Boil time reduction : the science please

[cire]

The science please.

If you like hazy beers with bigger heads and don't mind slight taste difference with reduction in hop utilization and shorter shelf life, then go for a 30 minute boil.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1966.tb02933.x
I wouldn't give a friend a hazy beer, and don't have to.

 

[AlexKay]

If you like hazy beers with bigger heads and don't mind slight taste difference with reduction in hop utilization and shorter shelf life, then go for a 30 minute boil.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1966.tb02933.x
I wouldn't give a friend a hazy beer, and don't have to.

A link! Thanks for providing a link to a scientific paper from a reputable source.

Reviewer's comment: numbers need error bounds to determine statistical significance of reported differences.

Also, paper is pushing 60.

But I agree with the general point, which is, other than saving half an hour (or a bit more) ... why? There are potential downsides, and not many up.

 

[VikeMan]

If you like hazy beers with bigger heads and don't mind slight taste difference with reduction in hop utilization and shorter shelf life, then go for a 30 minute boil.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1966.tb02933.x

I wonder how they measured shelf-life. They used the term 13 times without ever saying.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Also, paper is pushing 60.

Could it be that improved malting processes (2010s) are producing base malts that (partially) void the experimental results (1966)?

 

[cire]

I wonder how they measured shelf-life. They used the term 13 times without ever saying.

Usually following British Standards Institution guidelines. Those were began in 1901.

Could it be that improved malting processes (2010s) are producing base malts that (partially) void the experimental results (1966)?

Many believe the best grains are those that are still floor malted. Note also the results depend upon the nitrogen content which is dependent upon the growing and not the processing.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Many believe the best grains are those that are still floor malted. Note also the results depend upon the nitrogen content which is dependent upon the growing and not the processing.

So the results may depend on the base grain and the malting process?

 

[cire]

So the results may depend on the base grain and the malting process?

Influenced by?

Shelf life?
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1961.tb01757.x
Is but one of many.

 

[VikeMan]

Usually following British Standards Institution guidelines. Those were began in 1901.

In other words, we'll never know, unless someone happens knows what British Standards Institution standard applied to beer shelf life in 1965. But wait...

Shelf life?
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/j.2050-0416.1961.tb01757.x

"Determination of shelf life. — This has normally been carried out by storing beer in clear-glass half-pint bottles at 70°F., and visually observing the appearance of the beer at weekly intervals. The shelf life has been defined as the time in weeks between bottling and the appearance of a slight opalescense in the beer."

Assuming the shelf life test described in this 1960 paper was the same as used in the 1965 paper, that would mean (looking at the 1965 paper's tables) that the beers that had hazy worts also tended to be the beers that were judged to be slightly opalescent (hazy) sooner. No wonder NEIPAs need to be drunk fresh. They have a zero week shelf life.

ETA: Meant to include this, just because I find it humorous:

"However, this beer possessed an exceptionally powerful aroma and flavour of hop-oil which might be unacceptable to many palates."

How times have changed.

 

[cire]

I started drinking and brewing when beer that was hazy would usually be sent back to be poured down a drain and be replaced. There were exceptions for bottle conditioned beers, which included Guinness in those times, and from a few small scale, local brewers who didn't bother about clarity in their dark beers.

As for NEIPAs, only once have I brewed one. There's at least one paper in the wartime annals of the Journal of the Institute of Brewers contained in Wiley library online, that explains problems with such beers. Having read those papers and avoiding the potential trouble, my NEIPA dropped clear in a couple of weeks and one bottle drank well after more than a year.

 

[Dgallo]

I started drinking and brewing when beer that was hazy would usually be sent back to be poured down a drain and be replaced. There were exceptions for bottle conditioned beers, which included Guinness in those times, and from a few small scale, local brewers who didn't bother about clarity in their dark beers.

As for NEIPAs, only once have I brewed one. There's at least one paper in the wartime annals of the Journal of the Institute of Brewers contained in Wiley library online, that explains problems with such beers. Having read those papers and avoiding the potential trouble, my NEIPA dropped clear in a couple of weeks and one bottle drank well after more than a year.

This isn't the thread for the discussion but I'm just curious what your distain for haze in beer is from. There are lots of styles that have some bit of haze to them, especially styles that are dry hopped, heavy wheat, and/or Belgian.

 

[McMullan]

This isn't the thread for the discussion but I'm just curious what your distain for haze in beer is from. There are lots of styles that have some bit of haze to them, especially styles that are dry hopped, heavy wheat, and/or Belgian.

No, there aren't lots of hazy beer styles, traditionally. Very far from it. And producing bright beers has always been a measure of a brewer's skill, patience and understanding of the brewing process.

 

[Dgallo]

No, there aren't lots of hazy beer styles, traditionally. Very far from it. And producing bright beers has always been a measure of a brewer's skill, patience and understanding of the brewing process.

This beer here I brew takes far less technical skill and attention to detail than any of my NEIPAS do, all clear beer takes is fining and time cold

 

[McMullan]

This beer here I brew takes far less technical skill and attention to detail than any of my NEIPAS do, all clear beer takes is fining and time coldView attachment 773418View attachment 773417

With a little basic skill, an average brewer can produce a bright beer naturally within 10 days or less.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

here's at least one paper in the wartime annals of the Journal of the Institute of Brewers contained in Wiley library online, that explains problems with such beers.

References? Links?

 

[cire]

References? Links?

I gave them.

There's at least one paper in the wartime annals of the Journal of the Institute of Brewers contained in Wiley library online, that explains problems with such beers.

The journal of the Institute of Brewers from 1939 to 1945 all available at Wiley library online. Lots to learn and will save you time asking questions.

 

[cire]

I started brewing in 1963. A couple of years later I found 4 bottles of beer in a friend's home that I'd given him at least a year before and they were clear. Now my beers are crystal clear about 10 days after brew day with what I've learned including a 90 minute boil and copper finings.

Yes, there's more to it than that, but I don't care if you don't believe me, for whatever reason you have.