Consecration kit from MoreBeer

TrickyDick said:

No worries! Sour beer can often ferment to near or even below 1.000. Some species of Brett are so-called "super attenuators ". Only thing to do now is wait some more. I think Vinnie Cilurzo claimed in an interview that he doesn't bottle until below 1.009.

Sounds like you probably nailed this one.

Click to expand...

But I'm at that without having pitched Brett or Roselare yet, that's what I'm worried about.

Well that might be another matter.

Rest assured, all the data out there says that the effective funky Brett contributions are independent of the gravity, and are from transformation of wort/beer constituents, many of which are created by the primary yeast that the Brett will then consume.

If you want a righteously puckering sour, consider adding second generation Roeselare yeast cake. If that isn't possible, you might need to titrate the final pH with food grade lactic acid as a final measure. Before doing this, I'd say wait at least a year to let things get right. These beers take time, so don't worry, you are on the right track.

For what it's worth, I found that my batch, still on secondary and waiting to be bottled or blended, that half of the beer that I pitched the roeselare for primary fermentation is more sour than the other half fermented in primary with wlp530. (Then got Brett and roeselare per the VC method).

TD

What are your thoughts on adding maltodextrin to provide more bug food?

Couldn't hurt, but the thought that it is going to make it better than adding any other fermentable is potentially debatable.
I confess I am not sure what metabolic pathways are used by the bacteria and potentially the brettanomyces in utilizing the maltodextrin as fuel. I don't necessarily think it would lower the pH any more than regular table sugar would. It is my understanding the lactic acid derives from glycolysis via the resulting pyruvate molecule that is then converted to lactic acid. Maltodextrin is basically a chain of glucose molecules which can vary in length, and cannot be fermented by saccharomyces. Ultimately, the chains of maltodextrin are presumably broken down into glucose then fed into the normal pathways by the bugs. For whatever reason sacch cannot do this first step. The bottom line is if you want more sour, this may not necessarily be a huge benefit over any other fermentables. I'm no biochemist however so I would defer to them.

TD

TrickyDick said:

Couldn't hurt, but the thought that it is going to make it better than adding any other fermentable is potentially debatable.
I confess I am not sure what metabolic pathways are used by the bacteria and potentially the brettanomyces in utilizing the maltodextrin as fuel. I don't necessarily think it would lower the pH any more than regular table sugar would. It is my understanding the lactic acid derives from glycolysis via the resulting pyruvate molecule that is then converted to lactic acid. Maltodextrin is basically a chain of glucose molecules which can vary in length, and cannot be fermented by saccharomyces. Ultimately, the chains of maltodextrin are presumably broken down into glucose then fed into the normal pathways by the bugs. For whatever reason sacch cannot do this first step. The bottom line is if you want more sour, this may not necessarily be a huge benefit over any other fermentables. I'm no biochemist however so I would defer to them.

TD

Click to expand...

I am not a biochemist, either, but I agree with this. I think the brett will break the maltodextrin into simple sugars, allowing the sacc to ferment them.

The best strategy for adding fermentables would probably just wait for the sacc to lose most of its viability over a few months, then add a little bit of sugar.

Personally, if the flavor wasn't what I wanted, I'd either add lactic acid or brew another beer and blend them together or both.

jahdub said:

I am not a biochemist, either, but I agree with this. I think the brett will break the maltodextrin into simple sugars, allowing the sacc to ferment them.

The best strategy for adding fermentables would probably just wait for the sacc to lose most of its viability over a few months, then add a little bit of sugar.

Personally, if the flavor wasn't what I wanted, I'd either add lactic acid or brew another beer and blend them together or both.

Click to expand...

I am technically a biochemist, but I have no idea either. That being said I would guess it depends on the enzyme(s) produced to break down the malto dextrin. If it is exogenous, then yes sach could ferment it before the bugs get to it. However maybe some of the bugs have a transport for some of the larger sacharides, in which case sach would not have acces to them becuase they are inside the brett/bacterial cells.

As I suspected, there is no black and white answer for the question posed.

In my opinion, the answer is NO. No significant benefit to the beer will result from you dumping some maltodextrin into the mix, unless the goal is to increase the ABV of the final beer.

Complexity or pH are likely not affected by adding additional fermentables. Exposure to oxygen while you add these may detract from any possible benefit.

My vote is NO. Don't mess with what you've started. Wait until your intended bottling point and then just go with what you get.

TD

it should amp up sourness as it will give the pedio something to eat.

My batch seems to be stuck at 1.010. I'm thinking about adding some more bugs. Is that reasonable? I'm thinking about doing the roeselare this time.

Concerns:
Not quite sour enough
Bottle bombs if I bottle at 1.010 FG

History:
4/16/2014 - OG 1.074 (extract kit)
4/24/2014 - 1.015 Racked on currents and pitched brett
5/19/2014 - pitched lacto
6/14/14 - 1.011
10/14/14 - 1.010
2/15/15 - 1.010

Other thoughts were just to stir the crap out of it. ? There is hardly any pellicle on top.

Any suggestions are welcome! I've been trying to be patient, but I'm just worried that i'll never be able to bottle this at such a high FG for fear of bottle bombs. Also, It's probably only a 5/10 on the sour scale and I'd like some more sourness if possible.

Atomos said:

My batch seems to be stuck at 1.010. I'm thinking about adding some more bugs. Is that reasonable? I'm thinking about doing the roeselare this time.

Concerns:
Not quite sour enough
Bottle bombs if I bottle at 1.010 FG

History:
4/16/2014 - OG 1.074 (extract kit)
4/24/2014 - 1.015 Racked on currents and pitched brett
5/19/2014 - pitched lacto
6/14/14 - 1.011
10/14/14 - 1.010
2/15/15 - 1.010

Other thoughts were just to stir the crap out of it. ? There is hardly any pellicle on top.

Any suggestions are welcome! I've been trying to be patient, but I'm just worried that i'll never be able to bottle this at such a high FG for fear of bottle bombs. Also, It's probably only a 5/10 on the sour scale and I'd like some more sourness if possible.

Click to expand...

I don't think that I would stir it.
couple of questions-
Did the currants drop yet? What is the pH if you have a way to measure? What temperature is this sitting at, and does it change at all during the winter months? Was the lacto pitch pure lacto or with pedio as well?

I suppose it is possible that if there have been dips in the temp during the winter, that the yeast and brett and lacto may have flocculated or gone dormant. If so you might rock the carboy to attempt to re-suspend whatever may have flocculated out.

Honestly it could have gone as far as it is going to go, depending on your mashing technique, etc. I haven't measured the gravity of my two carboys in a while. One was below 1.010 another was at 1.011 if memory serves. Strangely, the more sour of the two, into which i pitched roeselare blend from the beginning (the other followed the RR methods detailed in this thread) finished slightly higher than the other done as you have done.

It is possible the lack of pedio may have limited the lactic acid production and drop in gravity? not sure.

What I would do is wait the full year and try to bring temp up to 68-70 degrees if possible for the last two months of your year for this beer finish and check it again before doing anything. You didn't mention adding oak. If you are going to do that you might try doing that now for the last two months of aging. If after two more months, the gravity hasn't budged and you are concerned about bottle bombs, you have a few options: continue waiting to see if it drops further; keg and force carb; bottle and put one into a plastic PET bottle to check for carbonation then once fully carbonated put ALL bottles into fridge and keep them there until you drink them to lower risk of bottle bombs or pasteurize the bottles once carbonated; or consider that its not going to further ferment beyond the terminal gravity you are at and let it ride. I believe corked finished bottle, as long as the cage isn't too snug against the top of the cork may permit some factor of safety by permitting the cork to slide a bit with time perhaps. Some tough decisions. Hope this helps some.

