Recipe Etiquette

[kombat]

ask someone who has no experience with a specific beer type to brew a beer of that style. With no information whatsoever that won't come anywhere close to that style without a recipe to get them in the ballpark no matter how awesome their process. They still need to know a general information about what the style entails! If someone has no idea what a Stout is and has never tried one how are they going to make anything anywhere near a stout just based on their system and processes? They won't.

The problem I have with this is that, as an admittedly relatively new brewer, there really doesn't seem to be much variation in ingredients in a given style, and thus I feel you're putting far too much of an emphasis on the recipe.

For example, say you took someone who'd never brewed a Pilsner Lager before and asked them to brew one. You're likely right, in that they'd have no idea where to start.

However, with even just a tiny bit of research, they'd find out that a Pilsner Lager is just Pilsner Malt and Saaz hops. They could also learn the style's target S.G. and IBU ranges, and it wouldn't take a genius to deduce that a "Pilsner Lager" uses a lager yeast, and is fermented at lager temperatures.

With just that Post-it note's worth of information, they could brew a beer that would definitely land in the style ballpark of a "Pilsner Lager."

Heck, even just deducing their own recipe from the above information, there's an excellent chance they'd devise a recipe that would end up being an exact duplicate of *somebody* else's recipe. So does that mean they can't call that beer their own? Do they lose any bragging rights because they ended up creating a recipe that matched one of the thousands of existing Pilsner Lager recipes, each of which only differ by a few ounces of the same grains or hops anyway?

Yes, I know tweaking the water and the yeast and whatever else can change the resulting beer. But it'd still be in the "Pilsner Lager" BJCP style. I guess I just don't see what the big deal is with putting the recipes on a pedestal, when they're all so close to each other anyway. We're only working with 4 ingredients here, guys.

It's about the execution, in my opinion.

 

[Rev2010]

However, with even just a tiny bit of research, they'd find out that a Pilsner Lager is just Pilsner Malt and Saaz hops.

Yes, but there's a difference in taste between different brands of pilsner malt. Some are spring cut, some winter, a lot come from different regions. That is why I feel hitting the moment of a perfect stunning combo is of importance. Many here will just buy the cheapest 2-row to make their beer, and it may possibly make a stunning beer, but to not have tried the differences and to always just buy Rahr I think is a bit one dimensional.

Meh, anyhow I think I've been taken a bit out of context here. I'll highlight what I said earlier on: "Look, I'm not in any way saying process has little importance, of course it does. I'm merely saying I personally believe a lot of people are severely downplaying the importance of recipe formulation."

I guess one of the reasons I have this stance is because I am also a musician. I *create* music. I don't just play cover songs all the time. I still personally feel thinking up a beer, working out the recipe, and tweaking it till it's just perfect is more of an accomplishment then taking a recipe out of a book, following the directions 100%, and winning a comp. Obviously this doesn't agree with the greater majority of you so I'll now bow out


Rev.

 

[pwkblue]

I've never entered a comp, so I won't opine on the etiquette there. But when I brew a recipe I found here at HBT, I do three things: 1) post a message in the recipe thread something like "Hey I just brewed this for the 4th time;" 2) a couple months later I'll post again, "It came out great, as usual;" 3) I call it what the author called it. This generates conversations like this:

"Hey Joe, have my latest homebrew, Deception Stout."
"Why is it called 'Deception'? "
"Because that's what the author of the recipe called it."

Cheers!

exactly the kind of thing I was hoping to hear....there is etiquette even when using a recipe at home. The feedback you describe helps everyone, and gives credit where credit is due!

 

[pwkblue]

I guess one of the reasons I have this stance is because I am also a musician. I *create* music. I don't just play cover songs all the time. I still personally feel thinking up a beer, working out the recipe, and tweaking it till it's just perfect is more of an accomplishment then taking a recipe out of a book, following the directions 100%, and winning a comp. Obviously this doesn't agree with the greater majority of you so I'll now bow out


Rev.

This is the core of my question...just curious about the respect for the creative content.
Clearly, most recipes within a style are very similar...the results ALWAYS come down to the details and execution..

BUT, If you think recipe doesn't matter I have a suggestion. Go look at one of the 5 star recipes posted here. Amazing how many of them come from 2 or 3 people Yooper, Biermuncher etc Why, they are good, thought out, repeatable recipes...and spot on to the style. Now...pick one...Yooper's 60 minute clone perhaps....and go search the recipe database at Hopville for 60 minute clone recipes. (Hopville contains actual brewday recipes of users) It isn't hard to see that most will make an IPA...a few look pretty good...but the only ones that look like they will be a clone...ARE Yooper's recipe! Could they have taken the hop schedule from the recipe in extreme brewing....and derived the grain bill and yeast from a few different interviews and articles available online...sure, but I'd guess most just searched google, and copied Yooper.

In conclusion...it's all good.

 

[moti_mo]

This is an interesting topic. It seems that a lot of people generally agree that it is not a problem to enter others' recipes into competitions because it is their process that is, in large part, being judged and potentially rewarded.

A question just to see what people think: Does this same philosophy extend to professional breweries that simply take a posted recipe from other professional breweries, brew it on their own, and then (a) sell that beer commercially and/or (b) win awards off of said recipe? There are many professional brewers who give fairly detailed recipes to various sources such as Zymurgy, etc, so this an easy scenario to envision. Now replace "recipe from other professional breweries" with "recipe from the HBT recipe database". Does the same philosophy hold; is everybody still OK with that?

Just interested in what people think about those scenarios.

 

[IffyG]

Meh, anyhow I think I've been taken a bit out of context here. I'll highlight what I said earlier on: "Look, I'm not in any way saying process has little importance, of course it does. I'm merely saying I personally believe a lot of people are severely downplaying the importance of recipe formulation."

I believe you are placing too much importance on recipe formulation and the ability of individual brewers to create the same beer from the same recipe. It's just not possible. Take a look at Saison Du Buff, a beer brewed from the exact same recipe at Stone, Dogfish Head and Victory brewing.

http://www.dogfish.com/brews-spirits/the-brews/collaborations/Saison-du-BUFF.htm

Now read through the tasting notes from several different drinkers of presumably the exact same beer.

http://beermonger.net/2010/08/13/the-beermonger-review-saison-du-buff-v-1-v-2/
http://kupkosmindbottled.blogspot.com/2010/09/saison-du-buff-comparison.html
http://www.guysdrinkingbeer.com/review-dogfish-headstonevictory-saison-du-buff/

Just from these tasting notes, it's pretty clear that the end result is three very distinct beers. I'm pretty sure if anyone would be able to perfectly copy someones recipe it would be one of these breweries.

 

[scottland]

There's too many variables to make broad sweeping statements with something like this, too many what if's

Good example. You find a munich helles recipe. 95% pils, 5% munich malt. A little hallertau @ 90 min, ferment with a lager yeast.

How much are any two munich helles recipes really going to differ? It's pretty much all technique. Yeast strain makes some difference, but pitching rates, oxygenation, temperature and yeast health make just as much difference.

As recipes get more creative (IPAs, porters, stouts, chocolate hazelnut raspberry Russian Imperial stout, etc), I think more there should be more etiquette regarding giving the recipe's creator credit. Denny's Bourbon Vanilla porter and his Rye IPA are two great examples. Iconic recipes, where the brewer almost always references Denny.

Personally, I don't see issue with taking creative license with recipes, nor submitting recipes to competitions. It's your ingredients, your beer, and your technique. Just because you're following someone elses list that says which ingredients to throw in when, doesn't mean you can't call it yours.

I see zero issue with submitting recipes to comps that use a recipe from online or a commercial clone. Brew it, enjoy it, and if it's tasty, share it! Steal my recipes all you like.

 

[malweth]

I have a lot of points (I'll present a few), but I'll start with the fact that recipes (not their language, just their information) are not copyrightable. That is why Coca-cola and friends keep their formulae secret.

1. What are the reasons for holding and entering competitions?

I think there are two primary reasons. (1) To determine the best beers entered and (2) to provide feedback to those entering beers. I wouldn't be surprised if #2 was the BJCP's primary goal. This also helps you tweak the recipes you start with (whether they're yours or not).

2. Perhaps this is another part of #1, but... how do we expand upon the body of knowledge in brewing?

Saying that every brewer should start by formulating their own recipes, not knowing how and why a certain style of beer is formulated in a certain way, doesn't make sense. That's like saying a scientist shouldn't expand upon the body of knowledge formed in textbooks and journal articles; it's like secluding artists so they can't take inspiration from previous works of art. Brewing is actually a mixture of the two examples, highly technical with lots of aspects of art.

