As stated in my review of 568, the final attenuation of the strain went to the 1.018-1.020 mark.  Perhaps this isn’t quite as dry as a typical Saison, but I also had 10% ABV, which certainly isn’t typical.  That being said, some residual sweetness was desirable for two reasons.  One, balancing out the ABV is necessary in a 10%ABV Saison, so a touch of sweetness accomplishes that goal.  Second, a touch of sugar with a fresh yeast addition creates the bright carbonation necessary for authenticity in the style.  The carbonation also aids in the perceived mouth-feel and is an additional boost to, perceptively speaking, keeping the ABV in check.  I’m happy to say that it worked brilliantly.

I primed to the tune of a 5/8 cup dextrose for 5 gallons.  Many of you will spot that this is between 1/2 and 3/4 a cup.  Normally, priming at 3/4 a cup for a brighter beer would make sense, but I did have some sugar left, and I didn’t want to make this beer a gushing monster.  At any rate, it seems to have worked out very well.  I’m happy to report that the beer is bright, has a nicely retained head, and tastes great.

But here is what most of us would come here looking for: what flavor impact did the yeast have?  I put my Saison into the bottle with a fairly clovey, lesser banana, and semi-prominent bubble gummy quality.  I expected the French Saison yeast to finish the beer to be a bit drier, which it did, and to create some more citrus, peppery, and overall spicy elements.

When I tasted the first bottle of the conditioned beer, it was still somewhat hefe in it qualities.  After about 4 weeks, the qualities of the French Saison started to shine through.  The bubble-gum and clove elements were retained but to a much lesser extent.  The spicy tones began to have an impact.  The hops aromas began to come into play (I used a very small amount in the last few minutes of the boil).  Overall, the beer began to have a richer spiciness.  I would expect this strain to behave that way if used in primary fermentation as well.

I have to say that I plan on using this strain for primary next time and will report back.  However, if you want a good strain for a spicy and less estery finish on your Saison, perhaps this is a good choice.

As always, I hope this was helpful, and I’d love some feedback.

Spread the Word:

Think about it: our blog of humble beginnings has had influence over a few people.  In an age of mass media, mass production, really mass culture, personal discussions and friendships of mutual respect via the blog world have helped us to influence, teach, and shape each others outlooks.  So, it is with thanks to all of you, our readers and friends, that I say I’m glad to have you hear and see pictures like this: Scott’s first brew.  Where’s yours?

Spread the Word:

Well, during the process of starch to sugar conversion, water penetrates the grain.  That water converts the starches into sugar while also increasing the viscosity.  Problem is that you want those sugars for a complete wort and beer.  But you want to be careful because too high of temperatures don’t simply extract entrenched sugar, they pull out the tannins/huskiness/astringency of the grain husks.  With few exceptions, 168-170ºF is about as hot that your sparging water should be.

There are various levels and ways of sparging that can be done.  For instance, barley-wines can often have little or no sparging at all.  Normally, however, brewers tend to run their sparged sugars to about 2º on the Plato scale.  Obviously, style dependence and objectives for the beer play a role.  I often reach my target volumes before the aforementioned Plato threshold.  There are many factors, including boiling time, etc.

It should be obviously that boiling wort for 60 minutes vs. 120 will have a significant difference in evaporation.  So, the way I tend to approach my sparging is essentially style based.  Sound confusing?  I know that it would have been for me on the first run, so I’m providing a basic formula for the sparging.

#s of grain + 1 quart (generally) for mash – 1/10 gallon per pound of grain for absorption = wort volume

wort volume + sparge water + 11% evaporation rate per hour = total starting volume for boil.

Here is a simple example.

I start with 16 pounds of grain, so I would add 4 gallons of water to the mash-1.6 gallons (accounting for 1/10 gallon per pound grain) = 2.4 gallons.

2.4 gallons + 2.6 gallons = 5 gallon batch + 22% evaporation rate (2 hour boil) = 6.1 (approximately)

6.1 – 2.4 = 3.7 gallons of sparge water.

If that is getting to be a little much, just remember the formula of 1 quart of water per pound of grain, 1/10 gallon absorption per pound of grain, and 11% evaporation per hour of boiling.

As far as sparging is concerned, all that’s needed is something to separate your grain from the wort.  The most simple method is called the Zappap method, which basically consists of two buckets, one sitting inside the other.  The top bucket will leave enough room for a spigot to be installed on the bottom one and will also give a gap where liquid can flow from the grain bed.  I constructed my own two tier way of using the Zappap concept.  Honestly, Zappaping is the easiest approach.

While you sparge, you don’t want to disturb the grain bed.  Disturbing the bed will stir up proteins and tannins and create a haze.  For that reason, you’ll want to find a way to deflect your sparge water from landing directly on the top of your grains.  One of the simplest ways I’ve seen this approached is with a pizza pan (the one with a bunch of holes in it).  If you care to see my approach here’s what mine looks like and how I did it.  At any rate, splashing the grains harshly is the enemy.

The last point I would like to make about sparging is re-circulation.  I always re-circulate my wort.  It also helps the wort to flow well, clean up, and establish the grain bed.  What I tend to do is run my wort in about 1/2 gallon increments until I match the volume of what is in the wort before sparging.  The example I gave above will help to spell this out.  For instance, I had 2.4 gallons of wort from the mash of 16 pounds grain and 4 gallons of water.  I would run 1/2 gallon through until I reached 2 1/2 gallons (2.4 to be exact) of that wort through before adding any sparge water.

That is the long and short of how I sparge.  I’m hoping to have some videos of this stuff at some point.

Spread the Word:

The word decoction refers to reducing/concentrating/boiling down a solution.  It also refers to extracting the essence of something.  In the context of beer, it refers to boiling the thickest part of the mash, which, in turn, allows further water penetration and starch conversion.  Also, various elements that are essential to stylistic flavor profiles are produced.

Decoction mashing is the traditional method for beers like Doppelbock, Lambic, and several styles that can also be step mashed.  Some of the benefits of decoction mashing are debated among beer geeks, but it does offer a pretty thorough conversion of starches to sugars and adds some tannin qualities, which are desirable for some styles.  In addition, Melanoidin (formed from Amino acids and sugars), which is accomplished through the so-called Mailard reaction, is said to happen during the boiling portions of the decoction.  This yields some of the deeper flavors of Bocks, for instance.

The basic method for decoction mashing entails separating 25% of the mash and bringing it up to temps that are conducive to starch conversion.  Often times, the remaining 75% of the mash is left at 122° (F) for a protein rest.  After about 30 minutes of conversion occurs in the 25% separated mash, it is brought to a boil for a short amount of time, creating some tannin qualities and character in final beer. The boiling mash is then added back to the 75% mash and brings it up to conversion range.  The increased viscosity and sugar content in the re-addition are said to “jump start” conversion in the larger mash.  At any rate, the beer is allowed to convert at the new temperature range.  That is, unless…

Sometimes double, and even triple, decoction mashes are performed to add even more character to the beer.  Double and Triple are used earlier in the process, achieving various temp ranges that are known to accomplish various by-products in the beer.  Let me say it in a less abstract manner.  Say you have a beer that is supposed to be mashed and rested at 95º.  You added your water to the grains to achieve the mash temp.  It also calls for a protein rest at 122º (the protein rest is known to break down various proteins and promote others that create good head retention).  What do you do?  Some recipes call on the brewer to pull 1/4 of the mash, perform a sachrification rest at 158º, raise to boiling, and re-add to the mash.  This grain that is re-added to the mash will have converted sugars, tannin qualities, and get the temperature to the proper range.  That’s one decoction.  A second one might be called for to achieve the conversion range for the entire mash.  So, 1/4 of the mash is pulled out, heated to 158º, rested for 30 minutes, made to boil and added back to the remaining mash.  A third one might be performed at any point along the way.

I know this is uncharted to many of us, so maybe a short diagramish thingy will help.

Grains+Water= Mash (let’s assume the initial temperature of the mash is 95º)

Whole mash—>1/4 taken out, heated to 158º, rested for 30 min, boiled (this is decoction)

1/4 boiled mash—>Added back to 3/4 mash

All the mash now=122º—>1/4 taken out, heated to 158º, rested for 30 min, boiled (this is decoction number 2)

1/4 boiled mash—>Added back to 3/4 mash

All mash now 148-158º (depending on targets temps and calculations).

That’s the long and short of decoction mashing.  Perhaps saying what is happening is harder than actually doing it, so I encourage you to try it some time.

