British Golden Ale Miraculix Best - Classic English Ale

[schmurf]

@Miraculix what about 1318... I think it's an alround British yeast with plenty of malt character. It's probably the one I use most and it haven't failed me yet. I also quite like 1187, but it can be a bit difficult sometimes. It's very 'British', in lack of better word, when it comes to flavour.

 

[MaxStout]

@MaxStout - what do your salts look like? You need calcium for flocculation (and for British beers to taste right)

IIRC, the Ca was about 100ppm.

I'm pleased with the flavor and don't mind a little yeast in the glass, but my wife thinks it's gross. (More beer for me!) If I leave the bottles in the fridge longer I get less yeast in the pour. After a week or so cold crashed it does settle well on the bottoms of the bottles.

I might brew it again next spring and seek out the Pub yeast.

 

[ong]

All I can say is that WLP037 is waaaaaay beyond my ability as a brewer. Made 5-6 batches: Some were real saison tasting, some started as saison then faded in the bottle, others had no saison tastes. Seemed pretty random to me. The amount of effort I would need to try figure out the proper temperature, aeration, and any other magic brewing tricks is far beyond my patience.

If I recall correctly @ong also gave up on WLP037 after 1-2 tries. We both got the same vault release. I was so fired up to get it, but have since decided that at least some of the WLP vault strains are in the vault because they are *ahem* not easy *ahem*. I love the vault concept, but my experience is a lot more miss than hit for getting a yeast I want to keep around. WLP085 is one I really like.

Don't think you can go wrong with Pub. It's also one of the lowest attenuating yeasts out there. Which means it is great if you want smaller ABV beers (which is primarily what I brew).

I did give up on it. It was so phenolic as to be undrinkable, at least to my taste. Kudos for having the patience to try 5-6 times!

I’m really digging 026, on the other hand, another Vault strain.

 

[ong]

Ok, 037 is off the table! Thanks for your insight, I don't want to mess around with yeasts like this for now.

The problem with pub is, it is my all-time favourite, but Imperial has problems to deliver outside of the us at the moment. I am therefore looking for another yeast (does not have to be similar, only has to be very British with lots of character and good flocculation).

I think Pub is just WY1968 (the Fullers yeast?), if that’s easier to find.

 

[Miraculix]

Thanks for all the ideas so far guys! I just got a new job confirmed and will be moving back to Germany in two or three months, therefore I will not brew again till moving houses is done. I'm having a session saison in the fermenter right now and about 40 bottles of beer which need to be finished before the big move, no point in adding additional ones to carry to Germany. So I'll be experimenting again when I'm back in Germany.

 

[kmarkstevens]

@Miraculix Cool. Congrats on moving to Germany. I hear you can actually find a couple of good beers there. Regardless, gives you time to plan out a pipeline for when you are ready to start brewing again.

 

[Shenanigans]

Thanks for all the ideas so far guys! I just got a new job confirmed and will be moving back to Germany in two or three months, therefore I will not brew again till moving houses is done. I'm having a session saison in the fermenter right now and about 40 bottles of beer which need to be finished before the big move, no point in adding additional ones to carry to Germany. So I'll be experimenting again when I'm back in Germany.

Good stuff, what part of Germany?
I'm from Ireland but live here about 15 years now, not far from Dusseldorf.

 

[Miraculix]

Good stuff, what part of Germany?
I'm from Ireland but live here about 15 years now, not far from Dusseldorf.

Going to be Bremen, I'm from Northern Germany, so it's a bit like going back home.

 

[MaxStout]

I gave it a few more weeks and tried a few more. Flavor has really developed and the malty goodness is shining through. But the head is crazy. I only bottle-carbed for 2.2 vols., but it's obviously beyond that. It might not have been completely fermented when I bottled. No off-flavors, so not an infection. I did have a lb. of wheat in the mash, so that adds to the head, too. The bottles don't appear over-pressured and no gushers when I open them, but I have to pour slowly and there's lots of effervescence.

But the flavor and aroma are great, so I'm not disappointed. Very drinkable beer.

 

[Miraculix]

I gave it a few more weeks and tried a few more. Flavor has really developed and the malty goodness is shining through. But the head is crazy. I only bottle-carbed for 2.2 vols., but it's obviously beyond that. It might not have been completely fermented when I bottled. No off-flavors, so not an infection. I did have a lb. of wheat in the mash, so that adds to the head, too. The bottles don't appear over-pressured and no gushers when I open them, but I have to pour slowly and there's lots of effervescence.

But the flavor and aroma are great, so I'm not disappointed. Very drinkable beer.

View attachment 647430

Looks perfect to me!

I am a fan of a big and stable head, so I did everything I could within this recipe, to increase it, without altering the flavour in a bad way.

Looks like it worked out .

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Nah - even as someone used to Northern sparkled heads, that's too much.

 

[Miraculix]

Nah - even as someone used to Northern sparkled heads, that's too much.

Depends on the pouring technique I guess. When poured normally, I didn't get this much head.

 

[MaxStout]

My pouring method is good (I have to pour carefully to keep the wlp002 yeast clods from going in).

But I think it's the combination of overcarbed + wheat content.

In any event, don't care. It's a tasty beer and I'm pleased with it. It looks like a wheat beer but def tastes like an English ale. And at 3.8% abv, I had 3 of them last night and barely got a buzz. Good session beer.

 

[Miraculix]

My pouring method is good (I have to pour carefully to keep the wlp002 yeast clods from going in).

But I think it's the combination of overcarbed + wheat content.

In any event, don't care. It's a tasty beer and I'm pleased with it. It looks like a wheat beer but def tastes like an English ale. And at 3.8% abv, I had 3 of them last night and barely got a buzz. Good session beer.

Oh i missed that it's overcarbed, that certainly explains the massive head. The wheat makes it last longer.

As long as it tastes good, everything's fine

Although I'll bet it would taste a bit better with less carbonation.

 

[Shenanigans]

I've had a similar phenomenon all 3 times I've used 1968/WLP002. The last two times I was sure it was finished with a stable FG for over a week before bottling. Last time I even heated it up to 23oC for a few days at then end. But the beer, an English IPA still ended up overcarbed after about a month in the bottle.

I gave up on that yeast after that but that was 3 or 4 years ago so I might give it another go soon. I want to try it in a Zmobie Dust clone and a Little Sumpin' maybe i'll have more luck with kegging.

 

[Miraculix]

I've had a similar phenomenon all 3 times I've used 1968/WLP002. The last two times I was sure it was finished with a stable FG for over a week before bottling. Last time I even heated it up to 23oC for a few days at then end. But the beer, an English IPA still ended up overcarbed after about a month in the bottle.

I gave up on that yeast after that but that was 3 or 4 years ago so I might give it another go soon. I want to try it in a Zmobie Dust clone and a Little Sumpin' maybe i'll have more luck with kegging.

Didn't have this experience with Imperial pub yeast. I heard that rousing the yeast to the end of fermentation helps.

 

[zonkman]

Ah man, if there was ever to be a house beer, this would be it. I made one change, using a local floral wildflower honey instead of the golden syrup. Multi-layered! Nice crisp, solid-but-light bitterness upfront (refreshing!), for which the marmalady-ness vs floral clash works as a perfect second layer of fragrant bitterness (almost a distinct second wave of bitterness in the flavor... if that makes sense). And then of course, beautiful: the long, lingering Maris Otter.

Made a horrid warm fermented Kentucky Common lager on the same brew day. This one's so good I'll dump the KC and still call the day a success.

Great work Miraculix. Superb.

 

[Miraculix]

Ah man, if there was ever to be a house beer, this would be it. I made one change, using a local floral wildflower honey instead of the golden syrup. Multi-layered! Nice crisp, solid-but-light bitterness upfront (refreshing!), for which the marmalady-ness vs floral clash works as a perfect second layer of fragrant bitterness (almost a distinct second wave of bitterness in the flavor... if that makes sense). And then of course, beautiful: the long, lingering Maris Otter.

Made a horrid warm fermented Kentucky Common lager on the same brew day. This one's so good I'll dump the KC and still call the day a success.

Great work Miraculix. Superb.

I am flattered!

Thank you for the kind words. I am really glad you like it.

Brewing a nice beer for oneself is nice but others being able to brew something nice because of it is so much better!

I really like the honey idea, I might try this the next time myself.

 

[radwizard]

I’m gonna brew this one here pretty soon. I have all the ingredients, and have been wanting to brew some English Ales lately.

I had quite the adventure getting the Golden Syrup, but managed to track it down.

Here’s the question:

I ended up with two different types of Lyles golden syrup - one is a cane sugar syrup used for baking, and the other is a desert syrup. The regular one has cane sugar listed as the ingredient and the desert syrup has invert sugar as the ingredient.

Which is the one used in this recipe? The color looks the same to me on both products.

Cheers!

 

[Miraculix]

I’m gonna brew this one here pretty soon. I have all the ingredients, and have been wanting to brew some English Ales lately.

I had quite the adventure getting the Golden Syrup, but managed to track it down.

Here’s the question:

I ended up with two different types of Lyles golden syrup - one is a cane sugar syrup used for baking, and the other is a desert syrup. The regular one has cane sugar listed as the ingredient and the desert syrup has invert sugar as the ingredient.

Which is the one used in this recipe? The color looks the same to me on both products.

Cheers!

Good question. I will have a look later in the shop! Are both coming in plastic bottles? I know that there is also stuff in a can, but I used the plastic bottle version.

 

[HTH1975]

I’m gonna brew this one here pretty soon. I have all the ingredients, and have been wanting to brew some English Ales lately.

I had quite the adventure getting the Golden Syrup, but managed to track it down.

Here’s the question:

I ended up with two different types of Lyles golden syrup - one is a cane sugar syrup used for baking, and the other is a desert syrup. The regular one has cane sugar listed as the ingredient and the desert syrup has invert sugar as the ingredient.

Which is the one used in this recipe? The color looks the same to me on both products.

Cheers!

the one with invert sugar is what you want

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Whereas a Brit would know that the classic stuff comes in a can, and would be a bit suspicious of some of the derivatives that come in bottles. They could be the can stuff in a different format, they could be something different.

 

[Miraculix]

Whereas a Brit would know that the classic stuff comes in a can, and would be a bit suspicious of some of the derivatives that come in bottles. They could be the can stuff in a different format, they could be something different.

Those bloody Germans know nothing about Lyle's!

 

[Miraculix]

I used this one:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lyles-Gold...=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=B01B7GJPYC

Which is supposed to be made of partially inverted sugar sirup.

It has 3g less carbohydrates per 100g than the canned version, which doesn't say what it's made of.

Could be that they lowered the sugar concentration because it's easier to squeeze it out of the bottle, could also be different in other ways.

If you want to stay true to the recipe, use the baking one. If you want to stay true to British tradition, use the canned one.

Probably doesn't make a difference but one never knows!

 

[Hanglow]

I'm fairly sure the dessert version just has a bit of water in it to make it squeezable. So it's slightly less fermentable but other than that I wouldn't worry at all

 

[Northern_Brewer]

The nutrition information says 77.5% sugar versus 80.5% sugar for the canned version.

I'm sure it's fine.

 

[radwizard]

How does this look for the mash water?

99 CALCIUM
14 MAGNESIUM
31 SODIUM
111 SULFATE
79 CHLORIDE
59 BICARBONATE

I have recently been trying to spend more time learning about brew water and mineral additions. For this beer I have more additions then I normally do (I am building from my tap water) .

Cheers!

 

[Miraculix]

How does this look for the mash water?

99 CALCIUM
14 MAGNESIUM
31 SODIUM
111 SULFATE
79 CHLORIDE
59 BICARBONATE

I have recently been trying to spend more time learning about brew water and mineral additions. For this beer I have more additions then I normally do (I am building from my tap water) .

Cheers!

Looks good! If you want to, you could go a bit higher on sulfate and chloride, 150 sulfate and 100 chloride would be my aim, but yours certainly looks decent. If the Calcium gets a bit higher than anticipated because of the additional Gypsum and CaCl2, so be it. No problem.

 

[radwizard]

Looks good! If you want to, you could go a bit higher on sulfate and chloride, 150 sulfate and 100 chloride would be my aim, but yours certainly looks decent. If the Calcium gets a bit higher than anticipated because of the additional Gypsum and CaCl2, so be it. No problem.

Cool, Thanks!

I have adjusted to:

124 calcium
14 magnesium
31 sodium
148 sulfate
96 chloride
78 bicarbonate

Brewing tomorrow! Cheers!

 

[cyberbackpacker]

Personally @radwizard I would advise not take the mineral addition advice above for your water-- you stated you are starting from tap, and we have no idea what is the composition of that water. We have zero way of knowing anything about the minerals that are already present in your tap water, and because of this the mineral additions suggested could get you in the ballpark, or it could royally screw the beer up.

I suggest sharing your tap water's composition first before soliciting requests, or an alternative is to buy distilled tap water and then you have a known "base" from which to take suggestions and build your water profile.