The Krausen that Would Not Die!!!

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.

Mainer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
991
Reaction score
370
Location
Portland
I brewed 5 gallons of an IPA, but as an experiment I decided to ferment it with a Kolsch yeast. I figured it would help me get that hazy, slightly sweet Northeast IPA feel.

Fermented at ~55 for three weeks; the airlock was still bubbling and krausen wouldn't drop. So I moved it upstairs and raised the temp to 65. After almost a week, it's STILL GOING! Krausen is still more than an inch thick.

It looks and smells great; the only thing I'm worried about is leaving it on the trub too long. With a total of 6 oz of hops in it (1 oz Galena at 30, 3 oz Crystal at flameout, and 2 oz Falconer's Flight dry, 5 days so far) there's a lot of vegetal matter in there. I had planned to give it a short secondary (I know, not usually necessary with an IPA, but with the Kolsch yeast I want to give it a little extra time to flocculate), but I don't want to rack until the Krausen drops. Any advice?

I should probably also point out that the OG was way higher than I expected it to be, at 1.070, possibly because I steeped some flaked oats in there to soften the mouthfeel. It was down to 1.030 at last read.
 
My grain bill was as follows:
6 Lb. Breiss Pilsen light DME
1 Lb. Carapils
10 oz Flaked Wheat
10 oz Flaked Oats
Specialty grains steeped 30 minutes at ~165

Wyeast 2565 Kolsch

Hops as noted above.
 
I wouldn't worry too much about the krausen, it's actually completely fine if it's still there when you go to bottle. As for leaving it on the trube too long, unless you're going to let it sit for months that shouldn't be a problem. Now, 1.030 is a little high for an FG however and that is a bit of a concern. When did you take the last measurement? Also how much yeast did you pitch?
 
I wouldn't worry too much about the krausen, it's actually completely fine if it's still there when you go to bottle. As for leaving it on the trube too long, unless you're going to let it sit for months that shouldn't be a problem. Now, 1.030 is a little high for an FG however and that is a bit of a concern. When did you take the last measurement? Also how much yeast did you pitch?
Yeah, it wasn't done at 1.030; it's still fermenting. I took that read when I moved it upstairs a five days ago. It's due for another reading soon, but I just keep hoping the trub will drop before I take another. I guess some of the airlock activity could just be the dry hops off-gassing, but I'm only dry hopping 2 oz, so I wouldn't think they'd off-gas that much. I suspect fermentation is still happening.

I pitched a single smack-pack of WY2565, no starter.
 
Took another reading after work today. We're down to 1.020. That puts me at about 6.5%. Fermentations seems to be still active, and massive amounts of yeast still in suspension. I guess some fermentations are just slower than others. I really like the hops, though. Sharp and citrusy, but not too much bitterness. When all's said and done, I think this is going to be a really excellent 1.5x hazy IPA.
 
I'm fermenting a cream ale with WY2565 right now and seeing the same thing. I top cropped this one (first time ever) and it still has a ton of kreusen. I was at 57 F for about 8 days then let it ramp up to 61, which is current basement temp. I started at 1.050 and am at 1.017 or so today. Tastes yeasty, but good. Very cloudy.
 
I think I'll throw this one into a short secondary. In part for clarity, but mostly because I need my primary fermenter for a batch this weekend.
 
Wow, a lot of things wrong with this thread.

#1: The presence of a krausen does not mean fermentation is still active. Some yeasts just have persistent krausens. Also, airlock activity does not imply ongoing fermentation. Airlocks can bubble for all sorts of reasons. Only gravity readings can indicate whether or not fermentation is occurring.

#2: You should have made a yeast starter. With liquid yeast, and a 1.070 OG, you dramatically underpitched. That's why it took so long to get started, and it will likely include some off-flavours, but hopefully the hop bill will mask some of them.

#3: Extract beers finish high anyway, so it would not be unusual for an extract beer to be finished at 1.020. With your highly-unfermentable grain bill, and your underpitched yeast, frankly I'm surprised that it's gone below 1.030.

#4: I'm shocked your FG is as low as it is already - it should be much higher. 1 lb of Carapils is waaay too much. Also, both flaked oats and flaked wheat need to be mashed, not just steeped. By just steeping them, you wouldn't get any fermentable sugars from them. So your grain bill is really only about 73% fermentable (the DME).

#5: Secondary does not improve clarity. If anything, it impedes it, because the yeast that had almost fallen out of solution gets mixed homogeneously back into suspension. You mentioned you need the fermenter for another batch, which is a valid reason to rack to secondary, but other than that I see no reason to employ a secondary with this batch. I would instead recommend you simply purchase another fermenter.

That's all I can think of for now. :)
 
Wow, a lot of things wrong with this thread.

#1: The presence of a krausen does not mean fermentation is still active. Some yeasts just have persistent krausens. Also, airlock activity does not imply ongoing fermentation. Airlocks can bubble for all sorts of reasons. Only gravity readings can indicate whether or not fermentation is occurring.
I realize this. I prefer to wait for my krausen to drop or at least thin, as it's indicative to me that yeast that is going to fall out of suspension has started to do so, but I'd never rely on it as my indicator that fermentation is done. That's why God invented the hydrometer.

#2: You should have made a yeast starter. With liquid yeast, and a 1.070 OG, you dramatically underpitched. That's why it took so long to get started, and it will likely include some off-flavours, but hopefully the hop bill will mask some of them.
Yeah, I know, I know, but I've never done a starter before, and I'm nervous about the new technique. It's new-brewer laziness and fear. I'll own that.

#3: Extract beers finish high anyway, so it would not be unusual for an extract beer to be finished at 1.020. With your highly-unfermentable grain bill, and your underpitched yeast, frankly I'm surprised that it's gone below 1.030.
I've only done extract batches so far, and they've all attenuated down nicely. My Vienna Lager got down around 1.010. Hell, even my Baltic Porter made it to 1.022

#4: I'm shocked your FG is as low as it is already - it should be much higher. 1 lb of Carapils is waaay too much. Also, both flaked oats and flaked wheat need to be mashed, not just steeped. By just steeping them, you wouldn't get any fermentable sugars from them. So your grain bill is really only about 73% fermentable (the DME).
Another newbie admission: I don't totally understand the difference between steeping and partial mash. I held my specialty grains in 3 gallons of water at 165 for about 50 minutes, then rinsed the grains (in the grain bag) with a gallon of water at 175. That's a steep, right?

#5: Secondary does not improve clarity. If anything, it impedes it, because the yeast that had almost fallen out of solution gets mixed homogeneously back into suspension. You mentioned you need the fermenter for another batch, which is a valid reason to rack to secondary, but other than that I see no reason to employ a secondary with this batch. I would instead recommend you simply purchase another fermenter.

That's all I can think of for now. :)
I know there's no magic about secondary that will clarify my beer. But the extra time may help, and since I need the primary fermenter the secondary container seemed like a good place to do it. It's maybe not ideal, but it seemed a good solution. The missus already thinks my brewing equipment takes up too much space, so purchasing a second primary fermenter isn't a battle I want to fight right now.
 
On the other hand (and this is probably a whole can of worms), someone recently called my attention to this experiment, wherein two identical batches of 1.065 wort were pitched, one with a starter and the other with a single vial. While the single-vial batch started much more slowly, they both finished at an identical FG within nine days, with zero-to-minimal difference in final flavor or appearance. Which forces me to ask... DOES a starter really matter?
 
I prefer to wait for my krausen to drop or at least thin

Me too, but also understand that some yeasts will simply never "fall." The krausen will sit on top of the beer indefinitely, even if they're not doing anything. Jostling the fermenter, or cold-crashing, will sometimes prompt the krausen to fall, but if you leave it undisturbed, sometimes the yeast will just sit on top for weeks on end. It doesn't mean they're still fermenting.

Yeah, I know, I know, but I've never done a starter before, and I'm nervous about the new technique. It's new-brewer laziness and fear. I'll own that.

No worries - we all started out somewhere, and it's a good idea not to try too many new things on the same batch. If you're going to keep using liquid yeast (and why not? Lots of yeast strains are only available in liquid form), then trying your hand at yeast starters is the next logical step for you.

