Quick easy first wort hopping question

I just spent 30 minutes reading about this technique because I'm going to use it in a Brown Ale I am making this weekend.

I will be FWH with an ounce of Northern Brewer. The answer I've been searching for is:

Do I leave that 1 ounce of Northern Brewer in the kettle for the boil also, or do I pull it out after I'm done sparging???

Simple question but I couldn't find a for sure answer as far as what most people do. Thanks.

FWH always stays for the duration of the boil, its just getting some of the flavors of the hops before hit hits the boil point and starts the AA extraction.

the only difference between FWH and "full boil" hops are that you wait til the boil starts on the "full boil" hops before adding it.

But don't some people only use low AA hops for FWH. Those wouldn't be your "full boil" hops necessarily. Right?

So in Beersmith, do I keep it set at a 60 min bittering addition and then just add the same amount of hops as a First Wort Hop? And if so, what length of time do I set the FWH for in Beersmith.

Thanks.

I think fwh is like +10% utilization, but yes you can put a fwh and a full boil hops, and make sure you see what the resultant IBU ends up at, or you'll get a much higher IBU than expected
(just don't count them as the same, if you put in 1oz fuggles fwh, and 1 oz fuggles beginning of boil, you should have 2 oz during the entire boil at a minimum w/o any later boil additions, which you're welcome to do too) Hops utilization is calculated on AA and duration of boil, the software knows how to adjust accordingly.

This quote from Palmer pretty much answers the question:

Only low alpha finishing hops should be used for FWH, and the amount should be no less than 30% of the total amount of hops used in the boil. This FWH addition therefore should be taken from the hops intended for finishing additions. Because more hops are in the wort longer during the boil, the total bitterness of the beer in increased but not by a substantial amount due to being low in alpha acid. In fact, one study among professional brewers determined that the use of FWH resulted in a more refined hop aroma, a more uniform bitterness (i.e. no harsh tones), and a more harmonious beer overall compared to an identical beer produced without FWH.

But don't some of you use high alpha hops with good results???

I've used high AA hops w./ good results yes, in fact, I just replace it w/ my full boil hops... i.e. it is both... I think the idea there is to add a bit more of what's mentioned w/ a light hops for flavor, instead of adding the AA, but you can use High AA to add nice aroma AND high ibu utilization.

I love it w my IPA, CTZ FWH and then later addition simcoe for 30, 15 and 5 min intervals.

Lodovico said:

This quote from Palmer pretty much answers the question:

Only low alpha finishing hops should be used for FWH, and the amount should be no less than 30% of the total amount of hops used in the boil. This FWH addition therefore should be taken from the hops intended for finishing additions. Because more hops are in the wort longer during the boil, the total bitterness of the beer in increased but not by a substantial amount due to being low in alpha acid. In fact, one study among professional brewers determined that the use of FWH resulted in a more refined hop aroma, a more uniform bitterness (i.e. no harsh tones), and a more harmonious beer overall compared to an identical beer produced without FWH.

But don't some of you use high alpha hops with good results???

Click to expand...

Palmer's book is a guide not a law book.
Do 8% AA Cascades count as a low AA hop?

babalu87 said:

Palmer's book is a guide not a law book.
Do 8% AA Cascades count as a low AA hop?

Click to expand...

+1
Simcoe,Zeus must also be low AA hops

I use both high and low AA hops in FWH. It absolutely depends on what you feel like bringing forward in your beer.

Also, not to start a war, but there are two FWH camps. One says you get +10% utilization, the other camps says -40% utilization, (which equates to about a 20 min addition).

I was firmly in the first camp, until I made a few FWH beers. Now I have beersmith set up to calculate my FWH adds at -40% utilization, as I've found that, for some reason that clashes with my scientific mind, for ME, FWH adds less bitterness, but a more subtle bitterness.

Again, I think in the end, it's up to you...I'm just saying I've been let down by the perceived bitterness levels of my beers when FWH-ing and calculating at +10%, but I've been very happy calculating them at -40%.

Well, my IPA is pretty dang hoppy w/ the high AA CTZ, and then the later simcoe additions... so not sure, but I think I'd fit in the +10% still, just more complex flavors imho I've done it quite a bit... but now you've got me thinking I should pay more attention and try something w/o it and see what I think.

shortyjacobs said:

I use both high and low AA hops in FWH. It absolutely depends on what you feel like bringing forward in your beer.

Also, not to start a war, but there are two FWH camps. One says you get +10% utilization, the other camps says -40% utilization, (which equates to about a 20 min addition).

I was firmly in the first camp, until I made a few FWH beers. Now I have beersmith set up to calculate my FWH adds at -40% utilization, as I've found that, for some reason that clashes with my scientific mind, for ME, FWH adds less bitterness, but a more subtle bitterness.

Again, I think in the end, it's up to you...I'm just saying I've been let down by the perceived bitterness levels of my beers when FWH-ing and calculating at +10%, but I've been very happy calculating them at -40%.

Click to expand...

Actually three camps

Denny suggested -65% and that seems right to me

babalu87 said:

Actually three camps

Denny suggested -65% and that seems right to me

Click to expand...

+1
works for me just fine.

It's really impossible to apply numbers to the bitterness supplied by FWH, as the issue is clouded by perception. FWH imparts a smoother perceived bitterness than straight "bittering" additions. Thus, 40 IBU from FWH might be perceived as less bitter than 40 IBU from a traditional, 60-minute addition. If you've worked out the difference numerically - as several posters have noted - it might be a good idea to adjust your software to take that into consideration. But that takes quite a bit of empirical observation to arrive at an appropriate number.

Scientific analysis of FWH beers, where bitterness is actually measured by instrumentation, shows that IBUs drop by approximately 10% when FWH is used in lieu of a bittering addition. Keep in mind that number is relative, as noted above.

Moreover, as I pointed out in your other FWH thread, straight alpha-acid numbers don't matter a damn. The reason Palmer mentions low-alpha hops are preferred for FWH is that most high-alpha hops have coarser flavor and aroma characteristics relative to traditional, low-alpha flavor varieties.

In fact, all these numbers are relative. The only true proof is in the finished beer.

Bob

Bob said:

It's really impossible to apply numbers to the bitterness supplied by FWH, as the issue is clouded by perception. FWH imparts a smoother perceived bitterness than straight "bittering" additions. Thus, 40 IBU from FWH might be perceived as less bitter than 40 IBU from a traditional, 60-minute addition. If you've worked out the difference numerically - as several posters have noted - it might be a good idea to adjust your software to take that into consideration. But that takes quite a bit of empirical observation to arrive at an appropriate number.

Scientific analysis of FWH beers, where bitterness is actually measured by instrumentation, shows that IBUs drop by approximately 10% when FWH is used in lieu of a bittering addition. Keep in mind that number is relative, as noted above.

Moreover, as I pointed out in your other FWH thread, straight alpha-acid numbers don't matter a damn. The reason Palmer mentions low-alpha hops are preferred for FWH is that most high-alpha hops have coarser flavor and aroma characteristics relative to traditional, low-alpha flavor varieties.

In fact, all these numbers are relative. The only true proof is in the finished beer.

Bob

Click to expand...

So if the alpha-acid numbers don't matter a damn, how does one decide the amount of hops to use for a FWH?? I guess that's what I'm not getting.

I guess it's just experimentation to see what you like in the finished beer?

Perceived bitterness is the only one that matters.

Last I knew humans tasted the beer

Lodovico said:

So if the alpha-acid numbers don't matter a damn, how does one decide the amount of hops to use for a FWH?? I guess that's what I'm not getting.

I guess it's just experimentation to see what you like in the finished beer?

Click to expand...

Yes, I think that's what we've learned.

In my case, my personal experience seems to contradict some of the other brewers. I think that I get plenty of bittering, probably like FWH +/-10 IBUs of a 60 minute boil. So, some of us say that they figure FWH -40, FWH +10, etc. But I don't know if I've ever seen or heard of any definitive research on this.

I can just say that in my experience, I often replace the 60 minute addition with FWH (not the 20 minute addition) and my beers seem to have more than enough bitterness. However, it's a smoother bitterness not harsh. I've used mostly high/medium AAUs since I make mostly IPAs and APAs. I've used warrior at 15%, simcoe at 13%, cascade at 8%, etc.

I'd love to see a side-by-side testing done. Maybe that would be a job for Basic Brewing Radio/BYO?

I respect all of the experts who have chimed in on this- so I'm not one to disagree with the venerable Denny Conn. But my unrefined palate tells me that the FWH does provide more bitterness than -65%, at least to me.

Lodovico said:

So if the alpha-acid numbers don't matter a damn, how does one decide the amount of hops to use for a FWH?? I guess that's what I'm not getting.

Click to expand...

Let me be more clear. The alpha-acid numbers don't matter a damn relative to Palmer's statement that only low-alpha hops are suitable for the FWH procedure. What matters is whether or not you find pleasant the flavor and aroma characteristics of the variety you intend to use for FWH. If that variety is SupaBittah at 16.8%AA, great. If it's SupaNoble at 2.4% you prefer, also great.

Having established that, the calculation to estimate the resultant alpha acids dissolved in the wort from the FWH addition is straightforward. Grams per liter is neither relative nor a matter of perception.

FWH is more art than science, however. You may find that using enough FWH hops to net the desired bitterness provides excessive flavor; that's not something science can predict. That's something only empirical observation can determine. You may find, for example, that FWH with Cascades turns your beer into an unpalatable breakfast grapefruit, but that FWH with Saaz is absolutely frickin' awesome, with the same level of measured and perceived bitterness.

See what I mean?

I agree with Yooper on Conn's numbers. I find -65% to be absolutely outside the realm of probability, unless there's some issue with both the physical dynamics of the brewing setup - i.e., utilization is off - and the palate of the taster - i.e., a palate turned to tin; after being assaulted with so many IBUs over the years, it's no surprise that it's difficult to taste anything else. One is reminded of Dave Lister and curries. One's palate becomes attuned to what one consumes, after all.

Regards,

Bob

Bob said:

I agree with Yooper on Conn's numbers. I find -65% to be absolutely outside the realm of probability, unless there's some issue with both the physical dynamics of the brewing setup - i.e., utilization is off - and the palate of the taster - i.e., a palate turned to tin; after being assaulted with so many IBUs over the years, it's no surprise that it's difficult to taste anything else. One is reminded of Dave Lister and curries. One's palate becomes attuned to what one consumes, after all.
b

Click to expand...

Lets see here, I brew roughly 70/30 (Belgian/APA-IPA) so my tastebuds are attuned to what? lets not forget the Gueuze,Lambic,Faro and how those beers would effect the tastebuds.


I'll stick with my promash settings(-65%FWH) as the beers all taste to my humbled-assaulted palate to be correct in re: IBU.

Easy, friend. I suppose I could have made my tongue-in-cheek more obvious. My mistake.

I still maintain that -65% is inexplicable. But if that's what you get, if that's what works for you, I can't argue with it.

And I prefer this image:



More elegant, don't you think?

Bob

Hey Bob, what does a mash hopping do for a beer?

Dunno. Completely new to me.

I hear it's kind of like FWH. Other than that, color me stumped.

B

Poobah58 said:

Hey Bob, what does a mash hopping do for a beer?

Click to expand...

Waste hops

Poobah58 said:

Hey Bob, what does a mash hopping do for a beer?

Click to expand...

They say it give a smoother hop profile. However, my experience was just the opposite as I found it to be brutally bitter. I think the problem is in the timing. Someone who could go from zero to rolling boil quickly will get one result, whereas someone like me with a POS turkey injector fryer will get way too much bitterness.

Mash hopping is not very compatible with my setup.