You can defiantly save money. I can make 5 gallons of IPA for 50-60$
What the hell kind of IPA's are you making! If your recipe calls for Brewers Gold, use hops next time.
You can defiantly save money. I can make 5 gallons of IPA for 50-60$
On the homebrew scale, HSA is a nonfactor.
On the homebrew scale, autolysis is a nonfactor.
I see these posted time and time again as boogeymen to be scared of. I could pull up revvy's HSA thread, along with the various citations and sources, but that's the kind of thing that should go in the article, no?
Autolysis is mentioned all the time, as well, with the "old wisdom" of racking your beer the moment it hits terminal gravity. That's totally unnecesary. Lots of brewers leave their beer on the yeast cake for weeks - sometimes months - with no ill effects. So on the homebrew scale, yeah, it's a myth.
Who pushes this myth? Age will fix some flaws due to brewing process. It won't fix anything close to "everything", and odds are, the beer would have been better had the "fix" never been needed.
Sheesh, Yooper. This feels like the "well, actually..." derails we get in the "funny things overheard" thread from time to time.
You can defiantly save money. I can make 5 gallons of IPA for 50-60$ and it costs 100$ if I buy it in the grocery store. I make extract batches so far but you save even more if you do all grain. The equipment is the only other thing that costs money but its a one time expense. What am I missing here?
You asked about myths. I replied. I like Revvy very much, and this isn't about him at all.
It's simply not true that HSA and autolysis are "myths". Are they common? Maybe not. But that doesn't make them myths. Nor are they necessarily a "non factor".
I personally have tasted autolysis, and I think a couple of oxidation issues I helped judge were partially due to age and HSA after discussing it with the brewer and a few other judges.
Myths are just that- myths. Maybe the risk of HSA at the homebrew level is overstated- I will agree with that completely. But I would not call it a "myth". There is a scientific basis to it, and I think most brewers with some scientific knowledge wouldn't rule it out as a "myth" even though it may not be a huge risk.
I am just saying I do save money. Just because you guys continue to upgrade doesn't mean everyone does. I am perfectly happy with 5 gallon batches that I can make now
You asked about myths. I replied. I like Revvy very much, and this isn't about him at all.
It's simply not true that HSA and autolysis are "myths". Are they common? Maybe not. But that doesn't make them myths. Nor are they necessarily a "non factor".
I personally have tasted autolysis, and I think a couple of oxidation issues I helped judge were partially due to age and HSA after discussing it with the brewer and a few other judges.
Myths are just that- myths. Maybe the risk of HSA at the homebrew level is overstated- I will agree with that completely. But I would not call it a "myth". There is a scientific basis to it, and I think most brewers with some scientific knowledge wouldn't rule it out as a "myth" even though it may not be a huge risk.
I agree. One thing I've noticed is that unless you have a an extremely tuned/trained palate, or have your beer torn apart (errrr....critiqued) by a national ranked judged, I really despise the typical "[insert HSA, tannins, phenols, autolysis, oxidation, etc.] is a myth because I don't taste it and my friends love my beer" posts.
It's had tannins, autolysis, oxidation, HSA, etc. noted by judges during various competitions.
Just because I can't taste/perceive them doesn't mean it is not there, and that there aren't some things I can do as a brewer to minimize many of the real "myths."
Tow-may-tow, tow-mah-tow. For homebrewing, I count these as myths; the risk level is neglible for the typical home brewer. They certainly should not be the boogeyman that get thrown around.
But hey, every article I write has an opinion slant to it - I don't pretend otherwise. Feel free to write me off as a crackpot.
I agree. One thing I've noticed is that unless you have a an extremely tuned/trained palate, or have your beer torn apart (errrr....critiqued) by a national ranked judged, I really despise the typical "[insert HSA, tannins, phenols, autolysis, oxidation, etc.] is a myth because I don't taste it and my friends love my beer" posts.
It's had tannins, autolysis, oxidation, HSA, etc. noted by judges during various competitions.
Just because I can't taste/perceive them doesn't mean it is not there, and that there aren't some things I can do as a brewer to minimize many of the real "myths."
I'm basing my information on the various studies and such that I read, as opposed to the "old wisdom" thats gets repeated time and time again (rack your beer as soon as gravity is stable, or you'll get autolysis).
I have a real issue with saying that just because something is less common than preached, it's a myth.
There are quite a few people who are genetically unable to taste diacetyl. That doesn't make diacetyl a myth when it's in their beers. They are just not aware of it.
