Feeling defeated

[eric19312]

US-05 is a good dry substitute for WLP001. You can get deep in the weeds about how they are actually genetically different but both are basically the Chico strain that Sierra Nevada built their brewery on. Once you are brewing consistently good beer with US-05 consider doing side by side and decide for yourself which one you prefer. But don't bother trying to test something fairly subtle until you have a reliable process.

 

[marc1]

@Upstate12866 You're entire post had a ton of meaning to me. Thanks for taking the time to share your words. As I mentioned to Knightshade, I have a honey brown that I want to make, purely because I already have the steeping grains and the extract for it. As soon as I get that one wrapped up and in one of the fermenters, I plan to order the stuff to start doing BIAB. I don't have nearly enough room to be doing a full-blown AG setup, but from everything I've read, BIAB is just as good. I spent a few hours this morning researching SMaSH brews. A lot of people really seem to enjoy the Maris Otter & EKG brews, so that's going to be what I do next once I finish out the stuff I have on hand. I'm really excited about this. I hadn't considered doing those prior to your post, but now I'm looking forward to getting a good observation of the different flavors that everything can offer, without the complexity of it all being mixed up.

Just to be clear, BIAB is 100% all grain brewing. Using that, or 3 vessel, or some other combination is all up to user preference in the all grain world.

 

[fragged]

But but but... it says that at howtobrew.com (the 1999 edition) as well as the 3rd edition (2006).

It's not until 4th edition (2017) that "distilled, RO, or low mineral spring water" (emphasis mine) is recommended.

Which makes sense - as the professional wort makers are taking the water out and leaving minerals behind. So putting back just the water (or the water with a small amount of minerals) would seem to be the best approach.

This^... a bunch of this. I've grown up with city water my whole life, so it tastes good to me. I've also had plenty of well water, it usually doesn't taste good. Some I know is bad(sulfer) some is probably great water but doesn't have that chlorine twang I apparently am accustomed to.

However if someone made beer with any (safe) well water vs. (untreated) chlorinated tap, I'd guarantee the well water beer would probably taste better.

Point being, "water tastes good" is an extremely subjective test, and should be discarded entirely in brewing.

Which brings another thought - have lots of people sample your brews and ask for feedback. Most of my beer tastes good to me, always has. My palette isn't great, or I maybe I too often relax-and-have-a-homebrew. Others have pointed things out that I'm then able to pick up on after they've mentioned it. I'd bet I oxidized a few realizing that it was happening....

 

[Knightshade]

@Wrinkle_Fever looks like @eric19312 beat me to it, but yep. US-05 will get you there. Probably 80% of the beers I've done have been w/that stuff. I did a couple ciders with S-04 as well. I've yet to brew a "great" beer, but I think I've made some pretty darn good ones with dry yeast and will continue to use it.

Unfortunately, I can't give you any guidance in regards to LME having never used it myself. I jumped off the deep end and just went straight to AG and just have DME on hand for when I miss my gravity #s.

I'm still figuring out water chemistry myself....and I still think it is kinda confusing. I know more about it after having read about it so much, but..still confusing. I think consistency is going to be your key there. I just brewed with RO until I felt like I could tackle that challenge too. I briefly used this right out of the Anvil Foundry user manual, but shortly after I stumbled upon some other stuff and felt like I again..ready to take on the challenge.

I admire that you're striving to stick with it though, and would encourage you to keep pushing forward!

 

[Cammanron]

Hi all,
I wasn't positive where to post this, so I hope right here is alright.
I started brewing extract beer kits from Mr. Beer early last year. I believe I brewed a total of 9 of them. I picked out kits for different beer styles, stouts, ipas, ambers, porters, reds, and a weird one that used mountain dew as the base instead of water. Aside from the IPA and the MTN dew beer, they all taste nearly identical. And not really in a good way. They are drinkable, but nothing that I'd ever want to share with anyone and have pride on my chest. So I did a bunch of reading and learning, and felt like maybe it was because I was using the prehopped extract from Mr. Beer.

So I went to a local homebrew store, bought an oatmeal stout extract kit and went about making it. I worked extra hard and made sure everything was sanitized as thoroughly as I could. I converted my garage fridge into a ferm chamber and managed to hold the fermenation period at 68 degress, plus or minus 2. Spent 3 weeks fermenting, final gravity had stopped changing so I went ahead and bottled. I tried a bottle at 2 weeks, and it there was very little enjoyable about it. Had a very slight oatmeal flavor to it, which I was happy about, but aside from that, the beer wasn't very good. Here I am at 4 weeks conditioning time, tried another last night, and it still tastes the same. Just very under average. But my biggest issue I see here, is that this stout I just made, tastes almost the same as all the other MR Beer recipes I had made when I started. I can't hardly tell any difference between this stout and the amber or irish red that I had made.

