More fermentation temperature reproach

[applescrap]

Well, I have a pretty good palate. I think in many cases, the opposite is true. Cake is more forgiving. A bit more flour, sugar, salt, chocolate? Meh, it'll be about the same.

As an example in beer, say you use cascade hops instead of noble hops in a typical lager recipe. I can smell/taste cascade hops a mile away. Even with .5 ounces of cascade hops vs .5 ounce of hallertauer, I will pick up on that right away, and the flavor profile wouldn't even be a bit close.

That's not to say that your beer with cascade hops is bad, but it would not be anywhere near a dunkel. I would tell just from the aroma.

Remember that while some people genetically cannot taste diacetyl, many others can in ppb- that's parts per billion. Same is true with many other substances.

I love that you love your beer and it's awesome. But remember that some of us have many years (often, decades) of experience and not just from reading. Not only are we pretty successful brewers, we are trained BJCP judges, and have had a lot of beer "samples" sent to us. Few are as great as the brewers claim (due to the ugly baby syndrome I suspect, but could be due to a poorly refined palateon behalf of the brewer), so any claims that a lager fermented at room temperature that used cascade hops tasted just like a commercial Munich Dunkel is going to be suspect I'm afraid.

I really abhor blanket statements, and would never say that all of Narziss' writings are bunk because Marshall make a non-scientific ex-beeriment (even Marshall wouldn't make such a ridiculous claim), and I'd again caution that while your anecdotal experiences are valuable and worth sharing, I'd not come across with an "all or nothing" approach.

Thank you yooper for your thoughtful response. You always bring up insightful points. Good to know about the cakes. I think i have been taking my cake making way to serious. Brings up a key point to me, we are all very interested and serious about different things. Get me talking about golf or coffee and i am way more involved. I never had a pony in this race. Never did. From day one i have brewed kind of like you and the cake. From the day i was told biab wasnt "real" brewing i have remained sceptical. The guys at my lhbs still think biab is a lesser quality of brewing. I think i have asked you how many warm fermented lagers you have made or have tasted. Im still curious.

You kind of help make my point with the cascade hops. I would think that 60, 90, 45 minutes whatever would leave the hops without much origin or flavor, but indeed some cascade qualities do remain. The point being is cascade in, cascade flavor out. German hops in, german hops out. Sure this dunkel tastes like a dunkel with cascade hops. Better some would say, worse some would say, not in style others would say, and different i would say.

Nobody said narziss's writing was bunk. I think its a given that his/her? methodology works. That is not what is in question. What is in question (by me) is if his methods are the only way to brew a lager here and now at home. This doesnt mean he is bunk just that there could be another way. I try not to make blanket statements although im sure i do at times and it is good to know that you abhor them. Honestly, i think you abhor me and that is ok. You always remain respectful and make your points eloquently. I think if we met and spent some time together, you might find we could really enjoy each others thinking about brewing. Ill send you the lager if i can.

How many homebrewers like myself have been turned off to these great styles because we dont have temperature fridges and have been told it will never work? Isnt this kind of questioning right in line with the spirit of homebrewing. I will continue to brew these lagers and see where it leads and encourage others to do the same. In doing that i will try to avoid all or nothing thinking as you know i am always willing to consider reconsidering.

 

[applescrap]

A quick side note, on his second visit to brew network marshall said that they extrapolated the data by bjcp judge, home brewers, duff man etc....and found that not one group faired better than another. Which in light of our discussions on human differences in taste and what we can perceive makes sense. This is NOT to say bjcp judges, professional tasters, sommeliers etc..arent amazing people who have worked hard at their craft and are seasoned professionals. Obviously not anyone can or should do their jobs. This is just what they found in these tests.

 

[seabass07]

Thank you yooper for your thoughtful response. You always bring up insightful points. Good to know about the cakes. I think i have been taking my cake making way to serious. Brings up a key point to me, we are all very interested and serious about different things. Get me talking about golf or coffee and i am way more involved. I never had a pony in this race. Never did. From day one i have brewed kind of like you and the cake. From the day i was told biab wasnt "real" brewing i have remained sceptical. The guys at my lhbs still think biab is a lesser quality of brewing. I think i have asked you how many warm fermented lagers you have made or have tasted. Im still curious.

You kind of help make my point with the cascade hops. I would think that 60, 90, 45 minutes whatever would leave the hops without much origin or flavor, but indeed some cascade qualities do remain. The point being is cascade in, cascade flavor out. German hops in, german hops out. Sure this dunkel tastes like a dunkel with cascade hops. Better some would say, worse some would say, not in style others would say, and different i would say.

Nobody said narziss's writing was bunk. I think its a given that his/her? methodology works. That is not what is in question. What is in question (by me) is if his methods are the only way to brew a lager here and now at home. This doesnt mean he is bunk just that there could be another way. I try not to make blanket statements although im sure i do at times and it is good to know that you abhor them. Honestly, i think you abhor me and that is ok. You always remain respectful and make your points eloquently. I think if we met and spent some time together, you might find we could really enjoy each others thinking about brewing. Ill send you the lager if i can.

How many homebrewers like myself have been turned off to these great styles because we dont have temperature fridges and have been told it will never work? Isnt this kind of questioning right in line with the spirit of homebrewing. I will continue to brew these lagers and see where it leads and encourage others to do the same. In doing that i will try to avoid all or nothing thinking as you know i am always willing to consider reconsidering.

BIAB vs no temp control is not a fair comparison. BIAB is a proven technique. Anyone who disagrees likely hasn't done it. It works. It makes great beer. It has benefits and issues, but good beer can be made with the method. You should stop asking advice from your lhbs. I have 5 lhbs's that I go to depending on where I am when I need supplies and one thing that is true of all of them is that they are not brewing experts. Quite the opposite.

The issue here is that you are claiming that you can make a good lager with no temp control. It comes down to semantics. Can you make a good IPA with no hops? Can you make a stout with no roasted grains? No. They might suit your palate, but they do not fit the descriptor you use. So, stop calling it a lager and call it something else. Just call it what it is. Notalager.

 

[joshesmusica]

Sure this dunkel tastes like a dunkel with cascade hops... not in style others would say, and different i would say.

They might suit your palate, but they do not fit the descriptor you use. So, stop calling it a lager and call it something else. Just call it what it is. Notalager.

This has been my point, and others' point, for a couple of pages now. It's great that you love the beer you're producing, apple, but that doesn't mean it is what you are calling it. In the beer brewing world, just like everywhere else, names have certain meanings and are there for a reason.

A darker colored beer, hopped with cascade, and fermented at the very top range the yeast can handle (not it's optimum, clean, range by the way) is just not a munich dunkel.

From the bjcp 2015 guidelines (found here: http://www.bjcp.org/docs/2015_Guidelines_Beer.pdf):

"Flavor:
Dominated by the soft, rich, and complex flavor of darker Munich malts, usually with overtones reminiscent of toasted bread crusts, but without a burnt-harsh-grainy toastiness. The palate can be moderately malty, although it should not be overwhelming or cloyingly sweet. Mild caramel,
toast or nuttiness may be present. Very fresh examples often have a pleasant malty-chocolate character that isn’t roasty or sweet. Burnt or bitter flavors from roasted malts are inappropriate, as are pronounced caramel flavors from crystal malt. Hop bitterness is moderately low but perceptible, with the balance tipped firmly towards maltiness. Hop flavor is low
to none; if noted, should reflect floral, spicy, or herbal German-type varieties. Aftertaste remains malty, although the hop bitterness may become more apparent in the medium-dry finish. Clean fermentation profile and lager character."

So while it might be very close to that description, those last three sentences are still very important for the style. There's a big difference between the "floral, spicy, and herbal" flavors coming from german, or landrace type hops, and the "Medium intense floral, citrus and grapefruit tones" that you would get from cascade. And then on top of that, fermenting at the top of a lager strain's range, and again, that isn't its optimum range, will produce more esters than fermenting in its optimum range. That's just a fact. You may not be sensitive to those specific esters, or they may be decently masked by the dark malts, but that doesn't mean they aren't present and can't be tasted by others. As stated, I'm incredibly sensitive to esters and can even tell when an ale yeast has been fermented slightly too high.

*Anecdotal break here: One of the first IPAs my former brew partner and I made was a clone of one of our favorite local IPAs. It was for his birthday. Every single person that tried it said it was great. They said it was just as good as some of the commercial ones they'd tried. Then I told them that I could taste an off-flavor in it, to me it tasted a bit like bubble-gum flavoring, and then asked if they could taste that in the background. Not one single person out of probably 6-7 people could taste it, but I could. Send me a warm-fermented lager, and I'm sure to be able to point out whether it has esters in it or not.*

Your dark lager doesn't really fit into one specific category (just fine if it's what you like, though you would get knocked on any one category you entered it into if you were to try your hand at competitions). It's not quite a california common because, if it tastes like the dunkel, it likely doesn't have enough bitterness. Also, it's likely too dark. But it's not an American brown ale, because, well, you used a lager yeast. Plus likely not enough bitterness to fit the category here either. Mix those two categories together, and it's basically what you've brewed.

An American Dark Lager.

So just go ahead and call it that, no problem with calling it that at all. I made a light lager for this past summer. I used 34/70, fermented at lager temps, used pilsner malt and a triple decoction. Sounds like I'm basically headed toward a traditional czech pils or bohemian pilsner. But then I used warrior hops for bittering, and citra hops late in the boil, plus dry-hopped with citra. I didn't go around trying to call it a bo pils. I called it what it was - a citra lager.

I just recently brewed a "marzen." But I got two recipes all confused in my head when I was going to order the ingredients - one recipe I was just going to use only warrior because this wasn't going to be a to-style batch, and it was only going to be a bittering charge, the other recipe was the marzen which I was going to brew to style. I didn't realize the mistake until brew day, so I just went with warrior. Granted it's only a 30-minute bittering charge, and I'm not going to enter this into competitions or anything, but when I talk with others about it, I'll either call it a "marzen" or my oktober-lager. Because I'm not trying to confuse people and make them think this is a traditional oktoberfest/marzen. I will, however, be buying some commercial examples of the style and see how they stand up to this one, but I can guarantee they will taste different.

Moving on to your helles, it's the same idea. You can't just go around calling it a helles when it doesn't fit the style. Call it a light lager. Call it a cascade lager, whatever you want. But calling it something traditional that has a specific meaning just doesn't make any sense to do. It's misleading.

tl;dr - call a beer what it is. Call processes what they are. Just ask owly how it goes over trying to just make shit up just because one wants to feel revolutionary.

 

[applescrap]

^^you make some great points about bjcp style guidelines and labeling of beers. I have no problem with that. You said you made an ipa which category was it? Could you also please give us the ABV and IBU so we can make sure it was an iPA, according to the Style Guidelines. Obviously I'm being a little facetious but you get my point. Every time somebody mentions IPA do you ask them for all the details to make sure it fits in the guidelines. I see the word stout thrown around all the time. How many different categories of stout are there anyways. Discussion of labeling is really a worthwhile topic. I have no problem changing what I'm calling these beers though so there is no confusion and also would like to continue a discussion on labeling elsewhere. I really like your post as well and thought it was thoughtful.

 

[seabass07]

^^you make some great points about bjcp style guidelines and labeling of beers. I have no problem with that. You said you made an ipa which category was it? Could you also please give us the ABV and IBU so we can make sure it was an iPA, according to the Style Guidelines. Obviously I'm being a little facetious but you get my point. Every time somebody mentions IPA do you ask them for all the details to make sure it fits in the guidelines. I see the word stout thrown around all the time. How many different categories of stout are there anyways. Discussion of labeling is really a worthwhile topic. I have no problem changing what I'm calling these beers though so there is no confusion and also would like to continue a discussion on labeling elsewhere. I really like your post as well and thought it was thoughtful.

I make an IPA fairly regularly. I noticed a long time ago that everyone thinks adding a ton of hops makes a huge difference. I experimented a bit with my ipa recipe and noticed that if I only add a small 60 min hop addition it is indistinguishable from commercial versions of ipa. People spend so much money on hops when they can get away with just doing a small early boil addition. People just blindly follow what everyone else does. Brewlosipher did a blind test with 2 people and the results were undeniably conclusive. Identical beers.

 

[jddevinn]

Brewlosipher did a blind test with 2 people and the results were undeniably conclusive. Identical beers.

ipe: 2 people

 

[applescrap]

I didn't check on it last night and today it's looking close to done already. I can see rise and fall of yeast. No doubt vigorous due to warmer temperature. A pungent ferment that smells like american lager underneath. Last night was cooler, today room measured 75 at the end of the day. The yeast made quick work of the 11 pound grist. At 25 cents a beer its hard to complain.

View attachment 1473302274452.jpg

 

[joshesmusica]

^^you make some great points about bjcp style guidelines and labeling of beers. I have no problem with that. You said you made an ipa which category was it? Could you also please give us the ABV and IBU so we can make sure it was an iPA, according to the Style Guidelines. Obviously I'm being a little facetious but you get my point. Every time somebody mentions IPA do you ask them for all the details to make sure it fits in the guidelines. I see the word stout thrown around all the time. How many different categories of stout are there anyways. Discussion of labeling is really a worthwhile topic. I have no problem changing what I'm calling these beers though so there is no confusion and also would like to continue a discussion on labeling elsewhere. I really like your post as well and thought it was thoughtful.

My point wasn't that you can't call your beer whatever the hell you wanna call it. But when you're attempting to discuss a topic like this with fellow brewers, it's prudent to use a common vocabulary. I actually don't prefer most IPAs that are brewed to style. So when I brew an IPA and I talk about it, I call it an I*PA - Imperial Pale Ale, because I like to have beers up around 7.5% sometimes and have them loaded up with hops, but they're not as bitter or as dry as would be fitting for the style. Plus I'll throw in some specialty grains, so it's more like the balance of a pale ale, just stronger.

Yes there are tons of different types of IPAs now. So if you make a black IPA, call it that when speaking with fellow brewers. If you make an Irish Stout, don't call it a RIS when speaking with fellow brewers. That's my point. Don't throw pale malt, american hops, and ferment above 70F with a lager strain that likely really shouldn't be fermented that warm and call it a helles. It's just not a helles.

 

[applescrap]

Saw a video of michael dawson from brew tv with chip(think thats his name?) He warm fermented a lager and they tasted it and said it was good.

The waitress at station 26 in Denver today, said the fermenters outside were glycol cooled. She said even a 3 degree difference is noticeable. What do you think? Can you tell a 3 degree difference in Mash temp? Can you tell a 3 degree difference in ferment temp?

 

[geoffey]

Saw a video of michael dawson from brew tv with chip(think thats his name?) He warm fermented a lager and they tasted it and said it was good.

The waitress at station 26 in Denver today, said the fermenters outside were glycol cooled. She said even a 3 degree difference is noticeable. What do you think? Can you tell a 3 degree difference in Mash temp? Can you tell a 3 degree difference in ferment temp?

Ughhhh... Really? Haven't we already been over this?

You: no (clearly)

Others: some yes and some no.

That's the simple answer to your question. Some people notice a difference, others don't.

 

[seabass07]

A 3 deg change in mash, no. A 3 deg difference in fermentation temp, yes. Well, depends on the yeast!

 

[geoffey]

Saw a video of michael dawson from brew tv with chip(think thats his name?) He warm fermented a lager and they tasted it and said it was good.

The waitress at station 26 in Denver today, said the fermenters outside were glycol cooled. She said even a 3 degree difference is noticeable. What do you think? Can you tell a 3 degree difference in Mash temp? Can you tell a 3 degree difference in ferment temp?

Ughhhh... Really? Haven't we already been over this?

You: no (clearly)

Others: some yes and some no.

That's the simple answer to your question. Some people notice a difference, others don't. I'm not sure how much it helps to ask the question over and over in slightly different ways or to compare it to cake.

 

[applescrap]

The smell of sulphur is diminishing in the fermenter. A classic sign of lager fermentation. Some Palmer for consideration.

View attachment 1473472935545.jpg

View attachment 1473472943873.jpg

 

[applescrap]

More of the lager, starting to clear.

View attachment 1473478095446.jpg

View attachment 1473478110193.jpg

 

[joshesmusica]

The smell of sulphur is diminishing in the fermenter. A classic sign of lager fermentation. Some Palmer for consideration.

Notice that he said it continues to vent. Vent being the key word. If you make the primary fermentation produce entirely too much sulphur, you need to secondary in a vessel that will vent. Racking an unclean beer to a keg after 10 days won't get rid of those compounds that need to escape out through an airlock (unless the keg is retrofitted with an airlock of course).

Also, interesting that you cut off what Palmer was about to say about the time lagering takes.

More of the lager, starting to clear.

What you are noticing is your "dark american lager" actually during the lagering process. The particles that are dropping out of suspension are the compounds that cause off-flavors that shouldn't be present in the beer. But the other thing you are seeing is the shape of the glass. Put it up to a light or a lighted-up book in a regular pint glass, and see if the clarity compares to that thing portion of your glass. Or better yet, just put the thicker part up to the light and see if it's the same level of clarity as the thinner portion.

I had a really cloudy "pilsner" last night at a micro-brewery here. It's what they were calling it, but it's not a pilsner. It's a light lager - they used some kind of citrusy hop, or lemon peel or something in it. Those particulates floating around in the beer made it a not very crisp beer. Even their more traditional pilsner seemed to have a bit of chill-haze in it, and that was very crisp at all either. Possibly even producing a bit of body or a seemingly sweet characteristic to the back end instead of a nice dry finish. Both were ok, but they weren't great, and I'd never buy them again. If I had a full keg of either one, I'd be disappointed.

That's not to say they fermented either one warm, but it is to say that process matters for the finished product.

 

[applescrap]

Fairly clear in the pint glass too. Im sure half a teaspoon of gelatin wouldnt hurt.

View attachment 1473566863855.jpg

View attachment 1473566888264.jpg

 

[seabass07]

Put your laundry away dude.

 

[Norselord]

Wow.

I'm not a psychologist, so i can't speak to apples' state of mind. He seems to act like my former brother in law who had some issues with schizophrenia and bi-polar. However, this is just anecdotal - since I have no professional experience, or the knowledge of a whole field of study.

On the other hand, I am a chemical engineer with 11 years experience working with microbiology. I can tell you from professional experience and education that yeasts and anaerobic bacteria behave significantly different with even a 1 degree Celsius change.

If you truly want to quantify the differences, i would suggest you get access to a gas chromatography–mass spectrometer. This will tell you exactly what the various esters, ketones, phenolics, and other fusel and various aolcohols are.

Without quantitative data, you are only providing opinions. Opinions are like ********; everyone has one, and they all stink.

 

[casualbrewer]

That lager will be 5x better when you can see through it and through the window outside. To me, that beer is very murky and in no way could it be clean or crisp. But i am a stickler for clarity as imo it relates directly to how clean or crisp my lagers are.

 

[applescrap]

That lager will be 5x better when you can see through it and through the window outside. To me, that beer is very murky and in no way could it be clean or crisp. But i am a stickler for clarity as imo it relates directly to how clean or crisp my lagers are.

I really should try gelatin fining sometime. To me this is another place where personal bias plays a strong role though.

 

[applescrap]

Wow.

I'm not a psychologist, so i can't speak to apples' state of mind. He seems to act like my former brother in law who had some issues with schizophrenia and bi-polar. However, this is just anecdotal - since I have no professional experience, or the knowledge of a whole field of study.

On the other hand, I am a chemical engineer with 11 years experience working with microbiology. I can tell you from professional experience and education that yeasts and anaerobic bacteria behave significantly different with even a 1 degree Celsius change.

If you truly want to quantify the differences, i would suggest you get access to a gas chromatography–mass spectrometer. This will tell you exactly what the various esters, ketones, phenolics, and other fusel and various aolcohols are.

Without quantitative data, you are only providing opinions. Opinions are like ********; everyone has one, and they all stink.

Through your ridiculously insulting post you help make my point, thanks! If we need gas chromatography and spectrometry to tell the difference, then to the human mouth their isnt one. Although i am sure you can taste 1 degree difference in mash and ferment temperature, right? You sir once again are saying stuff that I ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE you would not say to my face, statements that are hurtful. And why? Because i believe a lager can be fermented warm. This beer was .30 cents a beer and the one fermenting .25 cents. That is 1.50 a six pack 3 a 12 pack. 6 dollars a case, its plenty good considering that as well.

 

[mongoose33]

This conversation has gone on really far! One thing about brulosophy is that it really isn't terribly scientific. Each step imparts bias into the system. Actual science is costly, extremely focused, time consuming and should be utterly without bias. I don't think that those guys would even say they are doing actual science. If they do say that then they are not right. If the testers even know who brewed the beer, the experment in a science setting would be almost completely invalid. Testers would need to go through impartial testing to see how they taste and on and on. We homebrewers are all wandering around in the dark.

By the way, my personal hunch is that the brulosophers are biased towards faster beer.

I am a scientist, so I'm going to gently disagree with this view.

On a scale of 1-10, I'd give the brulosophy guys an "8" for how effectively they control, edging toward a "9". When everything is in the same batch, only to be split at the end, they've held all variables constant. Once they dispense into different fermenters, there's no control for cleanliness (which we're hoping is a nonfactor, and probably is given the lack of infections). There may be a few other areas where experimental bias sneaks in, but by and large, these are pretty well done.

If there were an area they could improve, and I'll bet you'd agree with this, it's in replication. I've actually changed some of my method of brewing based on the exbeeriments, but I'm taking a bit of a leap of faith there--I haven't seen but one instance of the exbeeriment, I'm hoping there is no undetected expermental bias there. [And in fact we're starting to see more replication--part 2, part 3--so he's listening.]

That said, IMO the one place that the exbeeriments could be improved is in the evaluation of results. They look really scientific with the p-value and such, and they're doing the statistical test correctly (I checked ), but the actionable intelligence from "statistically significant" results isn't always useful.

Here's my favorite exbeeriment to illustrate this. It compared Maris Otter to standard 2-row.

A statistically-significant number of raters (p=.004) were able to distinguish between beers made from the two malts. But here's the kicker: of those able to distinguish between the two, 10 preferred the Maris Otter beer, 10 preferred the 2-row beer, and 4 had no preference.

And it's even more even than that--of the 47 original testers, 22 of them couldn't distinguish between the two beers.

So what actionable intelligence can we take from this exbeeriment, one with a high level of significance? It tells me nothing about which is "better," MO or 2-row. I actually brew almost exclusively with MO because, well, I like it better.

But that doesn't mean you will. If I were a brewery trying to decide which were better, there's nothing here to help me. It would come down to cost and availability.

Compare to something like the old-hop versus new-hop exbeeriment. Very clear results, almost all tasters could distinguish between the beers, and everybody who could chose the newer hops.

So we have to ask ourselves, what do the results suggest we should do?

If they don't suggest a clear path toward more desirable beer, it's essentially the same as saying the variable tested doesn't have an effect (with the usual provisos of specific ingredients, who the sample represents, etc.).

 

[Norselord]

Through your ridiculously insulting post you help make my point, thanks! If we need gas chromatography and spectrometry to tell the difference, then to the human mouth their isnt one. Although i am sure you can taste 1 degree difference in mash and ferment temperature, right? You sir once again are saying stuff that I ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE you would not say to my face, statements that are hurtful. And why? Because i believe a lager can be fermented warm. This beer was .30 cents a beer and the one fermenting .25 cents. That is 1.50 a six pack 3 a 12 pack. 6 dollars a case, its plenty good considering that as well.

Absolutely would say to your face. Can't think of a reason why I wouldn't.

You have no idea how science works. You speak only about anecdotal evidence and opinions. Do you have any idea in which quantifiable amounts certain flavors and odors are perceptible? Hydrogen sulfide and other reduced sulfure compounds are detectable in the single digits of parts per million.

You need that fancy equipment to QUANTIFY the difference. If you can post a data set using established and accepted standard and methods of measurement, it will help convince everyone of your case. If you can think of another way to put a numerical value to your points, aside from opinions, I would love to see it.

Ofcourse you can make a cheap beer with a bottom fermenting yeast. But its not a lager, because you are not lagering it. It might even taste good; in your opinion.

Do you accept that microbiology works different at different temperatures? That certain enzymes (alpha and beta amylases for example) operate at peak efficiencies in specific ranges of pH and temperature?

Is there any evidence that the HBT community could present to you that would convince you that you are wrong? If not, then this topic is based solely on faith, and it is like arguing about religion.

 

[seabass07]

Through your ridiculously insulting post you help make my point, thanks! If we need gas chromatography and spectrometry to tell the difference, then to the human mouth their isnt one. Although i am sure you can taste 1 degree difference in mash and ferment temperature, right? You sir once again are saying stuff that I ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE you would not say to my face, statements that are hurtful. And why? Because i believe a lager can be fermented warm. This beer was .30 cents a beer and the one fermenting .25 cents. That is 1.50 a six pack 3 a 12 pack. 6 dollars a case, its plenty good considering that as well.

A lager can't be fermented warm. Temperature is part of the definition of a lager. Maybe you like the steam version of the page ale you're actually making... You can use a lager yeast warm and enjoy the result, but it isn't a lager. You seen to be under the impression that you are knowledgeable in this area, but your lack of experience is very obvious as is your tendency for extreme stubbornness.

 

[specharka]

Absolutely would say to your face. Can't think of a reason why I wouldn't.



You have no idea how science works. You speak only about anecdotal evidence and opinions. Do you have any idea in which quantifiable amounts certain flavors and odors are perceptible? Hydrogen sulfide and other reduced sulfure compounds are detectable in the single digits of parts per million.



You need that fancy equipment to QUANTIFY the difference. If you can post a data set using established and accepted standard and methods of measurement, it will help convince everyone of your case. If you can think of another way to put a numerical value to your points, aside from opinions, I would love to see it.



Ofcourse you can make a cheap beer with a bottom fermenting yeast. But its not a lager, because you are not lagering it. It might even taste good; in your opinion.



Do you accept that microbiology works different at different temperatures? That certain enzymes (alpha and beta amylases for example) operate at peak efficiencies in specific ranges of pH and temperature?



Is there any evidence that the HBT community could present to you that would convince you that you are wrong? If not, then this topic is based solely on faith, and it is like arguing about religion.

You jumped off the rails a bit here. It doesn't have to be lagered to be a lager -- it just has to be fermented with Saccharomyces pastorianus. 95% of the beers marketed and sold as lagers are not stored cold for any significant period of time. BMC brewers ferment with bottom cropping yeast, cold crash to drop the yeast out of solution, fine and filter any remaining yeast sediment before packaging from a bright tank. Steam beers are also lagers, despite being fermented at ale temperatures.

 

[applescrap]

I am a scientist, so I'm going to gently disagree with this view.

On a scale of 1-10, I'd give the brulosophy guys an "8" for how effectively they control, edging toward a "9". When everything is in the same batch, only to be split at the end, they've held all variables constant. Once they dispense into different fermenters, there's no control for cleanliness (which we're hoping is a nonfactor, and probably is given the lack of infections). There may be a few other areas where experimental bias sneaks in, but by and large, these are pretty well done.

If there were an area they could improve, and I'll bet you'd agree with this, it's in replication. I've actually changed some of my method of brewing based on the exbeeriments, but I'm taking a bit of a leap of faith there--I haven't seen but one instance of the exbeeriment, I'm hoping there is no undetected expermental bias there. [And in fact we're starting to see more replication--part 2, part 3--so he's listening.]

That said, IMO the one place that the exbeeriments could be improved is in the evaluation of results. They look really scientific with the p-value and such, and they're doing the statistical test correctly (I checked ), but the actionable intelligence from "statistically significant" results isn't always useful.

Here's my favorite exbeeriment to illustrate this. It compared Maris Otter to standard 2-row.

A statistically-significant number of raters (p=.004) were able to distinguish between beers made from the two malts. But here's the kicker: of those able to distinguish between the two, 10 preferred the Maris Otter beer, 10 preferred the 2-row beer, and 4 had no preference.

And it's even more even than that--of the 47 original testers, 22 of them couldn't distinguish between the two beers.

So what actionable intelligence can we take from this exbeeriment, one with a high level of significance? It tells me nothing about which is "better," MO or 2-row. I actually brew almost exclusively with MO because, well, I like it better.

But that doesn't mean you will. If I were a brewery trying to decide which were better, there's nothing here to help me. It would come down to cost and availability.

Compare to something like the old-hop versus new-hop exbeeriment. Very clear results, almost all tasters could distinguish between the beers, and everybody who could chose the newer hops.

So we have to ask ourselves, what do the results suggest we should do?

If they don't suggest a clear path toward more desirable beer, it's essentially the same as saying the variable tested doesn't have an effect (with the usual provisos of specific ingredients, who the sample represents, etc.).

Appreciate this post and enjoyed reading it. I agree with pretty much all of your points. I too would enjoy a couple repeat tests. Agree, a difference only means difference, could be better could be worse. My line of thinking is based on continuing evidence that there rarely is a difference in fermentation temperature, that even when a difference does occur how dramatic is its impact on the final product. I continually offer coffee or spice as an example. A small dash would be so noticible and distinguishable. Yet, preference could be either way like with the marris otter. In fermentation temperature the rare difference if ever perceived leads me to believe that this specific variable is less important, within reason, than perceived. And even if it creates a difference, that doesnt mean its worse. It seems the discussion could therefor become two fold for almost all variables. Is there a difference and will difference be better or worse. Curiously enough I am now wondering if the latter has been overlooked. Lets say if warm fermented lagers are different. ...maybe they are better too.

 

[applescrap]

So I racked the helles recipe modified with 2 row and cascade. I think its been 7 days. Normally wouldnt rack this quick but the dunkel modified kicked so there you go. Racked it and gave it a horizontal tango at 30 psi. Will be drinking it in a couple hours. Smelled like the 10 to 15 other times i have made something like this. Normally as a base for some sort of fruit or flavor.

 

[casualbrewer]

Take a hydrometer reading?

 

[applescrap]

Here is the first pull. It is cloudy no doubt from a 7 day ferment and being force carbed. Beautiful, beautiful golden color. Because I undershot my water it is a little too strong. Camden tablets made a huge difference. It's nice to not have that bad magician chlorine waiting in the wings. It's definitely not a helles. The Cascade and 2 row give it a flavor all its own. There are NO perceptible problems from warm ferment.

View attachment 1473627833242.jpg

View attachment 1473627842586.jpg

 

[seabass07]

Fine that and it might be a great example of a California common.

 

[casualbrewer]

Dang... Looks like a wit!

 

[jodell]

Wow that's cloudy

 

[joshesmusica]

I can't imagine how your intestines must be doing with all that suspended yeast. I'm guessing your bowel movements are on the looser end of the spectrum. I mean there's always a chance it might be finished with fermenting warm and all, but 7 days. That's borderline a problem if you can't let it sit longer than that.

 

[jodell]

I've read this whole thread through and I am going to take a stab at this.

OP: I hope you take what I say as sincere and genuine, I am not trying to make stabs or be a jerk or anything. However I am talking more against your argument style over anything here.

First off. According to your first post, you have come off saying you know better or your way is better. Whether you meant that or not people have read it like that.

Secondly, you have pointed out and asked multiple people if they have or will make a warm lager, however you have said you have no intention too. Should you be asking people to do what you won't do either?

Third, I don't want to tell a man how to do there business, if you wanna warm ferment and brew something in ten day, it's your beer who cares. However, I will say that you have told people that you know a ton about beer, between podcast, readings, and whatnot.

Last point. You have asked people if they are so married to there systems that they won't try anything new. However you have said in here that you don't plan to try a new fermentation method because your cheap beer is fine (I'm not trying to insult the quality of your brew but you always say that it's .30 cents a beer).

So with that I have a few questions.

1. Why make this thread at all?? People have read brulospher's stuff. If you weren't trying to say your way is better then why make it? ( this isn't sarcasm this is a genuine question)

2. Why do you except a few experiments over multiple others, people have brought you to other results that prove controlled Temps is better, to.my knowledge the brulospher has 5?? That's not very much data.

3. You keep asking people to try a warm ferment? You should really try a cold ferment before you ask others with the claims you have made. If you were just saying you've had a few successfull batches it might be one thing, but whether you know it or not you have come off as saying your way is better.

Again I mean this in a genuine way. And I will admit I had written this much more elegantly, my phone froze, and deleted everything. So this was a much quicker version of what I had...

 

[mongoose33]

Appreciate this post and enjoyed reading it. I agree with pretty much all of your points. I too would enjoy a couple repeat tests. Agree, a difference only means difference, could be better could be worse. My line of thinking is based on continuing evidence that there rarely is a difference in fermentation temperature, that even when a difference does occur how dramatic is its impact on the final product. I continually offer coffee or spice as an example. A small dash would be so noticible and distinguishable. Yet, preference could be either way like with the marris otter. In fermentation temperature the rare difference if ever perceived leads me to believe that this specific variable is less important, within reason, than perceived. And even if it creates a difference, that doesnt mean its worse. It seems the discussion could therefor become two fold for almost all variables. Is there a difference and will difference be better or worse. Curiously enough I am now wondering if the latter has been overlooked. Lets say if warm fermented lagers are different. ...maybe they are better too.

One thing I have learned throughout this journey called homebrewing is that one person's taste is simply that. I have a friend that complained about a beer using apricot extract instead of real apricot in their beer. I take his word for it, as I cannot perceive the apricot myself. But he has a very sensitive palate to these things, and I do not. That, btw, doesn't make me a bad person.

But the fact I can't taste something doesn't mean it's not there. I'm always very careful to avoid presuming that what I experience is common or to be expected. If I can't perceive a difference between two beers fermented at different temps, I don't say there's no difference. I say that I can't perceive it. You might be able to, I don't know.

