Double - Weizen Trippelbock Tasting

Usually I don’t have the opportunity to drink successive batches of a recipe side-by-side because by the time I rebrew, the previous batch is long gone. Not this time! I saved the last bottle of bourbon-soaked-oak aged Wheat Triplebock to drink along side the updated version (Weizen Trippelbock) that I aged in a first-use five-gallon Balcones Texas Single Malt Whisky barrel. Nearly four years passed in between brewing the first and second batches, so not exactly a perfect comparison for purposes of recipe tweaking.

The recipes were nearly identical, with the only substantial change being a minor reduction and substitution in the amount of Simpsons ~158L Extra Dark Crystal malt (6.35% to 3.9% plus 1% Simpsons Dark Crystal malt). Otherwise I was already pretty happy with the original recipe, which was inspired by Steve Berthel’s Bourbon Cask Aged Wheat Trippelbock from The Livery. Berthel has since left The Livery, which means I will probably never get to try the original (although we can all hope New Holland brews something similar with him on board).

In addition to being fun to taste similar batches brewed four years apart, these two also highlight the difference between aging on oak cubes and in a barrel. Honestly there isn’t some huge flavor advantage to the barrel-aged over the cubes. The biggest mistake many homebrewers make when using either small barrels or barrel “alternatives” is time. If a brewery barrel-ages their beer for six-months or a year, you aren’t going to extract the same compounds by aging your homebrew for only a few weeks with a higher oak-to-beer ratio. Cubes are cheaper and easier, but in some ways they actually better replicate a large barrel. With a small barrel it is easy to overdo the barrel/spirit character, with cubes you can reduce the amount and extend the aging.

This tasting also brings up one of my favorite topics, high alcohol beers! One of the back-handed compliments I can give to a strong beer is that it “hides its strength.” I realize phrases like this are used as actual compliments by many beer drinkers, so let me explain. If a 10% ABV beer tastes like it could be 6% ABV, then I’d rather drink a full pint of 6% beer than a 10 oz. tulip of the strong beer. When a beer is loaded with alcohol I want it to taste like it, not with hot fusel alcohols, but huge flavors, intense maltiness, viscous body, and depth of character that forces me to slow down and pay attention. Brewing a 15% ABV double-extra-imperial stout that tastes like it's 10% is certainly a feat of technical brewing prowess, but so is brewing Bud Lite...

Wheat Triplebock (Older)

Appearance – Dark tan head, only a few centimeters thick, but tight bubbles. The beer is dark brown, nearly black. Looks like a porter.

Smell – Loads of raisin, plum, vanilla, well-aged liquor. Bready maltiness to the extreme. The first signs of floral-perfume alcohol from age, but no other signs of oxidation. Varied aroma that keeps me coming back.

Taste – Big flavors. Lots of dried fruit, charred oak, caramel, and toasted malt. Finishes sweet, but not sugary. The light tannins always helped balance this portion compared to the version without oak. The alcohol is subdued, but it is mildly warming. There is a background hint of soy sauce as it warms, starting to show its age.

Mouthfeel – Almost syrupy, stick-to-your ribs, thick body. Carbonation is perfect, subtle, but present.

Drinkability & Notes – This one aged into a champ, and that's a feat considering it took a silver medal at a local competition in its first year (as an eisbock). Packed with flavor. While it is great now, I think it might be a year or so passed its peak, on the gradual down-slope. It isn't falling apart by any means, but the positive effects of oxidation are beginning to be overshadowed by the negatives.



Weizen Trippelbock (Younger)

Appearance – The head and beer itself of this batch are a few shades lighter thanks to the lower amount of Extra Dark Crystal. