What Is The One Aspect of Brewing That Is Least Important to Brewing a Good Beer? (In Your Opinion)

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I'll agree here. Too many people caught up in chasing the ever elusive efficiency point. I'd rather have repeatable low efficiency that random high efficiency.

If I had to have one thing in my process to give up or stop caring about, it might be sparge water temp. Not sure it matters if you use 170 degree water or straight tap water. I helped a friend brew who didn't have nearly the gear to fly sparge with, but he wanted to. I basically just stretched a water hose over his mash tun and let it trickle in. It worked and the beer was good.
I agree with this as well. Once the starches/sugars have been converted and in solution/suspension theres is really no reason to continue with heated water. Its just a rinse.
 
As I have been brewing for several years I often skip at least one so called essential step every brew.

#1. Making a yeast starter. This used to be an essential step but recently I've been getting yeast that's only a few weeks old. However if I get a yeast shipped to me then I typically use a starter.

#2. Cold crash. Me and the people who drink my beer could care less about clarity. The only cold crash i do is after I keg. Now if it's for a competition or I want it clear then I typically use whirlfloc along with a cold crash.

#3. Sparge temp. I will always heat my batch sparge water but if it's 140F or 180F I don't give a flying goose.

#4. Fermentation temperature. I always stay withing guidelines and typically on the low side but I've had temps go out of control and all was good.

#5. Having to drink on brew day. Sometimes this step was the key failure in my beers. Getting blitzed before the boil typically leads to unnecessary headbanging (I listen to metal on brew day) and missed hop additions and key steps. Now don't open a beer until the boil.
lol, I dont open a beer until Im done. after all, I spend a consistent 6 hrs brew day, by then and Ive dumped and cleaned up my equipment, I have surely deserved one.
 
Intensity of the boil. Really doesn’t seem to matter. Low simmer is fine, no need for hard rolling boil.
Mmmm, I could actually argue this to a small point. I usually just simmer the boil like you say. But, I have found that if I roll the boil at the end ,(10 minutes?) the hop particles are boiled up onto the sides of the kettle which leaves less in suspension or settled in the kettle to get drawn into the transfer to the FV.
 
Hi all!
I always like reading about brewing and different techniques/ ideas.
I had a question for the HB Forum crowd.
If you had to give up control of one (only one) aspect of the brewing process, what would it be?
ie: ability to control the quality and pH of your water [emoji97]? The ability to control the temperature of your fermentation? The ability to whirlpool or sparge? The ability to control the temp or your mash?
What would you give up, but feel you’d still be able to make good beer?
Interested in what people find least or, conversely, most important in their brewing process.
the whirlfloc tablet.
Ive brewed with and without , turns out if I get the hotbreak and cool quickly enough ,whirlfloc isnt necessary.
 
Fightin' words with the LODO! haha, love it. I'd say intensity of boils and possibly even the length of the boil.
 
Well, I suppose if you had stuff actually growing in the mash tun, you could possibly end up with some toxins in the beer. But something as simple as a good hot blast with a spray hose as soon as you're done using the equipment ought to do the trick there.
 
Sanitizing the mash or boil equipment! When I started brewing I spent so much time scrubbing everything with starsan.
I think you are supposed to scrub before the starsan.

I think it is interesting what parts of the process folks think is expendable. I don't agree with most of them, naturally, because my process is perfect ;)
 
I "feel" that many brewers, both on this site as well as everywhere are prone to grossly over-complicate the process for no reason other than gross over-complication.

Though I'm guilty at times, I am a believer of KISS principles. Rather than saying that "you" over-complicate the process, I would like to suggest that you first understand the process, then chose when and where you "want" to drill deeper. Mentioned earlier was temperature control. It may be Unnecessary if you understand your style and choose the appropriate yeast for your environment (provided its within reason).

Simmer vs vigorous boil affects your evaporation rate. Again, neither is incorrect, but you may miss target og if your post boil volume isn't correct. Not wrong by any means, but plan your recipe accordingly.

Sorry everyone for this, but lodo and any other "advanced" process DOES NOT make good beer. However, making good beer makes GOOD BEER. If your process is **** then you will end up with lodo turds.

