Homebrew Blogging Tips - SotB 2012

Rather than summarize the statistics of my fifth year of blogging for the annual State of the Blog post as I did in previous years, I decided to take the opportunity to summarize what I've learned from blogging. Over the years, I have received probably a dozen emails from new homebrewing bloggers seeking advice. This post is how I should have answered those requests if I'd had the effort at the time. The same sort of suggestions would help anyone starting a blog about a hobby or craft. I also hope that even if you don't blog that you might be interested in what goes on behind the scenes.

Having unique, high quality, content is the most important thing to focus on. This is easier to do if you write about something you have a passion for. Try to narrow your focus to find a niche or a niche within a niche that appeals to you. Be honest, don't try to cover up mistakes; posting flaws and accidents builds trust with the readers, if your batch sucks let people know so they can avoid the same mistakes. This is especially important with brewing because I often post a recipe before the beer is ready to sample. Don't try to sound like an expert on subjects where you are not, if you say something stupid in an authoritative way about one thing it undermines your credibility on other topics.

Almost as important as what you write about is how you write. It doesn't need to be perfect, but at least reread and spell check before you post. I find my results are best when I can wait a day or two between writing and editing. I usually draft in  Microsoft Word, but had formatting issues when pasting from there into Blogger's Compose mode. I now work around the problem by pasting into the HTML mode and using Compose to format the post.

Try to build credibility in your chosen field. One of the biggest issues with blogs is that anyone can start one. You need to find ways to prove to readers that you are a trustworthy source of information: awards, endorsements, professional credentials, whatever. In my case appearing on podcasts, having a sour beer advance to the second round at NHC, and working with professional brewers all helped me build a level of respectability (I hope). It also feeds back on itself, the blog got me a gig writing articles for BYO Magazine, and that in turn raises the credibility of the blog (this year I'll be writing on spontaneous fermentation, dark lagers, designing recipes, and fermented foods for BYO).

You don't need to post every single day (especially if you don't have something interesting to say), but if someone comes back to the blog a few times in a row without seeing an update they may stop checking. For me it has really helped to set a schedule for posting. I try to have a big post every Monday (a recipe, technique, travel), and something small later in the week (like a tasting, or poll results). It can be discouraging to keep posting when no one seems to be visiting at first, but keeping it up is key.

Try to make your blog appear at least marginally unique, professional, and easy to navigate. Try to avoid a background that is too clunky or distracting. Use tags, text links, and static pages to draw people back to related posts. It is hard to get people to visit your blog for the first time, so try to get those who do to stick around. People love photos especially when we are reading about eating and drinking; you don't need a DSLR and a high end lens, but try to take clear pictures (with a cheap camera good lighting and a free image editing software like Gimp are your best friends).

Don't cram your site with intrusive ads, your main goal early on should be to build a readership, not make a few dollars. The pace this blog has grown at means that each year I get about as many visitors as I did for the entire history of the blog before that point (this January the blog topped 100,000 page views in a month for the first time). If you have a niche try to get targeted relevant ads, I never had good luck with Google AdWords (they seem better for a general site with hoards of visitors).

Put up an email address (although probably not your personal email) and respond to questions as quickly as you can. Same goes for answering comments on the blog. Interacting with people directly is a great way to build a more enthusiastic following. The number of people who have emailed me for advice, and subsequently sent me beer, microbes, or other stuff has been amazing. Direct interaction on Twitter and Facebook is gaining importance, although I have not seen the sort of traffic that some other sites report. Despite having only half as many Facebook "Likes" as Twitter Followers similar posts get more interaction and traffic from Facebook. Facebook uses an algorithm that give priority to posts they think you'll enjoy, while Twitter relies solely on chronology. Twitter has a huge number of users who post with great frequency so it can be difficult to reach people without being a frequent tweeter.

Posting on relevant forums and message boards is helpful as well, but don't solely post links to your blog (try to be part of the community). Social media aggregator sites like Reddit's r/Homebrewing and StumbleUpon have also sent a lot of new visitors my way, but the amount who who click a link and explore passed the linked page is pretty low (20% for StumbleUpon, and 30% for Reddit) compared to users who come through search (35%) or message boards (~40%). As much as all of these referrals are important they account for less than 30% of the traffic on my blog.

