Can you Brew It recipe for Stone Arrogant Bastard
- Thread starter EricCSU
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk:
ultravista
Well-Known Member
reuliss - which recipe did you brew?
bigbeergeek
Well-Known Member
Have you done a side by side? I thought it was Special B too until I had them side by side. Only difference with mine was the malt was a little off. I have the hops to the point where they are indistinguishable. I used FWHing with Chinook and a 60 minute and I cannot detect any difference in the hops now. Malt, well that is another story. I talked to Tasty at NHC and asked if they were going to retry this. He wasn't very specific but I got the feeling from talking to him the Jamil wants to move on, so I thinks its up to us to perfect this one...
ultravista
Well-Known Member
That's Chinook @ 60 and that's it? I cut mine back from 4 oz to 3 oz and thought it improved.
I plan to keg mine this week and try, hydro samples left me thinking the special B was out of place. It been in the secondary for at least 6 weeks, so I hop I haven't lost that wonderful hop aroma. I also added some Breiss special malt on a whim, and some ahtanum hops. I can post my recipe when I post my taste impressions.
Ill post my impressions along with a side by side when mine is chilled and fully carbonated.
Ill post my impressions along with a side by side when mine is chilled and fully carbonated.
![Craft A Brew - Safale BE-256 Yeast - Fermentis - Belgian Ale Dry Yeast - For Belgian & Strong Ales - Ingredients for Home Brewing - Beer Making Supplies - [3 Pack]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51bcKEwQmWL._SL500_.jpg)
I brewed the one with 90% 2-Row, 10% Special B
No, I haven't done side by side, but I love this beer and have its flavor seered into my brain
Perhaps I would notice a difference side by side, but when I tasted it, my reaction was "Why is this Stone Arrogant Bastard not bitter enough?" And I answered myself by saying, "More Hops Next Time!"
I think my version is probably ready to try now. I'm going to pick up a commercial bottle tonight, funny that the last one seemed to vanish...
The question I have is dry hop yes/no?
Oh, and I'm planning to try and visit the brewery in October. Shooting for 31st, but realize that's Halloween, so dunno if there might some special event or something. I hear tickets are first come first serve, and I won't be able to make it over there until the afternoon. To anyone who has visited before, any suggestions or recommendations on getting in for tour? How packed is it, are folks lined up, etc? Seems like they probably get about 125 visitors per day if they get 50000 per year, and accounting to days they are closed...
TD
The question I have is dry hop yes/no?
Oh, and I'm planning to try and visit the brewery in October. Shooting for 31st, but realize that's Halloween, so dunno if there might some special event or something. I hear tickets are first come first serve, and I won't be able to make it over there until the afternoon. To anyone who has visited before, any suggestions or recommendations on getting in for tour? How packed is it, are folks lined up, etc? Seems like they probably get about 125 visitors per day if they get 50000 per year, and accounting to days they are closed...
TD
I seem to recall the answer to how much to dry hop being "More than you would expect."
From all the attempts (forgive if it has been addressed but I'm not reading all 650 posts) I've seen it's mostly Chinook all over the place. One of the few bits of verifiable information about this recipe is that it was originally formulated as a SMaSH recipe. The BN shows dialed in on it by infusing Stone IPA with tinctures of various malts and hops and such. Perhaps the same method could work for determining the amount of dry hopping? Do it the same way you would do the bud light hop test. Get a couple of bombers, put them in 12oz bottles, and drop various amounts of pellets in each bottle. Let sit in the fridge for a couple of days then try. Might give you an idea of how hard to hit it with the dry hopping.
From all the attempts (forgive if it has been addressed but I'm not reading all 650 posts) I've seen it's mostly Chinook all over the place. One of the few bits of verifiable information about this recipe is that it was originally formulated as a SMaSH recipe. The BN shows dialed in on it by infusing Stone IPA with tinctures of various malts and hops and such. Perhaps the same method could work for determining the amount of dry hopping? Do it the same way you would do the bud light hop test. Get a couple of bombers, put them in 12oz bottles, and drop various amounts of pellets in each bottle. Let sit in the fridge for a couple of days then try. Might give you an idea of how hard to hit it with the dry hopping.
Thanks. At one point I read this whole thread but h been some time. I did dry hop this late in the primary, and I think I will probably want to dry hop in the keg. I honesty don't recall dry hoping the secondary.
Think ill start one ounce at a time and go from there.
Thanks
TD
Think ill start one ounce at a time and go from there.
Thanks
TD
I'm just basing my info from the interviews with mike steele on the brewingnetwork which are fresh on my mind (having listened to them all over the past week). If you hit on something that gets close be sure to clue the rest of us in on it
Well, I'm sipping my undercarbed version now. I know I hit the gravity marks on both ends.