You asked for homebrewing "myths" to write about, and I gave you several that I am aware of. They are not my opinion, but based on fact and scientific papers. If your opinion is that these truths are myths, then I have no part of offering advise.
It's your article- so I'll bow out.
ThaBrewFather06 said:You can defiantly save money. I can make 5 gallons of IPA for 50-60$ and it costs 100$ if I buy it in the grocery store. I make extract batches so far but you save even more if you do all grain. The equipment is the only other thing that costs money but its a one time expense. What am I missing here?
This does not mean the time brewing is not an expense.
.
There's no question in my mind that I've tasted autolysis in my and other people's beers. It's a very distinctive soy sauce flavor, and I seem to be much more sensitive to it than my friends and family are.
I noticed it first in a delicate cider that sat on yeast for way, way to long, to the point that the color and texture of the cake began to change significantly. I've even gone so far as to cause yeast to autolyze on purpose so as to have a baseline flavor to compare against. Now, I taste it relatively frequently (even if its subtle) and without fail it always turns out to be from beer that has sat on too much yeast for too long at too hot a temperature.
The thing about these "myths" is that they spring their own counter-myths. People believe one dogma for a while, and then when holes start to appear they immediately produce a new dogma at the opposite extreme without considering the possibility that the truth might lay somewhere in the middle.
The greatest myths of brewing are just as often the counter-myths we cook up to dispel myths in the first place.
It doesn't seem soy-sauce-ish at all to me, but it wouldn't be at all surprising if it did if the autolysis was over-the-top. I've definitely gotten soy-sauce character in microbrews that are experimenting with pushing the abv limits... for whatever reason.
+1 on the brewing your own beer is cheaper, The LHBS has a sign up that says brew your own and save money, I chuckle every time I walk in.
AZ_IPA said:I agree. One thing I've noticed is that unless you have a an extremely tuned/trained palate, or have your beer torn apart (errrr....critiqued) by a national ranked judged, I really despise the typical "[insert HSA, tannins, phenols, autolysis, oxidation, etc.] is a myth because I don't taste it and my friends love my beer" posts.
It's had tannins, autolysis, oxidation, HSA, etc. noted by judges during various competitions.
If you ask 10 homebrewers how to do something, you will get 11 answers!All homebrewers agree on the best practices to follow when brewing your own.
It makes it "old wisdom".Repeating "new wisdom" over and over without a scientific basis doesn't make it fact.
What you are missing is that most people on here would consider homebrewing is a recreation activity...Of course, many will answer that they brew on their off time when they wouldn't be making anything anyways. This does not mean the time brewing is not an expense. It simply means that on non-brewing days off you spend the time (=money) on recreation or other activities.
What you are missing is that most people on here would consider homebrewing is a recreation activity
Exactly.If you ask 10 homebrewers how to do something, you will get 11 answers!...
I don't think that's the point being made. In economics there is a term called "opportunity cost" and it refers to what you give up doing in order to do something else. For example let's say you have the choice between brewing and going to the beach. If you decide to brew the opportunity cost is going to the beach.
Correct. But when people say that you should take into account your hourly wage when determining the cost of your homebrew it implies that the opportunity cost of homebrewing is paid work. I would assume most people brew in their time off and do not take annual leave to brew so the opportunity cost of brewing is not paid work (at least for me - if there is no extra work to do then my employer won't pay me for any hours more than 40 a week) and therefore you should not factor your time into the cost of your beer.
I'll agree with that to an extent. In some jobs, not mine (though I do work with some folks who have a job like this), you can opt to work over time if it's available. So if over time is available and you opt to brew then you do need to factor in your wage. It all depends on your particular economic situation.
Properly speaking, you'd then have to quantify in dollar terms and factor in the pleasure value of brewing and the displeasure costs of working, too.
...but who the #@$! wants to live like that?
I use to do BIAB all grain batches and I would squeeze the bag like it owed me money and never had a tannin problem.
I brew because I enjoy it. Damn we are an opinionated and somewhat pissy bunch! What other myths can we come up with? And should we redefine myths as " bogeymen (or bogey women) and things that get too much negative hype in the homebrew world?"
I don't think that's the point being made. In economics there is a term called "opportunity cost" and it refers to what you give up doing in order to do something else. For example let's say you have the choice between brewing and going to the beach. If you decide to brew the opportunity cost is going to the beach.
No it means I decided to stay home and have fun instead if sitting on a gritty coastal area fighting a seagull for my sandwich and wondering why the hell there is ice and food in the unfinished mash tun.
... and wondering why the hell there is ice and food in the unfinished mash tun.
Enter your email address to join: