Reasons NOT to use first-wort hopping...

[CanadianNorth]

Ok,

I just read this on beertools.com (http://www.beertools.com/html/articles.php?view=245), written by Eric Watson

1) First Wort Hopping:

Don't ! This was a technique adopted by German brewmasters in the early 80's under the premise that it produced a "finer bitterness" than traditional early kettle hopping. NONE do it anymore! The reason is that they found out that this method of hopping is detrimental to head retention. The current technique is to begin hop charges 10 minutes after the onset of a vigorous boil. Weihenstephan's professors contend that if you perceive a harshness in your bittering additions, it is a hop variety or crop issue, not the application of the hops themselves. This rings true in the traditional sense since German brewers have always maintained that the use of low alpha varieties (nobles) produces a finer hop character in beer.


and ((http://www.beertools.com/html/articles.php?view=249)):

Whether you knew it or not, adding the hops after a vigourous boil is attained is what is now practiced in all German professional breweries. It turns out that the albumin (that white scum) entrains hop constituants if it is present. This results in lower hop utilization and a reduction in head retention. In prior German studies, the practice of first wort hopping was thought to impart a "smoother" bitterness. What they did not take into account that this perception was due to a decreased alpha/beta utilization and loss of myrcene, cohumulone and other essentials in the albumin, not the supposed "more gentle extraction." They didn't even measure any other effects... such as head loss! Hard to imagine they made such a bad recommendation given the anal, engineering/quality based beer industry that exists in Germany! The current recommendation is that hops never be added before 10 minutes of VIGOROUS rolling boil has occured.

Is anyone familiar with this?
I was about to start some brews with first-wort hops, but this seems to imply that you shouldn't (or don't need to), assuming you remove the hot-break scum in your boill and let the beer boil for 10 minutes first.

any thoughts?

 

[Revvy]

I've fwh'ed plenty of ipas and had no issue with head retention, ....I call it just someone's opinion. Like so much of stuff in brewing. Take it for what it's worth. If you like FWH, fine, if you don't, then don't.

So what if the germans aren't doing it any more? Many are not following The Reinheitsgebot these days either. And some are....

There's a million ways to skin a cat, and they are all pretty much just preferences in doing things, not gospel.

 

[hal2814]

My only thought is that I've only been experimenting with FWH off and on for a year now but the best results I get are from the cascade family and the worst results are from traditionally German and Czech hops like Hallertau and Saaz. Maybe the Germans don't do it anymore because it doesn't turn out so well with their typical hops?

 

[jds]

I haven't experienced ANY loss of head retention in my FWH beers. Remember, brewing is a CRAFT, and there isn't one perfect way to do it. If you ask three brewers how to do something, you'll get five answers, and they may all be right.

 

[Revvy]

My only thought is that I've only been experimenting with FWH off and on for a year now but the best results I get are from the cascade family and the worst results are from traditionally German and Czech hops like Hallertau and Saaz. Maybe the Germans don't do it anymore because it doesn't turn out so well with their typical hops?

That's a good point. I've only done it with the big c hops...

 

[Boerderij_Kabouter]

I haven't personally read any studies about fwh, so I don't know either way, but the claims that fwh hurts head retention seem about as likely as it creating a smoother bitterness.

Either way, I have not developed a desire to try this practice in my brewing.

 

[Beernik]

I think 1st wort hopping was something redisovered in the 80s. I was under the impression that it wasn't adopted by any breweries as a long standing practice. I thought it was something that they kind of toyed with for a while experimentally and went back to what they were doing.

The problem, if you can find a problem, with a lot of European beer makers is that they are very reluctant to adopt a new process or technology because they fear it will change the flavor or quality of the beer. It doesn't matter if it could potentially "improve" the product because they aren't looking for improvement. They only desire consistancy.

I've only first wort hopped once and that beer is still being lagered. I'm not overly worried about spectacular head retention on any of my beers. I'm just curious about the difference, if any, in the flavor.

 

[Synovia]

The author makes a lot of statements without pointing to any actual data.

 

[CanadianNorth]

you guys make some good points. I'll continue with my own attempts at FWH's and see what I think. I'm doing my first brew that way tomorrow (and introducing a friend to all-grain brewing at the same time)!~

 

[dwarven_stout]

I've FWH'd a few beers (and no-chilled a few, which is another practice that superstition advises against). I've had no problems, and my beers always look great- clear, good head. For me, the primary FWH advantage is having a more gradual "hot break" due to the nucleation effect of the hops- the boil breaks sooner, and never reaches the same potential for boilover that I struggled with when I wasn't throwing hops into the runnings.

 

[jds]

Tomorrow, I'm FWH'ing AND no-chilling. So There!

 

[Revvy]

Tomorrow, I'm FWH'ing AND no-chilling. So There!

The world may not survive....

 

[chefchris]

i've done an all fwh beer (columbus) and no chill at the same time. That beer was awesome.

naysayers.

 

[Catt22]

I've always done the FWH thing with my Classic American Pilsner and the hop has always been Saaz. No problems with head retention or anything else that I can detect. It won a 2nd place in the final round of the NHC last year. OTOH, I don't know that it improves anything either. I suspect that the practice has been largely abandoned in commercial brewing for economic reasons more than anything else. It saves the added expense of the hops and when you are cranking out millions of gallons of beer, that would be a significant cost reduction. That's one major area where we home brewers have an advantage as it's only minor expense for us.

 

[remilard]

I haven't seen any real advantage (or disadvantage) to FWH. Since my sparge time varies it seems less repeatable than a boil addition and that is enough reason for me not to do it.

I think it has been far more popular with US home and commercial brewers than it ever was in Germany, where it was abandoned not long after adoption. Oddly Boulevard claimed to have revived the technique in the production of their collaboration # 1 but that is just flat out false.

I think the popularity in the US is almost entirely due to George Fix's posts on HBD in the 90s. Doing what Fix said to do has never done me any harm, but I have not observed the supposed aromatic benefits of FWH. Oddly the commercial brewers that do it in the US seem to be motived by economics (the higher IBUs from a FWH addition) rather than trying to get aroma from it. I've personally never been handed a 100% FWH beer that has significant hop aroma. If one of you has one, send it to me and I'll send the box back full of beer.

 

[remilard]

The author makes a lot of statements without pointing to any actual data.

True, if kai ever comes back I think he has read papers/texts from the post FWH era and may know the reasons it was discontinued in practice.

I need to get my wife to brush up on her German.

It is common knowledge that continental breweries have not used FWH for a while, there must be a reason.

 

[StAnthonyB]

I haven't FWH'd in like 10 years. I never saw any objective evidence for why it should be done. At the time I quit doing it I made some empirical obsverations and regarded what I had been learning at the time concerning the physical properties of fats and proteins.

 

[Houblon]

Ok,

>> a reduction in head retention.

any thoughts?

Yeah right... sure looks like theres no head on this beer

 

[PiratePointBrewer]

Wow a lot of interesting thoughts!!

We have used FW hops for the past 34 brews. We typically make a simple Pale Ale, a Simple Blond (sorry ladies), and a simple Amber. All have an OG at 1.050. You name the hop, we're trying it looking to make bulk purchases next year to save money. Here's our 2 cents.

We have never had a head retention problem. We don't lab test IBU so we could be losing something in the albumen?? We can't tell.

We have FW'ed US, UK, and Noble hops. It just takes more Nobles. That hits our point. Hops are expensive. FW is easy to do and you theoretically get a 10% bonus. We can taste the difference between the same brews with and without FW. Soooo, we'll take the 10% thanks!! We first wort to save money and still make a good brew.

What do you do? and Why?

Preston

 

[Yooper]

I haven't FWH'd in like 10 years. I never saw any objective evidence for why it should be done. At the time I quit doing it I made some empirical obsverations and regarded what I had been learning at the time concerning the physical properties of fats and proteins.

I do just the opposite- I FWH a ton of my beers. I'm not sure I can say that I get a "smoother" bitterness, because I've never done two batches side by side, one FWH and one not, but I will say that I haven't noticed any changes in head retention or cloudiness.

 

[StAnthonyB]

Yeah right... sure looks like theres no head on this beer

Holy crap!

What is that whipping cream or egg whites!?

 

[StAnthonyB]

I do just the opposite- I FWH a ton of my beers. I'm not sure I can say that I get a "smoother" bitterness, because I've never done two batches side by side, one FWH and one not, but I will say that I haven't noticed any changes in head retention or cloudiness.

Well said.

All this talk of hopping has got me thinking of building a hop back.

 

[Synovia]

True, if kai ever comes back I think he has read papers/texts from the post FWH era and may know the reasons it was discontinued in practice.

I need to get my wife to brush up on her German.

It is common knowledge that continental breweries have not used FWH for a while, there must be a reason.