TD

I don't think I'd stir it or shake it. Just let it alone. The bugs will continue to do their thing. It might be that the gravity is stuck at 1.010 and that's where it will stay. Not every sour gets down into the single digits. My experience has been that the partial mashes that I've put together to take advantage of a leftover yeast/bug cake when bottling the first AG sour never hit the same final gravity, even if fermentation takes off like crazy. I don't know if it's a characteristic of using extract or not, but that's what's happened to me. And I bottled with no ill effect. Certainly no bottle bombs. In fact, the biggest problem I've had with sours is to get them to carb as much as I would like them to when I bottle condition (even with the addition of fresh yeast at bottling, I think I tend hold back a little on the priming sugar). Anyway, there are lots of posts here from people who bottle above 1.010. I'm pretty sure that I read a post from Old Sock where he bottled a sour porter at 1.016 or something like that. As long as you have good reason to think it's done, I think you're fine.

Atomos said:

My batch seems to be stuck at 1.010. I'm thinking about adding some more bugs. Is that reasonable? I'm thinking about doing the roeselare this time.

Concerns:
Not quite sour enough
Bottle bombs if I bottle at 1.010 FG

History:
4/16/2014 - OG 1.074 (extract kit)
4/24/2014 - 1.015 Racked on currents and pitched brett
5/19/2014 - pitched lacto
6/14/14 - 1.011
10/14/14 - 1.010
2/15/15 - 1.010

Other thoughts were just to stir the crap out of it. ? There is hardly any pellicle on top.

Any suggestions are welcome! I've been trying to be patient, but I'm just worried that i'll never be able to bottle this at such a high FG for fear of bottle bombs. Also, It's probably only a 5/10 on the sour scale and I'd like some more sourness if possible.

Click to expand...

1) Did you just put lactobacillus in, or did you put in a blend containing pediococcus? Lactobacillus isn't very hop-tolerant and I believe the amount of hops the kit has you put in are enough to suppress it, largely. If you only put lactobacillus in before, definitely add some bottle dregs from an unpasteurized sour beer and/or a sour blend like Roeselare.

2) Don't worry about a pellicle. That's a sign of oxygen ingress more than anything.

This may be a touch off topic but I figured it was a decent place to ask...

I did this clone last year and will be bottling/kegging (haven't decided which yet) in a couple months. I plan to brew either another batch of this or a Tart of Darkness clone to put on top of the cake to keep the funk going. How should I go about doing this? I'm assuming I want to get the currants out of the picture..

Have a few ideas on how I could go about it without ruining anything:

-Rack the beer, dump the cake/currants, then inoculate the new batch with a half gallon or so of this batch?

-Not worry about the currants and just rack the new batch on top of the cake/currants?

-Rack this batch off, then try to separate the yeast from the currants (coffee filter maybe?)

Any other ideas? Currently have 5gal in a 6.5gal plastic big mouth bubbler (not ideal to have so much headspace I know, but seemed like my best option at the time.) I plan to make the next batch 6gal to alleviate the headspace and continue to use the same BMB so I can contaminate as little equipment as possible with funk.

i would do it with a sanitized stainless steel sieve: after the fresh wort is cooled and in your fermenter, pour the cake of the Consecration batch through the sieve on its way in. should filter out most of the currents. a coffee filter is too fine.

also, you don't need to pitch the entire cake. a quarter of it should be more than enough.

If you have a hop spider it makes a GREAT trub and currant type item sieve. Just bleach it afterwards to the world of BUGZ stays separate from the world of ordinary beer.

sweetcell said:

i would do it with a sanitized stainless steel sieve: after the fresh wort is cooled and in your fermenter, pour the cake of the Consecration batch through the sieve on its way in. should filter out most of the currents. a coffee filter is too fine.

also, you don't need to pitch the entire cake. a quarter of it should be more than enough.

Click to expand...

Problem with this approach is using a 2nd fermenter for bugged beer. Trying to find a way to avoid contaminating any other plastic. Maybe rack off, collect yeast cake in a glass vessel of some sort, clean current BMB, rack new beer in, then pour yeast cake through a sieve? Seems like a lot of ways for things to go wrong, guess infection isn't as big of an issue with a sour though...

ah, didn't realize you wanted to re-use the same vessel. in which case i would do as you described: pour (some of) the Consecration cake into a jar, put a lid on it, quickly clean and sanitize the fermenter, add clean wort then inoculate with the the cake. you could sieve the cake twice, once going into the jar and again going into the fermeter. if you filter it on the way into the jar, you'll be able to see how good a job you did and could potentially re-filter with something finer if you're concerned about the bits that made it through the sieve (although personally i wouldn't worry 'em).

sweetcell said:

ah, didn't realize you wanted to re-use the same vessel. in which case i would do as you described: pour (some of) the Consecration cake into a jar, put a lid on it, quickly clean and sanitize the fermenter, add clean wort then inoculate with the the cake. you could sieve the cake twice, once going into the jar and again going into the fermeter. if you filter it on the way into the jar, you'll be able to see how good a job you did and could potentially re-filter with something finer if you're concerned about the bits that made it through the sieve (although personally i wouldn't worry 'em).

Click to expand...

Pretty sure this is the route I'm going to take. I'm not worried about chunks, just want to make sure I get the bulk of the currants out (I think, unless someone tells me I don't need to worry about getting them out...)

ruger988 said:

Pretty sure this is the route I'm going to take. I'm not worried about chunks, just want to make sure I get the bulk of the currants out (I think, unless someone tells me I don't need to worry about getting them out...)

Click to expand...

I made a sour stout/Tart of Darkness clone that I aged on dried sour cherries. When I racked a new beer onto the yeast cake I left whatever was left of the cherries there. No negative effects that I can tell.

The currants are not going to stay in suspension for very long. I'd just add a pint or two of water, mix it up, let it sit for a few minutes, then decant and pitch that. Or do the same thing with a pint or two of beer left in the fermenter during racking.

I also brewed a ToD after bottling the Consecration. I strained most of the currants using a funnel/strainer than was on a clean growler. I say most because this was pretty messy work as the strainer kept getting clogged.

Once i got the yeast into the growler, I cleaned the carboy, put the ToD wort in there and pitched the yeast on top. It started souring very quickly compared to the Consecration, but a word of caution that it did take about 5 days for signs of fermentation to start, so be patient.

On a side note, how long is it taking for the Consecration to carbonate? I added wine yeast and priming sugar at bottling, but the carbonation is still very light after several months. I have moved the bottles from the basement to a warmer part of the house to see if that helps.

Something is not right there. Wine yeast along with priming sugar should carbonate within two weeks. Even with the low pH of a sour.

I have noticed that the sours can take 2-3 times as long to develop good carbonation compared to un-soured bottle conditioned beers. I have not added wine yeast however. Thanks for reminding me that it's part of the consecration recipe. Check the storage temps.

What wine yeast to use? Some wine yeasts can kill other yeasts. Think I'd want to avoid those varieties.

TD

I believe Rock Pile is what RR uses. Premier Cuvée has also been mentioned along with Montrachet or champagne yeast.

TrickyDick said:

Some wine yeasts can kill other yeasts. Think I'd want to avoid those varieties.

Click to expand...

71-B is one of the few wine yeasts that isn't 'killer'. if you're concerned about the wine yeast killing the brewers yeast, then 71-B is the way to go. mind you, after such a long aging the brewer's yeast should have flocc'ed out. rack carefully before bottling and next to none should make it into the bottle (hence the need for a bottling yeast).

sweetcell said:

71-B is one of the few wine yeasts that isn't 'killer'. if you're concerned about the wine yeast killing the brewers yeast, then 71-B is the way to go. mind you, after such a long aging the brewer's yeast should have flocc'ed out. rack carefully before bottling and next to none should make it into the bottle (hence the need for a bottling yeast).

Click to expand...

Thanks!

So while you're at it, how about some recommendations.
Here is what I have that needs to be bottled. Its basically most of last years homebrewing efforts - not all though. All are at terminal gravity and have been some some time
2 carboys of the Consecration clone. This is over a year old now.
2 carboys of an Oud Bruin (with the Wyeast PC yeast)
2 carboys of a Flanders Red - one got a quart of cherry concentrate - the other too full to add any. (Wyeast PC yeast)

I have some Lallemand CBC-1 on hand. Have some older packets of wine yeast - not sure which ones off hand that I'd intended to make a mead with but never got around to it.

TD

recommendation for what, a bottling yeast? CBC-1 would be a fine way to go. one pack would be enough for all 6 carboys. i would rehydrate the yeast before adding it to the bottling bucket.

sweetcell said:

recommendation for what, a bottling yeast? CBC-1 would be a fine way to go. one pack would be enough for all 6 carboys. i would rehydrate the yeast before adding it to the bottling bucket.

Click to expand...

Yes. Thanks. I'm not quite sure how well Wine yeast is any better than the CBC. Perhaps wine yeast is more tolerant of low pH (Think I might have read that in Oldsock's book)? Certainly doubt at this point its going to add any "character". I hate bottling......



TD

Remember to use champagne or Belgian bottles if you are going to "normal" sour beer carbonation levels (3.5-4 vols in many cases). Bottle Bombs also suck.

Yeah thanks. I have some 375ml cork finish for about 5g worth - the rest an assortment of Belgian New and Used cork finish and some commercial sour bottles with 29mm crown top. All in all, a real hodgepodge of bottles really.

TD

Yeah thanks. I have some 375ml cork finish for about 5g worth - the rest an assortment of Belgian New and Used cork finish and some commercial sour bottles with 29mm crown top. All in all, a real hodgepodge of bottles really.

TD

FredTheNuke said:

Remember to use champagne or Belgian bottles if you are going to "normal" sour beer carbonation levels (3.5-4 vols in many cases). Bottle Bombs also suck.

Click to expand...

If I only have standard capped 12 oz bottles, what would you suggest I do differently? Just use less priming sugar (e.g., 3.0 volumes)?

Absolute maximum would be three volumes. My personal limit is 2.5 volumes which is equivalent to about 30 PSI at room temperature (72 F).

yeah, stay well below 3.0. that's the highest i'd go id i was 100% confident that the beer was fully attenuated. a one point drop will get you to 3.0.

TrickyDick said:

All in all, a real hodgepodge of bottles really.

Click to expand...

that is what every sour bottling looks like for me. using a bench capper makes it bearable.

I'll shoot for 2.5... thanks!

Something I realized I hadn't considered: how do I account for wine yeast when determining how much sugar to use? My plan was to bottle 5 gallons of this with corn sugar and a packet of champagne yeast. The bottling calculator I use (http://www.brewersfriend.com/beer-priming-calculator/) doesn't include use of wine yeast.

The yeast eats the sugar. It doesn't change how much sugar to use.

Champagne yeast is wine yeast just a strain that ferments completely dry usually as far as 0.998

italarican said:

Something I realized I hadn't considered: how do I account for wine yeast when determining how much sugar to use?

Click to expand...

No need to do anything different, prime as usual per the calculator's instructions.

Has anyone tried (and been successful) brewing this without racking to secondary?

I'm planning to give this a go this weekend with Bug County as the primary blend, instead of doing a primary with abbey yeast, cold crashing, racking, and then adding brett/bugs.

My thought is to let it ride for a couple months (3? 6?) for the sacc to die off, and then add the currants right into the primary.

I'd appreciate any feedback!

It's almost a year, in April 2014, since I brewed my first batch of this stuff. I blended it after 6 months witch a fresh 5 gallon batch. The sourness isn't quite where I want it so I'll keep letting it age for a few more months.