Alternative Brewing

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

AlterBrewer

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
23
Reaction score
3
I would like to discuss alternative brewing methods with others whom have broken out of the homebrewing paradigm regarding the whole brewing process, from start to finish. Maybe, like me, you have even busted a brewing myth or two!

OK, a little background on me; I have 2 years brewing experience, so I am an intermediate brewer. I brew mostly AG now, but started out pure DME. I will never claim to know it all or call myself an expert in this enjoyable, although sometimes frustrating hobby. I got into brewing because I resented the high cost of beer and the sub-par brews being offered by multi-million dollar breweries.

I wanted to brew good beer cheaply, and have fun while I was at it. However, I was put off immediately when I researched homebrewing and all the trouble and time this hobby required. I thought, oh well, I can start small with my 1 gallon jugs and just try doing it my way. I figured I had better at least observe the sanitation rules, but I was NOT going to boil anything for a freakin' hour!

There had to be a better way, I thought. So, right from my very first brew, I have developed my own methods that make brewing more effortless and efficient. I'm sure what I'm going to publish below will be pure beer heresy to most, but I'm hoping to strike a chord with other brewers willing to break out of the traditionlist paradigm. I'm hoping I can share some easy, shortcut brewing methods with others, and hoping that some other brewers will share their non-traditional brewing methods with me. I am always looking for easier ways to brew without compromising quality.

All right, let's get to it. Below are several of my alternative methods of homebrewing. Please realize that all of these methods have been used repetitively and produced wonderful beer! I didn't think of all of them, but I put my own twist on most everything.

1. When I sanitize with StarSan, I use a gauged medicine dropper and only mix a pint to a quart of sanitizer at a time. You don't need to soak everything, if cleaned well ahead of time. All that is needed is surface contact for ~30seconds or more with whatever you're sanitizing. It only takes 1.5ml of StarSan for a quart, according to the manufacturer, I believe, so you won't be buying sanitzer for a long time!

2. Easy, efficient, water saving bottle sanitizing method: use a baster and squirt a full shot of StarSan into each bottle, swish around and dump back into your quart of pre-mixed StarSan. Do this one bottle at a time. Not as easy as bottle tree, but effective and cheap, with minimal equipment used.

3. Ditch the Hydrometer. Get a Refractometer on eBay for cheap. Then download a free conversion program for pretty accurate post fermentation readings. This way, you can just use one instrument for ALL gravity readings. This is especially important for brewing small batches.

4. Brew in smaller quantities if you don't need 5 gallons at once. I have never brewed more than 4 gallons at a time, and my norm is 2 gallons. It's easy to convert from 5 gallon recipes and formulas. I usually brew 2 gallons one day, then the next day brew another 2 gallons of a different beer style. I will eventually have 2 different beers to choose from, instead of one.

5. I am a minimalist. I didn't want to buy a mill, so I used my Vita-Mixer blender to grind the grain very fine, almost flour. It's a myth that your end product will be hazy or that you will release tannins into the wort. You get better efficiency with a fine grind. It only takes me few minutes to grind my grain for a 3 gallon batch. I grind 1 lb at a time, and it takes less than 10seconds per lb in the blender (Vita-Mixer is commercial grade strength though).

6. I use a 5 gallon paint strainer bag and place it into the brew kettle. My grain bill is placed in the kettle, then tap water is added, and I turn the stove on high. When I'm approximately 20 degrees from mash temp, I remove the kettle, place the lid on, and monitor the temp until it's around 150 degrees. I then proceed to mash for only 30-45 minutes. I also have let my mash temp vary as much as 15 degrees with no ill effects. I don't worry anymore about a holding a constant mash temp, it doesn't seem to matter. As long as I'm somewhere around 150, I'm happy. I plan on experimenting with even shorter mash times in the future. So you can see, my mash is transitioning from room temp to mash temp in a few minutes. There's no need that I can see to have pre-heated water and add that to the grain. This is easier! No ill effects, I promise! I only have to use one 5 gallon kettle since my max is 3 gallons.

7. When the mash time is over, I don't bother checking pH, conversion, or any other technical voodoo. I raise the temp to the low-mid 160's, stir vigorously, and remove the paint strainer (grain) bag, then place it in a 5 gallon bucket. I then proceed to do what this process is called; I mash the grain bag with my brew spoon, squeezing out as much of the sweet wort that I can. Then I place the grain bag in the sink to get it out of the way. Next, I pour what I extracted from the squeeze into the brew kettle with the rest of the wort. All the time the temp was being raised toward boiling while I was mashing the bag in the bucket. Another myth busted: no tannins from squeezing the bag. Also, you don't need clear wort, it will all settle out eventually in the fermenter.

8. Now, ready to boil, but not ready to add hops. Why? This one will blow you away: I place my hops in a pint of water in a separate small saucepan, and boil them SEPARATELY for ~2-3 minutes. This apparently has the effect of maximizing the hop utilization since the gravity of water is 0.

9. When my wort has started to boil, I skim off much of the hot break film. I wait 5 minutes, then dump the "hop tea" that I just made into the wort.

10. Now, I merely boil the wort for another 15-20 minutes, make sure I'm at my proper OG and volume levels, and remove from heat.

11. The lid is placed on, saran wrap sealed around the lid/kettle junction, and I place it in my fermentation area. It will be allowed to cool naturally overnight. This is similar to "No Chill", but just left in the kettle, instead, and you must transfer to the fermenter the next day to minimize any risk of infections. Remember, this is safe to do because you have a sterile environment from the extreme heat. If you're worried about something really dangerous getting in the wort overnight, then I advise you to quick chill the normal way. I always have it transferred within 24 hours, and never any infections or different tastes than a 15 minute quick chill. The only drawback, temporary only, is that there is a cooked vegetable DMS smell the next day when you remove the lid. That is alleviated early on during fermentation, so the end product will absolutely not be affected! Also, never any chill haze in my beer, another myth busted!

12. I guess my fermentation process is pretty traditional, so nothing strange to report here, except I sometimes use gallon jugs to ferment in. I have only ever fermented in glass 1 gallon jugs or 5 gallon plastic buckets. No perceived difference in taste, but more chance of infection with plastic, it seems.

13. Here's one that will surely have you wondering about me: When I first started brewing, I didn't have siphon hose, so I just poured the beer from the fermenter into my sanitzed brew kettle. Then, I used a sanitized Pyrex measuring cup, and dipped into the beer carefully, and poured it into each primed bottle through a funnel. Biggest drawback was a little foamy, but accomplished the task, nonetheless. Another possible myth busted here: I didn't get any perceivable oxidation, and the beer tasted great! I will say that because of my small batches, beer doesn't usually last beyond 3 weeks after bottling. So I don't know if my beer would store as long as yours? I have a theory that since there's another micro-fermentation going on in the bottle, that the yeast clean up the oxidation, but I just don't know. I have since siphoned to ascertain any differrences, but I can see none, so far.

14. I scoffed at the notion that you just can't simply reuse twist off bottles and their caps, as long as the caps are in perfect condition. Sure enough, I get great seals just by twisting the caps back on the Ultra bottles. Nice to just twist off the cap when you're ready to drink one! Caution: They are hard to twist off, so you may need a cloth or twist cap remover. I guess the CO2 builds up and swells the gasket, so it's on tighter than a commericially sealed twist off bottle.


OK, there's other things I have done that are off the wall too, but this is about all I can think of now. Just want everyone to know that my fermentation and carbonation times are all normal, my beer tastes normal, and you don't have to spend as much time and energy brewing. I'm not here to disrespect traditional methods, and I have the utmost respect for my fellow brewers. I just get frustrated because I read all these negative posts and people parroting what will happen if you do such and such. Also, I have scoured the forums for alternative methods, and while I have been immensely helped by discovering the BIAB, No Chill, and Stovetop Mash methods, I haven't really found much on short boil AG, boiling hops in water first for increased utilization, and just pouring instead of siphoning when transferring.

I hope you've enjoyed my post, and I welcome all points of view to discuss my processes or any other "far out there" methods. Please just be sincere, because this is not a joke, I seriously brew this way...and it's great!
 
However, I was put off immediately when I researched homebrewing and all the trouble and time this hobby required

This paragraph makes me wonder if you have every tried a "traditional" AG batch. Have you?

There had to be a better way, I thought.

Better is relative and subjective. Different is a more appropriate word here.

I'm hoping I can share some easy, shortcut brewing methods with others, and hoping that some other brewers will share their non-traditional brewing methods with me.

Nothing wrong with this, but realize that not everyone is looking to go the "easy" route. I've developed many ways to shorten my brew day to a manageable amount of time, but I enjoy every minute of the time I do spend brewing. If I was looking for a quick and easy brew day, I would boil some extract, add some hops, stick it in my freezer, then pitch some yeast once it cooled.

Please realize that all of these methods have been used repetitively and produced wonderful beer!

Hang around here long enough and you will see that there are alternatives to almost every single aspect of this hobby.

1. When I sanitize with StarSan, I use a gauged medicine dropper and only mix a pint to a quart of sanitizer at a time.

I mix up 5 gal batches because they allow me to just dump whatever needs to be sanitized into my large plastic tub and forget about it until I need it. But I reuse each 5 gal batch of StarSan for about 5-6 brew days, including my kegging/bottling and transferring days.

2. ...use a baster and squirt a full shot of StarSan into each bottle, swish around and dump back into your quart of pre-mixed StarSan. Do this one bottle at a time. Not as easy as bottle tree, but effective and cheap, with minimal equipment used.

Why waste so much time? ;)

I dump my already mixed, previously used 5 gal batch of StarSan into my plastic tub, put 45-55 bottles in there all at once, then start bottling. Your method has to take at least 4 times as long, if not more.

3. Ditch the Hydrometer. Get a Refractometer on eBay for cheap. Then download a free conversion program for pretty accurate post fermentation readings.

Personally, I prefer more than "pretty accurate", but that's just me. I tried a hydrometer at my friend's house and didn't see how it would save me any time or effort.

4. Brew in smaller quantities if you don't need 5 gallons at once. I have never brewed more than 4 gallons at a time, and my norm is 2 gallons. It's easy to convert from 5 gallon recipes and formulas. I usually brew 2 gallons one day, then the next day brew another 2 gallons of a different beer style.

This is kinda obvious.

5. I am a minimalist. I didn't want to buy a mill, so I used my Vita-Mixer blender to grind the grain very fine, almost flour. It's a myth that your end product will be hazy or that you will release tannins into the wort. You get better efficiency with a fine grind. It only takes me few minutes to grind my grain for a 3 gallon batch. I grind 1 lb at a time, and it takes less than 10seconds per lb in the blender (Vita-Mixer is commercial grade strength though).

Other than BIAB methods, this won't work because it would result in seriously stuck sparges. Yes, with small batch and/or BIAB, this is fine. Labs use a crush like this to make fermentable wort for experimentation. But with any other brewing method, this is not the best way to crush grains.

With my drill and my Barley Crusher, I can rip through 15lbs of grain in about 2 minutes flat. I don't see how you can be saving more than 30 seconds using your method, and you're only crushing a few pounds for your typically sized batch. Let's say you crush 4lbs of grain. That's 40 seconds of blender time alone, plus the time spent transferring the crushed grain and to-be-crushed grain as you finish each pound. Now that I think about it, your way might actually be slower.

6. I use a 5 gallon paint strainer bag and place it into the brew kettle. My grain bill is placed in the kettle, then tap water is added, and I turn the stove on high. When I'm approximately 20 degrees from mash temp, I remove the kettle, place the lid on, and monitor the temp until it's around 150 degrees. I then proceed to mash for only 30-45 minutes.

Plenty of people do this with full 5 gallon, and even 10 gallon batches. Nothing special here. I've done it for wheat beers with very high percentages of wheat.

I also have let my mash temp vary as much as 15 degrees with no ill effects.

This is the only part I have to call BS on. Let's figure a mash temp of 150º. You end up at 135º and you are basically doing a protein rest. You end up at 165º, and very few starches will be converted because most of the enzymes will denature. While a lot of literature will tell you that ALL enzymes will be dead at this temp, that isn't true. But most of them certainly will and you won't end up with much fermentable sugar. If you are serious about this statement, I'd love to try one of your beers mashed at 165º.

I don't worry anymore about a holding a constant mash temp, it doesn't seem to matter. As long as I'm somewhere around 150, I'm happy.

Only above average palates are going to be able to tell the difference between beers mashed +/-4-5º, nothing strange here. While you may get some newer or uneducated brewers on this forum arguing against that, anyone whose well read will agree to some extent with this statement.

I plan on experimenting with even shorter mash times in the future. So you can see, my mash is transitioning from room temp to mash temp in a few minutes. There's no need that I can see to have pre-heated water and add that to the grain. This is easier! No ill effects, I promise!

With good malts and an iodine test, even the most anal brewer can possibly start running off their mash in about 15 minutes. Many people do 60 minute mashes just to be sure they've achieved full conversion. You may be getting all of the possible sugars out of your grains doing it the way describe, but you also may not be. I prefer to know that I am.

7. When the mash time is over, I don't bother checking pH, conversion, or any other technical voodoo.

I've never checked for PH or conversion (not sure what other technical voodoo exists for the end of the mash).

I raise the temp to the low-mid 160's, stir vigorously, and remove the paint strainer (grain) bag, then place it in a 5 gallon bucket.

I don't mash out. My sparge water goes in at whatever temp the mash was.

8. Now, ready to boil, but not ready to add hops. Why? This one will blow you away: I place my hops in a pint of water in a separate small saucepan, and boil them SEPARATELY for ~2-3 minutes. This apparently has the effect of maximizing the hop utilization since the gravity of water is 0.

You definitely are not maximizing the hop utilization this way. There's loads of literature, from many different angles (using plain water, time, temp, etc) that backs this up. If you are happy with this method, that's fine, but it certainly is not maximizing your hop usage.

9. When my wort has started to boil, I skim off much of the hot break film.

A lot of people don't do this at all. I do with my lagers, but not my ales.

10. Now, I merely boil the wort for another 15-20 minutes, make sure I'm at my proper OG and volume levels, and remove from heat.

Do you have any picture of your beers? I'd love to see the clarity. Personally, I strive for beers with high clarity, but that is personal preference and nothing more.

11. The lid is placed on, saran wrap sealed around the lid/kettle junction...

Plenty of people do this, myself included.

The only drawback, temporary only, is that there is a cooked vegetable DMS smell the next day when you remove the lid.

This is more than likely because of your short boil time. I never smell DMS.

Also, never any chill haze in my beer, another myth busted!

I am not happy with a lager unless I can read through the glass.

12. ...but more chance of infection with plastic, it seems.

I don't own a single glass fermentor of any size or shape.

14. I scoffed at the notion that you just can't simply reuse twist off bottles and their caps, as long as the caps are in perfect condition. Sure enough, I get great seals just by twisting the caps back on the Ultra bottles.

You drink Ultra?

I haven't really found much on short boil AG,

Myself and many others have brewed without a boil at all.

boiling hops in water first for increased utilization,

You won't see that because it isn't true. There's plenty of lab-proven literature out there if you are interested.

Please just be sincere, because this is not a joke, I seriously brew this way...and it's great!

Every brewer should do what works for them. Other than your view on hop utilization and 15º temp swings in the mash, everything you mentioned here is personal preference and many others do either the same thing or something similar.

Brew on!
 
The icing on the cake would be if you entered your brews into competition and had wins.

Your methods are not too far out there. The common response is "people have been brewing for umpteen centuries".

No chill is the norm in australia. I use it occasionally during the summer months and with certian styles where late hop addition flavors/aroma are not factors.

Brew in a bag is another common mainstream means of extracting those sweet sugars.

Small batches of sanitizers, normal. Spray bottle of star san is my friend.

I'm not thrilled by your means of filling your bottles, in part because it seems that you are doing things the hard way! To each their own. A nice auto siphon and filler tip would be a huge time saver.

Small batches, jugs, standard. Many people keep their mr beers for that exact purpose. I like the idea of many smaller batches full of variety. Grandma used to make wine in a clay jar.

If reusing twist offs works for you, godspeed. A bench capper and bottle tree with a squirty vinerator would save a ton of labor.... of course this is a hobby... Labor is part of the game!

Not so "alternative" afterall! just different strokes for different folks. The end result is the same...a drinkable potent potable.
 
I bottle the same way. Very primitive. I just rack onto my priming sugar in a bucket and use a sanitized 4 cup measuring cup and a funnel to fill my bottles. I have yet to taste the wet cardboard! Still learning of course. So much to know!
 
I bottle the same way. Very primitive. I just rack onto my priming sugar in a bucket and use a sanitized 4 cup measuring cup and a funnel to fill my bottles. I have yet to taste the wet cardboard! Still learning of course. So much to know!

A bottling bucket and wand is fairly inexpensive and wil save time and is so much easier.
 
Wow, I just spent a lot of time reading through a lot of garbage.

If it produces beer you think is good, then have at it.

Some of your techniques are pretty standard, but some are not. Try making 5 gallons+ of a beer, using the same procedures. You might find they do not scale. I also think doing 5 gallons is easier than doing 5 x 1 gallon, or 2 x 2.5 gallons.

Personally, I do 7 gallon batches, and most times I think I don't have enough of each batch ... it goes too quickly. If I only had 12 or 24 bottles of a beer, it would be gone way too quick (Oops that's why you don't taste oxidation).

And I think your boiling hops for 2 minutes in water to get higher hop utilization is bull. I assume you put both the hops and the water in the wort boil after the 2 minutes to actually get some bitterness.
 
AirborneGuy:

I'm really astounded that you naturally chill in the kettle. That's cool!

I'm not trying to come across as illuminating the world with BIAB, No Chill, Stovetop Mashing, etc. How do you think I learned about it? The forums of course! I found out about using paint strainer bags, here, too. But still, it seems not many people are aware of it.

I am sure that I have read that hops are more highly utilized in lower gravities, making water the best thing for that purpose. BYO and even on this forum, I'm pretty sure I've read that. Part of the point of this post is to challenge conventional wisdom. Maybe there's a better way? When I don't boil separately, my beers haven't been as bitter. Why don't you try it?

As far as the 15 degree swing in mash temp, the range was from 145-160, still within normal mash temps. My point is that you don't need to hold it steady, that's my experience. Most of the time my temps vary from 148-156. If you read most any "how to" website or book you will see that I would have screwed up, for sure. But all's well in the end!

I've used a third less hops before than required utilizing my hop method, and had an IPA that I was worried about being too bitter, but it ultimately was the best IPA I've ever had. Maybe if the IBU's were actually measured with sophisticated equipment, then my brews wouldn't show as many IBU's, but the taste perception would be close to the same. How do I know? I've had plenty of commercial IPA's. My very first IPA tasted a little better than Longhammer, a very good IPA.

