first wort hops

So if using FWH as a substitute for bittering hops, if you plug them into a recipe calculator, should you just add 10% to your IBU total?

From a lot of my reading, many people seem to consider FWH as a substitute for your late hop additions. Is there any reason that I couldn't do both? Adding aromatics won't effect my FWH will it. And no, cost is not a concern, as I have inane amount of hops at my disposal.

Also, I was wondering if ph was altered, and how or if, you felt it effected your grain bill.

Thanks

 

If your only form of education on the matter is internet discussion threads - as in anecdotal examples / personal preferences instead of historical textbooks or hard science - then you my friend have much more to learn before you can dismiss an idea or condescend to others who don't share your thinking.

Simply because the hard science of a thing isn't completely understood at the moment does not preclude the fact that it may very well work and/or be better understood in the future.

What's a good example of that? Oh yeah: brewing beer.

In his book Brewing Better Beer, Gordon Strong postulates that although there is a measured 10% increase in IBUs, you won't perceive it that way. He recommends calculating it as a start-of-boil addition.

FWH won't make any difference on aromatics as the aroma will be boiled away, but it should add some flavor, perhaps more than a simple start-of-boil addition. It's unknown exactly why this is, though Gordon muses on pH difference between the first runnings soaking into the hops and the hops going into an already-boiling wort.

You can definitely still do aroma additions and it shouldn't have any effect on your grain bill. As far as I know.

 

Or, you could just not take it so personally and get super-defensive. Instead of being so sensitive about it, realize that there will be alternate viewpoints in life. Many people are defending FWH who don't completely understand it. They just do it, and it works for them. That's what they know.

 

Thank you, Pistol, for the info. I am excited to give this a try.

 

Okay. Your viewpoint is that it doesn't work. And you came to that conclusion without completely understanding it. But somehow you are both correct in your view and in telling others that theirs is wrong.

Makes sense to me. :smack:

Great! Glad to hear it!

 

It wasn't my intention to start a heated debate about this, or berate anyone's individual brewing practices. My apologies if it came across that way. I was initially being humorous about the subject and then it turned into a defensive attack because of my supposed tone, which has been and always will be brutally honest and passionate. I understand that FWH doesn't make sense for the IPA/IIPA style, but if you enjoy that it works for your palate then that's great... It still doesn't mean that you understand it. If you really wanted to intellectually discuss and learn about obtaining smoother bitterness in ways other than FWH, then someone should start a thread with a less subjective title and opener. Perhaps, "The many ways of how to obtain smoother bitterness in an IPA/IIPA... Advantages and Disadvantages of each method."

 

I believe I read somewhere around here that FWH seems to enhance the overall hop aroma in the finished beer.

Some people need to be ok with stating and briefly defending their opinion and then moving on...

 

The process is used to make another process better. It has very little to do with hop bittering or flavoring contributions from the hops added during FWH. It is used for the reason that the wort gravity is at the highest during the 1st run off. Adding hops as soon as the bottom of the boiler is covered with high density wort, breaks the surface tension of the wort and reduces the amount of hot break foam. This allowed the brewer to fill the boiler with a larger quantity of wort, without worrying about boil over. The krausen will be cleaner during fermentation. A decoction uses 5% of the weight of the bittering hops. An infusion uses 10-15%. The reason for the difference in weight, is that during the rests and boiling of the mash in a decoction, proteins that hops need to overcome, are reduced. The process of FWH is for producing a smooth, clean beer. Nothing more. If the finished beer has a smooth, clean hop profile, the process was done correctly. If a rough bitterness is detected, the process failed.

 

Anyone?

 

This post looks like it might meet the criteria (although it is DIPA).

http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f69/hopslam-clone-219599/

 

Award winning, often duplicated IPA recipe using FWH (as do every AIPA/APA I make)...

http://wiki.homebrewersassociation.org/DCRyeIPA