Spread the Word:

The fact that my first double bock turned out well, despite some flaws in the process, is evidence that I brewed (on a fundamental level) well the first time.  It also points out that I’ve not stopped learning.  I think that’s the thing I love about brewing; there is always something new to learn, do, and change up.  For the record, I’m still planning on some unique signatures on the brew, but I know that changing a recipe means being able to do it well in the first place.  I’ve decided to brew some classic/traditional brews for a while. 

Amazingly, or perhaps responsively to our current beer culture, I’ve decided to go back to the basics.  Sure I’m going to do some extreme beers and I plan to eisbock just about everything I brew.  But the past calls me.  There is something strangely new about re-discovering the past, something strangely appealing about the mundane.  I began to wonder if it’s because I’ve not really ever discovered the past.  I don’t know.  What I can say is that Zymurgy has sparked in me a new thirst for learning styles and their intricacies. 

Forgive me if this post is a little self-indulgent, but I do plan on sharing my “new” disoveries and (maybe) some of the recipes that I construct.  The 1700s style Porter is particularly exciting.  Meanwhile, I think Zymurgy might be an insightful starting place.

Spread the Word:

So back to the thought…  The thought/encouragement that I have for the homebrewers out there is to pick your spots.  I’m sure many of you can testify to the reality that not everyone appreciates a good homebrew.  Why?  Because those same people don’t generally appreciate good beer.  I’ve shared my homebrews with many people on many occasions.  It’s notable how many people come out of the woodwork when they find out free beer is involved.  Oftentimes, it’s the macro drinkers who are the first to ask.  I like to tell myself they are asking out of an deep-seated and unconscious desire for good beer, having been deprived their whole lives.

The truth is quite different from the above premise.  In fact, I told a young woman that I homebrewed and she expressed interest, only to follow up with “Does it get you f#@ked-up?”  I wasn’t too keen on sharing in that case.  Think about it: would you have a $5-15 dollar bottle of beer you’d share with someone knowing that they were just copping a buzz?  Why not your homebrew, too?

I guess my point is this: don’t waste your homebrew on those who won’t appreciate it.  All of us get excited about our concoctions.  We love our beer fiercely, and sometimes this skews our perception and tells us that everyone else will appreciate it.  However, I’m selective about who I share my beer with because I don’t simply want it to be a means to the end of being inebriated.  Plenty of time, a lot of effort, and some cash flow go into my beers…I want someone to know that when they drink it.

What about the other homebrewers out there?  Do you guys pick your spots or have a story to share about under-appreciated homebrew?

Spread the Word:

Here’s what I mean.  I bought my one gallon fermenter at a brew shop.  The going rate for the one gallon fermenter is about $5.  It’s not a huge expense, but it is one.  Do you cook much?  Do you cook with wine much?  Or do you know someone who does?  Here’s what I figured out.  I shopped at Smart and Final and was able to purchase a 4 liter jug o’ wine for about $7.50-8.00 (and I used a coupon to get an additional dollar off).  Not a bad price for some halfway decent cooking wine.  But here is the cool part: 4 liters is 1.05 gallons.  My suggestion is that you get cooking wine and your starter vessel in one place. Aren’t you cooking with the wine anyway?  Or, if you know someone who cooks with wine a lot, ask that someone to save their jug for you.

If you’re not as frugal (or cheap, depending on perspective), then don’t worry about this post.  I just figured that we all like to save a little money, which is why I’m doing this and switching to Geico at the same time.

Spread the Word:

For those of us who brew, we’ve often seen yeast packs or recipes that recommend making a yeast starter for beers that are over 1.070 degrees gravity (i.e., the beer has the potential to reach the ABV level of roughly 9.2%, assuming full fermentation).  The reasons behind this are many.  For one, a higher gravity creates a more hostile environment for lower levels of yeast.  Secondly, the small level of yeast simply can’t uptake sugar and multiply fast enough to keep up with levels.  They can literally explode.  Furthermore, higher sugars mean higher viscosity, which means lower oxygen uptake.  Because of this, the smaller amount of yeast has more trouble feeding off the lower levels of dissolved oxygen.  Additionally, as the ABV levels rise, the yeast is in an even more hostile environment.  For all these reasons (and more), you’ll see that starters are advisable for higher gravity beers.

