The ever changing opinions of proper techniques in brewing

I've been brewing for two years now so I'm past most doubts and worries, been there done that and I've got my processes down, but one thing I've noticed that still intrigues me is the extremely varied opinions on what is proper and what is not over time. I know overall even if one screws up big time we nearly always end up with beer. And most of the time perfectly drinkable beer. But having read a number of respected books and being on here for all this time really has me intrigued as to the changes in opinions on processes between the brewing literature and current day brewing. I will list a few of the examples I can think of off the top of my head:

1. (Original recommendation) Don't squeeze the grain bag, it will extract tannins. (Modern day recommendation) It doesn't make any difference at all. Many people doing steeping or BIAB squeeze the living Jesus out of their bags with no ill effects.

2. (Original recommendation) Fly Sparging gives the best effeciency and if you batch sparge the more sparges the better effeciency. (Modern day recommendation) It doesn't matter much at all and the efficiency difference is so minute that a single sparge is all that is necessary.

3. (Original recommendation) Do a protein rest for pilsener malt. (Modern day recommendation) Most malts today are well modified so it's not necessary unless you know for sure the malt is under modified - hence a single infusion is often all that is necessary.

4. (Original recommendation) Decoction mashing is necessary for a true German beer taste. (Modern day recommendation) So and so has done extensive tests and finds no difference in taste therefore decocting is not necessary and a waste of time.

5. (Original recommendation) For a hefeweizen a ferulic acid rest creates compounds that bring out more of the "clove" taste. (Modern day recommendation) So and so has done extensive tests and finds no difference in taste therefore it's an unnecessary step.

6. (Original recommendation) As according to the bottle label it says to use one tablet of Whirlfloc at 15 minutes near the end of boil. (Modern day recommendation) It's been written online that people have spoken with the actual manufacturer and they say one tablet is good for up to 12 gallons so only half a tablet is needed and it's most effective at the last 5 minutes of the boil.

7. (One opinion) It's not necessary to decant a one liter starter since it's only about 5% of the total volume of a 5 gallon batch therefore won't affect the taste. (Second opinion) Always decant the starter because you don't want sour oxidized starter wort in your beer.

8. (Original recommendation) Cool your priming suger solution before you add it to the beer. (Modern day recommendation) It's not necessary to cool the priming sugar solution since it's so small an amount any yeast it might immmediately contact and shock/kill is so small as to be insignificant.

9. (Original recommendation) After adding your sparge water allow ten minutes for the grain bed to set. (Modern day recommendation) Don't waste the time, vorlaufing sets the grain bed so start vorlaufing immediately.

Well, these are what I could think of off the top of my head. I'd like to state right up front I am NOT challenging any of the recommendations either old or new. I've found and gone with my own processes and am quite happy with the beers I brew so no trouble there. I'm only creating this thread to see if anyone else has been intrigued by the large degree of difference in process opinions in this wonderful hobby/field of ours. Again, either way you are making beer, I just find it rather interesting that on one hand there are those that tout things as the "proper way" and yet there are many hardened experienced others that say, "Umm no... that isn't necessary at all".


Rev.

Adding to #3, I think people go a bit overboard with the whole "pilsner malt means you must boil vigorously for 90+ minutes, and cool rapidly to avoid DMS". Maybe it's just my maltser (Canada Malting Co) but I've never had an issue with DMS using pilsner malt during a shorter boil. I won't rule out other variables that probably help lower the chance of off-flavours in what/how I brew, but still.

SixStringBeer said:

Adding to #3, I think people go a bit overboard with the whole "pilsner malt means you must boil vigorously for 90+ minutes, and cool rapidly to avoid DMS". Maybe it's just my maltser (Canada Malting Co) but I've never had an issue with DMS using pilsner malt during a shorter boil. I won't rule out other variables that probably help lower the chance of off-flavours in what/how I brew, but still.

Click to expand...

I've done mostly ales but I've done several ales using pilsner malts including a couple of batches using 100% pilsner malts (such as NortherBrewer's Patersbier). With the Paterbier since it's 100% Belgian pilsner malt I did the first one at 90 minutes boil and the second time I brewed it I did a 75 minute boil, though I can't recall exactly why at this time, but there was no difference between the two in taste. The other beers, Hefeweizens, Belgian Wits, etc I never bothered due to the lower pilsner malt amount and also never saw a difference.

Not that those anecdotal results mean anything factual of course, and as a result is why I still boil all-pils grain bills longer than 60 minutes, but it's still quite interesting.


Rev.

You forgot about it not being necessary to use a secondary.

Awesome thread!

I think the differences over time in best brewing practices have to do with the growth of the hobby and craft beer in general. That has meant growth in demand for ingredients. That means fresher, higher quality ingredients are more readily available. It also means there are more people testing out the established wisdom, to see if it is actually true. So, whether or not the 'old' way of doing things was good/necessary at some time in the past, that doesn't mean that it always will be. And that doesn't necessarily mean those techniques/practices are bad to do now. Maybe unnecessary...

Anyway, the list you put together is great for newbies to take a look at. When they are given some advice, they can reference this list and see if it is an old technique that has somehow been passed down to them, even if it isn't necessarily true anymore.

And I'm sure there are more that can be added to the list (I'm thinking things related to no-chill brewing techniques), but I'm just getting close to 1 year of brewing experience, so I can't add anything specific.

Xpertskir said:

You forgot about it not being necessary to use a secondary.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, that's another great example. I was sitting in the Heartland Brewery in NYC and I always wind up in a conversation whether want it or not. The guy talking to me turned out to be a homebrewer as well and he was HARDCORE in his "must secondary" opinion. I mentioned how on this online community (Homebrewtalk) it's common opinion that a secondary isn't really necessary unless one wants to add things to their beer (fruit, dry hop, etc) and even then many just do it right in the primary with no issues. He looked at me with a face and I felt annoyed - he was an older guy. Then as we're talking he says he doesn't do more than 6 batches a year because he ages and "conditions" them all for the necessary ridiculously long several months time that is way longer than necessary for the fair majority of beer types. Anyhow, it was then that I just shrugged him off. In my two years of brewing I've done waaaay more batches than he. I typically brew every weekend that I am in season. I only stop during late spring and start up again in September - probably close to 32 batches a year to his 6, so whatever. Some people are just set in their ways


Rev.

signpost said:

It also means there are more people testing out the established wisdom, to see if it is actually true. So, whether or not the 'old' way of doing things was good/necessary at some time in the past, that doesn't mean that it always will be. And that doesn't necessarily mean those techniques/practices are bad to do now. Maybe unnecessary...

Click to expand...

True, though one other thing I've read a lot of people say is that doing a protein rest on well modified malts will kill head and head retention. I've personally never seen that once and I've used malts that are said to be well modified. After doing a recent number of single infusion batches I've decided that on the beers I usually do a protein rest on in the past I am going to continue doing it, mostly because I've noticed significantly less chill haze on them. But that is what is so intriguing, I'm sure many have experience no difference or the reverse!


Rev.

Just recalled another one - hotside aeration. I've read in some brewing books to avoid this but most current day opinions are that it's not a threat at all. I seem to recall even Dr. Charles Bamforth doesn't think it's a problem either but I'd have to look it up. Anyhow, I hope there can be a little more discussion about this.... I hope I didn't spend the time typing up the first post for nothing I'd specifically like to hear back from those of us that have tried different techniques and found/not found any difference from recommendations either past or present.


Rev.

You left out hot side aeration.

Darwin18 said:

You left out hot side aeration.

Click to expand...

That was my last post.


Rev.

Amen, Rev... a-the-f*ck-men

The reason is quite simple, the internet.

Back before we had the internet, we got our knowledge mostly through the opinions of authors telling us what they believe, and handing down what they heard. It was pretty much one way....we were told how it was from someone in "authority" so therefore we believed it was "the only way." And usually we never knew the original source said author's info.

We also didn't know if the info was scientific "fact," something the author experienced for himself, was just something he "heard" and regurgitated, something he read somewhere, or something some other brewer told him. Or if it was just those "chestnuts" that you brought up...things you've all heard, and folks often regurgitate purely by rote, whether we/they experienced them or not.

Whether they understand them or not.

John Palmer admitted he just regurgitated what he "heard" about not leaving beer in primary too long. Not something he actually experienced, or bothered to questions....he just passed it on and an entire new generation bought it hook line and sinker.....Until folks on a certain forum starting reporting that they left their beer in primary a LOT longer that he said they could, on purpose or by accident, and their beer turned out fine...AND OFTEN tasted and looked even better than if they rushed the beer off the yeast......so that no longer became "gospel" except to the noobs who haven't read the forums, or listened to the podcasts, or read the articles discussing it....just a free book online...which in later versions he changed....

We also didn't know, nor often did the "author" if there were any other ways that were just as valid. We really had a one way channel of info handed down to us....And really so did the author.

Or we were told something from older, more experienced brewers...how they did it...again usually not knowing if there were any alternatives that were just as valid.

When you're a student and don't know anything, whatever a teacher tells us, whether in a book or a taught to us, it is thought to be gospel, and unchallengeable. Especially if we know little about it ourselves.

But then along came the internet and forums like this, where you, at any given moment have thousands of people on at the same time, reading the same things, discussing things, and you start to see that there are more than one way folks are doing things, and they're also working. Then folks start to notice that one group believes something, while another group believes something completely different, but if you overlap them you notice some curious things....For example the squeeze the grain bag thing....extract brewers are told NO, yet BIAB brewers do it...so what's that mean? Well Maybe what extract people heard or read, might be wrong....especially since the BIAB'ers were influenced by the way they were diing it in Australia, and where they discovered and started writing on the internet and in THEIR BOOKS about the role of temp and PH and how it relates to releasing tannins, NOT simply squeezing the bag.

So you have people around the world, some who never had the hobby have to go underground like we in the US had to during Prohibition...sort of the homebrewing dark ages in the states, while people in other parts of the world were learning other things.

Now we can communicate instantly with other folks and see different ways of doing things. Plus with advances in science folks apply more of it to this hobby, as well as the field of brewing in general.

We also find out that not everything that we know about how it's done commercially, and what we might have read in the trades, actually might NOT be the same on the homebrew level.