Indeed, the vegetal smell is probably from a short boil time, although it happens with extract, too. One third less boil time is worth it! All's well in the end, though. That is good info to know that you haven't had that smell. Does yours smell the same as if you quick chilled it?

No I don't drink Ultra, but it's not bad.

Of course what I'm posting is subjective. These are my experiences I hope will make it easier for others. Also save money, time resources and get out of the 5 gallon paradigm. Not everyone wants to brew big. The great majority of homebrewers brew 5 gallon batches, wouldn't you agree? Nothing wrong with that, BTW.

I like plastic fermenters, but anyone knows there's more chance for infections than glass or stainless. Just have to be more careful.

I skim the foam off just cause. Not suggesting that's alternative!

A lot of people would like a shorter, easier brew day when it comes to AG. I'm presenting some valid shortcuts. I enjoy brewing, too, but not if it is in the traditional time frame. I think a lot of processes are overdone. Just relax and make it simple, if the end result is acceptable.

I have and never will brew traditionally. That's kinda the point of this post, too. You better be sure that I've tasted plenty of traditionally brewed beer, and mine doesn't taste different in any bad way.

I assure you the process I have for grinding grain and sanitizing bottles is not a time consumer. They're both quick and easy and save money, water, and time.

Maybe you're not keen on refractometers. Pretty accurate is fine with me. I've not had any issues. Much quicker to use and versatile, one drop or two all that is needed, can use on boiling wort.

Why are you questioning the clarity of by beer? As I stated, no chill haze. Is my beer as clear as it could be? NO! But it's clear, and realize that my beer is not filtered and is bottle conditioned, and most of my beer isn't around past 6 weeks or so.

OK, you presented two things that I'm curious about; Your no boil All Grain that you and "many" others have performed. I have been interested in trying this. Can you expound on this? I haven't been able to find many threads on reduced time or no boil AG. Something tells me though, that it's probably better to boil at least ten minutes or more, just to get things meshed together.

Secondly, do you routinely "no chill in the kettle?" I would like to hear your opinions on that. Maybe you're doing something a little different than I am. I sometimes don't even bother with the plastic wrap.
 
Calder:

Sorry I wasted your time. Also sorry that you wasted time by posting. Try this: take some hops and boil them for 3 minutes in a pint of water. Then taste it after it cools. Man, that stuff is super bitter. Now boil the same amount of hops in the same gravity wort that you normally brew, also just one pint for 3 minutes.

Which one is more bitter? Nuff said...
 
Ramitt:

I never claimed that this was revolutionary. You have to admit this is not the norm. I have siphoned and used bottling buckets and wands plenty. I just thought that so many people think that if beer is poured instead of siphoned, that the beer would be ruined. Actually, some of best brews have been when I poured! Go figure!
 
Here's my thoughts on oxidation: I believe it is real as far as storage time goes, of course. But I am skeptical as to whether say, up to 6 months will make any difference after bottling. I've been meaning to save some bottles, but I just don't remember to.

Other things that have already been challenged are HSA, Chill Haze from slow cooling, DMS from short boils in the final product, shorter mash times, etc. Just think, if nobody ever challenged anything, where we would be today?
 
acidrain23:

Thank you for your post! I want to find out just how many more people are avoiding the "oxidation fairy" when they bottle.
 
One more thing. Could we please keep this civilized? Calling my methods "garbage" and bull and BS isn't very polite. It's downright insulting!

Anyone is welcome to post, but I want a constructive discussion. I expected plenty of disagreement, but the offensive posts are not helpful.

You may think I'm nuts, but if you really read the entire original post, you can see that this has worked for 2 years, now.

So chill out all, let's have some friendly discussion, please! I'm here to learn as well as share my brewing experiences.
 
My "issue", so to speak, is that a few of the attributes you are describing are highly subjective to personal preference and palate. I don't think you are getting chill haze from not cooling fast enough (actually, I don't recall that as a reason for chill haze), but I am 100% convinced you have hazy beers because of your extremely short boils. I can barely shine a flashlight through my no-boil beer that only used pilsner and wheat, but I've made porters with black malt that I can discern objects through.

I'm really astounded that you naturally chill in the kettle. That's cool!

Sometimes I do it in the kettle, sometimes in the fermentor. I find that it actually takes longer to chill if I leave it in the kettle. I started out leaving it in the kettle, but transfer to a fermentor now.

I am sure that I have read that hops are more highly utilized in lower gravities, making water the best thing for that purpose. BYO and even on this forum, I'm pretty sure I've read that. Part of the point of this post is to challenge conventional wisdom. Maybe there's a better way? When I don't boil separately, my beers haven't been as bitter. Why don't you try it?
I won't try it because I've read about this it in many brewing books and never seen any writer disagree with the fact that this isn't effective. Furthermore, if tis provided higher yield, commercial brewers would do it to cuts costs.

