Mixing Wort/Aging

First, I am relatively new to brewing. In fact I've never tasted my own brew yet. But that doesn't keep me from wondering a few things. After countless hours of videos and reading on the forums I have yet to come across somebody that has mixed worts. Maybe it's just not feasible..but it seems to me the Sam Adams Utopias are something of this nature.

First. I have two batches fermenting right now, a wheat ale, and an IPA. They are both about done fermenting. What would happen if I were to rack them both into one secondary at this point? Better yet..what would happen if I dropped say 5 grams of candied sugar into this 1 gallon concoction, let it sit for three days. And maybe then after that boil up another batch of wort of a different kind of beer mixed it in with that stuff and pitched yeast onto that and let it ferment out? Then rack it into another vessel and let it mature for a week? What if I were to keep doing this until I had 10 different types of beer mixed together (being very very very careful about contamination), and then I bottle it and let it sit for a year in the dark before trying it?

P.S. I'm not so concerned about taste as much as I am about creating something completely unique. I can learn to appreciate just about any taste.

My guess is that one year from now you would have a bunch of stale, shitty beer.

GaryWJ said:

P.S. I'm not so concerned about taste as much as I am about creating something completely unique. I can learn to appreciate just about any taste.

Click to expand...

Only one way to find out...

Go to the store buy a dozen different styles of beer. Pour them together into a bucket and taste. Lighter beers would disappear. The color would likely be something in the mid-range brown. Hops bitterness would be there, but the flavor and aroma would be as discernible as a field of mixed up weeds. The harsher things would overpower the milder things, but the mild stuff would muddle the stronger things. In other words you'd have a bunch of sh*tty beer.

blending is done, but it's fairly rare. much more typical is to brew the beer you want from the outset. for example, your mix of wheat beer and IPA would result in some sort of a pale ale... so why not brew a pale ale with some wheat in it? why go through all the trouble of doing two batches, when you could have achieved the same thing in one step?

all these steps of mixing and transferring also increase your chances of oxidation. be prepared for some of your beer to taste like cardboard.

you haven't yet completed a batch and you're already imagining all these crazy advanced techniques... this probably isn't what you want to hear, but: learn to walk before you try to run. your enthusiasm is awesome however you're currently suffering from something that most new brewers go through: kitchensinkitis, the desire to throw anything and everything into beer and/or use every technique under the sun in hopes of making something new and unique. i suspect that no one is going to talk you out of it, but be ready for failures along with whatever wins you might get.

good brewers don't randomly toss a bunch of ingredients into a pot, then blend with some other kaleidoscopic beer, and hope to get something good. they start with a plan, and based on experience have an idea what to expect. more often than not they choose what they will highlight. you can't highlight everything.

"I'm not so concerned about taste as much as I am about creating something completely unique."

Its a great spirit brother, and believe me, everyone on this board has been there. More often than not its a hard lesson well learned. My best advice for you is to learn to perfect traditional styles and then you can begin to really understand how to purposefully create something unique.

However, No one here would be opposed to finding out what happens if you do it! So,...

Just be prepared if it sucks, and then drink it even if it does.

Shinglejohn said:

"I'm not so concerned about taste as much as I am about creating something completely unique."

Its a great spirit brother, and believe me, everyone on this board has been there. More often than not its a hard lesson well learned. My best advice for you is to learn to perfect traditional styles and then you can begin to really understand how to purposefully create something unique.

However, No one here would be opposed to finding out what happens if you do it! So,...

Just be prepared if it sucks, and then drink it even if it does.

Click to expand...

We all start with this "this much is good, more must be better" idea. Everyone starting brewing wants to either make the highest alcohol brew, the biggest hop bomb, or--like the guy I met at the LHBS the other day--something that blends all the grains in the shop. In time, as we try these and realize we not have to either drink 5 gallons of the most horrid stuff we can imagine we usually return to the old tried and true. With the OP suggestion though, you would have what would probably be a couple barrels of swill to try to drink.

Go for it, though.

Kind of in the same realm of the OP's question: Does anybody here blend the same beers into larger containers(either due to size limitations or taste consistency).

Let's say I brewed a 2.5 gallon batch of all grain beer, pitched, and fermented in a 6 gallon better bottle. The following week, I brewed the same beer, and added the wort to the fermentor. Age for 4 weeks after the second wort was added.

Thus could be scalable to any size, or as many installments of wort you wanted.Would you re-pitch yeast on each installment?

