FWH as Only Bittering Addition?

So I've never done a FWH before but I want to use the FWH addition as my only source of bittering. Anyone have experience with that? Foreseen problems? Successes?

I'm doing a Belgian Blonde IPA and here is my proposed hop schedule:

1.50 oz Saaz Pellet 5.5% AAU (FWH approx 45 mins till boil)
1.00 oz Styrian Golding Pellet 4.4% AAU @ 15 Minutes (Boil)
1.00 oz Styrian Golding Pellet Dry Hopped for ~10 days

I've really had no experience designing hoppy brews so this will be one of my first and any help is appreciated.

The FWH will make the for a smoother bitterness and impart some flavors similar to a 20 minute add. I FWH all of my beers so I can get higher IBUs but still get flavors and not feel the bittering bite.

I've done three beers that are FWH'd now, and I'm really starting to question the 20-min flavor aspect. I do LOVE the strong-but-gentle bittering it yields, so I'd say the OP is in good shape there. But I've not cut down my 20- min additions and still don't see any noticeable increase in flavor. I know the party line is FWH=some more flavor, but my (admittedly meager) experience so far hasn't borne out that aspect.

"All your home brew are belong to us!"

From what I've read, the FWH should come from later additions and not replace your bittering hop. I just tried this for the first time on last Sunday's brew, an Amarillo IPA. We'll see how it turns out. Here's some quick reading/video on FWH:

http://billybrew.com/first-wort-hopping

I've done brews with FWH as the only bittering addition. It's just fine and it works.

There is so much conflicting information out there about what FWH does to a beer that I think the only way to determine anything is to do it on your system with your process and see what happens. I've read that it increases IBUs by 10-20%, decreases IBUs by same, adds more but gentle bitterness, makes no difference, tastes better... Take your pick.

I think it's totally subjective so figure out how you like it in your beer and go from there.

HomebrewMTB said:

From what I've read, the FWH should come from later additions and not replace your bittering hop. I just tried this for the first time on last Sunday's brew, an Amarillo IPA. We'll see how it turns out. Here's some quick reading/video on FWH:

http://billybrew.com/first-wort-hopping

Click to expand...

Yes, I've read that too. However, my experience is different. I get plenty of bitterness from FWH, but it does seem to be a smoother and less harsh bitterness. In my experience, it is NOTHING like a 20 minute addition! It's definitely a bittering addition.

I FWH almost all of my beers now. First, because I make mostly IPAs and APAs, and also because it's easy! I just toss my hops into the boil kettle when I start sparging and then don't add any hops again until 10-20 minutes left.

Yooper said:

I FWH almost all of my beers now. First, because I make mostly IPAs and APAs, and also because it's easy! I just toss my hops into the boil kettle when I start sparging and then don't add any hops again until 10-20 minutes left.

Click to expand...

YES! Definitely on same wavelength. I'm also brewing mostly IPA and APA but even for the non-PA brews I FWH. It is easier.

First Wort Hopping is still one of those things that mystifies me. I know that I love it in many beers, and I can sometimes even pick it out when sampling homebrews, but what actually happens still confuses me.

- Apparently it produces iso-alpha acids just fine once boiled, but the perceived bitterness is very small compared to a regular 60-minute bittering addition. Case in point my Koelsch recipe, which uses FWH and a 60-minute addition for what should theoretically be a 40+ IBU beer, but tastes like a 30 IBU beer with a very distinct and subtle hop flavor character.

- It does produce more hop character than a 60-minute addition, but that hop character is distinct from a normal flavor and aroma addition. It's cleaner - as if the hop oils are preserved, but the chlorophyll character gets purged in the boil.

- The impact really seems to vary from hop to hop. Probably has to do with the relative composition of the myriads of chemicals that get extracted from the hop during the process.

ArcaneXor said:

- The impact really seems to vary from hop to hop. Probably has to do with the relative composition of the myriads of chemicals that get extracted from the hop during the process.

Click to expand...

That's what is amazing to me- all the literature says to do this with low AAU/ low cohumulone hops. That really makes sense.

However, I've done it with chinook and found that even the chinook gets smoother. I don't pretend to understand it- but I like it!

I have done a Cream Ale with Columbus FWH as the only hop addition. It was great. I have also done APAs with Columbus; FWH, 20, 10 & 0 additions, they too were good.

Yooper said:

Yes, I've read that too. However, my experience is different. I get plenty of bitterness from FWH, but it does seem to be a smoother and less harsh bitterness. In my experience, it is NOTHING like a 20 minute addition! It's definitely a bittering addition.

