More fermentation temperature reproach

[joshesmusica]

This dunkel has a beautiful ruby red tint to it. Fresh and effervescent. It shows signs of a somewhat sloppy and greedy late racking, and the 40 psi horizontal tango it got from me, but overall it is more clear than not. I never fine beers with gelatin. I don't remove the trub into the fermenter either.

Seriously though.

You do see the difference between what you are trying to accomplish and what the quick-lager method brewers are doing right?

One of the biggest components for them is clearing agents. Yet you are claiming to have used none of those (evident even in your shoddy photos). Because the biggest challenge for a lager brewer is getting a clear, clean, crisp beer.

 

[jddevinn]

Hope i don't come off to jerky here, really enjoy the discussion

You don't come off jerky, just ignorant, ill informed and unwilling to consider any opinions (or you know facts) that are not your own whether they come from a more knowledgeable brewer or a professional scientific resource.

I'm sure many brew the way that you do (and many people drink 40's of malt liquor :fro but I've never seen anyone try to convince others that brewing science just doesn't exist and 2-row + hops is always the same.

(you do know that the 2-row malt that you buy didn't come from a farm right?? Some of those "dogma" loving chemists and biologists have malted it using a very sophisticated and precise processes, if they didn't you wouldn't be making beer using your methods at all)

 

[applescrap]

For sure! What yeast will you use and what temperature range(s) will you use?

White Labs has a helles yeast - recommended temperature range 48-52.

Wyeast has two suggested strains for the style (neither one of them typical for the classical style, but who gives two shits, right?), a danish yeast - temp range 46-56; and a bohemain strain - temp range 45-68!!!

Can't wait to read the results of your exbeeriment!

Of course, you will brew two completely separate, yet identical batches, the only difference being the fermentation temperature correct?

And you will have a panel size that will how a distinguishable difference between the two batches, right?

That's the spirit. I think white labs has a Tap Room/store in my college town of Boulder. I should call them and be like, hey I need your help in a little discussion. The white labs helles yeast sounds perfect. You know good and well I'm not doing any of that, but maybe you can convince me to use a hydrometer. then I'll report back. I think I'm going to go 30 Minute Mash and 30 minute boil to get to 2 hours. I just don't think I have more time than that this week. Temperature will be temperature of my little workroom. Think it stays around 65 ish in there. I have a clock that measures temperature or I guess my quick read.

 

[applescrap]

Here it is tonight

View attachment 1472527246211.jpg

View attachment 1472527253708.jpg

View attachment 1472527261828.jpg

 

[applescrap]

You don't come off jerky, just ignorant, ill informed and unwilling to consider any opinions (or you know facts) that are not your own whether they come from a more knowledgeable brewer or a professional scientific resource.

I'm sure many brew the way that you do (and many people drink 40's of malt liquor :fro but I've never seen anyone try to convince others that brewing science just doesn't exist and 2-row + hops is always the same.

(you do know that the 2-row malt that you buy didn't come from a farm right?? Some of those "dogma" loving chemists and biologists have malted it using a very sophisticated and precise processes, if they didn't you wouldn't be making beer using your methods at all)

Ouch, im playing nice. Im not unwilling to consider this information, quite the opposite, i just disagree. Oh those malsters are good aren't they. Please enlighten me though on malting because the 10 times or so i have heard it from dr. Banforths lips didn't quite cut it. In fact you make me want to listen to it one more time just for the memories. For what its worth i have tasted every malt in every store in my area.

 

[schematix]

Ladies and gentleman please don't feed the troll.

 

[applescrap]

Ladies and gentleman please don't feed the troll.

So here we are. I've heard all the same stuff from my other threads. Now im a troll. Hey everyone this guy ferments warm lagers, hes a troll. Troll alert, he disagrees with brewing dogma. I heard he brews fast too, must be a troll on a brew forum. I started the thread to troll and you caught me. Ive heard it all, displayed here....why don't I just go buy the beer (of course), i dont know brewing pedagogy (of course), theres a huge difference (like vinegar and ice cream), well the commercial people do it why dont you (my 16 dollar beer has to be award winning you know), im dissmissing everything, im telling everybody they are wrong, the implication that the end product is less than a dogma brewed beer (its just McCormicks vodka), and as long as i like it then thats what matters. Wow a lot to say about a little difference if at all in taste.

 

[GilSwillBasementBrews]

. Wow a lot to say about a little difference if at all in taste.

