Jamil's Scottish Strong Ale

[wentsj28]

Hello everyone,

I plan to brew Jamil's recipe for a Scottish Strong Ale which you can find here.

I plan to do an all-grain, 10 gallon batch. I was thrown off when I saw that he recommends 4 US-05 yeast packets. Should I just double the grain, hops, and yeast? I'll be fermenting in two glass carboys and would then put 4 yeast packets into each one?

Thanks!!

 

[Omahawk]

Yes to doubling everything.

 

[wentsj28]

Nice. Easy answer. I Iike those! Thanks!

 

[Omahawk]

Actually, I just read the recipe at the website, and noticed that the 4 packages yeast per 5 gallon batch was in reference to liquid yeast. Knowing that you usually need fewer dry yeast packets, I looked in my copy of Brewing Classic Styles. Jamil suggests "18 grams properly rehydrated dry yeast" for his strong scottish - which should be only 2 packets US-05 per 5 gallon. Double check the weight on the packet, but I think you should only need 4 packets total for 10 gallons.

 

[wentsj28]

Yes to doubling everything.

40 pounds of grain seems like a bit much, I'm not sure if my mash tun can hold all that, plus at least 12.5 gallons of water. I'm thinking about only doing 30 pounds of the base malt.

 

[Omahawk]

Yes, 30 lbs would max out my 10 gallon cooler. Look into adding some extract in the boil to hit your gravity target. Just make sure there's enough base malt in your mash to get conversion.

 

[wentsj28]

I might be ok with losing some OG by just using the 30 pounds. 9% ABV is a little high anyway. I want it to be strong, but I'm thinking 7% is closer to what I'd like

 

[Omahawk]

Make sure you adjust your bittering and crystal/roast malts accordingly. Good luck.

 

[LLBeanJ]

Make sure you adjust your bittering and crystal/roast malts accordingly. Good luck.

Agree for bittering. Disagree for the specialty malts. Just decrease the base malt to reach desired OG, leave specialty malts unchanged.

 

[Omahawk]

Agree for bittering. Disagree for the specialty malts. Just decrease the base malt to reach desired OG, leave specialty malts unchanged.

As long as you understand the effect that not changing the specialty malts has when you're cutting the base malts by 25% - go for it. It's going to change the relative level of attenuation, color and finish of the beer compared to the original recipe.

 

[passedpawn]

Take a quart or two and boil it (stovetop) to the point where it gets thick. Put it back in your boil pot or fermentor.

Also, ignore Jamil and put a few ounces of peat malt in there.

Gather awards.

 

[LLBeanJ]

As long as you understand the effect that not changing the specialty malts has when you're cutting the base malts by 25% - go for it. It's going to change the relative level of attenuation, color and finish of the beer compared to the original recipe.

Yes, you're correct, it will affect those things. But not how you think. Assuming all else to be equal with respect to batch size, brewhouse efficiency, boil time, and apparent attenuation, by simply reducing the base malt from 20 LBS (1.099 OG) to 14 LBS (1.072 OG), the FG will be 6 points lower than the recipe calls for and the color will be slightly lighter (~1.0 SRM). Reducing the specialty malts in proportion to the reduction of base malt would cause an even further drop in FG and lighten the color even more. If one was wanting to reduce the OG of the original recipe while maintaining the original FG and color, more specialty malts would have to be added, not less.

With all of that said, I've brewed this recipe twice. Both times I sized it for 1.090 (90% of original) and accomplished it by reducing the base malt only. The color was essentially the same and the FG came in 2 points under Jamil's numbers. It was also the best Wee Heavy I've ever had!!!

 

[LLBeanJ]

take a quart or two and boil it (stovetop) to the point where it gets thick. Put it back in your boil pot or fermentor.

Also, ignore jamil and put a few ounces of peat malt in there.

Gather awards.

+1

 

[Omahawk]

With all of that said, I've brewed this recipe twice. Both times I sized it for 1.090 (90% of original) and accomplished it by reducing the base malt only. The color was essentially the same and the FG came in 2 points under Jamil's numbers. It was also the best Wee Heavy I've ever had!!!

I have noticed that Scottish 70 schilling and 80 schilling recipes that have essentially the same specialty malt profile, just more base malt with the 80 schilling. Thanks for the info - I will defer to your Wee Heavy experience.

 

[wentsj28]

Thanks for all the great information everyone, but I've decided to go with a 5 gallon, all-grain batch. In this way I'll be able to brew exactly what Jamil calls for.

Take a quart or two and boil it (stovetop) to the point where it gets thick. Put it back in your boil pot or fermentor.

Also, ignore Jamil and put a few ounces of peat malt in there.

Gather awards.

When should I take these quarts from the brew pot? After the complete boil? During the boil? I'm just boil this down to get a thick syrup, then adding it right back?

Also, would I replace something with the peat malt? Or should I just add 8 ounces?

 

[LLBeanJ]

What passedpawn was referring to was doing a Scottish ale using caramelization, which is the traditional way that Scottish ales were brewed. If you were to do that, you wouldn't brew Jamil's recipe. Instead you would use a simple recipe of base malt (I'd suggest Golden Promise for any Scottish ale) and enough roasted barley to provide the color. That's it, none of the other specialty malts would be used, except for the peat malt (you just want subtle hints of smokiness and a little peat malt goes a long way, so use no more than about 3 oz. in a 5g batch), as the kettle caramelization will give you all the flavors that the specialty malts are trying to replicate.

As far as technique, you would mash as usual, then pull out your gallon of wort and boil it down on the stovetop. This could be done as the main boil was taking place (also, I'd recommend 90-120 minutes for the main boil). Once the caramelized wort is boiled down to about 1/2 to 1/3 the volume you started with, you can add it back to the main boil. You may also want to top off with water to replace what was boiled off from the caramelization.

If you choose to forego the caramelized version and brew Jamil's recipe as-is, just add 3 oz. of peat malt to the recipe and keep everything else the same. Also, try to use Golden Promise for the base malt if you can get it, otherwise M.O. will be fine.

 

[wentsj28]

What passedpawn was referring to was doing a Scottish ale using caramelization, which is the traditional way that Scottish ales were brewed. If you were to do that, you wouldn't brew Jamil's recipe. Instead you would use a simple recipe of base malt (I'd suggest Golden Promise for any Scottish ale) and enough roasted barley to provide the color. That's it, none of the other specialty malts would be used, except for the peat malt (you just want subtle hints of smokiness and a little peat malt goes a long way, so use no more than about 3 oz. in a 5g batch), as the kettle caramelization will give you all the flavors that the specialty malts are trying to replicate.



As far as technique, you would mash as usual, then pull out your gallon of wort and boil it down on the stovetop. This could be done as the main boil was taking place (also, I'd recommend 90-120 minutes for the main boil). Once the caramelized wort is boiled down to about 1/2 to 1/3 the volume you started with, you can add it back to the main boil. You may also want to top off with water to replace what was boiled off from the caramelization.



If you choose to forego the caramelized version and brew Jamil's recipe as-is, just add 3 oz. of peat malt to the recipe and keep everything else the same. Also, try to use Golden Promise for the base malt if you can get it, otherwise M.O. will be fine.

Wow! Thanks for the great explanation! I think I'm going to go with Jamil's recipe for a few reasons:

1) I've never been disappointed in a Jamil recipe.

2) This traditional process sounds a little advanced for me. Maybe in the future I will attempt it, but I'm still trying to get my brewing feet under me. I love brewing traditional styles though, so I will definitely give this a shot.

I'm not sure about adding the peat malt. I like smokiness in my beer, but this is a beer I'm going to be serving at a party of traditional BMC drinkers, and I don't want to scare them away from delicious homebrew/craft beer. That being said, I'd like to be true to style. Would 1.5 oz be enough to add subtle, but not overbearing smoke flavor?

Also, I plugged this recipe into beer smith and the OG and ABV were off the charts! Should I be worried about this? Or should I be alright? If so, I might tone back to 15 pounds of Pale Ale malt. I'm still not sure if I like that high ABV.

Lastly, would you suggest switching my base from the Pale Ale Malt to Maris Otter completely? should I do a 50/50 split? Or should I do something else?

Thanks for all your help everyone I really appreciate it!

P.S. I'm brewing this beer for a Song of Ice and Fire themed party. This is going to be our Robert Baratheon ale, if that helps you get an idea of what I'm going for.

 

[LLBeanJ]

That's understandable. You won't be disappointed with Jamil's recipe.

The first time I brewed it, I didn't add any peat malt. I also kegged that batch. It was very good. Friends who don't generally care for Wee Heavy liked this one. It's very smooth and has awesome flavor.

The second time I brewed it, I added a couple ounces of peat malt to the recipe and bottled the batch. I've only been thru maybe a half dozen of the bottles, but IIRC I only detected the peat malt in one bottle and it was very subtle. In the other bottles I've consumed so far, I couldn't taste it at all. I do like the peat taste and would probably change to 3 ounces next time, but if you're worried about how your BMC crowd will react to it, by all means leave it out completely. This brew will stand on it's own just fine without it.

Jamil's recipes in Brewing Classic Styles (that's where this recipe is from) are based on 6 gallons (1/2g is expected to be left in the kettle after the boil and another 1/2g is expected to be lost to trub in the fermenter, yielding 5g for packaging) and 70% mash efficiency. If your post boil volume is less and/or your mash efficiency is higher, you'll need to decrease the base malt to put the OG where you want it to be. Regardless, don't make any changes to the specialty malt quantities.

Regarding the base malt: M.O. is British pale ale malt. I would absolutely go 100% Golden Promise or M.O. for the base. I prefer G.P. myself as that's traditionally what the Scots used, but M.O. is pretty similar. G.P. is commonly used for Scotch whiskey, as well.

 

[kanzimonson]

Meh to the peat malt, this recipe rules as is. If it's my first time brewing a style, I always defer right to the BCS recipe, see what it does, and then makes changes from there.

I'd love to see it with 10-20% beechwood smoked malt and entered in a smoked category.

 

[wentsj28]

So, I'm going to go ahead and brew this beer this Sunday. This is the biggest beer I have ever brewed, so I want to make sure I do it right. I'd like to mash at 152 for about an hour. Given the grain bill, how much water should I use for the mash? And for the sparge? I can calculate strike temperatures no problem. I'd like to get about 6.5 gallons into the primary. I'd expect about a 10% loss during the boil.

My last brew efficiency was about 60%, but I'd like to get it up to about 65-70% for this beer.

Any help is appreciated!

 

[kanzimonson]

Total water needed = (Preboil volume) - (pounds of grain)(1.5qts strike water) + (pounds of grain)(.52qts absorption) - (sparge water) + (deadspace)

So you should know all these numbers except for sparge water. Just punch everything in, do the simple math (order of operations!) and you'll get a number for sparge water. I add an extra two quarts to my sparge water to ensure I have enough.

Also make sure you're converting between quarts and gallons as needed.

 

[LLBeanJ]

You're using US-05 right? If so, I'd mash at 156 since this strain can be expected to attenuate better than the Scottish ale strains. Also, this style will benefit from a 90 min boil if you can do it.

Mash with 1.25 qts / lb of grain. Collect your runnings and sparge with however much more it takes to hit your pre-boil volume. If you want 6.5g to go into the fermenter, then pre-boil = final volume (6.5g) + boiloff + amount expected to be left behind in the kettle (if any).

You can calculate total water needed:

Batch size (into fermenter) + boiloff (typically 1.0-1.5g/hr) + mash tun loss (if any) + kettle loss (if any) + grain absorption (for traditional mashing, expect 0.1 g/lb of grain) = total water

 

[wentsj28]

Thanks everyone!! I will use this formula from now on!!

 

[wentsj28]

So should I use 1.25 quarts of water/1 pound of grain, or 1.5? I ask because 1.25 gives me about 7 gallons of water, but 1.5 gives me about 10. That's a pretty big difference. Should I base it on my mash efficiency?

 

[LLBeanJ]

It doesn't really matter. Just pick one. Ideally, you'd be attempting to pre-calculate (using software) your mash pH and incorporating brewing salts to bring it into the area of 5.2-5.4. Mash thickness will influence the pH, so that's where you may use one ratio for one recipe and another ratio for another recipe. A thick mash might also be required if you are short on available mash tun volume for a particular grain bill, but I don't think that will be an issue for you here. But, if you're not concerning yourself with mash pH at this stage of your brewing experience, then just pick a ratio and go with it.

 

[kanzimonson]

Yeah, I agree it doesn't matter. I use 1.5 on most beers just because it works for my system. It's a nice medium between a thick and thin mash - I probably have a bit more liquid than is necessary but it helps me recirculate during the mash.

Are you fly or batch sparging? Batch will make your life easier because as LLBeanJ points out, you just completely drain your first runnings, look at how much more water you need to get to preboil, and add exactly that.

 

[wentsj28]

Batch sparging. So, recirculate at first to establish a grain bed, then take first runnings. See where I'm at and then add that much sparge water? Should I heat this water up to perform a mash out? Or should I just hear it to approx 156? I'm sorry for totally noobing out here everyone, but I really appreciate the help!

 

[kanzimonson]

No problem on asking questions.

Do one of the equations above to determine a general amount of sparge water you'll need. Prepare this much plus a few quarts extra. Recirculate and get your first runnings as you said. Then do some simple subtraction to figure out how much sparge water to add for the second runnings.

So all of my batches start with 7gal preboil. If I were batch sparging I'd take my first runnings and I have, say 3.5 gallons in the kettle. So I'd just add 2.5gal of sparge water back to the mashtun, let sit for 5-10min, recirculate a gallon or two, and then run out all the runnings. So easy.

 

[LLBeanJ]

Should I heat this water up to perform a mash out?

Typically, yes, you would heat your sparge water to 168-170, though for batch sparging, I don't think the water temp is that critical. However, since you're just wingin' it on pH, I definitely wouldn't go any hotter.

