Brett Imperial Stout

CornyKegs 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.
Nico93

Nico93

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
372
Reaction score
89
Hi
i want to brew a Brett Russian Stout and i need your help!
i thought to brew this beer and ferment it with a clean yeast and add brett to secondary
does the brett tooks the gravity to low? i want something like 1015/1020!
does the alcool stop the brett works?
I need to kill them when i reach the og?
this is the first idea of recipe, what to you think about?



Recipe: imperial 1.2 brett TYPE: All Grain
Style: Imperial Stout
---RECIPE SPECIFICATIONS-----------------------------------------------
SRM: 49,6 SRM SRM RANGE: 30,0-40,0 SRM
IBU: 79,4 IBUs Tinseth IBU RANGE: 50,0-90,0 IBUs
OG: 1,103 SG OG RANGE: 1,075-1,115 SG
FG: 1,020 SG FG RANGE: 1,018-1,030 SG
BU:GU: 0,774 Calories: 354,6 kcal/12oz Est ABV: 11,0 %
EE%: 70,00 % Batch: 5,28 gal Boil: 8,58 gal BT: 120 Mins



Total Grain Weight: 21,38 lb Total Hops: 5,29 oz oz.


Amt Name Type # %/IBU
15,43 lb Pale Malt, Maris Otter (3,0 SRM) Grain 1 72,2 %
2,20 lb Oats, Flaked (1,0 SRM) Grain 2 10,3 %
1,32 lb Roasted Barley (300,0 SRM) Grain 4 6,2 %
1,32 lb Chocolate Malt (350,0 SRM) Grain 3 6,2 %
1,10 lb Caramel/Crystal Malt - 80L (80,0 SRM) Grain 5 5,2 %




Amt Name Type # %/IBU
5,29 oz Goldings, East Kent [6,00 %] - Boil 90,0 Hop 6 79,4 IBUs



>Thanks!
 
What strain do you plan on using? Brett lambicus will give you a strong funk and might provide a chocolate-covered cherries flavor. Brett clausenii would give a milder funk that might do better to accentuate a big, complex beer like this. A dark horse would be Brett brux trois. I used that in 100% Brett fermented in a porter. It gave off interesting orange and lemon aromas and flavors, which somehow meshed well with the dark wort.

All strains have relatively high alcohol tolerance, but I would consider knocking the OG back some, because the Brett will cause this to attenuate more than you expect. Granted, I have never done a high gravity Brett beer before, but I would guess that it would still be pretty active in secondary fermentation.
 
dougdecinces said:
What strain do you plan on using? Brett lambicus will give you a strong funk and might provide a chocolate-covered cherries flavor. Brett clausenii would give a milder funk that might do better to accentuate a big, complex beer like this. A dark horse would be Brett brux trois. I used that in 100% Brett fermented in a porter. It gave off interesting orange and lemon aromas and flavors, which somehow meshed well with the dark wort.

All strains have relatively high alcohol tolerance, but I would consider knocking the OG back some, because the Brett will cause this to attenuate more than you expect. Granted, I have never done a high gravity Brett beer before, but I would guess that it would still be pretty active in secondary fermentation.
Click to expand...

from what you wrote I seem understand that the the clausenii is the best one that suits my idea

I thought to start with a high OG in order to obtain a fg as 1015/1020 despite the high attenuation of Brett,because i don't want to obtain an imperial stout with an fg like 1006 or so,i'm wrong?

thanks for your help
 
dougdecinces said:
http://www.themadfermentationist.com/2007/11/courage-russian-imperial-stout.html

This is an older thread, but he actually sulfited his beer and racked it off the yeast when he reached a FG and flavor he liked. That might be an option. You could always brew a 1 gal clean version of the beer and then blend the two so you have some yeast for bottle conditioning.
Click to expand...



i saw this article and i read it all but i don't like the idea to kill the brett, because if they survive i bottle bomb right?
 
Nico93 said:
i saw this article and i read it all but i don't like the idea to kill the brett, because if they survive i bottle bomb right?
Click to expand...
yeay, that was my concern too. k-meta doesn't kill yeast, it just stuns them. brett is pretty hardy so i'd worry about a few cells surviving.

i wonder if Oldsock has an update on k-meta and brett...
 