Also understand the difference between small and large batches. Yes the macro-brewers do things that we want to emulate, but the benefits may be negligible on a homebrew scale.
 
I agree with pitch rates. It probably is quite important and I'm a tool, but those yeast seem to be a lot more capable, hardy buggers than we give them credit for.

With that said, I'll probably continue to make starters, but I'm going to glop some DME into a pot, cook it, pitch my yeast and say "close enough" .

Oh shoot, that was a lager...

I propose pitching fresh yeast is another angle to consider rather than pitch rate. Why I can’t say for certain. Anyone?
 
Reading this thread has been interesting. At the risk of hurting some feelings, here’s my take (as if anyone cares :rolleyes:).

The only things really necessary to make beer are water, malted grain, hops, and yeast, plus vessels appropriate to the chosen process. Anything beyond that is a matter of personal preference. Yes, the grist must be mashed. But, as many have noted here, the range of mash temps is pretty forgiving. Yes, water chemistry can make a difference, but adding the other ingredients to the water available will make beer. Often quite good beer. Fermentation temps should be within the range at which the chosen yeast will perform its best, but there are many yeasts to choose from and some are quite forgiving.

Shiny equipment, trick siht, digitally controlled, automated systems are cool, but are more of an expression of a particular brewer’s brains:money ratio and, often, little more than an exercise in dick waving. $20K worth of bling doesn’t guarantee good beer any more than $5K worth of golf clubs will make a chronic slice disappear.

The OP specifically asked about the least important aspect of making good beer. Who gets to decide what “good” is? Taste is highly variable, and easily called into question. Just look at what the best-selling beers in America are. I’m an old guy. I’ve been drinking “craft beer” since that term meant anything other than an American Lager, which, at the time, was usually an import. I don’t claim to possess a particularly refined palate, but I know what tastes good, to me, and what doesn’t. I’ve also learned that, if I’m going to share my beer with others, I need to make beer that will appeal to a wide range of beer drinkers, who have in common the fact that they usually drink light beer, but are open to trying something else. “Something else”, in my experience, means beers from a relatively narrow selection of traditional beer styles. The outliers, the “stand-in-line-for-hours-to-pay-$100-a-case” beers aren’t going to appeal to my circle of beer drinkers, so I’ve concentrated on brewing relatively basic, classic, beer styles. The most common comment I’ve gotten from the 50, or so, folks with whom I’ve shared my beer has been “Geez, I’ve paid money for beer that didn’t taste this good”. So, if I can make beer that is as good as, or better than, commercial beers of the same style, in the opinions of a random sample of beer drinkers, can I claim to make “good” beer?Does that mean that my ghetto-quality, 3 vessel system, and the process I’ve developed using it, is perfect? Again, who gets to decide?

We’re making beer here, not chemotherapy drugs. We don’t need lab-quality equipment, instruments or practices. We need the basic ingredients, the minimum complement of tools and equipment, and an easily repeatable process. Oh, and we need to have fun while we’re doing this. Everything else is unnecessary. In my opinion, of course. :cool:
 
Enjoyment...
Unlike sports where a really fun player to watch is one who gets satisfaction in being the best, being satisfied with your brew does not make a good beer. Knowing what you're doing and then executing does.
 
So does any process matter anymore? Can we just whiz into a moldy bucket of grain, filter it through dirty underwear, ferment with pond scum in the back of the junk car in the yard and get good beer? RDWHAHB
 
So does any process matter anymore? Can we just whiz into a moldy bucket of grain, filter it through dirty underwear, ferment with pond scum in the back of the junk car in the yard and get good beer? RDWHAHB

If you enjoy the beer and the process makes you happy, why not?:rolleyes:

Seriously, who gets to decide? Who is the Grand Poobah of beer?
 
Efficiency.

NEVER! That could make the difference between a $8.40 10 gal batch. Or a $9.15 batch! And i don't worrie about the gluco for body, but everytime i have to add sugar to a batch to get my 1.060, i'm ashamed of myself....:D (and damn, 2 pages already?:))
 
I know I already posted, but I'm going to +1 on efficiency. I've been chasing that elusive rabbit for months now, researching better ways of getting the most out of my mash, and I finally decided I don't give a flying.....goat. As long as my beers are 5-6% (as that's what I'm usually aiming for), and I can get that by extending the boil, who cares. Brewing something tasty that I want in my glass is the desired end result. And using less grain, but maybe more water, to get there, la de dah, I plan my brewdays for 6+ hours anyway so I have time. I know I should also +1 to fermentation temps as well, since the best lager I've done so far this year got up to 88 when the ferment fridge futzed, but I'm not that brave.

