Recipe Etiquette

[SS_Brewing_Co]

But see, that's a variable that is outside the recipe. I'll go back to the cake analogy, if someone is baking an Apple Pie following a recipe that says to use 2 tbsp of Apple pie spice and they use 1, and the recipe calls for 1lb of dark brown sugar and they use 1lb of light brown sugar (because that's all that was available or all they had) and it was listed to bake at 425 for 2 hours and they baked at 375 for 90 minutes - well then of course there will be a difference.

But I think any of us on here with enough experience are able to hit and maintain a mash temp, get the grain bill right, know their efficiency and tweak the recipe to compensate, and ferment at the right temps. If any of us can't do this within a small margin of error than I'd say those amongst us that can't still haven't worked out their systems and processes fully yet. Not that there's anything wrong with that of course, but once one gets experienced enough most of us can manage to hit the numbers and hold the temps and all that. Any variables after that, like say fermentation temp swings due to weather conditions, power loss, etc, are unforseen variables which will no doubt expectedly lead to a change from the intended outcome

Rev.

Ok. Let me tell you the biggest problem here. Apple pie is not cake

 

[Rev2010]

How much would you have to change it to feel accomplished?

Being we're speaking beer, I'd probably say adjustments to the grain bill and hop bill primarily. Maybe some tweaks to the mash temp range or fermention range to accent and bring out certain qualities. At that point you are making a creative investment, not just following instructions.

You know very well there's no specific number one can put on this but question yourself because if you think there is no difference from using a recipe 100% full on instructions and patting yourself on the back and calling it an achievement and tweaking out a recipe to perfect it the way YOU think it would be best and then winning based on that is no different then I don't know what would change your mind anyway.

Rev.

 

[naiek]

You know very well there's no specific number one can put on this but question yourself because if you think there is no difference from using a recipe 100% full on instructions and patting yourself on the back and calling it an achievement and tweaking out a recipe to perfect it the way YOU think it would be best and then winning based on that is no different then I don't know what would change your mind anyway.
Rev.

All I read was "I make enough changes so I don't feel guilty submitting it." How many kits are submitted to contest every year? Are they in the wrong for doing so? I have not but wouldn't think twice about doing it, as I said before it's not a recipe formulation competition.

 

[dogbar]

Part of the issue here is that Rev is lumping things like pitch rates and fermentation schedules into the "recipe." A more widely accepted definition would be malt/hops/yeast.

Personally I think there's so much idiosyncrasy in the way most of us brew that I'm much more in the one recipe * ten brewers = ten beers camp. Heck, just the fact that I crank my burner higher than you do during the boil can make a big difference.

If you make a great batch, tip of the cap to the recipe formulator, but you deserve the gold star.

 

[pwkblue]

good discussion! Process and execution certainly matter! If for no other reason than you must adjust the details of any process to fit your equipment, water....available ingredients...and personal preference.

Yes, you could give the exact same ingredient list to 10 brewers and get 10 similar but different beers. ( could be a fun competition idea for local brew clubs and groups) Now if you included mash temps, schedule, and hopping details the results would be much closer.

As for comp submissions: it sounds like each person needs to decide what feels right for them. Personally I would want any submission I make to be my own creation. Of the 20 non-kit brews I've made (still a rookie) only 1 was a straight 100% recipe from someone else. usually I look at 10 or 15 recipes, maybe read a few articles....usually a fairly standard basic grain bill becomes obvious....creativity and research fills in the rest.

 

[gbx]

I'm in the "recipe doesn't really matter" camp...sure it matters as you can royal **** things up if you do something too crazy but your fermentation is the single most important factor in a good beer. Maybe its because I don't do freak beers with weird ingredients but rather just the classics- of the 20+ batches this year all but 2 has been pilsners (100% pilsner malt + saaz), porters (pale, brown, black), bitters (pale, crystal + some type of goldings) or dunkels (munich, carafa + hallertau). You are kidding yourself if you think you are brewing a classic style and believe you have created a new recipe. EVERYTHING has been done before in brewing...if it hasn't been done, it is probably a dumb idea and won't work.

 

[zeg]

Marketing? Really?? No, not at all in this case. It's because NOBODY'S chicken tastes like KFC, none. RC Cola doesn't taste like Coke neither does Pepsi, and while Pepsi markets like crazy Coca Cola is still the reigning king. Many try to imitate KFC and Coke but none ever become more popular and it has nothing to do with marketing in this regard but rather the taste of the product.

Nothing to do with it? Not buying it. Coca Cola's ascendancy had as much to do with business savvy and timing as it did with any particular recipe. And KFC isn't even particularly good fried chicken. If their recipe is something special, their execution is truly awful every time I give it another try. At this point, they're popular because they're popular and cheaper than something decent.

So I'm unswayed. The "Secret Recipe" is marketing hype more than anything real. If you perfectly replicated Coca Cola, no one would buy it instead because of billions of dollars to put red and white polar bears all over everything and decades of familiarity.

You are kidding yourself if you think you are brewing a classic style and believe you have created a new recipe. EVERYTHING has been done before in brewing...if it hasn't been done, it is probably a dumb idea and won't work.

I disagree with the absolutism in your last setence---there are plenty of good beer ideas left to discover, but you're right in the sense that most new ideas are bad. That's not just true in brewing.

But your point about the styles is one I agree with, and it's why it's silly getting hung up on exactly who developed the proportions in your brew. Unless you're entering the experimental category, you're copying someone else's idea. If you start from the guidelines, or from rough proportions like in Daniels' book, you're probably going to "invent" a recipe that dozens of brewers have brewed before. And even if you take someone's recipe verbatim, you're going to add your own touch to it.

If the competition specifies that only original recipes are allowed, that's one thing, but I've never seen that.

 

[frazier]

I've never entered a comp, so I won't opine on the etiquette there. But when I brew a recipe I found here at HBT, I do three things: 1) post a message in the recipe thread something like "Hey I just brewed this for the 4th time;" 2) a couple months later I'll post again, "It came out great, as usual;" 3) I call it what the author called it. This generates conversations like this:

"Hey Joe, have my latest homebrew, Deception Stout."
"Why is it called 'Deception'? "
"Because that's what the author of the recipe called it."

Cheers!

 

[Pilgarlic]

Etiquette with regard to competitions? Let me see... Zainasheff and Palmer published a book called "Brewing Classic Styles", the specific premise of which is that, using these recipes, you, too, can win medals. So I guess it's pretty clear what Jamil thinks about the etiquette thing. People enter competitions for different reasons. My homebrew club has a "Competition Team". Our objective is to improve our brewing knowledge and processes. Each member has chosen a specific style, and each of us brews that style repeatedly, using all available feedback (including competitions) to improve that beer. Personally, I start with well established recipes because MY PERSONAL brewing aspirations have to do with brewing well, not creating great recipes. Others in the group are more recipe focused, hoping to find that magical recipe tweak that makes it fall into place. All, clearly, are welcome in competition. With the exception of a few styles, competitions are about brewing to a style, and, frankly, most styles have been very well defined with respect to the recipe, and scoring well depends mostly on brewing well.

 

[Yooper]

Etiquette with regard to competitions? Let me see... Zainasheff and Palmer published a book called "Brewing Classic Styles", the specific premise of which is that, using these recipes, you, too, can win medals. So I guess it's pretty clear what Jamil thinks about the etiquette thing. People enter competitions for different reasons. My homebrew club has a "Competition Team". Our objective is to improve our brewing knowledge and processes. Each member has chosen a specific style, and each of us brews that style repeatedly, using all available feedback (including competitions) to improve that beer. Personally, I start with well established recipes because MY PERSONAL brewing aspirations have to do with brewing well, not creating great recipes. Others in the group are more recipe focused, hoping to find that magical recipe tweak that makes it fall into place. All, clearly, are welcome in competition. With the exception of a few styles, competitions are about brewing to a style, and, frankly, most styles have been very well defined with respect to the recipe, and scoring well depends mostly on brewing well.