You are "tasting" (again, highly subjective) increased bitterness because there is nothing else in the solution to perceive. Not to mention, why would you do this anyway? Even if you did actually get a tiny bit of extra yield, you wouldn't save more than $1 on the batch size you are making. Seems kind of pointless to me.

As far as the 15 degree swing in mash temp, the range was from 145-160, still within normal mash temps.

When you said 15º swings, you didn't describe what you meant well. A 15º swing is how I described it when I responded to your original post. A 5º swing is what you are describing now, which is what I called perfectly acceptable in the very next quote down.

I've used a third less hops before than required utilizing my hop method, and had an IPA that I was worried about being too bitter, but it ultimately was the best IPA I've ever had. Maybe if the IBU's were actually measured with sophisticated equipment, then my brews wouldn't show as many IBU's, but the taste perception would be close to the same. How do I know? I've had plenty of commercial IPA's. My very first IPA tasted a little better than Longhammer, a very good IPA.

Again, too subjective. I've been handed some pretty bad beers by homebrewers who raved about them seconds before. Seeing is believing, no offense.

Does yours smell the same as if you quick chilled it?

I've never noticed a difference in smell between the two methods.

Also save money, time resources and get out of the 5 gallon paradigm. Not everyone wants to brew big. The great majority of homebrewers brew 5 gallon batches, wouldn't you agree?

This really isn't an issue anymore. Plenty of people brew different sized batches. I track my recipes using brewing software and can scale my batches up or down in seconds. I personally stick with 5.5 gallons batches because of my equipment. I also don't want to go through a batch in one weekend. I like to have a beer around for a few weeks.

That's kinda the point of this post, too. You better be sure that I've tasted plenty of traditionally brewed beer, and mine doesn't taste different in any bad way.

See here's where the subjectiveness shines. What does "in any bad way" mean? You're pretty much admitting here that your beers taste different. Different how?

I assure you the process I have for grinding grain and sanitizing bottles is not a time consumer. They're both quick and easy and save money, water, and time.

Impossible. If I had to squirt StarSan into each bottle and swirl it around, I would quit brewing. My bottle sanitizing method takes me as long as it takes to dump 50 bottles into a big plastic tub, maybe 30-40 seconds at most.

Why are you questioning the clarity of by beer? As I stated, no chill haze.

Because you saying "No chill haze" is not enough when I've read and experienced plenty of information that points to short boils leading to beers that won't clear due to less protein coagulation. I'm not accusing you have having chill haze. Chill haze changes through the temperature range of your beer.

Is my beer as clear as it could be? NO!

...and then you "cleared" that up for me anyway... :D

OK, you presented two things that I'm curious about; Your no boil All Grain that you and "many" others have performed. I have been interested in trying this. Can you expound on this?

It's traditional for some wheat beers. I used it on a Berliner Weisse. Some people use it on Wit beers. When I did it, I decocted a small amount of the wort with the hops to get some hop utilization, but did not boil the wort once it was run-off.
 
Revvy you are no longer needed please hand the Yoda avatar over to alterbrewer he is the new Jedi teacher he is.

Nah, I think I'll keep it. Methinks he needs to read some of our info. Then he wouldn't think things like no-chill is revolutionary.

And had he read our stuff he might have considered a vinator to sanitize his bottles, lot simpler and quicker than his method.

vinator.jpg


:fro:
 
AlterBrewer said:
Calder:

Sorry I wasted your time. Also sorry that you wasted time by posting. Try this: take some hops and boil them for 3 minutes in a pint of water. Then taste it after it cools. Man, that stuff is super bitter. Now boil the same amount of hops in the same gravity wort that you normally brew, also just one pint for 3 minutes.

Which one is more bitter? Nuff said...

Well of course it is more bitter in just water, there is no sugar present to work against the bitter... The main purpose of hops is to balance out the sugars in a beer, they work together in the recipe.

But I will challenge your logic on this. Try boiling some hops in a pint of water, add that to a pint of your wort and taste it. Now boil some hops in a pint of wort, add a pint of water to dilute the two to the same gravity. Taste the two side by side, I would bet that there is no perceivable difference.

If you are boiling the hops in plain water, yes the utilization is higher in that small concentration of water. But that doesn't mean that it will increase the utilization into the wort. You are still adding the same amount of IBU's into solution in your wort, you have to look at the bigger picture, not just the small amount of water/hop solution.
 
HollisBT said:
Well of course it is more bitter in just water, there is no sugar present to work against the bitter... The main purpose of hops is to balance out the sugars in a beer, they work together in the recipe.

+1 also for deliciousness and preventing spoilage.
 
A lot of good stuff, but the gravity of water under standard conditions is 1.00 by definition.
 