Even saying that they should learn by brewing others' recipes, but not entering contests doesn't make sense for the same reason as #1.

3. Did you put anything of yourself into the beer?

I think this is easily answered by what others have been saying. If two people brew the same recipe, do they get the same beer? The reason they don't is that so many variables go into the beer that the recipe provides little more than the style category the beer falls into.

The reason my beer won with your recipe is because my sweat tastes better.

 

[BrotherGrim]

I like this discussion!

First, I am not against using someone else's recipes, at one time, two of the beers I had on tap were Yooper's recipes (almost). At the very least they were so lightly modified from the original that the label on the few bottles I put up and the tap signs both gave credit to the author, and everyone who asked "WTF is a Yooper?" got the explanation.

I have also taken top ranked recipes for the same style of beer that had vastly different recipes, analysed the brewer's comments about why and how they used particular grain bills, then morphed many recipes into something new using what I felt was the best of each of the originals, or the parts of each that appealed to a particular aspect of the beer that I was trying to achieve. That is how I put together my Irish Red which I call Crimson Tidewater. There is not enough of any original recipe in mine to warrant credit to anyone in particular, but I do thank the site for giving me the resources to make this recipe.

As far as competition, I personally think if the recipe is over 50% someone else's, then I would not enter it. I don't have a problem with somebody who does, it just doesn't give me feedback on my efforts. I really want to know how MY beer stacks up against others. I know Yooper puts up a great recipe, I have made two and loved them both, but that tells me I can brew her beer. I want to know if I can design and brew my own beers to that level.

Great discussion.

 

[hercher]

I thought the OP's question had as much to do with giving credit where it is due, as anything. As zeg mentions above, if a competition rule specifically states the recipe has to be original, than it should be. Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with using someone else's recipe, though you may want to ask permission if entering it into a competition.

However, part of the fun of brewing, for me, is designing my own beer. Even though I never do anything experimental, and my beers are always quite traditional, finding the right balance of malts and hops, hitting the color that I want, changing the flavor profiles, and so forth, is a challenge unto itself, and really allows me to say "this beer is mine." It is also part of the reason why I never use recipes, and have only once ever done a clone brew.

 

[Rev2010]

I believe you are placing too much importance on recipe formulation and the ability of individual brewers to create the same beer from the same recipe. It's just not possible.

I understand this is the internet, so I'll reiterate one last time. I am not putting too much emphasis on recipe formulation, the difference is I believe it's a very important aspect when all the rest of you are making it the very last thing of importance whatsoever. And the OP was talking about how people feel entering recipes they had no hand in creating, or if they tweak them themselves. I still say I would not feel accomplished entering a recipe I strictly followed from Yooper, or Denny, or Jamil and winning. If the rest of you feel fine with that than that is fine.

Speaking of recipes, if recipes are so unimportant than why do people brew recipes by Denny, or Jamil, or Palmer? Why is BM's Cream of 3 Crops so popular? It's merely a recipe.

I'll say it one last time then I am truly done with this thread because outside of maybe one poster no one seems to understand what I am saying. As a musician I create music. Sure I work within a specific style of music, this is the same as brewing within a certain style's guidelines. However, I don't take a song by one of my favorite artists and claim it my own no matter how different the nuances of my playing are. I also don't just play other people's music on my guitar. But gee, my guitar is different then yours! My rig is different then yours! My playing subtleties are different then yours! So why won't I just call the song my own? Because I didn't create it, that's why. I might have reproduced it and added my own flair but it's still not a product of my creation. But I am still using the notes that are used in all musical compositions (comparing notes to ingredients) just arranged differently. You can't even make a remix and not give credit to the original creator and not pay royalties by law. Why not? You did something entirely different with it, used a different system, process, and sounds?

There is no right or wrong with this whole point the OP is asking about. It's all OPINION. There is no real established etiquette for whether it's proper to give credit to a recipe creator/submitter when using their recipe. And yeah, recipes are not copyrightable but that's plain logic - you can't tell people they can't make a sauce, or beer, or cake, with a certain ingredient/portion list, that would be absurd. But somewhere in time some brewer took the chance to experiment and create a hefeweizen, or a pilsner, or a Saison, or a Lambic. These things didn't fall from the sky, someone thought them out and worked through designing them until they tasted great and not like ass regardless of their processes. And even through each of our processes are different and will indeed create different beers we can all agree I would hope that nearly everyone here that isn't a total noob can create a good example of most styles of beer out there.


