Vinter/Mazer-turned-Brewer made dumb mistake, needs advice.

I am an interemediate vinter and mazer, but have only recently ventured into the realm of beer. Unfortunatly, I've already hit a snafu.

I found an Alaskan Amber clone recipe, whipped it up without problems. When doing my first racking I noticed the brew was disappointingly weak and watered-down. Then I realized my STUPID mistake; I had filled my primary to SIX gallons, not FIVE gallons as I was supposed to.

So, now I have a halfway-through-secondary batch of watered-down Alaskan Amber clone brew that is hardly fit to drink (My fav beer is Guinness; I like beer with balls! Watered-down beer is not acceptable!). Can it be saved? Can I make up another batch of super concentrated wort and pitch it in with my current brew? Or...?

Help!

Thanks,

Surfrider

It shouldn't be too terrible. There's two aspects to "watered down" - the gravity and the bitterness. I think probably what you are concerned about is the bitterness, not the gravity, so the concentrated wort idea wouldn't really help that.

Gravity

I'm assuming your target gravity should have been something like 1.055 (appropriate for the style), so assuming you did everything else properly and were right in that range you would have had 275 gravity units (GUs) (55 * 5). However, you added an additional gallong of water, so we divide these GUs by 6 and your actual gravity should be somewhere around 1.045. Granted, this is a fair amount less, but definitely not enough to ruin the beer or make it undrinkable or anything like that. In fact, it might even still be within the style parameters.

Bitterness

Same idea. Your American Amber probably would have had IBUs around 25 or so. Total BUs of like 125 / 6 = 21. Still not that bad. Of course, if you're a Guiness fan, you probably wouldn't notice that much hop variation anyway.

Personally, I'd just leave it alone, drink it, and mark it up to experience. Since it's already most of the way through the secondary, it's mostly done and I just don't like screwing with stuff. However, if you can't keep yourself from messing with it or won't drink it, here's what you can do.

You want to up your gravity by 10 points, therefore total GU addition equals 60 (because of 6 gallons). DME has point per pound per gallon of 37. You should take about 2 pounds of Light or Amber (probably more appropriate for the beer) and mix it with a quart or so of water (as little as possible). Boil for about 15 minutes or so to ensure sanitization. Cool to 70 degrees or so (don't want to dump it in there and kill the few remaining yeasties) and dump it in there.

P.S. sorry for the overly long post.

This particular dilema got me wondering if dry-hopping is a method that would yield better taste results to compensate for the extra gallon of water?

I know you mentioned how you liked Guinness which isn't high on the IBU list but at this point it seems like not the issue at hand. It's more like making this current batch as good as it can be.....

just wondering.

Dry hopping won't compensate for a lack of malt or low bitterness. (granted in the PNW two oz. of Cascades will fix anything). I think cowain covered it well. Plan on a couple extra weeks in the secondary and you may have to rack a second time.

Well, first off, thanks for the speedy reply; I do appreciate the input. Now, to the important stuff:

I did not mis-speak in my original post; when I used the term "watered down," I meant it literally. I.e., the flavor profile of my brew is spot-on Alaskan Amber, it just tastes like it's been diluted with water. It is certainly not under-hopped (for either bitterness or aroma), and while the final ABV is/will be pretty low (a little predictive math indicates somewhere around 3.3%), I am not the sort who feels a high ABV is a requirment for a good beer. I am, however, the sort that feels that a high, umm, "flavor volume" IS. That said, leaving the brew as-is is simply not an option. *I* would not drink it, and I'd be embaressed to serve to others; it's not something I'd care to have my name on. But, again, I assert that the flavor profile is nearly perfect, it's just not intense enough.

Anyway, as for raising the gravity, I did give that some thought. Although, being a mazer, I must admit that my first thought was "Hmm, I wonder if I could feed this (the fermenting batch) some honey....?" When making meads, we will often add flavoring agents (fruits, spices, varietal honies, et cetera) to the secondary as doing so tends to preserve the flavor of the additive better than adding it during primary. Can I add more malt extract now and expect more malt character to be preserved through to the final product?

Dry-hopping was also mentioned. I am (academically) familliar with the process, but not as a band-aid procedure to fix a flawed brew. Being a brewing neophyte, I'd like some input from experienced brewers before I make such a move. Of course I'm aware that doing so would change the flavor profile away from the Alaskan Amber it was indended to emulate, but that's not neccessarily a bad thing, so long as the final result is actually more pleasing than what I have now.

Is mashing up some more grains to make a concentrated, low-volume wort, and adding said wart to the fermenter even an option? Possible but ill-advised?

As I said, I have to do SOMETHING. I just don't want that somethign to be to pour all this brew down the drain.

Again, thanks for the help.

-Surfrider



PS: And although Guinness is my favorite brew, I'm also a fan of some rather stinky, hoppy Belgian (et al) beers. So yes, I may well notice a less than dramatic change in the hops level.

Hey Surf,

I don't really know, but I don't really think that there would necessarily be anything harmful in adding some more concentrated wort to the secondary.

How much extra space do you have in the fermenter?

If you absolutely want 'more' then my suggestion would be to do an extra mash, and after you've done that, add, for example some honey to give it that extra bit of gravity (and taste). Cool it and add it to the secondary.

What I would say though, is that by doing this, I would suggest that it is essentially a bit like turning back the clock. After sparking up the secondary with a new load of fermentables, you should probably count it as being back at the primary stage and will still have to rack to a new secondary in a week or so.

Personally, I think I'd try and look at what other styles this beer might be "converted" to - or become an approximation of. Adding honey or brown sugar could give some nice flavours to the beer. It won't be the taste you were going for originally, but that doesn't mean it can't be a really good beer.

Of course, I don't know the recipe you've used there, so I don't know what you'd benefit from going for.

I have never heard it recommended to add some new wort to the secondary, but on the other hand I've also never heard it shouldn't be possible. Why not try it? And if you do, please let us know how it turns out, as that would be interesting to see. If it works it's good, if it doesn't, well it was worth a try and we might all learn something from it.

Well, I might anyway.

Cheers,

Jens-Kristian

Here's the recipe I used:

Alaskan Alber Clone
OG: 1.04
FG: 1.01
ABV: 3.9%
SRM: 23.5
IBU: 39.5

7 lbs Light Malt Syrup
.5 lbs Cara-Pils Dextrine
.33lb Crystal 901v
.33lb Crystal 120
2oz Special B
1oz Roasted Barley

2oz Fuggles (4.4%, 60 min boil)
1oz Mt. Hood (3%, 15 min boil)
1oz Mt. Hood (3%, dry hop to secondary)

Wyeast (1007) German Alt.

Mashed grains at 150 for 15 mins, then strained and sparged. Added extract and bittering hops and above listed times. Added wort to primary, filled with cold water to six gallons (when I should have added 5! ), pitched yeast at about 80 degrees, aerated. Fermented in plastic primary for 6 days (it made a LOT of krausen, btw..this is partly due to sparging, right?). Racked to glass carboy for secondary ferment, added dry hops. And here I am.

Personally, I think I'd try and look at what other styles this beer might be "converted" to - or become an approximation of. Adding honey or brown sugar could give some nice flavours to the beer.

Click to expand...

Excellent idea. Suggestions? As I mentioned perviously, I'm not stuck on keeping it exactly like it was originally intended to be, so long as I get a more full-bodied beer than what I'm going to have now. However, being a newbie, I'm hesitant to just start throwing in more ingredients without knowing what I'm doing. Is the addition of just the malt extract that Cowais suggested really going to be enough to flesh out this batch?

Thanks so much.

-Surfrider

Surfrider said:

Mashed grains at 150 for 15 mins, then strained and sparged.