Again that is your opinion. Many others have commented it's made a bigger difference in taste to them, which you dismiss. They're opinions are just as justifiable to them as yours is to you. So again beauty is in the eye of the beer holder. Nobody's right nobody's wrong so if you're happy believing we are just regurgitating brewing dogma for the sake of doing it and your beer is better than whatever we perceive. Great. Enjoy. We will continue to disagree and brew beer we perceive as good and think your methods are flawed. Hey we're all making beer and enjoying right??? Isn't that what really matters??

 

[k1ngl1ves]

Hey everyone this guy ferments warm lagers, hes a troll.

But you're not making a lager. You're making a steam beer. How hard is that to understand? It's two completely different types. They are both acknowledged categories in the world of beer.

Stop calling your beer a lager. Better yet, go make a lager. You mentioned in the first post you never made one before. This may be the only way you'll understand the difference, and it's a great way to gain some experience!


Of course, based on how this thread is going, I'm sure you'll reply that your beer is already great... so there's no need to go make a lager. Why waste your time, right?


I'm done wasting mine.

 

[applescrap]

I cooked steaks last night on the gas grill. In actuallity they cost more than the beer. We all know they would have been better on charcoal. So should i not call them a grilled steak. In a side by side with charcoal, one could taste a difference, but in the long run it was a grilled steak non the less. Should i cower in shame that they weren't the BEST steaks? Should i compare them to ruth chris steakhouse? Imagine if you looked at cooking and other facets of your life like this discussion. Do you really know how to make mashed potatoes, what about coffee? I make my own pasta, do you? Well if you dont then i get to look down my nose at you because you dont understand pasta and you are not eating the BEST pasta. Everybody here must grow their own vegetables and shop at Whole Foods. If you don't then you're not eating the absolute best food in a side-by-side taste test . Do you compare everything you make to commercial? Do you make cakes and wonder if they are as good as the best cake maker in your town. This passion about a beer that is going to be drank in a couple weeks and brewed again, i will never understand. I save this kind of thought for how I parent. I save this kind of time and money for vacations.

I think about spaghetti sauce. Do you make it? Do you use the traditional Italian method recognized by The Academy of cuisine? Do you make the traditional French red mother sauce? In the long run just like the beer it's still spaghetti sauce, it's still lager and it's still a steak.

 

[jddevinn]

I'm not on a pasta making technical forum telling everyone the pasta I made pasta from dehydrated eggs and there is no reason to let the pasta rest. And while the pasta is not the best they are only 1/10 of a cent per noodle and you can't tell the difference between them, store bought, or correctly made. All the chefs of the world are wrong with their cooking "dogma".

Also I wanted Manicotti but made Fettuccine since I didn't have a machine fit for Manicotti ...... but I'm going to call it Manicotti since that's what I want and the only difference is dogma.

 

[danok1]

But you're not making a lager. You're making a steam beer. How hard is that to understand? It's two completely different types. They are both acknowledged categories in the world of beer.

This. 1,000 times this!

Apple, let me start off by saying I'm glad you enjoy your beer and this hobby. What you do makes beer you're happy with, and that is the main goal.

However...

"Orthodox" home brew techniques have a valid purpose. The weight of experience tells us that if one follows this method, one is highly likely to brew a quality batch of (fill in your preferred style). It helps us to consistently brew the same beer batch after batch.

Now, I agree that we should question the HB orthodoxy. That's what Marshall and company are doing. But I don't agree that their work so far argues for throwing out the accumulated experience of the HB community. The "exbeeriments" are interesting, don't get me wrong. But what I take from them is to not get too worried if temperature occasionally get away from me, or if I don't aerate "enough". I don't take it as saying I should go ahead and ignore accepted best practices.

What would convince me is this: if a significant number of brewers started to make split lager batches, fermented one the "orthodox" way and the other with no temperature control (or even warm), entered the beers in a significant number of contests, and received similar average scores and comments. THAT would make a number of us sit up and take notice.

Why? Because the judges are testing entries against a Platonic ideal of the style, not just trying to figure out which sample is different in a triangle test with no other knowledge about the samples. And that's what many of us are shooting for: consistently making the best beer of a particular style as we can. And that brings us back to my point about home brew orthodoxy.