Rev.

 

[moti_mo]

This is an interesting topic. It seems that a lot of people generally agree that it is not a problem to enter others' recipes into competitions because it is their process that is, in large part, being judged and potentially rewarded.

A question just to see what people think: Does this same philosophy extend to professional breweries that simply take a posted recipe from other professional breweries, brew it on their own, and then (a) sell that beer commercially and/or (b) win awards off of said recipe? There are many professional brewers who give fairly detailed recipes to various sources such as Zymurgy, etc, so this an easy scenario to envision. Now replace "recipe from other professional breweries" with "recipe from the HBT recipe database". Does the same philosophy hold; is everybody still OK with that?

Just interested in what people think about those scenarios.

Nobody has any thoughts on this question?

 

[KeyWestBrewing]

I don't think it would be appropriate at that level IMO unless they purchased the recipe from the person that formulated it. What you do see is breweries collaborating on a beer/recipe like DFH, Stone, and Victory brewing companies did with Saison du Buff. Where all 3 breweries brew the same recipe on each of their systems then release it commercially.

 

[moti_mo]

But why is it not appropriate at the brewery level? Once posted online or in a magazine, that recipe is public and isn't protected in any way, so there's nothing illegal about what they're doing at all.

How is it any different just because its on a professional level and not an amateur level?

 

[IffyG]

These things didn't fall from the sky, someone thought them out and worked through designing them until they tasted great and not like ass regardless of their processes.

Give me any proven recipe and I can wreck it simply by fermenting a few degrees too warm, mashing too low because a thermometer is out of calibration, astringent because my water profile was off, or get some off flavors by under pitching, etc, etc.

I suppose I can sum my viewpoint up as "A recipe means nothing without proper process, but proper process can make bland recipe the best it can be".

 

[Rev2010]

Give me any proven recipe and I can wreck it simply by fermenting a few degrees too warm, mashing too low because a thermometer is out of calibration, astringent because my water profile was off, or get some off flavors by under pitching, etc, etc.

And I can wreck any song playing it poorly on my guitar, playing it in a different key, using a distortion or amp sound that is nothing like the original artist, and playing it in a faster or slower timing.... it still doesn't make the song mine

I suppose I can sum my viewpoint up as "A recipe means nothing without proper process, but proper process can make bland recipe the best it can be".

I mostly agree here but a recipe still means something without proper process. Plenty of times people have posted on here worried because they mashed a little too high, came in under efficient, or fermented too warm. What's everyone's response? Relax, it will come out fine and you'll still have a good beer. A recipe still got that person a drinkable, probably still very good, beer even with some small errors. The variables have to be pretty wild to truly throw a beer out of whack - "OMG, I just realized my beer was fermenting at 92 degrees for the three days now!!". Or, "I never checked my water and just now found out my mash PH is averaging 8.2!".


Rev.

 

[Buna_Bere]

6000 years of tweaking a Sumerian recipe sure produces some awsome IIPA's.

 

[Yooper]

First, I am not against using someone else's recipes, at one time, two of the beers I had on tap were Yooper's recipes (almost). At the very least they were so lightly modified from the original that the label on the few bottles I put up and the tap signs both gave credit to the author, and everyone who asked "WTF is a Yooper?" got the explanation.

You made me choke on my beer!

Here's the thing, though. It's YOUR beer. You made it, it's yours.

I went to a nice get together back in May with a bunch of people I never met before. The host was a lovely lady named Hope2perc. (Well, that's her name on this forum, anyway! :cross

She had made my oatmeal stout recipe. I tried it and it was excellent. Absolutely wonderful. But was it the same as the one I have on tap at home? No, it was not the same beer. Similar, yes, but I caught more crystal and coffee aroma and flavor from hers. Her body was a little heavier. Why is that? I don't know. She gave me credit, but it was HER beer. Totally.

Brewing isn't like music to me. Music, writing, sculpture- that's all "intellectual property". It's part of the creative process to form something new. But recipe formulation is simply taking ingredients that work well together and coming up with something great. It's like watching the cooking channel. You can follow a recipe for fondant, but it's the implementation that makes it work.

 

[malweth]

ISpeaking of recipes, if recipes are so unimportant than why do people brew recipes by Denny, or Jamil, or Palmer? Why is BM's Cream of 3 Crops so popular? It's merely a recipe.

In the same way an artist attempts to imitate the masters. Copyright law says a recipe is not enough to earn copyright. This is because my own process and decisions directly influence the outcome of the recipe.

But gee, my guitar is different then yours! My rig is different then yours! My playing subtleties are different then yours! So why won't I just call the song my own? Because I didn't create it, that's why. I might have reproduced it and added my own flair but it's still not a product of my creation. But I am still using the notes that are used in all musical compositions (comparing notes to ingredients) just arranged differently. You can't even make a remix and not give credit to the original creator and not pay royalties by law. Why not? You did something entirely different with it, used a different system, process, and sounds?

The difference is that anyone can't just come up with that song. Recipe formulations are limited and style limits them further. There are millions of variations on jazz fusion (or even more specific genres of music). Changing the instrument does not change the song. Changing the conditions of fermentation does change the beer.

And yeah, recipes are not copyrightable but that's plain logic - you can't tell people they can't make a sauce, or beer, or cake, with a certain ingredient/portion list, that would be absurd.

So you're saying it's not absurd that music is copyrightable but it isn't absurd that a recipe isn't. There has to be some reason one is OK and the other is not.



Further, regarding credit, I would never credit someone else on a beer I made -- regardless of where the recipe I came from. If I'm talking about the recipe, however, I'd always credit the source (even though it is not copyrightable - it is right from a scientific or journalistic perspective). It's not my recipe, but it's still my beer. I don't place credits on the bread I bake, either.

 

[moti_mo]

So is this acceptable at a professional level? Is it fine for a professional brewery to create their beers using posted recipes from other sources (professional, amateur, whatever) and then make their money and/or win their awards based off of those beers?

 

[Yooper]

So is this acceptable at a professional level? Is it fine for a professional brewery to create their beers using posted recipes from other sources (professional, amateur, whatever) and then make their money and/or win their awards based off of those beers?

I can't see why it wouldn't be. I mean, if something is public it's not a protected recipe.

I don't think any pros would want to, though, as the pro brewers I know are proud of their creative ability and recipe formulation. Some have been trained in Germany or at the Siebel, and I can't imagine them searching online for a Sierra Nevada clone.

But sure, if they want to see how another brewery does a peach saison, or something, they can peruse the recipes online.

 

[BrotherGrim]

You made me choke on my beer!

Here's the thing, though. It's YOUR beer. You made it, it's yours.

I never told anyone that you brewed it, I took all that credit myself! And yes, it was mine. I would have shared a pint with you, but it was still mine! I just wanted to give the credit for the recipe that in my opinion you deserved. When I made your fizzy yellow, I changed the hop schedule a bit and used a different yeast, so I am sure that the end result was different than what you brew.

My method for this one was reading the recipe thread completely (yes... all of it... it took for. ev. ver.) I was then able to decide how I wanted to alter it and brew it. I made the changes I wanted and brewed up what was regarded by all who tasted it a mighty fine beer. I gladly took credit for how it turned out, but when asked by other brewers if the recipe was mine, I told them it was not, and where the original could be found.

I just think that acknowledging the original author/artist/brewer/brewmistress/etc. is an honest thing to do. There was work and effort that was not my own applied to creating the recipe, and it should be recognized. I do appreciate the fact that you posted it out here where any of us can access it, and I know I could have brewed it and you would have never known, but I would.

So thanks again for a great recipe.

 

[pwkblue]

So is this acceptable at a professional level? Is it fine for a professional brewery to create their beers using posted recipes from other sources (professional, amateur, whatever) and then make their money and/or win their awards based off of those beers?

legal yes, but at a commercial level not really proper. At a slightly higher level it happens all the time: Just look at KBS...it gets rave reviews and acclaim...now every brewery in the country is making a bourbon barrel aged imperial coffee and chocolate stout. Are some clones and copies? perhaps, and while many are similar they all end up unique. Of course...was Founder's the first to do it? Probably not?

At a commercial level I don't think it is proper(legal yes)

 

[moti_mo]

I can't see why it wouldn't be. I mean, if something is public it's not a protected recipe.

I don't think any pros would want to, though, as the pro brewers I know are proud of their creative ability and recipe formulation. Some have been trained in Germany or at the Siebel, and I can't imagine them searching online for a Sierra Nevada clone.

But sure, if they want to see how another brewery does a peach saison, or something, they can peruse the recipes online.