Click to expand...

you didn't mash...you steeped.

Surfrider said:

Fermented in plastic primary for 6 days (it made a LOT of krausen, btw..this is partly due to sparging, right?).

Click to expand...

krausen volume is unrelated to sparging, methinks...
i know this is not terribly helpful for your current situation...just general education

Right . . .

Firstly, I'll just point out that I'm an AG brewer and I've never tried extract, so I have no actual experience with it as such.

I ran the numbers through a beercalculator I use, and it shows your OG should have been around the 1055 at 5 Gallons and 1045-47 as cowain suggested. With decent attenuation of 75% or so, it should still give fairly well on the alcohol side (around 4.7%) though I agree with you that taste is so much more important than alcohol. Just remember I'm used to calculating on AG mashes, so I might be a bit off.

As for the taste . . . Well, I think you should go for the mix of extract of your choice really. You could basically get the same stuff as you've alreay used for the original batch and try to add that in an amount suitable for the extra gallon of water? Just remember to boil it first so it is desinfected.

Alternatively, honey and brown candied sugar can give some really good tastes for the beer, in which case I'd probably go for a couple of hundred grammes of the candied sugar and about the same in honey. If you do that, it should take you up to an OG (or what would be an OG if you were at the start) of 1055. If you go for this option though, you'll most likely get a fruitier taste from the beer than what I perceive was originally the idea. Still, could be a fine beer, just different and perhaps more Continental European in style.

It's not unlikely that it'll take a fair bit longer to condition and so on, but hey, it's worth a shot.

I think you might get practically the intended brew by adding the extra extract to make up for the extra gallon.

Just to point one thing out though, I have not tried this method myself and I really can't guarantee it'll get what you'd like out of your beer. It's just a suggestion for what I might do myself if in the same situation.

No matter what you decide on doing though, I really would love to hear what comes of it!

Cheers,

Jens-Kristian

Lou said:

you didn't mash...you steeped.
i know this is not terribly helpful for your current situation...just general education

Click to expand...

No no, quite alright; I'm a stickler for proper terminology. Thanks for correcting me.

Jens-Kristian said:

Alternatively, honey and brown candied sugar can give some really good tastes for the beer, in which case I'd probably go for a couple of hundred grammes of the candied sugar and about the same in honey. If you do that, it should take you up to an OG (or what would be an OG if you were at the start) of 1055. If you go for this option though, you'll most likely get a fruitier taste from the beer than what I perceive was originally the idea. Still, could be a fine beer, just different and perhaps more Continental European in style.

Click to expand...

This idea sounds most excellent. Baring any other suggestions from other members (hint, hint) that tickle my fancy even more, I may well take this route.

It's not unlikely that it'll take a fair bit longer to condition and so on, but hey, it's worth a shot.

Click to expand...

Meh. NBD. Meads take years to peak, so a few extra weeks waiting on this beer is no big deal.

No matter what you decide on doing though, I really would love to hear what comes of it!

Click to expand...

Absolutely. Whichever route I take, I will post my progress and final results here.

-Surfrider

Yeah, I don't mind waiting for a beer either. It's worth it if it's good.

As for the dark candied sugar, I just did a Belgian that borders on a Tripel and used about 350 grammes of it, and ended up with priming my bottles with another 140 grammes as well as 35 grammes of honey. It tastes wonderful.

I checked in the calculator and it takes it up in OG to about 1059 if you use 400 grammes of sugar and 200 gr. honey.

So either the honey or sugar (or both) - it is still a relatively light tasting beer but has great taste.

Sometime when I have the time to get into it I really want to try to do mead, too. It's fairly easy to get in the shops here - I live in Denmark.

Cheers,

Jens-Kristian

Funny story. Somehow this keg got buried in the basement and forgotten, only to be re-discovered last weekend. As promised, this post is a followup, albeit a few years later than intended.

I followed Jens-Kristian's advice and, as I recall, added about 300 grams of dark brown sugar, and 300 grams of buckwheat honey which, as one would expect, restarted vigorous fermentation. I also added in a just a smattering of orange zest. I don't remember much else, but I can say for certain that once the...tertiary fermentation slowed down, I transferred the beer out of it's 6-gallon bucket into a corny keg for quaternary fermentation and bulk aging (leaving behind about two inches of lees in the previous vessel). And there it sat for over three years, until it was rediscovered a few days ago. It should come as little surprise that the beer was initially overcarbonated, but once the keg was sufficiently degassed and chilled, I dispensed it into a standard pint glass, and sampled. Here is the result:



Serendipity of the most spectacular, and ridiculously unlikely kind; this beer is brilliant!

There is a very strong, bright, distinct fruit character on the nose; yellow and red plums, and maybe...I know this is going to sound weird...the tiniest hint of mango? It's odd, but very pleasant. There are a lot of toasty, sugary, caramel-y notes on the nose, too. And lastly, there's the alcohol; this is the best (and oddest) part. When you first take the first whiff, there's no mistaking that this is a high-gravity concoction; the presence of alcohol is vast. But (and here's where it gets weird), it's very mellow, and very smooth; there is none of that sharp, burning, engine degreaser character that I've experienced in some other highly alcoholic brews. I'd almost describe the alcohol scent as "rich." It's very odd. The best way I can desribe it is like this: the alcohol character doesn't make you think "Wow, I couldn't drink too many of these,," it makes you tell yourself "Wow, I shouldn't drink too many of these!" (I'm not sure if that will maks sense to anybody else...)

The flavor profile is a just a stronger, sweeter, slightly tangy version of the nose highlighted with a bright, acidic, almost lemony note. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there is a a deep, pervasive, but not overpowering yeasty flavor that acts as more of a backdrop for the others. It's like a good bassline; you're immediately aware of it's presence, but it's not the first thing that grabs your attention, yet if you concentrate on it for a moment you realize the whole really is the sum of it's parts, and that this is a very, very important part.

You know how a lemon cream sauce has a the smooth taste of butterfat that is highlighted by the sharp, acidic point from the lemon? And even though the two elements seem like an unlikely pair, they just "work?" The effect of this beer's finish has a similar kind of effect. Compared to the main bouquet, the finish is smoother, softer, and the flavors are more....homogenized, merged into one single flavor, as opposed to a collection of flavors that work well with one another. Overall, it is mildly sweet and smooth, but there is just the tiniest hint of an acidic crispness. The last thing you take away from a swallow is a reminder of of the alcohol content; it's not intrusive at all, but you definitely know it's there, and you definitely know it's big.



Having just re-read what I've written, it occurs to me that it might all sound a little silly, or perhaps hard to follow. Sorry. But, I realized that I've never analyzed a beer this closely before (and relatively few wines as well), and I really got thinking about what I was experiencing. Anyway, if anybody has some of these ingredients laying around and is up for an experiment, I'd recommend this heartily. I am going to make another batch as soon as possible, but I'm pretty skeptical that I'll be able to recreate what I suspect if a freak stroke of luck. Whatever happens, I'll be sure to let you all know.

Thanks for the guidance. Cheers.

So I'll go ahead and play contrarian: I'd let it ride.

I don't think you've "ruined" a drinkable beer. Your starting gravity is in the 50s rather tahn the 60s, but many a fine beer started lower. While, it's certainly not as strong as the original recipe, I think it will turn out beer.

When tasting pre-carbonation, it usually seems to me to be a bit watery also. After you carb, it will be more palatable.

So, RDWHAHB and leave the beer alone, drink it when it's ready.

It's ruined. Please send it to me for proper disposal.

Okay, well, now I see that this is a zombie thread.

Weird, when I replied, Surfriders response was not visible. Jens-Kristian's reply was the last post, but yet is was at the top of the Beginner brew... ah well.

Glad it all worked out.