I didn't end up making it to the store on the way home. without a side by side and without a fully carbed brew, kind of pointless. I tell you though it is very very close to what AB tastes like, and I can't wait to have a side by side test. bitterness seems pretty darn good and may be right. I think that the malt is close but not sure if it is exact. It seems that the plum type character that comes through from the Special B is just off. More to follow. Oh, and I ran out of chinook hops. If I think the side by side comparo shows mine lacking, I may buy some and do keg hopping.
TD
I didn't end up making it to the store on the way home. without a side by side and without a fully carbed brew, kind of pointless. I tell you though it is very very close to what AB tastes like, and I can't wait to have a side by side test. bitterness seems pretty darn good and may be right. I think that the malt is close but not sure if it is exact. It seems that the plum type character that comes through from the Special B is just off. More to follow. Oh, and I ran out of chinook hops. If I think the side by side comparo shows mine lacking, I may buy some and do keg hopping.
TD
I'm not positive, but feel reasonably sure that when jamil asked mike about dryhopping the answer he got was "more than you would expect." I might be confusing that with a different question though. I don't really get much of a dry-hop perception of it myself, but perhaps that is why mike answered like he did? dunno. I'll revisit the episodes over the weekend and get it right.
neosapien said:excellent! thanks for saving me the time of listening to them all again. there it is then
I wish they'd bring that show back. Loved it.
thanks!
TD
TD
ultravista
Well-Known Member
For those that have brewed this numerous times, what is your yeast of choice and favorite mash temperature? I like my A.B. malty ...
I use wlp007 and mash at the high end...156 or thereabout. For what it is worth, I think I have the hops down, and do not dry hop. I do 10G batches, using 1.5 oz at FWH and 90, an oz for flavor at 20, and a half oz every 5 minutes starting at 15, including one at flame out. That's 6 oz of Chinook in a finished 10G batch which puts it around 80-85 IBU. This leaves a distinct Chinook flavor and roughness to add to the smooth malt flavor. I don't think I can get the hops much closer than the original. The malt or yeast is still not right. Maybe I will play with fermentation temps next and try to ferment this at 62-65 instead of 70. Dunno...got 5 gallons left so might be time to brew it up again.
ultravista
Well-Known Member
stonebrewer - do you find that this clone tastes different @ 156 vs. the 147-148 the CYBI recipes call for?
I am sure you tried both - what do you pickup that is different?
Would you mind posting your most recent, nearest to the real-deal, recipe?
I am sure you tried both - what do you pickup that is different?
Would you mind posting your most recent, nearest to the real-deal, recipe?
Ultravista: PM me your email address and I will send you my beersmith file for you to play with.
I mash at 156 because The Craft Of Stone Brewing's recipe for Stone Pale Ale, which this beer sorta fell out of, says to mash that high fro SPA. I think they were looking for a bit of sweetness. I don't find AB to be dry. To me AB, SPA, and Double Bastard all have a beautiful sweet, malty taste to them with a rough and tumble hop bite. That said, I may try to mash at 148 or so on some future version just to see what it produces.
Interesting enough, Steve and Greg both suggest that AB is SPA on steroids. But if you look at what we are brewing, it is not SPA. We are not using C60 and C75, Ahtanum and Columbus as we would be if we miscalculated the amounts of ingredients. So why am I using the SPA mash temp? Perhaps they subbed in Chinook for Columbus and used the same recipe, with lots more malt? Dunno...perhaps we should brew that?
I mash at 156 because The Craft Of Stone Brewing's recipe for Stone Pale Ale, which this beer sorta fell out of, says to mash that high fro SPA. I think they were looking for a bit of sweetness. I don't find AB to be dry. To me AB, SPA, and Double Bastard all have a beautiful sweet, malty taste to them with a rough and tumble hop bite. That said, I may try to mash at 148 or so on some future version just to see what it produces.
Interesting enough, Steve and Greg both suggest that AB is SPA on steroids. But if you look at what we are brewing, it is not SPA. We are not using C60 and C75, Ahtanum and Columbus as we would be if we miscalculated the amounts of ingredients. So why am I using the SPA mash temp? Perhaps they subbed in Chinook for Columbus and used the same recipe, with lots more malt? Dunno...perhaps we should brew that?
ultravista
Well-Known Member
PM with email sent - thank you.
I like a malty sweeter beer and I don't get that at 148 - it is much drier.
Got the Beersmith files too!
I like a malty sweeter beer and I don't get that at 148 - it is much drier.