But that's the scientist in me. I'm trying to be as honest as possible about my measuring instrument, i.e., my palate.

There is evidence for that. If you have not yet, I'd recommend the four books Water, Malt, Yeast, and Hops. The last has an interesting section discussing perception of certain hop flavors, and that some people can't perceive them. Thus any "objectivity" that comes from a single person's taste is, well, questionable.

That doesn't mean I don't care. I brew beers I like to drink. I tend not to make very hoppy beers. A good friend loves hoppy beers. If we were each to describe our favorites, we'd be very different. Who's right? Obviously, neither.

 

[applescrap]

I've read this whole thread through and I am going to take a stab at this.

OP: I hope you take what I say as sincere and genuine, I am not trying to make stabs or be a jerk or anything. However I am talking more against your argument style over anything here.

First off. According to your first post, you have come off saying you know better or your way is better. Whether you meant that or not people have read it like that.

Secondly, you have pointed out and asked multiple people if they have or will make a warm lager, however you have said you have no intention too. Should you be asking people to do what you won't do either?

Third, I don't want to tell a man how to do there business, if you wanna warm ferment and brew something in ten day, it's your beer who cares. However, I will say that you have told people that you know a ton about beer, between podcast, readings, and whatnot.

Last point. You have asked people if they are so married to there systems that they won't try anything new. However you have said in here that you don't plan to try a new fermentation method because your cheap beer is fine (I'm not trying to insult the quality of your brew but you always say that it's .30 cents a beer).

So with that I have a few questions.

1. Why make this thread at all?? People have read brulospher's stuff. If you weren't trying to say your way is better then why make it? ( this isn't sarcasm this is a genuine question)

2. Why do you except a few experiments over multiple others, people have brought you to other results that prove controlled Temps is better, to.my knowledge the brulospher has 5?? That's not very much data.

3. You keep asking people to try a warm ferment? You should really try a cold ferment before you ask others with the claims you have made. If you were just saying you've had a few successfull batches it might be one thing, but whether you know it or not you have come off as saying your way is better.

Again I mean this in a genuine way. And I will admit I had written this much more elegantly, my phone froze, and deleted everything. So this was a much quicker version of what I had...

Sure ok...you ask I'll answer, thats an honest post. I appreciate your genuineness and am sorry if my responses come off as not nice, im tired and quite frankly tired of this ridiculous beat down over my thinking.

Your first point, I really don't think i have done that. See the opposition to this methodology is bent on good, bad, better, worse, right and wrong. My focus is on the beer and what could work and considering brew dogma that is out dated. Others quickly take that to mean this is better. All that being said, if results are quicker, equal quality, require less equipment and expense, one could plausibly assume one method is better than the other. I am not ready to do that.

Second point im drinking the second warm lager i have made. Sorry if there is confusion there.

Third point, please explain to me how my methods demonstrate little knowledge. In my opinion it would be the exact opposite . After reading and intimately understanding all kinds of various Brewing techniques and methods, I determined this one was the best for me. I am more than happy for you to explain to me what I dont know. Perhaps some of the things you think I don't know are related to your opinions on Brewing and that's kind of the point of this thread.

Question 1, to discuss in open forum the importance of fermentation temperature as it relates to home brewers. To discuss brewing dogmas value. To reconsider the way we brew. To discuss warm fermented lagers. To enhance our thinking about brewing. Because i can. To have fun. To discuss brewing in general. I could probably keep going.

2. Not one single stinking piece of evidence has yet to be offered. All that has been offered is insulting me and so and so is right. Not one quality piece of scientific anything has been offered. Because somebody said it's true is the extent of what has been offered. Please add your data, experiments, etc... if you have some.

3. I take as assumption that this general way of thinking works. The issue remains how important it is.

Ok, cheers

 

[applescrap]

I can't imagine how your intestines must be doing with all that suspended yeast. I'm guessing your bowel movements are on the looser end of the spectrum. I mean there's always a chance it might be finished with fermenting warm and all, but 7 days. That's borderline a problem if you can't let it sit longer than that.

Haha, do you really want to talk about that. It was done on day 3 I bet. Normally would give a little more time.

This is what a 7 day old beer unfined, slightly warm, and force carbonated looks like. I call it....fresh. What some people call aging, i call staling depending on the beer.

 

[passedpawn]

Note from me: please stay on topic and be civil.

 

[stadtbrau]

Here is a Helles I warm fermented recently. I fermented at 62 degrees for 3 days.
Full disclosure.... The temp in the fermentation chamber dipped a little low briefly at the beginning of fermentation, approx 50 degrees, for 10 days. (Likely not significant)
Afterwards I dropped this beer to 34 degrees for a few weeks as I didn't have an empty keg available at the time (poor planning on my part) but I doubt it did anything.
This picture is a little misleading, that glass is pretty frosty. If it was not for the frost you would be able to see that this beer needed fining agents due to my rushed fermentation schedule...(I was all out of those too)