OT, somebody needs to find an emoji of a flying goat.
 
lol, I dont open a beer until Im done. after all, I spend a consistent 6 hrs brew day, by then and Ive dumped and cleaned up my equipment, I have surely deserved one.

Same here, I hate doing cleanup especially after a few beers. I usually want to just listen to music and be lazy after that lol. No beers for me usually unless I'm brewing with other people or finished cleaning
 
Intensity of the boil. Really doesn’t seem to matter. Low simmer is fine, no need for hard rolling boil.

I have to agree. I've recently upped my batch size to 5g from 2.5g, and a getting 7.5 gallons to a 'rolling boil' is impossible on my electric stove. However, it is strong enough to get a simmering boil. Hasn't affected my beer quality whatsoever. In actuality my 5g batches with weak boils turned out really good.
 
So does any process matter anymore? Can we just whiz into a moldy bucket of grain, filter it through dirty underwear, ferment with pond scum in the back of the junk car in the yard and get good beer? RDWHAHB
I think this was on tap at a local hipster bar, the neards were in full force and they were raving about the new fresh-squeezed 420ibu cranbraisen milkshake mokaccino sour bareel aged neipa.
 
For me, least important is oxygenation. I know yeast need oxygen, but I've noticed little difference with actively using pure oxygen or without it. I already bought the wand, so I still do it.
Yeast pitch count has been brought up a lot. I agree yeast are hardy critters and exact count may not matter, but I noticed a huge difference once I started using some kind of yeast starter instead of none. That and keeping some kind of semi-controlled fermentation temp were my biggest sources of improvement.
 
Farting around with water.

Seriously, just get the chlorine out, make sure it doesn't taste like metal, and unless your alkalinity is sky high, you're good to go.

Disagree. I brewed for about 9 1/2 years and used campden tablets to make sure to neutralize chlorine/chloramine. I had dialed in basically everything else about my process.

Switched to RO+minerals, and my beers markedly improved immediately. I consider it indispensible.

(Your mileage may vary. I'm dealing with SoCal water which is not great to begin with, so if you have a much better water source, just removing chlorine might work for you.)
 
Well, I suppose if you had stuff actually growing in the mash tun, you could possibly end up with some toxins in the beer. But something as simple as a good hot blast with a spray hose as soon as you're done using the equipment ought to do the trick there.

I get some crust along the top of the mash, and across the top of the boil, from grain bits [mash] or break material [boil], that doesn't come off with just a hose blast. I do scrub that gunk off before putting the equipment away at the end of the brew day.

But yeah, I don't know why anyone would sanitize their mash tun or boil kettle prior to use. Anything hot-side will be sanitized by heat.
 
For the OP's question, my answers are these:

1) Three-vessel brewing.

I started brewing and moved to a three-vessel single-tier system with two pumps before BIAB became a thing. I still do it. I still like it. But it's certainly a HECK of a lot more work, a HECK of a lot more cleaning, etc than BIAB.

If I had to give up something, I would go from three-vessel to BIAB. I've seen absolutely nothing that suggests that there is any meaningful difference or reduction as far as beer quality by going to BIAB.

2) Aggressive chilling down to pitch temp

Here in SoCal, I can't get ground water below ~80 degrees in the summer. In the winter, I can't get ground water cold enough to chill to lager temps. Previously I've been pretty anal about getting my temperatures through the chiller down low enough to immediately pitch yeast, and I usually like my pitching temp to be 3-5 degrees below my target temp.

This has required the use of ice water running through the CFC to hit pitching temps. That usually requires spending several days freezing 1 gal ziplock freezer bags full of water, or spending money for 40 lbs of ice. That's a pain.

I think the better answer is going to be to use the hose water through the CFC to get the initial chill, i.e. enough to get the cold break and maybe get the temp of the beer down to the 100-120 degree range. Then throw it in the fermentation fridge and get it down to pitch temps, and pitch the next day.