Optimize your posts to increase search traffic. The page's web address is a big factor in whether it is listed on the first page of the search engine's results. You have to strike a balance between eye catching to a human and full of key words for a computer (your website name is even more important). Speaking of website names, buy a "real" domain name rather than using the free .blogspot, it's just $10 a year through Google. Recently I became the proud owner of the address I originally wanted, MadFermentationist.com (a gift from a reader, it just links back to the blog, I don't think I'll go through the effort of moving the blog).

Adding html tags like a Meta Description, and Meta Keywords, can help (although from what I understand search engines no longer give them much weight). Similarly you can submit your site to DMOZ, but in my case I did this six months ago and it has not been listed in their directory of homebrewing sites yet. Add title and alt tags to your images to allow search engines to know what is in the picture to list it appropriately (you can hover your mouse over an image and see what they say). Recently I also added a little piece of code that makes search engines display the title of a post first rather than the blog name, making it clearer what the page is. Google Webmaster Tools allows you to remove any sitelinks (that display below your main link) that you feel are unnecessary, I've removed all of the Monthly archive pages for example.

Keep an eye on the traffic (I use Google Analytics), but don't get obsessed with the numbers of visitors. It is interesting to see who is linking to your site, consider linking back if it seems like a worthwhile site. Links drive traffic directly, but also are one of the major things search engines use to assign importance to a site. I have never emailed people requesting that they link to me, although I have reciprocated when people linking to me have asked (but only when I visit their site regularly). Try to post deeper links as well, not just to the homepage, but to a specific post that is relevant (having related words as the text of the link makes it even more valuable). Watch out for sites willing to pay for links, linking to them can cause search engines may to put you in a "bad neighborhood" which can hurt your site ranking.

Work on the technical stuff as much as you can, but time spent on the content is more valuable. When you do make changes view your blog from a couple different computers/browsers to make sure it displays properly on all of them. I've been lucky enough to have a couple people lend their eye for design and technical know how to help me improve the layout of the blog.

I hope at least a few people found that interesting. Any tips from other bloggers on things I missed?

Most Important Brewing Investments?

Fermentation Temp Control - 53%
Large Boil Kettle - 49%
Wort Chiller - 44%
Mash Tun - 37%
Outdoor Burner - 21%
Kegging System - 16%
Grain Mill - 14%
Oxygenation System - 8%
Stir Plate - 8%
Water Filtration - 5%
Wort Pump - 1%
Other - 0%
Beer Filter - 0%

(The vote was for brewer's top three choices, which is why they don't add up to 100%)

There are two main areas that a homebrewer can invest in to improve their beers: wort production gear, and equipment that improves fermentation. In my experience investments on the fermentation side is more important for brewing better beer, although it isn’t nearly as fun. Not many people get as excited about a constant fermentation temperature, or correct pitching rates, or ideal oxygen levels as they do about switching from extract to all-grain. However, I’d rather have a properly fermented extract beer no question over a poorly fermented all-grain batch.

I think the results give a pretty good path for a beginning homebrewer. I agree that gaining the ability to control your fermentation temperatures is the most important upgrade that any brewer can make. Not only does it enables complete dial in the temperature that suits a particular yeast strain but also provides the ability to lager and cold crash. Even if you don’t want to spend the money to have a dedicated refrigerator, a more hands on solution involving adding ice to a cooler or water batch can be a big help. Often overlooked, in cold climates having a method to raise the temperature of fermentation can be almost as important (especially for those of us whose basements are ~55 F at the moment). Either way it frees you from having the seasons dictate your brewing schedule.

I believe all-grain is the second most important investment a brewer can make, giving you a wider range of ingredients and a better ability to control the wort production. However, to take advantage of a mash tun you really need the ability to do full-boils (which requires a large boil kettle, and depending on your stove may also call for an outdoor burner) and cool all of that wort quickly (with a wort chiller). Don’t look at a full boil as an improvement that must be made simultaneously with going all-grain, a full boil and quick cool can really benefit the character of extract beers as well.