I would love some feedback on what I'm doing wrong, because I'm really starting to feel defeated with this. I love the process of brewing so much, and I want to continue it. But I also want to share it, but if I can't make anything acceptable tasting, then I'm just at a loss.

I was the same... The wife got me a Mr Beer kit for my birthday one year and I didn’t use it for an entire year.... When I did brew the batch, it was some sort of lucky convergence of recipe, time, dry hopping water etc....., and it turned out really well. Since then, I couldn’t reproduce the same impression. Whether it was in my mind or the ingredients or not whatever. All the MB recipes tasted virtually the same.

NOW, I’ve got several MB keg fermenters and I use them to ferment my BIAB all grain 2- 2.5 gallon batches. I got myself an induction plate, a big SS pot, bottling wand, and a Hellfire burner. My results are worthy of the term “craft beer”. I’m really enjoying brewing recipes and consuming the results.
I think MB gets a bad rap of sorts. It was a gateway for me and I’m sure many other brewers.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I'm still figuring out water chemistry myself....and I still think it is kinda confusing. I know more about it after having read about it so much, but..still confusing.

"Water chemistry" is complicated.

Water treatment for brewing good beer is much easier: Water Chemistry – How to Build Your Water – Bertus Brewery.

The chart you posted is an interesting "in between" graphic.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Point being, "water tastes good" is an extremely subjective test, and should be discarded entirely in brewing.

AFAIK, current editions of current popular books (2016 and newer) have done this. And forums are catching up.

 

[hotbeer]

I'm of the opinion that pH matter more than the differences in mineral content for just making a decent tasting beer.

Every store bought bottled water I've tested is slightly less than neutral pH. Which will make me think most any will be better to brew with than municipal water which is very high pH.

Now if there is some particular beer taste the OP is looking for, then that may involve a specific mineral content.

 

[marc1]

I'm of the opinion that pH matter more than the differences in mineral content for just making a decent tasting beer.

Every store bought bottled water I've tested is slightly less than neutral pH. Which will make me think most any will be better to brew with than municipal water which is very high pH.

Now if there is some particular beer taste the OP is looking for, then that may involve a specific mineral content.

The pH of the water itself has very little to do with how it will work out - alkalinity will have some effect, but without buffering capacity, the water pH can change drastically with tiny additions of acid or base. It is when it is mixed with malt that the pH matters (also sparging, if the water has high alkalinity).

 

[hotbeer]

The pH of the water itself has very little to do with how it will work out - alkalinity will have some effect, but without buffering capacity, the water pH can change drastically with tiny additions of acid or base. It is when it is mixed with malt that the pH matters (also sparging, if the water has high alkalinity).

You have a point there. It's been so long since anything I ever did chemistry wise. I probably am using pH when I should think alkalinity. But in my defense I do know that my municipal water is also very alkaline as well as high pH. Even when filtered through the refrigerator water filter which essentially is just a lump of activated charcoal.

My bottled store bought water is also a much lower alkalinity as well as below neutral pH. So that might play a part in why I think the OP's issue is their municipal water, whether it tastes good or not. I'll drink my municipal water. It tastes good. But the bottled water makes a much better coffee, tea and I'll suppose beer, since I haven't used my municipal water for beer.

I've tested all these waters with test strips and also a hardness tester that a friend uses for his business to check waste water output.

It might be the simplest way for the OP to try and see. That way they don't have to overcomplicate with figuring out how much of what to put in their water.

Once they know that's part of the issue, they can go all out with being their own water processing plant if that adds fun to the beer making for them.

 

[BarryBrews]

My money's on oxygen. Doesn't take much to kill flavor.

Bottling at home is tough. Hands down the biggest improvement I experienced in flavor was using close keg transfers and other low oxygen techniques. I bottled my first 59 brews and have kegged the last 40 brews, and I can assure you kegging is far superior in every way.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

@BarryBrews: have you read the recent "how to successfully bottle NEIPA" topics here at HomeBrew talk?

 

[eric19312]

I'm of the opinion that pH matter more than the differences in mineral content for just making a decent tasting beer.

Every store bought bottled water I've tested is slightly less than neutral pH. Which will make me think most any will be better to brew with than municipal water which is very high pH.

Now if there is some particular beer taste the OP is looking for, then that may involve a specific mineral content.

