Sweet Stout Left Hand Milk Stout Clone

[MisterClean]

I've made this several times and it's a fantastic beer. Today, I really messed up though!!! Smart me, didn't do my conversions correctly ie: grams to lbs, and I ended up adding 2 lbs of lactose to this batch. Obviously I assume this is going to be incredibly sweet, hopefully it's still drinkable. My OG was 1.070 and I'm hoping I can get this down below 1.025 still.

I highly doubt this, but has anyone brewed with this much lactose before? What were the results?? Fingers crossed for this batch!!!

make another batch without lactose and mix'em together!

 

[isomerization]

I've made this several times and it's a fantastic beer. Today, I really messed up though!!! Smart me, didn't do my conversions correctly ie: grams to lbs, and I ended up adding 2 lbs of lactose to this batch. Obviously I assume this is going to be incredibly sweet, hopefully it's still drinkable. My OG was 1.070 and I'm hoping I can get this down below 1.025 still.

I highly doubt this, but has anyone brewed with this much lactose before? What were the results?? Fingers crossed for this batch!!!

Will add about 17 points of gravity (if 5 gal batch) that the yeast can’t touch. So you’d need to finish at 1.008 “normally” if you want 1.025.

 

[Dawkfan]

make another batch without lactose and mix'em together!

This is probably the best solution, I might have time this week to brew again. There hasn’t been much activity in the airlock which I guess is to be expected with all that lactose. I’ll get a gravity reading in a couple of days and have a taste. Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Dawkfan]

This is probably the best solution, I might have time this week to brew again. There hasn’t been much activity in the airlock which I guess is to be expected with all that lactose. I’ll get a gravity reading in a couple of days and have a taste. Thanks for the feedback.

Quick update, I just kegged and sampled. It’s actually really good, and it’s very sweet. It finished up at 1.033. I didn’t have time to brew again last week without the lactose. I’ll carb this and try again. Might have a great dessert beer on my hands or might have to brew again without the lactose and blend. We shall see......

 

[toby.jhnsn]

Trying to put this recipe together in brewfather to give it a crack this coming weekend. How many people are overhitting the target OG by a considerable amount with the published quantities? Based on that grain bill, batch size and a mash efficiency (not BH) of 70% the estimated OG is coming out at 1.068. My mash efficiency is typically around 80% which would put me at an OG of 1.076!

 

[LLBeanJ]

Trying to put this recipe together in brewfather to give it a crack this coming weekend. How many people are overhitting the target OG by a considerable amount with the published quantities? Based on that grain bill, batch size and a mash efficiency (not BH) of 70% the estimated OG is coming out at 1.068. My mash efficiency is typically around 80% which would put me at an OG of 1.076!

Anytime you take someone else's recipe and brew it, you should be adjusting it for your own equipment. I assume most seasoned brewers do that, but I would imagine that lesser experienced ones might not. I BIAB, so I have no hot side losses and typically do 90 min boils so my BHE is usually around 85%. To brew this recipe on my system, I would leave all the other grains as-is but dial back the 2-row as needed to get my OG where I want it to be, which may or may not be per the recipe.

 

[toby.jhnsn]

Thanks for the advice. I was also scaling back the recipe to meet the target OG of 1.062 on my system. Was doing this by simply maintaining the percentages but started to get worried that the speciality malt quantities would affect the actual resulting flavour of the beer. Perhaps its best to keep these specialty malts at the original quantities for the batch size and simply adjust the base malt like you have suggested?

 

[LLBeanJ]

Thanks for the advice. I was also scaling back the recipe to meet the target OG of 1.062 on my system. Was doing this by simply maintaining the percentages but started to get worried that the speciality malt quantities would affect the actual resulting flavour of the beer. Perhaps its best to keep these specialty malts at the original quantities for the batch size and simply adjust the base malt like you have suggested?

I think that common logic would state that the way to deal with varying efficiencies would be to adjust then entire recipe proportionally, but my in my own experience I have found that I prefer the results from just tweaking the base grain amounts and leaving the specialty grains unchanged. In my experience, adjusting the entire recipe tends to result in a lack of desired flavor. Of course, YMMV, so you may want to do a bit of experimenting to see which you prefer. Different strokes and all that.

Also, welcome to HBT!

 

[isomerization]

I think that common logic would state that the way to deal with varying efficiencies would be to adjust then entire recipe proportionally, but my in my own experience I have found that I prefer the results from just tweaking the base grain amounts and leaving the specialty grains unchanged. In my experience, adjusting the entire recipe tends to result in a lack of desired flavor. Of course, YMMV, so you may want to do a bit of experimenting to see which you prefer. Different strokes and all that.

Also, welcome to HBT!

This is actually the recommended approach (scaling base malt to increase OG while retaining original speciality grains amounts. At least what I have seen/heard/read.

So +1 to the advice!

 

[Shenanigans]

This is actually the recommended approach (scaling base malt to increase OG while retaining original speciality grains amounts. At least what I have seen/heard/read.

So +1 to the advice!

I started a thread about this a few days ago but got no reply.
I can imagine if you are getting less efficiency that the malts that need to be mashed would take the biggest hit. Meaning that the proportion of sugars from the part of the mash that only needs to be soaked would be higher which may have a significant effect on the color and flavor of the end product, especially if you have a lot of crystal or roast malt.

If you play with Beer Smith and keep the OG and ratios constant but adjust the efficiency you will see that the color changes a lot. Same for keeping the amount of crystal/roast malt constant but varying the base malt to hit the required OG.

There must be some reliable calculation for keeping it all balanced and close to the recipe you are trying to copy.

 

[Dan L]

I made this recipe but only changed one thing and added another. I used half the lactose and added coffee to it. I love coffee stouts and this has got to be the best if not one of the best coffee stouts I’ve ever tasted.

 

[Dawkfan]

Quick update, I just kegged and sampled. It’s actually really good, and it’s very sweet. It finished up at 1.033. I didn’t have time to brew again last week without the lactose. I’ll carb this and try again. Might have a great dessert beer on my hands or might have to brew again without the lactose and blend. We shall see......

Another update, just pulled the first pint. It’s sweet but very good. I’m thinking of maybe adding some bourbon to this in the keg. How does 8oz sound to start off with?

 

[BongoYodeler]

Not sure on the amount but I'd be interested in doing that as well. I recently finished my last bottle of this, brewed back in the fall. It was good right out of the shoot, but tasted even better as it aged. The last bottle, 8 months old, was the best.

 

[LoneTreeFarms]

I used about 8 oz in a coconut stout that I made a while back. Couldn’t taste it but knew it was there.

 

[christophereatworld]

Had a couple of issues with the original recipe. All probably my own fault.

First off, my BIAB efficiency was terrible, which I attribute to poorly milled 2-row, which led to me having to top up with DME.

Secondly, it's only fermented down to about 1.030. First time using lactose, but it's still a solid 8 points above what I'd hoped to achieve.

It tastes pretty good still, but it's the first all-grain recipe I feel I failed with.

 

[GilSwillBasementBrews]

... the first time using lactose, but it's still a solid 8 points above what I'd hoped to achieve.

It tastes pretty good still, but it's the first all-grain recipe I feel I failed with.

Lactose being unfermentable will lead to a higher then expected FG

 

[BongoYodeler]

Had a couple of issues with the original recipe. All probably my own fault.

First off, my BIAB efficiency was terrible, which I attribute to poorly milled 2-row, which led to me having to top up with DME.

Secondly, it's only fermented down to about 1.030. First time using lactose, but it's still a solid 8 points above what I'd hoped to achieve.

It tastes pretty good still, but it's the first all-grain recipe I feel I failed with.

I just brewed 5 gallons of this this on Sunday, second time brewing it. First time was a 1.25 gallon test batch. This time I actually overshot my estimated OG a bit - est: 1.061, mine came in at 1.066. It's bubbling away in the fermenter right now. I'll be kegging this batch but the first time I bottled it. I will say it tasted quite good at first but only improved as it aged. The last bottle I opened tasted the best, it was in the bottle around 5 months by that time. Hopefully yours will taste even better as it ages as well.

 

[christophereatworld]

Lactose being unfermentable will lead to a higher then expected FG

Yeah, I figured that might be the case. Still hoped to get a little closer to the 1.022 the OP achieved. I've given the carboy a jostle and given the yeast a good talking to, so I'll see where we end up.

 

[IslandLizard]

Had a couple of issues with the original recipe. All probably my own fault.

First off, my BIAB efficiency was terrible, which I attribute to poorly milled 2-row, which led to me having to top up with DME.

Secondly, it's only fermented down to about 1.030. First time using lactose, but it's still a solid 8 points above what I'd hoped to achieve.

It tastes pretty good still, but it's the first all-grain recipe I feel I failed with.

What temp did you mash at?
Is your thermometer accurate at those temps?
Did you heat the kettle during the mash?
Used a hydrometer for your gravity reading?

What yeast did you use? Made a starter?

 

[christophereatworld]

What temp did you mash at?
Is your thermometer accurate at those temps?
Did you heat the kettle during the mash?
Used a hydrometer for your gravity reading?

What yeast did you use? Made a starter?

Mashed at 152
Thermometer hasn't let us down before
No kettle heating during the mash
Used a hydrometer for all gravity readings
Used rehydrated S-05

 

[IslandLizard]

Mashed at 152
Thermometer hasn't let us down before
No kettle heating during the mash
Used a hydrometer for all gravity readings
Used rehydrated S-05

Lack of aeration/oxygenation perhaps?
Fermentis now claims (their) dry yeasts don't need rehydration or aeration/oxygenation.

Maybe your poor mash efficiency has something to do with it. Such as beta amylase not getting a good grip on it.
Even if the crush is fairly coarse, given enough time with good periodic stirring should yield decent efficiency.

It may just be a fluke, only looking for a possible cause.

 

[crusader1612]

I Hit 1.024 with this recipe generally, However I do drop the amount of Lactose down slight (Metric 400g instead of 450g).
also try using something better than US-05. Sadly while this yeast has been a good pioneers of neutral strains, there are now better options available in both dry and liquid forms.

 

[christophereatworld]

Lack of aeration/oxygenation perhaps?
Fermentis now claims (their) dry yeasts don't need rehydration or aeration/oxygenation.

Maybe your poor mash efficiency has something to do with it. Such as beta amylase not getting a good grip on it.
Even if the crush is fairly coarse, given enough time with good periodic stirring should yield decent efficiency.

It may just be a fluke, only looking for a possible cause.

Really appreciate your insight. Thanks!

 

[LoneTreeFarms]

Mashed at 152
Thermometer hasn't let us down before
No kettle heating during the mash
Used a hydrometer for all gravity readings
Used rehydrated S-05

You could always try to roust the yeast by setting the bucket/carbon in the sink with some warm/hotter water. I’ve done that before after lagering in the garage.

 

[RTHP99]

Anyone have a water profile for this? The recipe is certainly good even just using spring water, but would be awesome with the right water

 

[BongoYodeler]

Anyone have a water profile for this? The recipe is certainly good even just using spring water, but would be awesome with the right water

When brewing this last weekend I used distilled water and the Beersmith 3 "Black Full" profile. Not sure how it'll turn out since it's my first time modifying water. The previous time I brewed this recipe I just used spring water.

 

[RTHP99]

When brewing this last weekend I used distilled water and the Beersmith 3 "Black Full" profile. Not sure how it'll turn out since it's my first time modifying water. The previous time I brewed this recipe I just used spring water.

Thanks, keep us updated!

 

[pmd5700]

This may be a silly question, but the recipe says the batch size is 5gal and the preboil size is 6.13gal. Is the 5gal the amount after boil, after fermentation, or after packaging? I’m guessing it’s after boil and the 1.13 gallons lost are due to boiling?

 

[BongoYodeler]

This may be a silly question, but the recipe says the batch size is 5gal and the preboil size is 6.13gal. Is the 5gal the amount after boil, after fermentation, or after packaging? I’m guessing it’s after boil and the 1.13 gallons lost are due to boiling?

Good guess, you are correct. 5 gallons into the fermenter.

 

[pmd5700]

Good guess, you are correct. 5 gallons into the fermenter.

Thanks! So the packaged amount would be like ~4.75 gallons assuming ~0.25 gallons trub loss?