Even with a great recipe, it's hard to win competitions! But if someone wants to improve their brewing skill I suggest actually trying to clone a beer. It's hard to do, and to do well.

I guess I don't get the aversion to using a non-original recipe for brewing for a competition. I mean, the little old ladies who enter jam in the state fair probably use a published recipe to win their blue ribbons.

There are so many variations in brewing techniques that even if you use the same recipe and brew the same beer I do, the beers won't even be that similar. Water chemistry, yeast pitching rate, yeast strain choice, fermentation temperature, brands of malt, etc make such a big difference that it's amazing.

One of my best friends is a brewer about 15 miles away from me. We swap grain with each other, and sometimes trade yeast. We often share recipes. His beer, even a recipe I made, doesn't taste like mine. Try it and see for yourself!

 

[kombat]

ask someone who has no experience with a specific beer type to brew a beer of that style. With no information whatsoever that won't come anywhere close to that style without a recipe to get them in the ballpark no matter how awesome their process. They still need to know a general information about what the style entails! If someone has no idea what a Stout is and has never tried one how are they going to make anything anywhere near a stout just based on their system and processes? They won't.

The problem I have with this is that, as an admittedly relatively new brewer, there really doesn't seem to be much variation in ingredients in a given style, and thus I feel you're putting far too much of an emphasis on the recipe.

For example, say you took someone who'd never brewed a Pilsner Lager before and asked them to brew one. You're likely right, in that they'd have no idea where to start.

However, with even just a tiny bit of research, they'd find out that a Pilsner Lager is just Pilsner Malt and Saaz hops. They could also learn the style's target S.G. and IBU ranges, and it wouldn't take a genius to deduce that a "Pilsner Lager" uses a lager yeast, and is fermented at lager temperatures.

With just that Post-it note's worth of information, they could brew a beer that would definitely land in the style ballpark of a "Pilsner Lager."

Heck, even just deducing their own recipe from the above information, there's an excellent chance they'd devise a recipe that would end up being an exact duplicate of *somebody* else's recipe. So does that mean they can't call that beer their own? Do they lose any bragging rights because they ended up creating a recipe that matched one of the thousands of existing Pilsner Lager recipes, each of which only differ by a few ounces of the same grains or hops anyway?

Yes, I know tweaking the water and the yeast and whatever else can change the resulting beer. But it'd still be in the "Pilsner Lager" BJCP style. I guess I just don't see what the big deal is with putting the recipes on a pedestal, when they're all so close to each other anyway. We're only working with 4 ingredients here, guys.

It's about the execution, in my opinion.

 

[Rev2010]

However, with even just a tiny bit of research, they'd find out that a Pilsner Lager is just Pilsner Malt and Saaz hops.

Yes, but there's a difference in taste between different brands of pilsner malt. Some are spring cut, some winter, a lot come from different regions. That is why I feel hitting the moment of a perfect stunning combo is of importance. Many here will just buy the cheapest 2-row to make their beer, and it may possibly make a stunning beer, but to not have tried the differences and to always just buy Rahr I think is a bit one dimensional.

Meh, anyhow I think I've been taken a bit out of context here. I'll highlight what I said earlier on: "Look, I'm not in any way saying process has little importance, of course it does. I'm merely saying I personally believe a lot of people are severely downplaying the importance of recipe formulation."

I guess one of the reasons I have this stance is because I am also a musician. I *create* music. I don't just play cover songs all the time. I still personally feel thinking up a beer, working out the recipe, and tweaking it till it's just perfect is more of an accomplishment then taking a recipe out of a book, following the directions 100%, and winning a comp. Obviously this doesn't agree with the greater majority of you so I'll now bow out


Rev.

 

[pwkblue]

I've never entered a comp, so I won't opine on the etiquette there. But when I brew a recipe I found here at HBT, I do three things: 1) post a message in the recipe thread something like "Hey I just brewed this for the 4th time;" 2) a couple months later I'll post again, "It came out great, as usual;" 3) I call it what the author called it. This generates conversations like this:

"Hey Joe, have my latest homebrew, Deception Stout."
"Why is it called 'Deception'? "
"Because that's what the author of the recipe called it."

Cheers!

exactly the kind of thing I was hoping to hear....there is etiquette even when using a recipe at home. The feedback you describe helps everyone, and gives credit where credit is due!

 

[pwkblue]

I guess one of the reasons I have this stance is because I am also a musician. I *create* music. I don't just play cover songs all the time. I still personally feel thinking up a beer, working out the recipe, and tweaking it till it's just perfect is more of an accomplishment then taking a recipe out of a book, following the directions 100%, and winning a comp. Obviously this doesn't agree with the greater majority of you so I'll now bow out


Rev.

This is the core of my question...just curious about the respect for the creative content.
Clearly, most recipes within a style are very similar...the results ALWAYS come down to the details and execution..

BUT, If you think recipe doesn't matter I have a suggestion. Go look at one of the 5 star recipes posted here. Amazing how many of them come from 2 or 3 people Yooper, Biermuncher etc Why, they are good, thought out, repeatable recipes...and spot on to the style. Now...pick one...Yooper's 60 minute clone perhaps....and go search the recipe database at Hopville for 60 minute clone recipes. (Hopville contains actual brewday recipes of users) It isn't hard to see that most will make an IPA...a few look pretty good...but the only ones that look like they will be a clone...ARE Yooper's recipe! Could they have taken the hop schedule from the recipe in extreme brewing....and derived the grain bill and yeast from a few different interviews and articles available online...sure, but I'd guess most just searched google, and copied Yooper.

In conclusion...it's all good.

 

[moti_mo]

This is an interesting topic. It seems that a lot of people generally agree that it is not a problem to enter others' recipes into competitions because it is their process that is, in large part, being judged and potentially rewarded.

A question just to see what people think: Does this same philosophy extend to professional breweries that simply take a posted recipe from other professional breweries, brew it on their own, and then (a) sell that beer commercially and/or (b) win awards off of said recipe? There are many professional brewers who give fairly detailed recipes to various sources such as Zymurgy, etc, so this an easy scenario to envision. Now replace "recipe from other professional breweries" with "recipe from the HBT recipe database". Does the same philosophy hold; is everybody still OK with that?

Just interested in what people think about those scenarios.

 

[IffyG]

Meh, anyhow I think I've been taken a bit out of context here. I'll highlight what I said earlier on: "Look, I'm not in any way saying process has little importance, of course it does. I'm merely saying I personally believe a lot of people are severely downplaying the importance of recipe formulation."

I believe you are placing too much importance on recipe formulation and the ability of individual brewers to create the same beer from the same recipe. It's just not possible. Take a look at Saison Du Buff, a beer brewed from the exact same recipe at Stone, Dogfish Head and Victory brewing.

http://www.dogfish.com/brews-spirits/the-brews/collaborations/Saison-du-BUFF.htm

Now read through the tasting notes from several different drinkers of presumably the exact same beer.

http://beermonger.net/2010/08/13/the-beermonger-review-saison-du-buff-v-1-v-2/
http://kupkosmindbottled.blogspot.com/2010/09/saison-du-buff-comparison.html
http://www.guysdrinkingbeer.com/review-dogfish-headstonevictory-saison-du-buff/

Just from these tasting notes, it's pretty clear that the end result is three very distinct beers. I'm pretty sure if anyone would be able to perfectly copy someones recipe it would be one of these breweries.

 

[scottland]

There's too many variables to make broad sweeping statements with something like this, too many what if's

Good example. You find a munich helles recipe. 95% pils, 5% munich malt. A little hallertau @ 90 min, ferment with a lager yeast.

How much are any two munich helles recipes really going to differ? It's pretty much all technique. Yeast strain makes some difference, but pitching rates, oxygenation, temperature and yeast health make just as much difference.

As recipes get more creative (IPAs, porters, stouts, chocolate hazelnut raspberry Russian Imperial stout, etc), I think more there should be more etiquette regarding giving the recipe's creator credit. Denny's Bourbon Vanilla porter and his Rye IPA are two great examples. Iconic recipes, where the brewer almost always references Denny.

Personally, I don't see issue with taking creative license with recipes, nor submitting recipes to competitions. It's your ingredients, your beer, and your technique. Just because you're following someone elses list that says which ingredients to throw in when, doesn't mean you can't call it yours.

I see zero issue with submitting recipes to comps that use a recipe from online or a commercial clone. Brew it, enjoy it, and if it's tasty, share it! Steal my recipes all you like.

 

[malweth]

I have a lot of points (I'll present a few), but I'll start with the fact that recipes (not their language, just their information) are not copyrightable. That is why Coca-cola and friends keep their formulae secret.

1. What are the reasons for holding and entering competitions?

I think there are two primary reasons. (1) To determine the best beers entered and (2) to provide feedback to those entering beers. I wouldn't be surprised if #2 was the BJCP's primary goal. This also helps you tweak the recipes you start with (whether they're yours or not).

2. Perhaps this is another part of #1, but... how do we expand upon the body of knowledge in brewing?

Saying that every brewer should start by formulating their own recipes, not knowing how and why a certain style of beer is formulated in a certain way, doesn't make sense. That's like saying a scientist shouldn't expand upon the body of knowledge formed in textbooks and journal articles; it's like secluding artists so they can't take inspiration from previous works of art. Brewing is actually a mixture of the two examples, highly technical with lots of aspects of art.

Even saying that they should learn by brewing others' recipes, but not entering contests doesn't make sense for the same reason as #1.

3. Did you put anything of yourself into the beer?

I think this is easily answered by what others have been saying. If two people brew the same recipe, do they get the same beer? The reason they don't is that so many variables go into the beer that the recipe provides little more than the style category the beer falls into.

The reason my beer won with your recipe is because my sweat tastes better.

 

[BrotherGrim]

I like this discussion!

First, I am not against using someone else's recipes, at one time, two of the beers I had on tap were Yooper's recipes (almost). At the very least they were so lightly modified from the original that the label on the few bottles I put up and the tap signs both gave credit to the author, and everyone who asked "WTF is a Yooper?" got the explanation.

I have also taken top ranked recipes for the same style of beer that had vastly different recipes, analysed the brewer's comments about why and how they used particular grain bills, then morphed many recipes into something new using what I felt was the best of each of the originals, or the parts of each that appealed to a particular aspect of the beer that I was trying to achieve. That is how I put together my Irish Red which I call Crimson Tidewater. There is not enough of any original recipe in mine to warrant credit to anyone in particular, but I do thank the site for giving me the resources to make this recipe.

As far as competition, I personally think if the recipe is over 50% someone else's, then I would not enter it. I don't have a problem with somebody who does, it just doesn't give me feedback on my efforts. I really want to know how MY beer stacks up against others. I know Yooper puts up a great recipe, I have made two and loved them both, but that tells me I can brew her beer. I want to know if I can design and brew my own beers to that level.

Great discussion.

 

[hercher]

I thought the OP's question had as much to do with giving credit where it is due, as anything. As zeg mentions above, if a competition rule specifically states the recipe has to be original, than it should be. Otherwise, I see nothing wrong with using someone else's recipe, though you may want to ask permission if entering it into a competition.

However, part of the fun of brewing, for me, is designing my own beer. Even though I never do anything experimental, and my beers are always quite traditional, finding the right balance of malts and hops, hitting the color that I want, changing the flavor profiles, and so forth, is a challenge unto itself, and really allows me to say "this beer is mine." It is also part of the reason why I never use recipes, and have only once ever done a clone brew.

 

[Rev2010]

I believe you are placing too much importance on recipe formulation and the ability of individual brewers to create the same beer from the same recipe. It's just not possible.

