Recipe Etiquette

[Krovitz]

Half pound wheat malt, half pound C-40, half pound munich, half pound Victory, three pounds MO, three pounds 2-row, mash at 152, top up to gravity with 2# DME. Use 0.5oz each of Citra and Amarillo in four additions at FWH, 20, 10 and flame out. Ferment with Nottingham.

How close did I get?

Ha. You've crossed two different recipes of mine. Hops are spot on though. Grain bill is much simpler.

BTW, that red ale came out pretty darn good too. I changed it a little, no wheat, C-60 and added a little caraaroma.

 

[dogbar]

Yoop has her palate, I only have the search function

Edit: So if I'd guessed .5# wheat, .5# c-40 and the rest two row and DME I'd have gotten there? Your red did throw me.

It's not lying to your girlfriend if you just blink once for yes, twice for no.

 

[zeg]

I still cannot understand this dismissive mentality. How on Earth can you say the list of ingredients is meaningless!? That is the equivalent of saying the ingredients themselves are meaningless. I mean, it's 2-row malt right? Who cares what brand it is. It's crystal malt right, so who cares what company it's from?

I would agree that "meaningless" is going too far. While just using the same recipe won't give you the same beer, using different ingredients certainly won't either.

However, when it comes to producing a good to great beer, I would put the recipe pretty far down on the list of things you have to nail. In the hands of a great brewer, almost any combination of malts and hops that meets a handful of constraints is likely to be a good beer, and probably will find some big fans.

If you are trying to produce a specific beer, then yes, the exact recipe is pretty important (though certainly not unique---there are plenty of small variations that I'm sure even Yooper couldn't distinguish!). If you are trying to fit it within a style, or to push the envelope ("just how much black malt can I put in before it's foul"), then it's fairly important. But if you are just trying to produce a good beer, it's not like you're going to get something foul because you had an extra pound of base malt, you used Crystal 60 instead of 20, or you were out of roast barley so you threw in some chocolate malt.

At the end of the day, if I try your beer and think it's phenomenal, my first reaction is going to be that you are a great brewer, not that you found a great recipe. That's what I'm trying to get at.

 

[Krovitz]

I'm not saying anything.

A lot of good points were made. In the end, she is my co-brewer. 50/50 split. Her recipes come out much better than mine, so I have to assume ingredients are just as important as process.

Back to OP, if someone chose to post their own recipes, they know that everyone can do whatever they want with it. So enter away. You might even make it better.

We just went full circle there.

 

[iambeer]

I'm not sure I understand. I usually pick a recipe that has 5 stars, change a couple of things so that it's totally new and unique. Then I give it to my head brewer and say "make this taste great".... "no matter what" ....or "else".

Sticks are better than carrots. Most of the time it comes out well but sometimes it doesn't, which forces me to look for a new brew master on Craig's List.

As you can see from the above, the recipe that I make is everything and the process is expandable. That is why I am the boss #1. Trust me there are plenty of talented young brew masters that would pay me to work for me as long as I let them go to trade shows and drink legal malt beverage during business hours.

 

[lou2row]

A quick tangent:
You buy a book of recipes. You make one of the brews and it comes out outstanding. Do you enter it?

 

[dogbar]

I'm not saying anything.

Ha, that means I got it

 

[Krovitz]

Ha, that means I got it

Closer but still off.