Coldbreak Brewing Giveaway - Open to All!

Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > General Techniques > Thoughts on my FWH experiment
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-25-2012, 01:49 PM   #11
rausched
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: , Indiana
Posts: 21
Default

Interested in hearing your results. Good luck.


rausched is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 05:55 PM   #12
Tamarlane
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 252
Liked 143 Times on 52 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

I am looking forward to seeing how this turns out. I usually FWH in place of a 60 min bittering addition, I have been doing so for years. I have never done any kind of side by side to see what the difference is, I just find it more convenient.


Tamarlane is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 06:00 PM   #13
bobbrews
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sierra, Nevada
Posts: 4,020
Liked 423 Times on 341 Posts
Likes Given: 72

Default

I don't see any merit in FWH + Bittering. Do one or the other. You're not gaining what you think you're gaining by doing both. And FWH is not a replacement for a 20 minute addition either.

I find the most benefit in eliminating the FWH concept altogether. Simply use slightly less hops than you would normally use at 60, add a small mid charge around 30 or 20 to bring the IBUs up to about where you want to be, hopburst with tons of late additions, and dryhop substantially.... Smooth bitterness with tons of aroma and flavor each and every time!!
bobbrews is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 07:25 PM   #14
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,380
Liked 467 Times on 348 Posts
Likes Given: 583

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaz4121 View Post
I would recommend aiming for the same IBU levels in each beer to appropriately gauge the finished beer objectively.
Also, brew one large batch of wort and split it to reduce variables.
__________________
Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014
Denny is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 07:26 PM   #15
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,380
Liked 467 Times on 348 Posts
Likes Given: 583

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbrews View Post
I don't see any merit in FWH + Bittering. Do one or the other. You're not gaining what you think you're gaining by doing both. And FWH is not a replacement for a 20 minute addition either.
400+ batches of experience disagrees with you.
__________________
Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014
Denny is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 07:27 PM   #16
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,380
Liked 467 Times on 348 Posts
Likes Given: 583

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReverseApacheMaster View Post
It makes sense to ignore the ibus and test the 20 min-FWH and 60min-FWH additions equally because that's how people talk about them. I'm interested to see how this turns out.
I've done something similar. See http://www.ahaconference.org/wp-cont.../DennyConn.pdf starting on pg. 29.
__________________
Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014
Denny is offline
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 07:32 PM   #17
MalFet
/bɪər nərd/
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
MalFet's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NYC / Kathmandu
Posts: 8,347
Liked 1303 Times on 870 Posts
Likes Given: 608

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbrews View Post
I don't see any merit in FWH + Bittering. Do one or the other. You're not gaining what you think you're gaining by doing both. And FWH is not a replacement for a 20 minute addition either.

I find the most benefit in eliminating the FWH concept altogether. Simply use slightly less hops than you would normally use at 60, add a small mid charge around 30 or 20 to bring the IBUs up to about where you want to be, hopburst with tons of late additions, and dryhop substantially.... Smooth bitterness with tons of aroma and flavor each and every time!!
Like Denny, I've had great results with FWH that are categorically different than anything I've been able to do with boil additions. It's a very different critter, no question.
__________________
"Be excellent to each other." -Benjamin Franklin
MalFet is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 09:07 PM   #18
bobbrews
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sierra, Nevada
Posts: 4,020
Liked 423 Times on 341 Posts
Likes Given: 72

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny View Post
400+ batches of experience disagrees with you.
I primarily brew IPAs, and like you... hundreds of them. I have tried every hopping method in the book. FWH does improve smoothness in some cases, but you're still wasting more hops than you need to by doing a large early FWH charge, and then maybe also combining it with a bittering addition. Save those highly aromatic hops for late in the boil. There's more than one way to get smooth bitterness. For instance, implement a small early + small mid charge if you want more IBUs without sacrificing smoothness.

I've had the most success with 95-97% of my kettle hops positioned late in the boil. These positive results have come with much third party perspective, so it isn't just me. Not doubting your experience, but there is always still something to learn.

Try using 1/2 oz or 3/4 oz of a low cohumulone high alpha hop at 60 instead of 1.5 to 2.0 oz of something harsh. It drastically improves smoothness, especially when used in conjunction with hopbursting.
bobbrews is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 11:33 AM   #19
Odin_Brews
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: golden, CO
Posts: 265
Liked 19 Times on 18 Posts
Likes Given: 10

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denny View Post
Also, brew one large batch of wort and split it to reduce variables.
My only concern with doing one large batch is that I can only cook and chill one at a time. So half would be sitting around waiting for the other half to boil, and there would be enzyme activity going on the wort which I thought might change things? Any truth to that?

THanks for the link Denny, I'd found it before but forgot completely about it.

I managed to brew all 3 over the weekend and hit the same efficiency across the boards so there should be minimal variability from the wort.
Odin_Brews is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 04:50 PM   #20
Denny
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Eugene OR
Posts: 4,380
Liked 467 Times on 348 Posts
Likes Given: 583

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbrews View Post
I primarily brew IPAs, and like you... hundreds of them. I have tried every hopping method in the book. FWH does improve smoothness in some cases, but you're still wasting more hops than you need to by doing a large early FWH charge, and then maybe also combining it with a bittering addition. Save those highly aromatic hops for late in the boil. There's more than one way to get smooth bitterness. For instance, implement a small early + small mid charge if you want more IBUs without sacrificing smoothness.

I've had the most success with 95-97% of my kettle hops positioned late in the boil. These positive results have come with much third party perspective, so it isn't just me. Not doubting your experience, but there is always still something to learn.

Try using 1/2 oz or 3/4 oz of a low cohumulone high alpha hop at 60 instead of 1.5 to 2.0 oz of something harsh. It drastically improves smoothness, especially when used in conjunction with hopbursting.
Your post demonstrates the role of personal preference in homebrewing and why there's usually no single "right" answer to any question! For me, low cohumulone hops for a "smooth" bitterness is generally the last thing I want in an APA or AIPA. I prefer the big hop slap you get from higher cohumulone or tradtional bittering additions. Every time I've done a hopburst beer, I've felt that the flavor was great but the bitterness was lacking. We also seem to approach FWH from different perspectives. You use it for bittering it would seem. I decide how much hop flavor I want from the FWH (usually an oz., sometimes a bit more - BTW, I certainly don't consider this wasting hops), look at how much bittering I get from that based on my assumption that it's the same as a 20 min. additipon, then add 60 min. hops to get to the bitterness level I'm looking for.


__________________
Life begins at 60....1.060, that is!

www.dennybrew.com

http://www.experimentalbrew.com - the website for the book "Experimental Homebrewing"...coming Nov. 2014
Denny is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SMaSH experiment--your thoughts appreciated Jakeintoledo All Grain & Partial Mash Brewing 12 07-11-2012 12:46 PM
Any thoughts on my unintentional experiment chefmike Lambic & Wild Brewing 3 11-30-2010 02:51 AM
Thoughts on my experiment kniles38 Lambic & Wild Brewing 3 07-02-2009 04:15 AM
Experiment i want to do, any thoughts? bkov Extract Brewing 3 11-03-2008 10:58 PM
experiment i want to try, your thoughts? bkov Recipes/Ingredients 7 11-03-2008 12:39 PM


Forum Jump

Newest Threads

LATEST SPONSOR DEALS