How many of you have rapid fermentations?

[day_trippr]

Uh oh. Is this thread about to cross with this one?

 

[snarf7]

I really don't have a dog in this fight; I just like to stir the pot sometimes.
A lot of folks on this board pay lip service to the "brew what you like" philosophy, but are the first to get their Underoos in a wad when somebody suggests that they've found the true path to enlightenment.

Same here, people get so bent out of shape when you tell them this or that technique is pointless. Me? I'm excited when I realize I can knock 30 mins off my boil day by eliminating some extra step that adds nothing of value. Obviously there are lots of things you cannot cut corners on or it compromises the end product, but otherwise? Game on.

The issue comes in when you start telling others that Brulo has debunked good brewing practices. Just because him and his alcoholic buddies don’t have any taste buds left doesn’t mean good brewing practices are for naught.

So tell me then, why should we listen to you and ignore him? Have you done any controlled experiments to determine the effect of different techniques? No, you're just another mouthpiece on the internet. To me a lot of this 'conventional wisdom' just sounds like the folks who don't believe in climate change or think that vaccines cause autism because they're convinced they know better than the scientists. Why are you so resistant to recognizing that you don't know everything and learning something new? Ego? Honestly I think a lot of this stems from the fact that making good beer is dead freking simple...yeah it takes some practice and you gotta fail multiple times before you get it right but at the end of the day it's not that complicated and anyone can do it. I think that miffs a lot of the people who've been doing it for awhile so they seek to complicate it with minutiae so they can feel superior somehow. Whatever gets you off I guess, but I think it's sorta pathetic.

 

[schematix]

So tell me then, why should we listen to you and ignore him?

I don't care who you listen to. But if you tell me or anyone else that poor brewing practices are ok because of Brulo i'm going to loudly disagree. At best him and his team of alcoholic drinking buddies masquerading as qualified judging panels is entertainment, at worst it's holding people back from making better beer.

Like i said before, if you like short and shoddy that's cool. If you like the details, that's cool too. Brew how you like.

Honestly I think a lot of this stems from the fact that making good beer is dead freking simple.

Totally disagree. Making drinkable beer is pretty simple. Making good beer requires a good bit of effort. Great beer, the stuff that rivals or exceeds successful commercial beer, on the other hand is difficult to make. It requires a lot more knowledge, equipment, and process. It's fine if you don't aspire to this level, but it does exist.

 

[Blazinlow86]

I don't care who you listen to. But if you tell me or anyone else that poor brewing practices are ok because of Brulo i'm going to loudly disagree. At best him and his team of alcoholic drinking buddies masquerading as qualified judging panels is entertainment, at worst it's holding people back from making better beer.

Like i said before, if you like short and shoddy that's cool. If you like the details, that's cool too. Brew how you like.



Totally disagree. Making drinkable beer is pretty simple. Making good beer requires a good bit of effort. Great beer, the stuff that rivals or exceeds successful commercial beer, on the other hand is difficult to make. It requires a lot more knowledge, equipment, and process. It's fine if you don't aspire to this level, but it does exist.

Well said

 

[snarf7]

I don't care who you listen to. But if you tell me or anyone else that poor brewing practices are ok because of Brulo i'm going to loudly disagree. At best him and his team of alcoholic drinking buddies masquerading as qualified judging panels is entertainment, at worst it's holding people back from making better beer.

So do you know this man personally and that's why you insult him? I seriously doubt it. Sounds like you're passing judgment on someone you've never met because he's disproven some of your nonsense brewing myths and you're butthurt and/or jealous over it.

Like i said before, if you like short and shoddy that's cool. If you like the details, that's cool too. Brew how you like.

If you bothered to read some of the findings rather than just vitriol you'd know that his findings are varied, sometimes they support the common 'wisdom' on this or that prcoess, sometimes they don't. I don't think he's advocating for sloppy technique or rushing things that shouldn't be rushed at all, but the reality is that a lot of what YOU believe to be gospel is complete and utter BS (at worst) or a game of diminishing returns (at best)

Totally disagree. Making drinkable beer is pretty simple. Making good beer requires a good bit of effort. Great beer, the stuff that rivals or exceeds successful commercial beer, on the other hand is difficult to make. It requires a lot more knowledge, equipment, and process. It's fine if you don't aspire to this level, but it does exist.

Judging by your ****** attitude, I'm pretty sure you can't muster any of them

 

[isomerization]

I don't care who you listen to. But if you tell me or anyone else that poor brewing practices are ok because of Brulo i'm going to loudly disagree. At best him and his team of alcoholic drinking buddies masquerading as qualified judging panels is entertainment, at worst it's holding people back from making better beer.

Like i said before, if you like short and shoddy that's cool. If you like the details, that's cool too. Brew how you like.



Totally disagree. Making drinkable beer is pretty simple. Making good beer requires a good bit of effort. Great beer, the stuff that rivals or exceeds successful commercial beer, on the other hand is difficult to make. It requires a lot more knowledge, equipment, and process. It's fine if you don't aspire to this level, but it does exist.

I definitely lean to your “side” of this debate, but what’s the point of personal attacks on the brulosophy guys? Don’t they use local brew clubs for the A/B analysis?

 

[snarf7]

I definitely lean to your “side” of this debate, but what’s the point of personal attacks on the brulosophy guys? Don’t they use local brew clubs for the A/B analysis?

It's clearly jealousy. They have their own site, their own experiments, their own podcast where they often host moguls in the brewing community (e.g. the Yakima hop dudes, the founder of Russian River, BJCP judges etc). Petty people need to knock others down to feel better about themselves. Its pathetic but not uncommon unfortunately

 

[Blazinlow86]

It's clearly jealousy. They have their own site, their own experiments, their own podcast where they often host moguls in the brewing community (e.g. the Yakima hop dudes, the founder of Russian River, BJCP judges etc). Petty people need to knock others down to feel better about themselves. Its pathetic but not uncommon unfortunately

I haven't heard the podcast with Russian River so a few questions. Did they confirm during the Podcast that they agree that all the extra thing's professionals do as standard practices was useless and therefore they don't do them? Would you say you believe that Russian River was trying to get some tips from the brulosophy crew on how they can improve there beers? Do you believe they read the brulosophy results and making changes to there process based on brulosophys findings to make a better end product? Or do you think it's possible they were asked to speak on the podcast and accepted and that it had nothing to do with there exbeeriments? Cheers

 

[schematix]

It's clearly jealousy. They have their own site, their own experiments, their own podcast where they often host moguls in the brewing community (e.g. the Yakima hop dudes, the founder of Russian River, BJCP judges etc). Petty people need to knock others down to feel better about themselves. Its pathetic but not uncommon unfortunately

I have no interest in doing what they do. The last thing I want to do with my hobby is write about it for others or try to sell T-shirts with my name on it.

I also don’t drink very much commercial beer or follow any brewing personalities so interviewing the owners of someone who repackages hops or resells Chinese parts to home brewers is of no interest to me.

My knock is not really so much on them as much is it people around here who quote it as proof of something when it’s not.

 

[schematix]

Delete. Dupe.

 

[Blazinlow86]

My knock is not really so much on them as much is it people around here who quote it as proof of something when it’s not.

This is exactly my feelings. I don't think there doing anything wrong. It's the fact that people are taking these things as proof and anyone that's tried brewing both ways knows with certainty that's it's not correct. Unfortunately amateur brewers that don't have the means to try the better way never get that first hand experience and therefore will never know what there actually missing. Cheers

 

[NGD]

So..I lost count. How many of us have rapid fermentations again?

 

[Qhrumphf]

Regular troll brings up Brulosophy with regular result. Nothing to do with this thread.

Block him and move on (so hopefully I don't have to see it when you lot quote him, since apparently blocking doesn't prevent that).

 

[snarf7]

 

[grampamark]

So..I lost count. How many of us have rapid fermentations again?

I did.

 

[TechFanMD]

I’m not sure I agree that the only reason to age is to cover up poor brewing practices (especially when talking RIS or stuff like barkeywine, anything oaked, etc).

As for the Brulosophy argument - I have to wonder how many brewers ‘back in the day’ got together and were like ‘that Papazian is a moron. I brew good beer without all of that fancy equipment’. The guys at Brulosophy often just come right out and say that it didn’t make a concussion and you should try for yourself....why people get their parties in a twist because someone tries it and tells others what they think is beyond me. And why not be able to quote it? It isn’t accepted scientific fact but it is another data point - whether you agree with it or not.

Truth be told - their experiments may not be very scientific and people love to complain about it- but they are more scientific and controlled than the random points people on here make to complain about them.

Don’t like what they are doing? Ignore it....but don’t constantly tell others that those guys are stupid and that people who read it are stupid unless you are willing to truly look at what they are doing and objectively think about it and what value it might have, or even try the experiment yourself. Bit&&$ about it really just makes you look mean.

Even bad, or less than perfect data can give you useful datapoints if you are smart enough to see the value and interpret what it all means.

 

[applescrap]

Rapid fermentation sounds like a dirty movie.

As if some of you have done anything even remotely as important for our beloved hobby as these great men. In short, I have a lot of respect for the breadth of their work if nothing else.

 

[HB2 HughBHomeBrew]

I'm solidly a non-pro, but I've visited a number of breweries and here is my take on this. A brewery follows the general flow of FV --> maturation tank --> package. Homebrewing practices naturally copied this and established the concept of primary --> secondary --> package (bottle/keg).

Over time, mantra changed and the transfer to secondary was deemed an unnecessary risk. So now we have primary --> package. But we all know that beer needs to condition somewhere. So where's the maturation tank?

And the answer is that for many, it's the FV - the primary. Hence many people are keeping their beer in the FV well after the 3-7 day fermentation is done. If bottling, there's also the factor of ensuring yeast completion without taking a million hydrometer samples. So these folks err on the side of caution.

For those who exclusively keg like me, we can treat the keg as both maturation tank and package. (Recently I have been fermenting in the same keg as well, but that's another story.)

So the simple procedure would be to transfer to the keg (a.k.a. maturation tank) at or near the actual 3-7 day completion of primary fermentation, moving it to cold storage - ideally in place for serving - begin carbonating immediately, but do not drink for at least two weeks. After that period, the keg becomes a package. To me this is a nice adaptation of pro practices to homebrewing, if you have the proper equipment.

This exactly. Only I can never wait the two weeks to start sampling, drinking and sharing! Good thing 5 gallons of beer still usually lasts more than 2 weeks

 

[stz]

Ok! This got a little off topic. Some of it is just uh ... like your opinion dude.

When I started home brewing (and I started off home brewing, not commercial brewing) I followed the instructions that came with kits. My beer tasted like kit beer and it wasn't what I wanted. Everybody around me seemed to be really satisfied with it, but it simply wasn't what I was looking for. The packet said IPA and this isn't what I want in an IPA? I didn't really even understand the differences in style of IPA's back then. If I'd just followed the packet I'd have never progressed so first step was distrusting the packet!

I used this site and others like it for information, mainly because of the american focus. The information found here often conflicted with the instructions of packets and all grain, freestyle was at the time light years ahead of home brewing in the UK which still had suppliers and practitioners with a 1970's kit mindset. Brew it in a bucket covered in cheesecloth, leave it in the shed or under the stairs for a month or two, stir occasionally, smells like eggs? Great batch! Drink it up quick lad, it'll put hairs on your chest and for just 5p a bottle and so on. Information which was local to me seemed quite focused on following the packet and had goals oriented around economy. It is similar here, some prefer simple methods/equipment, some like it exceedingly complex. I had to learn to sort opinions and develop my own practice. What is important to me? I generally like as simple as possible while still retaining the cornerstones of successful outcomes. Cheap doesn't come into it, it is just the appropriate cost.

I'd just started drinking american pale ales which were starting to become a thing here and thus burdened with a desire to try new things picked up anything bottled which looked interesting which was belgian beer mainly. I was curious as to what these american beers were like fresh. I've a systems analysis background and always look to optimise and I always geek out on a hobby taking it as far as I can so I bought and read books. Kept brewing. Kept trying to nail variables. The UK vibe was about trying to make home brew as cheaply as possible I was trying to figure out how to get the best of what was ridiculous dry hopping rates. We all know beers with a lot of hops in are expensive, but at the time the beer culture wasn't even gearing up to support these hop rates. I laugh about it now, but I used to think 4g/L was pushing it. I think books were where it changed for me because you can quickly assess the validity of an opinion when you've a bit of an understanding of what is going on under the hood? They have studies, with references, which are peer reviewed and have examples in industry.

Anyway. At the time the information in the american home brew community was cutting edge and at certain levels it still is. I still dip into it because it is a vast repository of information and opinion, a lot of it backed up by experience. Even when that experience is completely wrong it is still instructive. A lot of great books featuring cutting edge work still come out aimed at the home brew community. What did I actually mean to say before I started waffling?

There is an assumption that commercial is about fast, cheap, cost cutting and so on. Of course it is, we'll cut any corner which isn't detrimental to the beer quality. Beer quality is a subjective thing. Maybe we can make it taste 5% worse, but 15% cheaper? Maybe some people genuinely believe it tastes better that way. It isn't always a bad thing, you just have to change fast (with negative connotations) to 'the appropriate length of time'. The point is you have to have somebody who is objectively saying what the beer should be. That is your product profile. You define the processes to achieve that and define procedures from that and define further systems of management to make sure everybody follows the operating procedure. At the end of it you get your product and hopefully it is excellent.

For me ... At all times the beer must be excellent. We do not make or put out crap. Working back from that the beer takes the time it takes. Maybe some products are brewed less frequently or shelved for a time because of the opportunity cost. Why brew something which sells great when you can brew three other things that sell great in the same timespan? Things which reduce the time required can expand the portfolio of what can be brewed which expands the creative vision of the brewery. Other guys in the brewery will not accept a 1% reduction in perceived quality even if it made the beer 10% cheaper. I kind of will. 10% is within the margins of what people will even perceive and it is all a balancing act, it can translate into a 30% greater spend on ingredients. You've got to be aware of the bigger picture too. Yeah maybe ideally I don't want to ferment this warm, but I need this tank empty by friday and this strain never throws intolerable esters and at this abv higher alcohols are not a concern in the slightest and the hops will cover up anything anyway and the faster it reaches provisional gravity the sooner I can dry hop it so it becomes a choice between contact time and fermentation speed which is more important? To make these decisions requires experience and knowledge, a layperson might just call me cheap for rushing the beer through with a 'dangerously high' fermentation temperature. In reality it is not a problem.

Like I'm dry hopping warm at the tail end of fermentation? I'm letting fermenters free rise once 4-6 points off FG. Helps keep the hop material in motion, ensures a timely VDK reduction covering additional fermentation due to hop creep. Any later it'll be cooling itself off and VDK reduction goes long. I get two days on the dry hop warm, VDK reduction, a stable gravity and thus hopefully won't develop diacetyl down the line. I also allow pressure to build at this point, spunding at 4-6psi depending on strain, chill for two days and pack. I contract brewed with a brewer who chilled a few points from provisional, dropped the yeast, dry hopped at 16C for 5-7 days. Chilled to 0C for two days. Transfer and pack. Their beer picks up diacetyl down the line. 16C for 5 days off the yeast isn't as good as 2 days at 23C on the yeast. Their process is 13-15 days and has preventable problems. Mine is 7 days and attempts to address problems to a satisfactory level. They will tell me I rush my beer because I'm (they never call me cheap) ... working to pressures. Their beers are a touch brighter on pack, but I can produce almost twice as much beer per tank in the same time frame and as such certain costs are spread twice as thin. We can put out comparable products except his must be £85, mine can be £73.75. A greater profit margin allows more rapid reinvestment in the brewery and greater quality over time.

I've lost my point. I need more or less coffee. I think it was question everything. Throw out your assumptions and inherited wisdom. If you are that way inclined go back to actual science. Don't just assume that is the best way to do something, define best for yourself and take what you've learnt to achieve your goals. If a certain step seems unwieldy, ponderous, pointless, hurts your back think outside the box, think about why you do it, what you are trying to achieve and see if there is another way to reach the same outcome.

Like I'd love to dry hop off the yeast. But the time to crash enough yeast and run it off or less time, but move the beer off of it requiring a second tank, the unhelpful temperature it is now at and the implications for diacetyl, over attenuation, oxygen pick up and so on just means it makes sense to use a few more hops. We aren't getting the most out of those hops, but we are brewing more frequently to compensate for the additional cost of using more.

 

[kh54s10]

Nice ramble. I guess all that says, is to do what works best for you. And to think about what that takes.

A lot of the commercial aspect of the rant doesn't apply well to homebrewing.

My head hurts now. Time for some more coffee......

 

[Queequeg]

most of my beers are in the fermenter for 7 days. Even big beers I condition in the keg. There is no point imo keeping a beer in the fermenter for 21 days. Heck, I do my lagers now in 10 days.

 

[snarf7]

most of my beers are in the fermenter for 7 days. Even big beers I condition in the keg. There is no point imo keeping a beer in the fermenter for 21 days. Heck, I do my lagers now in 10 days.

Buh buh but... the yeast needs time to 'clean up' and stuff

And then it needs to age for 3 months to develop its flavor!