Much of the rest of the equipment on the list is really optional: a grain mill, oxygenation system, wort pump, kegging system, or beer filter can all improve your results, but mostly they are about saving time, effort, or money. I’ve been really happy with my newest investment, a stir plate and 2 L Erlenmeyer flask, for making starters (boil and cool directly in the flask, and the continuous stirring makes for a much denser yeast culture).

Out of all the results the only one that really surprised me was how low water filtration was; one of the most common off-flavors I taste at homebrewing club meetings is chlorophenols, usually the result of chlorinated brewing water. Given the relatively low cost of a carbon water filter, it might actually be the first suggestion I’d give to a new homebrewer. I’m not sure water filtration scored so low because it is under appreciated, or if it falls into the “optional” category since it only saves the time and money of buying chlorine free bottled water.

The longer I brew the more I am convinced that technique and process are far more important than recipe when it comes to making great beer. The ability some home and craft brewers have to make a range of delicious beers is more about how they brew than what they brew. Of course specific styles take distinct methods, and making a truly world class beer takes a higher level of recipe development, but that isn’t possible without solid fundamental wort production, fermentation, and packaging technique.

As always, I’m interested to hear what the five people who picked “Other” wanted to see? Conical fermentor? Hop back? Randall?

Vienna Malt Session IPA Recipe

I think beer is trying too hard to be wine. There is too much hype surrounding high alcohol, expensive, limited release, barrel aged beers with flavor profiles that demand splitting a 12 oz bottle three ways. Of  beer is every bit as capable as wine at excelling at that game, but where beer has traditionally dominated wine is the combination of big flavor and high drinkability. I'm not calling for all session ales, but I think there is a lot to be said for a beer that I can drink a pint of while I'm cooking dinner and not burn the French toast.

The only way to get a low alcohol wine is to water the grape juice down, but beer recipes can be adjusted to compensate for a more meager alcohol content. If you want an IPA with half of the standard alcohol content it is not as simple as cutting in half each malt and hop addition. I brewed a ~2% ABV Micro-IPA from the second runnings of a hoppy wheat beer a few months ago, and while it had the aromatic hop character I wanted it was severely lacking in malt backbone. Reducing the amount of malt can also result in a thin body, and the lower sweetness can lead to an unbalanced flavor. A few ideas to combat those pitfalls:

Boosting Perceived Body:
1. Add more crystal/dextrin malt, which will add sweetness and mouthfeel.
2. Add unmalted grains (especially oats and rye) for their beta-glucans, which add body without sweetness, but can also contribute haze.
3. Raise the saccharification rest temperature, a good choice to avoid the sweetness of crystal malts.
4. Use a less attenuative yeast strain, English strains are especially well suited.
5. Use a strain that produce a high amount of glycerin/glycerol, saison strains tend to excel at this.
6. Lower carbonation, I find high carbonation makes light beers taste seltzer-like (although higher carbonation can help is excessively thin beers like gueuze).

Enhancing Malt Flavor:
1. Use a more flavorful base malt like maris otter, Vienna, Munich, or dark wheat.
2. Raise the percentage of specialty malts, especially toasty malts like Victory, biscuit, and melanoidin.
3. Eliminate adjuncts like corn/table sugar, and corn which dilute malt flavor.
4. Conduct a no-sparge mash to increase color/flavor, and minimize tannin extraction.

Maintaining Balance:
1. For a hoppy beer reduce the IBUs proportionally to the expected residual extract (I think this is a better way to think about balance than the classic BU:GU ratio).
2. Do not trim late boil additions as much to maintain a solid hop aroma.
3. For dark beers consider increasing the percentage, but cold steeping your roasted grains to reduce harshness.
4. Use a more expressive yeast because the lower gravity will result in a cleaner fermentation profile.
5. Account for serving the beer fresher than you would a strong beer (e.g., use a highly flocculent yeast).