Well, sometimes the reason is "we saw no significant advantage, so we went back to our time honored traditional methods.

 

[CanadianNorth]

Yeah right... sure looks like theres no head on this beer

Clearly,

The guy was talking about head retention, not MERINGUE retention

That's awsome. :rockin:

um.... how the heck do you get that much head?

 

[EricCSU]

I've done FWH with Northern Brewer, Centennial, and Amarillo. All with good results, although I wouldn't know the difference because I didn't do a control beer (same recipe with no FWH).

All had plenty of good head retention.

Eric

 

[the_bird]

I do just the opposite- I FWH a ton of my beers. I'm not sure I can say that I get a "smoother" bitterness, because I've never done two batches side by side, one FWH and one not, but I will say that I haven't noticed any changes in head retention or cloudiness.

I've sampled some of Kaiser's FWH experiements, batches that he brewed on the same day with the same recipe, just one half being FWH'ed. Definately a difference. This happened to be a Pilsner recipe using some traditional German hops, I have to say that I *preferred* the non-FWH'ed beer in this case. Not sure if the hopping was smoother, per se.... maybe "rounder" is how I would describe it. Not obviously more bitter or less bitter. Pretty obviously different, though, there's no doubt in my mind that the FWH'ing had an impact.

 

[alcibiades]

All my exclusively FWH'd beers (no 60 min addition) lack in bitterness, even when I upped the FWH to compensate for any loss of IBU. I now FWH AND to a small early boil addition to get some bitterness bite, but not too much.

 

[-TH-]

i've done an all fwh beer (columbus) and no chill at the same time. That beer was awesome.

naysayers.

Was it also a SMaSH? Then it could be called a SMaSHaFWHaNC. :rockin:

 

[Revvy]

All my exclusively FWH'd beers (no 60 min addition) lack in bitterness, even when I upped the FWH to compensate for any loss of IBU. I now FWH AND to a small early boil addition to get some bitterness bite, but not too much.

Well I've never taken FWH hopping to mean NOT doing a bitterness addition in the 60 minute (or lesser range.) Since the wort is not boiling during FWH, there would be little if any isomerization of the alpha acids (or at least a lot less that with a boil kettle addition.)

So I could easily see why your beers lack in bitterness, you're getting little if any actually bittering from the hops, like you would in a boil.

I still add a bitterness addition, and since I uses beersmith which has a FWH designation for hop type, it still lets me know how much I need as a bittering addition to get my desired IBUs.

 

[chefmike]

um.... how the heck do you get that much head?

You have to treat her right through the whole process. Every step of the way. Quality, attention to detail, thoughtfullness. Strength where necessary, but with a gentle touch.


Wait... what were we talking about? :fro:

 

[chefchris]

Was it also a SMaSH? Then it could be called a SMaSHaFWHaNC. :rockin:

yup. SMaSH, no chill and FWH.
:rockin:

 

[MattHollingsworth]

Well I've never taken FWH hopping to mean NOT doing a bitterness addition in the 60 minute (or lesser range.) Since the wort is not boiling during FWH, there would be little if any isomerization of the alpha acids (or at least a lot less that with a boil kettle addition.)

So I could easily see why your beers lack in bitterness, you're getting little if any actually bittering from the hops, like you would in a boil.

I still add a bitterness addition, and since I uses beersmith which has a FWH designation for hop type, it still lets me know how much I need as a bittering addition to get my desired IBUs.

It sounds like you're misunderstanding FWH. With FWH you leave the hops in the kettle during the boil as well (you don't remove them or anything, except for people who are making up their own version of how to do it) and get a slightly higher level of bittering than a regular addition. It's just perceived to be a softer bitterness.

 

[Houblon]

Clearly,

The guy was talking about head retention, not MERINGUE retention

That's awsome. :rockin:

um.... how the heck do you get that much head?

Just MO with 6oz of crystal 20.

You have to treat her right through the whole process. Every step of the way. Quality, attention to detail, thoughtfullness. Strength where necessary, but with a gentle touch.


Wait... what were we talking about? :fro:

Thats exactly how to get great head:rockin:

 

[joety]

This rings true in the traditional sense since German brewers have always maintained that the use of low alpha varieties (nobles) produces a finer hop character in beer.

Mosher subscribes to this theory as well. I tried to remind myself of that as I use up the last of my hop shortage era hops such as the wonderful 2.6 alpha Goldings.