First Wort Hopping

[wepeeler]

I'm sure most of you have heard of First Wort Hopping, but I have a few questions about the technique. I've gotten into brewing lighter beers lately, and FWH seems to be the way to go with Noble hops. The 2 most common explanations I've seen are: replace your 60min bittering charge with FWH, or replace your aroma hops with FWH. I'm wondering what you are all doing? Seems to me like replacing the bittering charge makes the most sense, as you'd still want aroma hops.

I'm thinking of starting this with my next Kolsch, as I know the flavor profile quite well. I think it'd be easier to identify any differences in a beer as I brew as my house beer!

 

[dmtaylor]

It's a gimmick. It does nothing different from adding a few extra minutes onto your boil hop addition. Play around with it but that's the truth from what I can tell.

 

[bailey mountain brewer]

The only "benefit" I noticed was not needing to worry about excess foaming or boil over as compared to when you add your 60 min in a hard boil. But I have plenty of room so yeah, didn't notice any difference beyond that.

 

[DBhomebrew]

not needing to worry about excess foaming or boil over

Absolute truth to this. It works. SOP...

I won't say the whole preserving flavor and aroma thing is true or not, but I do get flavor in my bitters and I don't use anything past 30m. I haven't done any A/B tests or whatnot.

I'd split your bittering charge. That's what I do. FW, 60, 30. Roughly split equally by IBU contribution. YMMV

 

[Skeeter686]

Absolute truth to this. It works. SOP...

View attachment 851784

I won't say the whole preserving flavor and aroma thing is true or not, but I do get flavor in my bitters and I don't use anything past 30m. I haven't done any A/B tests or whatnot.

I'd split your bittering charge. That's what I do. FW, 60, 30. Roughly split equally by IBU contribution. YMMV

Sorry if I'm getting a bit off topic, but I've found that if I hold off on adding hops until hot break has kinda finished, I don't seem to have issues with boilover (which is something I've fought in my earlier brews).

Is there any disadvantage to adding a couple minutes of boil time prior to adding your 60 minute hops? Avoiding boilover is really nice.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

IIRC, Scott Janish has summarized some research around FWH. Check his web site first, otherwise it may be in his book. IIRC (again), it's more about 'beer stability' (in hop forward styles) than novel flavors. I haven't done anything with it yet (small batches don't last long enough to threaten the stability of the shelf ).

There's also "Mash Hopping and Beer Stability with Scott Janish" - BeerSmith Podcast #305

 

[dmtaylor]

Sorry if I'm getting a bit off topic, but I've found that if I hold off on adding hops until hot break has kinda finished, I don't seem to have issues with boilover (which is something I've fought in my earlier brews).

Is there any disadvantage to adding a couple minutes of boil time prior to adding your 60 minute hops? Avoiding boilover is really nice.

I agree. I've been doing this for at least 20 years. My standard boil time is like 70 minutes instead of 60. I add hops when the hot break falls.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I have read various studies on First Wort Hopping, and I cannot recall any of them showing that it improves hop flavors. As I recall, Brulosophy sent beers to a lab for analysis and it showed the FWH batch had higher IBUs.

Stan Hieronymus was one of the original proponents of FWH, and he put this out years ago:
https://appellationbeer.com/blog/we-might-have-been-wrong-about-first-wort-hopping/

I do BIAB, so I don't really have a window for FWH, at least not a long window like when I was fly sparging. I add my bittering addition when I notice my wort temps creeping up toward 210F. Having the hop pellets in the wort to break up the surface tension significantly reduces the chances of a messy hot break (though most times I have plenty of headspace in my kettle).

I was never a fan of the mystery and unknowns about FWH. If I want a "smooth" bitterness I will just reach for hops that are known to have a smooth bitterness. If I want more hop flavors, I will just add some flavor hops later in the boil.

 

[JohnDBrewer]

FWH is a bit like decoction, homebrewer's love it or hate it. In both cases, there are major traditional breweries out there that do it. Why, we don't really understand it.

For the record I do both, FWH on most all of my light beers beers and decoction, at least large percentage of the time, on my Czech and German lagers. I think I may start playing with the timing of the FWH though after reading some of the below.

 

[scrap iron]

I agree. I've been doing this for at least 20 years. My standard boil time is like 70 minutes instead of 60. I add hops when the hot break falls.

I stopped doing FWH a few years ago to be able to remove more of the hot break. I now do 70-minute boils adding the bittering hops at 60-minutes, even when using Pilsner malt.

 

[cactusgarrett]

Is there any disadvantage to adding a couple minutes of boil time prior to adding your 60 minute hops? Avoiding boilover is really nice.

I've heard one approach is to not add hops until after 20min of boiling has occurred. I believe it has something to do with degredation of proteins that happens, which then allow for better hop compound utilization/accessibilty.

Edit: found the reference.

 

[cactusgarrett]

Aside from helping potential boilovers, I'm of the opinion (from my own experiences) that there is a difference in hop perception when employing FWHing. When I've re-brewed recipes and moved (for example) the 60min boil addition to a (what equates to) a 70-ish minute FWH, despite what would be an increase in isomerized alpha acids (via instrumentation/measurement), I perceive the FWH version to be a bit softer, and have less of a bitterness "bite." In some of the more bold styles, like IIPA, it almost shifts the beer towards being perceived as sweeter. I've tried it in styles from IPAs/DIPAs to continental pilsners. To me, the practice is legeit and the effect is noticable.

 

[day_trippr]

Seems not unreasonable that there may be a process similar to biotransformation, but on the front end instead of during fermentation. May only be effective with certain hop strains as well...

Cheers!

 

[wepeeler]

Very interesting feedback. Like I said in the OP, I'm going to try it for my next Kolsch, a tried and true recipe where I should hopefully be able to tell a difference. I know FWH is big in Germany, where they use very low AA hops and try to squeeze any extra efficiency out of them. I'm currently reading Modern Lager Beer by the owner of Jack's Abby, and they swear by FWH and it's affect on producing a distinct flavor profile with Noble hops.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Very interesting feedback. Like I said in the OP, I'm going to try it for my next Kolsch, a tried and true recipe where I should hopefully be able to tell a difference. I know FWH is big in Germany, where they use very low AA hops and try to squeeze any extra efficiency out of them. I'm currently reading Modern Lager Beer by the owner of Jack's Abby, and they swear by FWH and it's affect on producing a distinct flavor profile with Noble hops.

What is the time/temperature profile that you are planning to use (or is being suggested in articles / books that you read)?

I looked at the article that @CascadesBrewer referenced in #8 - one of the FWH approaches was

• "[...] 60 to 70 percent of [...] hops [as wort is added] into the brewing kettle.
• [...] lautering takes 120 to 150 minutes.
• [...] first hop addition 20 to 30 minutes after runoff begins,
• and another five minutes before the onset of boiling."

 

[wepeeler]

What is the time/temperature profile that you are planning to use (or is being suggested in articles / books that you read)?

I looked at the article that @CascadesBrewer referenced in #8 - one of the FWH approaches was

• "[...] 60 to 70 percent of [...] hops [as wort is added] into the brewing kettle.
• [...] lautering takes 120 to 150 minutes.
• [...] first hop addition 20 to 30 minutes after runoff begins,
• and another five minutes before the onset of boiling."

Well, since I brew in a bag, I would be adding hops after I pull the bag and start to heat to boil. My process takes about 55 min to go from 160F to boil, since I'm only on a 120V electric. Modern Lager Beer suggests adding hops to the kettle as you transfer from lauter ton, in my case, after pulling the mash bag. "Much of the spicy and herbal hop aroma of Pilsner-style beer is created during wort boiling and not from late hop additions. While it's true that volatile hops oils are boiled away, the boiling process continuously converts nonvolatile hop compounds into aroma-active compounds. Prolonged boiling of hops, which causes humulene and caryophyllene oxidation and hydrolysis products, creates the spicy herbal note in lager beer (Praet et al. 2105). This flavor, defined as early kettle hop aroma is the defining characteristic of many traditional Pilsner-style beers."

So I'd have the hops in for almost 2 hours. The 55 min time is takes to get to a boil and then the 60 min boil.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Thanks @wepeeler !

It's not my intent to question your source(s) of information. I want to understand the process.

---

As others (above) may have hinted ...

It's possible that knowing FWH time, hop type (whole vs pellet), hop variety, and beer style are to important understanding why some people get good results with FWH and others say "meh".

 

[wepeeler]

Thanks @wepeeler !

It's not my intent to question your source(s) of information. I want to understand the process.

---

As others (above) may have hinted ...

It's possible that knowing FWH time, hop type (whole vs pellet), hop variety, and beer style are to important understanding why some people get good results with FWH and others say "meh".

I didn't take offense whatsoever. Just reading this brand new lager book has me intrigued! I too want to understand the process!

 

[Bramling Cross]

I'm on board with the folks that say there isn't much to it. It's easy enough to do, so I'll get a wild hair every few years and do it just for the helluvit. I always get the same non-results.

Another data point that compares conventional 60min bittering hops to FWH can be found in Mike Karnowski's recent book, Homebrew: Beyond the Basics... In his book Karnowski sent conventionally bittered and FWH bittered samples for lab analysis and found that both beers were within a couple IBUs of each other. The samples were then subjected to triangle testing by panels of BJCP certified judges and they struggled to find the odd sample. I don't want to step on Karnowski's toes by going into too much detail, but he, like so many other's that have subjected FWH to rigorous testing, found that there wasn't any substance to FWH's claims.

That's not to say that I don't think FWHs don't have merit. As a guy that has been brewing for decades, I think FWHs are a great cautionary tale. A lot has changed in homebrewing, often for the better, over the years. But it's worth taking a step back and recognizing that homebrewing has always been and will likely continue to be very prone to fads, trends, and extraordinary claims. Enthusiastically embrace new ideas, test them properly, and evaluate them critically because there are no silver bullets and there are no shortcuts to be had in brewing.

Anyway, that's what I think, for what it's worth.

 

[Ozarks Mountain Brewery]

I know this isn't the topic but if you mash hop with the same hop as your finishing hop it gives a better over all flavor of that hop

 

[Bramling Cross]

I know this isn't the topic but if you mash hop with the same hop as your finishing hop it gives a better over all flavor of that hop

Please don't take this the wrong way. I'm certainly not taking a shot at you and if mash hops are working in your brewery, who am I to tell you that they aren't? The validity of my opinions end at the edge of my brewery and the following remarks are only my opinions.

Nevertheless, I expect that in ten years' time mash hopping will be consigned to the same shelf on which FWHs currently sits. Like FWHs, it's an archaic technique that fell out of fashion as our art improved. Galvanized by the buzz around FWHs, mash hops had a similar reemergence around the same time as FWHs. At the time I was a guy that principally ran a UK-inspired home brewery, so I eagerly embraced mash hops as a miraculous lost UK technique. Much like FWHs, I found it to be (like most home brewing trends) big on promise, sorely lacking in tangible results.

That said, I understand mash hops have found their third-life in NEIPA brewing. This is an area of brewing in which I know very little--aside from enjoying Janish's experiments. But I do know that it's an area of brewing in which some rather fantastic claims are being made. Once NEIPAs fall out of fashion, I expect that mash hops, too, will fall out of fashion. It's been my experience (and also my opinion) that they contribute nothing tangible, even in a full LODO environment.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

compares conventional 60min bittering hops to FWH can be found in Mike Karnowski's recent book, Homebrew: Beyond the Basics...

I skimmed a section of the book that you may be referring to.

The book brewed a Pale Ale.

OP is working with Lagers.

So maybe yeast strain is also a contributing factor.

Again ... It's possible that knowing FWH time, hop type (whole vs pellet), hop variety, and beer style are to important understanding why some people get good results with FWH and others say "meh".

extraordinary claims.

Like "extract is always [much] darker than expected" from the late 2010s?

Which seems to have disappeared after some people started measuring the color of LME just before the start of the boil.

Perhaps a fresh look by those who are interested in FWH (and mash hopping), along with a willingness to "document everything" and share that information will help the topic move forward in a positive manner.

