SMaSH APA help for first time AG brewer

[HomebrewPadawan]

Hey guys!

I have just entered a whole new world...all-grain! I have been brewing extract beers for a little while now and feel I'm more than ready to step it up a notch.
I have just received the final pieces necessary to do it (10gal water cooler mash tun, wort chiller, and turkey fryer with 36qt pot), and am looking to the Sage-like wisdom and advise of people on this forum for help with my first batch!

I plan on doing a SMaSH for my first recipe for the simple fact that I want to start figuring out what things taste like on an individual ingredient level. With the help of the free software Brewtarget, I have concocted an APA recipe that seems to fit within the BJPC Guidelines (and one that I hope tastes good too). The recipe is as follows:

12# Maris Otter
1.5 oz Cascade (60 min)
1 oz Cascade (30 min)
0.5 oz Cascade (0 min or "flame out")
WhiteLabs WLP001

The questions I still have are:
1: what do you guys think a good target mash temp would be? 149-150??
2: what are your thoughts and opinions on this recipe?
3: anything else you wizards want to share would be greatly appreciated...people on this HBT Forum truly rock :rockin:

 

[motorneuron]

First things first: is this a 5-gallon recipe? What are your calculated IBUs, OG, and FG? I would recommend targeting 1.045 to 1.055 for your first AG; higher gravities are harder from a process point of view. For an APA, the IBU target is roughly in the 30 to 50 range.

Second things second, this recipe looks about right. I personally don't think that you HAVE to go for a SMaSH on your first beer. They are great for learning a particular ingredient, but it isn't so much simpler than a non-smash, simple recipe, and you are losing out on the ability to make some small but helpful adjustments. I think APAs improve with a little flaked wheat and/or carapils for head retention and body, for example, and you might want a little biscuit/victory/aromatic for depth, and possibly crystal if you are into that. If you were my buddy making his first beer, I would definitely tell you to do those things rather than make a SMaSH the first time.

Single hop is more legitimate in my mind. Your hop schedule looks a little light to me and could use a little more flavor/aroma. Without knowing your IBUs (and is this a 5-gallon batch?), I would suggest 1.5 oz at 60 mins, 1 oz at 30 minutes, and then 1.5 ounces at flameout, and probably a 1 ounce dry hop too.

As for mash temperature, it depends a little on your preferences and the other grains you have here. If you stick with a SMaSH, I would probably mash a little higher to maintain body--maybe 153 or 154. But 150 would be fine. You'll just wind up with a drier beer. The "standard" mash temp is around 152.

Good luck!

 

[HomebrewPadawan]

you bring up some very interesting points...

first off to answer your questions:
yes it is a 5 gal batch
IBU = 36
OG = 1056
FG = 1014

I like what you said about "small but helpful adjustments;" a good head on a beer is one of my favorite things, so perhaps I should look into the recommendation of flaked wheat and/or carapils. I have not come across these ingredients much (due to me doing extract kits), but should start researching them I guess!
I'll take a look at the hop schedule and play around with it, after looking at it again it does seem a little light on flavor/aroma. I definitely want a good aroma, so dry hopping becomes a real possibility.
I'll shoot for 152 then if that's kind of a "standard," I will then know what might be considered dryer or more malty after that.

Any other suggestions from the Wizards of HBT are welcome...Please bring it!!

 

[ericbw]

Extract often has carapils in it, so if you like your extract brews, adding carapils will make it more like you're used to, just as a baseline.

 

[jayway]

The recipe looks solid. I just did a SMaSH with MO and amarillo that we have been drinking for a couple weeks now and it's mightly tastey, I will make it again for sure. Mashed at 154 for added body with US-05, FG was 1.013, and I dry hopped with an oz.

Head retention could be better, pours a decent head but dissipates quickly.

 

[SeeMont]

I like your plan, Myself, I jumped head first in all grain brewing. A friend gave me a hard IPA recipe with a lot of additions, It turned out okay but I didn't learn the basics. As you have, I studied the process and that was not a problem. I myself am going back to a simple brew and doing SMASH recipe in order to taste what base beer is. For me, I wish I would have done that to start just for my own taste knowledge. Good Luck

 

[HomebrewPadawan]

The recipe looks solid. I just did a SMaSH with MO and amarillo that we have been drinking for a couple weeks now and it's mightly tastey, I will make it again for sure. Mashed at 154 for added body with US-05, FG was 1.013, and I dry hopped with an oz.

Head retention could be better, pours a decent head but dissipates quickly.

Do you know if flaked wheat and/or carapils would help that, or basically have you brewed with it in your grain bill?

I like your plan, Myself, I jumped head first in all grain brewing. A friend gave me a hard IPA recipe with a lot of additions, It turned out okay but I didn't learn the basics. As you have, I studied the process and that was not a problem. I myself am going back to a simple brew and doing SMASH recipe in order to taste what base beer is. For me, I wish I would have done that to start just for my own taste knowledge. Good Luck

Yes, exactly. I know I like beer, so I wanted to learn all the building blocks of it, hence the SMaSH idea. But I am tempted to try the wheat/carapils for a good head...but I suppose I shouldn't and see what I end up with the SMaSH...that way once I add wheat or carapils, ill know what the difference was! I think I just talked (typed) my way out of adding it to the grain bill...

Bring on the insight people! The more I read, the more I learn!

 

[Aonghus]

Looks like a killer first try to me. My only suggestion would be more Cascade hops (to hell with the guidelines) and longer boil time. I would go with a 90 minute addition ( I like a 90 minute boil ) and a doubled up 20 minute addition and do a whole 1oz at flame out. With your lower mash temps this will attenuate very well. You will have a west coast type beer with that wonderful extra taste from the M.O.

 

[jayway]

Do you know if flaked wheat and/or carapils would help that, or basically have you brewed with it in your grain bill?

Most of my recipes have 1/2lb of carapils for body and head retention. I like using it more than crystal malts, crystal adds too much sweetness for my tastes in the final beer and it doesnt leave a cloudyness/haze like wheat can. I like a nice clear beer. I only use wheat in my saisons and a honey wheat I brew on occasion.

 

[ericbw]

Torrified wheat also helps with a nice head, and I don't think it contributes haze. I don't know how it differs from flaked though.

 

[kingwood-kid]

If you're going to brew a SMASH, MO is a fine grain to choose. It's pretty easy to work with, but contributes a lot more flavor than 2-row, enough so that you don't need to add specialty malts. I 'm not really a foam afficionado, but a 1/2lb of carapils or any kind of wheat will help you out there.

I wouldn't use Cascade at 60 minutes; it's a lousy bittering hop. Just use something high-alpha acid (Magnum, warrior, columbus, nugget, etc) to get your desired IBUs and add your flavor hops at flameout and as a dry hop. Technically, it's not a SMASH, but it will save you some money, and almost nobody can tell one bittering hop from another. If you have 3oz Cascade, I'd use all at flameout or 2 at flameout and 1 at dry-hop.

 

[HomebrewPadawan]

I wouldn't use Cascade at 60 minutes; it's a lousy bittering hop. Just use something high-alpha acid (Magnum, warrior, columbus, nugget, etc) to get your desired IBUs and add your flavor hops at flameout and as a dry hop. Technically, it's not a SMASH, but it will save you some money, and almost nobody can tell one bittering hop from another. If you have 3oz Cascade, I'd use all at flameout or 2 at flameout and 1 at dry-hop.

That is an interesting thought, but I think I mine as well make it a true SMaSH to start with...although, I would like to hear so more opinions on the "almost nobody can tell one bittering hop from another" part of your post!

Is that really true? I would assume people would be able to tell one hop vs the next even if they were boiled the full 60 minutes? What are some thoughts on this?

 

[JordanKnudson]

I will offer the dissenting opinion on "nobody can tell the difference." To a point this is true -- it is not as distinct as flavor and aroma, which can be so specific that you know precisely which hop you are tasting/smelling as soon as it hits your face. However, different hops create bitterness with different qualities. We often refer to bitterness with adjectives such as "soft" or "sharp" or "clean" or "harsh," and so forth. Again, these are not incredibly specific terms, but they are different from one another. While the hops' aromatic compounds are very volatile and boil off quickly, the compounds that do not boil off are just as relevant (they are what creates the "bitter" in a bittering addition, after all), and the ratios of these compounds vary from hop to hop. It only makes sense that we would notice at least slight differences in the quality of bitterness between hop varieties with distinct profiles. (Quick caveat: how you use the hops during the process can create just as much difference, so not *all* of the distinctions are due to the varietal, but some major ones definitely are).

On another topic entirely, Carapils is great for mouthfeel and head retention, but I actually like your idea of doing it once without so that you can really pinpoint the difference when you do use it.

 

[HomebrewPadawan]

However, different hops create bitterness with different qualities. We often refer to bitterness with adjectives such as "soft" or "sharp" or "clean" or "harsh," and so forth. Again, these are not incredibly specific terms, but they are different from one another. While the hops' aromatic compounds are very volatile and boil off quickly, the compounds that do not boil off are just as relevant (they are what creates the "bitter" in a bittering addition, after all), and the ratios of these compounds vary from hop to hop. It only makes sense that we would notice at least slight differences in the quality of bitterness between hop varieties with distinct profiles.
QUOTE]

After your comment I did a little more reading on the idea. Both these links offered some insight on the topic. But what I think you are talking about here is cohumulone (along with others compounds)
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/role-bittering-hops-flavor-191563/#post2223965
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/how-much-do-bittering-hops-effect-hop-flavor-224123/

I think Yooper had a pretty good case when he said:

You can bitter with whatever hops you like. When hops were very cheap, more people bittered with lower AA hops. However, many people have found that since the bittering hops that are most neutral don't cause any harshness or flavor issues, a higher AAU hop variety, like galena or magnum, can be used without detriment to the beer.

some hops are higher in cohumulone than others. Higher cohumulone hops have a "harsher" bite to them and to me taste sharp. A clean bittering doesn't have that harsh bite. Here's a little info from the wiki on this: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/wiki/index.php/Cohumulone#Cohumulone I've read several books and articles with this info, and I don't pretend to fully understand it. There are many compounds in hops, even though we usually talk about alpha acids. The other compounds in them contribute to the characteristics of the hops, too.

This really seemed to help clear up the thought on the issue for me. I believe Yooper is saying hops like Magnum (for example) have a high AA% but are low in cohumulone, making them a less "harsh" choice for bittering hops. This would lead me to believe that you would in fact be able to taste, or at least sense, the difference between different hops as bittering additions, albeit to a lesser degree than a flavor addition.

Sound about right to anyone?

 

[JordanKnudson]

Yes. Cohumulone levels are currently one of the most focused-on aspects of hop breeding and selection. The trend at the moment is to breed hops with higher alpha acid percentages and lower cohumulone. Simcoe is a great example of the result of just such a breeding program.

There are other compounds involved in the process (of course, why can't it ever be simple?). I don't have a complete grasp on what they all do -- and frankly, I think even the experts still don't claim to have unraveled all the mysteries. However, they are all heading into your beer, and as such it's good to remember that just because they aren't the aromatic compounds that we all get excited about doesn't mean that they won't be discernible from one hop variety to the next. (This was, by the way, not meant as an argumentative post toward kingwood-kid. His idea to use Magnum as a bittering hop and Cascade for flavor/aroma is still a good one. But since you asked for other opinions on what he said, I just threw in my two cents.)

 

[ericbw]

After your comment I did a little more reading on the idea. Both these links offered some insight on the topic. But what I think you are talking about here is cohumulone (along with others compounds)
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/role-bittering-hops-flavor-191563/#post2223965
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f39/how-much-do-bittering-hops-effect-hop-flavor-224123/

I think Yooper had a pretty good case when he said:


This really seemed to help clear up the thought on the issue for me. I believe Yooper is saying hops like Magnum (for example) have a high AA% but are low in cohumulone, making them a less "harsh" choice for bittering hops. This would lead me to believe that you would in fact be able to taste, or at least sense, the difference between different hops as bittering additions, albeit to a lesser degree than a flavor addition.

Sound about right to anyone?

Another factor is probably the amount of hops (plant matter) needed to get the bitterness you want. So if you use Saaz to bitter, it would take a ton to get to an APA-level bitterness. So you'd probably taste more of the other stuff in addition to the bitterness. A high AA hop would take a smaller amount, and so you'd be left with less of the other stuff and more pure AA.

For instance, Saaz is at 3.5%, and Summit is at 15%, so to get to 30 IBUs would take about 3 times as much Saaz as Summit. So of course it would add additional flavors that might muddy the water.

I don't know anything about anything, but I would guess that is a contributing factor of why certain hops are used as "clean" bittering hops. I wonder if you'd find any low AA hops that are described as clean bittering?

 

[JordanKnudson]

I don't know anything about anything, but I would guess that is a contributing factor of why certain hops are used as "clean" bittering hops. I wonder if you'd find any low AA hops that are described as clean bittering?

There are a few, but it does seem that most of the time the correlations in your assessment hold true. One exception -- and one of my very favorite hops -- is Pacifica, formerly Pacific Hallertauer. It's low AA by today's standards (~5.5%), and it gives the most fantastic, smooth bitterness. Really beautiful stuff.

 

[kingwood-kid]

The cohumulone part is still mostly theory. Why some hops are less harsh than others is still a mystery. Of course, one person's "harsh" is another's "firm," so a lot of this comes down to preference and perception. At least on paper, smooth and bitter seem something like opposites to me, although I suppose I've had beer that was both.

JordanKnudsen said in post 13 what I meant to say in my post, but bungled slightly. When we describe the taste of hops, we're mainly talking fruity/citrus/spicy/etc... as opposed to their bittering capabilities. Almost all of those types of tastes will be gone when you boil the hops for 60 minutes, which is why I would, even in an alleged SMASH, use Magnum or something similar for bittering.

 

[HomebrewPadawan]

After this great discussion I have decided to change a few small things with the recipe...
First: I'm going to ferment a 4 gallon batch rather than a 5 (I'm going to use one of my two 5 gallon glass carboys for this). It will allow me to buy a few less ingredients (not a real concern), but also allow me to churn out a few less bottles in the end allowing me to make a few SMaSH's more frequently.
Second: After a few recommendations from people on this thread I have decided to change the hop schedule a little bit:

1 oz Cascade @ 60 min
1.5 oz Cascade @ 20 min
1.5 oz Cascade @ flameout

In a 4 gallon batch, this should lead to approximately 40 IBU (assuming 75% efficiency), and with the 1.5oz at flameout it should have a good cascade aroma.
Third: I have decided to leave out the flaked wheat/carapils for this batch and will go with it in my next batch.
Fourth: I have decided to shoot for a mash temp of 152f.

Does anyone reading this have any suggestions about the mashing process in general, as this will be my first time doing it?
My software is telling me 3.1 gallons @ 165f strike water (1.25 qt/lb thickness) should get me to 152f for the mash. Then a batch sparge of 4.3 gallons @ 170.
I guess I will be doing a "batch sparge" rather than a "fly sparge" this batch...who wants to help me!??

 

[JordanKnudson]

Looks good to me!

I usually do a slightly thinner mash (~1.5 q/lb), but loads of people do the 1.25 and swear by it, and I'm not saying you should change it. My only reason for this is that you don't get such a big temperature swing (you wouldn't need 165F strike water to reach 152F mash temp), and this gives me a better feeling of security. I once had BeerSmith calculate an infusion temp in a thick mash that was designed to get me into my saccharification rest from a protein rest. I ended up mashing out. That was no good. So to me, the thinner mash keeps your strike water temperature in a closer range to your target mash temperature, and this is a good thing. Also, a slightly thinner mash would allow you to get closer to equal runnings in your batch sparge. With all that said, seriously feel free to keep those numbers as they are. They aren't wrong (in fact they're totally normal).

I batch sparge as well. I love it. It's easier and quicker, and I can get just as good efficiency out of it as I can with fly sparging (YMMV). Here's an excellent interview with Denny Conn about how he approaches batch sparging: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki61_HppGnY

 

[HomebrewPadawan]

I watched the video (ironically I have been listening to the BeerSmith podcasts in my car for a few months now... FYI: I highly recommend them to anyone who wants to learn about beer while driving around!) and it helped a ton.
I have been playing around with the software today and found that I get more even quantities of mash and sparge water when I switch the grain bed to 1.5qt/lb and from what I have been reading today, "equal runnings" could be considered better, so I might try that too.

Anyone else have any sage-like wisdom to impart on a padawan like myself?