Afterbrewer....Thanks for your ideas, be they that different or not. I think the original idea of the thread is a good one. I'm still pretty new to this and always looking for different ideas and ways of doing things and would encourage other people to post their "out of the box" ideas as well. For example, I've never heard of no boil, unless using pre hopped kits like Coopers. So keep those new ideas coming. Whether people choose to try them or not is up to them.
 
I wouldn't say there is anything earth shattering in the post. The OP has mixed and matched various methods to craft a personal style of brewing.
When I read alternative methods, I thought, cool maybe somebody is mashing 80 lbs of grain in a preheated coal fired cement mixer... Or the folks using washing machines... Home scale continuous fermentation... Or something

What does "bother" me is the 2 minute hop boil in water. Adding hops over 60 minutes at various intervals, types, and quantities, allows a hop profile to be created with predictable results based on gravity and volume. Doing it in a 2 minute window would be difficult to replicate, and one may as well use hop extract. Opinion.
 
I avoid oxidation, but my method is hardly revolutionary. In fact it's the same procedure Vinney at Russian River uses.

I purge each keg or bottle with C02 prior to filling, push the beer to be racked through the siphon with C02, and pressurize the conical with C02 prior to transferring. Actually Russian River hits each vessel 3 times with C02 prior to beer being introduced, but even I don't go that far.

As far as the rest of the above mentioned steps, meh, if it works for you then brew strong brother. I brew to compete, and I would be quite curious to see how your beer placed after the above listed steps. I'll stick to my 5 hour brew days of smoking my pipe, enjoying time with my wife and son, and letting the dog run around like a fool. Brew days for us are just 5 hours when the whole family gets to enjoy the semi outdoors. (the brew house is a closed structure, but once the burners are on and the grains are mixed in its very hands off.) wait, that sounds pretty revolutionary!
 
I wonder if the boil in water alone is releasing a small but higher than normal amount of poly phenols from the hops. Thus contributing to perceived bitterness vs. true IBUs. Not saying its good or bad either way, FYI. The thing about this hobby that is always great is the wide range of techniques and "work arounds" people use. Cheers to any way you brew it as long as you brew it! Brew on!
 
brewchez said:
I wonder if the boil in water alone is releasing a small but higher than normal amount of poly phenols from the hops. Thus contributing to perceived bitterness vs. true IBUs. Not saying its good or bad either way, FYI. The thing about this hobby that is always great is the wide range of techniques and "work arounds" people use. Cheers to any way you brew it as long as you brew it! Brew on!

Even if that were the case, they still wouldn't be absorbed into the wort when you added it all in there. They would be absorbed at the same utilization factor that the wort would allow.

Also, I would think that the additional boiling might give a chance for some of the alpha to boil off. Albeit, a minuscule amount, but the idea of boiling it in just water is to get a minuscule increase in utilization.
 
I agree with cincydave. I enjoyed reading alterbrewer's post. I have only brewed a few batches in my first year of brewing(2 extract, 1 partial and I just did a BIAB ) and I was very strict about following the "rules" of brewing. Whether that was the instructions that came with the kit or what I have read in this forum or others. The BIAB was the first batch where I was not so uptight about brewday. Not that I am too uptight about it, I enjoy brewday-day either way. I had never heard of no-boil either. (what I haven't heard of could fill several libraries). I like hearing new ideas. I may incorporate one or more of them into my brew.

My 2 cents.
 
The hops boiled in water-v-wort issue goes to alterbrewer. It's really not a brewing question per se, it's a solution chemistry question: solubles, be they from hops or anything else, dissolve more readily in a less saturated solution of equal volume. That's why IBUs account for boil gravity.
One thing's for sure - whether you think the op was earth shattering or not, it stimulated a lot of interest and discussion. Let's face it, you can google search any topic and find HBT threads to learn from - the only reason to actually sign up is to bs and trade opinions about beer and brewing.
Hoppy brew year.
 
The hops boiled in water-v-wort issue goes to alterbrewer. It's really not a brewing question per se, it's a solution chemistry question: solubles, be they from hops or anything else, dissolve more readily in a less saturated solution of equal volume. That's why IBUs account for boil gravity.
One thing's for sure - whether you think the op was earth shattering or not, it stimulated a lot of interest and discussion. Let's face it, you can google search any topic and find HBT threads to learn from - the only reason to actually sign up is to bs and trade opinions about beer and brewing.
Hoppy brew year.

The OP talked about boiling in a small amount of water for a few minutes. Most calculators take into account the boil volume and time too.

...... Latest that is being touted, is that all the IBU calculators are wrong, and IBU extraction is dependent on time only, and not on gravity/sugar-concentration. I have yet to see any substantive information on this, but it seems to be getting some traction.
 
