brettanomyces behavior

Hi all,

I've been poking around these pages for a bit trying to "distill" out the behavior of Brettanomyces, and am confused slightly on something. It sounds as if under some conditions Brettanomyces goes very, very slowly and superattenuates, taking upwards of a year to complete its work. Under other conditions, it ferments just slightly slower than Sacc, or sometimes at the same rate.

I'm curious: does anyone have a summary of those conditions? I'm trying to decide an a next brew, and have only dabbled in Brett before (cultured from the dregs of Victory's Wild Devil), where I mixed it with bread yeast in primary and the whole thing went down from about 1.07 to 1.008 in about two months time, and the result, while ever so slightly sour, was hardly "funky" at all. (But, then, neither was Wild Devil!)

So, I guess another way of putting my question: does anyone have a good summary chart of how to control brett behavior?

Thanks,
Matt

Use Brett yeast in place of a sacc yeast and it will ferment similarly to a normal fermentation. It will give lots of fruit flavors and little (if any) typical Brett 'Barnyard' flavors. Need a big starter and ensure you aerate the wort well.

Add it either with or after a normal sacc yeast and the sacc will do most of the primary fermentation, and the Brett will be left with the scraps. In this case you will get flavors more associated with Brett beers. It will take a long time, it can take 6 months to get any Brett flavors to start coming out. In this case, you do not need a starter, and I think under-pitching is a good thing so as to stress the Brett increasing it's flavors.

Brett does not really produce 'Sour', there is some debate as to whether it contributes some slight sourness, but certainly nothing like you get in a Lambic or Flanders; the Sour in those beers are produced by other organisms.

every brett i've done has attenuated very well and every one has also done it slowly. others may have different experiences but brett has been very subtle for me... haven't had what i'd call a vigorous brett fermentation yet.

Just finished with 4 different brett fermentations (Brett A, Brett L from both Wyeast and White Labs, and Russian River Chips). These were all primary ferments with the same wort. Each carboy had 6 gallons each, and I added in about a 1/2 gallon starter of each yeast (decanted and swirled). Didn't oxygenate except for shaking the carboys.

Brett A took off first and vigorous. Brett L from WY same thing, a little slower than the Brett A. Brett L from WL developed a thin sheen on top for 2 days, yet it took about 3 days to develop that. Then it took off like the others. The Russian River chips took about a week to get going then they went bonkers as well.

The next step of this experiment is to take the same wort, we brewed 48 gallons, which was fermented with 530 and secondary on those 4 brett strains. I expect that ferment to be slow and low for a few months.

No samples taken yet, I expect to this weekend. Will report back with results.

brett a? - i'm only aware of b, c and l.

here is a good talk from NHC this year about brewing with brett.

http://www.ahaconference.org/confer...tions/attachment/6-16-2011-nhc-brettanomyces/

Also the babble belt is a good resource for all things brett and sour.

I have found that, like others, when using brett for primary fermentations, and pitching it at similar rates as sac 1x10^6/1ºP/1ml. It will behave similarly, and can produce surprisingly clean beers. Using it for a primary fermentation and under pitching can result in more brett character. ( at least thats what I have found)

Brett used as a secondary fermentation is what it is commonly used for. as well as using multiple brett strains.

jtakacs said:

brett a? - i'm only aware of b, c and l.

Click to expand...

Brett Anomolus (sp?) It was in production but eventually replaced by Brett C. Had a discussion with Jamil about it on Monday and asked him though his experience and connections if Brett A = Brett C and he said most definitely not. Brett A was isolated from English Casks and when added to a porter adds a nice level of complexity, not a lot of funk, but enough to make you ask what is that?

I did an All Brett A Pale Ale with 7 oz of Amarillo at 10 mins and that is one great beer. Smoky, some leather, and a hint of pineapple to go along with the Amarillo hops.

Inhiding said:

Brett Anomolus (sp?) It was in production but eventually replaced by Brett C. Had a discussion with Jamil about it on Monday and asked him though his experience and connections if Brett A = Brett C and he said most definitely not.

Click to expand...

Brett Cl. is Brett A, genetically. That doesn't mean it can't taste different- Saccharomyces ranges in flavor expression from Budweiser to Saison Dupont.

Thanks folks! I was curious, because I'm wanting to experiment with yeasts, but not wanting to bite the bullet and take on year-long to multi-year fermentation times.

What range of beers can be made with an all Brett fermentation, say Bruxellensis? Any reason why not to do something along the lines of a Belgian Dark Strong?

Any beer that tastes OK with a fruity taste. My Brett beers are similar to Saisons.

Folks,

Thanks for all the above comments about Brett. Starting from them, I've decided to try my hand at an all Brett "version" of a Belgian Quad, and am wondering if folks would give the developing recipe a look, especially with an eye to Brett B.'s behavior, and tell me if it looks like it'll work. I'm thinking about something along the following lines:

Recipe for 4.5 gal:
8 lbs two-row
1 lb Special "B"
2 lbs flaked rye
2 lbs dark Munich

Infusion mash in for a beta-glucan / protien rest of 113degF for 20 min, raise temp to 149deg F using a single decoction for a sacharification rest for 60 min, raise temp to mashout of 169 using a second decoction.

Boil down to about 4 gal, using Brewer's Gold hops for bittering and flavor (no aroma additions), and adding 3 lbs homemade dark candi syrup using this recipe. Expected OG (according to QBrew): 1.100. Cool rapidly, then pitch a LARGE starter (half gal, see below) built up from a single vial of WLP560. Once fermentation has slowed down, rack to secondary on top of one oz. American oak cubes soaked in something -- I'm leaning either towards port or bourbon. Wait about a month to a month and a half, then bottle as normal.

Specific questions (besides just the general "will Brett Brux eat through this"):

1) How large a starter? It sounds like some people build up a half-gallon starter slowly over two weeks, and that works quite well. On the other hand, I've read some people say that Brett B doesn't like high OGs, perhaps indicating either a larger starter would be needed or????

2) My main reason for wanting to add the oak cubes is not to flavor the beer -- although that is hopefully a side-effect -- but to give Brett a place to hang on to that I can save for future batches.

Thanks for any thoughts!

1 - Make it BIG, with your OG I would start in the 6+L range and maybe go a bit higher. On my standard gravity brett brux beers I (1040ish) I usually try to make a 3-4L starter if Im starting from a Brux packet, as the cell counts are lower than a normal smack pack. Are you using WY or WL? I would probably suggesting using WY over WL Brux in this beer

2 - You could easily save the slurry and have much more yeast cells to repitch, cubes are difficult to store, as you have to somehow in a fairly sanitary way dry and store them. While saving some yeast cake in a mason jar is much easier and provides you with a way to repitch or grow up a starter with much less wort

Overall I like the recipe, I think the rye will be interesting in the beer. I do think that 3# of syrup is a bit much though, especially with your low mash temp. All that sugar will thin and dry the beer, and with a low mash temp there already is few dextrins to provide body. Couple that with the tendency of brux, in my experiences with it, to ferment shall we say a bit over the top phenolic and funky in high OG beers and it could take a very long time for this thing to smooth out. IMO brux does its best work in lower OG beers, or as a secondary yeast in big beers. I think as far as the recipe goes if it were me I would lower the syrup a bit, and maybe even buy a pack of D2 (no homemade stuff tastes like that) and go with 1# to 2# max, ferment very cool to minimize higher alcohols and a really strong phenolic presence [dont worry itll still get funky - in my experience high OG + brux = spicy/phenolic rotting banana muffins ]

Thanks, ryane! Would it be better for me to aim for a sacc. mash temp of 155degF instead, to get more dextrins? Also, to answer your question, I've already bought a vial of WL, so am stuck with it for the moment. Out of curiousity, what's the major difference between the WY and WL strains?

About fermenting cool, what temp would be good? Actually, I'm a bit concerned on this point as I don't want it to be off the wall undrinkably funky, but I don't have that much control of the temp of the place where I'm staying. (With a window open, I think it can get down to 62 or so at night, but during the day it'll regularly get up to 75.) Am I looking at disaster?

Agreed with ryane on the brett b perception in high OG beers. Fermenting higher will just make the beer finish higher- unless you pitch bacteria, brett by itself tends to mostly stop around 1.010-012 and then take off a couple more points very slowly over time. I'd stick with a 150ish mash. I store brett cakes in quart ziplocks- that way if they ferment out a little more in the fridge I don't accidentally end up with broken Mason jar in there. The one time I tried saving chips, I kept them wet and they went acetic. Had much better luck saving slurry.

Hey all,

Well, I'm now in the process of slowly building up that massive starter! I think I've got about a 2 litre starer now, the goal being to build up by the Autumnal Equinox to the 6+ L starter you recommended. Meanwhile, a question about fermenting cold:

How cold? My father-in-law has a wine cellar he's willing to let me use. It keeps things about 54degF. Is that too cold?

Thanks,
Matt