I've only done extract batches so far, and they've all attenuated down nicely. My Vienna Lager got down around 1.010.

That's very surprising, but not unprecedented. Under the right circumstances (big, healthy yeast pitch, good oxygenation, highly-fermentable wort, well-managed fermentation temperature schedule), you can get extract batches to finish that low, but with a grain bill featuring a high percentage of unfermentables, combined with an underpitch, and the fact that it's a lager, I find it very surprising that you were able to get it to finish so low.

Another newbie admission: I don't totally understand the difference between steeping and partial mash. I held my specialty grains in 3 gallons of water at 165 for about 50 minutes, then rinsed the grains (in the grain bag) with a gallon of water at 175. That's a steep, right?

Yes. However in your case, even if you'd held the grain at a "mashing" temperature (140 - 160° F), you wouldn't have been "mashing," because mashing requires at least some percentage of base grains, that is grain with a high diastatic power. That means they contain the enzymes that can convert starches into sugars. Most grains contain them, but "base" grains contain an excess of them - that is, they contain enough not only to convert the starches in themselves, but there's a surplus available that can even convert starches found in other grains that are mashed alongside them.

In your case, your grain bill contained no base grains, and thus there were no enzymes present able to convert the starches into sugars. So there would have been no conversion at all, and you would have basically just leeched starches from the oats and wheat, along with the (mostly) unfermentable sugars and proteins in the Carapils. What was the reason for including such a high percentage of wheat, oats, and carapils? Any one on their own is usually included to increase mouthfeel and body, but combining all 3, and in such relatively high quantities, seems like overkill. Was this a recipe you made up yourself, or did you find it from somewhere?

I know there's no magic about secondary that will clarify my beer. But the extra time may help, and since I need the primary fermenter the secondary container seemed like a good place to do it. It's maybe not ideal, but it seemed a good solution. The missus already thinks my brewing equipment takes up too much space, so purchasing a second primary fermenter isn't a battle I want to fight right now.

That doesn't really make sense, since if you rack the beer to secondary, then brew another batch, you're going to have 2 "vessels" anyway. If you purchase another fermenter, you can leave your current batch where it is, and add the new batch to your new fermenter. That's still only 2 "vessels" taking up space. What are you using for fermenters? If you're using buckets, you can "stack" unused ones inside one another and save space that way. If you're using carboys, then I can understand the space concern, as there's no really convenient way to minimize space with carboys.
 
That doesn't really make sense, since if you rack the beer to secondary, then brew another batch, you're going to have 2 "vessels" anyway. If you purchase another fermenter, you can leave your current batch where it is, and add the new batch to your new fermenter. That's still only 2 "vessels" taking up space. What are you using for fermenters? If you're using buckets, you can "stack" unused ones inside one another and save space that way. If you're using carboys, then I can understand the space concern, as there's no really convenient way to minimize space with carboys.
I currently have two five-gallon carboys and a six-and-a-half gallon carboy. I use the 6.5 for primary in order to allow extra head space and avoid blow-offs. I use the two fives for secondary.
 
Yes. However in your case, even if you'd held the grain at a "mashing" temperature (140 - 160° F), you wouldn't have been "mashing," because mashing requires at least some percentage of base grains, that is grain with a high diastatic power. That means they contain the enzymes that can convert starches into sugars. Most grains contain them, but "base" grains contain an excess of them - that is, they contain enough not only to convert the starches in themselves, but there's a surplus available that can even convert starches found in other grains that are mashed alongside them.

In your case, your grain bill contained no base grains, and thus there were no enzymes present able to convert the starches into sugars. So there would have been no conversion at all, and you would have basically just leeched starches from the oats and wheat, along with the (mostly) unfermentable sugars and proteins in the Carapils. What was the reason for including such a high percentage of wheat, oats, and carapils? Any one on their own is usually included to increase mouthfeel and body, but combining all 3, and in such relatively high quantities, seems like overkill. Was this a recipe you made up yourself, or did you find it from somewhere?
I converted from an all-grain recipe. The oats and malt were both to enhance mouthfeel and add the haze I look for in a Northeast-style IPA. I knew the oats needed a base malt, but I must have thought the carapils could act as one. Like Icarus, I have perhaps flown too close to the sun. At any rate, it doesn't seem to be a dumper, so... at least there's that.
 