Best,
Dan

 

[joshesmusica]

I cooked steaks last night on the gas grill. In actuallity they cost more than the beer. We all know they would have been better on charcoal. So should i not call them a grilled steak. In a side by side with charcoal, one could taste a difference, but in the long run it was a grilled steak non the less. Should i cower in shame that they weren't the BEST steaks? Should i compare them to ruth chris steakhouse? Imagine if you looked at cooking and other facets of your life like this discussion. Do you really know how to make mashed potatoes, what about coffee? I make my own pasta, do you? Well if you dont then i get to look down my nose at you because you dont understand pasta and you are not eating the BEST pasta. Everybody here must grow their own vegetables and shop at Whole Foods. If you don't then you're not eating the absolute best food in a side-by-side taste test . Do you compare everything you make to commercial? Do you make cakes and wonder if they are as good as the best cake maker in your town. This passion about a beer that is going to be drank in a couple weeks and brewed again, i will never understand. I save this kind of thought for how I parent. I save this kind of time and money for vacations.

And that's completely fine man, if you're just looking to make some quick booze in order to get drunk often enough. If you're not looking to make the best beer in the world, that's completely fine.

BUT, that's not how you started out the thread, and it's not how you've discussed your methods throughout the thread. You keep repeating the fact that your methods produce an equal quality beer to anything out there. Now you've gone back and changed your stance.

Many of us, especially the ones in this discussion, want to try to make the best beer that we can. We want to try to take that steak and be able to compare it to some highly acclaimed chef's steak. And that's why we focus on doing things the right way. Just how the chef does things in a certain way in order to make that highly acclaimed steak.

At the start you're saying you couldn't tell a difference in a side by side taste test between your steam beer and an actual lager. Now you're saying you can taste a difference in the different methods to make a steak and comparing that to your beer. Now you're even admitting that your beer isn't the best beer out there, but it's good enough to get your drunk, so that's all that matters.

Then when people start calling you out that it will make a difference when you ferment a lager at ambient air temps being 65 (which likely means actual fermeter temps are over 70), you get defensive and say they're just stuck in their dogma, and you've got a newer, better way.

But now you're taking it back, that it's not the best way, but you don't care, cause you're going to down the keg in two week's time anyways.

Others have said it throughout the thread, it's fine if you like your beers and want to make it however you want. It's your beer! Just like it's also fine if we want to take every effort to make the best beer we can, because, it's our beer!

But what's not fine is to just start claiming that your way is better and everybody should follow your lead and stop fermenting lagers cool, and stop even lagering them altogether because it's all just a waste of time and money without any kind of empirical data whatsoever.

Lastly, although, it's probably just as in vain as anything else anybody's tried to discuss with you, if you would just take the extra 2 minutes to make your posts more coherent, people would probably like to interact with you a bit more on here. As it is right now, people see your avatar next to an incredibly long, chunky paragraph where not much care is given about grammar and spelling, and they turn away after the first run-on sentence. Just like how ferment temperature means a lot to a high quality beer, grammar and spelling and being coherent mean a lot to help communicate your point.

 

[jayrome2722]

OP, This feels like Morpheus offering the red and blue pill to Neo, but instead of offering, he is insisting on the red pill. Perception is reality, and there are 7 billion different realities running around the world right now. Those that know this need proof before their realities will align more closely with yours. I am suspending disbelief in this case. However, along those same lines I did have a thought about the Exbeeriments, and that is "what if both beers had flaws that covered up the perceptible differences in the beers?" I don't believe that is true, but what if it were? In that spirit I think the only way to resolve this is for you to send me some of this warm fermented Lager so I can taste it for myself, so that my perception can be altered (or not)

 

[applescrap]

OP, This feels like Morpheus offering the red and blue pill to Neo, but instead of offering, he is insisting on the red pill. Perception is reality, and there are 7 billion different realities running around the world right now. Those that know this need proof before their realities will align more closely with yours. I am suspending disbelief in this case. However, along those same lines I did have a thought about the Exbeeriments, and that is "what if both beers had flaws that covered up the perceptible differences in the beers?" I don't believe that is true, but what if it were? In that spirit I think the only way to resolve this is for you to send me some of this warm fermented Lager so I can taste it for myself, so that my perception can be altered (or not)

Haha, I like analogies. Well done. Plenty of the insisting is not being done by me too. But if anything I am insisting that both pills will lead to good places. The problem is most people are insisting that only one method works, I'm insisting that they both do.