There is a lot that can be done without filtering to get it off the yeast cake. If you cold-crash the carboy, then rack the beer to a second carboy without disturbing the yeast cake, then add k-meta, I am guessing that would pretty much ruin any chance of brett surviving. Then you can bottle with a sacch strain and be golden. It's a lot of work, but I don't see why it wouldn't do the trick.
 
dougdecinces said:
If you cold-crash the carboy, then rack the beer to a second carboy without disturbing the yeast cake, then add k-meta, I am guessing that would pretty much ruin any chance of brett surviving.
Click to expand...
i don't have any experience doing this, my concern is that brett is so damn hardy that a little will make it through. cold crashing doesn't remove all the yeast (just most of it, and brett isn't very flocculent) and k-meta inhibits growth while the sulfur levels are high enough. sulfur levels will drop as they bind with other molecules in the beer.

but this might just be me being a worry-wort.
 
The other point that I don't think has been brought up yet, is that 1.103 down to 1.020 is already 81% apparent attenuation and close to 11 ABV. You are already pushing the alcohol tolerance and attenuation limits of brett, especially given the high proportion of specialty malts. If you push the OG up another 5-10 points, there will be almost no chance of brett attenuating it down much further than 1.020.
 
The type will factor in. I made a bretted up black IPA with clausenii in the secondary. I would need to check my notes but, I think it stopped around 1.012 which was a little high even for regular sacch. Bottled 3 months ago and still no gushers or bombs. Brett won't chew threw everything all the time. You should still have some body on a beer that big. You could add lactose for body. If I remember, most strains won't touch it.
 
I'd link mine but I cant copy and paste URLs with the app on my phone. Look up RIS 9097. Ive been brewing a brett stout for a few years. No sulfite just a nice 6-8 month fermentation and I ended with plenty of body and no bottle bombs or even over carbed after two years in the bottle for some.
 
dougdecinces said:
The other point that I don't think has been brought up yet, is that 1.103 down to 1.020 is already 81% apparent attenuation and close to 11 ABV. You are already pushing the alcohol tolerance and attenuation limits of brett, especially given the high proportion of specialty malts. If you push the OG up another 5-10 points, there will be almost no chance of brett attenuating it down much further than 1.020.
Click to expand...
brett can be active in wines, which are in the 13-15% range so 11% isn't the obstacle that it is for sacch. wyest lists its bretts as having an alcohol tolerance of "approximately 12% ABV"... even they can't pin down a number.

high proportion of specialty malts means that there is a lot of dextrines and other long(er) chain sugars = brett can ferment some of those, sacch can't.

you bring up a good point, tho - brett is unpredictable. it doesn't always super-attenuate.
 
A single strain can be predictable. You just have to get a feel for it.

The best I got, I think, was 78% apparent attenuation with 9097. That was with 158/160f mash temps and high proportions of black malt. I like mine roasty so thats what I make.
 
Brett added in the secondary will almost certainty super-attenuate, dropping your FG lower than you would prefer. You could primary with bret (I've got a RIS brewing that way right now) and hit your FG fairly closely. You can also stabilize - as others have mentioned metabisulfate works but the effects may be transitory; however, using the meta plus potassium sorbate should be sufficient to block further fermentation. I've stopped a few sour beers (which contained brett) with meta + sorbate, back-sweetened, and had the bottles remain stable for over two years.

Bryan
 
Warthaug said:
Brett added in the secondary will almost certainty super-attenuate, dropping your FG lower than you would prefer. You could primary with bret (I've got a RIS brewing that way right now) and hit your FG fairly closely. You can also stabilize - as others have mentioned metabisulfate works but the effects may be transitory; however, using the meta plus potassium sorbate should be sufficient to block further fermentation. I've stopped a few sour beers (which contained brett) with meta + sorbate, back-sweetened, and had the bottles remain stable for over two years.

Bryan
Click to expand...

Bryan that is factually not correct. If you brew it to be a brett with single strain you will not superattenuate. Maybe an additional 10% past "normal" yeast. If he mashes for 2 hours at 145 then sure he will get high attenuation.

I am not full of poop. I did a 1.100+ RIS three years in a row with Brett L and they all ended around 1.026. I mashed high and even had no luck with bottle conditioning. So now I only force carb the beer.

I currently have a RIS with ECY02 and my own gangbuster culture and after a year it was only at 1.030 from 1.092.
 
smokinghole said:
Bryan that is factually not correct. If you brew it to be a brett with single strain you will not superattenuate. Maybe an additional 10% past "normal" yeast. If he mashes for 2 hours at 145 then sure he will get high attenuation.

I am not full of poop. I did a 1.100+ RIS three years in a row with Brett L and they all ended around 1.026. I mashed high and even had no luck with bottle conditioning. So now I only force carb the beer.
Click to expand...
May I suggest that before"contradicting" someone that you read the post first. I specifically pointed out that superattenuation was an issue with Brett in the secondary and that a way around that was to do an all-Brett ferment (ok, that party was poorly written).

I would also echo the previous posts regarding bretts alcohol tolerance. The numbers published by the companies are not overly accurate. I've pushed all-Brett & mixed ferments over 15% (I.e. commercial strauns), and have experienced a Bret cork-taint (I.e. wild strain) in an 18% mead.

Bryan
 
I might chime in with a beer that I am working on today: a 100% Brett fermented (primary) Wheatwine that's currently sitting at about 12% ABV and 79% attenuation.

Brett can certainly handle the alcohol if you teach it to; try brewing a smaller Brett stout (or other style) as a kind of yeast starter to get the Brett acclimated to a 6 or 7 % ABV range, then pitch that yeast cake into your RIS.

I will also note that for high ABV beers like my wheatwine I've had more success with a bled of Brett strains. Because each strain has its own unique talents I think it is safe to assume that it helps assure a complete fermentation; but with a 100% Brett primary over attenuation is simply not an issue.

Best of luck!
 
Warthaug said:
May I suggest that before"contradicting" someone that you read the post first. I specifically pointed out that superattenuation was an issue with Brett in the secondary and that a way around that was to do an all-Brett ferment (ok, that party was poorly written).


Bryan
Click to expand...

I completely understood what you wrote. You are misunderstanding me maybe. I am saying my beers had brett in with English ale yeast from day one. So yes it was "secondary" with Brett. They did mot superattenuate. I am speaking from years of experience playing with Brett and breaking all the "rules" you and others hand out for quite a while. So now I contradict common held beliefs because I have challenged them on my own at home rather than just telling people something I heard. I work with a set of lab precision pedometers and make sure what I am reading is accurate. Brett will not superattenuate on its own especially when it is a single strain in with the saccharomyces strain for a prolonged "secondary" fermentation period. Trust me I have done it for more than three years. I don't have.bottle bombs nor do I have 1.002 terminal gravity stout that started at 1.110.
 
smokinghole said:
I completely understood what you wrote. You are misunderstanding me maybe. I am saying my beers had brett in with English ale yeast from day one. So yes it was "secondary" with Brett. They did mot superattenuate. I am speaking from years of experience playing with Brett and breaking all the "rules" you and others hand out for quite a while. So now I contradict common held beliefs because I have challenged them on my own at home rather than just telling people something I heard.
Click to expand...
You are making some pretty big assumptions about others experience here; I've been brewing (deliberately) with brett and other non-sacc yeasts since the late 1990's. If you follow the link to my blog below you'll see that I manage a massive (over 130 yeasts) yeast-bank, as well as collect, characterize and use a range of wild yeasts. Moreover, I'm a microbiologist by profession. I'd image both hobby-wise and professionally, I've got far more experience than you. Moreover, there are a lot of other people who also have a lot more experience than you who would state much the same as I have.

Yes, there are strains of brett which will not super-attenuate regardless of the situation; just as there are sacc strains which will super attenuate - hence why I said "almost certainty". But, in the majority of cases, brett used as a secondary fermenter will super-attenuate. According to my brew-log, brett added to the secondary led to super-attenuation in 47 of 51 beers - that's 92%. The cases where that didn't occur were all trois or clausini (which all got to the mid-80's); both lambicus, brux & wild bretts super-attenuated every time they were used.

smokinghole said:
I work with a set of lab precision pedometers and make sure what I am reading is accurate.
Click to expand...
Pedometer measure the number of steps you take...I don't see the relevance to brewing.

smokinghole said:
Brett will not superattenuate on its own
Click to expand...
This too is untrue; brett on its own usually will not superattenuate, but it will in some cases. I've had two all-brett saisons finish below 1.000 - i.e. super-attenuate, as have a couple of trois-based low-alcohol pale ales. The "rules" for all-brett ferments remain a big question mark, but in my experience if you build a beer that sacc would attenuate highly, an all-brett ferment will generally super-attenuate it.

smokinghole said:
Trust me I have done it for more than three years.
Click to expand...
Call me when you've done it for over a decade over a few hundred brews :tank:

Bryan
 
thanks to all for the replies! :mug:


i don't like the idea of putting substances like meta or sorbate in my beer if it isn't necessary.


i read some different opinions and i have confused idea:

what i understand is that brett are not really super attenuating, starting at 1103 makes me able to reach 1020 with 80% attenuation but i will not obtain 1005/1010
i need to make a starter with brett in order to help them to get used to alcohol and after pitch brett and sacc in primary

am i right or am I really going screwing it up?

smokinghole said:
Bryan that is factually not correct. If you brew it to be a brett with single strain you will not superattenuate. Maybe an additional 10% past "normal" yeast. If he mashes for 2 hours at 145 then sure he will get high attenuation.

I am not full of poop. I did a 1.100+ RIS three years in a row with Brett L and they all ended around 1.026. I mashed high and even had no luck with bottle conditioning. So now I only force carb the beer.

I currently have a RIS with ECY02 and my own gangbuster culture and after a year it was only at 1.030 from 1.092.
Click to expand...


Having no experience with brett, I'd love to hear more about your experience with it and use it as a starting point :) what temp do you use for mash? May I have the recipe you use?


Thanks to all!

edit:
Warthaug we posted in the same time! now i just read your replay and my ideas are even more confused, based on your experience there is a way to limit the attenuation of brett without use meta + sorbate?
 
Warthaug said:
You are making some pretty big assumptions about others experience here; I've been brewing (deliberately) with brett and other non-sacc yeasts since the late 1990's. If you follow the link to my blog below you'll see that I manage a massive (over 130 yeasts) yeast-bank, as well as collect, characterize and use a range of wild yeasts. Moreover, I'm a microbiologist by profession. I'd image both hobby-wise and professionally, I've got far more experience than you. Moreover, there are a lot of other people who also have a lot more experience than you who would state much the same as I have.

Yes, there are strains of brett which will not super-attenuate regardless of the situation; just as there are sacc strains which will super attenuate - hence why I said "almost certainty". But, in the majority of cases, brett used as a secondary fermenter will super-attenuate. According to my brew-log, brett added to the secondary led to super-attenuation in 47 of 51 beers - that's 92%. The cases where that didn't occur were all trois or clausini (which all got to the mid-80's); both lambicus, brux & wild bretts super-attenuated every time they were used.


Pedometer measure the number of steps you take...I don't see the relevance to brewing.


This too is untrue; brett on its own usually will not superattenuate, but it will in some cases. I've had two all-brett saisons finish below 1.000 - i.e. super-attenuate, as have a couple of trois-based low-alcohol pale ales. The "rules" for all-brett ferments remain a big question mark, but in my experience if you build a beer that sacc would attenuate highly, an all-brett ferment will generally super-attenuate it.


Call me when you've done it for over a decade over a few hundred brews :tank:

Bryan
Click to expand...

I must bow to the almighty I suppose. I will no longer offer up any dissenting opinion or experience. Bryan knows all and is the last word. That's what you want to hear right?:rolleyes:

By the way, you got me! I had no idea a pedometer was a thing that counted steps and not measure gravity.

If you build a beer to not attenuate highly with sacch then it will not super attenuate with brett. This is the point I'm trying to make. If you make a 1.090 wort and mash it at 158-160 with the intention of fermenting WITH brett then the beer will finish appropriately. If you mash an RIS to finish around 1.020 or a little higher with just sacch you will increase the attenuation as you so correctly pointed out many many times. I'm not saying brett won't attenuate further. I'm saying it should be proportional to the sugar composition of the wort prepared.

I'm confused by your demeanor and obvious sensitivity to me saying that you're not 100% accurate. If you want me to say you're mostly right then, you're mostly right. I guess that's sort of the glass is mostly full not partially empty. So you're mostly right not partially wrong because exceptions need not apply correct?
 
Nico93 said:
thanks to all for the replies! :mug:


i don't like the idea of putting substances like meta or sorbate in my beer if it isn't necessary.


i read some different opinions and i have confused idea:

what i understand is that brett are not really super attenuating, starting at 1103 makes me able to reach 1020 with 80% attenuation but i will not obtain 1005/1010
i need to make a starter with brett in order to help them to get used to alcohol and after pitch brett and sacc in primary

am i right or am I really going screwing it up?




Having no experience with brett, I'd love to hear more about your experience with it and use it as a starting point :) what temp do you use for mash? May I have the recipe you use?


Thanks to all!

edit:
Warthaug we posted in the same time! now i just read your replay and my ideas are even more confused, based on your experience there is a way to limit the attenuation of brett without use meta + sorbate?
Click to expand...
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f127/ris-old-ale-blend-272750/
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f68/smokingholes-imperial-stout-363830/

If you have any questions you want answered I'm happy to help out. I haven't done this for 10 years and I'm not a microbiologist so you might not want to take any of my advice or believe me. I'm only a professional brewer at a very large brewery with a background in biotechnology. I still hang out here because I don't deal with sour and brett at work and well the professionals out there that do it tend to keep techniques and such to themselves. I get to discuss here with people willing to try things and that tend (not always though ;)) to be less close minded than many professional brewers. Have a search around there is not many if even any, brewers doing an imperial stout with brett. You can find bourbon barrel aged out the wahzoo though.
 
That reminds me. I have a sweet stout barrel aging with a mix of souring bugs and multiple brett strains. The last I tasted it was 3 months in. (It is now around 5 months) When I tried it then it was not too thin and still had plenty of body. I didn't hydro sample it. Tannins in oak help create body. Point is even if it does over attenuate I don't think it is going to seem too thin. Thinner than a normal RIS sure but, it will still be good.

I say go for it!
 
Nico93 said:
i don't like the idea of putting substances like meta or sorbate in my beer if it isn't necessary.
Click to expand...
If you manage things correctly you likely do not need to. It is an option, and aside from filtering/centrifugation, is the only way to reliably stop fermentation at a specific point.

As others/I mentioned before, setting things up correctly ahead of time (e.g. strain selection, brewing methods, fermentation temps, oxygenation, etc) should give you a beer with (close to) the desired characteristics.

Nico93 said:
i read some different opinions and i have confused idea:

what i understand is that brett are not really super attenuating, starting at 1103 makes me able to reach 1020 with 80% attenuation but i will not obtain 1005/1010
i need to make a starter with brett in order to help them to get used to alcohol and after pitch brett and sacc in primary

am i right or am I really going screwing it up?
Click to expand...
I would be worried about super-attenuation in this case. As an example, I brewed a similar beer last year - 1.100 starting gravity, brett added to secondary (primary was good ol' 1056), and it finished - 8 months later - at 0.998. The pre-bretted beer ended fermentation at 1.028; so brett brought it down quite a bit.

When added to the secondary you generally do not need a starter with the brett; the amount that comes in a white labs or wyeast tube is generally considered to be enough for this purpose. I've tried it both ways and only seen modest gains in terms of fermentation time & flavour production with a starter. Obviously, for an all-brett beer you want a starter for the brett. And for a mixed beer, whatever yeast(s) you start the beer with need to be prepared with a starter.

If you choose the correct strain - trois or clausini - you are much less likely to see super-attenuation, but you still need to formulate your beer correctly. The major difference between them and brux/lambicus is their ability to "eat" dextrins. They're not as good as it, meaning they are more likely to stop before super-attenuating the beer than are brux/lambicus. A warmer mash temp will give you a more dextrinous wort, which in turn is less likely to be super-attenuated by trois or clausini. Likewise, avoiding late oxygen exposure, using cold crashing, etc, can limit super-attenuation.

An alternate option is to prepare a beer that will super-attenuate (i.e. with a fermentable wort), and then provide body and sweetness via non-fermentable adjuncts such as oats. Body, at least, can be added in a way that brett cannot reduce, in this fashion. Osedax also mentioned using oak for the same purpose - oak has the advantage that it adds both body and sweetness (plus that great oak taste).

Nico93 said:
Having no experience with brett, I'd love to hear more about your experience with it and use it as a starting point :) what temp do you use for mash? May I have the recipe you use?
Click to expand...
I have a few posted on my blog; I'm a bad blogger and don't blog most of my brews, but I'd be happy to provide you with anything of interest. At a minimum, there is a bret-secondaried barleywine, and all-brett porters and RIS recipes on there.

Bryan
 
smokinghole said:
I must bow to the almighty I suppose. I will no longer offer up any dissenting opinion or experience. Bryan knows all and is the last word. That's what you want to hear right?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Apparently sarcasm is wasted on this board. However, when you offer demonstrably incorrect advice and pull out three years experience as proof expertise, don't be surprised if people get irate. We (the brewing community) have been working with brett (deliberately) for over 20 years - a lot of the advice out there is a product of that. Noticing a few exceptions does not mean that knowledge is wrong; it means that there are exceptions.

smokinghole said:
By the way, you got me! I had no idea a pedometer was a thing that counted steps and not measure gravity.
Click to expand...
I assumed that was a "autocorrect". Did you mean refractometer? If so, there are issues with those as well (lab grade or otherwise)...but that's another thread.

smokinghole said:
If you build a beer to not attenuate highly with sacch then it will not super attenuate with brett. This is the point I'm trying to make. If you make a 1.090 wort and mash it at 158-160 with the intention of fermenting WITH brett then the beer will finish appropriately.
Click to expand...
And you are (partially) wrong. Some strains of bretts can easily metabolize the long-chain dextrins produced at higher mash temps and will super-attenuate even the most dextrinous or worts. Other strains of brett cannot, or do so poorly, and will produce a sweet/bodied beer from a high-temp mash. Manipulatable factors - e.g. how you prepare your bret, how much & when you oxygenate, fermentation temperature profile, etc, can all alter the degree of attenuation you get with a single strain of brett. Obviously, a low-temp mash will lead to a highly attenuated beer regardless of those factors, but a dextrinous mash is not a guaranteed way of preventing super-attenuation.