Think of it this way: say you had to weed your garden in very hot and hostile temps.  Imagine that the garden is huge and there are a ton of weeds to cover.  Would you prefer to do this job on your own?  In this case, you might not ever finish or you might even collapse from exhaustion.  Or would you rather have a whole army that could more quickly, thoroughly, and easily knock out the task?  I know which I’d choose.  Apply the same line of thought to yeast; get an army to do the job of a few soldiers.  You get the point.  But how do you make a starter?

The first thing you need is a vessel that works well for making a starter.  Your five or six gallon fermenter is overkill, and it may be too rich an oxygen setting for your small army.  I always use a gallon fermenter, which I also use for experimentation.

Following normal pitching procedures is probably the best way to approach the starter.  What I mean is, take the liquid yeast (re-hydrate first if it’s powder) and give it the normal 3-6 hours innoculation period.  From there, you need to maintain normal sanitation practices.  Clean the one gallon fermenter with the solution you use (chlorine and iodine solution in my case).  When you are getting ready to pitch the yeast, boil one quart of water a put in 3/4 a cup of pilsen malt.  (I suggest pilsen malt because it ferments cleanly and relatively neutrally.  You can do something else if you wish but there is no guarantee against off flavors from other sugars and subsequent yeast production.)  Boil for for about 15 min.  Cool the wort to proper pitching temps (around 70º or so), pitch it in, and give it a good shake.

Note:  Avoid putting anything in the wort to cool it.  Ice in particular is a bad idea.  An ice bath outside the pan is fine.  Just remember to make sure the water from the outside doesn’t get into the wort when you pour it.

Now you have a starter.  Making this the day before brewing ought to be just fine.  I always wait until my yeast settles, dump all but a little bit of the liquid out, shake the yeast with the small remaining liquid and pitch into the larger wort.  For really big beers, I’ve fed the yeast for up to a week.  The more the merrier.

Sanitation Note: Remember that the airlock you use can collect bacteria, so clean it up before taking it off.  Some suggest isopropyl alcohol and a lighter to get sterilization.  I’ve always found a good cheap vodka to work just as well.  Q-tips are just about perfect for a job like this.

Spread the Word:

What got me thinking about this?  Well, I’m just now brewing my first lambic. Already this an interesting style, but there are various roads I had to choose in order to make the lambic mine.  For instance, what was my grain bill going to include?  What percentage wheat should I use?  Was I going to add a small portion of one more grains to put a slight spin on the whole?  These were questions I had to ask myself before I even got into the brewing process.

Hops.  What about those?  How do I get stale hops, which are important for the style?  Is there an artificial way to do this?  What type of hops?  Of course, I had to do some whole leaf hops for this one.  Should I put a slight spin on the style by adding aroma hops?  Already the questions were stacking up.

What method best works for souring the lambic?  Sour mash?  Bacterial strain additions?  Both?  I think you get the picture, and there is a lot more that I could add.  For instance, I could have varied my mash temps to get a different beer.  Here is the point.  A lager isn’t just a lager any more than a lambic is just a lambic.  It all depends in whose hands the recipe falls.  So, the admonition is twofold. One, if you brew, just have a blast with experimentation because there are many variables that can make the “same” beer vastly different. Two, don’t just pass by a beer based on style.  Find a brewer who puts unique signatures on beers and enjoy them for all their worth.

Spread the Word:

That’s the thing about homebrew supplies.  There are various sources from which they can be purchased, but there’s no one with whom to speak.  Brewing advice or just shooting the shit are some of the most rewarding aspects of shopping for homebrew supplies locally. There is room to bounce ideas off one another and to help the more fledgling homebrew neophytes.  I actually had the privilege of offering some sound advice to a guy who was doing an extract brew.  I suggested some German Chocolate Wheat malt to help with head retention and get more of the chocolate tones (and less coffee) that he was looking for.  I also advised him to be careful with the vanilla beans he was putting in bourbon, reminding him that the higher ABV would be more efficient in extraction and to be cautious about it.

More than that, the fellows there are ready, willing, and very able to help.  I had ordered some special 6.3 ounce bottles for some of my more rare and strong brews.  They got them quickly and had them waiting for me.  Beyond this, their selection of grains, adjuncts, sugars, equipment and beyond is very nice.  If they don’t have it, they can get it.

So, I want to commend this homebrew supply shop to you.  Isn’t it time that we’ve moved toward having more personal aspects of brewing in a very impersonal world?  Check them out and support your local businesses.

Spread the Word: