Chocolate stout

[Queequeg]

So I have been working on a chocolate stout for some time now. This will be my 4th iteration. The idea is to get the base beer as chocolaty as possible. Not coffee, not roast but chocolate. Rich velvety dark chocolate.

So this after significant experimentation and tasting of grains is what I am thinking regarding my next attempt. (the off measures are because the bill was generated based on % and converted from metric)

SG 1.064
FG 1.019

6lb 9oz simpson golden promise
2lb 6oz flaked oats
1lb 9oz weyermann chocolate spelt
1lb 5oz wheat malt
15oz honey malt
6oz special B
lb D90 candi syrup

Mash at 156F

warrior at 60 mins to yield 35 IBU's


The grain bill is built around the Weyermann chocolate Spelt, got this stuff recently after reading that it is Weyermann's most chocolaty malt. In taste test of the crushed grain against a big selection of other supposed chocolaty grains it blew them all out the water. So hence the inclusion of no other roast grains, I don't want to muddle the flavour.

Special B and Honey malt are there to increase the perception of sweetness, the theory being moving away from cocoa of the chocolate spelt to a more confectionery character.

The most chocolaty stout I made before this was a Belgian stout, which use D90 (which imparts chocolate character) so I have included it here lighten the body and get some of that chocolate character.(it also had a lot of phenols & spice which I don't want)

I will probably use London ale III and ferment on the warm side to get some fruity esters. Using WLP500 or 530 did cross my mind but I am hestitant.

I did originally include lactose, but ime it doesn't really achieve much and I can always add it after if need be.

I will probably add chocolate in some form to primary or keg, along with vanilla. But I want to nail the base beer first.

Please offer you thoughts, especially regarding yeast choice.

cheers

 

[JohnSand]

I love 530, but I don't think I would use it here. London Ale sounds right to me. I'm interested in your results, I might brew it sometime too.

 

[Queequeg]

Cool, I have good some kay star white chocolate extract coming in the post, may use a small amount along with some vanilla extract. both as a subtle enhancement not overwhelm.

I will probably up the wheat by 2% and lower the golden promise. This will give the wort a bit more diastatic power and help with foam deleterious effects of the oats.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Triple Chocoholic by Saltaire is a good benchmark in this area - not to clone necessarily, but to help you think in what direction you want to take it. It got quite widely distributed at one point after it won Speciality CBoB, I think Waitrose might still do it. They use 4% oat malt in a fairly simple grist - we talked about it in this thread along with various chocolating options for a Sam Smith's clone.

Would be interested to hear how you get on with the chocolate spelt - where did you get it from?

WLP540 might be a good choice on the yeast front - a POF- British yeast that's used to making big dark beers.

 

[specharka]

Triple Chocoholic by Saltaire is a good benchmark in this area - not to clone necessarily, but to help you think in what direction you want to take it. It got quite widely distributed at one point after it won Speciality CBoB, I think Waitrose might still do it. They use 4% oat malt in a fairly simple grist - we talked about it in this thread along with various chocolating options for a Sam Smith's clone.

Would be interested to hear how you get on with the chocolate spelt - where did you get it from?

WLP540 might be a good choice on the yeast front - a POF- British yeast that's used to making big dark beers.

That’s the Rochefort strain, correct? I second this recommendation, it’s one of my favorites for big, malty quads and I’m sure it would work great here.

It’s a matter of opinion but I personally don’t enjoy that much honey malt in anything—at higher levels it contributes this odd sickly sweet flavor that can be really distracting. I really enjoy Simpsons Golden Naked Oats in beers like this and think it would make a good addition to counterbalance some of the sweeter tones.

And I’m sure you’re on point with the chocolate spelt, but if you’re interested in trying something else out, English pale chocolate malt is unbelievable. Bairds or Thomas Fawcett in particular present more robust chocolate flavor without any of the roasty or burnt character. They’re a little on the lighter side (200-225 L) but the flavor is incredible.

 

[Queequeg]

I have tried UK pale chocolate in the same tasting session as the chocolate spelt but the chocolate spelt is a lot more chocolatey. Pale chocolate has a very assertive coffee and roast character and the chocolate which is present falls to the back of the palette.

The first thing that hits you is the cocoa, it's very similar to eating cocoa solid. Then there coffee and a hint of dark chocolate.

I bought it from the homebrewcompany.co.uk.

As for saltaires triple chocolate, that's a simple recipe but I cant see it yeilding the results I want. I guess there beer is chocolatey from their cocoa additions.

The honey malt I have is Colorado honey and not Gambrinus which is much paler and much less intense but still sweeter than most crystal, at least in my taste test of the raw grain.

 

[Queequeg]

WLP540 might be a good choice on the yeast front - a POF- British yeast that's used to making big dark beers.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

 

[Queequeg]

Having a think about this, I'm going to make some changes.

First I had read that oats suppress ester production because of the high lipid content.

So I will swap them out for flaked barley which means I can drop the wheat malt too.

I am also thinking that the honey malt is unnecessary simulation because I can probably get the sweetness I need from controlling the FG/SG and IBU's.

I will up the special B slightly and scrap the D-90.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

(sorry, thought I'd pressed send on this)
POF is a package of DNA that enables a yeast to produce the phenolic flavours typical of Belgian yeast (and wild-type yeast for that matter). So the typical saison yeasts are all POF+, but most kolsch/US/UK yeast are POF-. The POF- mutation is regarded as a sign of how domesticated a yeast strain is, as the cleaner beer it makes is seen as more desirable by most brewers (except those weirdos in the Low Countries).

WLP540 is unusual among the yeasts used in Belgium for being POF-, since it originally came from Britain and is related to the likes of Ringwood and Bedford.

 

[thunderaxe]

I have tried UK pale chocolate in the same tasting session as the chocolate spelt but the chocolate spelt is a lot more chocolatey.
...
The first thing that hits you is the cocoa, it's very similar to eating cocoa solid. Then there coffee and a hint of dark chocolate.

i'm looking to make something along the same lines, a hazelnut-chocolate porter where i want to get chocolate and nut tastes out of the dark malts while avoiding roasted and coffee flavours as much as possible. i was planning on using chocolate rye because many descriptions i've read referred to it as having a milk chocolate flavour, and no roasted character due to rye's lack of a hull.

i was wondering if you tried chocolate rye in your comparison tastings and if so if you would still recommend going with chocolate spelt instead?

 

[Queequeg]

Chocolate rye is nice but I never really got a strong chocolate flavor from it. It has a very strong biscuit/grainy quality to it. Chocolate spelt at least from tasting the raw grains was more chocolatey.

I will say that chocolate rye is much smoother and so you could possibly use more. I can see why people say it tastes like milk chocolate though because of it mild character.

If you can wait a few weeks I will have this made and will be able to give you tasting notes.

 

[Queequeg]

so I brewed something up. It did not go well. The beer tastes awful, sour and almost effervescent (but not carbonated). Also kicking out a quite of sulfur.

3 Things that could have caused this

1) the deliberate stressing of the yeast, I think this is responsible for the sulfur
2) contamination, there is no biofilm so I don't think this is the issue. But I will see what the final gravity says
3) I used "Bicarbonate of soda" from the supermarket to adjust Na and HCO3 levels. Turns out this was E500 which can be any blend of sodium carbonates including Na2Co3.

If number 3 is to blame which I think it is, that would explain the effervescence and sourness. *sigh*

Anyhow this has given me the opportunity to revise the recipe, so I will be brewing a replacement later this week.

Couple of take aways' from this, apart from making sure you read the label, is that flaked barley imo is crap. Honestly I have much more success with malted grains at building body, texture and mouthfeel. Also I finally realized I cant stand lactose in beers, it just tastes like off milk to me, if you want it sweeter use more crystal.

I am thinking of going with;

20% wheat malt
10% chocolate spelt
15% crystal (type to be decided)
55% pale malt

Mash high (70C) and use wyeast 1469. Though 540 tastes great, (well at least the starter did) it too attenuative for a sweet chocolate stout. I think 540 would be great in an imperial stout though. Bitter to about 35 IBU's no aroma/flavor additions

I may add some roast barley, as the current version which was all chocolate spelt isn't quite stouty enough.

 

[JohnSand]

Sorry about your results.
I don't use water adjustments, and have no useful suggestions except to give it time. I rarely dump a beer that is younger than six months.

 

[Queequeg]

Now its finished it doesn't taste as bad, still too salty to drink though. I will dump, not a problem.

This is what I am thinking based on research and previous batches including this failed one.

10lbs pale malt
3lbs 5oz of wheat malt
2lbs cararye
2lbs chocolate spelt
3 oz dingmans debittred roast barley

Final gravity should be around 1.024, so hopefully nice and syrupy. the 2lbs of crystal is to make up for the absence of lactose. Im trying to keep the grainbill as simple as possible.

 

[JohnSand]

Good luck.

 

[hezagenius]

I brewed up a chocolate stout about a year ago. It's super smooth with a nice chocolate flavor. It's weird because there is almost no roastiness or coffee flavor at all. It's kind of weird the first few times because you are expecting that roasty aftertaste and it's not there. I ended up with a FG of 1.027 and I would say it feels a little thin. I'm going to brew another iteration of it and try to shoot for about 1.035 and boost the malts accordingly. I think I'm going to try to get a SG around 1.100 and get an ABV in the 8.x% range.

Here's the recipe if you are interested:
8.50# Pale 2-Row
2.00# Flaked Oats
2.00# Pale Chocolate Malt
1.00# Oat Malt
0.75# CaraAroma
1.00# Lactose (last 10 minutes of boil)
1.00oz EKG @ 60min
1.00oz EKG @ 30min
1056 with 1L starter

Mash chemistry:
Na 13.7
Cl 60
Ca 50
SO4 30
Mg 7.6
Mash at 156F for 60min
SG: 1.072
FG: 1.027

 

[Queequeg]

thanks for the recipe hezagenius. Thanks JohnSand.

 

[day_trippr]

[...]It's weird because there is almost no roastiness or coffee flavor at all.[...]

Given there are no roasted grains, that much doesn't seem weird at all.
I've never used either chocolate spelt or light chocolate barley malt so don't know if they convey any coffee notes...

Cheers!

 

[Queequeg]

well chocolate spelt is basically cocoa, it has a sutble dark chocolate note and some coffee but it is very smooth. I used over 2lb in the batch i cocked up on and I think i will need to combine it with a little roast barley.

By comparison pale chocolate is strong coffee, with a little cocoa.