OG reading is now .998, what is going on?!?!

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.

Thisismyname

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2012
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Here's info at a glance:

Amber ale,
- 1 kg of liquid malt extract (if I'm correct, the yellow syrupy stuff used to replace dextrose)
- 1 kg of amber ale beer kit malt
- 1 packet of safale us-05
- a pack of hops (maybe 7-10 grams)
- Mixed and put into primary on Nov 9th
- OG 1.032

Now I have had issues with this beer from the start. Even though I have kept the batch at a very consistent 20oC/68oF, the fermentation has been very slow and extremely inactive. I did see bubbles but it never came close to the aggressive foaming and bubbling I'm used to. The things I know that could've done this were that I forgot to aerate the wort, i didn't rehydrate the yeast, and when I pitched the yeast the wort was at 27oC/80oF.

It's FINALLY starting to clear but the OG reading is ridiculous (.998). It doesn't smell bad though so I did do a taste test and the stuff doesn't even taste like beer, it tastes like some sort of cheap champagne...

I've NEVER had this problem before, and have no clue what to do with this beer... what could have caused this and what do I do now?
 
Would suggest checking your hydrometer. Float it in plain water and see if it reads a perfect 1.000. In other words, calibrate it. But you're right - that's a screwy reading. Might want to also consider the temp of your wort. There are temp correction tables around. I want to say that most hydrometers are set up for 65 deg F.
 
I don't like telling people this but I have to agree with ncbrewer and thughes. Sounds like wild yeast or bacteria to me. The hydrometer might be off but the statement that is a dead give away to me is "the stuff doesn't even taste like beer, it tastes like some sort of cheap champagne..." Saying that it is probably wild yeast or bacteria doesn't necessarily mean the brewer needs some work on their cleaning and sanitizing. I suppose it is possible, I don't know how likely, that the pack of yeast was well beyond expiration, terribly mishandled before it go to the brewer, or a combination of the too and it just wasn't nearly viable enough to beat out a colony of wild yeast or bacteria. Long slow fermentation that took forever to clear is another sign that sounds like wild yeast or bacteria.
 
Would suggest checking your hydrometer. Float it in plain water and see if it reads a perfect 1.000. In other words, calibrate it. But you're right - that's a screwy reading. Might want to also consider the temp of your wort. There are temp correction tables around. I want to say that most hydrometers are set up for 65 deg F.

Just check out the hydrometer, I think you guys are right, I broke my last hydrometer by accident and bought another cheaper one... I just tested it in some tap water, i tested it in both warm and cold water and they're both giving readings well below 1.000, my last one was .994... so I guess its off by about .006, so I guess I'm actually at 1.002 then?

If so, what are some reasons for really lazy fermentation? Is it possible I'm not rinsing out my equipment well enough after sanitizing?
 
I don't like telling people this but I have to agree with ncbrewer and thughes. Sounds like wild yeast or bacteria to me. The hydrometer might be off but the statement that is a dead give away to me is "the stuff doesn't even taste like beer, it tastes like some sort of cheap champagne..." Saying that it is probably wild yeast or bacteria doesn't necessarily mean the brewer needs some work on their cleaning and sanitizing. I suppose it is possible, I don't know how likely, that the pack of yeast was well beyond expiration, terribly mishandled before it go to the brewer, or a combination of the too and it just wasn't nearly viable enough to beat out a colony of wild yeast or bacteria. Long slow fermentation that took forever to clear is another sign that sounds like wild yeast or bacteria.

i guess i'll have to be extremely thorough with my sanitizing next time I clean my equipment... the annoying part is that I usually let my stuff sit in 'chloroclean' for at least 30 minutes, so I'll just have to make sure its actually sanitizing better somehow
 
But don't dump it just yet - let it ride and see if it becomes something good.
 
What exactly did you mean by "mixed and put in primary"?
Tell me that you boiled the wort and hops per the directions please?
Did you boil, and then add water to top off?
Did you get the water and wort really well mixed?
My guess is that the LME is not mixed, and you are reading (and tasting) basically water.
 
I don't think you want to keep using Chloroclean. Otherwise, your next thread will be "Why does my beer taste like band-aids/medicine?". Residual chlorine and especially chloramine can wind up producing chlorophenols which do not taste good. Pick up some Star-San or iodine-based sanitizer that you don't have to rinse.

As far as this batch goes, you probably did get an infection but all may not be lost. Did it actually taste bad or just not like beer? The reason I ask is that sour beers are a whole category of beers that are infected on purpose. Try a few commercial sour examples first so you know what to look for and then taste yours again. You might actually have something nice there.

Of course, you might not.
 
If you can spare the bottles, go ahead and package it and leave it be for a few months. Could turn out to be fantastic. A mildly infected beer isn't usually half bad.

