EricCSU
Well-Known Member
Make sure you get a good mash out too. That always kills my efficiency when I don't.
Eric
Can you Brew It recipe for Stone Arrogant Bastard
- Thread starter EricCSU
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
Make sure you get a good mash out too. That always kills my efficiency when I don't.
Eric
Really?? I always thought eff was determined by grain crush, mash temp and mash length. I always thought mash out stop enzyme activity so beer gravity stays where you want it? Where am I wrong, how do you do your mash out so it improves OG. Thanks for any insight.
MikeG
Well-Known Member
I guess I always felt my "mash-out" was my first batch sparge which raises the grain temp to 168-170. So are you guys saying I will increase my eff if I mash out with some the mash. I assume this should be a thin mash and not thick like double dec brewing?
Mad_Milo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2009
- Messages
- 209
- Reaction score
- 8
If you batch sparge (I do), you can just treat mash-out as an infusion to calculate your qty of boiling water to raise your temp to 170. Then you can sparge as usual.
I have also found that performing a double batch sparge by dividing your regular sparge in half boosts your efficiency a bit. I've gained 3-5% by doing this. Just be sure your sparge is at temp (170), not boiling!
I have also found that performing a double batch sparge by dividing your regular sparge in half boosts your efficiency a bit. I've gained 3-5% by doing this. Just be sure your sparge is at temp (170), not boiling!
MikeG
Well-Known Member
Mash-out is a process; your first batch sparge (rinsing) is your first runnings. Getting that closest as possible to <170F helps the sparge/mash-out process to collect as much sugar as possible in your wort.
2bluewagons
Well-Known Member
aa bit, but whenever I have done a mash out (I batch sparge) I have gotten a big down dip in efficiency due to thinning out my first runnings. Then I reach my boil volume with just a single sparge, so I left a lot of sugars in there. I guess you have to make sure your mash is a little thicker to begin with to account for the mash-out water, huh?But the two beers I made recently with this problem both have amazing malt profiles, I think it concentrated the specialty malts?
OK, back to AB, I will be brewing this at some point...
HItransplant
Well-Known Member
me too.
number 3 talks about sparging.. I think there is some confusion.
your first batch sparge "acts" like a mashout.. but only for the grainbed left after first runnings. The wort you lautered during the first runnings hasnt been "mashed-out," but you can accomplish the same thing by lautering straight it into your kettle and starting it on heat.
heres another attempt at explanation adapted from "How To Brew"
What is Mashout?
Before the sweet wort is drained from the mash and the grain is rinsed (sparged) of the residual sugars, many brewers perform a mashout. Mashout is the term for raising the temperature of the mash to 170°F prior to lautering. This step stops all of the enzyme action (preserving your fermentable sugar profile) and makes the grainbed and wort more fluid. ......
.......A lot of homebrewers tend to skip the mashout step for most mashes with no consequences.
What is Sparging?
Sparging is the rinsing of the grain bed to extract as much of the sugars from the grain as possible without extracting mouth-puckering tannins from the grain husks. Typically, 1.5 times as much water is used for sparging as for mashing.
so.. my take is:
1. mashout is done before lautering to increase sugars dissolved in first runnings. sparging is done afterward to increase sugars dissolved in second runnings.
2. If you have a "normal" mash thickness (ie, in the middle of the bell shaped curve), and are adhering to the typical limitations on grain without husk, you shouldnt have any efficiency benefit from a mashout.
Conclusion:
it sounds like sparging and mashing both acomplish "thinning" out the sugars, ergo, if you do a good enough sparge, you shouldnt need a mashout-- which probably explains why how to brew says most homebrewers dont do one.
whew.. I feel smarter. Does that make sense to anyone else though?
makes sense, thanks. Usually I put my first runnings onto the burner and start my boil. Then I add the 1st and 2nd sparges as they finish. SOMETIMES I wait for the 1st sparge to finish before I add the first runnings and first sparge to the burner. Perhaps this is the reason for the lower Eff this last time. I won't do that anymore. Thanks all Charlie
Just to add, from the original interview with Mitch Steele he said their water comes out to be 100 ppm hardness.
One question that baffles me.
In the first show, JZ said the test came back from the lab with 58 IBUs. They say the second attempt is nearly dead on with about 95 IBUs. Why would their test not be anywhere close?
In the first show, JZ said the test came back from the lab with 58 IBUs. They say the second attempt is nearly dead on with about 95 IBUs. Why would their test not be anywhere close?
wheatgerm
Well-Known Member
i'm struggling to get the color/gravity to come out right on this with the given grain bill. what's the color supposed to be?
Frodo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 1,074
- Reaction score
- 40
I also have a question about color (I get close pretty close to the stated SRM in the recipe in my software, actually 24 but who really cares if it's that close), but is the color of AB really at 22.5 SRM? That seems too high.
wheatgerm
Well-Known Member
Beersmith defaults to having Special B's color at 180. AHB has it listed on their site at 140-155 though. Once I changed it to 150 the color estimate comes out looking much better at 22.4 using the following recipe:
Boil Size: 6.75 gal
Batch Size: 5.25 gal
Boil: 90 min
Efficiency: 70%
OG: 1.071
FG: 1.017
ABV: 7.12%
IBU: 92.1
Color: 22.4
Malt Bill:
-[90%] 13.5 lb Pale Malt (2 Row) US (3.5 SRM)
-[10%] 1.5 lb Special B (150 SRM)
Hops:
-1 oz. Chinook (12.5%) @ 85 min.
-1 oz. Chinook (12.5%) @ 45 min.
-1 oz. Chinook (12.5%) @ 15 min.
-1 oz. Chinook (12.5%) @ 0 min.
Yeast:
-WLP007 (1.5L Starter)
-------------------------------------------
The OG came out at 1.071 at a BH efficiency of 70%. It comes out at 1.066 when efficiency drops to 65%(which is usually where I'm at). At 1.066 the FG would have to go to 1.011 to come out to the listed 7.2% ABV. Can WLP007 pull that off?
Boil Size: 6.75 gal
Batch Size: 5.25 gal
Boil: 90 min
Efficiency: 70%
OG: 1.071
FG: 1.017
ABV: 7.12%
IBU: 92.1
Color: 22.4
Malt Bill:
-[90%] 13.5 lb Pale Malt (2 Row) US (3.5 SRM)
-[10%] 1.5 lb Special B (150 SRM)
Hops:
-1 oz. Chinook (12.5%) @ 85 min.
-1 oz. Chinook (12.5%) @ 45 min.
-1 oz. Chinook (12.5%) @ 15 min.
-1 oz. Chinook (12.5%) @ 0 min.
Yeast:
-WLP007 (1.5L Starter)
-------------------------------------------
The OG came out at 1.071 at a BH efficiency of 70%. It comes out at 1.066 when efficiency drops to 65%(which is usually where I'm at). At 1.066 the FG would have to go to 1.011 to come out to the listed 7.2% ABV. Can WLP007 pull that off?
Frodo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 1,074
- Reaction score
- 40
The recommended mash temp is 148F, so that'd make it really fermentable. I'm actually thinking it'd be possible it could get even lower FG especially at a fermentation temp of 67F.
20-25 SRM lands you about the color of a brown ale. not opaque. I've made the previous AB clone recipe from CYBI, the color was still about 22 SRM, and looked identical in a side by side comparison with the real AB.
Yes it can, as long as you ptich a healthy amount. WLP007 is a workhorse yeast that still gives nice British ale flavor and aromas.
wheatgerm
Well-Known Member
BrewWiki notes the problem with color calculation when using special b:
"This malt is always dark, but the color and flavor vary more than most other malt styles; most of the commonly available varieties are in the 110-160 L range, but it may be even darker. Don't depend on homebrew software to calculate the color of your beer correctly, since it may be expecting a much darker malt than you are actually using; some older sources assume Special B will be over 200 or even up to 300 L."
Learn something new every day.
"This malt is always dark, but the color and flavor vary more than most other malt styles; most of the commonly available varieties are in the 110-160 L range, but it may be even darker. Don't depend on homebrew software to calculate the color of your beer correctly, since it may be expecting a much darker malt than you are actually using; some older sources assume Special B will be over 200 or even up to 300 L."
Learn something new every day.
Tarheel4985
Well-Known Member
We brewed 10 gallons using the new recipe on Saturday. The mash went great and we hovered between 148 and 150 for just over an hour. We estimated 27# 2-row and 3# of Special B because we've been getting around 70% for the last few batches. Well we didn't have a refractometer to test the runnings into the BK, so we just went ahead and boiled 13.5 gallons down to about 11 after the 90 min boil and unfortunately our efficiency was higher than normal. Our gravity going into the fermenter was 1.080 so our efficiency was around 83%. Not the end of the world but it won't be AB.
As for color, the sample I measured looked a little lighter than AB, so I think the comments about Special B and color consistency are probably true. It's not as universal as other malts. Fermentation took off within about 3 hours using a 4L starter split in 2. I'll post the results but I imagine it will come out closer to Double Arrogant than AB but we'll see.
As for color, the sample I measured looked a little lighter than AB, so I think the comments about Special B and color consistency are probably true. It's not as universal as other malts. Fermentation took off within about 3 hours using a 4L starter split in 2. I'll post the results but I imagine it will come out closer to Double Arrogant than AB but we'll see.
2bluewagons
Well-Known Member
They have also mentioned on various shows that there is a big difference between kettle IBUs and finished beer IBUs. Yeast pitching rate, the floc level of the yeast, and filtering can all affect the bitterness that makes it to the bottle.
Cool. Good to know.
So when a bottle says 100 IBU's or whatever, do they mean finished beer IBU?
maida7
Well-Known Member
It could be either. I don't think there is a hard fast rule for that.
bdleedahl
Well-Known Member
Also I believe if you listen to the Brew Strong hopping podcast they say that the IBU's that you will get using different formulas (usually Tinseth or Reiger I believe) or sending it to a lab will never be the same, and in fact may not even be close to one another; the point is is that as long as you are consistent using one formula you will will learn what those numbers mean for your system
2bluewagons
Well-Known Member
Yeah I don't think there is a requirement for breweries to list IBUs at all, let alone what kind of value it is. Generally, I would think that larger breweries will test the final beer and provide an average of those results. I am pretty sure Stone's IBU numbers are measured values of the final beer, and would think that Sierra Nevada, Sam Adams, etc. would be the same.
But the above post is correct, testing of final beers is prohibitively expensive for us. I think WhiteLabs has an annual event where they open up their testing capabilities to the public, and it is still something like $150 for a single test. Get to know the IBU number your software is giving you and relate it to the taste of your beer, maybe even comparing bitterness to a commercial beer. That will allow you to fine-tune your beers to a bitterness level you are shooting for.
BeerPressure
Well-Known Member
I bought the grain & hops today for this brew. They didnt have WLP007 in stock so I had to settle for the Safale 04 English.
Next time I will be sure to get WLP007.
Next time I will be sure to get WLP007.
I'm brewing it this weekend with my home grown Chinook and S-04. I've also got some oak cubes in bourbon so maybe I'll oak some of it.
BeerPressure
Well-Known Member
Anyone drinking theirs yet? I waited and got WLP007. Brewed 01/08/2011. Hit mash temp and OG came in at 1.065.
Not yet. I'm in no rush to bottle this since I like Arrogant Bastard a whole lot more when it ages a bit. I had the fresh stuff when I was in San Diego a few weeks ago and I really didn't like it as much as some of the older bottles I have here.
Here is the recipe from a LHBS that I followed. Seems to be a decent clone.
Arrogant Strong Brown Ale
Arrogant Strong Brown Ale
EricCSU
Well-Known Member
That probably does make a good beer, but I would be very surprised if it made AB...the recipe is so far off in quite a few ways.
Eric
Maybe that's the difference. I tried brewing this a couple weeks back and moved it to a secondary to clear up room. The flavor wasn't quite right, though the OG/FG was there, along with the hop schedule and ferment temps (if anything, it might have been slightly low here).
Tarheel4985
Well-Known Member
We brewed this back on 12/18 and just transferred it to the keg last week. Since I had split it into two 5 gallon batches, I dry-hopped one for about 5 days and left the other alone. I didn't have enough space in the kegerator so I only have the dry-hopped one on tap right now, but the initial taste after about 3 or 4 days of carbing is excellent. I'm probably the opposite of Apendecto as I like mine fresh and hoppy, so I would probably prefer drinking it now as opposed to later this spring or summer. But once space opens up I'll carb the non dry-hopped batch and let you know the results.
Ours finished rather sweet at about 1.016 but started at 1.081, which was much higher than the clone recipe, so it still seems pretty balanced. I only have Oaked Arrogant available to compare it to for now, but after I pick up another bottle of the original I'll post a side-by-side comparison. I had the original on tap at a local bar the other night and I certainly wouldn't consider mine a clone, but it's still pretty tasty. Not sure if overshooting the OG played a big factor or not.
Ours finished rather sweet at about 1.016 but started at 1.081, which was much higher than the clone recipe, so it still seems pretty balanced. I only have Oaked Arrogant available to compare it to for now, but after I pick up another bottle of the original I'll post a side-by-side comparison. I had the original on tap at a local bar the other night and I certainly wouldn't consider mine a clone, but it's still pretty tasty. Not sure if overshooting the OG played a big factor or not.
maida7
Well-Known Member
I have the OLD recipe (the one with all the crystal malts) on tap currently in my kegorater. It's a very tasty beer but it's not the same as AB. I've tried them back to back and the AB is more hoppy then my clone. The clone is maltier and smoother. They are very similar but not exactly cloned. Eventually I'll brew the new and improved recipe (the one with just special B) and see how that fares.
Sithdad
Well-Known Member
I brewed mine just before Christmas and just bottled it Saturday. I've never had Arrogant Bastard, but I got whole Chinook hops from my sister-in-law's father. He and some friends have started a hop farm. I'm hoping to get a bottle of AB and test mine side-by-side. I didn't have 007, but I did have Pacman on hand so I used that. Interested to see how it works out. I've never used Special B either and I was surprised how much it smelled like raisins.
Tarheel4985
Well-Known Member
The clone recipe never called for dry hopping, so I wouldn't suggest it if you're trying to make an exact clone. I'm assuming the original is not dry hopped but I could be wrong. The only reason I dry hopped was because I prefer a fresher, hoppier AB to the ones that have been aged and cellared for a while.
that works, i wasnt sure if i has missed something or not.
I missed my og by 5 points so mine wont be extact, but ill get a good idea of the flavor profile.
HItransplant
Well-Known Member
bottled last week, Ill wait a few more before I crack one open... sample was good though
I was kind of surprised at the "no-dry hop" as well. Seems to me, if it's a hoppy beer it gets the dry hop treatment.
I really can't wait to see how this turns out. Nothing beats a recipe with so few ingredients, especially if it winds up being great.
On a side note, I brewed 9 gallons and it only cost me something like $20 with reused yeast and home grown hops. To buy an equivalent amount out here, would be around $200. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