Again, as an example, my current all-bret RIS started at 1.092; was mashed at 69C (high-body), and 2.5 weeks in has already attenuated to 1.011 (88% attenutation and is still falling). The reason is simple - the strain I chose (a lambicus strain) is good at "eating" dextrins and I've used a mixture of high oxygenation, a ramped temperature profile and a high pitch rate to promote continued fermentation. I've done similar beers with the same strain that ended at ~75% attenuation; again, achieved by manipulating fermentation temperature, pitch rate and aeration in a dextrinous wort.


smokinghole said:
If you mash an RIS to finish around 1.020 or a little higher with just sacch you will increase the attenuation as you so correctly pointed out many many times. I'm not saying brett won't attenuate further. I'm saying it should be proportional to the sugar composition of the wort prepared.
Click to expand...
Except that this is wrong. Many strains of brett secrete an enzyme called "α-Glucosidase" which breaks down dextrins into fermentable sugars. Strains with this capacity - unless appropriately managed - will readily super-attenuate dextrinous worts.

Bryan
 
Well my entire outlook on brett and brewing has been changed, I have seen the light. Don't bother putting brett in your beer it will not end as intended. Thank god I found this post so I could see the error in my ways. I will crawl into the hole I came from and never offer dissent to the spoken word of Bryan concerning anything fermentation related. I have just been educated! ;)

I'll just keep doing what I do, and you do what you do.
 
please guys do not argue, all your answers are very helpful to me and it is normal that not everyone has the same experiences ...:mug::mug:


I changed the recipe according to what I am understanding


1) high og in order to have a little higher fg despite a hight attenuation
2) oats to increase unfermentable scratch
3)brett Claussenii because is not a great eater
4)higher mash temp

with metric units

Boil Size: 32,50 l
Post Boil Volume: 25,84 l
Batch Size (fermenter): 15,00 l
Bottling Volume: 13,49 l
Estimated OG: 1,120 SG
Estimated Color: 101,7 EBC
Estimated IBU: 88,5 IBUs
Brewhouse Efficiency: 68,00 %
Est Mash Efficiency: 85,2 %
Boil Time: 120 Minutes

Ingredients:
------------
Amt Name Type # %/IBU
4,50 kg Pale Malt, Maris Otter (5,9 EBC) Grain 1 55,2 %
0,50 kg Chocolate Malt (689,5 EBC) Grain 2 6,2 %
0,50 kg Roasted Barley (591,0 EBC) Grain 3 6,2 %
0,35 kg Caramel/Crystal Malt - 80L (157,6 EBC) Grain 5 4,3 %
0,10 kg Peat Smoked Malt (5,5 EBC) Grain 7 1,2 %
0,35 kg Barley, Flaked (3,3 EBC) Grain 4 4,3 %
1,50 kg Pilsner Liquid Extract (6,9 EBC) Extract 8 18,4 %
159,62 g Styrian Goldings [4,50 %] - Boil 60,0 mi Hop 9 88,5 IBUs
0,35 kg Oats, Flaked (2,0 EBC) Grain 6 4,3 %
2,0 pkg Safale American (DCL/Fermentis #US-05) Yeast 10 -
1,0 pkg Brettanomyces Claussenii (White Labs #WL Yeast 11 -


Mash Schedule: imperial
Total Grain Weight: 8,15 kg
----------------------------
Name Description Step Temperat Step Time
Saccharification Add 0,00 l of water at 69,0 C 69,0 C 90 min
Mash Out Add -3,82 l of water at 78,0 C 78,0 C 15 min








Boil Size: 8,59 gal
Post Boil Volume: 6,83 gal
Batch Size (fermenter): 3,96 gal
Bottling Volume: 3,56 gal
Estimated OG: 1,120 SG
Estimated Color: 51,6 SRM
Estimated IBU: 88,5 IBUs
Brewhouse Efficiency: 68,00 %
Est Mash Efficiency: 85,2 %
Boil Time: 120 Minutes