AlterBrewer

I'm new to brewing and appreciate the alternative perspectives. It's not surprising that the more set in their ways brewers would want to rebut you point for point.

I'm currently brewing using extract but use the late addition method to increase hop utilization. It would seem the same principle would apply to boiling hops in pure water, so I thought that was really interesting. I wonder what interaction there could be between the compounds in the malt and those in the hops that would make this undesirable to some?

Also, I like the idea of using smaller batches. Currently I could probably only manage a 5-gallon batch once a month or so as I'm saving for more sophisticated equipment. Smaller batches would allow me greater variety and more experience in a shorter time. Do you tend to do 2-stage fermentation with these? If so, what vessels do you prefer for primary and secondary?

-bben
 
If so, what vessels do you prefer for primary and secondary?

-bben

Secondary? And you said who is set in their ways? :rockin:

Since it's obvious you're talking about me, I think you are putting too much thought into the reason for my "rebuttal".

A lot of what this guy is doing is not "alternative" at all. Many of us to do it regularly. As a matter of fact, I would venture that he formed his opinion of what he thinks other homebrewers find verbotten from books, not from this forum, because it's a lot of the literature that's behind the times and slow to catch up to new tecniques. Some of what he characterized as "time saving" actually takes much longer than what more experienced homerbewers are doing.

I'm the last person to care what other people do with their beer or how they make it. But I try to some extent to pass some of my knowledge of what works on to people who might have something to learn. If you want to mash flour, mix it with hop water, and ferment it more power to you.
 
Airborneguy

It's not only a matter of whether a secondary is necessary or preferable. Depending on the vessels, the use of a secondary could allow me to start a new batch in the primary sooner. And more batches in shorter time is my goal.
 
AlterBrewer

I'm new to brewing and appreciate the alternative perspectives. It's not surprising that the more set in their ways brewers would want to rebut you point for point.

I'm currently brewing using extract but use the late addition method to increase hop utilization. It would seem the same principle would apply to boiling hops in pure water, so I thought that was really interesting. I wonder what interaction there could be between the compounds in the malt and those in the hops that would make this undesirable to some?

Also, I like the idea of using smaller batches. Currently I could probably only manage a 5-gallon batch once a month or so as I'm saving for more sophisticated equipment. Smaller batches would allow me greater variety and more experience in a shorter time. Do you tend to do 2-stage fermentation with these? If so, what vessels do you prefer for primary and secondary?

-bben

I have only tried secondary twice. Too much trouble for someone like me. Didn't see any clearer beer or better tasting beer. Good idea if you only have one fermenter, though, so you can ferment another batch.
 
I think if you use a "secondary fermentation" for what it actually is then you'd see some improved results. To rack the beer to another carboy after fermentation with no additions of any adjuncts or yeast is not secondary fermentation; that is simply conditioning or a brite tank. I use secondary fermentations quite often (being I ferment in conicals this is the same vessel.) I use a secondary fermentation after primary fermentation has completed, and I'm adding another yeast to either dry out the beer or add another characteristic such as Brett or lacto. In this instance a secondary fermentation is taking place being that another yeast strain is mowing through residual sugars or more complex non-fermentables pure strains of brewers yeast can't manage. Sometimes I need to run off the primary yeast and add a yeast that has a higher alcohol resistance to finish fermentation. If I am dry hopping or adding oak I am not doing a secondary fermentation at all, but rather conditioning the finished beer.

Many here including myself have said many times over that moving beer to a separate vessel for no reason is an outdated, risky, and un-needed procedure.
 
squirrelly

I understand that the risk of autolysis is considered low for most fermentation times, but what about getting the off flavors that could be encountered from leaving one's beer on the trub? Or is that generally discarded before fermentation?
 
Are you referring to my method of secondary fermentation? I use stainless conicals for fermentation which allow me to harvest my yeast to re-pitch and dump the trub once fermentation is complete. By using this method I do not disturb the beer, can pressurize the fermenter with C02, and still remove any trub.
 
I've learned a lot from the "alternative" spirits on this board, so cheers to that. However, every new brewer tends to think that they are the spearhead of a brewing revolution, so I tend to take their decrees with liberal skepticism. No offense intended...I've been guilty myself...in my case, I eventually realized that my newbie beers just weren't as great as I thought they were, so my process has gotten more traditional over the years.

I wouldn't take issue with any of your particular techniques. If it works in your brewhouse, carry on. Overall I would warn that:
(1) Taste is subjective. Others may not agree that your results hit the mark. Still others may have goals beyond a cheaper beer supply, a shorter brew day, or a "normal" taste with no "ill effects."​
(2) Not all techniques scale well to other volumes, or translate well to other systems. The traditional techniques are "traditional" because they work for most people, most of the time. Everyone should feel free to pick and choose from the toolbox, but I'd be careful before insinuating that any of the tools are obsolete for everyone.​
 
Back
Top