Mr Beer - Read all about it and ask questions

That's a great idea! I actually just tried this - unfortunately, I have an odd-brand cooler and the shape of the molding inside makes the LBK unstable, so I can't use this tip.



However, carefully moving the LBK around, I did get to sit it on a table and look at the trub. I thought it would be a solid layer, but it looks like it has some thin spots in the middle. Maybe I am seeing pics of older trub, and mine will look like that in 2 more weeks as more stuff falls out of suspension.

Is you beer see through? If you hold a light up behind it does it appear clear?

It's not that clear, no. I know that fermentation doesn't end just because the krausen falls, so it's still working, just on the tail end of fermentation.

As I said before, I have read the thread and have listened. This beer will sit on the yeast for a total of three weeks (13 days left!) then spend 5 weeks total for carb/conditioning at 70-75 degrees. Only then will a put one in the fridge and let it sit for another week (!!!) before trying it.

I have made out a "schedule" already and see that my third batch of brew will be going before I ever drink any of my first. But, the wait is getting easier already. Kinda.

You will possibly be happier if you put the entire LBK in the fridge for a few days, then bottle condition at 72 for three weeks. It will cause particles and a significant amount of yeast to drop out of suspension. You'll likely find that the bottles won't have nearly as much foam appear as you are bottling from the spout on the LBK, and your beer will be much clearer. There will also be less sediment in each bottle, since the cold crash dropped a large amount before you bottled.

Also, I would highly suggest carbonation drops in lieu of measuring sugar for each bottle.

Interesting. If I have the room, I will think about cold-crashing it. Interestingly enough, the kit I just picked up from Craigslist had two bags of carb-drops in it, I was definitely going to use these this batch, just to see.

:fro:

Carbonation drops - are they better than corn sugar? I am slowly moving my way up to 5 gallon batches (so close to start!), but have a LBK ready to be bottled on Tuesday. I have a bottling bucket, the corn sugar (Dextrose) and my tubing and all that. I am using 16oz glass bottles (have my capper and caps!), so I think I'm ready. I was going to make a syrup with water and the sugar (~.22 cups) by boiling it, adding it to the bucket after it cools a little, then slowly mixing the beer into the bucket (no splashing!) and a slight stir. Then, into the bottles.

I know the drops would be easier, but would they be better/worse/the same as using corn sugar? Or is that one of those personal preference, start a 200 page argument and get banned from HBT forums for life kind of questions?

If you have a bottling bucket, then use the dextrose solution for priming. I suggest the drops for the Mr. Beer method because measuring sugar for each bottle is both tedious and inconsistent. The Mr. Beer method doesn't use a bottling bucket, and I assume he's following that method using that equipment.

I actually have another of the LBKs I was going to rack the beer into for priming, but I thought "since I have these drops, might as well use them!"

The drops work OK but I prefer the bottling bucket and DME made into a syrup and mixed in. I think it makes it a better finished product than beer primed with table sugar and even a bit better than with corn sugar.

Kirkwooder said:

The drops work OK but I prefer the bottling bucket and DME made into a syrup and mixed in. I think it makes it a better finished product than beer primed with table sugar and even a bit better than with corn sugar.

Click to expand...

DME is not fully fermentable (as is corn sugar). Dextrose really is the best priming sugar. It's affect on alcohol content and flavor is negligible due to it being such a small percentage of the finished product and due to it being fully fermentable. I have used DME and have no complaints with the exception of it taking longer to fully carbonate.

uatuba said:

DME is not fully fermentable (as is corn sugar). Dextrose really is the best priming sugar. It's affect on alcohol content and flavor is negligible due to it being such a small percentage of the finished product and due to it being fully fermentable. I have used DME and have no complaints with the exception of it taking longer to fully carbonate.

Click to expand...

I find that the DME produces a finer carbonation bubble in the finished beer that helps with head retention and aroma, as well as a better mouth feel.

"to each his own."

I finally got brewing tonight w/Mr beer. The can said best by August 2014! I boiled 1 gal water, added HME, and 1 gallon of cold water. I rehydrated a packet of S -04 @100 F. Used the cold water and an ice bath to get down to 80 F. Added yeast since it was about to foam out of a measuring cup. I threw the LBK in the fridge just till it came on down to 70 F. Gonna move to a dark corner as soon as it cools down.

Kirkwooder said:

I find that the DME produces a finer carbonation bubble in the finished beer that helps with head retention and aroma, as well as a better mouth feel.



"to each his own."

Click to expand...

Well it doesn't have any affect on the size of the carbonation bubble (?) so there's that. There may be a slight impact on head retention, mouthfeel, and aroma, but it's imperceptible to human senses.

uatuba said:

Well it doesn't have any affect on the size of the carbonation bubble (?) so there's that. There may be a slight impact on head retention, mouthfeel, and aroma, but it's imperceptible to human senses.

Click to expand...

Like I said "To each his own". You can believe what ever you wish, it truly makes no difference to me.

Kirkwooder said:

Like I said "To each his own". You can believe what ever you wish, it truly makes no difference to me.

Click to expand...

Well there is belief and there is fact. I don't quibble over belief, unless it contradicts demonstrable fact.

I couldn't agree more!

uatuba said:

Well it doesn't have any affect on the size of the carbonation bubble (?) so there's that. There may be a slight impact on head retention, mouthfeel, and aroma, but it's imperceptible to human senses.

Click to expand...

Just curious if you have anything to back thee claims up? Is there no such thing as "finer" carbonation? Why does champagne seem different than soda or beer? Just the amount of carbonation?

How do you know it's imperceptible?

Just asking questions.

If you are finding that your foam contains large bubbles, set a few bottles aside in a cool dark place for about a month. Polyphenols and other suspended particles in your beer will settle out and the foam will become much finer. The suspended particulate matter in beer creates nucleation sites for the entrained CO2 to form around, creating larger bubbles rising to the surface. When these materials settle out, the CO2 comes out in smaller, more distinct bubbles.

slym2none said:

Yeah, I wish the MB kit had told me to cool the wort first. That's one thing I'd think they would want to tell us! ...





I used two 1-gallon jugs of spring water & didn't open them until necessary, I hope that is "clean" enough (at this point) for my beer but I will remember to pre-boil them, sanitize the jugs it came in, and let them cool off before using for my next batch. ...

Click to expand...

As far as temps go, I'm always surprised many beginner instructions don't emphasize good temps. Pitching yeast too hot is never good, and I'm amazed they don't emphasize proper temps during fermentations. Keeping fermentation temps in the proper range for the yeast you are using can make a world of difference.

As far as your top-off water goes, I personally don't see much benefit in boiling if using an unopened jug of spring water or something like that. I clean that outside of the jug a with sanitizing solution, but boiling probably isn't necessary. If you are using your tap water, that would be different, and I might be more inclined to boil then cool before using. But with store bought, unopened water, boiling might be overkill. I've never done it and never had an infection (not to say it's not in the realm of possibility).


Sent from my iPhone using Home Brew

ericbw said:

Just curious if you have anything to back thee claims up? Is there no such thing as "finer" carbonation? Why does champagne seem different than soda or beer? Just the amount of carbonation?

How do you know it's imperceptible?

Just asking questions.

Click to expand...

Because no one can tell the difference between beer that is force carbed and beer that is bottle conditioned, much less the difference between two bottle conditioned beers using different priming sugars...that's how I know it's imperceptible.

I would suggest splitting one of your beers into two batches and prime one half with table sugar and the other with DME. Let them carb up and then try them. See if you can tell the difference. I have done this many times, and had several different people taste the two beers and almost all have noticed the difference.
This is just my experience and may differ from others, so give it a try yourself and see.

Kirkwooder said:

I would suggest splitting one of your beers into two batches and prime one half with table sugar and the other with DME. Let them carb up and then try them. See if you can tell the difference. I have done this many times, and had several different people taste the two beers and almost all have noticed the difference.
This is just my experience and may differ from others, so give it a try yourself and see.

Click to expand...

Last batch, I did half with table sugar and the other half with carbonation drops. I did notice a difference, but I attribute it to me expecting and wanting to taste a difference. Was it there? I really don't know.

I'd love to see someone do a blind taste test to find out. Someone that can do a consistent batch that tastes good and is a reliable test. I'd love to see an article on HBT about that...

BrewinBromanite said:

As far as temps go, I'm always surprised many beginner instructions don't emphasize good temps. Pitching yeast too hot is never good, and I'm amazed they don't emphasize proper temps during fermentations. Keeping fermentation temps in the proper range for the yeast you are using can make a world of difference.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I had a huge head of krausen 12 hours later, it settled down to less than an inch for the next 6 days, and by day 8, gone. Nothing on top of the beer, and it doesn't seem as cloudy. I just hope I didn't get any off-flavours.

10 days to go before bottling! I will make sure to take a small taste then.

Kealia said:

And I agree with most of what you said.
Here's my thought: Let's use cane sugar and honey for comparison. Cane is 100% fermentable and will produce CO2 leaving nothing behind (except alcohol of course!). Let's call honey 80% fermentable and agree that it will leave behind either more complex sugars that the yeast can't eat or "the rest of the honey that isn't sugar). How does that affect the CO2 that is produced? How can a CO2 molecule/bubble be a different size based on what creates it?

I won't argue that the same level of CO2 can feel different in different beers (a thinner beer versus a heavier beer) but I'm not buying into the 'different bubbles" until somebody can explain that to me.

At that point, I will gladly remove foot from mouth

Click to expand...

Oh, I like this guy... PAGE 351!!!

:rockin:

uatuba said:

Because no one can tell the difference between beer that is force carbed and beer that is bottle conditioned, much less the difference between two bottle conditioned beers using different priming sugars...that's how I know it's imperceptible.

Click to expand...

I believe that you can't tell the difference, and even that you don't know anyone that can. But saying "no one can tell" isn't backing up your claim. You're just restating the two things you already said.

I was curious if you had anything to back it up, or if it's like, just your opinion, man.

There are people who claim there's a difference in force carb vs natural carb. I also heard an interesting podcast about soda that's carbed with dry ice, supposedly giving it a different quality.

slym2none said:

Oh, I like this guy... PAGE 351!!!



:rockin:

Click to expand...

Verify his claim that honey is 20% less fermentable than sugar. I'm not sure about that.

However, DME does have "stuff" in it that doesn't ferment. And you use more DME to prime than you would sugar. So maybe he's on to something. Even though he has nothing to refute the smaller bubbles theory.

I have several recipes that I prime with honey. It struck me a while back that the bottles which were honey primed seemed to have a more lasting, finer bubbled head. So I took a 5-gallon batch of my Scotch Ale and split it to bottle half with table sugar and half with honey. I took a sample of the honey I was using (clover honey) and diluted a small sample by weight to check the sugar content. It worked out to be about 86% sugars versus the table sugar.

So I primed accordingly.

Observations: The honey took longer to carbonate the beer. By the time the honey had fully carbonated, there was no discernible difference between the batches. [note: SWMBO poured blind, not knowing which was which and served them to me also blind. The only indicator was the color of the bottle cap which she revealed to me after I had made my observations.] This lead me back to my records which also indicated that those beers that I carbonated with honey did take on the average 7 to 9 days longer to carbonate at room temperature (mid-60's).

One data point only but pretty convincing for me considering I had a preconceived idea that the honey primed would give me a different result.

ericbw said:

I believe that you can't tell the difference, and even that you don't know anyone that can. But saying "no one can tell" isn't backing up your claim. You're just restating the two things you already said.

I was curious if you had anything to back it up, or if it's like, just your opinion, man.

There are people who claim there's a difference in force carb vs natural carb. I also heard an interesting podcast about soda that's carbed with dry ice, supposedly giving it a different quality.

Click to expand...

There's no scientific reason why it would be different, period. I can assure you that there isn't a person alive, save for some sensory savant, that can tell the difference with any more reliability than random guessing. I'm not doing your research for you.

uatuba said:

There's no scientific reason why it would be different, period. I can assure you that there isn't a person alive, save for some sensory savant, that can tell the difference with any more reliability than random guessing. I'm not doing your research for you.

Click to expand...

Ok, but what's the basis for saying there's no scientific reason? How do you know that?

uatuba said:

There's no scientific reason why it would be different, period. I can assure you that there isn't a person alive, save for some sensory savant, that can tell the difference with any more reliability than random guessing. I'm not doing your research for you.

Click to expand...

Just what super power did the good Lord bless you with that gives you the ability to tell what every person on the planet can and cannot taste?

Kirkwooder said:

Just what super power did the good Lord bless you with that gives you the ability to tell what every person on the planet can and cannot taste?

Click to expand...

It's called common effing sense. Do you want to accept a challenge? I'll be glad to send you three bottles of beer carbed with three different methods. If you can identify them, I will do a second batch. If you can identify the methods of carbonation for those, I'll buy you a brew kettle.

If you can't...and you can't...you'll admit you're full of it and never spout this BS again.

uatuba said:

It's called common effing sense. Do you want to accept a challenge? I'll be glad to send you three bottles of beer carbed with three different methods. If you can identify them, I will do a second batch. If you can identify the methods of carbonation for those, I'll buy you a brew kettle.

If you can't...and you can't...you'll admit you're full of it and never spout this BS again.

Click to expand...

I have done this several times. I don't need to do your challenge.

And as for spouting, I'm not the one who's claiming to have super powers. You are being a D bag, and I called you out on it. Disagree with me if you want, but to claim that you know that I, or anyone else for that matter, can't tell the difference is a CROCK! How do you know what I can or can not do?

I know of at least one reference in a published book that agrees with me. Do you have any thing other than your own "cause I say so" attitude that supports your position?

Kirkwooder said:

I have done this several times. I don't need to do your challenge.



And as for spouting, I'm not the one who's claiming to have super powers. You are being a D bag, and I called you out on it. Disagree with me if you want, but to claim that you know that I, or anyone else for that matter, can't tell the difference is a CROCK! How do you know what I can or can not do?



I know of at least one reference in a published book that agrees with me. Do you have any thing other than your own "cause I say so" attitude that supports your position?

Click to expand...

The "D bag" thing to do is to claim something that isn't true. I've offered to let you prove that you can tell a difference. I've offered you 6 free beers and a mea culpa in the form of a $250 brew pot if you prove me wrong, with only the request that you admit I'm right in the event you can't. You won't accept, because you know the result.

All of the reference materials I've been able to find claim that there is ZERO difference in terms of final product that is determined by carbonation method.

Hey,

Ive brewed 3 batches of Mr Beer and they all have the same underlying taste. Its a bready sort of taste. I cant really pin point it but its the same through all batches.

The one thing I know I messed up on in all 3 batches was pitching the yeast practically rigth after taking it off the flame. I mixed it with about a gallon and a half of cold water, but it was probably in the 90s when I pitched their dry packet yeast.

Is this the cause of the same consistent weird taste, or is it the type of yeast theyre giving me?

Has anyone else had a consistent flavor through all their mr beer batches?

Thanks
Vinny

ericbw said:

or if it's like, just your opinion, man.

Click to expand...

:d :d

V1nny said:

Hey,

Ive brewed 3 batches of Mr Beer and they all have the same underlying taste. Its a bready sort of taste. I cant really pin point it but its the same through all batches.

The one thing I know I messed up on in all 3 batches was pitching the yeast practically rigth after taking it off the flame. I mixed it with about a gallon and a half of cold water, but it was probably in the 90s when I pitched their dry packet yeast.

Is this the cause of the same consistent weird taste, or is it the type of yeast theyre giving me?

Has anyone else had a consistent flavor through all their mr beer batches?

Thanks
Vinny

Click to expand...

That could be a reason. But how long was it fermenting and then conditioning before you tasted it?

The most basic advice on Mr. Beer is to give it more time in the fermenter. That's the single best improvement to Mr. Beer, and it's free! 3 weeks in the fermenter, 2 weeks in the bottle, 1 week in the fridge is a good schedule.

Secondly, most people will say to change the yeast. Get a pack of US-05 if you can. Coopers is also decent, and inexpensive. Avoid Munton's, though.

You should see improvements from those two things.

uatuba said:

It's called common effing sense. Do you want to accept a challenge? I'll be glad to send you three bottles of beer carbed with three different methods. If you can identify them, I will do a second batch. If you can identify the methods of carbonation for those, I'll buy you a brew kettle.

If you can't...and you can't...you'll admit you're full of it and never spout this BS again.

Click to expand...

See, you're being asked why you said something. What reference you have to support something you said was "scientific." Instead, you cite "common sense," which is the opposite of scientific.

Common sense can be correct, and it can be proven scientifically, but it's not scientific.

Then you said you won't do the research for someone else.

Then you suggested that others do the research for you (disguised as a bet).

Again, you might be correct in what you're saying. But the conversation has changed from the original question. The question I was originally asking was how you came to such a strong conclusion. Your only answer is common sense.

If you had already done this experiment, then say so. That's a basis for your comment and an answer to the question I asked you.

ericbw said:

See, you're being asked why you said something. What reference you have to support something you said was "scientific." Instead, you cite "common sense," which is the opposite of scientific.

Common sense can be correct, and it can be proven scientifically, but it's not scientific.

Then you said you won't do the research for someone else.

Then you suggested that others do the research for you (disguised as a bet).

Again, you might be correct in what you're saying. But the conversation has changed from the original question. The question I was originally asking was how you came to such a strong conclusion. Your only answer is common sense.

If you had already done this experiment, then say so. That's a basis for your comment and an answer to the question I asked you.

Click to expand...

Everything I have said is consistent.

1) There is no scientific reason that the size of the carbonation bubble would be any different based on carbonation method.

2) The very slight differences that do occur as a result of carbonation methods are imperceptible to the masters as evidenced by;

3) the fact that their written resources state as much. You can look these up yourself.

4) It is therefore common sense to understand that if the masters cannot discern a difference, then neither can someone positing on a website in the Mr. Beer forum.

5) However, I stated a willingness to allow demonstrable proof that I'm wrong...that somehow, there is a sensory savant who can tell the difference between types of gasoline by smell alone.

I am not the person who is claiming something that flies in the face of the knowledge available, and even when I've offered to allow him to prove me wrong, he simply says he's done his own tests and can tell the difference. I'm saying that the Pygmalion Effect is in play which, given all of the evidence available, makes the most sense.

I know that some people really WANT to believe that using different carbonation methods make a noticeable difference. I did at one time, too. I finally started looking into it, which is what everyone who has a question should be doing, and I found it pretty overwhelming that it really just doesn't matter.

uatuba said:

Everything I have said is consistent.

1) There is no scientific reason that the size of the carbonation bubble would be any different based on carbonation method.

2) The very slight differences that do occur as a result of carbonation methods are imperceptible to the masters as evidenced by;

3) the fact that their written resources state as much. You can look these up yourself.

4) It is therefore common sense to understand that if the masters cannot discern a difference, then neither can someone positing on a website in the Mr. Beer forum.

5) However, I stated a willingness to allow demonstrable proof that I'm wrong...that somehow, there is a sensory savant who can tell the difference between types of gasoline by smell alone.

I am not the person who is claiming something that flies in the face of the knowledge available, and even when I've offered to allow him to prove me wrong, he simply says he's done his own tests and can tell the difference. I'm saying that the Pygmalion Effect is in play which, given all of the evidence available, makes the most sense.

I know that some people really WANT to believe that using different carbonation methods make a noticeable difference. I did at one time, too. I finally started looking into it, which is what everyone who has a question should be doing, and I found it pretty overwhelming that it really just doesn't matter.

Click to expand...

I am telling you that I believe I can tell the difference. I also believe that every new brewer should try several methods of priming for themselves, to see for themselves, if , in fact they can tell a difference.

If you don't believe me that is your right, but you don't need to to prove how much of a ****** bag you can be about it. Simply state your disagreement politely and move on! No need to further ad to the proof.

Now, can we please get back to Mr. Beer related conversation!

ericbw said:

That could be a reason. But how long was it fermenting and then conditioning before you tasted it?

The most basic advice on Mr. Beer is to give it more time in the fermenter. That's the single best improvement to Mr. Beer, and it's free! 3 weeks in the fermenter, 2 weeks in the bottle, 1 week in the fridge is a good schedule.

Secondly, most people will say to change the yeast. Get a pack of US-05 if you can. Coopers is also decent, and inexpensive. Avoid Munton's, though.

You should see improvements from those two things.

Click to expand...

Ok thanks.

I normally did 2 weeks in fermenter then 3 in the bottle. I'll switch those around with this recent batch. Also I'll pick up some of that yeast you recommended from my LHBS.

Would it be ok to put the LBK in a swamp cooler? Right now it's in a cooler that stays at 70 f.