Confession time

[Stormcrow]

I guess beer judging probably isn't in my future. On certain rare occasions I've discovered that some craft beers didn't taste as hoppy as I expected, but did have what I thought was a very pleasant caramel undertone. It happened often enough that I became frustrated with my inability to find whatever malt contributed that particular flavor.

The other day I rediscovered a couple of sealed bottles of my homebrew pale ale that were only half full and a couple of months old. I was dialing in bottling from the keg and these two were initially filled with foam. Rather than top them off after the foam settled, I just capped them and put them in the fridge with the rest, promptly forgetting all about them. Lo and behold, when I opened one out of sheer boredom the other day, I discovered my elusive caramel note!

Apparently there is a stage of oxidation that I find pleasant. I'm not interested in perfecting the art of oxidation and making it a part of my process. I'll just keep playing with malts instead. Still, I found the whole thing interesting and began to wonder if any of you have had a similar experience, or if this just makes me a beer philistine.

For that matter, any other theories on what I might be tasting here?

 

[D.B.Moody]

Apparently there is a stage of oxidation that I find pleasant.

I think I do too. I did several comparison batches to see if not using a secondary would improve my beers because transferring to a secondary needlessly exposes my beer to oxygen. I found that the differences between the secondary and the no secondary batches were slight to almost undetectable, and me, my fellow taster, and my older son all preferred the "smoother," "mellower" taste of the batches that had gone through a secondary. I brew only ales. I do not keg, so I also transfer to a bottling bucket. I have been happily ignoring oxygen since 1994. The comparisons were of a bitter, a pale ale, and an IPA. I reported on these comparisons in a thread "What does a secondary fermenter do?" I decided to stick with using a secondary. I also decided to develop an IPA recipe and process that doesn't use a secondary and does other things to better retain the hop flavor and aroma by addressing oxidation. I may have preferred my IPA that went through a secondary, but, reflecting upon it, I decided it wasn't very IPAish. It won't be brewed until next year, so for now I'm still happily ignoring the oxidation bugaboo.

 

[hottpeper13]

I don't like the slight oxidation I got in the beers I bottled from a keg without a CO2 purge. I thought it had the same flavor as C-60 and haven't used that malt in any brews since. That's in 2015 when I won a beer gun at a picinic. When a recipe calls for C-60 I use a crystal wheat that is 60- L.

 

[bracconiere]

@Stormcrow never more noticeable then when it's a special b brew! aging in an O2 rich bottle from a keg, i found REALLY brings out the Special B!

 

[CascadesBrewer]

For that matter, any other theories on what I might be tasting here?

It is an interesting observation. Back around the start of 2019 I got back into brewing after a 2.5 year break and I made a lot of changes to my process over the first 6 months back into brewing. Early on I stopped using a secondary. When I got into brewing some NEIPA-style beers, I took steps to avoid cold side oxidation. I also got into water chemistry in that time. Wow, I was actually able to make nice IPAs that were fresh and hoppy!

I was surprised by the impact to my Pale Ales. My most brewed batch was a simple Pale Ale that was 9 lb 2-Row and 1 lb Crystal 40 or 60. I thought it was an incredible beer and one reason I kept at brewing. After my changes, the same recipe was noticeable lighter in color. Some of the background sweetness that I attributed to using Crystal disappeared! Now even my basic Pale Ale has more pronounced hop and grain characters! For me this was a definite improvement.

But I agree that oxidation character is not always bad. I tend to think that some oxidation in styles like English Bitters, Porters or Stouts lends to the character. Any barrel aged beer likely had quite a bit of oxygen exposure. The "aged" character from old bottles is at least in part the result of oxidation.

 

[tracer bullet]

Agreed that it isn't always bad. When people "age" their stouts I'm sure it's a part of what happens. Especially if they're in actual wooden barrels - ain't no way those are staying O2 free.

 

[hotbeer]

If you don't have a full bottle of the same beer to compare to, then I wouldn't just assume the amount of headspace had anything to do with what you are tasting.

I've got some beers in the fridge right now that I bottled over a month ago and they are just now starting to taste almost but not quite decent. But they've changed in taste considerably since the normal two weeks after bottling time generally allowed.

 

[Stormcrow]

If you don't have a full bottle of the same beer to compare to, then I wouldn't just assume the amount of headspace had anything to do with what you are tasting.

I've got some beers in the fridge right now that I bottled over a month ago and they are just now starting to taste almost but not quite decent. But they've changed in taste considerably since the normal two weeks after bottling time generally allowed.

Good observation, and yes I did have several other bottles and the rest of that keg for comparison. The flavor has only appeared in those partial filled bottles.

 

[Stormcrow]

@Stormcrow never more noticeable then when it's a special b brew! aging in an O2 rich bottle from a keg, i found REALLY brings out the Special B!

I was thinking some malts would react more noticeably than others. I just kegged a brew yesterday with special b in it. Should have minimal oxygen exposure, but might not be too bad either way.

 

[passedpawn]

I guess beer judging probably isn't in my future. On certain rare occasions I've discovered that some craft beers didn't taste as hoppy as I expected, but did have what I thought was a very pleasant caramel undertone. It happened often enough that I became frustrated with my inability to find whatever malt contributed that particular flavor.

The other day I rediscovered a couple of sealed bottles of my homebrew pale ale that were only half full and a couple of months old. I was dialing in bottling from the keg and these two were initially filled with foam. Rather than top them off after the foam settled, I just capped them and put them in the fridge with the rest, promptly forgetting all about them. Lo and behold, when I opened one out of sheer boredom the other day, I discovered my elusive caramel note!

Apparently there is a stage of oxidation that I find pleasant. I'm not interested in perfecting the art of oxidation and making it a part of my process. I'll just keep playing with malts instead. Still, I found the whole thing interesting and began to wonder if any of you have had a similar experience, or if this just makes me a beer philistine.

For that matter, any other theories on what I might be tasting here?

I saved a bottled stout for 24 years, then drank it with a friend. No carbonation, tasted like soy sauce. It was not horrible, but you wouldn't want to finish it.

That's the flavor at the end of the oxidation spectrum.

 

[Henbrew]

Temperature plays a big role in malty undertones in my experience. I have an ESB that improves greatly once it's been in the glass for 5-10 minutes.