Can you Brew It recipe for Stone Arrogant Bastard

It's decidedly not an old ale unless you age the heck out of it, they'll ding you for hop aroma.

OK this keg is almost kicked. This was a really good beer. One of my favorites that I've brewed. This was SOOOOO close to Arrogant Bastard. The problem was the hops. It started off with the bitterness of AB but dissapated quickly over time. I think my flameout hop addition wasn't whirpooled long enough or even at the right temperature. I added them right at flameout and have since learned I shoud have waited just abit until the temp dropped a little. it was still very good, so good in fact that I have another 5 gallons fermenting right now. I bumped up the hops to 1.25 oz and hopefully got the flameout hops right. We'll see. I do think that the Special B is the only specialty grain that should be used. The malt profile, In my opinion, was spot on.

rustym said:

I know that Arrogant Bastard, according to BJCP guidelines is included as an example of Cat23A, Specialty Beer. I'm trying to match up a base style (if there is one). I would almost consider it an American Strong Ale, but that's not a BJCP style. Anybody (judges?) have any advice or direction to give me on that?

Click to expand...

I always thought of AB as an old Ale with American hop flavor. Americans seem to take English style beers and hop the crap out of them. Anyway that's the way I categorize it.

Thinking about doing a half batch of AB this weekend. I am curious how long you leave in the primary if this one is not dry hopped? 4 weeks should be fine right?

If you pitch the correct amount of healthy yeast, 3 weeks is enough. I generally keep my beer in primary for 2-3 weeks depending on the gravity.

I usually keep mine in the carboy for 3 to 4 weeks too, temperature controlled. I think 3 weeks is the least my brews have been on the yeast cake.

I've never dry hopped my AB. 90% 2-row, 10% Special B, and about 4 ounces of Chinook.

As far as flameout, I too will let my wort cool a little but before throwing the last ounce in. I cover the keggle so there's nothing getting in there ... not really a whirlpool but a steep.

This is my next brew, maybe this Sunday.

Brewed this back in early October and kegged it at 3 weeks. It is truly a great beer. Last weekend I bought a bomber of AG and poured the two side by side. Color and aroma were spot on and taste was sooo close. The kegged pour was in a frosted glass so the beer was quite a bit colder than the AG. After it warmed up a bit they were almost identical. Don't think I would change a thing.

TrubDog - did you follow the hop schedule exactly? If no, what did you do?

I sent this beer to the Music City Brew Off competition just to see what it would do. I entered it in the Cat23A, Specialty Beer, because of the hop profile, which, according to Beersmith should be around ~95-100 IBU, which is too much for any of the related base styles like Old Ale. I scored a 36 and a 40 which I thought was pretty good since I kind of rushed it to get it shipped in time. Both judges dinged me for the hop profile. They both said there was no way this was close to 100 IBU. They said the hop nose was there and even got better as it warmed but one of the judges even commented that he "would be curious to know how I calculated the IBU's". I included the recipe with the entry as well so the 4 additions of Chinook (and I used 1 oz. each time) calulates to ~100 IBU. They both commented that the base malt was excellent and my clarity was excellent but the hops weren't there.

IMO, the hops in AB are not that forward as in a real hoppy IPA, but the bitterness is what sets it apart. I think the bitterness is there in my attempt and as TrubDog stated above I think the taste and color are identical. Any thoughts?

My AB wasn't as hoppy as Stone's either. It was damned good but just not the same. The recipe calls for less than an ounce per addition; I however used a full ounce each time.

For all of you folks saying yours aren't as hoppy: How much gypsum/chloride are you using for your water? Also, presumably you're correcting for alpha acid differences?

I wonder if using extract would add a more "hoppy" taste to the beer. Everyone says it's not as hoppy, and I'll bet Stone isn't using 100% pellets for this one. Could using hop extract be the key? (DISCLAIMER: I have no experience with using hop extracts!)

afr0byte said:

For all of you folks saying yours aren't as hoppy: How much gypsum/chloride are you using for your water? Also, presumably you're correcting for alpha acid differences?

Click to expand...

I haven't corrected my water profile at all. I'm on a well and my water is very good right out of the tap but I have never had it tested. Maybe that would help. How much would the gypsum aid in hop utilization?

As far as AA corection, I did take into account the difference and obviously came up with more IBU's. The actual recipe for .85 oz calculated to abut 92 IBU's. Even if the actual AA was lower than Chinooks ~13%, the increase should have made up the difference.

I've made IPA's before and have had no problem before making a hoppy beer. But here's my question...I haven't had an AB in a couple of months, but I never thought that AB was as hoppy as, say a Stone IPA. I always thought that the hops in AB contributed to a noticeable bitterness that blended well with the grain bill. Set me staright here!

rustym said:

I haven't corrected my water profile at all. I'm on a well and my water is very good right out of the tap but I have never had it tested. Maybe that would help. How much would the gypsum aid in hop utilization?

As far as AA corection, I did take into account the difference and obviously came up with more IBU's. The actual recipe for .85 oz calculated to abut 92 IBU's. Even if the actual AA was lower than Chinooks ~13%, the increase should have made up the difference.

I've made IPA's before and have had no problem before making a hoppy beer. But here's my question...I haven't had an AB in a couple of months, but I never thought that AB was as hoppy as, say a Stone IPA. I always thought that the hops in AB contributed to a noticeable bitterness that blended well with the grain bill. Set me staright here!

Click to expand...

The sulfate will tend to make the hops pop more. Other than lowering pH a bit, gypsum wouldn't really alter the utilization. Tasty Mcdole got pretty close, and he probably used a relatively standard Pale Ale profile. You may be able to find his profile (he uses it for most beers) if you google for Tasty Mcdole water profile.

It might been covered earlier in this thread or maybe another but I remember reading that stone blends their local water 50/50 with RO then gets sulfate level up to 200PPM.

jtejedor said:

It might been covered earlier in this thread or maybe another but I remember reading that stone blends their local water 50/50 with RO then gets sulfate level up to 200PPM.

Click to expand...

I've heard the 50/50 thing, but I didn't know what sulfate level they targeted.

I made the 10% special B version of this recipe and its been in the keg for a month now. I compared it head to head with a bottle of AB yesterday and I have a few comments. The beers were exactly the same color and clarity. Taste was not the same though. The AB was much more bitter than my clone and had a deeper more rich flavor profile. I picked up hints of caramel and chocolate in the AB which my clone does not have. My cloned version is relatively close but it's definitely missing something in both the malt bill and hops bill. I used 100% RO water with gypsum, calcium chloride, and lactic acid in the mash. Mash pH was calculated at around 5.4. I mashed at 147 and hit all my numbers dead on.

I think there are several things I would do different if I brew this again. I will definitely replace some of the special B with a small amount of chocolate or roasted and maybe even a different crystal malt. The real AB also had more body and much better head retention than my clone. I think I either need to mash at a higher temp or maybe there's some carapils in the real one. Also, I think the hop flavor was fairly close, but the real AB had way more deep bitterness than mine. I think maybe I would use more hops early next time.

Don't get me wrong, the clone is a very good beer, it's just not really Arrogant Bastard. I have 5 more gallons of it so I have 2oz of light oak chips floating around it in the carboy now.

OK, thank you Afrobyte

After reading what you wrote, I started looking into water...BIG MISTEAK

It's all I've been raeding for the past 3 days. I've listened to the whole "waterganza" thing on Jamils podcast and now am looking at spreadsheets and everything else! I know this is , but I think you may have pointed me in the right direction. I'll brew this again in a couple of weeks and see what happens.

I used this:

All Chinook
1oz at 60
1oz at 30
1oz at 10
1oz at 0

I basically moved up the hop schedule a bit. Still did a 90 min boil.

TrubDog: How did come out?

I just popped open a bottle of this I made back in August. I used Chinook @ 90,60,30, & 5. I used WLP007 for part of the batch and WLP002 for the rest. I used 1/2 lb of british crystal 135/165L and 1 lb of special b. The bottle of WLP002 is identical to what I have had at Stone! I usually use the WLP007 but I made an experimental gallon and a few bottles with the WLP002 and I cannot tell the difference between it and the real thing. I bottle aged it and I am shocked at how close it is to the real thing. I usually use 007 and like the beer it makes, but this is like what I had in Escondido earlier this year. It was REALLY hoppy and had that unique taste and smell. I will have to do another BIG batch of this with wlp002. Color me suprised!

stonebrewer said:

..Color me suprised!

Click to expand...

How did the WLP007 compare in there with the AB and the 002 version? Assuming you went with the 90/10specB, right?

shmEk said:

How did the WLP007 compare in there with the AB and the 002 version? Assuming you went with the 90/10specB, right?

Click to expand...

