Can homebrew ever equal microbrew quality ?

[dimmy32]

I agree with you ayoungrad.
"luck" is the part of the process that includes variability.
Every batch of grain is not exactly the same. Fresh hops vary in terms of harvest year , growing conditions, etc etc.
I'm betting you can make the same recipe over and over and try your best to keep everything the same, but it will never taste identical.
Yeast can mutate and change over time as well.

So many variables you cannot control.

But still you can make consistent, delicious beer batch after batch .
Personally, I like the variability.
I notice this very easily at microbrews as well.
I usually go to the same one every week.
The IPA doesnt always taste the same, even though they have all the fancy equipment.

 

[DD2000GT]

My opinion, based on your criteria on your original post, is no. Simple plastic fermentors and basic technique will not get you superior beer. I have been brewing for over 20 years, most of those on extract batches. My early brews were "ok" and very drinkable, but as time, experience, and equipment increased - so did my beers. I am an all grain brewer now and "most" of my beers are microbrew quality and I could sell them.

As was posted earlier - the ingredients are the same - it is the skill and equipment that make the biggest difference.

 

[Homercidal]

My opinion, based on your criteria on your original post, is no. Simple plastic fermentors and basic technique will not get you superior beer. I have been brewing for over 20 years, most of those on extract batches. My early brews were "ok" and very drinkable, but as time, experience, and equipment increased - so did my beers. I am an all grain brewer now and "most" of my beers are microbrew quality and I could sell them.

As was posted earlier - the ingredients are the same - it is the skill and equipment that make the biggest difference.

His post asked if better "equipment" will make better beer, or could rival microbrews. You clearly state the experience and equipment has made better beer for you.

I'm confident that if you were to apply your experience to making beer with simple equipment, you could make beer as good as the average microbrewery.

I am confident because I have personally tasted several beers that were made in plastic buckets on a turkey fryer that were excellent. I've even had an IPA made from extract that was as good as many IPAs I could buy at the store.

 

[pjj2ba]

I would say, yes and no. Sure we can all hit that great beer that is as good or better than craftbrews. The question is can you do it EVERY TIME!? That is where the difference lies and where the equipment can make the difference. This is where I am at. I can make very good beer, but I'm still not satisfied that I can repeat a recipe and have it turn out the same every time. I've got two recipes that I'm really happy with and so far I have been able to successfully reproduce them. I've got a few more to work on.

 

[LVBen]

I would say, yes and no. Sure we can all hit that great beer that is as good or better than craftbrews. The question is can you do it EVERY TIME!? That is where the difference lies and where the equipment can make the difference. This is where I am at. I can make very good beer, but I'm still not satisfied that I can repeat a recipe and have it turn out the same every time. I've got two recipes that I'm really happy with and so far I have been able to successfully reproduce them. I've got a few more to work on.

Microbreweries don't make good beer every time. I've heard many times about microbreweries pouring out entire X-barrel batches. Macro breweries do it too! Though, yes, they are probably far more consistent than homebrewers. A big difference is that many homebrewers will still drink and serve their beers even if they don't turn out perfect.

 

[Shooter]

Simple plastic fermentors and basic technique will not get you superior beer.

Well, I guess I'm giving up the hobby then...and I thought it was going so well.

 

[xjmox14x]

Microbreweries don't make good beer every time. I've heard many times about microbreweries pouring out entire X-barrel batches. Macro breweries do it too! Though, yes, they are probably far more consistent than homebrewers. A big difference is that many homebrewers will still drink and serve their beers even if they don't turn out perfect.

They also have more incentive to get it right every time (or try to at least). If a batch fails and they have to dump it, they're looking at a loss on the order of tens of thousands of dollars minimum (much more if you include the loss of sales of that product as well).

http://www.dogfish.com/community/bl...-say-the-120-is-not-on-the-way-yet.htm?page=1

The big boy toys are usually more precise and automated (as opposed to wrapping your mash tun with a sleeping bag), so they can MORE consistently turn out great beer. However, this doesn't mean it happens every time. Nor does using less advanced setups mean you can't ever produce great beer.

 

[dimmy32]

I tried that IPA at our local beer festival ! pretty good for bottled beer

The big beer companies can add all kinds chemicals to their beer to stabilize it.
I know a guy who works for Molson , here in montreal. He showed me a list of additives, I figgered around 20 or so .
no wonder that beer gives me massive headaches after only drinking 4 of them !

 

[emjay]

My opinion, based on your criteria on your original post, is no. Simple plastic fermentors and basic technique will not get you superior beer. I have been brewing for over 20 years, most of those on extract batches. My early brews were "ok" and very drinkable, but as time, experience, and equipment increased - so did my beers. I am an all grain brewer now and "most" of my beers are microbrew quality and I could sell them.

I agree equipment makes a huge difference, but the particular example you listed is interesting. There is *no* reason you can't make top-notch beer in a plastic ferment. Stainless conicals are nice, but the benefits are largely a matter of convenience, and superior yeast harvesting, which only affect quality if the brewer lets it.

 

[Palefire]

Homebrew can certainly equal or surpass average microbrew quality. That's not too difficult.

Consistently making beer that's as good as or better than the best microbrews (whatever you consider those to be)? That's hard.

 

[LVBen]

I tried that IPA at our local beer festival ! pretty good for bottled beer

The big beer companies can add all kinds chemicals to their beer to stabilize it.
I know a guy who works for Molson , here in montreal. He showed me a list of additives, I figgered around 20 or so .
no wonder that beer gives me massive headaches after only drinking 4 of them !

I add gypsum, calcium chloride, yeast nutrient (vitamins, minerals, inorganic nitrogen, organic nitrogen, zinc, phosphates and other trace elements), and sometimes clarifiers.

I'm not sure if I'm at 20, but I'm probably close.

 

[DD2000GT]

I agree equipment makes a huge difference, but the particular example you listed is interesting. There is *no* reason you can't make top-notch beer in a plastic ferment. Stainless conicals are nice, but the benefits are largely a matter of convenience, and superior yeast harvesting, which only affect quality if the brewer lets it.

In my mind I am thinking plastic buckets used as fermentors, not better bottles for instance. Plastic buckets let oxygen in which will negatively effect beer. I meant no offense to anyone - I started with a used glass watercooler carboy and a aluminum pot, so I am not putting anyone down. My statement was about making "superior" beer. While good or even great beers may be capable with rudimentary brewing equipment, I don't think superior beer can be made with these IMO. Heck - just a few weeks ago I made an dry extract partial boil wheat beer to show my kid what his Mr. Beer setup could make - it turned out pretty good and much better than the kits they sell.

 

[samc]

Big breweries more than likely pasteurize the beer, they are not generally adding stabilizers. As stated above the additions are more likely water minerals, etc.

The advantage we home brewers have is that we don't have to package our beer for travel and shelf sitting. To formulate a commercial recipe that is still drinkable 90 days in the bottle is a lot different than one that you fill your corny keg with and start drinking ASAP.

I'd say that 75% of my beers are as good if not better than any Microbrewery stuff I taste. Went out to dinner last night and after looking at the beer list I went with a Martini, which by the way sucked compared to what I'd pour at home.

 

[Shooter]

In my mind I am thinking plastic buckets used as fermentors, not better bottles for instance. Plastic buckets let oxygen in which will negatively effect beer. I meant no offense to anyone - I started with a used glass watercooler carboy and a aluminum pot, so I am not putting anyone down.

Dang, I use a plastic bucket AND an aluminum pot. With every post you are just compounding my problems!!!

 

[dimmy32]

there is a big difference in adding natural "chemicals" , like calcium, salt, algea, whatever, and other chemicals, like artificial flavour, artificial colors ( I did see artificial colors on that list ! ) , things like sodium azide - an anti-fungal and a bunch of other stuff i had no idea what it did.
The dude explained to me that it was mostly preservatives, stabilizers and anti-bacterial/fungal stuff. They also add colour and artificial flavour.
He even went so far to say that brand X and brand Y come from the same batch - they just add diff flavourings , before bottling.

 

[LVBen]

there is a big difference in adding natural "chemicals" , like calcium, salt, algea, whatever, and other chemicals, like artificial flavour, artificial colors ( I did see artificial colors on that list ! ) , things like sodium azide - an anti-fungal and a bunch of other stuff i had no idea what it did.
The dude explained to me that it was mostly preservatives, stabilizers and anti-bacterial/fungal stuff. They also add colour and artificial flavour.
He even went so far to say that brand X and brand Y come from the same batch - they just add diff flavourings , before bottling.

Some of that stuff may be true, but some of it is probably, at least, slightly exaggerated. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that "The dude" is probably not a reliable source of information.

 

[emjay]

In my mind I am thinking plastic buckets used as fermentors, not better bottles for instance. Plastic buckets let oxygen in which will negatively effect beer. I meant no offense to anyone - I started with a used glass watercooler carboy and a aluminum pot, so I am not putting anyone down. My statement was about making "superior" beer. While good or even great beers may be capable with rudimentary brewing equipment, I don't think superior beer can be made with these IMO.

Ah, okay.

Even then though, most styles will really be negligibly affected by the oxygen permeation of HDPE buckets. It's only when you leave a beer for significantly longer than usual (as in, what you'd do for an APA) that it really becomes an issue, and in that case I'll use glass. But the point is, even with a bucket, *most* styles can be made without being negatively affected.

I'm not taking offense though. I'm an equipment junkie myself. Almost everything in my brewery is stainless steel, and I've been working to find ways to lose the few plastic pieces left... I even made a thread about my "stainless bottling bucket". Heck, I own about 75% of Blichmann's product lineup!

But getting myself a conical or two is pretty low on my list of priorities... if not the bottom. And that's really what I was getting at... not doubting the importance of equipment in general, but rather, fermentors specifically.

 

[Homercidal]

In my mind I am thinking plastic buckets used as fermentors, not better bottles for instance. Plastic buckets let oxygen in which will negatively effect beer. I meant no offense to anyone - I started with a used glass watercooler carboy and a aluminum pot, so I am not putting anyone down. My statement was about making "superior" beer. While good or even great beers may be capable with rudimentary brewing equipment, I don't think superior beer can be made with these IMO. Heck - just a few weeks ago I made an dry extract partial boil wheat beer to show my kid what his Mr. Beer setup could make - it turned out pretty good and much better than the kits they sell.

How much oxygen does a plastic bucket let in, as opposed to, say a stainless conical, in the 3-6 weeks it might spend in there?

And how does that compare with the amount of oxygen you let in simply by transferring into a keg or bottles?

The fact is, buckets, carboys, either glass or plastic, let in a practically immeasurable amount of O2, and chances are, unless you are taking insane precautions during transfer, you're letting much more in at that time.

Plastic *might* be a concern for extended aging, like for several months to several years. Mostly a problem in wine, mead, and to some extent, cidermaking.

You could argue about Better Bottles, since they are often used for bulk aging. But buckets are generally used anywhere from 2-6 weeks before the beer is kegged or bottled. And I've primaried a stout for 3 months with no detectable oxidation.

 

[squirrelly]

I agree with most of the posts in this thread. My wife and I started as most do on the kitchen stove doing partial boils and not knowing anything about fermentation temp control or the importance of compulsive sanitation practices. As we progressed in our quest for knowledge, and really began to understand the science behind brewing good beer, our brews improved with each batch.

In the last seven years we have begun buying and putting together equipment to make each batch of beer more consistent and more to a professional quality. While we placed in competitions, and even won a few ribbons here and there it wasn't until we built the actual brewery did we really increase the consistency from batch to batch. Both she and I are two different types of brewers, and brew for different reasons; I believe this is what makes us a great team. I brew for consistency, to challenge myself, and because I love the science behind brewing. She brews to win competitions, and mostly because she loves drinking the beer she has created. I will brew the same recipe over and over until I'm absolutely satisfied with it, and know it will be the best beer in its style. This means sometimes I'm brewing the same recipe twice a week for 6-12 months straight. She gets very bored with this, and will create a new recipe almost every time she brews. I typically dump the entire 10 or 20 gallon batch if it is not to style, or exactly how I wanted it. She finds this to be silly, and kegs whatever she brews.

With all that being said since we have gotten a couple stir plates, a couple chest freezers (one for lagers and one for ales) an RO water system in the brew house, have regulated fermentation temp very strictly, make huge yeast starters 3 days prior to brew day, build up our brewing water, sanitize to the point of being OCD with Star-San, regulate mash PH and temp, conduct a proper mash out, sparge with proper water temps and water levels, created a "clean room" for yeast handling, use as little plastic equipment as possible, and most importantly have invested in a fully digital B3 1100 RIMS S.M.A.R.T system have we been able to create excellent professional quality beer with each batch. I guess I would say equipment along with experience, and knowing how to identify and prevent off flavors really does make a difference. I think we have right around 13K invested in our brewery thus far, and that does not include the house we bought simply because it offered a great place to brew.

Of course we judge and compete against folks who have modest setups, and these beers do quite well. As long as the brewer can brew to style and reduce off flavors, I think he/she is up there with micro quality. As I've stated before, if a lot of the commercial beers went to competition today, they would be beaten by homebrewers with stock pots and turkey friers.

[email protected]. on tap: homemade sarsaparilla and easy virtue blonde. primary: heffewitzen, blow your top steam. conditioning: fruity monk Belgian wit

 

[JohnTheBrewist]

I've been making great beers in my plastic buckets for many, many years. I'll put my better homebrewed beers up against microbrewed any day, and they're often much better than brewpub offerings.

I truly believe that the right equipment (not necessarily fancier) is the key. Much of the fancier equipment makes the process easier or the brew day more enjoyable though.

Cheap kettle vs expensive kettle. An expensive kettle won't make better beer as long as your process control is good, and your kettle is appropriately sized for your batch size. But, a more expensive kettle will probably have a thicker bottom for more even heating, might have fittings for a valve and thermometer, and may clean up easier. There are a couple other improvements one can make to the kettle, but none has anything to do with the kettle material.

Buckets vs Carboy vs Conical: I've used them all, and they all have their place. But you'll never convince me that any of them makes better beer than the other. Buckets may scratch easier, but if you're careful with them they'll last for years. I like the ease and simplicity of buckets and still use them when my brewhemoth conical is already in use. I had a glass carboy once and broke it, I don't see myself buying another. My conical is a joy to use, but hasn't improved my beer.

Chillers: According to Jamil, his homemade whirlpool chiller works better than an expensive plate chiller. IMO, as long as you can cool your wort relatively quickly, they all work about the same.

Fermentation control: Will a dedicated fridge or similar ferm chamber make better beer than a SOF chamber or swamp cooler method. Probably not, as long as you can maintain a constant temp. But there's less monitoring involved with the former.

I have a few more items such as a digital PH meter, a digital refractometer, oxygenator, stir plate, etc. But I'm pretty confident that the simpler tools for the same thing will make just as good a beer.

There is certainly equipment beyond this such as a yeast lab as BK mentioned. But most of this additional equipment really only adds to the brewery's consistency and flexibility.

 

[Yooper]

In my mind I am thinking plastic buckets used as fermentors, not better bottles for instance. Plastic buckets let oxygen in which will negatively effect beer.

Dang, I use a plastic bucket AND an aluminum pot. With every post you are just compounding my problems!!!

I use plastic buckets as well! Oh, I guess my beers must suck then.

 

[Shooter]

This whole thread really has me in a state of panic. I think I'm going to start another thread to see if I really should be worried or if I should just RDWHAHB. I'm going to title the new thread:

"HELP, IS MY BEER RUINED?"

Please keep an eye out for it!

 

[brian74]

The freshness of homebrew is what does it for me. The stuff I brew hasn't travelled across the country or planet in varying conditions and it is its freshest when I'm drinking it.

 

[Malticulous]

I think most of mine are as good or better than what I can buy. Not to say I'm as consistent. I don't want to be. I don't want to brew the same things over and over every day like they do any more than I want to drink the same beer all the time. That's why I homebrew.

 

[frydogbrews]

I think most of mine are as good or better than what I can buy. Not to say I'm as consistent. I don't want to be. I don't want to brew the same things over and over every day like they do any more than I want to drink the same beer all the time. That's why I homebrew.

yup.

also, yoopers right, her beer does suck. she should quit.

 

[warex]

reason I'm asking, is one of my home brew friends wants to buy one of those massive copper kettles and other professional brewing equipment.
He seems convinced better equipment will produce better quality beer....
less chance of any oxidation , more tighter control over temperature ( stovetop temp control is variable ) .

He may have read Bert Grant's book. Bert Grant is one of the forefathers of home brewing. He had a thing for copper and thought it added something important to the beer.

 

[brian74]

And my plastic buckets are just fine. Don't fall into that idea that they're inferior. The fermentation process itself creates a protective CO2 layer above the beer. And as far as O2 leaking in through the bucket, it's negligible on our scale and considering the amount of time the beer is in the bucket.

It's easy to make yourself believe that you have to have the most expensive option because "it must be better." Not necessairily the case. Remember, there is a marketing side of homebrewing and we are being advertised to every day. The more we spend, the more they make.

 

[LVBen]

This whole thread really has me in a state of panic. I think I'm going to start another thread to see if I really should be worried or if I should just RDWHAHB. I'm going to title the new thread:

"HELP, IS MY BEER RUINED?"

Please keep an eye out for it!

LOL! I can see it now:

"I made a huge mistake. I was really drunk last night, and after I chilled my wort, I accidentally put my wort into a plastic bucket with a lid and airlock instead of my SS conical and then aerated and pitched the yeast. Is my beer ruined?"

 

[jonmohno]

Of the 99% of homebrews you tried what percentage of those were conditioned over a few months?

 

[daksin]

LOL! I can see it now:

"I made a huge mistake. I was really drunk last night, and after I chilled my wort, I accidentally put my wort into a plastic bucket with a lid and airlock instead of my SS conical and then aerated and pitched the yeast. Is my beer ruined?"

This genuinely made me laugh, out loud, in my office.

Thanks for that

 

[boo boo]

I love microbrew beer, and the challenge to to equal or best it, in terms of taste, quality.
Using only simple plastic fermenters, basic equipment...is it possible to succeed ??

99 % of all homebrew I've tried never quite beats microbrew, imo.

Like was said before, Yes, it is quite possible to make beer as good or better than micro brewed beer or other commercial beer. I have made some myself, and I have had some shipped to me from Montreal and Gataneau that exceeded any micro brewed beer I can get locally. Also last week a member of the brewNosers in Halifax brought down some HB as well as hard to get imported beer for a tasting. His wit was excellent and only second to a fellow brewer here. Both are better than anything I can buy at the store, and that includes Blanche de Chambly.

 

[Forddog]

Better!
Especially if you go all grain, good yeast, good water and control
fermentation temps.

+1 consistent fermentation temps

I started doing this and beers got way better and clearer

 

[Dan]

I love microbrew beer, and the challenge to to equal or best it, in terms of taste, quality.
Using only simple plastic fermenters, basic equipment...is it possible to succeed ??

99 % of all homebrew I've tried never quite beats microbrew, imo.

Yes it is.

 

[jonmohno]

This reminds me of when i was a kid an my brother found a combination lock and he was destined to open it.Meaning with work/experience/consistency/ time/yes,luck yes,hit or miss, yes.lazyness and or not cleanliness,yes.maybe.If they dont seem right,change up your technique,ingredients,....
He could also solve a rubix cube which always amazed me of his geekyness but still admired. I just cheated and peeled a couple of my neighbors rubix stickers off and swiched them and my neighbors dad got super pissed, and he was big and hairy and i ran away cuz i dint like angry bears. I lied when confronted because i didnt want to get eaten.

 

[emjay]

I love the Ugly Baby Syndrome apparent in so many of these posts

 

[Shooter]

I love the Ugly Baby Syndrome apparent in so many of these posts

Look, I'm coming to grips with the fact that my plastic bucket and aluminum kettle are providing me with crappy beer, but nobody, and I mean nobody, calls baby ugly, and they definitely don't put her in the corner!!

 

[rexbanner]

Most beer is best fresh. Also, commercial brewers have to pinch every penny. We don't. Bottled beer styles less than ~1.060 OG are easy to beat, the rest are fairly easy to equal and can be beaten.

 

[gr8shandini]

Some of these posts remind me of the guy at the golf course with a $500 driver who keeps shanking the ball. Aside from scale, there's no functional difference between homebrew equipment and the commercial stuff.

 

[Darkblade]

Re golfer with $500 club who keeps shanking it - yeh a hacker is always going to be hacker.
But give a good brewer better equipment & surely he/she will do better.
I'm not not sure what equipment you blokes are using (I'm still in the plastic fermenter stage & happy enough thankyou) but surely better equipment coupled with skill & expertise should win out?
You reckon valentino Rossi or Casey Stoner would have been world champs running around the paddock on a back their mate-down-the-road tuned for them? No.
By the same token, reckon I would be in with a chance of being world champ with their kit? No way!
Maybe you blokes with the kettles & mashes etc are pumping out good brews. Maybe they are as good as a microbrewers but at the end of the day, big $$, expertise & equipment is surely going to triumph.
Thats not to say we cant be happy with what we have achieved. Off for a bevvie lads - cheers.

 

[Shooter]

You reckon valentino Rossi or Casey Stoner would have been world champs running around the paddock on a back their mate-down-the-road tuned for them?

MotoGP it livens up ANY conversation!