Do "professional" brewers consider brulosophy to be a load of bs?

[MSK_Chess]

Who's Nurse Ratchet? Just kidding, but that did date you a bit.

Mildred!

 

[Kee]

Who's Nurse Ratchet? Just kidding, but that did date you a bit.

That's like not knowing who Hamlet was. Anyone not knowing about Ken Keysey, the Merry Prankskers, or "The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test" may want to set aside some of their reading time to learn more.

 

[cmac62]

That's like not knowing who Hamlet was. Anyone not knowing about Ken Keysey, the Merry Prankskers, or "The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test" may want to set aside some of their reading time to learn more.

I did see a few dead shows before Jerry went into rehab (permanently) Tie Dye and the smell of sativa in the air. Those were the days. Oh well now we have Trump and Antifa instead. :fro:

 

[Denny]

That's like not knowing who Hamlet was. Anyone not knowing about Ken Keysey, the Merry Prankskers, or "The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test" may want to set aside some of their reading time to learn more.

Kesey lived where I live and I worked with him several times. Also used to see Further driving around. His family is still here.

 

[cmac62]

Kesey lived where I live and I worked with him several times. Also used to see Further driving around. His family is still here.

Denny you look like you may have been to a dead show or 10 :rockin::fro:

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Where are you guys/gals purchasing your Brewtan B? I just online searched the three LHBS's that are within 45 minutes of me, and came up with zilch.

The Malt Miller in the UK (no affiliation) has it for £5 for 50g (ie US$6.72 for 1.76oz), which works out a bit cheaper than ibrew's AU$9.50 for the same amount, I don't know how shipping compares though.

 

[soccerdad]

I heard that other bands do shows as well. Not interested

 

[Brulosopher]

Fair enough. But they're aiming for commercial success and I brew for myself. If I'm going to brew a German lager I expect it to be clean, so I'm going to use W-34/70 and ferment it cold. If I want an estery Vienna "lager" I'll just use a kolsch yeast.



What I think I learned from that brulosophy experiment is that you can ferment W-34/70 warm and make good beer. What I don't understand is which beer more accurately represents what a German-style lager SHOULD be, which IMHO is low-ester and clean.

Are you presuming both beers in our lager ferm temp xBmts were estery? I’ve been drinking lager for over a decade, judging for nearly 5 years, and I haven’t detected esters in any of my warm fermented lagers with 34/70.

Just remember one thing with all this ongoing discussion: we don't know who the people are who are taking the triangle test, and we don't know what they've been eating and drinking prior to the test.

Both of those issues seriously call into question the validity of the results. No amount of statistical handwaving can overcome a lack of good data to begin with.

If people have been drinking IPAs prior to testing a lighter more nuanced beer, can they do that? If this wasn't an issue, then why do people suggest, when sampling a flight of beers, that drinkers move from the lightest to the heaviest beers?

Of course it's an issue, and it's the biggest flaw in how the brulosophy experiments are done. We don't know the population to whom the sample generalizes, and we don't know how or even if they were prepared for the test (clean palates, etc.).

Not that I expect it to convince you or anyone else of the validity of our experiments, but I generally collect data in my garage between around 11am and 2pm. Most people bring beer with them that we store in my fridge until after data is collected. When we take samples to meetings and such, we try to catch tasters before things get going just to ensure their palates aren’t obliterated.

But hey, if you don’t buy it, try it! It’s pretty easy.

 

[mongoose33]

Not that I expect it to convince you or anyone else of the validity of our experiments, but I generally collect data in my garage between around 11am and 2pm. Most people bring beer with them that we store in my fridge until after data is collected. When we take samples to meetings and such, we try to catch tasters before things get going just to ensure their palates aren’t obliterated.

But hey, if you don’t buy it, try it! It’s pretty easy.

Remember post #24.

I'm actually going to try to do an exbeeriment this weekend. I can't brew two batches in parallel, my system won't accommodate it. So I'm brewing two batches sequentially. I'll make a big starter and split between the two at the end of the day, after I'm sure the batches are at the same temperature.

I already have approached the organizer of our LHBC about doing a tasting at our November meeting; I'll get there early and be sure that people did the test before drinking anything else there.

I'm pretty confident I can do two equivalent batches sequentially changing only the variable being tested. We'll see. And we'll see if there's a difference, and if there's a difference between them in preference.

I won't say what the variable is, but I'll report back later.

 

[Die_Beerery]

Are you presuming both beers in our lager ferm temp xBmts were estery? I’ve been drinking lager for over a decade, judging for nearly 5 years, and I haven’t detected esters in any of my warm fermented lagers with 34/70.

Says the man who has a Helles "clone" kit with Kolsch yeast.


Also for the record, I am a professional and I do consider Brulopshy B.S.

 

[Denny]

Denny you look like you may have been to a dead show or 10 :rockin::fro:

17 times, but I was paid to be there every time but once. I actually can't stand the music. Makes me an anomaly where I live!

 

[jbsg02]

I recently did my own "short and shoddy" experiment, although not really shoddy, just short. 30 min mash and 30 min boil. From water collection to cleanup was done just short of 3 hours and that's with wort chilling taking a long time with my cheap chiller and warm tap water.

Beer turned out really really good. Took some samples to my LHBS and no one reported off flavors or DMS.

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

Are you presuming both beers in our lager ferm temp xBmts were estery? I’ve been drinking lager for over a decade, judging for nearly 5 years, and I haven’t detected esters in any of my warm fermented lagers with 34/70.

I'm not presuming anything... My concern was that ester production was not actually a variable that was tested by your method.

You performed a triangle test (good, determine if the change is detectable) and you performed a preference test (good, but limited). You did not ask anything about ester production.

Conventional wisdom is that yeast generate more esters at higher temperatures. I would want to know whether your fermentation temperature experiment bore that out in practice at the homebrew scale. By only addressing whether the effect was detectable and preference, you didn't ask nor answer that question.

 

[JONNYROTTEN]

I really like Bruosophers tests.
He does a lot of tests of practices that people question....whats the problem with that.
If anyone else wants to go through the time and trouble and can do it better than have at it and post your results....otherwise....quit your bitchin

 

[mongoose33]

I really like Bruosophers tests.
He does a lot of tests of practices that people question....whats the problem with that.
If anyone else wants to go through the time and trouble and can do it better than have at it and post your results....otherwise....quit your bitchin

I can appreciate that. The "bitchin'" as you describe it comes from those of us with research and measurement backgrounds who see areas the work could be improved.

Why? It has to do with whether we're getting "actionable intelligence" or not. If--if--there are serious methodological or measurement flaws, then that's called into question.

That's all it is. If you want to believe the Brulosophy approach is perfect and you can unconditionally trust the results, that's your right.

 

[JONNYROTTEN]

I can appreciate that. The "bitchin'" as you describe it comes from those of us with research and measurement backgrounds who see areas the work could be improved.

Why? It has to do with whether we're getting "actionable intelligence" or not. If--if--there are serious methodological or measurement flaws, then that's called into question.

That's all it is. If you want to believe the Brulosophy approach is perfect and you can unconditionally trust the results, that's your right.

I never said anything was perfect. I'm sure Brulosopher would agree. I like the fact that he puts in the effort testing questionable practices. Like I said if it can be improved and you know a better way then have at. Spend the time and effort for OUR benefit and post your results...otherwise....

 

[SoCal-Doug]

It really doesn't matter what a professional brewer thinks about anything. Once they take the leap of faith and spend a **** ton of money on equipment, lease, insurance and payroll, they have entered into another world where quality, survival and net profit become equal concerns.

They need to brew for quality of course but also need to be competitive on pricing and costs. In many cases, myths, realities, processes and best practice may collide with affordability and/or the available equipment and labor.

They also need to brew for what sells rather than letting batches go stale. I'm don't know about other areas, but around my area of Southern California, it's hard to find a brewery that has anything other than IPA's (and anything else that's extreme-hopped) and maybe a stout or porter in the mix. Those appear to the fad at the moment. It's hard to find one that will brew a Saison (unless maybe one that's fruited up) or anything soured or Brett'ed (using costly space to age without a quick return on investment is a tough nut to crack)

Many now are serving other breweries products to widen all of their offerings (IMO a smart move). The public simply does not have the range of interests, tastes and variety that the typical home brewer does.

 

[Zenga18]

I really like Bruosophers tests.
He does a lot of tests of practices that people question....whats the problem with that.
If anyone else wants to go through the time and trouble and can do it better than have at it and post your results....otherwise....quit your bitchin

The problem is the tests are useless. They make lazy assumptions, there's no justifications or reasoning for any of their experimental designs, they have multiple variables they don't control for and there's no actual data collected. They hide behind the taste testing because it allows them to provide "scientific" results without any actual results.

They're the kardashians of science, all show and no substance. A picture of a thermometer and scientific jargon they don't understand themselves doesn't validate the results. Maybe some people see that and think "wow they went through a lot and everything is measured so carefully" but there's really no scientific thought process in any of it, and it's presented with a certain air of snake oil salesmanship. Just read his response below, someone questions ester production his answer is "I've been drinking lager for 10 years and I cant taster esters" That's a salesman answer, not a scientific answer.

 

[Denny]

I can appreciate that. The "bitchin'" as you describe it comes from those of us with research and measurement backgrounds who see areas the work could be improved.

Why? It has to do with whether we're getting "actionable intelligence" or not. If--if--there are serious methodological or measurement flaws, then that's called into question.

That's all it is. If you want to believe the Brulosophy approach is perfect and you can unconditionally trust the results, that's your right.

Why not either just accept it for what it is or ignore it completely? You're asking for it to be the way you want it to be and neither Brulosophy or Experimental Brewing is interested in doing things that way.

 

[Denny]

The problem is the tests are useless. They make lazy assumptions, there's no justifications or reasoning for any of their experimental designs, they have multiple variables they don't control for and there's no actual data collected. They hide behind the taste testing because it allows them to provide "scientific" results without any actual results.

They're the kardashians of science, all show and no substance. A picture of a thermometer and scientific jargon they don't understand themselves doesn't validate the results. Maybe some people see that and think "wow they went through a lot and everything is measured so carefully" but there's really no scientific thought process in any of it, and it's presented with a certain air of snake oil salesmanship. Just read his response below, someone questions ester production his answer is "I've been drinking lager for 10 years and I cant taster esters" That's a salesman answer, not a scientific answer.

Gee, there are thousands of people out there who don't feel the tests are useless. If you do, all you have to do is ignore them.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

The problem is the tests are useless. They make lazy assumptions, there's no justifications or reasoning for any of their experimental designs, they have multiple variables they don't control for and there's no actual data collected. They hide behind the taste testing because it allows them to provide "scientific" results without any actual results.

They're the kardashians of science, all show and no substance. A picture of a thermometer and scientific jargon they don't understand themselves doesn't validate the results. Maybe some people see that and think "wow they went through a lot and everything is measured so carefully" but there's really no scientific thought process in any of it, and it's presented with a certain air of snake oil salesmanship. Just read his response below, someone questions ester production his answer is "I've been drinking lager for 10 years and I cant taster esters" That's a salesman answer, not a scientific answer.

Certainly Brulosophy is not that bad. They seem to apply a respectable degree of overall control. Many of the experiments are well thought out (sans for the ones where massive IPA level hops might hide just about anything that may otherwise be recognized as a difference), and have answered valued questions and dispelled multiple brewing myths for me. I do laugh at the repetitive stream of the same old photos of mash tuns, boil kettles, hydrometers, temperature read-outs, pH meter readings, etc... though. Nothing is gained by looking at these pictures. I do like to see pictures of the finished beers though.

 

[bob1852]

The problem is the tests are useless. They make lazy assumptions, there's no justifications or reasoning for any of their experimental designs, they have multiple variables they don't control for and there's no actual data collected. They hide behind the taste testing because it allows them to provide "scientific" results without any actual results.

They're the kardashians of science, all show and no substance. A picture of a thermometer and scientific jargon they don't understand themselves doesn't validate the results. Maybe some people see that and think "wow they went through a lot and everything is measured so carefully" but there's really no scientific thought process in any of it, and it's presented with a certain air of snake oil salesmanship. Just read his response below, someone questions ester production his answer is "I've been drinking lager for 10 years and I cant taster esters" That's a salesman answer, not a scientific answer.

You must be fun at parties...

 

[passedpawn]

The problem is the tests are useless. They make lazy assumptions, there's no justifications or reasoning for any of their experimental designs, they have multiple variables they don't control for and there's no actual data collected. They hide behind the taste testing because it allows them to provide "scientific" results without any actual results.

They're the kardashians of science, all show and no substance. A picture of a thermometer and scientific jargon they don't understand themselves doesn't validate the results. Maybe some people see that and think "wow they went through a lot and everything is measured so carefully" but there's really no scientific thought process in any of it, and it's presented with a certain air of snake oil salesmanship. Just read his response below, someone questions ester production his answer is "I've been drinking lager for 10 years and I cant taster esters" That's a salesman answer, not a scientific answer.

This pretty sums up one camp of people here. I find it kinda sad really.

I like that the guys at that site are doing ANYTHING other than anecdotal conjecture, which ironically is what built this forum. Sure, it's not peer reviewed and unassailable studies, but it's better than nothing. If you choose to treat everything from there as fact, that's up to you. I don't, but I use it as another datapoint in my efforts to make better beer. Probably a better datapoint than the usual "this stuff is awesome make some" type of evidence we usually have.

 

[joshesmusica]

Why not either just accept it for what it is or ignore it completely? You're asking for it to be the way you want it to be and neither Brulosophy or Experimental Brewing is interested in doing things that way.

Man, you sure are doing A LOT of self-advertisement for your site when the discussion isn't even about that...

Gee, there are thousands of people out there who don't feel the tests are useless. If you do, all you have to do is ignore them.

And more defensive posts. I mean, sure, if you guys are just fine with imperfect results that people SHOULD be ignoring. Then ok.

But most of the people are simply saying things could be done better. And it's not like it would be difficult to make the results actually better. So why not want to improve? Why are you apparently so against that while you continue to advertise your site?

 

[joshesmusica]

This pretty sums up one camp of people here. I find it kinda sad really.

I like that the guys at that site are doing ANYTHING other than anecdotal conjecture, which ironically is what built this forum. Sure, it's not peer reviewed and unassailable studies, but it's better than nothing. If you choose to treat everything from there as fact, that's up to you. I don't, but I use it as another datapoint in my efforts to make better beer. Probably a better datapoint than the usual "this stuff is awesome make some" type of evidence we usually have.

I, and I believe others, think this approach to the site is just fine. I always do approach their results with a grain of salt as well. The difference for me is the way they communicate the results. In one sentence, they say, "Don't take these results as the end game." Yet in those same conclusive paragraphs, they make it seem like the results are typically conclusive.

For me its their language, and the way that it convinces so many people that their results are the gold standard.

For others, it's the fact that the statistical approach they're using is flawed, and could be improved upon, and would likely result in far fewer tests being deemed statistically insignificant.

And for the record, I'm actually a fan of Brulosophy and Marshall and what they're doing. I've privately messaged back and forth with Marshall many times. I read every single one of their posts. But I think they could always improve. And I think they generally have accepted critique very well over the years and improved their processes. Now I think they could take a couple more steps in the right direction, and obviously others do as well.

 

[Kee]

Also for the record, I am a professional and I do consider Brulopshy B.S.

Care to elaborate?

 

[jbsg02]

Also, not all pro brewers are god's gift to beer, there are quite a few homebrewers that I bet would brew circles around some so called "pros"

 

[applescrap]

17 times, but I was paid to be there every time but once. I actually can't stand the music. Makes me an anomaly where I live!

Cool, very cool. Bet you have seen some other amazing people. Curious what you did/do.

 

[cmac62]

Also, not all pro brewers are god's gift to beer, there are quite a few homebrewers that I bet would brew circles around some so called "pros"

Agreed, putting out the cash and work to open a brewery makes you a risk taker, but not necessarily a great brewer.

 

[passedpawn]

Cool, very cool. Bet you have seen some other amazing people. Curious what you did/do.

Haha, you might be the only person here who doesn't know that Denny was cowbell guy with Blue Oyster Cult. :rockin: