Diacetyl: Why the hate?

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.

HiGravShawn

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
267
Reaction score
2
Location
Nawlins
Okay so I did a lot of research before my first brew so from day one have done a 14-21 day primary so I have never really had any noticeable diacetyl. At a local beerfest Saturday I tried Old Thumper which has a butterscotch flavor that really rounded out a delicious brew. I mean it was one of my favs out of 100+ beers I tasted. After reading up this, it is from diacetyl and basically I am giving mine an unintentional diacetyl rest by leaving it on the yeast so long. Two questions...

1. While I know it may not be appropriate for every style, none of BJCP guidelines seem to approve of more than a little bit of this in any style, while I thought it was absolutely delicious (at least in this English ale). Is the level in Old Thumper considered small or would that be a negative, say in a competition?

2. I have no place to cold crash my whole fermenter to try and catch that diacetyl and I'm afraid of trying to bottle really quickly after primary fermentation is done (i.e. BOOM). Anyone know how I can enhance this flavor in a Old Thumper clone?
 
well, my last pale ale had some unintentional diacytl in it. I bottled it after 12 days. It was at 68-70 degree fermentation for that length of time. I've bottled beers in the past at 7 days and had no diacytle though. Perhaps it depends on the yeast floccuation.
I wouldn't worry about exploading bottles anytime after 10 days. but do a hydrometer reading just to be sure.
 
1) Shipyard is known for their diacetyl bombs, it's one of the reasons I can't drink their beers. I had heard they ferment everything with Ringwood and that is why. However, I have heard Dogfish Head uses the same yeast and have had never tasted it.
 
One of the issues with diacetyl is the the widely varying sensitivity to it. What may seem like a pleasant, palate-filling butteriness to you may be an overwhelming, rotten off-flavor to others. The same way with phenols, that's why you'll see very experienced and knowledgeable beer people swear off wheat beers.
 
One of the issues with diacetyl is the the widely varying sensitivity to it. What may seem like a pleasant, palate-filling butteriness to you may be an overwhelming, rotten off-flavor to others. The same way with phenols, that's why you'll see very experienced and knowledgeable beer people swear off wheat beers.

That's interesting. I wonder if there's a correlation because I am not a fan of wheat beers. Buddies love em while I can't seem to find more than a few that are "OK" and even then one is enough.
 
Who cares what the BJCP says? If you like the flavor of diacetyl in your beers, use the appropriate yeasts and fermentation temperature profiles to produce as much of it as you like. Homebrewing is about what YOU like, not about what the BJCP likes.
 
Who cares what the BJCP says? If you like the flavor of diacetyl in your beers, use the appropriate yeasts and fermentation temperature profiles to produce as much of it as you like. Homebrewing is about what YOU like, not about what the BJCP likes.

It's not that I particularly care what they think, but helps me figure out what the normal level is. Also, one day I may want to enter a competition and I hear a lot of people complain they get pinged on diacetyl.
 
It's not that I particularly care what they think, but helps me figure out what the normal level is. Also, one day I may want to enter a competition and I hear a lot of people complain they get pinged on diacetyl.

I agree. It's not to conform to BJCP it's to understand what is "some diacetyl". I think OLd Thumper is perfectly balanced and would consider it "some diacetyl". Others think it's over-the-top. Old thumper is listed in the BJCP commercial example of ESB I believe. I'd think so many judges would have an aversion to diacetyl to some degree that it'd be best to leave it out of your competition beers.
 
I just did a tasting of eight beers at our local homebrew competition and four of them had extreme levels of Diacetyl, one with minor and three were well fermented and clean. It wasn't brought up by anyone during the discussion. There are wildly different sensitivities to it.
 
It's not that I particularly care what they think, but helps me figure out what the normal level is. Also, one day I may want to enter a competition and I hear a lot of people complain they get pinged on diacetyl.

You shouldn't complain if you get dinged for what is considered a flaw according to the guidelines. English ales and Scottish ales both allow for a limited amount of diacetyl. Anything more and you should be dinged.

Brewing for competition isn't like brewing for taste. I personally think diacetyl is disgusting, but in low levels is appropriate to a few styles. If you want good comp. scores, though, you have to play by the rules. That's how it is. Don't like it, don't compete.
 
FWIW, you can chemically convert diacetyl in fermented beer with a small dose of potassium metabisulfite.

The risk is you use too much and are able to detect sulphur in the aroma and/or add a salty taste. But, the risk may be worth it if you'd like to enter it in a competition.
 
One of the issues with diacetyl is the the widely varying sensitivity to it. What may seem like a pleasant, palate-filling butteriness to you may be an overwhelming, rotten off-flavor to others. The same way with phenols, that's why you'll see very experienced and knowledgeable beer people swear off wheat beers.
Good point. Its like how some of us can't stand New Belgium beers (except Ranger). What is that that weird Fat Tire flavor? The same thing is in Moose Drool...
 
That was part of my question as I am trying to determine what "a limited amount" means since different people have different tastes.

The best way to answer this is to try the examples listed in the BJCP guidelines, and try to stay within the levels you find there. And also note that what may be "limited" to one judging panel can be "overwhelming" to another.
 
Not a fan myself. In small doses diacetyl can be okay... as in Pilsner Urquell - a time or two I've been able to taste a hint. In higher doses it just tastes rancid. Want a butter bomb? Try Stite Golden Pilsner. Picked up a six pack once to give it a try. Barely choked down 1/2 a bottle. After opening a couple more, I wound up dumping it all.
 
I doubt I would like it in a really light beer. In Old Thumper which is the only place I've really noticed it, it worked because it's an Extra Strong Bitter. It gave this feeling of sweetness and fullness that balances with the bitter without adding too much cloying malt or adding true sweetness.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top