And when more and more people start to see that there's different ways of doing things, they start to experiment on their own, (like how it happened with the shift in long primary beliefs....people learned about it, tried it, experiemented, came to their own conclusions and the ideas about autolysis being inevitable started to fade away.

This is happening all over the place, in other hobbys and in science as well...People at home are pushing the evenlope of science all the time now....people are doing gene splicing in labs in their basements made of things cobbled together from ebay...People are doing molecular gastronomy in their own kitchens.....homebrewers are building sous vide cookers with their homebrew knowledge and their coolers, then writing about it on foody blogs, and chefs who never did that before, rather than buying a 4,000 commercial sous-vide machine, and building an ebay temp controller, and doing it on a small scale, then they are pushing the envelope in the field.

(for example I was reading a food blog by a chef, who said it was really difficult to do sous-vide on a small scale, you needed a way to move the water around, and you needed a temp controller.....I sent him a link to my sous-vide thread on here, and he was blown away by the simple idea of an aquarium pump and stone, and a 40 dollar ebay temp controller.)

It's a democratization of knowledge and wisdom......And different disciplins coming together.

And suddenly WE push the knowlege base in the hobby. We argue stuff here, then people like the Basic brewing guys and the byo guys start experimenting, and the knowledge base changes...whether some folks want it to or not...or are willing to accept it or not. Some old dogs, will always be old dogs....

And with places like this we know INSTANTLY when something happens in the hobby, or the field...when the whitehouse brews a beer, we know immediately what happend. When an author changes his mind on a podcast, we know instantly, and the knowledge base shifts....

That's why I find it funny when folks say there's nothing but junk and bad info on the internet...actually the best info is on the internet, on forums like this, BECAUSE SOONER OR LATER IT GETS PEER REVIEWED....actually it nearly gets autmatically peer reviewed when folks back it up or reject it. And the info becomes state or the art....because we're doing it.

Even if it won't appear in a book for 3 or 4 years....We've written the new books already.

The point is because it's no longer knowledge handed down one way, it's now knowledge gained and shared collectively, and collaboratively we find out that quite simple there's more than one way to do things...and they all work.

And just maybe some of those things we took as gospel might just have been 100% wrong.....but more than likely what we believed as Gospel...was just one of many gospels on the same topic...all of them valid.

That's why I say, that there is rarely a "better" or "Best" or even a Right way of doing things....only what's RIGHT FOR US.

You find out really quick, that if you ask 10 different homebrewers the same thing, you'll get 12 different answers, and they'll all be CORRECT.

And you just have to figure out what works for you.

How about HAVING to age beers in glass, or something other than PETE vessels?? While you won't find any PETE vessels used to ferment, or age, in, you also won't find any glass vessels here.

You forgot:

(Original recommendation) If the beer turns out gross, a nearby woman is responsible and is justiced to death without trial. Her death may cause the beer to recover to a tasty malt beverage within 4 weeks according to the famous Vienna 1658 Christobäumebraumeisteren study.

(Modern day recommendation) various reasons.

Golddiggie said:

How about HAVING to age beers in glass, or something other than PETE vessels?? While you won't find any PETE vessels used to ferment, or age, in, you also won't find any glass vessels here.

Click to expand...

I use plastic Cooper's fermenters, the original style ones. One of the other homebrewers I've talked to that worked at the Heartland brewery in NYC (as a manager not a brewer or anything) asked me if I've ever had odd tastes carried over from the plastic. I told him not at all not once, and I never got the whole idea behind it. I'll state a few things first:

I've been an AG brewer for a year now and stuck with my Cooper's fermenters because they have so many positives. They are plastic (no risk of stitches from carboys breaking), they had tons of headspace (have never needed a blow off tube, not even once with the craziest fermentations), and they have a built in bottling spigot (no need to rack to a bucket, I simply pour in and gently stir my priming sugar solution in).

That said, I clean my fermenters well and not abrasively with Oxyclean (another thing that is super easy to do with these fermenters). But what intrigues me is how anyone could think any possible slight odor or taste that might be trapped in the plastic could have any noticeable effect whatsoever on 5 gallons of beer!!! I mean really, I would have to not clean the thing for flavors and odors to come through.

@Revvy - excellent post bro


Rev.

And the clergy continue to speak wisdom.

Thanks, Rev2010 and Revvy for some great posts. :rockin:

I think the main fallacy in this thinking is that there is a "proper" way to do things.

A second note is more inline with what Revy said...the passage of knowledge and opinion seems to merge within the community. Whether we read it in a book or hear it from another brewer, there seems to be something lost in translation. An inexperienced brewer asks a veteran if they do x or y. Often times the veteran says that he likes do do it one way. But soon the inexperienced brewer is saying it MUST be done that way instead of just an option or a common method used. There is a lot of parroting in the homebrew community, I see it a lot on this site too.

In the final analysis...try it. This is how opinions and common practices are changing. Instead of assuming it must be done this or that way, try both and see what you like. My system and method of brewing have changed so much over the past years, mainly because I may have read something, but I still tried it out myself. I've done the longer primary, no secondary/use a secondary, and I stick with my system because (1) one method worked better than the other, or (2) I saw no real difference so I do what I prefer.