 

[Dog House Brew]

Very interesting feedback. Like I said in the OP, I'm going to try it for my next Kolsch, a tried and true recipe where I should hopefully be able to tell a difference. I know FWH is big in Germany, where they use very low AA hops and try to squeeze any extra efficiency out of them. I'm currently reading Modern Lager Beer by the owner of Jack's Abby, and they swear by FWH and it's affect on producing a distinct flavor profile with Noble hops.

I’ve brewed my same Kolsch recipe probably 30 times. My Crystal hop addition used to be only FW. The last 5 batches have a 20min addition. I like the small 20min for the aroma. My lagers now get FW and a small 20min addition. FW to me has always just been a smooth bitterness. Maybe say more rounded. My Kolsch and the few lagers I brew are all single hop brews too. I think the hop varietal makes a difference too. Crystal for example, I lose that lemony character when I dose at say 60/20/5. I can dose it at FW/20 and I think it makes my best beer. Really improved my lighter brews. My story and I’m sticking to it.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

the boiling process continuously converts nonvolatile hop compounds into aroma-active compounds

Interesting statement and not one I recall reading in other sources. In my experience, hops added at 60 minutes do add flavors and hop aromas that are different from late boil additions which are different from low temp whirlpool or dry hop additions. I picked up that book as well and I am working through it. I am very impressed with some of the lagers I have had from Jack's Abbey.

 

[wepeeler]

I’ve brewed my same Kolsch recipe probably 30 times. My Crystal hop addition used to be only FW. The last 5 batches have a 20min addition. I like the small 20min for the aroma. My lagers now get FW and a small 20min addition. FW to me has always just been a smooth bitterness. Maybe say more rounded. My Kolsch and the few lagers I brew are all single hop brews too. I think the hop varietal makes a difference too. Crystal for example, I lose that lemony character when I dose at say 60/20/5. I can dose it at FW/20 and I think it makes my best beer. Really improved my lighter brews. My story and I’m sticking to it.

Very interesting. For my Kolsch I always do a 60 min and 10 min (same hop), figuring the late addition is giving me aroma. I might try the FWH approach first, adding the bitter charge but keeping the 10 min and adjust future batches. Maybe I'll try a 20!

Interesting statement and not one I recall reading in other sources. In my experience, hops added at 60 minutes do add flavors and hop aromas that are different from late boil additions which are different from low temp whirlpool or dry hop additions. I picked up that book as well and I am working through it. I am very impressed with some of the lagers I have had from Jack's Abbey.

Definitely an interesting book. I'm around page 115 or so. I started this thread because of what I read on page 74 about FWH. Jack's Abby is definitely doing lager right!

 

[Redhouse Brewing]

FWIW I’ve done FWH quite a bit on WCIPA and have observed a smoother bitterness vs a bit harsher when adding the bittering hops at 60 mins.

I do boil my wort for 15 minutes before adding the 60 min addition for a total of 75 minutes.

When I use FWH, I only boil the wort for a total of 60 mins not the extra 15. That’s how I’ve done it the past 6 years with great results so no reason to change it.

I have brewed 60 batches of WCIPAs and 12 of those batches were experimental (6 and 6) FW vs 60 min additions. In all of the comparisons I found that for some of the beers I liked the FW hopping and others I liked the harshness of the 60 min addition. For those that I used fruity type hops (citra, mosaic, amarillo, etc) I like the FW (smoother) bitterness. For the classic hops (centennial, cascade, CTZ, chinook, etc) I preferred the 60 min (harsher) bitterness.

 

[micraftbeer]

I use FWH only on my hoppy beers. I find the roundness/softer bittering thing with it. I've played around with it and came up with my general rule of doing about 25-50% of my bittering IBU as FWH, and the rest at 60 or 90 minutes, depending on my boil time. (I still do other additions for flavor and aroma at like 12 min, 3 min, and/or 0 min).

I found my hoppy IPA was too harsh of bitterness if I did all at 60 min, and lacking a certain bite if I did all FWH.

On my non hoppy beers, the IBU is low enough that I don't need to dial down the bite of bitterness any, so I just stick with the 60 min additions.