I tend to think the opposite. Water pH is a non issue as mentioned by @marc1 . Mash pH is an issue related to efficiency in all grain brewing and has some impact on beer flavor (but not much so long as you are in a pretty wide safe zone). Mineralization can have a profound impact on final beer flavor and character.

 

[BarryBrews]

@BarryBrews: have you read the recent "how to successfully bottle NEIPA" topics here at HomeBrew talk?

Funny thing I almost exclusively brew NEIPA's! What point are you trying to make?

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

What point are you trying to make?

Bottling beers that last 45 to 60 days (maybe much longer, it takes time to confirm this) appears to be a solved problem.

 

[dirkomatic]

As so many have stated... Use RO water and good old US-05. When I started brewing, dry yeast wasn't a popular or viable option and making yeast starters and harvesting yeast was really common. Now, at $3 per brew, I buy a pack of yeast and spend time/money/effort on the fermentation side of things, which is really where most of my issues have always been.

Also, you mentioned a "honey brown." Honey beers are an odd thing and I haven't tasted many homebrews which are successful with honey. Keep it simple with a pale ale recipe with RO and dry yeast. If I were you, I wouldn't even steep grains yet. Get your simple pale ale down and then steep grains after that to see how that affects things. Then change up some hops and see how they affect things... Then try to turn your pale ale into a stout by using roasted barley in the steep... Take it slowly and truly understand what you change in your process each time.

Finally, when you have the time and funds, if you're still going... Invest in the cold side of things. Stainless fermenters and or kegs are cheap enough... The initial outlay can be pricey if you buy everything all at once (CO2 tank, regulator, tubing, fittings, keg, fermenter, freezer, faucet, shank, temp controller, etc.) but being patient and piecing it out is an option and goes a long way toward better beer.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Also, you mentioned a "honey brown." Honey beers are an odd thing and I haven't tasted many homebrews which are successful with honey.

FWIW, the Honey Brown Ale Kit instructions are back in #38 (the kit instructions steep honey malt).

 

[Cammanron]

FWIW, the Honey Brown Ale Kit instructions are back in #38 (the kit instructions steep honey malt).

I may be wrong bit "honey brown" isn't really using much honey, if at all. It's about the impression you get from drinking it. Probably about using honey malt to get the effect you're looking for....

But what do I know?... I'm still new.

 

[Beenym88]

I feel like I am there too. Maybe its just the excitement of pouring my own brew, but right now I enjoy my own beer way more than commercial beers including some really good microbrews that used to be my go-to. Is it freshness? Or is it just because its mine? Not sure... but right now a lot of beer I am getting in store is tasting bland to me.

I think it’s because you make what you like. I now like my IPAs better than anyone’s because I prefer very low hop bitterness a little malt sweetness and fruity hops but that’s not your typical IPA.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I may be wrong but "honey brown" isn't really using much honey, if at all. It's about the impression you get from drinking it. Probably about using honey malt to get the effect you're looking for....

You are correct, the goal of honey malt is to provide those 'honey-like' flavors without needing to use honey. And honey doesn't do a good job of providing 'honey' flavors. Specialty honey is more interesting as the specialty flavors (for example orange blossom) will often remain in the beer. Buckwheat ESB Honey Ale Recipe is a beer that I brew on occasion.

Often, suppliers and/or maltsters will provide flavor profiles for the malt (text description and/or sensory profile chart). For example (from this page click on the 'information' link at the bottom of the page). It's generally good to check the information sheets as the name may not accurately describe the flavor profile. For example, with 'chocolate' malt many people taste more 'coffee' flavors than 'chocolate' flavors (link to a chocolate malt description )

 

[VikeMan]

I now like my IPAs better than anyone’s because I prefer very low hop bitterness a little malt sweetness and fruity hops but that’s not your typical IPA.

Ummmm....
https://dev.bjcp.org/beer-styles/21b-specialty-ipa-new-england-ipa/

 

[ThatVideoKid]

Ummmm....
https://dev.bjcp.org/beer-styles/21b-specialty-ipa-new-england-ipa/

exactly what I was thinking. I feel like its a rarity that I see a bitter IPA these days besides the big ones.

 

[tbaldwin000]

I'm not going to go into depth, but here are my thoughts.

I would put money on the issue being the use of LME. LME is a low grade and very variable product, and most certainly has a specific flavour which would run through all of your batches, owing to how it is made and stored. I would stick to using a combination of dry malt extract and steeping speciality grains, I'd put money on that making a vast difference to your beer.

