Sharing a Citra IPA recipe

[dcp27]

Even then, I don't think it'd work. Because 1.000 is lower then 1.020

70/20 = 71.43% attenuation

70/75*71.43% + 5/75*100 = 73.33%

75*.2667 = 1.0199 - basically 1.02 if you round. im pretty sure this is the way bob is looking at it

 

[TyTanium]

Looks like we're at an impasse here.

I realize higher OG is where the extra alcohol comes from. But you're telling me the extra alcohol has no effect on FG?

Let's walk through the math here:

5 gallons of 1.020 beer has 5 x 20 = 100 gravity units of residual sugar.

Let's say we add a gallon of water. What's the SG? 100 / (5+1) = 16.7 = 1.0167 SG...you've just diluted the beer with water, hence gravity falls...nothing fancy here.

So if we add sugar, assuming no change no change in maltose fermentation, the amount of residual sugars remains unchanged. Therefore, the only change is more alcohol.

So those same 100 gravity units of residual sugar / (5 gallons beer + X oz of alcohol) = SG LOWER than 20.

Since alcohol is less dense than the beer, the SG must fall. You're diluting with a less dense liquid, just like adding water.

 

[bobbrews]

The sugar itself isn't going to lower your FG, except for the slight impact of alcohol being less dense than water.

If you are not satisfied with that answer and the prior explanations I gave then you should post a basic question in the General Discussions page. I have brewed many identical IPAs with sugar vs. without sugar, so I am satisfied with that answer.

There seems to be two answers to every question nowadays (dryhops can [vs. do not] get grassy after 5 days) or (hop utilization is [vs. is not] affected by wort gravity).

Give it a shot!

 

[jbaysurfer]

Because you didn't actually give us findings... you gave us expectations. And even if they were actual findings, the two beers are not exactly the same (aside from the sugar in the 2nd version).

Sugar and whether it makes a beer drier by replacement, or addition to, base malt was the only variable in question.

Your anectodal evidence is no stronger then my math based evidence.

What's funny is, in the above post you basically admitted that the same thing everyone else here has been arguing is right. "except for the slight impact of alcohol being less dense than water."

Except of course. It's probably not as slight as you'd lead us to believe, so I did some math that proves it.

Regarding being at an impasse Tytanium, I'll quote an old Navajo anecdote:

You can not wake a man who is pretending to be asleep.

 

[bobbrews]

Math also proves that black holes & event horizons can't exist. Yet they do.
Math also predicts that hop utilization decreases as wort gravity increases, yet some brewers think this is false -- I believe Palmer even revised his concept about this blaming break material as the culprit.

Besides, don't try to make this an argument of opinion vs. math... you hardly painted a clear picture with your math.

And it's not funny to admit alcohol is less dense than water. That still doesn't mean that adding sugar (instead of substituting a portion of malt for sugar) will result in a lesser FG than the original beer.... It just results in a higher OG.

Be my guest and post a very general question on the topic in the main forum. See what other's have to say and believe what you want to believe.

 

[jbaysurfer]

Math also proves that black holes & event horizons can't exist. Yet they do.
Math also predicts that hop utilization decreases as wort gravity increases, yet some brewers think this is false -- I believe Palmer even revised his concept about this blaming break material as the culprit.

Besides, don't try to make this an argument of opinion vs. math... you hardly painted a clear picture with your math.

And it's not funny to admit alcohol is less dense than water. That still doesn't mean that adding sugar (instead of substituting a portion of malt for sugar) will result in a lesser FG than the original beer.... It just results in a higher OG.

Be my guest and post a very general question on the topic in the main forum. See what other's have to say and believe what you want to believe.

I know the answer. Sugar ferments out below the FG of malt, so therefore any sugar added to the boil will decrease FG and DRY OUT.

I'm done, but you can post another really long and obfuscating response now. Maybe if you further muddle the original question, it'll serve to discredit your detractors more.

 

[bobbrews]

I know the answer. I'm done.

Good for you! I'm glad you finally came to a solution that satisfies you Do you feel better?

 

[jbaysurfer]

Jaytizzle, I'm sorry I dedicated 2 full posts to the OT discussion. Didn't mean to distract. Please keep us posted on this brew, my guess is you're dryhopping as we speak!