Ingredients:
------------
Amt Name Type # %/IBU
9,92 lb Pale Malt, Maris Otter (3,0 SRM) Grain 1 55,2 %
1,11 lb Chocolate Malt (350,0 SRM) Grain 2 6,2 %
1,11 lb Roasted Barley (300,0 SRM) Grain 3 6,2 %
0,77 lb Caramel/Crystal Malt - 80L (80,0 SRM) Grain 5 4,3 %
0,22 lb Peat Smoked Malt (2,8 SRM) Grain 7 1,2 %
0,77 lb Barley, Flaked (1,7 SRM) Grain 4 4,3 %
3,31 lb Pilsner Liquid Extract (3,5 SRM) Extract 8 18,4 %
5,63 oz Styrian Goldings [4,50 %] - Boil 60,0 mi Hop 9 88,5 IBUs
0,77 lb Oats, Flaked (1,0 SRM) Grain 6 4,3 %
2,0 pkg Safale American (DCL/Fermentis #US-05) Yeast 10 -
1,0 pkg Brettanomyces Claussenii (White Labs #WL Yeast 11 -

with us units


Mash Schedule: imperial
Total Grain Weight: 17,98 lb
----------------------------
Name Description Step Temperat Step Time
Saccharification Add 0,00 qt of water at 156,2 F 156,2 F 90 min
Mash Out Add -4,04 qt of water at 172,4 F 172,4 F 15 min


I'd like to have the opinion of both of you (and of course others)mug::mug:

p.s. sorry for my english, i'm from Italy :)
 
Nico93 said:
please guys do not argue, all your answers are very helpful to me and it is normal that not everyone has the same experiences ...:mug::mug:


I changed the recipe according to what I am understanding


1) high og in order to have a little higher fg despite a hight attenuation
2) oats to increase unfermentable scratch
3)brett Claussenii because is not a great eater
4)higher mash temp

with metric units

Boil Size: 32,50 l
Post Boil Volume: 25,84 l
Batch Size (fermenter): 15,00 l
Bottling Volume: 13,49 l
Estimated OG: 1,120 SG
Estimated Color: 101,7 EBC
Estimated IBU: 88,5 IBUs
Brewhouse Efficiency: 68,00 %
Est Mash Efficiency: 85,2 %
Boil Time: 120 Minutes

Ingredients:
------------
Amt Name Type # %/IBU
4,50 kg Pale Malt, Maris Otter (5,9 EBC) Grain 1 55,2 %
0,50 kg Chocolate Malt (689,5 EBC) Grain 2 6,2 %
0,50 kg Roasted Barley (591,0 EBC) Grain 3 6,2 %
0,35 kg Caramel/Crystal Malt - 80L (157,6 EBC) Grain 5 4,3 %
0,10 kg Peat Smoked Malt (5,5 EBC) Grain 7 1,2 %
0,35 kg Barley, Flaked (3,3 EBC) Grain 4 4,3 %
1,50 kg Pilsner Liquid Extract (6,9 EBC) Extract 8 18,4 %
159,62 g Styrian Goldings [4,50 %] - Boil 60,0 mi Hop 9 88,5 IBUs
0,35 kg Oats, Flaked (2,0 EBC) Grain 6 4,3 %
2,0 pkg Safale American (DCL/Fermentis #US-05) Yeast 10 -
1,0 pkg Brettanomyces Claussenii (White Labs #WL Yeast 11 -


Mash Schedule: imperial
Total Grain Weight: 8,15 kg
----------------------------
Name Description Step Temperat Step Time
Saccharification Add 0,00 l of water at 69,0 C 69,0 C 90 min
Mash Out Add -3,82 l of water at 78,0 C 78,0 C 15 min








Boil Size: 8,59 gal
Post Boil Volume: 6,83 gal
Batch Size (fermenter): 3,96 gal
Bottling Volume: 3,56 gal
Estimated OG: 1,120 SG
Estimated Color: 51,6 SRM
Estimated IBU: 88,5 IBUs
Brewhouse Efficiency: 68,00 %
Est Mash Efficiency: 85,2 %
Boil Time: 120 Minutes

Ingredients:
------------
Amt Name Type # %/IBU
9,92 lb Pale Malt, Maris Otter (3,0 SRM) Grain 1 55,2 %
1,11 lb Chocolate Malt (350,0 SRM) Grain 2 6,2 %
1,11 lb Roasted Barley (300,0 SRM) Grain 3 6,2 %
0,77 lb Caramel/Crystal Malt - 80L (80,0 SRM) Grain 5 4,3 %
0,22 lb Peat Smoked Malt (2,8 SRM) Grain 7 1,2 %
0,77 lb Barley, Flaked (1,7 SRM) Grain 4 4,3 %
3,31 lb Pilsner Liquid Extract (3,5 SRM) Extract 8 18,4 %
5,63 oz Styrian Goldings [4,50 %] - Boil 60,0 mi Hop 9 88,5 IBUs
0,77 lb Oats, Flaked (1,0 SRM) Grain 6 4,3 %
2,0 pkg Safale American (DCL/Fermentis #US-05) Yeast 10 -
1,0 pkg Brettanomyces Claussenii (White Labs #WL Yeast 11 -

with us units


Mash Schedule: imperial
Total Grain Weight: 17,98 lb
----------------------------
Name Description Step Temperat Step Time
Saccharification Add 0,00 qt of water at 156,2 F 156,2 F 90 min
Mash Out Add -4,04 qt of water at 172,4 F 172,4 F 15 min