These are certainly not all things that should be done concurrently for one batch of session beer, but it is a good idea to pick the ones that make sense for the type of beer you are brewing. For this batch I switched out most of the bland American pale I would usually use in an IPA for toastier Vienna malt. I also opted for a hotter mash and no-sparged to boost the body and malt flavor. I selected a low attenuating English yeast to replace the default Chico strain, to add both body and additional flavor.

For hopping I went with one of my favorite combinations - Amarillo/Simcoe/Columbus (which I last used in my favorite IPA recipe); I love the bit of extra dankness that Columbus adds to the otherwise fruity duo. I used only late "hop bursting" additions to help increase the hop aroma without overdoing the bitterness. I also tried a new technique called "hop standing" which means waiting for 30 minutes or longer after the flame-out hops are added before chilling. This technique was proposed by Ray Daniels, as a way to better replicate the whirlpool additions that breweries use, which often sits in the hot wort for a substantial amount of time before chilling. This goes against the homebrew mantra (Jamil's article on late hopping) to cool as quickly as possible after adding the final dose of hope, so to cover all of my bases I added a second dose of hops as I started the chiller.

Session Vienna "IPA"

Recipe Specifics
----------------
Batch Size (Gal): 5.25
Total Grain (Lbs): 10.00
Anticipated OG: 1.038
Anticipated SRM: 5.6
Anticipated IBU: 37.5
Brewhouse Efficiency: 54 %
Wort Boil Time: 60 Minutes

Grain
-------
72.5% - 7.25 lbs. German Vienna Malt
22.5% - 2.25 lbs. American Pale Malt
5.0% - 0.50 lbs. CaraVienna

Hops
-------
0.50 oz. Simcoe (Pellet, 11.00% AA) @ 15 min.
0.25 oz. Columbus (Pellet, 11.00% AA) @ 15 min.
0.75 oz. Amarillo (Pellet, 10.00% AA) @ 10 min.
0.75 oz. Simcoe Pellet (Pellet, 11.00% AA) @ 5 min.
1.50 oz. Amarillo (Pellet, 10.00% AA) @ 0 min.
1.50 oz. Columbus (Pellet, 11.00% AA) @ 0 min.
1.50 oz. Simcoe (Pellet, 11.00% AA) @ 0 min.
1.25 oz. Amarillo (Whole, 11.00% AA) @ Dry Hop
1.25 oz. Columbus (Whole, 11.00% AA) @ Dry Hop
1.25 oz. Simcoe (Whole, 14.00% AA) @ Dry Hop

Extras
--------
0.50 Unit Whirlfloc @ 12 min.
0.40 Tsp Yeast Nutrient @ 12 min.

Yeast
------
White Labs WLP037 Yorkshire Square Ale

Water Profile
----------------
Profile: Washington DC cut 50% with distilled, plus 2 g CaCl and 1 g gypsum

Mash Schedule
-------------
Sacch Rest  40 min @ 153

Notes
-----
1/10/12 Starter made with .75 L, first time using the stir plate.

Cut with 50% gallons of distilled water to lower carbonate. Added 2 g of CaCl to the mash since I was short on gypsum.

Valley Malting Pale.

No Sparge, filled up the 5 gallon mash tun to the brim. Collected 3.5 gallons of first runnings @ 1.060. Diluted with 3.25 gallons of the diluted DC Tap water and 1 g of gypsum.

Added 1 oz of each hop and let sit for 25 min, then chilled with the addition of an additional .5 oz of each.

Chilled to 68 F, strained, and pitched the slightly decanted starter (finished quickly and flocc'd hard). Left at 64 F ambient to ferment

Good fermentation by 12 hours. Gave periodic twists to help with the high flocculating yeast.

1/20/12 Racked to a double purged keg with the bagged dry hops. Pretty full fill on the keg. Hit with ~30 PSI and shook twice to get a jump on the carbonation. Left in the basement at ~45 F to dry hop and drop clear. Down to 1.010, tasted a bit more bitter than I expected, but cold and time should help that.