 

[casualbrewer]

Haha, I like analogies. Well done. Plenty of the insisting is not being done by me too. But if anything I am insisting that both pills will lead to good places. The problem is most people are insisting that only one method works, I'm insisting that they both do.

To the degree in which they work though is the main point here. It's easy to turn out a decent drinkable beer, but it is very hard to turn out a beer with zero flaws regarding to its style. Which way do you want to go?

 

[applescrap]

At this point i think all points have been made on both sides of this discussion. Ill make a helles and report back.

As a final note i reread this whole thread and im just not seeing the spirit in the claims made against me. I have offered or tried to offer my opinions free of insults or this is the only way or this is the best way, etc... I have been accused of being a troll, ignorant, unknowledgable about brewing processes, discrediting the entire hb community, making beer just to get drunk and on and on. When i talk to people the way some of you have, i am embarrassed and ashamed. Usually i apologize. I think some of you have crossed the line of decency and have made claims about me that really aren't in the spirit of my tone and healthy discussion in general. Im not changing at this point, no data has been offered still, and brewing lagers at higher temps isnt going away either. It doesnt make your process wrong or mine the best.

 

[8rnw8]

Ladies and gentleman please don't feed the troll.

This. So much this.

 

[applescrap]

This. So much this.

What is this?

 

[applescrap]

I cant believe it, you pretty much bullied me into splashing out on a dunkel. Bought hofbrau dunkel. Had dinner there on both trips to munich i think. Jagerschnitzel, red cabbage, german fried potatos, ranch, and salad with ranch. After a liter or so i am usually stuffing my face with their chocolate. We got broke and stayed in this dirty hostel on one trip. My wife was pissed off because she just wanted her own bathroom. I felt bad and went out in the hall to wizz in the shared wc and there was a vending machine in the hall. Never forgot! it had $0.75 cent lowenbraus (dark too i think) and the dankest little bags of dark chocolate and chocolate covered nuts and cherries. I was like in f'in heaven.


Anyways sorry, where was i, so wanted other beer, but bought hofbrau dunkel. Mine is much darker and is obviously a different recipe. Mine is made with just different ingredients. That being said they just taste very similar in the same style. I have attached the Style Guidelines because really that's what they both tasted like. Note the style calls for some unfiltered versions like mine. As you know I would never put gelatin in anything. Its not an insult, it doesn't mean I think you're wrong for doing it, I just would never do it. That is a discussion for a different time. After sitting in the glass and getting towards the bottom mine becomes more clear, but it is a much darker recipe. Could have something to do with the fact that I Brew in the bag and squeeze most of the fluid out of the grain. Mine was made with Denver tap water , which needs Camden, and I didn't use it. theirs was made with whatever water they use. They're very similar and at some point you're just like drinking one or the other. I didn't prefer one over the other tell you the truth and my wife preferred mine by far. Both are crisp and there is no concern there. Mine is much much more fresh obviously. Glad to be retrying some memories but in long run it is what it is. They both represent the style.

View attachment 1472702396632.jpg

View attachment 1472702409673.jpg

View attachment 1472702420371.jpg

View attachment 1472702430888.jpg

 

[applescrap]

2nd try

View attachment 1472702649810.jpg

View attachment 1472702661481.jpg

 

[The_Bishop]

If you're brewing beer with chlorinated water with no treatment for the chlorine and you don't taste the bandaids then you simply have *no* palate. This makes your arguments regarding the flavor of the beer you brew with no temperature control even more weak.

 

[applescrap]

If only i had your palate and class. Thanks for adding so much to this discussion on warm ferment.

 

[applescrap]

The general consensus is Denver water is excellent for Brewing. The Denver Water web page actually has the full profile for homebrewers. They actually have a Homebrew page. My wife preferred mine, I could care less drinking one or the other. Both fall exactly in the style category. That six pack cost almost 60% of what it cost to brew.

 

[applescrap]

I heard Marshall say something on the Brewing Network the other day that really is important I think.

It's just beer. Nobody's going to die or lose their job. It's just a glass of beer.

 

[55x11]

I disagree, temperature given a reasonable range, will have very little impact on final taste. That is the point of my position. Even if there was a little difference, it's so slight without Brewing multiple batches to compare to its a non-factor imo. Especially considering all of the minute recipe changes one could make that would make a dramatic difference in taste and overall character. Like a cup of coffee or a tsp of cinnamon. These small differences really just don't warrant passionate disagreement in my opinion.