On the other hand (and this is probably a whole can of worms), someone recently called my attention to this experiment, wherein two identical batches of 1.065 wort were pitched, one with a starter and the other with a single vial. While the single-vial batch started much more slowly, they both finished at an identical FG within nine days, with zero-to-minimal difference in final flavor or appearance. Which forces me to ask... DOES a starter really matter?

That's a single data point, and even in that experiment, there were several differences, not the least of which being the day and a half head start the properly-pitched batch had over the direct-pitch. And even then, almost half of his tasters (9 out of 20) successfully identified the different batch. The author himself admitted he could reliably identify the underpitched batch, saying he "perceived the starter-pitched beer has having slightly more hop aroma with a slightly less sharp flavor." That "less sharp flavor" could be explained as fewer higher alcohols, as the underpitched batch would have stressed the yeast, causing them to produce off-flavors (such as fusel alcohols) that could be perceived as "sharp."

In addition, the author employed cold-crashing and gelatin, which would help strip out at least some of the off-flavours, mitigating the differences somewhat (though evidently not entirely).

Finally, this is an anecdotal story by a single homebrewer, as opposed to the reams of research done in labs by hundreds of commercial breweries over the past century, which have concluded that the optimal pitch rate is around 0.75 million cells/mL for ales, and 1.5 million cells/mL for lagers. I trust the science behind these recommendations, and my own anecdotal experience with (accidentally) underpitching yeast vs. proper pitch rates has lead me to conclude that properly-pitching your yeast just plain produces better beer.

I currently have two five-gallon carboys and a six-and-a-half gallon carboy.

Great! So if you trade one of those 5 gallon carboys up to a 6.5 gallon carboy, you now have 2 primary fermenters, while retaining the option to do a secondary on those occasional batches where it's appropriate, without any net change in the space usage. No complaints from the missus, right? :)
 
That's very surprising, but not unprecedented. Under the right circumstances (big, healthy yeast pitch, good oxygenation, highly-fermentable wort, well-managed fermentation temperature schedule), you can get extract batches to finish that low, but with a grain bill featuring a high percentage of unfermentables, combined with an underpitch, and the fact that it's a lager, I find it very surprising that you were able to get it to finish so low.
The lagers (both the Vienna and the Baltic Porter, which I did with a lager yeast) were dry yeast. If I'm reading you correctly, you're saying a starter may matter for liquid yeast, but not dry? Is that maybe why they attenuated out the way they did?
 
Great! So if you trade one of those 5 gallon carboys up to a 6.5 gallon carboy, you now have 2 primary fermenters, while retaining the option to do a secondary on those occasional batches where it's appropriate, without any net change in the space usage. No complaints from the missus, right? :)
Maaaaaybe... but my cellar is so nice and cold during the winter, I'd hate to give up the chance to lager down there...
 
The lagers (both the Vienna and the Baltic Porter, which I did with a lager yeast) were dry yeast. If I'm reading you correctly, you're saying a starter may matter for liquid yeast, but not dry? Is that maybe why they attenuated out the way they did?

That would be a factor, yes, especially if we're comparing it against a (hypothetical) liquid yeast direct-pitch. But still, the main factor is the extract, as extract recipes are notorious for finishing higher than the analogous all-grain recipe.

You're correct - starters are not necessary (and are in fact discouraged) for dry yeasts. However, it is strongly recommend that they be properly rehydrated (in plain water, not wort), per the manufacturer's instructions. Research (cited in "Yeast", White/Zainasheff) indicates that sprinkling dry yeast directly into wort can reduce cell viability by up to 50%. For lagers, when using dry yeast, I always pitch 2 packets, and rehydrate them carefully. I've had excellent results doing this.
 
Okay, last thought on this thread for a while (since, y'know, I'm at work and should probably be, y'know, working):
I'm kind of stressing out about these things, so as a newbie I feel like it's important to remind myself that humans have been making really good beer for thousands of years with way less control than what I have. So while seeking advice is good and I should always be looking for ways to improve, I hope to keep in mind that if the beer turns out good and getting there is fun, then there's no reason to worry too much about process.
 
Maaaaaybe... but my cellar is so nice and cold during the winter, I'd hate to give up the chance to lager down there...

You can "lager" in the bottles or kegs - it doesn't have to be in the fermenter. Bottle as normal, give them 3 weeks at 70-ish° F to carb up, then move to your cellar to lager for a few weeks/months. The yeast don't care if they're in a carboy or a beer bottle. :)
 
I was going to rehydrate my lager yeast, but the Saflager S-23 envelope said right on it in big, red, capital letters, "DO NOT REHYDRATE!"
 
Was it a sticker someone added on? Because I've looked at pictures of the packet on several homebrew website, and I don't see such a warning on either the front of the back of any pictures of the pouches. Indeed, the data sheet on the manufacturer's own website include instructions on how to properly rehydrate the yeast.

I've seen pre-packaged kits that have a line in the instruction sheet discouraging rehydrating the yeast, but I'm not aware of any actual yeast manufacturer themselves making such a recommendation.
 
Was it a sticker someone added on? Because I've looked at pictures of the packet on several homebrew website, and I don't see such a warning on either the front of the back of any pictures of the pouches. Indeed, the data sheet on the manufacturer's own website include instructions on how to properly rehydrate the yeast.

I've seen pre-packaged kits that have a line in the instruction sheet discouraging rehydrating the yeast, but I'm not aware of any actual yeast manufacturer themselves making such a recommendation.
Hmm. Maybe I'm thinking of the Vienna Lager, then. That was, indeed, from a Brewer's Best kit, and I didn't record what yeast was used. It was the Baltic Porter where I used the S-23.
 
Was it a sticker someone added on? Because I've looked at pictures of the packet on several homebrew website, and I don't see such a warning on either the front of the back of any pictures of the pouches. Indeed, the data sheet on the manufacturer's own website include instructions on how to properly rehydrate the yeast.

I've seen pre-packaged kits that have a line in the instruction sheet discouraging rehydrating the yeast, but I'm not aware of any actual yeast manufacturer themselves making such a recommendation.
I may also be thinking of the instructions, not the package. Funny how memory plays tricks on you if you don't write things down. I'm coming dangerously close to violating my own signature line.
 
That seems more likely.

At the end of the day, you're going to have beer from this batch. I apologize if I'm throwing too much info at you, I know it can sometimes feel like trying to drink from a fire hose. I don't mean to discourage you at all, you're clearly enthusiastic about brewing and are learning quickly. HBT is a fantastic resource full of really helpful and experienced brewers, even though we may sometimes disagree on certain topics.

You said you're planning another brew this weekend? Care to share the recipe and plan? Maybe we can make some suggestions to help you improve your process, to help make this batch even better than your current one.
 
That seems more likely.

At the end of the day, you're going to have beer from this batch. I apologize if I'm throwing too much info at you, I know it can sometimes feel like trying to drink from a fire hose. I don't mean to discourage you at all, you're clearly enthusiastic about brewing and are learning quickly. HBT is a fantastic resource full of really helpful and experienced brewers, even though we may sometimes disagree on certain topics.

You said you're planning another brew this weekend? Care to share the recipe and plan? Maybe we can make some suggestions to help you improve your process, to help make this batch even better than your current one.
Yeah... I was just working on that. I was planning on doing a Spruce Tip IPA based loosely on extract conversion of this recipe but without the grapefruit and adding back in a regular hop schedule. I was looking at roughly this:

6.6 Lb Pale Ale LME
8 oz crystal
4 oz flaked oats

1 cup spruce tips, 60 min
.5 oz Northern Brewer, 60 min
.5 oz Southern Cross, 60 min
.5 oz Northern Brewer, 15 min
.5 oz Southern Cross, 15 min
1 cup Spruce Tips, 5 min
2 oz Northern Brewer, flameout
2 oz Southern Cross, flameout

Danstar Nottingham Ale Yeast

But based on your recommendation, I was considering swapping out the LME for 4 Lb. of DME, and doing a partial mash with the oats, crystal, and maybe 2 Lb. of two-row?
 
(I dropped the pilsner in favor of Pale because the problematic beer we're talking about was mostly pilsner, so I wanted something a little darker with a little more substantial malt backbone.)
 
Good call - as mentioned before, the flaked oats cannot be steeped, they must be mashed. The LME/DME shouldn't make any difference, as long as you adjust the quantity to preserve the gravity points they'll contribute (which it appears you have). If you're game, this might be a great opportunity to try your hand at your first partial mash, in which case yes, I'd mash the crystal and flaked oats with a couple of pounds of 2-row (milled, of course), in, say, 4 quarts of water. You want a mash temperature of around 150° F, and hold it for 60 minutes. Then remove the grain bag (I assume you're doing BIAB?), rinse/squeeze the grains, top up to your target pre-boil volume, add 1/3 - 1/2 the LME/DME, heat to a boil, and add the rest of the DME/LME at flameout.
 
Good call - as mentioned before, the flaked oats cannot be steeped, they must be mashed. The LME/DME shouldn't make any difference, as long as you adjust the quantity to preserve the gravity points they'll contribute (which it appears you have). If you're game, this might be a great opportunity to try your hand at your first partial mash, in which case yes, I'd mash the crystal and flaked oats with a couple of pounds of 2-row (milled, of course), in, say, 4 quarts of water. You want a mash temperature of around 150° F, and hold it for 60 minutes. Then remove the grain bag (I assume you're doing BIAB?), rinse/squeeze the grains, top up to your target pre-boil volume, add 1/3 - 1/2 the LME/DME, heat to a boil, and add the rest of the DME/LME at flameout.
That sounds not much more complicated than what I've been doing, so I'd say I can give it a go. I would, indeed, be using a bag.

I can really mash in as little as four quarts? I had no idea. I thought I had to be at nearly full boil volume.

Let's say, for argument's sake, I wanted to do this with all-grain, get rid of all the extract. (I probably won't this weekend, but will want to try it at some point in the future.) How would I do that?

All else aside, how does the recipe look? Hop schedule okay? I know doing Nothern Brewer and Southern Cross looks a little cutesy (and let's be honest, that is, partly, why I picked them), but more importantly they both seem to be good dual-purpose hops with evergreen notes that will complement the spruce tips... right?
 
Good call - as mentioned before, the flaked oats cannot be steeped, they must be mashed. The LME/DME shouldn't make any difference, as long as you adjust the quantity to preserve the gravity points they'll contribute (which it appears you have). If you're game, this might be a great opportunity to try your hand at your first partial mash, in which case yes, I'd mash the crystal and flaked oats with a couple of pounds of 2-row (milled, of course), in, say, 4 quarts of water. You want a mash temperature of around 150° F, and hold it for 60 minutes. Then remove the grain bag (I assume you're doing BIAB?), rinse/squeeze the grains, top up to your target pre-boil volume, add 1/3 - 1/2 the LME/DME, heat to a boil, and add the rest of the DME/LME at flameout.
(And the switch from LME to DME is only because my LHBS sells LME in 3.3# containers only, but DME in 3# or 1# bags, so if I'm doing a quantity that doesn't divide equally into 3, DME is just more convenient.)
 
I can really mash in as little as four quarts? I had no idea. I thought I had to be at nearly full boil volume.

You can steep at whatever volume you want (since you're just leeching sugars into the water), but mashing generally must be done within a prescribed thickness. The general recommendation is between 1.25 and 1.75 quarts of water per pound of grain. If you're mashing 2 pounds of 2-row with 0.75 lb of Crystal and oats, that's 2.75 lbs of grain, times say 1.5 quarts per pound = 4.125 quarts. If you go too thin, it can take longer for the enzymes to convert the starches to sugar (since they're not as densely packed together).

Let's say, for argument's sake, I wanted to do this with all-grain, get rid of all the extract. (I probably won't this weekend, but will want to try it at some point in the future.) How would I do that?