I understand this is the internet, so I'll reiterate one last time. I am not putting too much emphasis on recipe formulation, the difference is I believe it's a very important aspect when all the rest of you are making it the very last thing of importance whatsoever. And the OP was talking about how people feel entering recipes they had no hand in creating, or if they tweak them themselves. I still say I would not feel accomplished entering a recipe I strictly followed from Yooper, or Denny, or Jamil and winning. If the rest of you feel fine with that than that is fine.

Speaking of recipes, if recipes are so unimportant than why do people brew recipes by Denny, or Jamil, or Palmer? Why is BM's Cream of 3 Crops so popular? It's merely a recipe.

I'll say it one last time then I am truly done with this thread because outside of maybe one poster no one seems to understand what I am saying. As a musician I create music. Sure I work within a specific style of music, this is the same as brewing within a certain style's guidelines. However, I don't take a song by one of my favorite artists and claim it my own no matter how different the nuances of my playing are. I also don't just play other people's music on my guitar. But gee, my guitar is different then yours! My rig is different then yours! My playing subtleties are different then yours! So why won't I just call the song my own? Because I didn't create it, that's why. I might have reproduced it and added my own flair but it's still not a product of my creation. But I am still using the notes that are used in all musical compositions (comparing notes to ingredients) just arranged differently. You can't even make a remix and not give credit to the original creator and not pay royalties by law. Why not? You did something entirely different with it, used a different system, process, and sounds?

There is no right or wrong with this whole point the OP is asking about. It's all OPINION. There is no real established etiquette for whether it's proper to give credit to a recipe creator/submitter when using their recipe. And yeah, recipes are not copyrightable but that's plain logic - you can't tell people they can't make a sauce, or beer, or cake, with a certain ingredient/portion list, that would be absurd. But somewhere in time some brewer took the chance to experiment and create a hefeweizen, or a pilsner, or a Saison, or a Lambic. These things didn't fall from the sky, someone thought them out and worked through designing them until they tasted great and not like ass regardless of their processes. And even through each of our processes are different and will indeed create different beers we can all agree I would hope that nearly everyone here that isn't a total noob can create a good example of most styles of beer out there.


Rev.

 

[moti_mo]

This is an interesting topic. It seems that a lot of people generally agree that it is not a problem to enter others' recipes into competitions because it is their process that is, in large part, being judged and potentially rewarded.

A question just to see what people think: Does this same philosophy extend to professional breweries that simply take a posted recipe from other professional breweries, brew it on their own, and then (a) sell that beer commercially and/or (b) win awards off of said recipe? There are many professional brewers who give fairly detailed recipes to various sources such as Zymurgy, etc, so this an easy scenario to envision. Now replace "recipe from other professional breweries" with "recipe from the HBT recipe database". Does the same philosophy hold; is everybody still OK with that?

Just interested in what people think about those scenarios.

Nobody has any thoughts on this question?

 

[KeyWestBrewing]

I don't think it would be appropriate at that level IMO unless they purchased the recipe from the person that formulated it. What you do see is breweries collaborating on a beer/recipe like DFH, Stone, and Victory brewing companies did with Saison du Buff. Where all 3 breweries brew the same recipe on each of their systems then release it commercially.

 

[moti_mo]

But why is it not appropriate at the brewery level? Once posted online or in a magazine, that recipe is public and isn't protected in any way, so there's nothing illegal about what they're doing at all.

How is it any different just because its on a professional level and not an amateur level?

 

[IffyG]

These things didn't fall from the sky, someone thought them out and worked through designing them until they tasted great and not like ass regardless of their processes.

Give me any proven recipe and I can wreck it simply by fermenting a few degrees too warm, mashing too low because a thermometer is out of calibration, astringent because my water profile was off, or get some off flavors by under pitching, etc, etc.

I suppose I can sum my viewpoint up as "A recipe means nothing without proper process, but proper process can make bland recipe the best it can be".

 

[Rev2010]

Give me any proven recipe and I can wreck it simply by fermenting a few degrees too warm, mashing too low because a thermometer is out of calibration, astringent because my water profile was off, or get some off flavors by under pitching, etc, etc.