Most hydrometers are calibrated at 60*, but usually it says on it somewhere (or the brand does online).
 
What exactly did you mean by "mixed and put in primary"?
Tell me that you boiled the wort and hops per the directions please?
Did you boil, and then add water to top off?
Did you get the water and wort really well mixed?
My guess is that the LME is not mixed, and you are reading (and tasting) basically water.

Good point. OP, did you actually measure your OG or that just what the recipe says it's supposed to be?
 
Good point. OP, did you actually measure your OG or that just what the recipe says it's supposed to be?

I measured the OG, i did it after I added yeast though... As per mixing, what I did was I added 2 litres of hot water (around 70oC) to the extract (like the instructions said), and then i stirred, i then poured another 18 litres of cold distilled water (right from the jug) into the batch, added the liquid glucose, added hops, then added yeast.

After stirring for a couple of minutes i transfered to the carboy. From the sounds of it i guess i have an infected batch. I'll still bottle it though
 
I don't think you want to keep using Chloroclean. Otherwise, your next thread will be "Why does my beer taste like band-aids/medicine?". Residual chlorine and especially chloramine can wind up producing chlorophenols which do not taste good. Pick up some Star-San or iodine-based sanitizer that you don't have to rinse.

As far as this batch goes, you probably did get an infection but all may not be lost. Did it actually taste bad or just not like beer? The reason I ask is that sour beers are a whole category of beers that are infected on purpose. Try a few commercial sour examples first so you know what to look for and then taste yours again. You might actually have something nice there.

Of course, you might not.

I wouldn't say it tasted horrible... it just didn't taste at all like beer, in fact the first thing that came to mind was fruit punch... it just tastes really fruity but alcoholic. I really like your suggestion of using iodine-based sanitizer, I really think that would really help fix things a lot. I'm gunna start looking for star-san and use that instead.
 
Thisismyname said:
I measured the OG, i did it after I added yeast though... As per mixing, what I did was I added 2 litres of hot water (around 70oC) to the extract (like the instructions said), and then i stirred, i then poured another 18 litres of cold distilled water (right from the jug) into the batch, added the liquid glucose, added hops, then added yeast.

After stirring for a couple of minutes i transfered to the carboy. From the sounds of it i guess i have an infected batch. I'll still bottle it though

I've only heard of no-boils for kits that have hopped malt extract. Do your actions match up with the directions from your kit?
 
The procedure just sounds like a recipe for wild yeast or bacteria.

No boil at all?

I'd definitely bottle it though--brewing was done with wild yeast for thousands of years before germ theory.
 
Adding hops to wort that's not boiling? There will be almost no bitterness from them, and despite what people say "I don't like hoppy beers" you NEED bitterness or it's not beer. Even Bud Light has hop bitterness.

You can't look at brewing like making a cake where you just mix everything together. Ya gotta do it in steps, even with extract. At minimum, hops need to be added per a schedule, to boiling water or wort. The extract should be added somewhere during the boil or just as the heat is removed. Yeast should never be added until the wort is cooled to 70F or below. Everything should be sanitized that will touch the wort after it's no longer boiling. I'd use StarSan if possible. It's no rinse, yeast love it, and it just works...in a matter of seconds.
 
i guess i'll have to be extremely thorough with my sanitizing next time I clean my equipment... the annoying part is that I usually let my stuff sit in 'chloroclean' for at least 30 minutes, so I'll just have to make sure its actually sanitizing better somehow

I don't have any experience with "choloroclean" but if it contains chlorine, like the name implies, it needs to be rinsed after use which, to me, sort of defeats the purpose. I switched to starsan several years ago and now I swear by the stuff. Haven't had any sanitation issues since using it ever. No rinse, don't fear the foam.
 
Adding hops to wort that's not boiling? There will be almost no bitterness from them, and despite what people say "I don't like hoppy beers" you NEED bitterness or it's not beer. Even Bud Light has hop bitterness.

You can't look at brewing like making a cake where you just mix everything together. Ya gotta do it in steps, even with extract. At minimum, hops need to be added per a schedule, to boiling water or wort. The extract should be added somewhere during the boil or just as the heat is removed. Yeast should never be added until the wort is cooled to 70F or below. Everything should be sanitized that will touch the wort after it's no longer boiling. I'd use StarSan if possible. It's no rinse, yeast love it, and it just works...in a matter of seconds.

I know what you're saying but the reason I didn't boild the malt is because I know for a fact you're not supposed to boild the extract from the kits since they've already been boiled and it changes the properties of the sugars and nutrients in the malt that make it very hard for the yeast to absord. This isn't coming from just me either, all the malt extract kits say right on the instructions never to boil and even the brewer at the micro brewery I buy my supplies from told me not to boil the extract either.

I have made decent beers in the past doing exactly as i did, except I always used cooper's yeasts instead of higher quality yeasts and this time i didn't spend even a quarter of the time rinsing out the hoses and equipment to make sure no chlorine was left behind... regardless, I think i either killed my yeast or possibly infected it by maybe not leaving my hydrometer in the chlorine long enough.
 
Thisismyname said:
I know what you're saying but the reason I didn't boild the malt is because I know for a fact you're not supposed to boild the extract from the kits since they've already been boiled and it changes the properties of the sugars and nutrients in the malt that make it very hard for the yeast to absord. This isn't coming from just me either, all the malt extract kits say right on the instructions never to boil and even the brewer at the micro brewery I buy my supplies from told me not to boil the extract either.

Interesting. Looks like Palmer and Papazian should update their bibles if that's the case.

Where are you getting these kits from anyway? This goes against every other source out there, not to mention that not boiling your wort probably increases your chance of infection by a big percentage.
 
It sounds like he is using a kit with Hopped extract, like Mr. Beer. Those you are not supposed to boil, and any hop additions are only for flavor/nose since the extract is already hopped for bitterness. Just thinking out loud...
 
It sounds like we're comparing apples and oranges here.

The OP made a "no boil" prehopped kit. They are commonly called a "kit and a kilo" type of kit, as they don't have a boil, hops, or anything. It's like mixing up frozen apple juice. You sanitize, stir, and add yeast. There isn't any boil or anything like most people do when they "brew". It's very different than what many brewing kits are, but common in the UK and Australia. I think they are more common in Canada than in the US as well, and there are some people in the US that use them. But most people in the US buy grains, extract, hops and yeast and do a boil so it's very different and not something that many of us are familiar with.

Sanitizing is still crucial, of course. I'd bottle this beer when it starts to clear, and see what happens. The hydrometer reading sounds wonky, that's for sure, but I don't think it's as low as is being read right now. I think the hydrometer is faulty.

Those "Kit and a kilo" kits are not particularly good, but they can make a drinkable beer in the end.
 
I understand what you're saying about not boiling pre-hopped kits though I've never used one. Boiling would possibly increase bitterness and potentially darken the wort. I would want to get the wort up to at least 140*F for 10 min or so to sterilize it though.

I doubt your infection came from the hydrometer. Chlorine will kill just about any bug in seconds and is an effective sanitizer. It's just not that good for beer.
 
Ditto on the hydrometer. I recently took a reading that I knew was way off and after examining the hydrometer at different angles in good light I discovered a hairline fracture. They are fragile..on my third one now. When this one goes I'm going with a refractometer. Ditto also on the Starsan. 20 batches in two years and no issues here.
 
I was watching a brewing TV episode where they were making a batch that ended in 0.998, and they mentioned, that It just means that it has less sugar than what naturally is in water. They didn't have a bug, but a very attenuative yeast.
 
BeerAlchemist said:
they mentioned, that It just means that it has less sugar than what naturally is in water.

??? What? That's crazy talk!
 
It sounds like we're comparing apples and oranges here.

The OP made a "no boil" prehopped kit. They are commonly called a "kit and a kilo" type of kit, as they don't have a boil, hops, or anything. It's like mixing up frozen apple juice. You sanitize, stir, and add yeast. There isn't any boil or anything like most people do when they "brew". It's very different than what many brewing kits are, but common in the UK and Australia. I think they are more common in Canada than in the US as well, and there are some people in the US that use them. But most people in the US buy grains, extract, hops and yeast and do a boil so it's very different and not something that many of us are familiar with.

Sanitizing is still crucial, of course. I'd bottle this beer when it starts to clear, and see what happens. The hydrometer reading sounds wonky, that's for sure, but I don't think it's as low as is being read right now. I think the hydrometer is faulty.

Those "Kit and a kilo" kits are not particularly good, but they can make a drinkable beer in the end.

Thanks for clearing this up. I hadn't heard of these no-boil kits, though I know of pre-hopped extract. I still wonder if he mixed the yeast together with semi-warm/hot wort rather than cooling into the 70's at least.
 
I was watching a brewing TV episode where they were making a batch that ended in 0.998, and they mentioned, that It just means that it has less sugar than what naturally is in water. They didn't have a bug, but a very attenuative yeast.

What it means is that the final product is less dense than water (due to the alcohol).


TL
 
I made 6-10 small batches like this in a "Beer Machine" which is like Mr. Beer. Anyway, you just sanitized and added cool water and yeast. I never had an infection. The beer ranged from "bleh" to passable. The best...was nowhere near the typical quality of what I brew now though.
 
I would have to change my Brewery Rule with this type of Kit.

Now: Rule #1: Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize!

With No Boil::drunk: Rule #1: Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize! Sanitize!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top