Mouthfeel of lambic and spontaneously or mixed fermentation beers

[foragedbrews]

Something I've been thinking about and hoping I can get some answers. I live in the UK where traditional cask ale is not highly carbonated. My favourite beer styles are lambic and mixed or otherwise unconventionally fermented (albeit not kettle sours), and what I struggle to understand is how these beers, despite often undergoing complete attenuation due to the diastatic nature of the cultures, are not thin and watery. They're dry, but their lack of dextrins and long chain sugars doesn't make me feel like I'm just drinking funny flavoured water. Meanwhile, a lot of traditional cask ale I found to be watery, despite having a higher FG (around 1008-1012, often). Is this due to the high carbonation usually found in wild beers, is it some other factor(s)? Or is it a bit of both? Hopefully someone who knows the science here can help.

 

[McMullan]

I wouldn’t call cask ales ‘watery’. More drinkable than lambics and other ‘wild’ brews, according to my taste. But I’m not a huge fan of gassy champagne either. It’s not really comparable to cask ale, though. Even if we made a lambic and cask ale more comparable in terms of dextrins, carbonation and ethanol, just a few important factors affecting perceived mouthfeel, they’re still going to be perceived very different, because the cask ale has been fermented by a population of yeast (S. cerevisiae) whereas the lambic has been fermented by a diverse microbial community. The latter is going to contain numerous biotransformed molecules not present in the cask ale. Some of these ‘lambic’ molecules, alone or in combination, are going to influence the perceived mouthfeel. An acquired taste, imo, compared with a more refined cask ale.

 

[hottpeper13]

I use a diasticus yeast that produces glycerin so a beer with an FG of 1.002 has mouth feel and still very drinkable.

 

[foragedbrews]

I wouldn’t call cask ales ‘watery’. More drinkable than lambics and other ‘wild’ brews, according to my taste. But I’m not a huge fan of gassy champagne either. It’s not really comparable to cask ale, though. Even if we made a lambic and cask ale more comparable in terms of dextrins, carbonation and ethanol, just a few important factors affecting perceived mouthfeel, they’re still going to be perceived very different, because the cask ale has been fermented by a population of yeast (S. cerevisiae) whereas the lambic has been fermented by a diverse microbial community. The latter is going to contain numerous biotransformed molecules not present in the cask ale. Some of these ‘lambic’ molecules, alone or in combination, are going to influence the perceived mouthfeel. An acquired taste, imo, compared with a more refined cask ale.

I admit this is purely my personal perception, and will no doubt differ from others' experience, maybe I presumed what I get is what others do too because I know others who feel the same way.

That aside, what you mention regarding to other fermentation byproducts makes sense actually, I will look into it more. Thank you.

I use a diasticus yeast that produces glycerin so a beer with an FG of 1.002 has mouth feel and still very drinkable.

Ah, I had forgotten about the production of glycerin, I'll investigate further, thank you too!