English Ales - What's your favorite recipe?

[duncan_disorderly]

Whoever said that Heritage Crystal comes in darker than you expect from 180 EBC was totally spot on though!

Chevallier is a lot darker than you expect.

 

[Miraculix]

And do you guys reckon I need to make a starter for the brett? Or just pitch the tube as is in the secondary?
The tube has a BBE of 14th march 2023. I probably won't make an overbuilt starter since I at the moment don't have any stuff to store the slurry in a safe way.

Afaik, it usually gets pitched directly.

 

[Erik the Anglophile]

The bitter came out right on the money, volume wise and gravity wise. 1.041 vs estimated 1.040 is within acceptable margin.
I've had some issues dialing in my system since I started brewing larger batches and milling all the grain myself, but now it seems I got my mash efficiency and boil off + a reliable way to calculate the amount of sugar.

 

[DBhomebrew]

And do you guys reckon I need to make a starter for the brett? Or just pitch the tube as is in the secondary?
The tube has a BBE of 14th march 2023. I probably won't make an overbuilt starter since I at the moment don't have any stuff to store the slurry in a safe way.

Your beer in secondary will be a fairly safe place to store some brett for 6, 9, 12 months.

My understanding is brett doesn't need much in the way of pitch rate [in secondary]. Direct should be fine.

 

[faithie999]

With a 5% addition I don't think it's going to matter much but thats just my opinion not backed by anything. Do you know what the ratio is to completely neutralize it is? I've seen where some say it's 3 grams sodium bicarbonate to 1 gram of citric and also 1.3 grams sodium bicarbonate to 1 gram of citric.

Edit: scratch the 3 grams to 1 gram and let's go with the 1.3 to 1. Also I add my inverts at flameout.

I was just about to post the 1:1.3 ratio (by weight) after inquiring of the Google machine. I decided to check this ratio with my swimming pool chemistry pH test solution using RO water to dissolve the acid and bicarb. on hand I have crystalline (pure) citric acid and powdered bicarbonate of soda. the 1:1.3 ratio comes from the fact that it takes 3 moles of bicarb to neutralize 1 mole of citric acid, and when accounting for the respective molecular weights, the weight ratio is 1:1.3 acid to bicarb.

The pH test shows that the 1:1.3 is still acidic, and it takes closer to 1:2 to bring the pH up to neutral.

this is probably important for making invert sugar for cooking or eating purposes, but as others have said, the invert we make for brewing gets added to a mildly acidic wort, so it neutralizing it isn't necessary.

 

[DBhomebrew]

My understanding is brett doesn't need much in the way of pitch rate [in secondary]. Direct should be fine.

These results challenge the notion that "stressing" Brettanomyces by underpitching leads to more or different levels of flavor-active compounds. The results also demonstrate that exceedingly small amounts of Brett cells are needed to quickly cause changes in a beer. The low end of the pitch rates tested represents approximately 1/5 of a White Labs vial pitched into a 5 gallon batch.
https://www.milkthefunk.com/wiki/Brettanomyces_secondary_fermentation_experiment

 

[Erik the Anglophile]

Direct pitch should be fine then.

 

[IslandLizard]

And do you guys reckon I need to make a starter for the brett?

Absolutely! I've said it before, make a starter, for a variety of reasons.

The tube has a BBE of 14th march 2023.

Best-by date for liquid yeast is typically 6 months after packaging, which was 9/14/22 in your case.
That means that yeast is 3 months old. And has traveled under unknown conditions. That's the main reason to make starter.

And you want to save some out, right? I'm willing to bet that tube ran you about $15 equivalent to get to you. Better stretch its usage somewhat.

You're also pitching it into a high gravity Stock Ale. If you co-pitch with the sacch strain the Brett may grow some, establishing herself. If you pitch later for a 2nd fermentation, she's faced with 9-11% ABV beer. She needs healthy cells, and more of them.