If it turns out good, and you're interested in a trade, I'll swap you a bottle of my KR Citra DIPA for this. Let me know.

 

[jaytizzle]

Jaytizzle, I'm sorry I dedicated 2 full posts to the OT discussion. Didn't mean to distract. Please keep us posted on this brew, my guess is you're dryhopping as we speak!

If it turns out good, and you're interested in a trade, I'll swap you a bottle of my KR Citra DIPA for this. Let me know.

Hell yeah, I'll gladly make a swap with you.

Not dry hopping yet. I've got a family function at the end of July that I'm saving this one for. I'm letting it bulk age and will begin dry hop on July 13. Then I'll cold crash from 7/20 to 7/23, then keg and carb. I'll make sure to bottle a few and put them aside for a swap. I appreciate the offer!

 

[Boerderij_Kabouter]

By this time, this evening, I make no apologies for statements made or comments logged. That said...

Bob, you are missing the boat. You initial premise is right. Replacing malt with sugar will create a drier beer. The problem with this whole discussion is one of semantics. "Drier" is a subjective term used to describe the relative response of an individual to the level of alcohol balanced against the acids, sugars, and other constituants of the beer. This balance is delicate and more complicated that anyone has discussed on this board to m knowledge ov er the last several years. These discussions exist in text book I have read and forgotten, but the matter is beyond technical citation.

Adding pure sugar to beer will "dry" that beer. That is to say that one's opinion of a beer with added sugar (whether added on top of or in replacement) will be that the beer has less residual sweetness (albeit not less residual gravity which is not typically detectable by the palate). That case is closed. The best IPA brewers from Leids to San Diago agree on this point and the science (as reported by Tytanium) backs it up. Stating that the addition of pure sucrose raises the final gravity significantly both flies in the face of conventional wisdom in the craft and in the face of science.

With that out of the way...

Adding sugar, either on top of or in replacement of malt, will change any recipe. In addition to changing the flavor profile, it will add a perceived dryness to the beer above and beyond the all malt beer (assuming a significant amount of sugar).

A very common piece of advice is to add a bit of simple sugar to any IPA recipe. I would eco this advice on many beers, but not all. American IPAs intended to showcase the hops and wherein the malt plays only a supporting role this makes sense to provide a pure hop impact. However, in balanced English style and double IPAs, I feel and all malt grain bill still has a place.

Take what you want from this thread, but I think logic will show you which of the above contributors exhibits logic, and which is trying to push weight around.

 

[Zabuza]

5 gallons of 1.020 beer has 5 x 20 = 100 gravity units of residual sugar.

Let's say we add a gallon of water. What's the SG? 100 / (5+1) = 16.7 = 1.0167 SG...you've just diluted the beer with water, hence gravity falls...nothing fancy here.

Besides, don't try to make this an argument of opinion vs. math... you hardly painted a clear picture with your math.

So much wrong with this post. First of all, how is TyTanium not being clear? Everyone understands your point that if all the added sugar is eaten, the FG should remain the same (because there'd be no residual sugar left over to screw with the FG). Dogmatically repeating that this is the end of the story and there is nothing more to say does not make that the case. TyTanium clearly states that the extra alcohol generated from adding that sugar is of a much lower gravity than the surrounding liquid - and since we can all agree that there would be more low-density liquid in the finished product, this simply means that the final gravity would be lower. You can't claim that adding a bunch of alcohol (and nothing else) to a beer won't lower the gravity, man...that's just crazy.

Oh and another thing - what on earth are you talking about with the whole opinion vs. math thing? When our opinions are outright refuted by mathematical truths, we have a responsibility to revise those opinions (or at the very least, point out exactly where the math is wrong). To cling dogmatically to your opinion in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary would be to invite irrationality and credulity which undermine critical thinking and evidence-based reasoning. Don't endorse that BS, especially on a forum that's trying to help n00bs learn the science of beer making.

Oh, your statements about black holes and event horizons are complete nonsense, by the way...those things ARE predicted by math - how on earth do you think we came up with them? They're in principle unobservable (you can't check out a black hole and come back) and we certainly don't currently have the ability to go visit the edge of one or anything, so how do you think we postulated their existence? That's right, via math.

Good for you! I'm glad you finally came to a solution that satisfies you Do you feel better?

Dude, c'mon...really? You're just making a fool out of yourself because you're the one that's wrong. How embarrassing...that's why you should refrain from making posts like these.

 

[bobbrews]

So much wrong with this post. First of all, how is TyTanium not being clear?

If you actually read who I was responding to you would know it was not TyTanium. It was jbaysurfer.

Oh, your statements about black holes and event horizons are complete nonsense, by the way...those things ARE predicted by math - how on earth do you think we came up with them?

You obviously know nothing about the loopholes in our science. But I'm not going to try to educate you on that either. Everything we think we know about physics breaks down when we try to understand black holes. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE CALLED THEORIES!! I thought it was representative in this situation since everyone is giving theories here and no concrete answers.

Dude, c'mon...really? You're just making a fool out of yourself because you're the one that's wrong. How embarrassing...that's why you should refrain from making posts like these.

No I'm not. If there are people out there who think they know the answer before all the details are resolved, then why bother listening to them? This guy said he already knew everything and that he was done. Good for him! That doesn't change the fact that the question is still up for debate for many others as seen in this thread.

The problem with this whole discussion is one of semantics. "Drier" is a subjective term

No it's not. Dry in this discussion, and in the most un-subjective sense denotes a lower FG. A 1.010 FG beer is drier than a 1.020 FG beer. No arguing that. I'm arguing that adding a bunch of simple sugar to a base recipe without sugar that predicts 1.020 FG will not drop the FG of the original recipe. Do I have clear convincing unrefutable proof for everyone? No... no one here does.

 

[TyTanium]

I have brewed many identical IPAs with sugar vs. without sugar, so I am satisfied with that answer.

This is helpful...I have not done comparisons so I can only theorize and rely on others' experience.

And I agree that if I have a 1.015 that I want to finish at 1.010, adding a few pounds of sugar post fermentation isn't my best bet - the best would be to modify the recipe ahead of time and replace malt with sugar.

No need for all the animosity here. We're just a bunch of homebrewers using mostly anecdotal evidence and high-school chemistry to understand a very particular nuance that many pro-brewers don't understand. Conversational speculation is good, IMO. I've certainly found this discussion valuable.

Good post, BK...I've read a few old threads saying the same, it's a perception based on a bunch of ratios, etc...not as simple as the number on the hydrometer. Happen to still have any of those old textbooks?

EDIT: Mods - a large portion of this thread is off topic (sorry OP - it was my doing)...but the content is still valuable I think, are you able to move the OT posts to its own thread?

 

[bobbrews]

TyTanium... I'm not telling you to believe what I believe. I'm telling you why I believe what I believe.

Everyone in this thread is being just as dogmatically repetitive by telling us what they believe. No one has all the answers for everyone or the thread would have ended.

 

[jbaysurfer]

This guy said he already knew everything and that he was done.

I said I knew the answer to whether a sugar addition dries out a beer. Not everything. I AM done with the debate, but felt I needed to represent myself since you went out of your way to MISrepresent me. Bad form.

 

[bobbrews]

jbaysurfer... nothing personal. We're all getting a little annoyed for not having a clear answer everyone can agree on. I personally don't think sugar dries out a beer in every situation.

 

[Boerderij_Kabouter]

This internet stuff is serious business.

Dryness is a subjective term. A beer with 8abv and a finishing gravity of 1010 will be comparably more dry when tasted next to a 4abv beer with a 1010fg. Dryness refers to a sensation of flavor and sensory analysis in your mouth. If we were talking about purely finishing gravity we would be talking about that, no dryness.

Bob, you will continue to believe what you want and there is enough debate here for people to make up their own minds.

 

[bobbrews]

Dryness is a subjective term. A beer with 8abv and a finishing gravity of 1010 will be comparably more dry when tasted next to a 4abv beer with a 1010fg. Dryness refers to a sensation of flavor and sensory analysis in your mouth. If we were talking about purely finishing gravity we would be talking about that, no dryness.

Bob, you will continue to believe what you want and there is enough debate here for people to make up their own minds.

You obviously have a lot to learn about dryness. Dryness is not synonymous with alcohol content. You could have a sweet bourbon with 40% alcohol. Besides, in your above example you're comparing two beers with the same FG... They will have the same level of residual sugars!!! This discussion is not about perceived dryness, but actual dryness.

And you could make up your mind all you want, but there are still no concrete answers.