Other things I think worth mentioning:

If you are using filtered tap water then I don't imagine that is your issue. Don't get me wrong, water chemistry is a deep and important topic in brewing, but I wouldn't really pay it much attention until you move to brewing with grain. For what it's worth the pH of your water is completely irrelevant - the yeast will work the pH to their preferred point in no time at all, and the malt extract combined with your water will be providing adequate buffering.

I would stop using liquid yeast (for now). It's expensive, has less vitality than (properly kept) dry yeast, stores poorly, and has no real advantages unless there is a specific yeast you know you need to brew with. There are masses of good dry yeasts out there, I suggest you pick one of those and get familiar with it, I would probably pick US-05, S-04, Verdant, or Nottingham for general ale brewing, Verdant being the most characterful of those, US-05 the most ubiquitous in craft and a profile you are likely already familiar with without even knowing it.

 

[VikeMan]

For what it's worth the pH of your water is completely irrelevant - the yeast will work the pH to their preferred point in no time at all, and the malt extract combined with your water will be providing adequate buffering.

Do you have a source supporting the statement that "the yeast will work the pH to their preferred point in no time at all?" I've seen a fairly wide range in finished beer pH and have never read anything authoritative that says wort pH (or buffering capcity) is irrelevent.

Also, the fact that (as you mentioned) malt extract and water form a buffer system (which would tend work against yeast working the pH to their "preferred" point) would be an argument for paying attention to water, not against.

 

[tbaldwin000]

Do you have a source supporting the statement that "the yeast will work the pH to their preferred point in no time at all?" I've seen a fairly wide range in finished beer pH and have never read anything authoritative that says wort pH (or buffering capcity) is irrelevent.

Also, the fact that (as you mentioned) malt extract and water form a buffer system (which would tend work against yeast working the pH to their "preferred" point) would be an argument for paying attention to water, not against.

There are about a million sources, it's a well studied aspect of yeast behaviour. Every strain has a differing preferred pH range, but each will work consistently into that range unless you do something insane like constantly add agents to fermentation to adjust away from that range. No minerals from municipal water, or from the water used to make malt extract, are going to cause a significant difference to the yeast's abilities to make the environment their own.

The buffering capacity works with the yeast because it allows for a more stable environment once they've made it their own.

This is also why if you want to adjust the pH of your beer, for any reason (and there are plenty of reasons to do this) you should do it after fermentation is complete and the yeast are no longer present. There are of course cases where the yeast cannot work to their preferred level, for instance if your substrate is already very acidic (e.g. kettle souring), but if your water was like a kettle sour then you'd notice.

 

[VikeMan]

There are about a million sources, it's a well studied aspect of yeast behaviour.

I would agree that fermentation reduces pH, if that's what you really meant to say. What I question is the claim that "the yeast will work the pH to their preferred point in no time at all" and then stop changing the pH.

Please provide one authoritative source that supports this. Seems like a reasonable request, given your claim that there are about a million. Any peer reviewed paper will do. Thanks.

 

[dwightr8]

I think it’s because you make what you like. I now like my IPAs better than anyone’s because I prefer very low hop bitterness a little malt sweetness and fruity hops but that’s not your typical IPA.

My feelings exactly. Care to share a recipe?

 

[satph]

Your profile says you're in Virginia Beach. Is American Homebrew Supply your LHBS? Seven Cities Brewers Club has their next meeting at AHS in Norfolk on Thursday June 10th. Bring your beer.

 

[eric19312]

On issue being debated between @VikeMan and @tbaldwin000 .... this is probably getting too deep for concern raised by OP in this Beginners Brewing Forum.

I tend to agree with @VikeMan that there is a lot of interest in post boil pH and resulting finished beer pH with finished beer pH being seen as a critical quality parameter in QC/QA oriented breweries. I know some brewers here advocate adjusting post boil pH in effort to assure reaching target finished beer pH. I think others look at the finished beer pH as an indication of quality of the fermentation...it is data point confirming you ran a good fermentation -- viable yeast, correct pitch rate, oxygenation, nutrients, temperature all the rest of the details. Similar to FG in that it is data point beyond taste of the beer that you made it right.

But let's help this new brewer make some decent beer to get started then nerd out with us after he/she is hooked

 

[tbaldwin000]

Please provide one authoritative source that supports this. Seems like a reasonable request, given your claim that there are about a million. Any peer reviewed paper will do. Thanks.

I don't have a specific study on the exact topic in the way you are requesting, but proton pump action of yeast in particular is well studied both in brewing and in model environments. Linking you to an individual study won't benefit this thread, but if you are curious then Google will reveal a great deal of reading material.

As @eric19312 says it will derail this thread to continue this discussion, so I will leave you to your own thoughts and opinions.