Click to expand...

I agree %100 with this. FWH is not a replacement for a 20 minute aroma addition. If it was the same, why mess with FWH at all. I find that all things considered, FWH gives a softer/smoother bittering then a standard bittering addition. I often split my bittering addition into thirds on my big batches of beer. 1/3 in the mash, 1/3 FWH and 1/3 at 60. Nice all around bittering effect with this technique. However, in very hoppy ales like IPA's I like to get at least %50 of my IBUs at 20 minutes or less....in combination with my three tiered bittering additions.

I do a lot of FWH also, and find I prefer it to separate 60 (or 90) minute additions and a 20-minute addition. I find it a smoother bitterness and flavor.

No idea why that is. I suspect it has something to do with certain chemicals binding with break materials. Traditional technique is to add the main bittering charge only after significant hot break is observed. Perhaps some of the chemicals which impact the perception of harshness bind with that initial hot break and precipitate.

Hm.

Bob

Yooper said:

That's what is amazing to me- all the literature says to do this with low AAU/ low cohumulone hops. That really makes sense.

However, I've done it with chinook and found that even the chinook gets smoother. I don't pretend to understand it- but I like it!

Click to expand...

WOW! I hadn't seen the low AAU/cohumulone info. I've just done Amarillo, Glacier, and Nugget FWH SMaSHes... First batch won't be officially ready til Saturday, but my samples for gravity tests were delicious! Like you said, a much smoother but still very strong bitterness. It really makes me happy to see firsthand experiences reported in here

"All your home brew are belong to us!"

So let's talk specifics if we can. Here is my recipe from Sunday's brew. If I had NOT done the FWH, I would have done ~1.5oz at 60, and added another half oz to the 5 minute. Something like that anyway. With what I did, I had a FWH addition and a 60 minute addition. This kicked the theoretical IBU out of range (Tinseth) but I was hoping for smooth bitterness. We'll see in a couple weeks...

So what do your FWH IPA recipes look like?


FWH Amarillo IPA
American IPA
Type: All Grain Date: 11/6/2011
Batch Size (fermenter): 5.25 gal Brewer:
Boil Size: 6.78 gal Asst Brewer:
Boil Time: 60 min Equipment: Pot and Cooler ( 5 Gal/19 L) - All Grain
End of Boil Volume 6.24 gal Brewhouse Efficiency: 72.00 %
Final Bottling Volume: 4.85 gal Est Mash Efficiency 82.3 %
Fermentation: Ale, Two Stage Taste Rating(out of 50): 30.0
Taste Notes:
Ingredients


Ingredients
Amt Name Type # %/IBU
10 lbs Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM) Grain 1 76.9 %
2 lbs Vienna Malt (3.5 SRM) Grain 2 15.4 %
1 lbs Caramel/Crystal Malt - 40L (40.0 SRM) Grain 3 7.7 %
1.00 oz Amarillo Gold [9.30 %] - First Wort 60.0 min Hop 4 30.3 IBUs
1.00 oz Amarillo Gold [9.30 %] - Boil 60.0 min Hop 5 27.6 IBUs
1.00 oz Amarillo Gold [9.30 %] - Boil 20.0 min Hop 6 16.7 IBUs
0.50 oz Amarillo Gold [9.30 %] - Boil 5.0 min Hop 7 2.7 IBUs
0.50 oz Amarillo Gold [9.30 %] - Boil 1.0 min Hop 8 0.6 IBUs
1.00 oz Amarillo Gold [9.30 %] - Dry Hop 5.0 Days Hop 9 0.0 IBUs

Beer Profile

Est Original Gravity: 1.064 SG Measured Original Gravity: 1.067 SG
Est Final Gravity: 1.014 SG Measured Final Gravity: 1.010 SG
Estimated Alcohol by Vol: 6.7 % Actual Alcohol by Vol: 7.5 %
Bitterness: 77.9 IBUs Calories: 224.3 kcal/12oz
Est Color: 7.8 SRM

Here's one I just kegged:

9 lbs 8.0 oz Pale Malt (2 Row) UK (3.0 SRM) Grain 69.42 %
2 lbs 8.0 oz Munich Malt (9.0 SRM) Grain 18.27 %
1 lbs Caramel/Crystal Malt - 20L (20.0 SRM) Grain 7.31 %
8.0 oz Caramel/Crystal Malt - 80L (80.0 SRM) Grain 3.65 %


1.00 oz Northern Brewer [10.20 %] (60 min) Hops 30.1 IBU (FWH)
0.50 oz Ahtanum [4.50 %] (20 min) Hops 4.5 IBU
0.50 oz Amarillo [9.50 %] (20 min) Hops 8.5 IBU
0.50 oz Simcoe [12.20 %] (20 min) Hops 12.1 IBU
0.50 oz Simcoe [12.20 %] (10 min) Hops 7.3 IBU
0.50 oz Ahtanum [4.50 %] (10 min) Hops 2.7 IBU
0.50 oz Amarillo [9.50 %] (10 min) Hops 5.1 IBU

2.00 oz Simcoe [12.20 %] (Dry Hop 7 days) Hops -
1.00 oz Amarillo [9.50 %] (Dry Hop 7 days) Hops -

And here's one we're drinking now:

11 lbs Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM) Grain 85.04 %
1 lbs 4.0 oz Caramel/Crystal Malt - 60L (60.0 SRM) Grain 9.66 %
8.0 oz Special B Malt (180.0 SRM) Grain 3.87 %

0.65 oz Chinook [11.50 %] (60 min) Hops 24.6 IBU (FWH)

0.50 oz Chinook [11.50 %] (20 min) Hops 11.4 IBU
0.50 oz Cascade [5.40 %] (5 min) Hops 1.8 IBU

1 Pkgs Denny's Favorite (Wyeast Labs #1450PC) [Starter 50 ml] Yeast-Ale

0.75 oz Chinook [11.50 %] (Dry Hop 5 days) Hops
0.75 oz Centennial [9.60 %] (Dry Hop 5 days) Hops

And this is one of our house favorites (keg just kicked!) (10 gallon batch):
Hopworks!

19 lbs Pilsner (2 Row) Ger (2.0 SRM) Grain 82.84 %
1 lbs 8.0 oz Caramel/Crystal Malt - 40L (40.0 SRM) Grain 6.54 %
1 lbs 8.0 oz Munich Malt - 10L (10.0 SRM) Grain 6.54 %
8.0 oz Caramel/Crystal Malt - 10L (10.0 SRM) Grain 2.18 %

1.50 oz Magnum [13.40 %] (90 min) (First Wort Hop) Hops 36.2 IBU

1.00 oz Cascade [8.00 %] (15 min) Hops 6.8 IBU
1.00 oz Amarillo [4.50 %] (15 min) Hops 3.8 IBU
1.00 oz Centennial [9.60 %] (15 min) Hops 8.1 IBU

1.00 oz Cascade (homegrown) [5.00 %] (0 min) Hops -
1.00 oz Centennial (Homegrown) [8.50 %] (0 min) Hops -
1.00 oz Amarillo [4.50 %] (0 min) Hops

0.50 oz Centennial (Homegrown) [8.50 %] (Dry Hop 7 days) Hops -
0.50 oz Amarillo [4.50 %] (Dry Hop 7 days) Hops -
0.50 oz Cascade (homegrown) [5.00 %] (Dry Hop 7 days) Hops -

I've done a lot of FWH only beers and I have to push the IBU calculations quite a bit higher than then the bitterness I perceive. I only do that on beers with very little hop character and it works. It's not like I get flavor but more of a underlying character to the bitterness. I seldom use it on hoppy beer's anymore.

Do other programs such as beersmith do a better job calculating the IBUs from FWH? I use Hopville and the IBU level is way off when you FWH. It treats them like a full duration boil plus.

I've used columbus, warrior, chinook, Nelson sauvin, and Styrian Goldings and have really liked the result. I'm working under the theory that hop oils will have different isomerization products at 170F than if added at 212F. And since those oils have already isomerized at 170 they are fixed to a certain extent when the kettle gets to 212. But that's a guess.

Like yooper said a cohumulone level of about 30% is supposedly what you are looking for. Id like to try something outside this range just to check though!

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll have to do a brew over on this one soon. Next time I'll try increasing the FWH addition and skipping the bittering addition.

JimTheHick said:

Do other programs such as beersmith do a better job calculating the IBUs from FWH? I use Hopville and the IBU level is way off when you FWH. It treats them like a full duration boil plus.

Click to expand...

Beersmith 2.0 has an adjustable percentage for the FWH. Default is +10% though so kicks it up higher than a 60 minute addition. You could set it for -XX% though if you feel you need to add more to get the same perceived bitterness. Does anyone else have any recommendations on this?

When I added at 60min I definitely noticed a more pronounced bitter bite than any of my other IPAs. Even a FWH DIPA I made that was at 100 IBUs with 1Lb of hops did not have as much of a bite as a 55 IBU 60 minute add IPA I also made.

I also really like using Northern Brewer for FWH in IPA to get some earthiness behind all the citrus hops. FWH for Mt Hood and Saaz is also great for blonde styles as it mellows them out a little and makes them smoother.

Yooper said:

Yes, I've read that too. However, my experience is different. I get plenty of bitterness from FWH, but it does seem to be a smoother and less harsh bitterness. In my experience, it is NOTHING like a 20 minute addition! It's definitely a bittering addition.

I FWH almost all of my beers now. First, because I make mostly IPAs and APAs, and also because it's easy! I just toss my hops into the boil kettle when I start sparging and then don't add any hops again until 10-20 minutes left.

Click to expand...

I agree. Once I tried it I found That I like the smoother bitterness it adds. Been doing it to all of my IPA/APA's lately and really like the results.

I apologize if this has already been brought up but do maltier beers benefit from FWH? Something like a stout with only one hop addition at 60 min?

I don't buy many kits anymore, but northern brewer has one that intrigued me. Keeler's reverse burst or something like that. It's a Düsseldorf Alt with only FWH. 3 oz of spalt. I'm kegging it today.

Reno_eNVy said:

I apologize if this has already been brought up but do maltier beers benefit from FWH? Something like a stout with only one hop addition at 60 min?

Click to expand...

Technically, FWH would be prior to the 60-minute addition. And while I've only done 3 FWH batches, all on PAs, i think that more subtle hop-presence beers would actually be fantastic with FWH.

In fact, SWMBO has requested that I rebrew my Naughty Punkin' Porter and since you've mentioned it I'm going to use FWH on that recipe. It'll likely be Thanksgiving before I get to that (gotta brew my Christmas gift ales first) but I'll post results for anyone that's interested.

Cheers!

"All your home brew are belong to us!"

Piratwolf said:

Naughty Punkin' Porter

Click to expand...

Recipe? I brewed a punkin porter earlier this year based on this recipe:

http://weekendbrew.blogspot.com/2009/10/punkin-porter.html

It's okay but not great. It was a less than perfect brew day so I'm not sure if it's just me or the recipe. I'd love to see some other options.

I just adapted the recipe from Extreme Brewing (DFH):
EDIT: I checked out your link. Looks like the guy really cut out a lot--his OG is way low compared to the original--which would really cut down on the enjoyment for us. END EDIT

Partial mash/steep:
2tsp gypsum
1# black patent
1.5# pale 6-row

Boil:
3.3# light LME
3# amber LME
1# dark LME
1oz Hallertau--60 min
1ozCascade--20 min
2tsp Irish moss--20 min
1# lactose--20 min (I'm gonna cut this to 1/2-3/4# for re-brew)
.5 oz Hallertau--10 min
30oz can pumpkin pie filling (no spices)--10 mins
1tsp ea allspice, cinnamon, nutmeg--5 min
1tbsp pure vanilla extract--flameout

SG: 1.084
FG: 1.021
Target ABV: 8%

Nottingham dry yeast

FWIW the Notty (Naughty) crushed this, taking it all the way down to 1.017 or so. I just recall the ABV was a little over 9%... But the creaminess and full body meant you couldn't tell. Everybody loved it, and it's been SWMBO's favorite by far.

"All your home brew are belong to us!"

Piratwolf said:

Technically, FWH would be prior to the 60-minute addition. And while I've only done 3 FWH batches, all on PAs, i think that more subtle hop-presence beers would actually be fantastic with FWH

Click to expand...

Yeah, I meant the recipe has one 60-minute addition as it is now without adjusting to FWH.

I've done some batches with FWH a few years back but they were PAs as well. I'm just going to be doing other new techniques/ingredients with this upcoming batch and I don't really want to add any more experimentation. I was hoping somebody had first-hand experience with using FWH on a malt-forward recipe.

Thanks, though

Reno_eNVy said:

Yeah, I meant the recipe has one 60-minute addition as it is now without adjusting to FWH.

I've done some batches with FWH a few years back but they were PAs as well. I'm just going to be doing other new techniques/ingredients with this upcoming batch and I don't really want to add any more experimentation. I was hoping somebody had first-hand experience with using FWH on a malt-forward recipe.

Thanks, though

Click to expand...

Gotcha. Good luck!

"All your home brew are belong to us!"

Just did and imperial black IPA(1.078-1.012) with hop additions:
90 min boil
FWH 1.5 oz. Chinook 11%
60 min. 1.5 oz. Chinook
5 min. 0.5 oz. Chinook, 1 oz. Cascade 4.8%
0 min. 0.5 oz. Chinook, 1 oz. Cascade
Dry 1oz. Cascade, 1 oz. Kent Goldings
With the amount of Chinook the bitterness does seem smoother than expected, but hard to tell.

About a year ago I moved to FWH and whirlpool hops only. Makes fantastic beers with great hop character. I calculate IBU based on 90 minute boil using Beersmith with 0% adjustment.

My whirlpool hops are usually 30%-50% of my IBU. I calculate them as a 10 minute addition, they steep about 20 minutes while the whirlpool settles prior to chilling.

Two hop additions is simple and makes great beers. I just toss the hops in the kettle and the whirlpool at the beginning of sparge. Having a dedicated whirlpool vessel helps too.

I am curious - is it possible to FWH in a partial/mini mash situation? I mash my grains at 155 (or various temps as called for) for the hour required, then move my grains to a second, sparge pot for about 15 minutes and the dump to the main BK. If I drop hops into the bag when I move to the sparge pot, will this in effect give me a FWH situation? I would assume that when the sparge water is dumped into the BK, the hops would stay in the grain bag and not follow the water?

TIA.

banesong said:

If I drop hops into the bag when I move to the sparge pot, will this in effect give me a FWH situation? I would assume that when the sparge water is dumped into the BK, the hops would stay in the grain bag and not follow the water?

Click to expand...

I didn't try FWH til after I started AG, but I see no reason it couldn't work w/ PM. That being said, I think that mash-hopping is different.

FWH happens when I collect my 1st runnings, which are usually around 154 or so (like your PM water), and put them on the burner to move to boil. So I'd suggest adding your FWH to the steeped-grain water when you remove the grain bag and start moving the temp to boil.

I do FWH in partial mashes all the time. FWH is simply the act of adding hops to the kettle as soon as you start running off the mash. So in your case you'd add your FWH portion to the kettle when you remove the grain bag. Then proceed as usual.

Bob

Reno_eNVy said:

Yeah, I meant the recipe has one 60-minute addition as it is now without adjusting to FWH.

I've done some batches with FWH a few years back but they were PAs as well. I'm just going to be doing other new techniques/ingredients with this upcoming batch and I don't really want to add any more experimentation. I was hoping somebody had first-hand experience with using FWH on a malt-forward recipe.

Thanks, though

Click to expand...

I FWH most all of my beers, malt forward beers as well, I like the smoothness I get from FWH, I had a stout I brewed with a 60 minute hop addition and felt it had a harsh bitterness that I thought detracted from the beer, it was like a mellow roasty pint with a slight slap in the face that I couldn't place, I re-brewed with a 30 minute addition instead, it now had a hoppy flavor that threw off the balance yet again.

Since FWH that beer has a nice balance between the bitterness and the flavor

To me I think of FWH as a way to smudge the bitterness into the flavor addition so it is more like a ramp of hoppyness instead of a stairway of separate steps.

Thank you azscoob! I'm going to get ingredients for a stout now so that's fantastic timing on your part.

azscoob said:

To me I think of FWH as a way to smudge the bitterness into the flavor addition so it is more like a ramp of hoppyness instead of a stairway of separate steps.

Click to expand...

How very poetic of you

bwomp313 said:

How very poetic of you

Click to expand...

I was fighting to come up with how to state the effect, glad I could stir emotion too!!

Piratwolf said:

I didn't try FWH til after I started AG, but I see no reason it couldn't work w/ PM. That being said, I think that mash-hopping is different.

FWH happens when I collect my 1st runnings, which are usually around 154 or so (like your PM water), and put them on the burner to move to boil. So I'd suggest adding your FWH to the steeped-grain water when you remove the grain bag and start moving the temp to boil.

Click to expand...

Ahh, thank you. For some reason, I had the picture in my mind of adding the hops to the grain instead of the runnings ::

I think I might add this to my next house batch.

Just had a taste of the hydro sample and smooth smooth smooth! Can't wait till it is time to drink this!! I am now a believer!

azscoob said:

I was fighting to come up with how to state the effect, glad I could stir emotion too!!

Click to expand...

You did, you really really did.