Got the Beersmith files too!
stonebrewer said:
I think my word choice was not best. I find AB remarkably dry considering all of the unfermentable crystal malt, whether it be special b or something else. I think with all of that crystal you have to be careful mashing too high as it will get too sweet. With the grain bill, it's going to be sweet no matter what, but it could easily get cloying if not given the assistance of a low mash temp (IMHO)
reuliss: Not sure I agree. Let's talk about the "myth" that crystal malts cannot be fermented. I believe this is yet another "fact" that does not hold up to inspection. It has been the subject of experimentation by Nilo on HBT and he found that even higher kilned malts will indeed be fermentable, especially if you mash them with base malts as the enzymes from the base malts will indeed convert some of the more complex sugars into base sugars that are fermentable. Alpha-amylase is critical here as it can break down complex sugars into simple sugars that yeast can convert. So when brewing this beer, I want to mash higher in order to break up all that sugar from the crystal malts into something the yeast can eat. The confusing part is that this goes against the literature that says to mash between 140-150 to get higher attenuation. I am wondering if no one has taken into account complex sugars from crystal malts and their impact on beer at lower mash temps?
I always look at balance in a beer, so you have to look at all 4 of the ingredients and find harmony. For this beer, I use WLP007 which attenuates well over 80% for me, so a lot of the sugar is going to get converted. Next, I am hopping it with a very rough, bitter hop in Chinook, that needs more malt presence and sweetness (IMHO) to counteract its contributions. The malt bill is a bit sweet at first glance, but the yeast chosen for this beer and the hops counteract that nicely. Water does not have a great impact here, but I do change my PH by adding phosphoric acid to lower the PH in the mash/sparge to a range that helps the enzymatic action work at peak efficiency. When looked at in total, you would expect a bitter beer with a great malt backbone and a very slight hint of sweetness from residual sugars. Remove too much of the crystal, change the hops, or mash lower and this beer changes a lot and may end up too sweet for my taste.
I always look at balance in a beer, so you have to look at all 4 of the ingredients and find harmony. For this beer, I use WLP007 which attenuates well over 80% for me, so a lot of the sugar is going to get converted. Next, I am hopping it with a very rough, bitter hop in Chinook, that needs more malt presence and sweetness (IMHO) to counteract its contributions. The malt bill is a bit sweet at first glance, but the yeast chosen for this beer and the hops counteract that nicely. Water does not have a great impact here, but I do change my PH by adding phosphoric acid to lower the PH in the mash/sparge to a range that helps the enzymatic action work at peak efficiency. When looked at in total, you would expect a bitter beer with a great malt backbone and a very slight hint of sweetness from residual sugars. Remove too much of the crystal, change the hops, or mash lower and this beer changes a lot and may end up too sweet for my taste.
stonebrewer, I understand your point and I respect that you are testing the conventional wisdom. That said, the conventional wisdom is as it is for a reason. It's not just this recipe that Jamil and Tasty said to mash low. When Matt Bryndelson (sp?) from Firestone Walker was on the podcast, he talked about how me mashed their IPA at 148 in order to dry it out. He also did a step mash and raised to the neighborhood of 155 for a 10 min rest at the end, so perhaps that last step is a nod to your line of reasoning. But the bottom line is that the betas are the enzymes that really break up those sugars at a rapid clip. The alphas only chew off small pieces at the end of the sugar links. Both effects are good if you want to dry something out, which is way the 148 for 60 min and 155 for 10 min might be a great way to go for that effect.
Either way, though, it doesn't sound to me as though you disagree with my take on what the utlimate goal with this beer should be: to get as much of a fermentable wort as possible in order to get this wonderful beer as dry as possible. Not that it will be dry, but dry considering the grain bill. Otherwise we all end up with raisin syrup with this beer. You have just taken the strategy of achieving that effect with a different means. But are ends are the same, no?
Either way, though, it doesn't sound to me as though you disagree with my take on what the utlimate goal with this beer should be: to get as much of a fermentable wort as possible in order to get this wonderful beer as dry as possible. Not that it will be dry, but dry considering the grain bill. Otherwise we all end up with raisin syrup with this beer. You have just taken the strategy of achieving that effect with a different means. But are ends are the same, no?
reuliss: interesting points. FW beers are some of my favorite and I am anxious to try Matt's step mash technique as I have read about it several times and am intrigued by the results. I was waiting to do this with a Double Jack clone, but I think you have talked me into step mashing my next AB brew to see what I get. When I think of AB I think of malty-sweet, which Strong describes as sweet up front but finishing dry. I think that is where you and I can come to common ground. All this talk about AB has me wanting a bottle!! I am on travel so gotta go beer hunting tomorrow. Cheers!
Enjoy! And a "hunt" is a great way to describe it. I live in Montgomery County, Md., and it's not always easy to find AB.
