The OFFICIAL 11-11-11 Old Ale Thread - The HBT Anniversary Series

Williams 728
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.
I want to get in on this one. I just placed my order for yeast (LHBS only does White Labs).

Sounds like something that will be killer with some age.
 
Whew, just got through whirlpooling this beer. That was a longish brewday. The kettle caramelization step takes a while so plan for that when scheduling your brew day. I think I boiled it down for 2 or so hours. Started with 2 gallons and got it down to just under 0.5 gallons before it started to scorch a bit so I pulled the plug. It had thickened and darkened significantly and the flavor had become very nice. I don't think it boiled down enough to get the toffee I was looking for but I didn't want any burnt flavors getting in. Should still turn out well. Anyone who was worried about it not being dark enough need not worry anymore. I'll post a pic of the gravity sample later on after everything is wrapped up and the yeast is pitched. The boil down really added a lot of color. Stay tuned for pictures of the brew day.
 
GuldTuborg said:
I'm looking forward to these. Sadly, it will be a few weeks before I'll be able to brew mine.
Click to expand...

Here they are! I got distracted by the UNC game.:eek: Man, the color on this beer is perfect. Just what I had hoped for. "Gun Stock Ale" really fits.

First runnings coming to a boil
DSC_4616NEF.jpg


Getting some foam on top
DSC_4618NEF.jpg


Boiling down
DSC_4621NEF.jpg


Starting to get syrupy and foaming quite a bit
DSC_4622NEF.jpg


Reducing more and getting more syrupy
DSC_4632NEF.jpg


Getting pretty dark and thick now, this is where I noticed some scorching on the bottom
DSC_4634NEF.jpg


Ooops! Haven't tried scrubbing that out yet...:eek:
DSC_4636NEF.jpg
 
Syrup added to other runnings and heading for a boil
DSC_4637NEF.jpg


Hops added
DSC_4638NEF.jpg


Trub cone. I got greedy and pulled up some break material
DSC_4640NEF.jpg


The color: dark polished walnut
DSC_4641NEF.jpg


Gravity came in spot on
DSC_4644NEF.jpg
 
Edcculus said:
Wow, what a freaking beautiful beer. And thats only the wort!!!
Click to expand...

Yeah, I couldn't be happier with the color. When I was coming up with ideas for this beer, this is exactly what I had in mind. There is a picture of Samuel Smith's Yorkshire Stingo I'll try to find and post below that had a very similar color and it always makes me want a beer just like it when I see that picture. (Although SS's Yorkshire Stingo is slightly underwhelming, it looks amazing)

Be sure to use the thickest-bottomed pot you can when you do the boil down everyone. I thought my pot was adequate but I guess it wasn't. You'll need a lot of room above the wort level too, since once it gets syrupy it bubbles up to 2-3x its volume.


The inspiration
samuel_smith_stingo_glass&bottle2010.gif
 
Man, those pictures make me even more excited to brew this beer. I'll hopefully have all the ingredients to brew this one at the end of the upcoming week. I've scheduled the brew day for 11/13!
 
I am getting very excited to brew this beer and cant keep from talking about it. Questions about the reducing of syrup. Did you stir it while you were boiling, and what did you do with your mash in the meantime.
 
Kirbster said:
I am getting very excited to brew this beer and cant keep from talking about it. Questions about the reducing of syrup. Did you stir it while you were boiling, and what did you do with your mash in the meantime.
Click to expand...

If you have a sufficiently thick-bottomed pot, stirring shouldn't be necessary since the heating a cooling of the syrup causes it to constantly circulate around. If you are worried though, you can do what I did and run something over the bottom to check for any rough spots which will indicate scorching.

As for what I did with my mash, I ran the rest of the first runnings and all the second runnings into my main boil kettle while I started reducing the 2 gallons of first runnings. Then once all my other runnings were collected, I pulled the pot with the reduction off and put the main boil kettle on the burner to bring it up to about 180 to stop conversion. then I pulled it off and let it sit while I reduced the syrup. Then the syrup was added to the main boil kettle and carried on as usual.
 
The wort was very sweet with malt flavors tending toward toasted bread crust with a slight graininess. Had a smooth bitterness. It's always hard to tell from the wort sample how a beer would be but it tasted good to me! I was worried that my boildown wasn't enough to get some toffee because I tasted a bit of caramel in the sample but no toffee. Well, a great subtle toffee smell is making it's way out of the fermenter (that is bubling like crazy by the way) so there is toffee in there somewhere. I'm really looking forward to pulling another sample once fermentation slows down.
 
KingBrianI said:
As for what I did with my mash, I ran the rest of the first runnings and all the second runnings into my main boil kettle while I started reducing the 2 gallons of first runnings. Then once all my other runnings were collected, I pulled the pot with the reduction off and put the main boil kettle on the burner to bring it up to about 180 to stop conversion. then I pulled it off and let it sit while I reduced the syrup. Then the syrup was added to the main boil kettle and carried on as usual.
Click to expand...

Nice pics Brian! What temp did you hit for your mash?
 
KingBrianI said:
It's always hard to tell from the wort sample how a beer would be but it tasted good to me!
Click to expand...

Very true, but you can often get a general idea of what some major flavors are, even if you don't know what the overall balance will be, or what the yeast will do to it. Thanks for the updates! I'm excited about my brew, now. This is going to take some major patience. I hope I'm up to the challenge.
 
KingBrianI said:
It held at 157 for the whole 60 minutes.
Click to expand...
I didn't read through the whole recipe development thread, but when I saw the 158 degree temperature for both infusion and rest I thought it was a misprint; that the infusion was at 158 (or whatever your system needed) and that the rest would be lower. I thought that getting to 1.016 (80% attenuation) would take a much lower mash temperature. No experience with the 9097-PC is probably my problem. You’re expecting great things from this yeast?

And thanks for the pictures. I think you have all of us more excited about brewing this.




Edit:
Ordered ingredients today :mug:
 
AnOldUR said:
I didn't read through the whole recipe development thread, but when I saw the 158 degree temperature for both infusion and rest I thought it was a misprint; that the infusion was at 158 (or whatever your system needed) and that the rest would be lower. I thought that getting to 1.016 (80% attenuation) would take a much lower mash temperature. No experience with the 9097-PC is probably my problem. You’re expecting great things from this yeast?
Click to expand...

158F was chosen because of the extended aging with the brett that is in the 9097. Over the course of several months, the brett will continue to eat those long chain sugars. Brewers looking to brew this without brett should probably lower the mash temp.
 
My plan for this beer was to brew a lower gravity batch this weekend using the same ratio of grains. The reason being two fold. One, to get an idea of the flavors produced and also to have a nice slurry to pitch the Old Ale onto.

Then this morning my aging brain recalled something from a batch of Flanders Brown that's been aging in my basement for about a year and a half. It used Wyeast 3763-PC Roeselare Ale Blend. Since it's similar to the Wyeast 9097-PC Old Ale Blend that we plan to use in this beer, I'm thinking that the email below from Wyeast about 3763-PC should be taken into consideration.

QUESTION FROM:
Herman Richards

I have a pack of Wyeast 3763-PC Roeselare Ale Blend on the way and have
a couple of questions on its use. Is it a bad idea to make a starter?
My thougt is that the growth rate of the mixed cultures may be
compromised. The other question is related. Rather than make a starter
I sometimes will brew a smaller expermental batch and use that yeast
cake for the intended beer. Would transfering the expermental batch to a
secondary after a week or so and reusing the yeast be a problem with
your blended cultures?
Click to expand...
Herman,

It is not recommended to make a starter with this blend. You will
definitely throw off the balance of cultures in the blend. Basically,
you will increase the Saccharomyces population w/o increasing any of the
other cultures.

The second technique you listed would be better than a starter, but once
again, you will not be propagating all of the cultures. This time, you
would be increasing the Saccharomyces culture and maybe some of the
lactic acid bacteria.

Let me know if you have other questions.


Jess Caudill
Brewer/Microbiologist
Wyeast Laboratories
(541) 354-1335
Click to expand...
 
I'm glad you posted that. I was wondering about a starter since brett grows slower than sacc. Maybe I can buy two packs for pitching if its not too late for my order.

Edit: Nevermind on checking my BMW invoice I accidentally ordered two anyhow. What a fortunate accident.
 
smokinghole said:
Maybe I can buy two packs for pitching if its not too late . . .
Click to expand...
Fortunate that you have the second pack on the way. With my 3763-PC Roeselare I only had one pack, so I split the batch and pitched the yeast onto 2-1/2 gals of wort in a 3 gallon carboy. Not a great shot, but here's where the brett growth is at 17 months in.

Looking forward to our next science experiment. :tank:

 
AnOldUR, I understood that email as warning against a starter because of the lactic and pedio. I'm not sure a starter would be adverse for the Brett. It will take weeks to kick in and eat the leftovers from the sach anyway. At least that's my understanding.
 
I made a 2 L starter 48 hrs prior to pitching. I guess since I got a bit of a head start on most of you I might be bale to provide some ide aon whether the Brett seems to be taking off by the time the rest of you are able to brew. I was planning on primarying for 1 month then racking to secondary. Do you think there might be a pellicle in the primary by then or is it too soon? I imagine a pellicle would form pretty quickly in secondary due to the O2 in there.
 
Here is what I think I am going to do. Brew two 12-gallon batches. Each batch will be split into three 4-gallon fermentors for a total of six separate batches:

Fermentor 1 - Wyeast 9097-PC
Fermentor 2 - Wyeast Brett-C only
Fermentor 3 - Wyeast 9097-PC + Wyeast Lactobacillus 5335 (Or maybe Roeselare Ale 3763 instead)
Fermentor 4 - Same as Fermentor1 + oak
Fermentor 5 - Same as Fermentor2 + oak
Fermentor 6 - Same as Fermentor3 + oak

What do you think? Have I got my bases covered?
 
KingBrianI said:
I made a 2 L starter 48 hrs prior to pitching. I guess since I got a bit of a head start on most of you I might be bale to provide some ide aon whether the Brett seems to be taking off by the time the rest of you are able to brew. I was planning on primarying for 1 month then racking to secondary. Do you think there might be a pellicle in the primary by then or is it too soon? I imagine a pellicle would form pretty quickly in secondary due to the O2 in there.
Click to expand...

There is a thread from a year ago of several different brewers using this. There is some good info on what to expect over the course of several months. Based on the experience of others, I'd guess the pellicle will start after the transfer to the secondary and last several months.
 
jmo88 said:
AnOldUR, I understood that email as warning against a starter because of the lactic and pedio. I'm not sure a starter would be adverse for the Brett. It will take weeks to kick in and eat the leftovers from the sach anyway. At least that's my understanding.
Click to expand...
Anyone else have a comment on this? My knowledge of yeast is limited.

My take on the email was that the Saccharomyces will reproduce in the time frame of a starter, but all the other bugs will either not reproduce or do it at a slower rate. When you pitch this starter into your wort it will again go through a reproductive stage, but with the Saccharomyces at a higher ratio than what was intended.



jmo88 said:
There is a thread from a year ago of several different brewers using this. . .
Click to expand...
This is the thread that got me to brew the Flanders Brown mentioned earlier. It's too bad there isn't follow up on these threads where (in Wyeasts words), "Aging for up to 18 months is required for full flavor profile and acidity to develop." I would love to hear how Jason's beer turned out.
 
AnOldUR said:
Anyone else have a comment on this? My knowledge of yeast is limited.

My take on the email was that the Saccharomyces will reproduce in the time frame of a starter, but all the other bugs will either not reproduce or do it at a slower rate. When you pitch this starter into your wort it will again go through a reproductive stage, but with the Saccharomyces at a higher ratio than what was intended.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify my take on it, the difference I see in a pedio/lacto/brett/sach blend compared to the 9097 is that the 9097 should ferment in 2 phases (sach followed by a long brett). Brett doesn't need a big cell count at the end of sach fermentation to do its job. Therefore, a starter, increasing the sach cell count and not the brett, won't hurt the beer's profile . The sour blend would need to have the proper ratio of all the bugs to get the desired profile as the fermentation would have several phases overlapping. I'm sticking my neck out a bit on this one since I don't have much experience in this department, just research.
 
Ahh, so that's the reason for the long secondary - to let the Brett do its thing. Like I said, this is my first bugged beer. I'm already learning! :)
 
Just doing a little math and I don't think my mash tun will be big enough to do a 12 gallon batch. :( Don't think I can do three 8-gallon batches in one day.... Maybe instead of 35.5 Lbs of pale I'll swap out 8 lbs of pale for 6.6 Lbs of extra light LME. That would give me 32-ish Lbs with the specialty grains in the mash tun which is right at my limit unless I mash thick... Going to have to play with the numbers some more. :drunk:
 
jmo88 said:
I'm sticking my neck out a bit on this one . . .
Click to expand...
Don't think anyone will be chopping you head off. That makes a lot of sense. I wasn’t aware of the pedio/lacto/brett/sacc blend in the 3763-PC as compared to just brett and sacc in the 9097-PC. Thanks for the information.
 
For the secondary brett fermentation, should you use a 5 gallon carboy for a 5 gallon batch or should you/could you use a larger 6-6.5 gallon fermenter? I figure the brett will be producing CO2, so using a larger fermenter shouldn't be a big deal.

If so, I could do the primary and oaking in my 6.5 gallon bucket then transfer to my 6.5 gallon carboy and let the brett do its thing. Then I can use my 5 gallon carboy for the lager I have going now.
 
mojotele said:
For the secondary brett fermentation, should you use a 5 gallon carboy for a 5 gallon batch or should you/could you use a larger 6-6.5 gallon fermenter? I figure the brett will be producing CO2, so using a larger fermenter shouldn't be a big deal.

If so, I could do the primary and oaking in my 6.5 gallon bucket then transfer to my 6.5 gallon carboy and let the brett do its thing. Then I can use my 5 gallon carboy for the lager I have going now.
Click to expand...

My experience with brett is a bit lacking but the way I understand it, Brett needs a little O2 to produce its distinctive flavors. That's why people wil put oak dowels through the stopper hole to allow some exchange of air.
 
KingBrian beings you have brewed this recipe all ready maybe you can help me. Did you just add an additional 2G of sparge water to make up for the boiling down of the first 2 gallons? Or did you just top off your fermenter with added water?
 
jmo88 said:
AnOldUR, I understood that email as warning against a starter because of the lactic and pedio. I'm not sure a starter would be adverse for the Brett . . .
Click to expand...

Sorry if I gave out bad information on using a starter with the 9097-PC.
Just heard back from Wyeast and like jmo88 said, this yeast is different from the 3763-PC blend.

Herman,

For this blend, I do not think it as much an issue. The Brett will probably not grow in the starter, as the Saccharomyces will take over, but there should still be enough Brett for long term secondary aging. It may just take a month or two longer.

Jess Caudill
Brewer/Microbiologist
Wyeast Laboratories
(541) 354-1335


Click to expand...
 
Quick question, I've never attempted a sour beer and do not intend on attempting it on this one. I plan to use Wyeast 1318 London ale III. Would it be okay to make a starter for this? I assume the talk of no starters is for only thise that making a sour. Also, would I still want to leave it in secondary for 6-8 months? AND, since I've never sat on a beer for anywhere close to this length of time, will I need to add yeast at bottling?
 
AlphaWolf-Brewery said:
KingBrian beings you have brewed this recipe all ready maybe you can help me. Did you just add an additional 2G of sparge water to make up for the boiling down of the first 2 gallons? Or did you just top off your fermenter with added water?
Click to expand...

I added 2 gallons of water to the runnings and boiled that with the wort. I didn't want to oversparge and extract tannins so I did it that way. I feel safer boiling the extra water with the wort than adding it to the cooled wort in the fermenter.
 
KingBrianI said:
I added 2 gallons of water to the runnings and boiled that with the wort. I didn't want to oversparge and extract tannins so I did it that way. I feel safer boiling the extra water with the wort than adding it to the cooled wort in the fermenter.
Click to expand...

So you only took ~7 gallons of runnings total and added 2 gallons of water to the boil? I wonder what the impact would be of just running off the extra 2 gallons from the sparge, were you measurably close to over sparging and extracting tannins or were you just playing it safe?
 
AnOldUR said:
Sorry if I gave out bad information on using a starter with the 9097-PC.
Just heard back from Wyeast and like jmo88 said, this yeast is different from the 3763-PC blend.
Click to expand...

No worries at all. Thanks for emailing them.

Jason_Merritt said:
Quick question, I've never attempted a sour beer and do not intend on attempting it on this one. I plan to use Wyeast 1318 London ale III. Would it be okay to make a starter for this? I assume the talk of no starters is for only thise that making a sour. Also, would I still want to leave it in secondary for 6-8 months? AND, since I've never sat on a beer for anywhere close to this length of time, will I need to add yeast at bottling?
Click to expand...

This isn't a sour beer. A tartness might develop overtime due to the brett, but it will be nothing like typical sour ales like lambics and geuze. Make a starter with any strain you choose. I'd leave it in the secondary to bulk age for a few months if you're not using brett, especially if you want to age on oak. Also, it wouldn't hurt to add a little neutral yeast like US05 at bottling. For those using the 9097, I don't think we'll have a problem bottling carbing them.
 

Similar threads

S
Autumn Wheat Ale
Replies
5
Views
1K
kwilson16
kwilson16
R
Motueka Single hop Pale Ale
Replies
1
Views
764
redrocker652002
R
3 Dawg Night
FotHB XIX: Legal to Drink in Canada
2 3
Replies
86
Views
3K
3 Dawg Night
3 Dawg Night
Brit the !@#$
New Apple Orchardist Member Looking to Develop Graf Recipe Using Cider Syrup
Replies
16
Views
833
madscientist451
madscientist451
Gadjobrinus
Riggwelter - hops & grist?
Replies
0
Views
521
Gadjobrinus
Gadjobrinus

Latest posts

Back
Top