Buckwheat Amber Sour Ale Tasting

This post marks the first in a series of tasting of the beers I (with the help of a couple friends) spent a day bottling a couple months ago, four base beers and four blends. When I brewed this sour amber ale I was hoping it would answer a couple questions I had. First, I wanted to see how well the Jolly Pumpkin souring method would transfer to homebrewing - a relatively cool saccharification rest (149 F in this case), short aging (still less than a year old), and the wild Michigan microbes harvested from a few of their beers. Second, I wanted to see what sort of flavors a couple pounds of buckwheat would contribute, both the grain itself and any esters the Brett was able to produce from its fatty acids.

My three-year-old Cannon digital camera died (camera lens failure...) about 30 seconds after snapping the pictures for this tasting. As a result, this tasting series will be on hiatus for the next couple weeks until I have the chance to research and buy a new camera.


Buckwheat Sour Amber Ale

Appearance – Clear leathery brown body with a thick slightly off-white head suspended on top. The head recedes over a couple minutes leaving a nice sheet of lacing along the sides of the wine glass.

Smell – The nose is a mix of toasty, almost roasty, malt and Brett aromatics. The Brett leans more towards fruity than funky and gives that really distinct Jolly Pumpkin aroma to the beer. There is some tobacco and loam aromas as well, surprised at the range of aromas in such a young sour beer.

Taste – The sourness is slightly puckering, bright and lemony. The finish is crisp and clean, surprisingly subdued compared to the aroma. It has a surprising amount in common with several of the darker Jolly Pumpkin beers, especially Fuego del Otono. There is some toasty oak character as a secondary flavor. Could certainly use another six months in the bottle for the flavor to catchup with the aroma.

Mouthfeel – Smooth mouthfeel, although it seems like most of the boost from the buckwheat is gone. Not overly dry or tannic. Solid carbonation, but not too much for a dark beer.

Drinkability & Notes – Solid balance, one of those sour beers that I can really drink in quantity. In terms of what I set out to do, it is a successful demonstration of techniques from Jolly Pumpkin, but sadly I don't get much of the tropical character I was hoping for from the buckwheat.

Souring a Beer with Acid Malt - Ithaca Brute Style

It is hard not to get embedded in a rut when you really get into brewing sour beers. The investments of time and effort are so big that it discourages major risk taking (just take a look at all of the lambic brewers who essentially brew only one beer!). While I'm confident enough to adjust the grain bill, or add interesting new ingredients, my basic method hasn't changed much since I stared to be happy with the results a few years ago. As I hinted at in my Great Souring Experiment post, I’d like to try mimicking the methods that several respected craft breweries are using. I doubt all of these batches will be as good as my default, but maybe I will find a way to make sour beers that is faster, more reliable, or produces a unique flavor.

My first attempt at a new method was to use the one that head brewer Jeff O'Neil developed while at Ithaca Beer Company to produce the pale sour Brute. He has since moved on to Peekskill Brewing, which sounds like it will allow more freedom for him to experiment. The basic idea of the method is to use a significant proportion of acid malt in the mash, a hot saccharification rest, and a clean primary fermentation with only Brett pitched into secondary. The combination of mashing at both a low pH and high temperature creates a largely unfermentable (to brewer's yeast) wort. Brute starts with a hot primary fermentation with their house English ale yeast and then crash cools when it reaches about 50% apparent attenuation. Oak spirals and Brett Drie are then added and allowed to age for close to a year.

I started the mash for my inspired by batch at 159 F and allowed it to convert before adding the acid malt. Ithaca does not wait to add the acid malt, but I was a bit worried about getting really terrible starch to sugar conversion. I initially added 1.5 lbs of the tangy sourdough-flavored acid malt from Weyermann. When this didn’t result in a pH as low as I expected I added another 1.5 lbs. Now at 20% acid malt, the mash made it down to a pH of 4.5. As pH is a logarithmic scale, the final pH of Brute ~3.7 would require more than six times as much acid to reach. On their website Weyermann suggests 8% acid malt to sour a quick Berliner weisse, but I don't see how this would work when 20% in this beer gave no noticeable acidity.

I'm interested to see how far the Brett will be able to lower the pH on its own, it is also possible that Brute had other microbes, which had not been pitched, at work in the dedicated tank. Jeff has also said that he felt that seasonal temperature swings were a big part of what made Brute work, so I'll be letting this batch sit outside of my temperature controlled basement "fermentation" room next summer... maybe.