I'd like to have the opinion of both of you (and of course others)mug::mug:

p.s. sorry for my english, i'm from Italy :)
Click to expand...

I'll leave it to smokinghole to determine if this is a good plan of attack for a brett stout, but I do want to chime in and confirm that you are doing a starter for your US-05. Otherwise you will need something closer to 5 or 6 packets.
 
are you sure? mr malty say that for 15 liters 2 packet are enough:confused::)
 
The recipe looks good - I'm curious to see how the smoked malt turns out with the brett; should be an interesting balance.

As for the yeast amount, even though you're only doing 15L (~4 US gal) you are low. For a high-gravity ale, you need to pitch more yeast per volume, in your case about 400B cells are needed. One 11.5g packet of dry yeast contains ~70B cells when packaged, and you need to assume there will be some loss during transport/storage/rehydration. Technically, you need 5.7 packets for your beer.

That said, because you are using brett, you may be able to get away with less. 2 packets is still a little on the low side, but you may not need to add the full 6.

Bryan
 
ok!

you think is better 5pack of us05 or a pack of wlp Edimburgh Ale with 10liters starter?


and prefer to use brett lambicus instead of Claussenii? too much attenuation?
 
Lambicus will go a little further and produce a more assertive brett flavor. I'm not sure if clausenii will go amazingly or horrible with the peat. It has typical wet hay characteristics mixed with pineapple. It also seems to improve the perception of sweetness.

I think I will throw a dash of laphroaig 10 in my brett c CDA to test the theory.

Good luck with it!
 
Nico93 said:
are you sure? mr malty say that for 15 liters 2 packet are enough:confused::)
Click to expand...

High gravity beers usually require a much higher pitch rate than regular gravity beers. I didn't run any calculations, but just off the top of my head, I knew a beer like that would require around 500 billion cells, give or take. You don't want to mess around with pitch rate on beers this big, lest you run the risk of a stuck fermentation. Since S-05 is so cheap, don't bother being stingy.
 
Nico93 said:
ok!

you think is better 5pack of us05 or a pack of wlp Edimburgh Ale with 10liters starter?


and prefer to use brett lambicus instead of Claussenii? too much attenuation?
Click to expand...

5 packs of US-05 should be fine. And might actually be cheaper than trying to make a 10 liter starter.
 
ok! I'll use 5pack of US-05

the last think that i have to do before orders the material is between brett lambicus or claussenii!

i'm scared that lambicus took the gravity to low and that claussenii leave the gravity to high (considering the big og)
 
5 packs is way too much. 2 is all that is needed. per the OP's original post, he's making 19 liters (AKA 5 gallons) of 1.103 wort. plug that into MrMalty and...

mrmalty.PNG
 
sweetcell said:
5 packs is way too much. 2 is all that is needed. per the OP's original post, he's making 19 liters (AKA 5 gallons) of 1.103 wort. plug that into MrMalty and...
Click to expand...

I use Brewer's Friend's calculator and it says, if you are pitching 1.25 billion cells/ml you need 580 billion. I always pitch at that high a rate when I am dealing with high gravity worts. Even if you are pitching at the baseline recommended value of 0.75 billion cells/ml, you still need 348 billion cells, or 3 packs of yeast. US-05 is $3.80 a packet at my LHBS. I don't know why you would risk a big hassle over $7.60.

If you pitch 0.35 billion cells/ml into an imperial stout, you are doing it wrong.
 
 

Similar threads

S
Autumn Wheat Ale
Replies
5
Views
1K
kwilson16
kwilson16
Gadjobrinus
3 potential new - Best, Strong Bitter, Imperial Stout
Replies
14
Views
1K
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus
Russian Imperial Stout -
Replies
7
Views
763
duncan_disorderly
D
mashdar
Chocowheat Dry Session Stout
Replies
0
Views
477
mashdar
mashdar
kevin58
Märzen 1936 Heineken Märzenbier
Replies
2
Views
2K
MHBT
M
InkBird 300

Latest posts

Back
Top