Very similar though a little less hoppy and a tad more dry. I have varied the hops and malts a little over the attempts. I use around 14 lbs of two row, around a pound/pound and a half of special B, and about a half pound of dark crystal (British 135/165L). I use either all Chinook or Chinook w/ Columbus for aroma at 5 or flameout. The malt seems pretty spot on and I am really happy with the hops now. Now that I have a decent sized MLT, I plan to do a lot more experimental batches of various sizes. Should be fun in side-by-side tests. Worst case I keep drinking a lot of really good, fresh beer that is close to AB!

stonebrewer - what was your mash temperature?

I was wondering about WLP002 vs. WLP007, per Mitch, both will work. Do you think the yeast itself made the difference?

I brewed the #2 version Sunday, 90% 2-row & 10% Special B. I mashed at 153 (over shot temp and left it as-is). The pre-fermenter gravity reading was 1.072 so I'm somewhere in the 72% efficiency. These grains were purchased through Brewmasters Warehouse with a double crush instruction. Looking at the grains however, I don't think they were double crushed.

Total grain bill was 15.94 pounds. I collected a little over 5.5 gallons so that extra 1/2 gallon reduction may have upped the OG a point or so.

I mash in a bag and collected 6 quarts of second running "leftovers" (1.042) while the main batch was in the kettle. On the stove, I condensed down to 40 ounces and a whopping 1.122. I dumped that into the kettle towards the end. It was sweet and viscous. If you mash in a bag, try this some time. I don't know what flavors it imparts but condensing down otherwise discardable runnings really makes sense.

My Chinooks were 13.99 AA so I went 1 oz. at 85, 1 oz. at 40, and 1 ounce after flameout at approximately 180 degrees. When I hop, the previous hops stay in the bag.

The flameout hops were "steeped" for 60 minutes while I let the wort cool down.

It tasted pretty damned hoppy.

I'm wondering how the 153 mash temp will affect the flavor. Is there really a perceptable difference between 148 and 153?

Now we need to perfect the Double Bastard ...

Ultravista

Stone tends to mash higher than I do, at around 156. I usually mash my "equivalent" of their beers in the 148-152 range, somewhere between alpha and beta amylase. I find this gives me the best of both worlds. YMMV. Both WLP002 and WLP007 make great clones of AB. I just think that WLP002, which I rarely use, seems to make the hops pop a little more (or there is something I am missing, **** like that happens in brewing ALL THE TIME!) and the beer is a tad sweeter/maltier than WLP007. I use 16 pounds of grain. WHO in his right mind uses 15.94? Same thing for Beersmith's water calculations! Use 27.5 quarts? No! I use 7 gallons. I guess what I am trying to say is I don't sweat the details and getting close it pretty dang awesome in homebrewing terms. I have a read a lot on brewing and will keep reading but I will share one thing I have learned: brewers are lazy. Not knocking them, but they are like many of us. So instead of having drabs of hops or grain laying around, craft brewers just toss it in! If they are building a new beer that calls for 10.72342 lbs of hops, they throw the 11 pound bag they bought in cause who wants to keep up with that .27658 lb of leftovers? I used to use .85 oz of Chinook at w,x,y,z minutes but now I just use 1oz as that is easier on me. Still makes really good beer!! Sorry if I went on a small rant there, but I think if we stop and think about how things are really done, we can make equivalent products. I think we rely too heavily on computer programs to tell us how to make beer (and I am a computer guy!) instead of using common sense.

Sounds like you make really good beer! You are also lucky to be close enough to drive to Stone when you want. I have to fly there, but am lucky to do so once or twice a year. Next time I am in Vegas I will look you up and we can pontificate about the wonders of brewing...

Cheers!

stonebrewer - I hear ya.

I'm anxious to see how this tastes mashed at 153 from the last version at 148. There should be a little more mouthfeel and residual sweetness from the unfermentables. To what extend, I don't know.

Having tried the Double Bastard, I can say that I prefer the D.B to the A.B. for the maltiness. Maybe D.B. is mashed a little higher and we know it has a higher starting gravity.

I brewed a Barney Flats Oatmeal Stout recently. It called for London ESB Ale (Wyeast Labs #1968), I however used WLP007. WLP007 dried it out pretty well, so much so that it's no longer close to the real thing. With that in mind, I am certain WLP007 is doing the same thing to A.B.

1968 London ESB Ale Yeast = WLP002 English Ale Yeast

FWIW regarding the DB, at a Stone tasting event I asked Grek Koch himself if the ingredients in the DB were the same as the AB just "ramped up and tweaked a bit"....his response was "No, there's some different stuff in there...." he was vague obviously but pretty much said the grain bill is different than the original AB - which makes sense, it's definitely a different malt taste/finish....I personally think DB ist their best beer

As much as I love Stone beers, I have not tried the DB yet. I will have to soon. I am heading to a Vertical Epic Ale tasting tomorrow with 2003-2012 on tap.

Let me know how that comes out for you mashed higher. I have been meaning to do a 156 mash at some point, and may do so soon now that I have a spare MLT and can split batches about anyway I can imagine. Should be an interesting side by side comparison! Agree on wlp007 being more efficient at gobbling sugars than wlp002. I have used both and like both. I tend to use wlp002 when I want more residual sweetness, combining that with a higher mash temp. Perhaps a good side by side would be to do AB at 148 with 007 and 156 with 002 and see what I get? Yep...beer! Grin!

stonebrewer, when using WLP007, how fast does your batch typically ferment and settle down?

For example, I pitched at 5:30 PM Sunday, by 3 AM the following morning, the fermenter was pretty active. 24 hours later, it was really rockin-and-rolling. Today, Wednesday morning, it has settled back down and appears the krausen has subsided.

Pitching temp started at 66, it rose to 72, and it's down to 67.

Does WLP007 work that quickly?

Every time I have used it, the fermenter has been in a fridge. This time however, I have it inside on the kitchen floor. It may always act this way, I just haven't seen it.

When you're doing A.B., how quick is the primary fermentation activity?

the WLP-007 is a pretty fast worker from what I remember when using it in the past

Sounds the same as what I see: it works furiously for a day or two and by day 3 or 4 the krausen has fallen in and I am getting a bubble in my bucket about every 15 seconds. I tend to leave it on the yeast for two weeks before kegging it and 007 keeps working though it slows considerably after the first week. For the first 1-3 days it looks like a washing machine with a huge amount of churn before settling down. I always ferment with 007 in my basement at 68-72 and it works fast and produces a good amount of alcohol. I always use a liter starter and generally use washed yeast. Most of the time I start getting a bubble per minute within 4 hours, especially if I hit it with a minute or so of pure oxygen. I always feed the yeast with energizer and some 1.040 starter wort. Typically I start this on Friday night for a Sunday evening pitch.

The Stone Epic ales were AWESOME last night. Had the 3-3-3, 5-5-5, 7-7-7, 9-9-9 and 12-12-12 and a double bastard. I hurt like hell this morning, but it was worth it!! LOVED the 9-9-9, 12-12-12 and double B!! Stone has recipes for all Epics online and I am definitely going to brew some of those! You guys were spot on about the double B...that was like liquid sex!

stonebrewer - your process is very similar to mine with the exception of feeding the yeast with an energizer. I have never used a nutrient yet and have had great success. I too hit the cooled wort with about a minute of O2 through a 200 micron stone. Not full blast, but a nice bubble.

The detail you provided regarding WLP007 is spot-on to what occured with my recent batch of AB. Funny how these things work ...

I can get the verticals here in Las Vegas this time of year. I'll have to pick some up. Stone is pretty cheap, like $6.99 for the Double Bastard, Barley Wine, Verticals, etc. My local place also discounts %10 on six bottles too.

The Double Bastard is the best in my opinion. I would really like to perfect it on the homebrew scale. Like Double Dead Guy, which I do have a recipe for (courtesy of John @ Rogue), the Double Bastard is my favorite goto beer.

ultravista - Always nice to have confirmation that you are doing the same as other brewers and getting the same results! I bought a huge bag of energizer after reading a couple of books that detailed the nutrients needed for yeast to properly grow and metabolize. Not sure if it helps or not, but I get pretty good results so I stick to it. I wash a lot of yeast and am thinking once I runout of energizer to just put a cup of old yeast into the boil instead of buying more energizer. That will at least give them the Biotin they need and the vitamin B complex. I don't think they contain DAP or magnesium sulphate, but honestly have not done the research yet to find out one way or the other. I think they like/need zinc as well, but that is going off memory and mine it not trustworthy...grin!

I think I am going to brew up 10G of AB this weekend and am trying to decide today which yeast to use. I am leaning towards WLP002 right now but may change my mind before I kick off the starter in an hour or so...

If you find a DB recipe you like PLEASE let me know and I will do likewise! I got a bottle the other night ($17! yikes!) and have to find a way to recreate or get close!

Anyone ever try pulling off the first gallon of wort and boiling it hard and reducing to a half gallon and then adding it back into the main boil like you would for a Scottish ale? I wonder if this would help with the malt flavor that it seems isn't quite nailed down. I am planning on brewing this soon, and may give it a try.

