Tell me About Brett

[Clint Yeastwood]

I've used yeast that was supposedly from Trappist strains, and I never got the rank smells or flavors that are in beers like Christmas Ale. I wonder what causes those things. It can't be any of the ingredients I've used.

As for Orval, it has very little of that stuff. It makes me wonder why brett hasn't always been as mainstream as saccharomyces.

For years, I was told brett tasted and smelled like rotten things from barnyards, and I can understand why that would drive people away, but if it's not true, why isn't it more commonly used? Judging from the difficulty of getting it out of equipment, it must be very hardy and unlikely to stall, and because it's dry, it must get a lot of attenuation. But I don't know how much of what I've been told is true.

 

[chthon]

I would expect that. I don't even think their Christmas Ale contains any added spices.

Most Belgian yeast is Phenolic (POF+...Phenolic Off Flavor Positive). That is responsible for the typical clove and pepper notes. There are a lot of other phenolic flavors (like smoke, plastic/band-aid, etc.) and often phenolics in small amounts can have a subtle character. That is likely one aspect you are tasting.

Also, most Belgian yeast (especially the Trappist styles) is fairly estery. This adds some of the fruity, cherry, dark fruit, banana, bubblegum (banana + berry), type flavors. Many of these beers are fermented in the 80F range, which can increase the ester production. Throw in some dark sugars or dark crystal malts, and you get more complex flavors.

I am a massive fan of St. Bernardus Abt 12. It would win my vote for "Best Beer in the World." I almost feel guilty paying only $12 for a 750ml bottle. It is likely a very simple recipe that is mostly Pilsner malt and dark sugar (maybe they use something like Special B), and some basic German hops. It is their yeast and process that makes the beer special. The yeast is likely very close to the Westmalle strain (WLP530, WY3787, Imperial Triple Double, and others).

6,75 EUR for a bottle locally, 1,81 EUR for 330 ml

 

[chthon]

I've used yeast that was supposedly from Trappist strains, and I never got the rank smells or flavors that are in beers like Christmas Ale. I wonder what causes those things. It can't be any of the ingredients I've used.

As for Orval, it has very little of that stuff. It makes me wonder why brett hasn't always been as mainstream as saccharomyces.

For years, I was told brett tasted and smelled like rotten things from barnyards, and I can understand why that would drive people away, but if it's not true, why isn't it more commonly used? Judging from the difficulty of getting it out of equipment, it must be very hardy and unlikely to stall, and because it's dry, it must get a lot of attenuation. But I don't know how much of what I've been told is true.

Are you aware that until the advent of modern biology and modern (well, end 19th century at Carlsberg) most beers contained brett? It is even named at the place of discovery, "Brettanomyces", British yeast. Most beers were either consumed fairly fast, or got an extended aging in huge or lined vats (not like spontaneous fermentation) where the brett did its work, getting the final gravity under 1.010, or lower. Porter, Stout, Old Ale, Pale Ale, bière de garde, all were conditioned by brett.

If brett has no contact with oxygen, then no funky tastes or acidity appear. (That's where the huge vats come from. If it is not lined there is oxygen ingress, but the huger the vat, the lesser the effect, as the area vs. the volume shrinks).

 

[DBhomebrew]

It is even named at the place of discovery, "Brettanomyces", British yeast.

More accurately, the British beer was taken to Carlsberg, Denmark and analyzed there. They weren't the first to find it, but one of their people, N. Claussen, wrote it up, etc.

Brettanomyces (British fungus) claussenii was the typical British strain. Other bretts were found elsewhere. Claussenii is very mild as bretts go.

 

[Clint Yeastwood]

I found an interesting article which says the problem with brett is that it doesn't do much for body. The article also says it grows slowly, so I suppose that alone would push factory brewers away from it.

It claims Orval doesn't add brett until bottling. If that is true, and I want the real Orval brett experience, maybe I should buy a bottle and leave it on the counter for a while so it ferments out.

https://byo.com/article/all-about-brett/

 

[VikeMan]

It appears I am. On the web, I'm seeing 6.2% and 6.9%. One source says it can go as high as 7.2%. What the hell does that mean? Is it fermenting in the bottle or what? Are the monks who brew it too hammered to be consistent? Do they just mash whatever they find lying on the brewery floor, ferment it, and dump it in bottles without measuring anything?

The brewers know exactly what they are doing. (BTW, they are not monks.) Orval is nominally 6.9% ABV. It says so right on the label. With age it undoubtedly does go a little higher, because yes, it is fermenting in the bottle, even after the sugar added for carbonation is used up. Brett slowly works on carbs that the primary clean strain couldn't. But more importantly, Brett transforms compounds created by clean yeasts into other compounds, thus changing the mix of aromas/flavors.

For years, I was told brett tasted and smelled like rotten things from barnyards, and I can understand why that would drive people away, but if it's not true, why isn't it more commonly used?

Most of the unique characterstics imparted by the various Brett strains would be a disaster, by modern standards, in most clean styles.

 

[CascadesBrewer]

I found an interesting article which says the problem with brett is that it doesn't do much for body. The article also says it grows slowly, so I suppose that alone would push factory brewers away from it.

It claims Orval doesn't add brett until bottling. If that is true, and I want the real Orval brett experience, maybe I should buy a bottle and leave it on the counter for a while so it ferments out.

https://byo.com/article/all-about-brett/

Does your bottle have any dates? I would guess it is several months old before it gets on a shelf in the US. I have read that Orval fresh at the brewery is a very different beer than it is at 1 year or 2 years.

I have my first beer with Brett going now. I added to to the secondary after primary fermentation with a Saison yeast. I expect it will work away for 6 months or so before it is ready to bottle. I has been 3 months and I still see bubbles and airlock activity. I believe that co-pitching Brett at the start of fermentation can turn over a beer in a month or so. 100% Brett fermentation is a thing I have heard about as well.

 

[Clint Yeastwood]

I would think that if brett gives Orval funny smells after it finishes, and the bottle I got was tame, it had to be a young bottle. I don't know if it had a date.

 

[VikeMan]

I would think that if brett gives Orval funny smells after it finishes, and the bottle I got was tame, it had to be a young bottle. I don't know if it had a date.

Fresh Orval ("fresh" meaning about 2 months from brew day...you can't get it younger than that) definitely has a "funny" smell, if by that you mean distinctive Brett brux character. And it definitely does increase and evolve with time. IMO, about 6-9 months in the bottle is the sweet spot for Orval. But that's with my taste buds and my cellar aging temperature.