noble hops) addition timings
Replies
9
Views
1K
GoodTruble
G
B
Double Hopped Psuedolager
Replies
0
Views
571
Brewsterguy
B
CornyKegs 300

Latest posts

Back
Top