There are other ways/timings to pitch a secondary yeast, but they all need healthy cells, and plenty of them.

 

[Erik the Anglophile]

That's true, might make a small starter, like a 1L one, just to make sure the yeast has vitality, and gets to work as quick as possible to eat up and push out any oxygen picked up during transfer/ in the small inevitable head space.
I just got the crazy idea to do a sorta kinda solera thingy with the Imperial Brown Stout, since I have two small PET carboys, I could brew the stout in january sometime and just draw ~1.5dl of the Stock Ale and pour into the other carboy and rack the stout on that, it's likely gonna be full of brett by then.
@DBhomebrew
@IslandLizard

 

[Northern_Brewer]

You're also pitching it into a high gravity Stock Ale. If you co-pitch with the sacch strain the Brett may grow some, establishing herself. If you pitch later for a 2nd fermentation, she's faced with 9-11% ABV beer. She needs healthy cells, and more of them.

There are other ways/timings to pitch a secondary yeast, but they all need healthy cells, and plenty of them.

Remember the context - this is the English ales thread, he's trying to replicate a traditional stock ale. Where there was no "pitching" of a secondary yeast at all, the entire effect came from small numbers of stressed cells clinging for dear life to the sides of a barrel.

USians may prefer a Brett-heavy approach, but this Brit would rather see moderation. It'll be fine without a starter.

 

[cire]

Thanks for the information @cire . Going off what I thought the ratio was I would guess and this is a guess that my pH went to around 6 after adding the baking soda and I definitely left a little bit behind in the vessel that was holding the measured baking soda so I'm betting around .1 grams or so was left.

I used distilled water when making my inverts so no additional buffering capacity with the water.

No need to be overly concerned about minor variations, buffering of the wort will overpower small . However it is worth noting that while distilled water has little buffering power, my treated water to eliminate alkalinity will be 400 times more acidic at pH 4.4 than distilled water at pH 7. With a calibrated pH meter you can determine how much of any acid is required to lower your chosen water to a particular pH, and how much alkalinity or base is needed to return to a particular level.

While on the subject of sugar, might I advocate the following method making caramel, which is not available in some parts.

https://www.deliaonline.com/cookery-school/techniques/how-to-make-caramel

 

[hout17]

No need to be overly concerned about minor variations, buffering of the wort will overpower small . However it is worth noting that while distilled water has little buffering power, my treated water to eliminate alkalinity will be 400 times more acidic at pH 4.4 than distilled water at pH 7. With a calibrated pH meter you can determine how much of any acid is required to lower your chosen water to a particular pH, and how much alkalinity or base is needed to return to a particular level.

While on the subject of sugar, might I advocate the following method making caramel, which is not available in some parts.

https://www.deliaonline.com/cookery-school/techniques/how-to-make-caramel

Thanks @cire looks like I'll have to break out my pH meter to confirm. I do know that distilled as soon as it's exposed to air drops to a pH of around 5ish as it absorbs CO2 from the environment.

Thanks for the link I'll check it out!

 

[cire]

Indeed it will and does, but the effect is transient and the CO2 is driven off when water is heated for mashing or making invert sugar.

The caramel video is worth a look and consideration for providing body and color to a beer. It can be made darker than advised in the sequence by heating for longer, but there is an upper limit.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

It's worth pointing out that the "dry" method of making caramel in that Delia link is quicker and less like to result in crystallisation - but the downside is that it is quicker, and so it's much easier to burn it if you don't watch it like a hawk.

The "wet" method, where you dissolve it in a bit of water first, takes longer but is a bit more forgiving if you're doing other things at the same time.

 

[marc1]

Recipe:

12.5 Gallons post-boil
OG - 1.049
FG (estimated) - 1.015
ABV - 4.6%
IBU - 41

Overall Water (from RO):
Chloride - 91
Sulfate - 200
Calcium - 135

Crisp Chevallier 100%

Mashed at 151 for 1hr
9 gallon mash
88% lactic acid for mash pH adjustment
Measured mash pH at end of mash: 5.45

5 gallon sparge

1 hour boil
2.2mL 88% lactic acid to boil
post-boil pH - 5.24

1oz EKG 60
3oz Willamette 60
3oz EKG 15

Whirlfloc 10

Ferment with London Fog @68F

Kegged it two days ago. Not clear at all, still tastes a bit yeasty. Based on this so far, I would not use London Fog again for any British ales. I was hoping it could be dual use (British and NEIPA), but 002 is far more enjoyable.

I had 3oz of EKG at 15 for 12.5 gallons post boil, and it tastes too hoppy. This yeast may also accentuate hops more than my usual 002.

I'll update in a couple few weeks once it conditions some more.

Update:

It's decently drinkable now, but not nearly as enjoyable as others I have made. It still hasn't cleared. The malt flavor isn't anything special, either. Golden Promise with some other grains for flavor is far superior. Also, I went a bit higher on minerals than I have before, and it tastes a bit too minerally for me.

So lessons learned for me:
Don't use London Fog for British beer.
Chevalier isn't worth the $$$.
Dial back the minerals a bit.

 

[Miraculix]

Update:

It's decently drinkable now, but not nearly as enjoyable as others I have made. It still hasn't cleared. The malt flavor isn't anything special, either. Golden Promise with some other grains for flavor is far superior. Also, I went a bit higher on minerals than I have before, and it tastes a bit too minerally for me.

So lessons learned for me:
Don't use London Fog for British beer.
Chevalier isn't worth the $$$.
Dial back the minerals a bit.

The yeast is just not good. And drowning it in sulfate doesn't help either, especially if the Ibus are also too high. Wouldn't blame the malt for a faulty recipe. A bitter is about balance, there is just too much of everything in your recipe.

 

[marc1]

The yeast is just not good. And drowning it in sulfate doesn't help either, especially if the Ibus are also too high. Wouldn't blame the malt for a faulty recipe. A bitter is about balance, there is just too much of everything in your recipe.

100% agree that the yeast was not good for this beer, and was the single largest issue with it. Pushing the minerals up there was a bit too much, I'm not going to do that anymore with these styles.

The bitterness isn't a problem, though. I like bitters that I make with 40-45 IBUs (milds I keep under 20), and this doesn't taste overly bitter. It could probably use a little more bitterness for my tastes, which might be a yeast effect.

The flavor of the malt isn't bad, it's just nothing special to justify the price to me compared to Golden Promise.

I'll go back to 002 for the next one, or see if one of the local shops can get Pub ordered in.

 

[Miraculix]

100% agree that the yeast was not good for this beer, and was the single largest issue with it. Pushing the minerals up there was a bit too much, I'm not going to do that anymore with these styles.

The bitterness isn't a problem, though. I like bitters that I make with 40-45 IBUs (milds I keep under 20), and this doesn't taste overly bitter. It could probably use a little more bitterness for my tastes, which might be a yeast effect.

The flavor of the malt isn't bad, it's just nothing special to justify the price to me compared to Golden Promise.

I'll go back to 002 for the next one, or see if one of the local shops can get Pub ordered in.

You also rushed it, didn't you? This malt doesn't come into its beauty before at least one and a half months or better two in the bottle/keg. You can drink it before and it will taste ok to good before aging it a bit, but its real benefits start to appear after some aging. I've seen that myself multiple times. And regarding bitterness, again, it's about balance with these UK ales. Don't get me wrong, you can obviously brew what you want, but then it's no wonder that the malt doesn't work as well as it does within the specific frame of a classic UK bitter. Which means abv of about 4 to 4.3% and ibus around 30 +-5. I'm sure that there are some northern examples with higher ibus than that, but it's not a typical thing.

The most important thing is aging it appropriately. Not too long, but some time really is necessary. This brings out the desired flavour. Then, abv not above 4.3% plus ibus around 30.

 

[Miraculix]

100% agree that the yeast was not good for this beer, and was the single largest issue with it. Pushing the minerals up there was a bit too much, I'm not going to do that anymore with these styles.

The bitterness isn't a problem, though. I like bitters that I make with 40-45 IBUs (milds I keep under 20), and this doesn't taste overly bitter. It could probably use a little more bitterness for my tastes, which might be a yeast effect.

The flavor of the malt isn't bad, it's just nothing special to justify the price to me compared to Golden Promise.

I'll go back to 002 for the next one, or see if one of the local shops can get Pub ordered in.

Oh, and one thing I forgot. Chevallier has a higher protein content than modern base malt. The problem is that the protein content determines the ibu utilisation rate. The more proteins in solution, the lower the ibu utilisation rate. This means that you will effectively get less ibus from the same amount of hops with chevallier than with a modern base malt. What you are tasting when you say you are missing some ibus is exactly that effect.

 

[marc1]

You also rushed it, didn't you? This malt doesn't come into its beauty before at least one and a half months or better two in the bottle/keg. You can drink it before and it will taste ok to good before aging it a bit, but its real benefits start to appear after some aging. I've seen that myself multiple times. And regarding bitterness, again, it's about balance with these UK ales. Don't get me wrong, you can obviously brew what you want, but then it's no wonder that the malt doesn't work as well as it does within the specific frame of a classic UK bitter. Which means abv of about 4 to 4.3% and ibus around 30 +-5. I'm sure that there are some northern examples with higher ibus than that, but it's not a typical thing.

The most important thing is aging it appropriately. Not too long, but some time really is necessary. This brings out the desired flavour. Then, abv not above 4.3% plus ibus around 30.

It was kegged at the end of September, so it's had 2 and a half months. It's an enjoyable beer now, while it was not shortly after kegging.

Actual OG to FG was 1.051 to 1.017, which is 4.4% according to BrewTarget.

I can taste the malt in the beer, and Chevallier is OK but not worth the extra money to me, especially at the non-full sack prices of $3/pound. (For the record, I'm also not huge on Maris Otter, I much prefer Golden Promise).

Thanks for all the feedback, I have learned a lot from this brew.

 

[Erik the Anglophile]

I just got the crazy idea to do a sorta kinda solera thingy with the Imperial Brown Stout, since I have two small PET carboys, I could brew the stout in january sometime and just draw ~1.5dl of the Stock Ale and pour into the other carboy and rack the stout on that, it's likely gonna be full of brett by then.

Anybody got any objections to my idea to use a little of the stock ale to "inocculate" the imperial stout? The stout will likely be brewed some time around the shift between january/february.

 

[DBhomebrew]

Anybody got any objections to my idea to use a little of the stock ale to "inocculate" the imperial stout?

Have you read Cornell's recent post about Gale's Prize Old Ale?

The “solera” system used in brewing POA, where a little of each batch is held back to inoculate the following brew as it ferments, ensuring exactly the same micro-organisms get to work on the beer every time, and guaranteeing that the rich fruity flavours, underpinned with a touch of refreshing sourness, are reproduced with every brewing, is an ancient technique that modern craft brewers are only now re-learning as they attempt to make the sort of world-class beer that POA already is.

https://zythophile.co.uk/2022/11/22/rush-out-now-and-buy-as-much-gales-prize-old-ale-as-you-can/

 

[Erik the Anglophile]

Maybe...
But it sure seems like a convenient way to get brett in to the second brew.

 

[DBhomebrew]

Maybe...
But it sure seems like a convenient way to get brett in to the second brew.

That's exactly what I'm saying. It's easy, convenient, and with historical precedent!

 

[kmarkstevens]

Ridgeway Brewing Oxfordshire bottle condidtioned yeast - worth trying to reculture?