Same formula: Mash the (milled) grain along with the flaked oats in a quantity of water equal to about 1.50 quarts per pound of grain. Your temperature depends on how much body you want in your beer. You'll want to heat your water a little higher than your target mash temperature before "doughing-in," because the grain will start out at room temperature, and will absorb heat as the temperature equalizes throughout the mash. I generally tend to heat my water about 10 - 15° F above my target mash temp (i.e., if I want a mash temp of 148° F, I'll heat my strike water to 160 - 162° F).

All else aside, how does the recipe look? Hop schedule okay?

Looks fine to me, but honestly I'm not that familiar with those particular hop varieties. If you're basing it off of a Mad Fermentationist recipe, you're probably fine.

Re: DME vs. LME: DME generally contributes more gravity points per pound, because LME is "diluted" a little with water. I forget the exact conversion factor, but you can Google it easily enough. That's why recipes specify less DME than LME for the same beer.
 
You can steep at whatever volume you want (since you're just leeching sugars into the water), but mashing generally must be done within a prescribed thickness. The general recommendation is between 1.25 and 1.75 quarts of water per pound of grain. If you're mashing 2 pounds of 2-row with 0.75 lb of Crystal and oats, that's 2.75 lbs of grain, times say 1.5 quarts per pound = 4.125 quarts. If you go too thin, it can take longer for the enzymes to convert the starches to sugar (since they're not as densely packed together).



Same formula: Mash the (milled) grain along with the flaked oats in a quantity of water equal to about 1.50 quarts per pound of grain. Your temperature depends on how much body you want in your beer. You'll want to heat your water a little higher than your target mash temperature before "doughing-in," because the grain will start out at room temperature, and will absorb heat as the temperature equalizes throughout the mash. I generally tend to heat my water about 10 - 15° F above my target mash temp (i.e., if I want a mash temp of 148° F, I'll heat my strike water to 160 - 162° F).



Looks fine to me, but honestly I'm not that familiar with those particular hop varieties. If you're basing it off of a Mad Fermentationist recipe, you're probably fine.

Re: DME vs. LME: DME generally contributes more gravity points per pound, because LME is "diluted" a little with water. I forget the exact conversion factor, but you can Google it easily enough. That's why recipes specify less DME than LME for the same beer.
Maybe I *will* do this as my first AG/BIAB beer, and use a malt bill closer to the Mad Fermentationist's than to my extract conversion. The hop bill, though, isn't his. His version is a gruit, using the Spruce Tips and some grapefruit peel for bittering instead of hops. I'm eliminating the grapefruit and putting some hops back in.
 
clicked on the link to the spruce tip thing on mad fermentationist. The photo caught my eye, those aren't "spruce tips" in the photo as generally understood but rather tips of mature spruce branches. Spruce tips are the soft new growth you're starting to see right now, right after the little brown thingy falls off.

Point of all this is, in some brewing I've done the mature branch tips don't contribute as much punch as the new growth. My concern in reviewing that recipe is you might have a lot going on with the bitterness factor by using a cup at 60 and another at 15.

But if I were in your shoes I'd go with my original hunch, and even if it doesn't come out great, it's a learning thing and you get some fresh beer. No harm in that! :)

EDIT: Looking again at thing the author says they were ordered tips, Spruce on Tap, they know their stuff, but still they don't look like tips. So who knows.
 
Last edited:
clicked on the link to the spruce tip thing on mad fermentationist. The photo caught my eye, those aren't "spruce tips" in the photo as generally understood but rather tips of mature spruce branches. Spruce tips are the soft new growth you're starting to see right now, right after the little brown thingy falls off.

Point of all this is, in some brewing I've done the mature branch tips don't contribute as much punch as the new growth. My concern in reviewing that recipe is you might have a lot going on with the bitterness factor by using a cup at 60 and another at 15.

But if I were in your shoes I'd go with my original hunch, and even if it doesn't come out great, it's a learning thing and you get some fresh beer. No harm in that! :)

EDIT: Looking again at thing the author says they were ordered tips, Spruce on Tap, they know their stuff, but still they don't look like tips. So who knows.
I've read that while the young tips are easiest to use, you can use any part of the tree and get similar results. How much did you use, out of curiosity? Either way, the ones I harvested look mostly like his, save that his look like some kind of blue spruce (which makes sense, since Spruce on Tap seems to be out of Colorado) and mine are white spruce (I think).
 
I'm using Norway Spruce, possible it's not as flavorful.

Going to do a small all-grain batch tonight with spruce tips at the :15 minute mark, I'll try to circle back in a couple weeks with results.

Being a Mainer I'm wondering if you've tried using fiddleheads in some fashion in a brew?
 
I chickened out at the lhbs. I was going to go all-grain, but I was worried my little 5gal kettle wouldn't fit 14 Lbs of grain and 4+ gallons of water. So instead, here's the recipe I've come up with.

3.5 gallon mash at ~150:
4# American Pils
4# pale ale
1# malted rye
.5# cara-red
.5# flaked oats

60 minute boil:
1c spruce tips, full boil
1 oz Northern Brewer, full boil
3# pilsen light dme, 15 min
1 oz Northern Brewer, 15 min
1c spruce tips, 15 min
1t Irish moss, 15 min
1oz Northern Brewer, flameout
2oz Simcoe, flameout

Danstar Nottingham, 1 packet
Primary temp ~63 F. (That's the temp in my upstairs closet. The other option is the cellar, ~52-55)

Thoughts? Suggestions?
 
Hey that looks like fun. Did a one gallon batch Wednesday night (I do one or two gallon all grain for time and convenience really)

Anyway did it with an good full ounce of spruce tips at the :15 minute mark, working with a small amount (about .1 oz heavy of each) couple mild hops targeting 20 IBUs from the hops. Used real soft tips, and afterward they had cooked like a soft vegetable, you could eat them easily if so inclined.

Well when the show was over took a taste seemed like I didn't get any spruce effect, was kind of disappointed. Last night gave the fermenter jug a sniff and got a mild but distinct smell of spruce so I'm hopeful.:)

Here's what the tips looked like prior to the boil (if I did the attachment right)

Good luck with your batch!

spruce tips.jpg
 
Soft hops, huh? I'm kind of doing the hops by gut, since the recipe I'm basing it on was a gruit that got all its bittering from the spruce and a generous dose of grapefruit peel. Do you think that in a 5 gallon batch, the 3oz of Northern Brewer and 2oz of Simcoe would be overkill? I could easily just save the Simcoe for another brew.
 
If I were making this, I would lighten up the grain bill and skip the simcoe to try and showcase the spruce. BUT I don't have any experience to speak of and I really don't want to step on another man's recipe! I just think it's fun to brew with alternative ingredients so that's why I stuck my nose in this thread.

If my math is correct you got a pretty heavy hitter going, thinking the ABV will come in upwards of 7, lot of things happening so guessing you aren't targeting a session beer here ;)

As for the hop schedule, only you can answer that, depends on what you want it to be. You want a big hop flavor with spruce thrown in the mix, stick to your guns. It's your beer!
 
If I were making this, I would lighten up the grain bill and skip the simcoe to try and showcase the spruce. BUT I don't have any experience to speak of and I really don't want to step on another man's recipe! I just think it's fun to brew with alternative ingredients so that's why I stuck my nose in this thread.

If my math is correct you got a pretty heavy hitter going, thinking the ABV will come in upwards of 7, lot of things happening so guessing you aren't targeting a session beer here ;)

As for the hop schedule, only you can answer that, depends on what you want it to be. You want a big hop flavor with spruce thrown in the mix, stick to your guns. It's your beer!
Like maybe kick the DME down to 2# instead of 3#? I was considering doing that. I guess I'd like to be between 6% and 7%. Not crushable, but not double. Is there a user-friendly online calculator for such things?

I might tone down the hops and drop at least 1 oz of Simcoe, maybe both. I had wanted to use Northern Brewer and Southern Cross, which is generally lower-alpha than Simcoe, but my LHBS didn't have any Southern Cross.
 
Back
Top