IMO I would first find beers that compliment each other and try mixing those like Mississippi Mud mixes pilsner and porter together and is pretty good but a bunch of random beer in a big bucket would probably be really bad

Thank you for all of the replies. I was just wondering if that end up with a product that wouldn't kill you directly. I read something about sam adams Utopia..and that seems to be similar to what they did. And that is indeed flat, and around 20% ABV. Except they mix and add and repeat for many many years and if I remember right oak barrels are involved.

I did add two grams of sugar and quarter of a "cutie" clementine to my wheat ale with a couple days between as to not shock the yeast. The yeast seemed to hold up well. Tried a 1 oz sample of it that was left in the cane after racking into secondary and it was quite tasty. Going to bottle and leave for 3 weeks before I try it.

I can get local microbrews on tap for $3 per 22 oz..and old Chicago restaurant features 100+ brews. My batches are soo small I would rather turn it into a science experiment. Going to start a batch of mead this weekend.

itzkramer said:

Kind of in the same realm of the OP's question: Does anybody here blend the same beers into larger containers(either due to size limitations or taste consistency).

Let's say I brewed a 2.5 gallon batch of all grain beer, pitched, and fermented in a 6 gallon better bottle. The following week, I brewed the same beer, and added the wort to the fermentor. Age for 4 weeks after the second wort was added.

Thus could be scalable to any size, or as many installments of wort you wanted.Would you re-pitch yeast on each installment?

Click to expand...

I know some do a form of this when they want a ten gallon batch but only have the kettle space for a 5 gallon batch. In this case, they brew up 5 gallons place it in the fermenter, then brew the next five gallons and place in the fermenter as well--if they have a big enough fermenter. I'd rather brew two five gallon batches with different hop schedules and then ferment them with different yeasts to experiment.

All you're really talking about is a beer cocktail--like a Black and Tan or Mississippi Mud--but doing it in a way that is unlikely to be very pleasant.

If it is because you can only brew up a 2.5 gallon batch with your system but have space for five gallons in your fermenter then why kick off fermentation until you have it filled with the second batch? What is this meant to do? Instead brew the first 2.5 gallons and while it is cooling brew the second batch. After they're both cool just rack them both to the fermenter, aerate and pitch. If you don't have time to do two batches in one day then use no-chill for the first batch then when you get your second batch done blend, aerate and pitch.

If it's mixing flavors you want then make two beers and pour them into one glass.

Of course, the main rule in homebrew is "It's your beer; do what you want," but I doubt you'll be happy with the results.

Thank you. I appreciate the thoughts. At this point..I really don't enjoy many of the beers I try the first time. I just like trying new things. I grew up in a teeny tiny town where the most exotic beer you may find is a can of busch light somebody set in the sun for 3 weeks then you try to cool it off and drink it. Might have been..a little younger then too. Didn't have great access to real beer.

Thanks for the input on the blending. I'll be doing some small batches in the house during the winter. I'll go back to 5 and 10 gallon batches once it warms up a bit.

Gary, if I am correct, a black and tan separates because of the different final gravities of the beer. If you mix in the fermentor you will lose that.

I would buy some bottles and experiment. If you like something you make then brew those styles and mix after the beers are done. The others are correct, if you mix in the fermentor you will lose a lot of the great qualities if the different beers.

Look up "Gueuze". It's a Belgian style that involves blending different ages of lambics. Barrel-aged beers, and beers that involve wild yeast are also often blended to achieve the best taste. It's not quite what you described, since it's almost always beers of the same style, but you're not TOO far out there.

Some commercial beer blend beer...but its usually the same beer. I've enjoyed a few of these but there should be a reason. A good example is aging a big beer (IIPA, American Strong, etc) on oak or bourbon or something then mixing it with a younger, fresher batch to maybe bring out the hop profile. Strangely enough, I was planning this type of brew this weekend and saw this thread today.

Good luck with whatever you try...or don't try

GaryWJ said:

Thank you for all of the replies. I was just wondering if that end up with a product that wouldn't kill you directly.

Click to expand...

whatever you end up might taste weird, but it certainly won't kill you.

GaryWJ said:

I read something about sam adams Utopia..and that seems to be similar to what they did. And that is indeed flat, and around 20% ABV. Except they mix and add and repeat for many many years and if I remember right oak barrels are involved.

Click to expand...

utopia can be considered one of the pinnacles of beer blending and aging. these aren't random mixes they're making. at least no one can accuse you of not aiming high enough!

GaryWJ said:

I did add two grams of sugar and quarter of a "cutie" clementine to my wheat ale with a couple days between as to not shock the yeast. The yeast seemed to hold up well. Tried a 1 oz sample of it that was left in the cane after racking into secondary and it was quite tasty. Going to bottle and leave for 3 weeks before I try it.

Click to expand...

the sugar would not have added any flavor. it was fermented out and created alcohol. is that what you were hoping to achieve?

best bet for getting citrus flavor into your beer is to use the rind (peel). shave off the outer orange portion, making sure to avoid the inner white part (the pith), and either add that late in the boil or use more and add it as a "dry hop".

Yea the sugar was just for alcohol basically. Just wanted to see it bubble some more.

You are cracking me up bro.
Don't care what it tastes like.
Just wanted to see it bubble.
You made my day

I'm in the midst of working a blend, but not as much for experimentation to create but rather experimentation to save. I hope.

I brewed 3 batches 1 gallon each, all within a day or two of each other. One was an American stout, one a double IPA, and the third an imperial stout. I was using BIAB for all three. Turns out, I had a jacked up thermometer and didn't realize until later that I mashed really high. Like 170s I think. For all three.

They all turned out really sweet after fermentation was finished. Even with added time, I couldn't break down the gravity on any. So instead of dumping, I put all three into a fermenter, added about a pound of sugar boiled into about a gallon of water, and some champaign yeast. I figured the straight cane sugar an water might help dry it out some, and figured the champaign yeast might be able to eat down some of the other remaining sugars.

I did this before I joined here so I probably should have asked, but instead I am where I am with it. I figure worst case, I start experimenting with making a sour. Shrug.

But that said - I don't think I would mix wort or young beers that showed promise on their own without really good reason. Just feels wasteful... Unless I was brewing half gallon batches or something.

I tried it before and after and it tasted maybe even better after the additions. This beer flat has a better, albeit stronger, taste then I could have ever fully expected. But I'm glad it made your day I guess. Who doesn't enjoy a little yeast action? If I can drink cheap vodka I think any beer...is doable..and likely to be an incredibly better experience in whole. Thanks for all the info, very helpful!

eyebrau said:

I mashed really high. Like 170s I think. For all three.

(...)

I figured the straight cane sugar an water might help dry it out some, and figured the champaign yeast might be able to eat down some of the other remaining sugars.

Click to expand...

unfortunately champagne yeast won't help with those other sugars. they can only digest simple sugars - they can't eat matotriose and other complex malt sugars. worse yet, champagne yeast is a "killer yeast" - once pitched, it won't allow saccaromyces to grow.

eyebrau said:

I figure worst case, I start experimenting with making a sour. Shrug.

Click to expand...

going with a bug mix and/or brett would work. they'll chew through those left-overs.

eyebrau said:

But that said - I don't think I would mix wort or young beers that showed promise on their own without really good reason. Just feels wasteful...

Click to expand...

i absolutely agree.

sweetcell said:

worse yet, champagne yeast is a "killer yeast" - once pitched, it won't allow saccaromyces to grow...

going with a bug mix and/or brett would work. they'll chew through those left-overs.

Click to expand...

Two questions. First - would the champaign yeast have a negative effect on the brett? Second - whats your opinion on brett with no bugs? I know that it either already is or soon would be too high ABV for lacto, and probably the same problem with the hops I used. Don't think I'll have a lot of access to other bugs. Patience is no problem in any event - I can wait years with no problem.

eyebrau said:

Two questions. First - would the champaign yeast have a negative effect on the brett? Second - whats your opinion on brett with no bugs? I know that it either already is or soon would be too high ABV for lacto, and probably the same problem with the hops I used. Don't think I'll have a lot of access to other bugs. Patience is no problem in any event - I can wait years with no problem.

Click to expand...

i don't know if brett is affected by killer yeasts, i'm a relative newb when it comes to brett. based on what i've read here (links below), opinions are mixed but more people have stated that brett is not affected. that makes sense since brett can infect wine.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f127/will-killer-yeast-kill-brett-lacto-etc-327098/
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f127/killer-wine-strains-239761/
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/2-yeast-1-starter-279977/

brett, alone, will no make the beer sour. it will make it funky, banyard-like, fruity, leathery - it will depend on the type of brett used - but not sour. personally i'm not the biggest fan of sour flavors, so i prefer brett-only to most sour beers.

if time isn't a concern, then you could order some bugs online. the Roeselare blend is a popular one (http://www.wyeastlab.com/rw_yeaststrain_detail.cfm?ID=194)

I'm not super big on sours either... From what little I've read, I'm thinking of just trying brett-c and just letting it go on that with a lot of age. And perhaps wood chips. Anyway, thanks for the advice!

brett C is supposed to be the fruitiest & mildest of the bretts. B is next on the scale, and L (lambicus) being the most intense.

pitch low (don't make a starter) and protect the beer from oxygen as best you can. good luck!