I failed to take many pictures during the brew day, but the American University journalism project were around throughout the day snapping photos of ever step of the process.

Acid Malt Soured Saison

Recipe Specifics
--------------------
Batch Size (Gal): 5.50
Total Grain (Lbs): 15.00
Anticipated OG: 1.069
Anticipated SRM: 4.1
Anticipated IBU: 10.1
Brewhouse Efficiency: 67 %
Wort Boil Time: 90 Minutes

Grain
-------
66.7% - 10.00 lbs. German Pilsener
20.0% - 3.00 lbs. Weyermann Sauer(acid) Malt
13.3% - 2.00 lbs. Wheat Malt

Hops
-------
0.50 oz. Hallertauer Tradition (Pellet, 6.00% AA) @ 60 min.

Yeast
-------
WYeast 3726 Farmhouse Ale

Water Profile
----------------
Profile: Washington DC

Mash Schedule
-----------------
Sacch Rest 45 min @ 159 F
Acid Malt Sacch 30 min @ 159 F

Notes
-------
Brewed 12/04/11 with my neighbor Josh and the American University journalism crew

Mashed 45 minutes before adding the 1.5 lbs of Weyermann acid malt, waited 15 minutes, and pH was still at 5.5, added 1.5 lbs more which took it down to 4.5. Not quite as sour as I wanted, but it should be interesting.

Double batch sparge. Ended up with a bit more gravity than I wanted. Pitched yeast cake from one carboy of the first refill of the apple brandy solera. Shook to aerate.

Fermentation was going strong after 12 hours at 64 ambient. After 24 hours total I added 1 gallon of distilled water to lower the gravity.

After 48 hours placed it in a pot on the radiator to get it up to ~82 F.

12/10/11 Racked to secondary, down to 1.015. Not much acidity, I may have to pitch more microbes that I was intending.

1/13/12 Added ECY Brett Blend #1 via dregs from my Brett'd Rye Saison.

Home Smoked Roggenbier Tasting

Rye is a weird grain. It has a flavor that some people call "spicy" but I've never thought it made a beer taste like it had been spiced (unless you also add caraway, like our Kvass). To me rye malt adds more of a rustic earthy grain flavor that is hard to articulate. On previous batches I'd stuck between 15-25% (in Denny's RIPA, and Brett'd Saison), but brewing with my friend Scott we went all the way up to 45% in our Cherry Wood Smoked Roggenbier. Brewing a collaborative recipe is a good way to try something out of your comfort zone, something you would not brew if the choice was entirely up to you. Sometimes it yields a beer you love (as it has on several previous batches with Scott), while other times it gives you a data point for future experiments.

Rauch Roggenbier

Appearance – Ruddy brown, with the rye adding a thick almost muddy haze despite several weeks of cold conditioning. Head pours a finger thick, but deflates rather quickly. Looks similar to a dunkle, but I would like it to be a bit lighter on the haze.

Smell – Some ctrusy hops, sweet cigarette smoke, sulfury yeast. Nice complex aroma, the smoke is lighter and melds better with the yeast and hops than other smoked malts I have used. It is a nice level of smoke for complexity, but some people might want more.

Taste – Firm bitterness, lingering smoke, maltiness, a bit muddled. The rye adds an indistinct earthy malt character that gets in the way of the other flavors. I think I would back down on the rye to 25% if I brewed it again (swapping in some wheat malt probably).

Mouthfeel – Creamier and almost syrupy compared to what I expect in a beer like this (the rye's beta glucans are to credit/blame). Solid carbonation, I'm sure purists would want it spritzy, but in a higher bitterness example like this I think too much carbonation would be grating.

Drinkability & Notes – Solid beer, but it just doesn't have the balance I want. Baking down on the rye, and upping the smoke slightly would be the way to go if I brewed it again. One of the problems with home-smoked malt is that inconsistency compared to commercially smoked versions, but the soft cherry wood smoke was the right choice by Scott for this beer.

As a side-note, this is my 500th post... yikes.