FWH only recipe question

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.

oldthomas

New Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2011
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Location
Peoria
My question is whether or not only a FWH addition will bitter adequately. I've used the technique but have never made a recipe with only a FWH addition. I'm more or less committed to the recipe below, but I'd like to hear from the experienced. How would you describe your FWH only beers?

Recipe:
10# Maris Otter
3# Rye
1# Special B
2 oz Willamette FWH
WY3522 yeast

Thoughts?
 
I've done FWH and dry hop. FWH is nice but you're going to be lacking in the aroma department with the final product.
 
I don't do IPA's but I do FWH all my other beers (Belgians and German lagers mostly). Any aroma hops go in at flameout, no hops in between FWH and flameout.
 
You generally need to up the amounts since a FWH is closer to a 20min add in IBUs. I'd also recommend a dry hop for the aroma
 
helibrewer said:
I don't do IPA's but I do FWH all my other beers (Belgians and German lagers mostly). Any aroma hops go in at flameout, no hops in between FWH and flameout.

Could you give me an example Belgian recipe that was a success?
 
You generally need to up the amounts since a FWH is closer to a 20min add in IBUs. I'd also recommend a dry hop for the aroma

With all due respect, why is this? Have you experimented to confirm this yourself? I know this is the oft-repeated "common knowledge" but I have done a few side-by-side tests with standard 60 minute addtition vs exact same amount as FWH. The percieved bitterness seemed the same to me and others that have tasted the experiments but there is something "different" about the FWH bittering. It's much more mellow and seems to hit the back off your tongue as it finishes.

The reason I did the experiments is that no one could tell me why hops that were boiled for over 60 minutes (FWH) should result in LESS bitterness than the standard 60 minute boil of bittering hops. So, why should a standard bittering charge boiled for 60 minutes give you "x" amount of IBU's but the same amount done as a FWH (and boiled longer than 60 minutes) only give you 20 minutes worth of IBU's?

I'm not trying to be combative, just so tired of the same old "truths" being repeated constantly and taken as gospel. Doesn't anybody else think to challenege these facts that just don't seem "right" or am I just some kind of rebellious freak?
 
With all due respect, why is this? Have you experimented to confirm this yourself? I know this is the oft-repeated "common knowledge" but I have done a few side-by-side tests with standard 60 minute addtition vs exact same amount as FWH. The percieved bitterness seemed the same to me and others that have tasted the experiments but there is something "different" about the FWH bittering. It's much more mellow and seems to hit the back off your tongue as it finishes.

The reason I did the experiments is that no one could tell me why hops that were boiled for over 60 minutes (FWH) should result in LESS bitterness than the standard 60 minute boil of bittering hops. So, why should a standard bittering charge boiled for 60 minutes give you "x" amount of IBU's but the same amount done as a FWH (and boiled longer than 60 minutes) only give you 20 minutes worth of IBU's?

I'm not trying to be combative, just so tired of the same old "truths" being repeated constantly and taken as gospel. Doesn't anybody else think to challenege these facts that just don't seem "right" or am I just some kind of rebellious freak?

I have done the experiment and had the beers measured. I had many tasters in a blind triangle tasting. My conclusion is that although the FWH only beers measured about 10% more IBU, they tasted less bitter.
 
So the measured IBU is actually higher? That would seem to confirm the theory that the longer boil of the FWH does result in more IBU.

I suppose that the "perceived" bitterness could be subjective dependent upon the individual taster? Perhaps the FWH bittering being less "harsh" could be construed as "less" bitter? Too many variables related to the palate of the individuals doing the tasting but I am glad to see that the actual measurement supports the thoery that longer boil = higher IBU (even though the perception of those higher IBU's in different). Thanks for the input!
 
So the measured IBU is actually higher? That would seem to confirm the theory that the longer boil of the FWH does result in more IBU.

I suppose that the "perceived" bitterness could be subjective dependent upon the individual taster? Perhaps the FWH bittering being less "harsh" could be construed as "less" bitter? Too many variables related to the palate of the individuals doing the tasting but I am glad to see that the actual measurement supports the thoery that longer boil = higher IBU (even though the perception of those higher IBU's in different). Thanks for the input!

My tasters included, but were not limited to, BJCP Grand Master judges and commercial brewers. You can read the results here http://www.ahaconference.org/wp-content/uploads/presentations/2008/DennyConn.pdf starting on pg. 29.
 
And THAT is the kind of rebellious brewing I'm talking about! Excellent paper and documentation, wish more folks would do stuff like that and publish the results.

FWIW, the results of my decoction experiment start on pg. 25 of that same presentation.
 
I love hops and I really liked the attributes of FWH. While brewing a few IIPAs I noticed that they were measuring at 100 IBUs but the impression was perceived around similar beers in 70-80 range. I FWH all of my beers and go to the end of scale on IBUs for almost every style, but I noticed they all seemed to be smoother and almost not hoppy or bitter enough. Now I have started adding .1-.2oz at 60 minutes to give a little more hop bite for a more perceived bitterness. After reading about FWH seeming more like a 20min add I now write my recipes by adding all the hops and then changing FWH to 20min to see the change in IBUs and hence how much more I need to add to hit the bittering perception I'm aiming for. Ex. would be a 100 IBU IIPA I would calculate for 120-ish to hit the mark.
 
There's a lot of great information in that .pdf Denny, thanks for sharing. It's definitely interesting that most people could not pick out the FWH beer. I know I probably wouldn't be able to (in a blind test) I just wish there was a clear definitive statement that said something like "Even though FWH are in for the full boil (and then some), we've found that process x determines the perceived bitterness, and so the results show that hops added during initial boil phase will give off more bitterness." What is that process! I also like the info on decoction brewing, interesting that the most preferred was the decocted while the infused had more body (as I find that's something I really enjoy about certain beers, that you can get so much body), but I've found 1450 to help me out there.
 
With all due respect, why is this? Have you experimented to confirm this yourself? I know this is the oft-repeated "common knowledge" but I have done a few side-by-side tests with standard 60 minute addtition vs exact same amount as FWH. The percieved bitterness seemed the same to me and others that have tasted the experiments but there is something "different" about the FWH bittering. It's much more mellow and seems to hit the back off your tongue as it finishes.

The reason I did the experiments is that no one could tell me why hops that were boiled for over 60 minutes (FWH) should result in LESS bitterness than the standard 60 minute boil of bittering hops. So, why should a standard bittering charge boiled for 60 minutes give you "x" amount of IBU's but the same amount done as a FWH (and boiled longer than 60 minutes) only give you 20 minutes worth of IBU's?

I'm not trying to be combative, just so tired of the same old "truths" being repeated constantly and taken as gospel. Doesn't anybody else think to challenege these facts that just don't seem "right" or am I just some kind of rebellious freak?


I read a BYO article that found similar results and to the taste. Not more bitterness but smoother more complex bitterness.
 
There's a lot of great information in that .pdf Denny, thanks for sharing. It's definitely interesting that most people could not pick out the FWH beer. I know I probably wouldn't be able to (in a blind test) I just wish there was a clear definitive statement that said something like "Even though FWH are in for the full boil (and then some), we've found that process x determines the perceived bitterness, and so the results show that hops added during initial boil phase will give off more bitterness." What is that process! I also like the info on decoction brewing, interesting that the most preferred was the decocted while the infused had more body (as I find that's something I really enjoy about certain beers, that you can get so much body), but I've found 1450 to help me out there.

But if you add the results of no preference and non decocted preference, it's more than preferred decocted. That says to me that there's no real preference for the decocted beers.
 
Personally, I FWH all of my beers. It's easy and I like the bitterness profiles I'm getting. My formula says that the FWH gives slightly less IBU's, but it's very, very minimal. I'm assuming the author of the spreadsheet set it up this way due to the perceived bitterness.
 
So the measured IBU is actually higher? That would seem to confirm the theory that the longer boil of the FWH does result in more IBU.

I suppose that the "perceived" bitterness could be subjective dependent upon the individual taster? Perhaps the FWH bittering being less "harsh" could be construed as "less" bitter? Too many variables related to the palate of the individuals doing the tasting but I am glad to see that the actual measurement supports the thoery that longer boil = higher IBU (even though the perception of those higher IBU's in different). Thanks for the input!

Subjective, sort of. 11/12 people in the most prominent study preferred the FWH beer and perceived the beer as less bitter. But that does leave 1/12 for your subjective palate theory. It's not 100% I guess haha. Denny's experiment is really interesting too though. I know the original study I'm citing used noble hops. I wonder if it's actually that limited. It is an old German technique.
 
Denny,

Thank you for posting your paper(s)! While I sort of expected the results you got in FWH-ing, I've always wanted to know what highly trained & experienced palates would report.

EDIT: I also love the overall theory behind your presentation: making the best beer possible with a reasonable amount of effort :)
 
Good info. I had started FWH all batch's bittering additions out of shear simplicity and laziness. I always use a pils malt due to availability in my area, thus a 90 minute boil. And unless using someone else's recipe, I do any remaining additions after 20 minutes. Thus I have over an hour of clean up time from the mash... much more considering it takes me almost an hour to hit a boil at the moment. I never did a back to back, but was happy with the beers. Good to see someone did the test.
 
Back
Top