I realize that there is *some* risk to this. But I think the benefit of ease and of reducing brew day time and reducing work/cost a little bit is worth it.
 
Agree with this ^
I just started BIAB as opposed to a cooler having done both batch sparge and no sparge and not only is it easier, the beer is just as good if not better
I also cannot cool down fast enough being also in San Diego... much lower risk to wait 10-12 hours and pitch at the proper temp... Haven't tasted any off flavors from the wort sitting for that time
 
2) Aggressive chilling down to pitch temp

I would expand on this and say you can skip quick chilling at all. The no-chill folks do it all the time. I chill with an ice bath, which is faster than no-chill, but it still doesn't always eliminate chill haze. Just leave the bottles in the fridge long enough to drop this out if it bothers you.
 
I would expand on this and say you can skip quick chilling at all. The no-chill folks do it all the time. I chill with an ice bath, which is faster than no-chill, but it still doesn't always eliminate chill haze. Just leave the bottles in the fridge long enough to drop this out if it bothers you.
I'm gonna +3 (or wherever we are, I'm tired) to this as well. I can't get my wort below 77 in the summer with our groundwater, so I too just throw the fermenter in the fridge (if a lager) to get it to pitching temperature; if an ale, as long as it's below 78, I just say the heck with it and pitch. Yeast will get going faster, and as long as the majority of the time in the ferment fridge is at acceptable levels, won't hurt it. Having a good ferment fridge with a reliable temperature controller helps.
 
I think my one process to skip would be transferring to secondary. I don't ever do that, just throw my dry hops, fruit, whatever in tha bucket. I'm lucky in that my tap water is so good a Saki brewery located here for just the water. I'll add a bit of Gypsum for really hoppy beers, but that's it.

I have a streamlined process; BIAB partial mash, dunk sparge, boil and just do 3 hop additions. FWH, 20min for flavor and flame out/whirlpool at the end along with the LME. Pitch the right amount of dry yeast rounded to the nearest packet, usually US-04 or S-05. Ferment in a bucket, shake for a minute to oxygenate. Add something to the primary like dry hops if applicable and keg when it hits TG.

Only a change in my equipment would cause a change in process.
 
I have worked on my processes to be very consistent brew to brew. So to ask me which process I would give up would be extremely difficult for me. I suppose running my wort chiller water thru a pre chiller ice bucket could be a candidate but I like to get a fast cold break so it would be hard to give up especially in the Summer.

Equipment-wise is easy: hop spider. I went hop commando in my kettle years ago. Of course using whole hops helps.

Ingredients would be water minerals (other than Calcium Chloride and Gypsum). I could give up table salt, mag sulfate, pickling lime, etc pretty quickly. I’ll even give up lactic acid if I can use acidulated malt.

I gave up style guidelines years ago as well. I brew blonde, pale, amber, brown, black, and stout (extra black?) beers using as few malts as possible to reach the goal. I hit ‘style’ with hops and yeast. If little dots don’t align perfectly inside the left and right range fan limits I could care less.
 
Last edited:
- chilling wort (no chill work great)
- vigorous boil 60 or 90 minutes (20 minutes simmering is enough)
- dry yeast rehydration or oxigenation
- boil kettle fining
- precise regulation of mash or fermentation temperature
- cold crash
- excessive hygiene (hot water is enough for hot side and fermenter)
- fragmented hop addition (FWH for bitterness, hopstand for flavor and dryhop for aroma is enough)
- strict adherence to style rules

This is my experience.
 
strict adherence to style rules
*Unless entering a competition.
I've thought about it a few times, but it seems like more effort than I'm interested in putting forth. I brew for me. I grill, cook, bake, ferment or whatever for me (or for you if you ask). But I only seek my own approval (and kind of my wife).
 
- fragmented hop addition (FWH for bitterness, hopstand for flavor and dryhop for aroma is enough)

I am pretty confident that there is a significant flavor difference between a 15 min hop addition and a hopstand addition. If you are looking for the earthy/spicy hop flavors from a more traditional IPA/Pale Ale then you will miss those with just hopstand hops. If instead you want the floral/fruity hop aromas then you can move all hops to a hopstand.
 
Back
Top