And I can wreck any song playing it poorly on my guitar, playing it in a different key, using a distortion or amp sound that is nothing like the original artist, and playing it in a faster or slower timing.... it still doesn't make the song mine

I suppose I can sum my viewpoint up as "A recipe means nothing without proper process, but proper process can make bland recipe the best it can be".

I mostly agree here but a recipe still means something without proper process. Plenty of times people have posted on here worried because they mashed a little too high, came in under efficient, or fermented too warm. What's everyone's response? Relax, it will come out fine and you'll still have a good beer. A recipe still got that person a drinkable, probably still very good, beer even with some small errors. The variables have to be pretty wild to truly throw a beer out of whack - "OMG, I just realized my beer was fermenting at 92 degrees for the three days now!!". Or, "I never checked my water and just now found out my mash PH is averaging 8.2!".


Rev.

 

[Buna_Bere]

6000 years of tweaking a Sumerian recipe sure produces some awsome IIPA's.

 

[Yooper]

First, I am not against using someone else's recipes, at one time, two of the beers I had on tap were Yooper's recipes (almost). At the very least they were so lightly modified from the original that the label on the few bottles I put up and the tap signs both gave credit to the author, and everyone who asked "WTF is a Yooper?" got the explanation.

You made me choke on my beer!

Here's the thing, though. It's YOUR beer. You made it, it's yours.

I went to a nice get together back in May with a bunch of people I never met before. The host was a lovely lady named Hope2perc. (Well, that's her name on this forum, anyway! :cross

She had made my oatmeal stout recipe. I tried it and it was excellent. Absolutely wonderful. But was it the same as the one I have on tap at home? No, it was not the same beer. Similar, yes, but I caught more crystal and coffee aroma and flavor from hers. Her body was a little heavier. Why is that? I don't know. She gave me credit, but it was HER beer. Totally.

Brewing isn't like music to me. Music, writing, sculpture- that's all "intellectual property". It's part of the creative process to form something new. But recipe formulation is simply taking ingredients that work well together and coming up with something great. It's like watching the cooking channel. You can follow a recipe for fondant, but it's the implementation that makes it work.

 

[malweth]

ISpeaking of recipes, if recipes are so unimportant than why do people brew recipes by Denny, or Jamil, or Palmer? Why is BM's Cream of 3 Crops so popular? It's merely a recipe.

In the same way an artist attempts to imitate the masters. Copyright law says a recipe is not enough to earn copyright. This is because my own process and decisions directly influence the outcome of the recipe.

But gee, my guitar is different then yours! My rig is different then yours! My playing subtleties are different then yours! So why won't I just call the song my own? Because I didn't create it, that's why. I might have reproduced it and added my own flair but it's still not a product of my creation. But I am still using the notes that are used in all musical compositions (comparing notes to ingredients) just arranged differently. You can't even make a remix and not give credit to the original creator and not pay royalties by law. Why not? You did something entirely different with it, used a different system, process, and sounds?

The difference is that anyone can't just come up with that song. Recipe formulations are limited and style limits them further. There are millions of variations on jazz fusion (or even more specific genres of music). Changing the instrument does not change the song. Changing the conditions of fermentation does change the beer.

And yeah, recipes are not copyrightable but that's plain logic - you can't tell people they can't make a sauce, or beer, or cake, with a certain ingredient/portion list, that would be absurd.

So you're saying it's not absurd that music is copyrightable but it isn't absurd that a recipe isn't. There has to be some reason one is OK and the other is not.



Further, regarding credit, I would never credit someone else on a beer I made -- regardless of where the recipe I came from. If I'm talking about the recipe, however, I'd always credit the source (even though it is not copyrightable - it is right from a scientific or journalistic perspective). It's not my recipe, but it's still my beer. I don't place credits on the bread I bake, either.

 

[moti_mo]

So is this acceptable at a professional level? Is it fine for a professional brewery to create their beers using posted recipes from other sources (professional, amateur, whatever) and then make their money and/or win their awards based off of those beers?