10.10.10 Recipe Discussion Thread - The HBT Anniversary Series

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.

Chriso

Broken Robot Brewing Co.
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
4,618
Reaction score
89
Location
Someplace
While we're all getting ready to brew the wonderful 09.09.09 Barleywine HBT Anniversary Brew, I thought I might get the ball rolling on the 10-10-2010 brew.

I will not be starting a swap at this time. It's ludicrous to start taking "I'm In"'s this early, as we have a year before we even need to START thinking about brewing this bad mama-jamma. But I would like to brew one on 10-10-08 and 10-10-09, so that is why I am starting this thread so early. When we get closer to 10-10-09, I will volunteer to organize this swap, but will also bow out of the way if someone else would like to organize it (I'm guessing BierMuncher might be ready for a vacation by then!).


So let's talk about the brew.

I am nominating a Strong Scotch Ale for the 10-10-10 brew because I love Wee Heavies, and I think they could age well. Does anyone disagree with a Strong Scotch ale for 10.10.10? Here's the BJCP info for a 9E.

Code:
9E. Strong Scotch Ale

Aroma: Deeply malty, with caramel often apparent. Peaty, earthy and/or smoky secondary aromas may also be present, adding complexity. Caramelization often is mistaken for diacetyl, which should be low to none. Low to moderate esters and alcohol are often present in stronger versions. Hops are very low to none.

Appearance: Light copper to dark brown color, often with deep ruby highlights. Clear. Usually has a large tan head, which may not persist in stronger versions. Legs may be evident in stronger versions.

Flavor: Richly malty with kettle caramelization often apparent (particularly in stronger versions). Hints of roasted malt or smoky flavor may be present, as may some nutty character, all of which may last into the finish. Hop flavors and bitterness are low to medium-low, so malt impression should dominate. Diacetyl is low to none, although caramelization may sometimes be mistaken for it. Low to moderate esters and alcohol are usually present. Esters may suggest plums, raisins or dried fruit. The palate is usually full and sweet, but the finish may be sweet to medium-dry (from light use of roasted barley).

Mouthfeel: Medium-full to full-bodied, with some versions (but not all) having a thick, chewy viscosity. A smooth, alcoholic warmth is usually present and is quite welcome since it balances the malty sweetness. Moderate carbonation.

Overall Impression: Rich, malty and usually sweet, which can be suggestive of a dessert. Complex secondary malt flavors prevent a one-dimensional impression. Strength and maltiness can vary.

Comments: Also known as a "wee heavy." Fermented at cooler temperatures than most ales, and with lower hopping rates, resulting in clean, intense malt flavors. Well suited to the region of origin, with abundant malt and cool fermentation and aging temperature. Hops, which are not native to Scotland and formerly expensive to import, were kept to a minimum.

Ingredients: Well-modified pale malt, with up to 3% roasted barley. May use some crystal malt for color adjustment; sweetness usually comes not from crystal malts rather from low hopping, high mash temperatures, and kettle caramelization. A small proportion of smoked malt may add depth, though a peaty character (sometimes perceived as earthy or smoky) may also originate from the yeast and native water. Hop presence is minimal, although English varieties are most authentic. Fairly soft water is typical.
Vital Statistics:
OG	FG	IBUs	SRM	ABV
1.070 - 1.130	1.018 - 1.030+	17 - 35	14 - 25	6.5 - 10%

Commercial Examples: Traquair House Ale, Orkney Skull Splitter, McEwan's Scotch Ale, MacAndrew's Scotch Ale, Belhaven Wee Heavy, Broughton Old Jock, Scotch du Silly, Gordon Highland Scotch Ale, Founders Dirty Bastard

I am putting forth a possible recipe choice.

If the HBT public would like an official Brewpastor recipe, then I will cede to the masses. I am always honored to brew one of Brewpastor's creations.

Suggestion #1 For 10.10.10
18.5 lbs Pale Malt, Maris Otter
6.0 oz Roasted Barley
4.0 oz Caramel/Crystal Malt - 60L

1.00 oz Fuggles [4.50 %] (60 min)
0.50 oz Fuggles [4.50 %] (20 min)

Est Original Gravity: 1.100 SG
Est Final Gravity: 1.025 SG
Estimated Alcohol by Vol: 9.9 % (Almost 10%.)
Bitterness: 15.2 IBU
Est Color: 17.5 SRM

Mash at 153*F for 90 minutes. Hopefully this will get us a ton of malty body, but then towards the end (with the extended mash time) also gain us some sugars that will allow this to dry out past the advertised 1.025 FG, which will hopefully put us at 1.100 OG and 10% ABV. According to BeerSmith's calculator, all we need is 1.100 -> 1.024 to achieve 10.0% ABV.

Boil the first 2 qt of First Runnings in a saucepan. Boil vigorously, in order to caramelize the wort, and shoot for about 1 pint of total volume. Add this syrupy wort back to the main kettle .

Boil the full volume for 90 minutes. Add hops at 60" and 20".

Ferment at 65*F? I nominate either WLP028 Edinburgh or WLP004 Irish Ale. Both feature roughly 75% Attenuation.​

That's 1.100 OG, 10% ABV, and 10oz of Specialty Grains.

Please, post thoughts and ideas here. I am looking for your feedback!
 
I like the idea and I like the recipe. That's a simple recipe which is exactly what is called for. I would vote for the WLP028 for the yeast. Would it be wrong if we use US pale malt in place of Maris Otter individually? It's not readily available to me and it's $28 at the cheapest not including shipping online.

If we want to stick to the proper grain and not go with US substitutions may I suggest using Golden Promise instead? It's the same price and it's traditionally grown in Scotland and traditionally used in Scottish ales.

Also, I did a Wee Heavy recently that started at 1.110 and finished at 1.042 before I added beano to get it down to 1.030. That was with WLP004 Irish Ale. That's only 62% attenuation before beano and 73% with. I don't know if it will be better with WLP028 but I think with that high a gravity and a goal to get to 1.025 for FG we may want to outline some really good procedures for facilitating that.

:tank:

When adding the syrup back to the kettle, is that at beginning of boil or whenever it's finished boiling down to the syrup form?
 
I have no problem with using Pale 2-Row for the base malt. I just used the MO to appease all the English Beer Fans out there that love their MO. Don't misunderstand me, I love MO too. It's just nearly 20 lbs of it, and I like buying 2-Row by the sack. I was going to write the recipe with Golden Promise, but it wasn't in my BeerSmith for some reason. (Must not've copied the malts over yet.) So, all in all, I think any of these 3 malts would be a fine base.

When adding the syrup back to the kettle, I would add it whenever it's down to an acceptable syrupy level. On my Scottish 80/-, that meant about 30 minutes of watching a kettle outside and a saucepan inside. I'd use a large soup-pot for the indoor pot next time, to give more room for boiling / reduce the chance of a sticky mess. OR have a helpful friend give you a hand at that stage. :)

Procedures will probably be good oxygenation, and a big honkin' starter. :D That sound right?

--

P-Chef, I'm not opposed to those ideas. I thought that a Scottish 10 might be more widely-brewed perhaps. I know I'm not quite to the level of being able to clone all of these fine, fine Belgian creations. I think the Westvleteren 12 is a great idea. And if I wasn't already drooling over a Scottish beer, I would say a Rochefort 10 is good too.

I just gotta convince myself to like Tripels more. I like Dubbels now, thanks to your beer. :)
 
I was also thinking we might be able to get the second runnings as a Scottish /40-. Anyone else think we should be able to do this?

:tank:
 
I would drop the crystal and drop the mash to 154 or you won't get down to where you want to get. My Wee heavy in my pulldown goes from 1.081-1.020, so going from 1.100-1.020 is going to be a problem for the yeast and the style. I would not want it dry(1.020 isn't dry but it should be really malty)
 
I would drop the crystal and drop the mash to 154 or you won't get down to where you want to get. My Wee heavy in my pulldown goes from 1.081-1.020, so going from 1.100-1.020 is going to be a problem for the yeast and the style. I would not want it dry(1.020 isn't dry but it should be really malty)

I agree. I mashed at 156-157 and I think that may have also contributed to my high FG before beano.

:tank:
 
Cool. I edited the mash temp in the OP. I haven't edited the crystal yet but I'll try to edit + repost the BeerSmith file in a moment here.. I only did the 4 oz of it for color. I guess we'll get that from caramelizing the first runnings though, won't we?
 
+1 on leaving the crystal in.
It's an easy way to get colour and a little maltyness with out having to mash too high.

Can I suggest the 55/60 is a really balanced crystal.

I will probably partake in the brew session.
 
I can't seem to find the 55/60 anywhere. Is that another name for CaraMunich II? Seperate product?

Maybe by 10/10/10 I can get SWMBO to agree to a vacation over there, Orfy! I could be the next "HBT Mule". :)
 
+1 on leaving the crystal in.
It's an easy way to get colour and a little maltyness with out having to mash too high.

Can I suggest the 55/60 is a really balanced crystal.

I will probably partake in the brew session.

This is too bad we can't swap, then compare with and without the crystal

I can't seem to find the 55/60 anywhere. Is that another name for CaraMunich II? Seperate product?

QUOTE]

Look for 49-64L
 
If you'd like to brew early, jim, we could do a pre-swap! Like I mentioned in the OP, I plan to brew two batches, one '08 and one '09, and send a couple bottles of each once we get to swapping them in 2010.

I'd be surprised if only 4 oz of crystal made a hugely noticable difference. Subtle, perhaps. But it's a very, very small proportion of the bill. I would think it'd come out about the same, whether you used 10L or 120L. (Actually, according to BeerSmith, 120L adds about 1 SRM, and removing the malt altogether removes about 1 SRM. No crystal = 16.5 SRM, 120L Crystal = 18.5 SRM.) After all, our caramelization of first runnings is what helps to make this truly "interesting", taste wise, right?

Subbing for 4oz of Victory or 4oz of Rauchmalt/Smoked Malt could be very interesting, too. Or even 4oz of Chocolate malt, it would take us to 22 SRM but within style guidelines. (But the caramelized runnings might put it out of style.)

Looks like it's easiest found by "Muntons' Crystal Malt". Weird that it's a range. Any explanation for what this is / why it's different? Just curious. :)
 
I know I'm not a supporter (yet, I do have a much overtime check coming, part of which is already set aside for a lifetime membership), but I am all about a wee heavy. This month's BYO has a lot of great info on scottish ales. One of the big reccs is to ferment low, 60-65 tops. Once I get home and can look through it I'll post what the folks have to say about crystals and chocolate malts. Also, I do recall MO being the brewers choice of base.
 
I picked 65*F for the ferment temp because White Labs notes on their webpage that Edinburgh Ale doesn't like dropping below 62* and we want to help everyone participating to avoid a stuck ferment. I will probably go 63*F myself, but I plan to oxygenate, use yeast nutrient, pitch a 2L starter, etc etc etc.
 
Since we're discussing a double-brew of the recipe (one in 08 and one in 09), why not brew each year with a different yeast (WLP028 in 08 and WLP004 in 09)?

That would make for an interesting comparison of the yeast impact on the brew when we open in '10. Or am I making this too complicated?
 
OK, nothing specifically mentioning certain malts, although in the 8 recipes, many of them favor Vienna and Munich malts pretty heavily. 20% for both is actually somewhat standard. As well as 10% crystal in most recipes and a small amount of chocolate malt in some.
 
I'd use 8oz crystal 60. But that's me. This recipe looks solid. Nice job.

Scottish ale is one of my favorites so I'll brew this one up for 10-10-09 whether we do this for 10-10-10 or not. I'll be dropping in some Lagavulin 16 when I do mine. Yum! :D
 
Being that this batch could possibly be consumed in October, why not make it an oktoberfest... or is that already off the table?
 
An Oktoberfest would be "all right".... but is it really epic? I mean... the 6.6.6 brew, the Rye IPA, was apparently the bizzomb, especially a year later... Someone took a keg of it with them to the GABF gathering, and all the big HBT dawgs were raving about it. So now I want to brew the 6.6.6 when I find time. Similarly, the 8.8.8 RIS is freakin' epic. It is the epitome of a RIS, and is super delicious. The Barleywine, although too early to tell, is GUARANTEED to be epic once 9.9.9 rolls around. I strive to make 10.10.10 just as epic as the others, and while I love the idea of an Oktoberfest, I just don't see it working.

BUT.

That is why this thread is here. Give me an epic Oktoberfest recipe and I will cheerily and gladly bow before thee! (That goes for you, Brewpastor, if you're lurking out there). I tried to think of one, and the definition of the style is imposing a few limits I just can't work around. I don't know if an "Imperial Oktoberfest" would be any good, either.

Also good to note, so far it seems that most of us involved have taken great strides to make these recipes as approachable (for high-gravity brews, anyways) as possible... hence no lagering. It could be an Oktober-fast Ale... But I don't know whether that would age well, especially over 2 years. A Strong Scotch? Definitely. :)

Like I said. LOVE the inspiration, just can't figure out how to make it work. Maybe one of you have the key?
 
An Oktoberfest would be "all right".... but is it really epic? ...

Not really.

One of the things I like about these recipes is that they are beers you can't just walk into the local (insert big local grocery chain name here) and buy two or three 6'rs from different major brewers off the shelf.

These should be hard-to-nearly-impossible-to-buy beers in my opinion.
 
I want to do an Imperial Pilsner sometime... But we need to stick with ales since not everybody can lager (or wants to.. fridge space is better for kegs :drunk:).

Seems like an imperial Oktoberfest would just end up being a Doppelbock. Those are sooooo corner gas station, get-them-in-cans these days. :D
 
I, too, really want to do an Imperial Pilsner sometime. Soon, the fermentation cooler will be in construction phase, buahaha. :)
 
Thats my birthday, so I feel I should definitely be in...how bout something pretty off the wall. A brew that stays the same throughout the recipe for everyone except for the hops. There is a hop schedule, but you have to replace the hops with some other spice or whatever. After everyone has brewed it, you can reveal what you picked to brew with...Just an idea...not sure if its a good one or not. what you think?
 
Has anyone ever had an Imperial Pilsner? Sounds like too much booze and not enough body? How would you make one? If you add more base malt you're going to get into Pale Ale and IPA territory. Just adding a bunch of dextrose to a pilsner recipe sounds nasty. I haven't so I'm just wondering what it's all about.
 
I just thought I would add in a recipe too.
This is the Wee Heavy that I have on tap now and it's about to run out. She's a year old now and ab-so-effn-lutly amazing.

Bagpipper Ale
Brew Type: All Grain
Date:
Style: Scottish Wee Heavy Ale
Brewer: Part Time Brewery
Batch Size: 5.50 gal
Boil Volume: 7.00 gal
Boil Time: 60 min
Brewhouse Efficiency: 75.00 %
Equipment: Brew Pot (15 Gal) and Igloo/Gott Cooler (20 Gal)


Ingredients Amount Item Type % or IBU
13 lbs Pale Malt, Maris Otter (3.0 SRM) Grain 79.66 %
1 lbs Aromatic Malt (Briess) (20.0 SRM) Grain 6.13 %
1 lbs Caramel/Crystal Malt - 40L (40.0 SRM) Grain 6.13 %
1 lbs Special B Malt (180.0 SRM) Grain 6.13 %
3.0 oz Peat Smoked Malt (2.8 SRM) Grain 1.16 %
2.1 oz Roasted Barley (Briess) (300.0 SRM) Grain 0.80 %
1.00 oz Northern Brewer [8.00 %] (60 min) Hops 20.8 IBU
1.00 tsp Irish Moss (Boil 10.0 min) Misc
1 Pkgs Edinburgh Ale (White Labs #WLP028) [Starter 200 ml] Yeast-Ale

Beer Profile Estimated Original Gravity: 1.082 SG (1.075-1.100 SG)
Measured Original Gravity: 1.080 SG
Estimated Final Gravity: 1.021 SG (1.018-1.035 SG)
Measured Final Gravity: 1.028 SG
Estimated Color: 24.2 SRM (10.0-47.0 SRM)
Bitterness: 20.8 IBU (20.0-40.0 IBU)


Mash Profile Name: Single Infusion, Full Body Mash Tun Weight: 40.00 lb
Mash Grain Weight: 16.32 lb
Mash PH: 5.4 PH
Grain Temperature: 72.0 F
Adjust Temp for Equipment: TRUE

Name Description Step Temp Step Time
Mash In Add 18.44 qt of water at 181.3 F 154.0 F 60 min
Mash Out Add 8.32 qt of water at 211.2 F 168.0 F 10 min
Sparge Water: 2.52 gal
Sparge Temperature: 168.0 F
 
Has anyone ever had an Imperial Pilsner? Sounds like too much booze and not enough body? How would you make one? If you add more base malt you're going to get into Pale Ale and IPA territory. Just adding a bunch of dextrose to a pilsner recipe sounds nasty. I haven't so I'm just wondering what it's all about.

I had an imperial pilsner about 2 years ago, and no joke, it tasted like a 40.
 
I kinda feel that these are brews that should take time to create a recipe, and time to age. That being said do we really need to start thinking about something 2 year down the road, soon we will be working on something for 2020 and so on. I am just thinking here that we are getting WAY ahead of ourselves.:confused: How about a poll or something to see what everyone wants, then working from there. I seem to remember that the RIS was started that way.

jay8s
 
Chriso said:
But I would like to brew one on 10-10-08 and 10-10-09, so that is why I am starting this thread so early.

That's why I want to get this rolling. I mean, if we decide not to do it yet, fine. I'll brew the Strong Scotch anyways in October, I've been meaning to brew one.

Just trying to get some discussion going. *shrug*

I mean, I guess the real question is, why are we doing these Anniversary Brews in the first place?

How about a poll or something to see what everyone wants, then working from there. I seem to remember that the RIS was started that way.
Actually, that was the 07-07-07 Brew. And it had numerous, numerous polls. And in fact, STILL takes a great deal of reading to figure out which recipe was, or wasn't, the real one. The 08-08-08 brew pretty much started by saying, "BrewPastor, grant us a recipe with 8's in it", and he did, and it was wonderful. That kind of "take charge"-ness was, in my opinion, one of the things that really caused the RIS Swap to take off. It is my perception that the '07 beers never really got shared, except between a few dedicated HBTers who took their bottles with them to a gathering. (GABF?)

The only poll that took place with the 08 RIS, to my recollection, was whether to Brew or Drink on 8/8/08. Most brewers voted Drink.
 
I think a scotch ale is perfect, and I'll let you guys work out the recipe, but I am so in on this one.

I think a dubbel or tripel would make a good choice for these brews in the future. Just throwing that out there.
 
Actually, that was the 07-07-07 Brew. And it had numerous, numerous polls. And in fact, STILL takes a great deal of reading to figure out which recipe was, or wasn't, the real one. The 08-08-08 brew pretty much started by saying, "BrewPastor, grant us a recipe with 8's in it", and he did, and it was wonderful. That kind of "take charge"-ness was, in my opinion, one of the things that really caused the RIS Swap to take off. It is my perception that the '07 beers never really got shared, except between a few dedicated HBTers who took their bottles with them to a gathering. (GABF?)

The only poll that took place with the 08 RIS, to my recollection, was whether to Brew or Drink on 8/8/08. Most brewers voted Drink.

I agree 110% I was participating in the original 07/07/07 thread, and while I was initially very excited, it quickly degenerated into chaos. I think someone even made the point that it was an example of why democracy just doesn't work!
I'd be happy to work off of a single base recipe. Those who prefer to alter a single component should feel free to do so; this will make sharing and comparing more interesting. However, once a standard recipe is decided upon, I would humbly suggest that participants should limit themselves to modifying only one variable. otherwise there is no cohesiveness.
 
Back
Top