I agree with this completely, and I think this is part of the point Rev2010 is trying to make, if not completely winning over some people. At a certain point in a lot of (but not all) brewers' careers, brewing other peoples' recipes doesn't cut it any more. If your process is good, your process is good, and winning competitions using well-established recipes that you know are winners doesn't really feel like that much of an accomplishment any more.

At that point, the next step is to create your own recipes so that you're making something that isn't readily available out there, using your knowledge of the subtleties of how different ingredients play off of each other to make a unique and delicious beer. To downplay the development of a unique recipe, like some (but not everyone of course) in this thread has done, is a disservice to those who try to do this on a regular basis (amateur or professional).

You don't have to have attended Siebels to come up with great recipes and to put a strong emphasis on creative ability and recipe formulation in your brewing. Tons of amateur brewers do this all the time. Its just another approach to brewing, and another approach to entering competitions. If you're really looking to get feedback on how you're dialing in your process and your brewing skill, then entering tried-and-true recipes that are known winners is a great way to do this. So that is another approach. Neither are wrong, as you said. I just think that discounting recipe formulation as secondary to process doesn't tell the full story. Both are paramount to making good and unique beer.

 

[Rev2010]

Copyright law says a recipe is not enough to earn copyright. This is because my own process and decisions directly influence the outcome of the recipe.

No, it's not copyrightable because no one should have a monopoly on how to make a food item.

The difference is that anyone can't just come up with that song.

Sure they can. Plenty of musicians have been sued over nearly exactly similar musical passages that the originator claimed was "ripped off" when the accused artist never even heard any of that artists material. There are only so many notes on a guitar and so many ways to arrange them that things that have been done are always repeatedly being done again by someone else. In those instances it has to be proven to be copied directly from the accusing artist and not a new body of work that is still it's own separate work (different lyrics, bassline, drumbeat but same guitar passages for example).

Recipe formulations are limited and style limits them further.

It's beer. Last I checked there are no limits. Maybe if you want to compete in a specific style then yeah, but the same thing applies if I showed up to a flamenco guitar competition and played the blues.

Changing the instrument does not change the song. Changing the conditions of fermentation does change the beer.

Changing fermentation temp changes the taste of the beer. It doesn't change the style.

So you're saying it's not absurd that music is copyrightable but it isn't absurd that a recipe isn't. There has to be some reason one is OK and the other is not.

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. A song is a several minute long culmination of notes, lyrics, drums, etc arranged in a certain way. There are plenty of instances where there is the same "riff" in different songs, it's all over the place and no one is getting sued because no one can own the exclusive rights to the E Chord -> D Chord -> G Chord combination. This is the same for recipes. No one can own exclusive rights to a pumpkin pie with 4lbs of pumpkin, 1 tsp of Cinnamon, 1/2 tsp of Nutmeg.... you get the point.



Rev.

 

[moti_mo]

legal yes, but at a commercial level not really proper. At a slightly higher level it happens all the time: Just look at KBS...it gets rave reviews and acclaim...now every brewery in the country is making a bourbon barrel aged imperial coffee and chocolate stout. Are some clones and copies? perhaps, and while many are similar they all end up unique. Of course...was Founder's the first to do it? Probably not?

At a commercial level I don't think it is proper(legal yes)

Again, I'm not sure why it would be "proper" at one level and not another. Is it an ethical issue to use someone else's recipe only when you make money off of it? If so, why does money make it an ethical issue? In both cases, the recipes are free and public. Is it unethical if you enter a comp with someone else's un-credited recipe and win a medal, and potentially another prize (cash, gift certificates, etc.). At what monetary level does it change from "proper" to "not proper"?

 

[kblankenship11]

You are kidding yourself if you think you are brewing a classic style and believe you have created a new recipe. EVERYTHING has been done before in brewing...if it hasn't been done, it is probably a dumb idea and won't work.

I like this discussion!! I agree with gbx. If you are brewing something that isn't wildly unique (oyster stout comes to mind...) it's been done before.

Pilsner Urquell is a pretty basic recipe. But the execution of a recipe like that is critical. There are a million ways to f*k that up--and I bet if you put a homebrew bottle of that next to a bottle from the store and gave it to your buddy he would notice the difference, even if you had the recipe from the brewery.

 

[BrotherGrim]

I think it really boils down to choice. If you feel that entering a competition with a recipe that you did not create yourself is OK and the recipe is in a public forum, then go for it. It's not for me, but I don't mind if you do. If I did enter such a beer, I would have to make a note of who's recipe it was. For instance, I might be convinced to enter "Revvy's Pale: A helluvaway to haul water!!"

Different strokes and all.

 

[lou2row]

My two cents:
-I try to give credit in one form or another to anyone I have gotten a recipe from on here. If I make Yoopers "I pooped today" brown ale, I may keep the same name. Or I may give Yooper credit by keeping her in the name; say "Yoopy's brown Poopy" ale. Or if I get asked about the recipe, I would say where it originated, and then comment what changes I made.

-If I am happy with how my version of Yooper Pooper came out, I would have no problem entering it in a competition if I am looking for comments on it from experts. Though I will add, I would not likely enter it into a big competition to win prizes, unless I had made several revisions and changes to the original. Just my personal etiquette.

-The world is full of people that will steal ideas to make themselves feel important. I have dealt with this at work, as ideas I came up with were stolen and engineers would say they came up with it after I had to draw them pictures of how to make it work.

 

[malweth]

I think this is an issue that can never get universal agreement. I expect most people don't enter unique beers into competition. We are hopefully getting exactly what we expect out of the comp.

On the other hand, while I can respect the point of view, I'd be offended if someone said my medal didn't count because I used someone else's recipe.

Is it more of a creative output to start from scratch? Certainly. Is it going to win? Not without more money than I can spend on beer or more beer than I can possibly drink (at least without destroying my body) (or a lot of luck). Luckily for all the homebrewers who aren't at the master brewer level there are amateur and pro brewers willing to release their recipes. It's also lucky for the AHA that recipe-users are welcomed to enter competitions (how would you feel winning in a category with two entries)?

Furthermore, at what point does one's output become not worthwhile? Did you read Designing Great Beers? Do you credit Ray Daniels on each of the recipes you create?

I can't subscribe to elitist points of view and I can't categorize this any other way.

 

[BrotherGrim]

I don't mean to take anything away from what you accomplish however you do it. As you said, we all would have our own reasons for submitting a brew, and if you should happen to win in my opinion that win is just as valid.

My statements about not submitting somebody else's recipe apply to me and my reasons for entering a competition. As I stated before, I will happily brew somebody else's recipe if it is what I am wanting to brew at that time, I just choose not to enter those beers into a competition. My reasons to enter are to see how my recipes and processes stack up. That is all.

 

[zeg]

My statements about not submitting somebody else's recipe apply to me and my reasons for entering a competition. As I stated before, I will happily brew somebody else's recipe if it is what I am wanting to brew at that time, I just choose not to enter those beers into a competition. My reasons to enter are to see how my recipes and processes stack up. That is all.

I certainly understand these points, and I am quite sympathetic. I generally prefer to generate my own recipes, and I've yet to follow a recipe to the letter. Whether you're interested in entering someone else's recipe in a contest is entirely up to you. However, as a general matter, I still don't see that there is any etiquette problem with using a non-original recipe in a competition (unless, as I said earlier, it's against the contest rules).

This debate is very similar to the endless debates about extract versus all-grain brewing. In that case, some people are interested in doing every step themselves, whereas others are content take various shortcuts or simplifications. Here, some people are interested in designing beers from the ground up, while others are content to focus only on the brewing.

Every brewing contest I'm aware of is a judge, ultimately, of the latter. So are most similar competitions. To run with the analogy with music, I don't recall many bands in the high school Battles of the Bands who were playing original songs---most were covering songs others had written. (And, incidentally, it's only a VERY recent phenomenon that musicians are expected to perform their own compositions.)

To me, the only etiquette question that comes up is when someone asks about where your recipe came from. If it borrowed heavily from someone else's work, then I think one should best be gracious and honest enough to acknowledge that.

 

[Pilgarlic]

Etiquette prescribes generally accepted social conventions that define courteous behaviors. A reasonable way to glean etiquette would be to ask "how do courteous people behave under these circumstances?" When so focused, the etiquette question with respect to "borrowed" recipes for competition is clear. Submitting cloned or borrowed recipes for judging in competition is not generally considered to be discourteous; on the contrary, it's a common, conventional and accepted practice.

Whether one prefers to do it or prefers not to has nothing to do with the etiquette question.

 

[johngault007]

I just got sucked into reading 8 pages of this post and came to this conclusion. I suck at brewing....LOL

One of my standard recipes that I created and make all the time is a little different each time I make it. Not much, but I notice the difference. Of course, I don't have temperature control, and I haven't quite dialed in my setup due to slight changes ever so often.

Back to the post, if I use someone's recipe and modify it, I still like to personally give credit, "It's mine, but I used so-so's original recipe as a guideline/source." Not saying it's right or wrong, just how I am. And I wouldn't be upset sharing a recipe with someone and not getting credit.

 

[dogbar]

As to professional breweries ripping each other off, the whole reason we have "styles" is because someone once made a great beer and dozens of nearby breweries copied it

Even when I try to copy recipes, there's always that one ingredient I have to sub because I can't find it and that extra pound of base malt because my efficiently stubbornly sits at 70%.

I copied your stout recipe recently, Yoop. Should have listened to you on the yeast.

 

[kombat]

To paraphrase Bill Clinton, "it depends on what the definition of 'recipe' is."

The problem I'm having with this discussion is that I think it's silly to try to lay claim to the idea that 8 pounds of Pilsner Malt and 2 oz. of Saaz is some kind of unique formulation for Pilsner Lager. That's obviously silly.

But if your definition of "recipe" includes everything from the spacing of your mill rollers to the fermentation schedule of your 2-step yeast starter, then I can sort of see how there might be some room for personalization there that could be construed as uniquely insightful.

I guess what I'm saying is, if by "recipe" you mean "8 pounds of Pilsner malt mashed at 150 for 60 mins, then a 90 minute boil with a single 60 minute addition of 2 oz. of Saaz", then no, I don't think there's anything "unique" or worthy of protection there. That's the same basic recipe EVERYBODY uses. Even extending it to other styles, there's really very little variation from the established baseline recipes.

But if your idea of a "recipe" includes all the little brewing details, then that might be a little different story.

 

[eelpout]

I'm just a little shocked to see people openly submitting clones and the recipes of other in contests.

Are you entering a recipe formulation contest or a homebrewed beer competition ?

 

[stratslinger]

Interestingly enough, last winter I brewed a double batch with a buddy of mine. We pitched the same amount of the exact same yeast, but he fermented at his place, I fermented at mine. I have a temp controlled fermentation chamber, he does not. The two finished beers were clearly different - and neither of us has anything approaching a BJCP judge's trained pallette.

If two beers out of the same kettle, with the same yeast, came out different due only to different ferment temps, I think it's safe enough to say that the "give 10 brewers the same recipe, get 10 different beers" idea holds water. I see nothing inherently wrong with brewing and entering a third party's recipe in a competition.

 

[DonMagee]

To me recipes are frameworks and not absolutes. Let's use cookies as an example. The standard framework for all chocolate chip cookies is on the back of nestle chocolate chip bags. It's pretty much the gold standard for making chocolate chip cookies.

If you follow that recipe, it's pretty hard to make a bad cookie. But the methods you use to execute that cookie will change the cookie. You have all these variables that can't be in the recipe. Is your oven temp right? Is your oven evenly heating? How did you scoop out the batter? What was your cookie sheet made of? How did you cool the cookie? How did you determine when to take the cookie out? etc.

On top of all this, this rock solid base is the perfect foundation to make the cookie you want. Do you want a thinner, flatter, crispier cookie? Let's take out an egg and add some milk. Do you want a chewier cookie? Let's swap the butter for margarine and use 1 egg, 1 egg yolk, and some milk. Do we want more chocolate flavor in our cookies? Let's add some cocoa powder to the batter.

All of this is still basically the same recipe. So this is my approach to brewing, find rock solid frameworks for the style of beer I enjoy (a clone recipe for my favorite commercial example works here) then modify it to bring out the traits I enjoy most.

 

[Krovitz]

I got a question I think is related to recipe etiquette.

Recently, I was pm'ed for my only 1st place recipe. My girlfriend picked out all the ingredients while I just figured out our process. I asked her if she minded giving out the recipe and, to my surprise, she was adamantly opposed to it. I told her he was an HBTer. No. I said we've brewed HBT recipes. She said they chose to post those. I said he's from Memphis, and not part of our local homebrew competition in Mass. No!

I truly believe everyone in this community stands on the shoulders of giants. Sharing of knowledge and ideas is a huge part of homebrewing and makes us all better brewers. She wants her secret recipe.

I've been ignoring the guy. I'm obviously not going to lie to my gf and give him the recipe but maybe there's a compromise. What should I do? How do you guys feel about posting recipes for the world to see?