I have my take on brulosophy experiments (which I like reading), but I wanted to point out they always have a control. What you are offering, however, is anecdotal evidence of - "I don't temp-control and my beer taste fine, to me".
Which is fine, but I would encourage to try to do what Brulosophers do and ferment batches at very different temperatures and see the results. I just did it with Hefeweizen and the yeast response was very different at ~70F vs. 65F. I also did it with belgian strains, with similarly, easily perceived taste differences - and not just by me, but by others as well.

Now onto my comment about brulosophy experiments.
I think these guys are doing great, statistically relevant, as well-controlled experiments as anyone can do.

But they are also experienced brewer with nice setups who are very good at controlling ALL the variables except the tested one. I believe (and it's just a theory) that if you dial-in and control 19 out of 20 variables, you have a lot of freedom in that single variable and your beer will be very similarly tasting - to at least half of regular beer drinkers who may have not super sensitive palates anyways.

But if you start relaxing your requirements on multiple variables, the margin of error in producing decent to great beer shrinks dramatically. So it ALWAYS pays off to control everything you can so that when things get out of control (for various reasons), you can still be in the "sweet spot" for your target beer.

In other words - if you ferment at 74F instead of 65F with a yeast that has 60-72F range, maybe it will be fine, but combine it with under pitched yeast, pitched a bit too warm, and some random temperature variations, and some cut corners in sanitation, your water chemistry being not quite ideal, lack of vigorous boil or short boil, slow chilling, and maybe using some stale ingredients - and now you got a horrible undrinkable beer all of a sudden. When any of those minor mis-steps by themselves (when everything else is controlled for) probably wouldn't matter.

And in homebrewing at amateur level, there is almost always some random variable that we either cannot control or fail to control for various reasons. Which is why it's often so difficult to replicate the same batch precisely, something even brulosophers admit all the time.
So in my opinion it pays to be as organized and as "controlling" as possible.

 

[joshesmusica]

I heard Marshall say something on the Brewing Network the other day that really is important I think.

It's just beer. Nobody's going to die or lose their job. It's just a glass of beer.

:takes off his sarcasm hat, puts on his sincere one:

I agree with this, and I think most people who have participated in this thread would as well. Likewise, I would say most of the people who have commented also highly admire Marshall and his gang and what they're doing for homebrewing. I know I follow along with every new post. What he's done has really helped me relax about worrying about doing everything perfectly every time.

The problem, I think, is your approach to this topic. It's not until page 3 (for me) that you actually start saying stuff like, I just brew this for me, everyone should brew how they want to brew, this is good enough for me, I'm not after the best beer per style as possible, etc. You started out the thread however proclaiming that nobody should be worried about temp control, and ingredients don't really matter that much, it's all going to taste the same no matter what, you guys are all just stuck in your brewing dogma, etc. Not to mention that you're making all these claims based off of a few expbeeriments, that are only one point in an area that requires many different data sets in order to make a conclusion, and your own anecdotal evidence. Surely you can see why this would cause a bad reaction and cause people to respond to you in the way they do?

When you come off incredibly prideful, that you have all the answers, and everyone else is wrong and just stuck in their old school brewing dogma, people will respond in kind.

I'm positive that you mean well and are just incredibly excited that you happened to make a beer that didn't show any signs of off-flavors to you and your wife (by the way, darker beers and hoppier beers tend to really mask fermentation off-flavors), but that doesn't mean you should be telling people to abandon something they, and many other homebrewers, have experienced to be the truth. And, as I continue to say, if you would just think about the way that your style of writing also comes off to people, conversations would likely go much further with you on this site.

 

[AZCoolerBrewer]

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.

 

[applescrap]

:takes off his sarcasm hat, puts on his sincere one:

I agree with this, and I think most people who have participated in this thread would as well. Likewise, I would say most of the people who have commented also highly admire Marshall and his gang and what they're doing for homebrewing. I know I follow along with every new post. What he's done has really helped me relax about worrying about doing everything perfectly every time.

The problem, I think, is your approach to this topic. It's not until page 3 (for me) that you actually start saying stuff like, I just brew this for me, everyone should brew how they want to brew, this is good enough for me, I'm not after the best beer per style as possible, etc. You started out the thread however proclaiming that nobody should be worried about temp control, and ingredients don't really matter that much, it's all going to taste the same no matter what, you guys are all just stuck in your brewing dogma, etc. Not to mention that you're making all these claims based off of a few expbeeriments, that are only one point in an area that requires many different data sets in order to make a conclusion, and your own anecdotal evidence. Surely you can see why this would cause a bad reaction and cause people to respond to you in the way they do?