Yup, I do that with most beers I brew. As a "mash in a bag" brewer, I drain the bag and can usually collect 6 to 7 quarts post sparge. I boil down these runnings to a quart or less on the stove.

Very similar to your process.

I did a decoction mashout on my last stab at AB. 14% special B, all hop additions increased by 30% nailed it in my opinion (and the regular AB drinkers I shared it with)

After 20 days, I kegged the AB. It tasted great, hoppy and the Chinook flavor came through. All with only 3 oz.

One hydrometer read 1.014 and another 1.020. I'll have to calibrate to determine which one is accurate. The high one is new from Brew Masters Warehouse. It will suck if it's that far off.

I can't believe I rad the whole thread!!

Seems to be several personal preferences and opinions of outcomes of these clone recipes. Seems like all are close.

Personally, I don't know if I have the nose to sniff out all the details. I picked up the last bottle at the local store today of AB after reading this and tried to discern if I could tell what specialty malt and hops were used. Nope, it's too arrogant for me! I'm lucky I even enjoyed the beer! The onslaught of hops and bitterness dominated any chance I had at discerning malt subtleties. Maybe it's like spicy food, and I need to desensitize the bitter tastebuds or something.

I think I'm gonna try to brew this recipe anyway, as I enjoyed the AB I bought today after a long working weekend.

My thoughts after reading the thread are as follows:

If I were trying to create a mystique about a special recipe, I would count on homebrewerrs trying to teases it from my employees and I agree that there is probably a certain amount of misdirection going on.

I think it might be not a recipe ingredient thing, but a process thing that is keeping folks from perfecting the absolute clone. Why does Guinness taste different in Ireland than in America when the stuff we get is brewed in Ireland?? Could be same thing here. Lord knows my palate will not be able to tease out the finer detail.

Has anyone tried a hop back or hop rocket? I made a 10 G batch of pale ale June 2011, just before I went on a brewing hiatus. I had a carboy sitting in the house for a good 10 months before I kegged it. The hop aroma was still incredible compared to non hop backed brews. Maybe this would help up the hop aroma and flavor for those missing the mark?
Also, bittering the early additions I think the more extraction of alpha acid bittering, it becomes exponential to get the uber bitter beer. Maybe I will do 2 oz x 90 min, and double the addition weight for each successive addition. I doubt that you can really taste the difference between an 85+ IBU beer and a100+ IBU beer that has an OG over 1.060. Maybe if you did a straight pilsner malt and no specialty malt...l

Does anyone think that they might be doing any manipulation such as blending beer, toasting malt, or perhaps lying about the simplicity of their grist? Water profiles I think only lend so much. It could be simply a fermentation temp or yeast or second fermentation thing going on?

Who knows, but ultimately, the 90:10 2 row to either special b or c150 seems to be good enough for a home brewer to enjoy a great beer that's close enough for most.

I'm going to try it soon, but have too many March madness plans to consider any extra brews. Got 10 brew days planned already!

TD

Mr. Dick

I have made several batches with 90% 2-row and 10% Special B. While Special B may be in the ballpark, I don't think the ratio is right. Bottles of AB have a distinct flavor to them, similar to Jubelale (at least to me).

Jubelale lists crystal and an extra special malt.

So I'm wondering .. increase the Special B or possibly go with 120 or 150.

Either way, I think 10% is a little shy.

Have you had Jubelale? Do you know the taste I am referring to?

To me, that unique flavor is more pronounced in the Double Bastard.

Check this thread too: http://www.thebrewingnetwork.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=16613

Does anyone think that they might be doing any manipulation such as blending beer, toasting malt, or perhaps lying about the simplicity of their grist? Water profiles I think only lend so much. It could be simply a fermentation temp or yeast or second fermentation thing going on?

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think it is the yeast. I am pretty sure this is a simple beer, ingredient wise. The one thing we cannot get is their house yeast. WLP007 and WLP002 both come close, but are different and I think that is the subtle delta that eludes us. That said, I have made this beer six ways to Sunday and I can say each has been different and each has been freakin' awesome to drink. Changed just fermentation temps last time and got a "bubble gum" ester note that I have tasted in some of Stone's brews. I am actually having a glass of that now and am really enjoying it. This was a 10G batch and it is over half gone; brewed right before Christmas. Took a couple of gallons to a party and it was a hit. Took a gallon to a Friday, after work get together and it was a huge hit. I think I will brew it again in a week or two. This time I may change from Special B to C150 as Austin HB has it on sale for a $1 per pound...or I may just make it the same way I did this one. Please post after you brew it...