So, I was in the World Market getting stocking stuffers today, and they had several Ridgeway Brewing beers including bad elf and santa's butt. Bad Elf winter ale is only 4.5% octane and was on the bottom shelf in the back with the least amount of light. So, I grabbed a bottle, will probably have it on xmas and of course will try to recondition the yeast just 'cause.

A really old Ridgeway Bad King John Yeast - Home Brew Forum had this to say about the Bad King John yeast: That's brewed for them at Hepworth, so is probably the historic Henley of Thames/Brakspear yeast, good stuff, also available as Wyeast 1275 "Thames Valley Ale": https://www.wyeastlab.com/hb_yeaststrai ... cfm?ID=138

thoughts?

 

[Northern_Brewer]

A really old Ridgeway Bad King John Yeast - Home Brew Forum had this to say about the Bad King John yeast: That's brewed for them at Hepworth, so is probably the historic Henley of Thames/Brakspear yeast, good stuff, also available as Wyeast 1275 "Thames Valley Ale": https://www.wyeastlab.com/hb_yeaststrai ... cfm?ID=138

No "probably" about it, I have it on good authority that Ridgeway's current production yeast originally came from Brakspear, it was set up by a former Brakspear brewer who also eg took the contract for Coniston Bluebird bottles with him. However it has been repitched for 20+ years so is arguably now the "Ridgeway/Hepworth" yeast!

And 1275 is not "the Brakspear yeast" - it is a single strain that may have originated from Brakspear, but that doesn't make it "the Brakspear yeast", you need the full multistrain. According to an old Wyeast catalogy that Bierhaus found, "1882 Thames Valley II - Slightly fruitier and more malty on the palate than 1275. Well balanced with a clean, dry finish. The source of 1275 and 1882 uses them together to produce a highly complex flavor profile and spicy character." so combining 1275 and 1882 would get you closer - but you're better with dregs.

One thing to mention is that one reason for the drop system used by Brakspear and others is that their yeast needs plenty of oxygen, although I don't know how that might have changed at Hepworths.

 

[Miraculix]

No "probably" about it, I have it on good authority that Ridgeway's current production yeast originally came from Brakspear, it was set up by a former Brakspear brewer who also eg took the contract for Coniston Bluebird bottles with him. However it has been repitched for 20+ years so is arguably now the "Ridgeway/Hepworth" yeast!

And 1275 is not "the Brakspear yeast" - it is a single strain that may have originated from Brakspear, but that doesn't make it "the Brakspear yeast", you need the full multistrain. According to an old Wyeast catalogy that Bierhaus found, "1882 Thames Valley II - Slightly fruitier and more malty on the palate than 1275. Well balanced with a clean, dry finish. The source of 1275 and 1882 uses them together to produce a highly complex flavor profile and spicy character." so combining 1275 and 1882 would get you closer - but you're better with dregs.

One thing to mention is that one reason for the drop system used by Brakspear and others is that their yeast needs plenty of oxygen, although I don't know how that might have changed at Hepworths.

Brakspear bitter (now apparently called "gravity") was my most beloved low og bitter readily available at sainsburie's during my UK times. I miss it a lot.

 

[shoreman]

Cheers and Happy Holidays! Here’s a snap of my Xmas beer based off of Ringwood Old Thumper recipe in CAMRA’s Brew Recipe book by Graham Wheeler. I haven’t had much of a chance to brew much this past year, so nice to have a brew for the holidays. I bottle conditioned in 22oz.

Marris Otter, wheat, crystal 77, chocolate.

Challenger & EKG hops

Verdant yeast. 5%abv

Finished nice and dry as I like it - 1.010

 

[eshea3]

Ready to uncap this beauty on Boxing Day

 

[DuncB]

Ridgeway Brewing Oxfordshire bottle condidtioned yeast - worth trying to reculture?

So, I was in the World Market getting stocking stuffers today, and they had several Ridgeway Brewing beers including bad elf and santa's butt. Bad Elf winter ale is only 4.5% octane and was on the bottom shelf in the back with the least amount of light. So, I grabbed a bottle, will probably have it on xmas and of course will try to recondition the yeast just 'cause.