When you come off incredibly prideful, that you have all the answers, and everyone else is wrong and just stuck in their old school brewing dogma, people will respond in kind.

I'm positive that you mean well and are just incredibly excited that you happened to make a beer that didn't show any signs of off-flavors to you and your wife (by the way, darker beers and hoppier beers tend to really mask fermentation off-flavors), but that doesn't mean you should be telling people to abandon something they, and many other homebrewers, have experienced to be the truth. And, as I continue to say, if you would just think about the way that your style of writing also comes off to people, conversations would likely go much further with you on this site.

This thoughtful post warrants a response. I feel like you tried hard to be thoughtful and engage in a quality discussion and i appreciate that. I AM proclaiming temperature control doesnt matter given some reasonableness. Its just my opinion. You continually make strong ascertions about things i have done or said. I would appreciate your quoting them so I can reconsider. I dont recall telling everyone they were wrong. I dont recall saying it, but I do believe many are stuck in brewing dogma. And even worse they use that dogma to look down their nose at people like me, which has happened here hasnt it! And even worse, using dogma to turn off would be new homebrewers with overly complicated brewing methodology and equipment requirements. Once again just my opinion. You can disagree but the insults levied at me are a little much arent they? Stating i dont believe in most brewing dogma and that both methods will work, is not the same as you are wrong.


I have asked time and time again for data other than so and so said it to be true and have received none. Stating i said ingredients dont matter is in total and complete opposition to my brewing philosophies. My whole thing is what goes in the pot is what comes out given some modest skill. The better the ingredients the better the beer. What i did say was you cant put 10 pounds 2 row and an oz of hops in a kettle and pull out avery jacobs stout. My beer tastes as good as the hofbrau dunkel and if anything is just different due to recipes and other factors. You dont have to believe it, but it doesnt make me an a..hole that i feel that way. Its just how i feel. It's time to focus on fermentation temperature and not me. As a fault I can come off as prideful and I appreciate you pointing that out. If you don't like the way I write then don't read it, a response im sure you can understand. No one is forcing you to read my work. But as a closing note, I do appreciate an overall better tone from you.

For the love of God it's just a freakin beer. Why do I have to be making the best beer ever made in the world? Is that what this thread is about? Is that the whole point here who makes the best beer. I will end that discussion everyone makes better beer than me.

 

[55x11]

I AM proclaiming temperature control doesnt matter given some reasonableness. Its just my opinion.

You have to define the "reasonableness". I think everyone will agree with it, but the question is reasonableness. It definitely doesn't matter if you are off by 1 degree F, I think most of us (ALL of us?) will agree with that.

5 degree - maybe, maybe not.

10 degrees - well, here we will some diversion.

20 degrees?

100 degrees?

The problem with these statements is that they are indeed just your opinion, but you won't let this go but also won't provide any more "evidence" than - I like my beer so it must make no difference.

At the very least, if you said - I split the batch in two and fermented one at 100F and another at 40F and nobody I know including me could tell any difference - or whatever temperature differential suits your definition of "reasonable", well, that would be at least somewhat useful.

But right now your statements are very dogmatic. Unless you tried proper temperature control vs. no temperature control, how do you know for sure it "makes no difference"?

On the flip side I have to defend brulosophers. Saying "they are not scientific" is a cop-out. They follow the scientific principles as close as possible.
They start with a hypothesis, they design an experiment which typically follows the identical process except for the variable being tested. They test the results by the blind triangle test with what is usually a fairly robust statistical analysis.
The test panel doesn't know what variable is being tested or what's different about beers. Knowing that Marshall brewed that beer shouldn't make them pick sample 1 vs. sample 3. So saying it's not double-blind is a cop-out.

I think a lot of people have the impression of "scientific approach" as in - "well, if you didn't test pH and calcium concentration of resulting beer, so your approach is not scientific". Or maybe "Well its not been published in peer-reviewed journal so it's not science". Or "well you don't have a PhD so it's not scientific".
But remember that the hypothesis they are proposing usually is NOT whether the beers will be identical in some chemical composition within some uncertainty. It's whether the beers will taste substantially different. As in - tasted by humans. Who have a wide range of senses and are imperfect and maybe biased, but that's what matters in the end.

What do we care if two samples have 3% difference in cohumulone if nobody can taste the difference and thinks beers are identical?

Also, just because they test a lot of "faster" methods vs. "traditional" methods of brewing (like fast and shoddy ales, or fast lagering) doesn't mean they are "biased" towards anything - it's the tasters who have to decide whether the faster methods produce different beers.

 

[applescrap]

I have my take on brulosophy experiments (which I like reading), but I wanted to point out they always have a control. What you are offering, however, is anecdotal evidence of - "I don't temp-control and my beer taste fine, to me".
Which is fine, but I would encourage to try to do what Brulosophers do and ferment batches at very different temperatures and see the results. I just did it with Hefeweizen and the yeast response was very different at ~70F vs. 65F. I also did it with belgian strains, with similarly, easily perceived taste differences - and not just by me, but by others as well.

Now onto my comment about brulosophy experiments.
I think these guys are doing great, statistically relevant, as well-controlled experiments as anyone can do.

But they are also experienced brewer with nice setups who are very good at controlling ALL the variables except the tested one. I believe (and it's just a theory) that if you dial-in and control 19 out of 20 variables, you have a lot of freedom in that single variable and your beer will be very similarly tasting - to at least half of regular beer drinkers who may have not super sensitive palates anyways.

But if you start relaxing your requirements on multiple variables, the margin of error in producing decent to great beer shrinks dramatically. So it ALWAYS pays off to control everything you can so that when things get out of control (for various reasons), you can still be in the "sweet spot" for your target beer.

In other words - if you ferment at 74F instead of 65F with a yeast that has 60-72F range, maybe it will be fine, but combine it with under pitched yeast, pitched a bit too warm, and some random temperature variations, and some cut corners in sanitation, your water chemistry being not quite ideal, lack of vigorous boil or short boil, slow chilling, and maybe using some stale ingredients - and now you got a horrible undrinkable beer all of a sudden. When any of those minor mis-steps by themselves (when everything else is controlled for) probably wouldn't matter.

And in homebrewing at amateur level, there is almost always some random variable that we either cannot control or fail to control for various reasons. Which is why it's often so difficult to replicate the same batch precisely, something even brulosophers admit all the time.
So in my opinion it pays to be as organized and as "controlling" as possible.

This is super good. And you make some nice points. I like your use of the term different. Different isn't always better it's just different. Why does the implication of different always have to mean better? You offer some really interesting points on variables and the compounding possibilities. I disagree with a lot of variable dogma to, obviously, so i cant agree with you a 100 percent, but it is very worthy of consideration on a compiling basis.

I'm not saying anybody is wrong because I disagree with the other variables!

I need to share my Brewing process which is pretty consistent by my standards but probably not by most. Don't care doesn't have to be the exact same every time and i rarely Brew one recipe 2x in a row. I said I don't care if it's consistent, so that has to be interpreted on this forum as I'm just making beer to get drunk you know.

When I have time later I'll explain how I brew, but I have plenty of threats that you can find it too. Anyways it has crossed my mind that I'm a decent brewer and i have taken that for granted. I never question anybodys brewing on here though. Figure most Brew plenty well. I have been known to question the amount of time, expense and trouble it takes people to brew look forward to more dialogue with you

 

[applescrap]

You have to define the "reasonableness". I think everyone will agree with it, but the question is reasonableness. It definitely doesn't matter if you are off by 1 degree F, I think most of us (ALL of us?) will agree with that.

5 degree - maybe, maybe not.

10 degrees - well, here we will some diversion.

20 degrees?

100 degrees?

The problem with these statements is that they are indeed just your opinion, but you won't let this go but also won't provide any more "evidence" than - I like my beer so it must make no difference.

At the very least, if you said - I split the batch in two and fermented one at 100F and another at 40F and nobody I know including me could tell any difference - or whatever temperature differential suits your definition of "reasonable", well, that would be at least somewhat useful.

But right now your statements are very dogmatic. Unless you tried proper temperature control vs. no temperature control, how do you know for sure it "makes no difference"?

On the flip side I have to defend brulosophers. Saying "they are not scientific" is a cop-out. They follow the scientific principles as close as possible.
They start with a hypothesis, they design an experiment which typically follows the identical process except for the variable being tested. They test the results by the blind triangle test with what is usually a fairly robust statistical analysis.
The test panel doesn't know what variable is being tested or what's different about beers. Knowing that Marshall brewed that beer shouldn't make them pick sample 1 vs. sample 3. So saying it's not double-blind is a cop-out.

I think a lot of people have the impression of "scientific approach" as in - "well, if you didn't test pH and calcium concentration of resulting beer, so your approach is not scientific". Or maybe "Well its not been published in peer-reviewed journal so it's not science". Or "well you don't have a PhD so it's not scientific".
But remember that the hypothesis they are proposing usually is NOT whether the beers will be identical in some chemical composition within some uncertainty. It's whether the beers will taste substantially different. As in - tasted by humans. Who have a wide range of senses and are imperfect and maybe biased, but that's what matters in the end.

What do we care if two samples have 3% difference in cohumulone if nobody can taste the difference and thinks beers are identical?

Also, just because they test a lot of "faster" methods vs. "traditional" methods of brewing (like fast and shoddy ales, or fast lagering) doesn't mean they are "biased" towards anything - it's the tasters who have to decide whether the faster methods produce different beers.

Awesome brulosophy discussion. This is what im sayin.

And you answered some of your questions to me, side note im going to have to start saving questions ive answered before. Not going to go deep here but here's a main point; i dont have to. I have faith in those awesome guys marshall, ray, malcom and the new guy jake (denvuhhh). I have faith in annecdote after annecdote on this very website by greater people than me. I have faith in my intuition, experience, and palate too. Im just warming up here on this. Going to stop. Reasonable i dont know. Just off the top of my head here, im not rain man, i think plenty of lagers have been made at 50 and 65 with no triangle taste test discernibility. Also ray i think tested lager at 82 degrees with a result just above chance barely significant, but he himself said hey these are close. So i am guessing 30 for lager and ten for ales.

Come to think of it they put it on the pack. I was pretty close see pics about 24 degree for each. Kind of helps my argument that the yeast people say 24 degrees difference is within range. But as the brilliant bobbym once said, what do those hipster yeast people know about their yeast. That being said some ale strains and lager strains may be reactive at higher than 80 imo based on data. Different not worse

View attachment 1472785261308.jpg

View attachment 1472785268473.jpg

 

[jddevinn]

I have asked time and time again for data other than so and so said it to be true and have received none.

I have listed you pages of published textbooks and industry standards. Of course you believe all the chemists, biologists and professional brewers are just "so in so saying things".

 

[seabass07]

I heard Marshall say something on the Brewing Network the other day that really is important I think.

It's just beer. Nobody's going to die or lose their job. It's just a glass of beer.

It's just a glass of beer. But you are wrong. If you like your 80f fermented lager, then keep making it. But if you can't tell the difference, maybe your taste buds are broken?

 

[applescrap]

I have listed you pages of published textbooks and industry standards. Of course you believe all the chemists, biologists and professional brewers are just "so in so saying things".

Of course i dont believe everything they say. That doesn't mean they're not right. Think of it like this there are 99 ways to skin a cat and 92 of them work.

 

[applescrap]

It's just a glass of beer. But you are wrong. If you like your 80f fermented lager, then keep making it. But if you can't tell the difference, maybe your taste buds are broken?

You are right, what if they are broken? Hey might work out what if everything just tasted like what: Willamette pinot, napa cabernet or st emillion. What if the only thing I could taste is my mothers chopped liver that would be weird.

Marshall said on brew network that after running the data bjcp judges did the same as everyone else.

 

[applescrap]

I have listed you pages of published textbooks and industry standards. Of course you believe all the chemists, biologists and professional brewers are just "so in so saying things".

Oops, on topic i believe that the chemists, biologists, and professional brewers that put an acceptable 24 degree range on their product that they sale, which we all use, might be right when it comes to fermentation temperature.

 

[jddevinn]

Oops, on topic i believe that the chemists, biologists, and professional brewers that put an acceptable 24 degree range on their product that they sale, which we all use, might be right when it comes to fermentation temperature.

So now you are saying that you DO keep the wort fermenting with 34/70 within the 48.2-71.6°F (preferably 53-59°F) recommended range?!?!! You saying temperature control isn't needed is 100% the topic of this thread.

 

[applescrap]

^^ hey that's not what I'm saying. I don't know what temp it is in there. that's what I'm saying

 

[applescrap]

I have to explain how the brew was born. I will!