Revvy said:

The reason is quite simple, the internet.

Back before we had the internet, we got out knowlege mostly through the opinions of authors telling us what they believe, and handing down what they heard. It was pretty much one way....we were told how it was from someone in "authority" so therefore we believed it was "the only way." And usually we never knew the original source said author's info.

We also didn't know if the info was scientific "fact," something the author experienced for himself, was just something he "heard" and regurgitated, something he read somewhere, or something some other brewer told him. Or if it was just those "chestnuts" that you brought up...things you've all heard, and folks often regurgitate purely by rote, whether we/they experienced them or not.

Whether they understand them or not.

John Palmer admittied he just regurgitated what he "heard" about not leaving beer in primary too long. Not something he actually experienced, or bothered to questions....he just passed it on and an entire new genration bought it hook line and sinker.....Until folks on a certain forum starting reporting that they left their beer in primary a LOT longer that he said they could, on purpose or by accident, and their beer turned out fine...AND OFTEN tasted and looked even better than if they rushed the beer off the yeast......so that no longer became "gospel" except to the noobs who haven't read the forums, or listened to the podcasts, or read the articles discussing it....just a free book online...which in later versions he changed....

We also didn't know, nor often did the "author" if there were any other ways that were just as valid. We really had a one way channel of info handed down to us.

Or we were told something from older, more experienced brewers...how they did it...again usually not knowing if there were any alternatives that were just as valid.

When you're a student and don't know anything, whatever a teacher tells us, whether in a book or a taught to us, it is thought to be gospel, and unchallengable. Especially if we know little about it ourselves.

But then along came the internet and forums like this, were you, at any given moment have thousands of people on at the same time, reading the same things, discussing things, and you start to see that there are more than one way folks are doing things, and they're also working. Then folks start to notice that one group believes something, while another group believes something completely different, but if you overlap them you notice some curious things....For example the squeeze the grain bag thing....extract brewers are told NO, yet BIAB brewers do it...so what's that mean? Well Maybe what extract people heard or read, might be wrong....especially since the BIAB'ers were influenced by the way they were diing it in Australia, and where they discovered and started writing on the internet and in THEIR BOOKS about the role of temp and PH and how it relates to releasing tannins, NOT simply squeezing the bag.

So you have people around the world, some who never had the hobby have to go underground like we in the US had to during Prohibition...sort of the homebrewing dark ages in the states, while people in other parts of the world were learning other things.

Now we can communicate instantly with other folks and see different ways of doing things. Plus with advances in science folks apply more of it to this hobby, as well as the field of brewing in general.

We also find out that not everything that we know about how it's done commercially, and what we might have read in the trades, actually might NOT be the same on the homebrew level.

And when more and more people start to see that there's different ways of doing things, they start to experiment on their own, (like how it happened with the shift in long primary beliefs....people learned about it, tried it, experiemented, came to their own conclusions and the ideas about autolysis being inevitable started to fade away.

This is happening all over the place, in other hobbys and in science as well...People at home are pushing the evenlope of science all the time now....people are doing gene splicing in labs in their basements made of things cobbled together from ebay...People are doing molecular gastronomy in their own kitchens.....homebrewers are building sous vide cookers with their homebrew knowledge and their coolers, then writing about it on foody blogs, and chefs who never did that before, rather than buying a 4,000 commercial sous-vide machine, and building an ebay temp controller, and doing it on a small scale, then they are pushing the envelope in the field.

(for example I was reading a food blog by a chef, who said it was really difficult to do sous-vide on a small scale, you needed a way to move the water around, and you needed a temp controller.....I sent him a link to my sous-vide thread on here, and he was blown away by the simple idea of an aquarium pump and stone, and a 40 dollar ebay temp controller.)

It's a democratization of knowledge and wisdom......And different disciplins coming together.

And suddenly WE push the knowlege base in the hobby. We argue stuff here, then people like the Basic brewing guys and the byo guys start experimenting, and the knowledge base changes...whether some folks want it to or not...or are willing to accept it or not. Some old dogs, will always be old dogs....

And with places like this we know INSTANTLY when something happens in the hobby, or the field...when the whitehouse brews a beer, we know immediately what happend. When an author changes his mind on a podcast, we know instantly, and the knowledge base shifts....

That's why I find it funny when folks say there's nothing but junk and bad info on the internet...actually the best info is on the internet, on forums like this, BECAUSE SOONER OR LATER IT GETS PEER REVIEWED....actually it nearly gets autmatically peer reviewed when folks back it up or reject it. And the info becomes state or the art....because we're doing it.

Even if it won't appear in a book for 3 or 4 years....We've written the new books already.

The point is because it's no longer knowledge handed down one way, it's now knowledge gained and shared collectively, and collaboratively we find out that quite simple there's more than one way to do things...and they all work.

And just maybe some of those things we took as gospel might just have been 100% wrong.....but more than likely what we believed as Gospel...was just one of many gospels on the same topic...all of them valid.

That's why I say, that there is rarely a "better" or "Best" or even a Right way of doing things....only what's RIGHT FOR US.

You find out really quick, that if you ask 10 different homebrewers the same thing, you'll get 12 different answers, and they'll all be CORRECT.

And you just have to figure out what works for you.

Click to expand...

As a newbie I want to thank you for this insightful post. I'm not the sharpest tack in the toolbox and all the conflicting information sometimes made my head spin. Finally I figured out for myself take the advise, use it but in the end of you got beer - success! I try to get as much info as I can, figure out what makes sense to me or applies best to my situation and go from there. I tape an index card to the fermenter and write down little notes about what I did, conditions at the time etc. so I'll have a database of what worked and more importantly what didn't.

Revvy said:

That's why I say, that there is rarely a "better" or "Best" or even a Right way of doing things....only what's RIGHT FOR US.

You find out really quick, that if you ask 10 different homebrewers the same thing, you'll get 12 different answers, and they'll all be CORRECT.

Click to expand...

I think the difficulty most people face with this is that this is the way we are taught in 99% of our experiences, both in school and real life. As a kid when you were learning math and science there was a clear answer on the test. you may have even been given partial credit for your answer, which reinforces that there is one right answer.

From a new brewer perspective, it is easy to follow the chain Revvy mentioned about listening to one person give a piece of advice and then take it as gospel. You did what someone said and your beer came out pretty good, so that MUST be the right way to do it! Since I got the answer in the end that must be the chain that gets me there! (Yes this is simplified since sometimes there is more than one way to compute something.)

Now compare that to an essay. There are certain structures of an essay that have to be there to make it good like punctuation, spelling, etc. After that you are free to experiment and come out with different things, all of them generally correct. I think once I applied this to brewing everything became a little easier and I stopped freaking out about stuff.

Anyway, to avoid a threadjack:
Original: Add LME or DME at the beginning of the boil (extract). Modern: You can add it different times in the boil or at flame out. Also helpful with partial boils to keep the color light.

Revvy said:

And just maybe some of those things we took as gospel might just have been 100% wrong.....but more than likely what we believed as Gospel...was just one of many gospels on the same topic...all of them valid.

Click to expand...

This. What a great analogy using the Gospels- all of the Gospels focus around the same subject of Jesus' life and the same end result, but take four different routes doing so. Brewers all have their different little nuisances that center around making great beer; some of them are important, some less important (just like differences in the Gospels), but they are all part of what allows that brewer to make what we all love and cherish: beer.

As for Rev2010, you should actively keep this thread under moderation; gather any other original advice/modern advice brought up by members and amend your first post with those points. Looks like some people here have already grown as brewers by reading though these points; I know I have, especially about whirlfloc which I used for the first time yesterday (a whole tablet in 5 gallons... d'oh!). Like it's been said already, much of the old advice is debatable and can still produce great beer, so it'd be awesome for newer brewers to understand where certain wisdom comes from and how they can apply it to their own individual process(es).

This would be a great sticky if it grows to encompass much "conventional wisdom."

Home-brewing is, in a sense, a relatively new scientific community that is constantly growing. With the internet we've been able to share knowledge like never before. I have no doubt that many of the things we now take to be true and good will eventually be disproven or improved upon, like any good discipline. That's the benefit of coming to a forum like Homebrewtalk, where you have the advantage of a huge pool of knowledge, as opposed to just reading "How to Brew."

I think Rev hit it on the head with his last post.

Recently there was a thread regarding reading materials and mainly aimed at magazines. Having worked for a few different magazines (as a photographer) I have seen it from the inside and am disgusted by them in general. Back about 20 or so years ago they were basicallly the equivelent of the internet putting forth new ideas faster than boooks could be printed. The down side to this is they are also profit driven companies and have become horribly flooded with product placement both in articles as well as consisting on average of 65-70% advertising. So the actual progress of a hobby or sport is stunted by what a manufacturer can build and sell.

With the advent of the internet magazines have become useless fire materials. I would go out and shoot an event, edit the images and send them to the publisher. Then I would go log into my favorite forum and see write ups and coverage of the very same events the day of or the day after it happened with images included, the magazine wass still 10 dys from print and 20 days from shipping, by the time it hit the mailbox or shelves it wass old news and people were already either adapting or moving beyond that. This hobby is no different, new techniques, experiments, low buck alternatives, etc. all get posted and shared freely and styles morph from there fasster than even the BCJP can keep up in many cases.

The gist of all this is don't be afraid to experiment and try new things, then share your successes and failures because you never know who may just try the same thing with a minor tweak that moves it to the next level.

Nightshade said:

This hobby is no different, new techniques, experiments, low buck alternatives, etc. all get posted and shared freely and styles morph from there fasster than even the BCJP can keep up in many cases.

The gist of all this is don't be afraid to experiment and try new things, then share your successes and failures because you never know who may just try the same thing with a minor tweak that moves it to the next level.

Click to expand...

I don't think I'd compare the (home) brewing industry to something like the sports or technology industries. There's always a new game, new injury, new prediction every day with sports, and there's always a gadget or technology being revealed every day. Brewing takes months at a time to test any kind of theory or get results. The internet certainly does have an edge, but at least a slower process like brewing can still survive in print form in the digital age.

metanoia said:

I don't think I'd compare the (home) brewing industry to something like the sports or technology industries. There's always a new game, new injury, new prediction every day with sports, and there's always a gadget or technology being revealed every day. Brewing takes months at a time to test any kind of theory or get results. The internet certainly does have an edge, but at least a slower process like brewing can still survive in print form in the digital age.

Click to expand...

I disagree, if we wait for tests and technology then you may as well just brew exactly as they did 100 or more years ago. I can brew 20 batches in the time it takes them to run a months worth of tests and depending on if I am brewing an ale or a lager I can have multiple verifications of whether the style, taste, gravity or fermentation shows improvement from meticulous note taking. This is not to even begin mentioning others results from trying the same and sharing results across a forum.

Science will prove it as conclusive or not, but if it works in my kitchen and it works in ten other kitchens then that is conclusive proof and how the art of brewing used to progress for thousands of years before the internet or even science.

I guess the short of it is that what we do is use scientific method without the fancy degrees and lab coats.

I create a theory on paper of what grains will make a good tasting brew, what strike temps, sparge times, hop additions, boil times and fermentation process are all part of this.

Then I put it into action to test the theory.

End result is either good bad or indifferent.

Every brew is scientific process in a brewroom.

I brew with an average of 200lbs of grain every time I brew and I am neither afraid nor concerned if a theory fails to meet what I think the end result was even though I am taking a calculated risk and my boss also realizes this when I create a new recipe. Why wouldn't I do the same with 15lbs of grain on my own dime? It is a very minimal risk of loss but a big chance to improve the direction of brewing even on a smaller scale.

Rev2010 said:

Just recalled another one - hotside aeration. I've read in some brewing books to avoid this but most current day opinions are that it's not a threat at all. I seem to recall even Dr. Charles Bamforth doesn't think it's a problem either but I'd have to look it up. Anyhow, I hope there can be a little more discussion about this.... I hope I didn't spend the time typing up the first post for nothing I'd specifically like to hear back from those of us that have tried different techniques and found/not found any difference from recommendations either past or present.


Rev.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is a good one. I have heard the same thing about hsa. If I recall correctly, what I heard was that the major breweries have to worry about it because of the tremendous volume of liquid and the waterfall-like movement of said liquid. At the homebrew level the movement is so slight that hsa is not a real threat. I also seem to recall it was Bamforth that said it.
Since hearing that, I have dropped my concern level from slightly worried/paranoid straight into rdwhahb and have had zero issues. My process' haven't really changed since hearing this, but I spend a whole lot less time thinking about it. I chill in my keggle with a home made immersion chiller, so it takes a while to bring it down under 140 (which is what I have heard is the "safe" zone).

As for the old vs. new theory in general. I've read books, listened to podcasts, read these forums, and you can drive yourself nuts trying to figure out which is best. Do what fits your system and makes your life easier and go with it. After you've had a few of the fine brews you have created, you're not going to give a #$@% anyway.

Consensus and methods in the brewing world take years, if not decades, to become popular or even known. Technology is outdated within weeks, a sports game is irrelevant a week later after another's been played. I find it hard to argue that a year old brewing magazine is more or just as outdated as a year old sports magazine.

I plan on using Jamil's article in BYO last year as a basis for a Hefe next week; is there anything else that has come out in the last year to radically change the knowledge he shared then? I'll tell you that the New Orleans Saints are quite a different team than a year ago!

Whatever you do is great for you, but that has so very little impact on industry as a whole. It's important as a tiny piece of the puzzle in the long run, but it won't radically change things in the brewing world from month to month.

metanoia said:

Consensus and methods in the brewing world take years, if not decades, to become popular or even known. Technology is outdated within weeks, a sports game is irrelevant a week later after another's been played. I find it hard to argue that a year old brewing magazine is more or just as outdated as a year old sports magazine.

I plan on using Jamil's article in BYO last year as a basis for a Hefe next week; is there anything else that has come out in the last year to radically change the knowledge he shared then? I'll tell you that the New Orleans Saints are quite a different team than a year ago!

Whatever you do is great for you, but that has so very little impact on industry as a whole. It's important as a tiny piece of the puzzle in the long run, but it won't radically change things in the brewing world from month to month.

Click to expand...

I take issue with the highlighted portion, because what homebrewers do very much has an influence over the craft industry. BMC will always do as it has done but the craft industry is much quicker to pick up and run with new processes much faster (well some are at least) and many of these come from the homebrew world.

edit* and I could care less about football, I was in the offroad industry where I saw firsthand how what happens in some guys garage directly impacts the sport and manufacturers would scramble to profit from it with a refined product that would end up at market easily 20 months after everyone had adopted it and even taken it to the next step up.

Nightshade said:

With the advent of the internet magazines have become useless fire materials. I would go out and shoot an event, edit the images and send them to the publisher. Then I would go log into my favorite forum and see write ups and coverage of the very same events the day of or the day after it happened with images included, the magazine wass still 10 dys from print and 20 days from shipping, by the time it hit the mailbox or shelves it wass old news and people were already either adapting or moving beyond that. This hobby is no different, new techniques, experiments, low buck alternatives, etc. all get posted and shared freely and styles morph from there fasster than even the BCJP can keep up in many cases.

Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said in this post BUT. We still (psychologically?) consider books, and even magazines to be the "authority" and many still view "collaboratively created" (internet) information, or information from non published people suspect.

The whole "no secondary" thing is a prime example. We were doing it on here, and discussing it on here (and getting attacked on here by die-hards, Palmer worshipers, and "old dogs") for years before BYO magazine and Basic Brewing decided to do their first experiment. And although I don't think the methodology of those experiments were perfect. It wasn't until then and later when Palmer redacted his statements, that a lot of the nay sayers quieted down...and some even tried it for themselves, and became converts, or at least apologized for the vicious attacks against those of us who posted contrary.

People still believe that people who get published, or are in magazines are "experts" more so than someone who might post only on forums. But the truth is, usually a person who gets published is just LUCKY. Plenty of folks books, or ideas may be just a valid, and totally contradictory, but they didn't make it through the cut of the thousands of manuscripts and articles submitted at any given time.

Papazian and Palmer are no better brewers necessarily or more expert than many folks on here. They just managed to put words down on paper AND get their books through the system. Papazian is a better self promoter than he even is as a brewer, thank god, or else the hobby probably wouldn't be what it is, and maybe still illegal in the US. Palmer is a metalurgist by trade, not a pro-brewer. But he is/was an excellent HOBBY BREWER, like many folks on here, who just managed to write an excellent beginner book on the subject, that by being FREE ONLINE, became our bible, no matter how flawed a work it might be....He even admitted that his original explanation of IBUs in the book was wrong, after he went to some symposium and it blew his mind, and he reported it in the amazing Basic Brewing podcast "What is an IBU, really?" Which I've posted on here.

But just because someone writes books, or magazine articles doesn't make him any more right or perfect on knowledgeable about subject than any one who doesn't.....it just maybe means they were more disciplined to actually sit down and write a book, and more persistent to patiently push it through the publication process.

I don't know how many times someone who contradicts someone like Palmer on here (and not just me) get's attacked with arguments like "You don't have a book, what do YOU know." or "You think you know more than him?" Or "You think you're a better brewers than him?" or whatever.

And just because you haven't published a book doesn't mean you're any less knowlegable. Heck I've turned down three offers to write a basic brewing type book because of my stuff on here. I've had publisher say that whenever they google something on homebrewing HBT usually comes up as the first few links, and it's usually something I've posted.

But I've turned them down for several reasons. 1) I think there's already plenty of good books out there on brewing. 2) I think places like this have more value, because a books is usually 3 or more years out of date by the time it's published, and like Nightshade said about the magazine and the forums the info's going to be out long before the book is. 3)I'm NOT that disciplined as an author. I tend to lose interest in what I'm writing pretty quick (I have a couple unfinished novels and non fiction books to prove it.) 4)Basically as a guy with a day job, and working as a co pastor of a church, I already have a lot on my plate. [/sidetrack, sorry]


The thing is, the internet has now given us the opportunity to share an amazing amount of info FASTER than even a magazine can. And it's also brought a lot more folks with different insights together to share knowledge in a way that is better than the old ways of books, and magazines. Like I said earlier, it's instant peer review for one thing.

But I think it's dimished the role of "experts" when you find out that everyone is actually an expert.

And having a different opinion, or different experience than someone doesn't make that person's ideas any more or less valid...they're just different.

Everyone knows that you mash for at least an hour. Except some brewers have noticed that the conversion seems done much quicker and the speed of conversion is dependent on the quality of the crush. I BIAB and always have mashed for an hour but it appears that my mash has completed in about 15 minutes. Some day I will try the iodine test to see just how long it really does take for full conversion. I do know of another brewer who has shortened his mash to 30 minutes and he seems to think it is done then.

jon73 said:

do what fits your system and makes your life easier and go with it. After you've had a few of the fine brews you have created, you're not going to give a #$@% anyway.

Click to expand...

this!!!!!

But just because someone writes books, or magazine articles doesn't make him any more right or perfect on knowledgeable about subject than any one who doesn't.....it just maybe means they were more disciplined to actually sit down and write a book, and more persistent to patiently push it through the publication process.

Click to expand...

This has been a problem in the education system, especially in higher education where a book written 20 to 50 years ago is used to teach. Some of the ideas in them are very good but some are very flawed but the books continue to be the "bible" of the professor (the professor may have been the one writing them even) and changes are extremely slow to come about.

Good list, but when I started brewing 20 yrs ago, some of those concepts weren't even invented yet. BIAB? Batch sparging? Mash pH? All unknown. LOL.

Back then, starters were uniformly 0.5L (2 cups). 3 or 4L would be unheard of. So "decanting a starter" wasn't even a question since they were so small! Oh, and you're brewing an ale? Add gypsum. LOL.

Our knowledge is still evolving and I look forward to where we'll be in another 10 yrs.

Just a quick off topic... I saw the thread is rated and out of curiosity I clicked on the Rating thingy to see if it shows who rated it and it says "I've" already rated this thread yet there's only one vote... but I never rated this thread nor would I have rated my own thread cause that's lame. Any idea what's up?


Rev.

SpeedYellow said:

Good list, but when I started brewing 20 yrs ago, some of those concepts weren't even invented yet. BIAB? Batch sparging? Mash pH? All unknown. LOL.

Click to expand...

Wrong. Actually BIAB has been used in australia for over 20 years. The point was, we didn't know about it in the rest of the brewing world, until John Palmer wrote the article about it in BYO in '08." But it was a recognized form of ag brewing over there.

Same with batch sparging. People were batch sparging even long before fly sparging. Most of the early partigyle brewing was done just by dumping water in and draining it out.

And I do believe, but could be wrong, an understanding of mash ph is a few hundred years old as well. As long as they've understood what PH is, they've applied it to brew....It's just something relatively more recent to the HOBBY, once cheap PH strips and cheap meters became more readily available.

But the point is, all these things have become more common and more shared and understood in the last 20 years. But they existed.

Nightshade said:

I take issue with the highlighted portion, because what homebrewers do very much has an influence over the craft industry. BMC will always do as it has done but the craft industry is much quicker to pick up and run with new processes much faster (well some are at least) and many of these come from the homebrew world.

Click to expand...

That's why I wrote the sentence that followed: "It's important as a tiny piece of the puzzle in the long run, but it won't radically change things in the brewing world from month to month."

You may come on here and post that you did that worked great, yet defied "conventional wisdom." Nobody's going to automatically take your experience as the new standard, but some people might try it and a month or two report back that they had a better experience using that method as well. Still, it will take years of trial and error before any small changes will have a big impact on the home brew community. That's why I said it's important, but the transmission of this data is nowhere near as quick as the news of a new CPU being released or a quarterback getting injured. That was my point- important, but a much slower to change industry.

It is awesome the amount of information (and products) available to new brewers on websites like this. Although people complain, jokingly, about "wasting" time mucking about on forums like this, I wasted a lot more time brewing with bad processes that resulted in wasted time and bad beer.

I started brewing in the early 1990s and all I had to learn from was "The Complete Guide to Homebrewing" and a little booth at a local mart that sold homebrewing equipment.

All the extract was from cans, and if I wanted to add hops I bought hopped extract. I didn't have an autosiphon or even a racking cane so transferring from one vessel to another was a major PITA. I only used bleach for sanitizing, which didn't always get rinsed off all the way. I seem to remember bottling right from the carboy when I first started because I had never heard of a bottling bucket. I also didn't have any kind of a faucet attachment for cleaning inside carboys or bottles. I topped off with city water right from the tap.

I'd say only one in three batches of beer didn't have some kind of off flavor. I quit doing it a couple times out of frustration.

New brewers today are lucky to have so many resources on hand. Sure, there are discrepancies and processes get revamped, but the knowledge base available at the touch of a button is insane.

Great thread.

3 other topics:
Table sugar. Used to be blamed for cidery flavors. Now we know the culprit is bad kits/temp control, etc. Many of us use table sugar liberally w/out issue
Dry hop time. "Dry hopping too long = grassy flavors". The anecdotal evidence seems to be mixed on this one, and I've not seen anything conclusive. I've never experienced it, but others have so I don't want to discount their experience.
Sparge temp. Used to be blamed for efficiency issues. But it really doesn't matter; sparging cold even works.

Saxomophone said:

It is awesome the amount of information (and products) available to new brewers on websites like this. Although people complain, jokingly, about "wasting" time mucking about on forums like this, I wasted a lot more time brewing with bad processes that resulted in wasted time and bad beer.

I started brewing in the early 1990s and all I had to learn from was "The Complete Guide to Homebrewing" and a little booth at a local mart that sold homebrewing equipment.

All the extract was from cans, and if I wanted to add hops I bought hopped extract. I didn't have an autosiphon or even a racking cane so transferring from one vessel to another was a major PITA. I only used bleach for sanitizing, which didn't always get rinsed off all the way. I seem to remember bottling right from the carboy when I first started because I had never heard of a bottling bucket. I also didn't have any kind of a faucet attachment for cleaning inside carboys or bottles. I topped off with city water right from the tap.

I'd say only one in three batches of beer didn't have some kind of off flavor. I quit doing it a couple times out of frustration.

New brewers today are lucky to have so many resources on hand. Sure, there are discrepancies and processes get revamped, but the knowledge base available at the touch of a button is insane.

Click to expand...

It's so hard for a new brewer today like myself to imagine what home brewing was like back then. Even commercial brewing must have been so different, seeing as how there were only a small handful of breweries in the 1980s. Still, I'm envious of the learning that you guys had through trial and error, being in on the ground-floor of what is now a huge hobby and profession.

metanoia said:

It's so hard for a new brewer today like myself to imagine what home brewing was like back then. Even commercial brewing must have been so different, seeing as how there were only a small handful of breweries in the 1980s. Still, I'm envious of the learning that you guys had through trial and error, being in on the ground-floor of what is now a huge hobby and profession.

Click to expand...

I had an uncle who brewed his own when I around 5 years old...would have been late 70's I guess. Sure wish he was still alive to pick his brain!

The only issue I have with most of these posts is the guys with 15 years of brewing experience are not the only ones making comments in most threads...Its easier for a new guy to read a book and trust that book, than to come on a site like this where any Tom Dick or Harry can post some lame comment and pass it off as fact. To me, the books and articles form a foundation, something you can at least partialy trust, even if it's not always fact and is later retracted.