A really old Ridgeway Bad King John Yeast - Home Brew Forum had this to say about the Bad King John yeast: That's brewed for them at Hepworth, so is probably the historic Henley of Thames/Brakspear yeast, good stuff, also available as Wyeast 1275 "Thames Valley Ale": https://www.wyeastlab.com/hb_yeaststrai ... cfm?ID=138

thoughts?

I'm hopefully going on a Hepworths brewery tour after Christmas as it's about 2 miles from where I'm staying for christmas so I'll see what I can find out.

 

[DuncB]

I've got a bottle of Dark Star 2011 Dark Saison to try over the break.
Also the Yuletide ale recipe from Ken Shales book I brewed in 1995 when our son was born. Last tried it in 2016 on his 21st, it was beer but given more than 40% of it was sugar it's not that complex but is about 10% +.

I'm keener to try the Thomas Hardy clone even if it is a bit young at 6 months.

 

[Mutant]

Split 12 gallons (British Strong Ale) into three versions using WLP005, WLP013, and WLP023 (original recipe was WLP022 which isn't currently available). Mostly Maris Otter and Simpsons GP, with Target, EKG, and Challenger. IBU 55, SRM 8, OG 1.071. FG, respectively, 1.015, 1.013, and 1.013 - putting them all in the 8% range. Handed out some "green" uncleared bottles this week. The overall preference was WLP013, yet I do believe the original recipe with WLP022 was nicer. Hoping to crank up another 12-gallon batch next week using only WLP013, as we are expecting constant rain for 7+ days (totaling over 5"). At the ~8%, drinking and walking might even get you picked up by the police.

 

[Colindo]

@Mutant How would you describe the flavours that the three yeasts imparted? What was the biggest difference? I haven't used much White Labs yeast so far, so would like to get some more details. The closest I used so far is WY1028, which is said to be the same as WLP013.

 

[warx]

we are expecting constant rain for 7+ days (totaling over 5").

Same here (SF Bay Area). Luckily just casked three ales for xmas so enough to hunker down for a bit (David Heaths ESB, Fullers London Porter, and TT Landlord). Although, I can move my Anvil in the garage and leave a side door open and run a box fan pushing the steam out of the open door.
Re Yeast; I did buy my first White Labs - two packs of WLP002 last month but ended up using 1469 and 1968. Looking forward to trying it though. The 1469 came up a couple of points short on the Landlord. Not sure why. Still trying to find the best for copying some Adnams brews.

 

[Hanglow]

Not brewed any ale in ages due to various minor injuries and lack of time, so making do with some of the real stuff in a nice 17thC pub. Hawkshead bitter, well kept.

Happy crimbo everyone

 

[schmurf]

I've got a bottle of Dark Star 2011 Dark Saison to try over the break.
Also the Yuletide ale recipe from Ken Shales book I brewed in 1995 when our son was born. Last tried it in 2016 on his 21st, it was beer but given more than 40% of it was sugar it's not that complex but is about 10% +.

I'm keener to try the Thomas Hardy clone even if it is a bit young at 6 months.

I've got myself some bottles of Thomas Hardy Ale some weeks ago, got curious when you brewed a clone. Probably will wait some months to open them though.

 

[Colindo]

Still trying to find the best for copying some Adnams brews.

I found Wyeast 1335 to be an interesting yeast to work with. In an ale with 100% pale malt and only bittering hops it produced the flavours of crystal malt and spicy hoppiness. Would work well to boost those flavours in any beer, I'd guess. Can't say how accurate it is in reproducing Adnam's beers though, since I never had those in the UK and the bottles of Broadside you get in Germany are usually muted from bad storage. I just got a fresh bottle of Adnam's Southwold Bitter though, so might be able to say more in the next few days.

WY1335 also produced my only beer without any chill-haze from single infusion mash that I ever managed to make. Never got anything that clear without a more sophisticated mashing.

 

[kmarkstevens]

@warx In my blind taste tests, Imperial Pub always outperformed 002. In general, I find the Imperial versions to be "better" somehow.

That said, I have reconditioned yeast from a bottle of Fullers that Northern Brewer kindly brought to the pacific northwest. I'm behind in my brewing pipeline, but have a reconditioned Fullers vs Pub yeast off on my radar.

I *ahem* had a little issue with fermenter sanitation. Then I finally figured out I can put the Speidels in my dishwasher without soap, and these puppies can handle the heat and come out sanitized. Sometimes I prove I am an idiot.

 

[Mutant]

@Mutant How would you describe the flavours that the three yeasts imparted? What was the biggest difference? I haven't used much White Labs yeast so far, so would like to get some more details. The closest I used so far is WY1028, which is said to be the same as WLP013.

I will try my best to describe them as I've been drinking some today. When I taste test, I use 4 oz Pyrex measuring cups, and that is what I'm doing now.

WLP005 -given this batch came out at FG 1.015 (OG 1.071 for all), it is a bit sweeter than I'd prefer. It is a front-of-pallette sensation with more focus on the malt and the IBU 55 seems muted. I might want to use this for a slightly darker beer (these three are IBU 8) with more hops if I need to balance everything with the touch of sweetness that exists. Not sure if I could have left this batch ferment out longer to get it a bit drier and balanced. I just think the residual sweetness is taking away from enjoying this one. Not really any fruity tones.
WLP013 -this ended up at FG 1.012 or 1.013. This definitely carries the oakiness as described by White Labs. That is a big plus. This one seems to hold its head better. For this beer being IBU 55 and SRM 8, this seems to be the nicest balance of dryness/sweetness, malt, and hops.
WLP023 -this also ended up at FG 1.012 or 1.013, but it comes across as being a bit sweet. I think that is because the yeast is pushing very fruity esthers. This isn't bad, and may age out well. I think the way I'd want to balance this is with more IBUs to counter the sweetness that is probably just the fruity esthers.

Overall, I think White Labs nailed it on their descriptions - they are never sufficient, but the only way to know is to experiment with them.

Given that this recipe was originally using WLP022, all that I can remember of that batch from a couple of years ago was that it disappeared very fast. I submitted it to the 2020 Nationals (which were canceled). The SF Regional folks went ahead and did the "unofficial" judging during COVID. I was awarded a silver in the British Strong Ale category. One judge commented that he wanted a case. Everyone that had that WLP022 batch was impressed. Not sure what my score was, or the criticism. I just went to look at White Lab's description and they say 'slightly fruity and bready characters' which is likely why it balanced this beer so well. I'm wondering how mixing WLP022 and WLP013 would work out, as those two might be a good combo.

Hope this helps. I was hoping to crank out another 12 gallons this coming week, but I dread all the cleaning that comes with making beer. I am focused on a few competitions: Placer County California, California State Fair (if they have one), and Nationals. I only have two beers to submit. A 17% Eisbock made two years ago that has aged quite well, and one of the above (likely WLP013) if any of them clear in time.

 

[Mutant]

@warx In my blind taste tests, Imperial Pub always outperformed 002. In general, I find the Imperial versions to be "better" somehow.

That said, I have reconditioned yeast from a bottle of Fullers that Northern Brewer kindly brought to the pacific northwest. I'm behind in my brewing pipeline, but have a reconditioned Fullers vs Pub yeast off on my radar.

I *ahem* had a little issue with fermenter sanitation. Then I finally figured out I can put the Speidels in my dishwasher without soap, and these puppies can handle the heat and come out sanitized. Sometimes I prove I am an idiot.

Just wondering if you build up sufficient starter when using the WLP002 in comparison to the A09? If I underpitch (and sometimes overpitch), things don't turn out well.