dme or corn sugar?

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.

TaylorBrewed

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
117
Reaction score
18
Location
Elmira
So I'm going to be doing a extract recipe this weekend it calls for equal amounts of light dme and corn sugar with specialties grains.

I want to increase the alcoholic content from 5 to 6 % and have extra dme and corn sugar on hand.

I don't want to screw with the taste so my question to you guys is this. Should I add more of one or the other as it won't mater ( in that case I would add more corn sugar becase its cheaper) or should I just add increased equal amounts of the two just like the recipe already calls for ?
 
Adding DME will add body and flavor along with the alcohol. Corn sugar will dry out the beer as it only contributes alcohol. I say go with just the DME for a better beer.
 
It's also a good idea to take into account the rest of the recipe. Upping the ABV without changing anything else may upset the balance. It may not be a problem, but can't say without knowing the style, original IBU, etc.
 
Sugar is great if you want added dryness. But there are limitations. For an extract beer, I would only replace between 0-15% of the total grist with sugar. If you add more than that, it becomes less of a beer and more of an odd sort of sugar cane cider.
 
It's also a good idea to take into account the rest of the recipe. Upping the ABV without changing anything else may upset the balance. It may not be a problem, but can't say without knowing the style, original IBU, etc.

I have to second that. Just throwing fermentables into a recipe to boost abv (without considering the balance of the beer) usually doesn't get you the results you're hoping for. Sure, it'll pack more of a punch, but possibly at the cost of taste/drinkability. If you want a stronger beer, I'd recommend brewing a style of beer that's stronger, and not to try and 'soup up' an existing recipe.
 
That's an interesting point of view, "adding dryness".. ... dry is the absence of sweet... or is it something more? Thinking on it, it's about keeping the balance of the original recipe, the original goal? Maybe a mix of the two, DME and corn sugar?
 
That's an interesting point of view, "adding dryness".. ... dry is the absence of sweet... or is it something more? Thinking on it, it's about keeping the balance of the original recipe, the original goal? Maybe a mix of the two, DME and corn sugar?

You're exactly right. Dry is not sweet. The balance of the original recipe is probably a good start, but depending on who wrote the recipe - it really is written to 'their' liking. If it is from "Jim Bob's Beer Recipe Flyer" - it's a crap shoot. If it's from Brewing Classic Styles - that's a whole 'nother ball game.
 
I have to second that. Just throwing fermentables into a recipe to boost abv (without considering the balance of the beer) usually doesn't get you the results you're hoping for. Sure, it'll pack more of a punch, but possibly at the cost of taste/drinkability. If you want a stronger beer, I'd recommend brewing a style of beer that's stronger, and not to try and 'soup up' an existing recipe.

I agree. When I'm adding fermentables to a recipe in order to boost the ABV, I'm generally trying to get to a given style's ABV and OG. I'm also expecting to hit within a target FG range. Most of the time, I don't add simple sugars unless the style expects dryness.

To me, the ABV is an afterthought. I try to get somewhere within the style's range but I don't aim high or low within that range. Furthermore, higher ABV beers tend to have more malt character (unless you're making malt liquor), to balance out stronger hop character (or vice versa). When designing these beers, you consider your OG target and you specialty grains. You rarely have to correct your ABV because the yeast you use should attenuate to a FG range.
 
To me, the ABV is an afterthought. I try to get somewhere within the style's range but I don't aim high or low within that range. Furthermore, higher ABV beers tend to have more malt character (unless you're making malt liquor), to balance out stronger hop character (or vice versa). When designing these beers, you consider your OG target and you specialty grains. You rarely have to correct your ABV because the yeast you use should attenuate to a FG range.

Exactly! When I drink beer, I drink beer because I like beer and not to get loaded (there's bourbon and rum for that :D ). Don't get me wrong, one of my favorite beers to drink (or brew) are big, high abv IPA's, but I drink them cuz I love IPA, not because they're pushing 9 or 10 abv. I actually see high abv as somewhat of a downside, as it limits the number of beers one can consume before becoming intoxicated.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against drinking to get a buzz, but IMO it's silly to brew beer for the sole purpose of a high abv beverage if you sacrifice quality to do so. There's Olde English HG 800 for that. :mug:
 
If the initial recipe calls for equal amounts of DME and corn sugar, I would definitely add more DME to beef up the ABV. Just make sure you use a light DME, and not a dark one.

-a.
 
Has anyone compared the hydrometer reading before and after adding corn sugar and again after the conditioning? That should speak volumes... alcohol by volume, that is. :D
 
Has anyone compared the hydrometer reading before and after adding corn sugar and again after the conditioning? That should speak volumes... alcohol by volume, that is. :D

There's a conversion calulator or standard measurement that is already a known for different priming sugars by volume. IIRC, the standard is like .5% addition, but I don't know if too many people actually care enough to count that toward their recorded ABV.
 
I have to second that. Just throwing fermentables into a recipe to boost abv (without considering the balance of the beer) usually doesn't get you the results you're hoping for. Sure, it'll pack more of a punch, but possibly at the cost of taste/drinkability. If you want a stronger beer, I'd recommend brewing a style of beer that's stronger, and not to try and 'soup up' an existing recipe.

Agree. A good brew is about balance. Just adding DME or sugar will throw off the balance. I you want a higher ABV beer then do a recipe that is designed for that.
 
Agree. A good brew is about balance.

This general statement really depends on the style of beer your brewing. For instance, I have the strong belief that most American Double IPAs should be un-balanced. But yes, it is wise to know what you're brewing before you brew it... and not to add sh$t to the kettle just because you have it on hand.
 
All else equal, I would agree that adding DME just to increase ABV might create an unbalanced beer. If you post the original recipe, we can provide a better answer to your situation.
 
Thanks for the inputs guys. This is my first time doing a extract recipe . Started brewing the biab style. So this question was to get more information on how to increase my og when doing biab. I have had some bad luck getting my effiencey dialed in. And always wondered what I should add to get me closer to my og. Figured increasing the alcohol volume on this beer would be the same as increasing my og when doing biab style.

The reason for doing this extract kit is because I always have extra dme on hand and corn sugar for yeast starters and priming my beer.

It's just a ale recipe from Austin home brew . That I plan on adding some fruit to. Don't know the recipe off hand as I am at work right now but I can get back to you. Thanks
 
This general statement really depends on the style of beer your brewing. For instance, I have the strong belief that most American Double IPAs should be un-balanced.

Balance doesn't necessarily mean an even balance. A good DIPA isn't unbalanced so much as it's balanced towards hops bitterness, flavor and aroma. Technically, and 'unbalanced' DIPA would be overly malty, maybe even sticky. Conversely, a well balanced doppelbock will be over the top malty with almost zero late hops character. It's not about an even amount of malt and hops, it's about the appropriate amount of malt and/or hops character for the style.
 
What I meant by that was not sticky, sweet, or weak in hop character but rather innately bitter, dry, and hop forward... all of which is what a great Double IPA should be in my opinion. There is certainly beauty in Un-Balance. If you want extreme balance, brew an ESB. Just don't say that every style of beer must be balanced. I would hate a balanced Berliner Weiss or Sour.
 
Just don't say that every style of beer must be balanced.

Why not? I think one of the keys to a beer being seen as a good representation of a particular style is that it's perfectly balanced to style. Again, 'balance' in a beer doesn't necessarily mean an even balance, I think you're mistaking 'balance' for an 'even amount' here, and that's just not the case with beer. A well balanced Dortmunder export is going to be way more bitter and hoppy than a well balanced brown porter, but both beers can still be well balanced to style.
 
Balance to style is also debatable. There are plenty of breweries and homebrewers alike that defy/rebel against BJCP guidelines and receive tremendous amounts of praise. There are no set rules for everyone and there will never be. Balance in general is also subjective... not everyone has the same palate. One person may think Dogfish 90 is very balanced, another may think it's overly malty & sweet, and yet another may think it's too bitter.

Personally, I brew to taste... not to balance.
 
Balance to style is also debatable.

Dare I ask.....?

There are plenty of breweries and homebrewers alike that defy/rebel against BJCP guidelines and receive tremendous amounts of praise.

Well, no doubt. There's a vast amount of great beer that doesn't fit any style, thus the Specialty Beer category in the BJCP. Doesn't really pertain to the topic of balance, or lack thereof in a beer, though.

There are no set rules for everyone and there will never be.

:confused: But there are recognized style guidelines for every known style of beer, and I think balance may come into play just a bit when judges are considering a beer in competition.

One person may think Dogfish 90 is very balanced, another may think it's overly malty & sweet, and yet another may think it's too bitter.

Again, it seems that you're mistaking the term balance to entail an even balance. Think of it like this; you're standing on a balance beam holding a 40# weight in your right hand. You can balance yourself on that beam, but you'll be leaning to the left to counteract the weight. Your 'balanced', but to one side of the beam. (kinda the same as a beer that's balanced, but more so to either the hops or the malt.) Now, think of standing on that same beam without anything effecting your weight distribution, you're balanced, perfectly so. (kinda like that 'perfectly balanced' ESB you mentioned.)

Personally, I brew to taste... not to balance.

Well, yeah, I brew to taste too. But I think the taste of a particular style of beer is influenced by the balance. I'd sure hate to brew an IPA that was balanced improperly, so I consider that when coming up with a recipe.
 
That was really a whole lot of rant for nothing. But I'll take the balance beam scenerio. Double IPAs for instance are theoretically SUPPOSED to be un-balanced more toward the side of hops... no, not 99% vs. 1%, but definetely not 50/50. I completely agree however that with a given OG, there is a certain amount of IBUs you need to counteract the sweetness, yet not go overboard (though I'd rather go overboard than under-board which I have done for this style with good results). However, with this scenerio I'm still not looking for a balance of bitter vs. sweet. I still want the beer to be innately bitter. And I still want the hops to be the star. Therefore, balance is a silly word to use for a style that relies on the beauty of un-balance.
 
Therefore, balance is a silly word to use for a style that relies on the beauty of un-balance.

:confused: What word would you suggest as the term brewers should use to describe a beer's balance? If you could get over the idea that the term 'balance' being used to describe beer implies an exact '50/50' evenness you'd probably understand what I'm saying. In brewing, the word 'balance' is used to describe a ratio of Bitterness Units to Gravity Units (points), and has very little to do with a 50:50 blend of hops and malt character, unless of course the style being brewed has an even BU:GU ratio. It's really not that difficult a concept, thus the gymnastics reference needed to explain it in more simple terms. :drunk:
 
That was really a whole lot of rant for nothing. But I'll take the balance beam scenerio. Double IPAs for instance are theoretically SUPPOSED to be un-balanced more toward the side of hops... no, not 99% vs. 1%, but definetely not 50/50. I completely agree however that with a given OG, there is a certain amount of IBUs you need to counteract the sweetness, yet not go overboard (though I'd rather go overboard than under-board which I have done for this style with good results). However, with this scenerio I'm still not looking for a balance of bitter vs. sweet. I still want the beer to be innately bitter. And I still want the hops to be the star. Therefore, balance is a silly word to use for a style that relies on the beauty of un-balance.

I think your are misunderstanding the term balance. Maybe a better term would be BU:GU ratio. That is what we are trying to communicate as the idea of balance. We are not saying there should be a balance. but the proper ratio for the brew to taste right. An IPA should be hoppy, but increasing the OG will change the ratio. For example an imperial IPA will have a BU:GU ratio of about 1.0. So if the OG is 1.080 and the IBU's are 80 that is the proper ratio ( or balance) If you chnage the OG the ratio (balance) will be off. Does this make sense?
 
I think your are misunderstanding the term balance. Maybe a better term would be BU:GU ratio. That is what we are trying to communicate as the idea of balance. We are not saying there should be a balance. but the proper ratio for the brew to taste right. An IPA should be hoppy, but increasing the OG will change the ratio. For example an imperial IPA will have a BU:GU ratio of about 1.0. So if the OG is 1.080 and the IBU's are 80 that is the proper ratio ( or balance) If you chnage the OG the ratio (balance) will be off. Does this make sense?

:mug: Well put!! It's not about the balance being even, but about the balance being proper according to a particular style. An IPA with a BU:GU ratio of .5 (or 'evenly' balanced) wouldn't taste anything like an IPA should, it would be out of balance.
 
Maybe a better term would be BU:GU ratio. That is what we are trying to communicate as the idea of balance. We are not saying there should be a balance. but the proper ratio for the brew to taste right. An IPA should be hoppy, but increasing the OG will change the ratio. For example an imperial IPA will have a BU:GU ratio of about 1.0. So if the OG is 1.080 and the IBU's are 80 that is the proper ratio ( or balance) If you chnage the OG the ratio (balance) will be off. Does this make sense?

I understand completely and I already referenced this. (see above and below). I get what you're saying, but I'm covering all the bases of the term. Balance is a subjective word for people... like "hype" or "bitter".

"I completely agree however that with a given OG, there is a certain amount of IBUs you need to counteract the sweetness, yet not go overboard (though I'd rather go overboard than under-board which I have done for this style with good results)."
 
Back
Top