 

[wentsj28]

Typically, yes, you would heat your sparge water to 168-170, though for batch sparging, I don't think the water temp is that critical. However, since you're just wingin' it on pH, I definitely wouldn't go any hotter.

What would be the steps involved if I didn't wing my ph? Or is that a whole different can of worms?

 

[LLBeanJ]

It can be a bit complicated and I am by no means an expert. In fact, I probably know just enough to be dangerous. There are a couple of resident water experts on the forum who hang out in the Brew Science subforum who can answer specific questions and offer guidance.

To begin with, it requires knowing the mineral profile of your brewing water, which can usually be obtained from your municipal water provider or you can send a sample to a lab (e.g. Ward Labs) for analysis. Absent that, you could buy reverse osmosis (RO) or distilled water, which is essentially mineral free and then build it up from scratch using various salts/acid.

Once you have your water's profile, you can use one of the online spreadsheets/calculators (e.g. Bru'n Water, EZ Water, Northern Brewer's water calculator) to input your water profile, grain bill, mash thickness, and sparge volume to get a relatively close idea of where your pH will fall. The sweet spot is usually in the 5.2-5.4 range. If it falls outside of the range, you can add different salts to raise or lower the pH. Acid (usually lactic or phosphoric) and acidulated malt can be added to lower the pH. It's not uncommon to need a combination of salts and acid to get it where you want it. The style of brew will also play into the final water profile you should be aiming for, but pH control is the primary goal.

Finally, if you're tweaking your water you should have a reliable way to measure the pH so that you can verify what you ended up with is what you wanted. For that you can use test strips (not all that accurate, but better than nothing) or a pH meter.

For more info, take a look at the Brewing Water Chemistry Primer in the sticky in the Brew Science forum. It will get you pointed in the right direction.

 

[wentsj28]

Great!! Thanks! I will look into it. I'm probably going to go winging it style this time. I'll be more of a Walter White next beer

 

[wentsj28]

You're using US-05 right? If so, I'd mash at 156 since this strain can be expected to attenuate better than the Scottish ale strains. Also, this style will benefit from a 90 min boil if you can do it.

Two questions:
1.) Can you explain the purpose for the higher mash temp? Is it to increase efficiency?

2.) What is the purpose of the 90 minute boil? Do I just boil 30 minutes with no hops, then add hops according to schedule?

Thanks for all your help! I'm very excited to brew on Sunday!

 

[LLBeanJ]

The ideal yeast for this style would be Wyeast 1728 Scottish Ale or White Labs WL028 Edinburgh strain. Both of these are the same strain (McEwans) and would be expected to attenuate in the 70-75% range. The reason for the higher mash temp is to create a somewhat low fermentable wort so that you'll end up with a bigger bodied beer, which is how a Wee Heavy should be. In your original post you talked about pitching packets of US-05, so I assumed that's what you'll be using. US-05 (aka "Chico" strain) will typically attenuate in the 75-80% range. In order to compensate for that somewhat higher attenuation, you'll want to mash a bit higher than if you were using the Scottish ale yeasts to end up with the same FG when using a higher attenuating yeast. In the recipe, Jamil states to mash at 154 and that would be perfect for the Scottish ale yeasts. Both times I brewed this recipe I also used the Chico strain, but one of the liquid versions (WLP001) and in playing around with the recipe in BeerSmith, I found that Chico mashed at 156 would yield the same FG as W1728 or WLP028 mashed at 154, so that's where 156 comes from and why.

The 90 minute boil is to add some kettle caramelization to the wort to increase flavor and complexity. I don't know if you've ever had a Wee Heavy, but this style is very rich, sweet, and full bodied (as compared to most other styles) and the kettle caramelization you get from a little longer boil will help accentuate this. So, for the hop schedule, yes, you start the boil then add the hops when you have 60 minutes remaining.

I'm actually drinking one of my Wee Heavy's right now. All I can say is that it's an excellent brew.

 

[wentsj28]

Great! Thanks for the explanations! I've had Scottish styles before, and probably a Wee Heavy (I go to a lot of beer tastings, so a lot gets forgotten). I'm very excited to try this one. I will keep you all posted on how things are going.

 

[wentsj28]

Would this beer benefit from mashing at 150 degrees for 45 min and then raising the temperature to 156 for another 45 minutes? I've been listening to Jamil's podcast on high gravity beers and this was something John Palmer suggested.

 

[LLBeanJ]

I've not listened to the podcast, but I would expect a step mash like that to increase the fermentability of the wort, which is not something you would want with this style. I would see the value of this for a big Belgian or IIPA where you would want to increase fermentability so that it finishes dryer, and therefore, makes the beer less sweet and more quaffable, but not with a style like Wee Heavy that is supposed to be big bodied and, well, heavy. Again, I have not heard the podcast, so I'm just going off my own experience. I could be completely wrong.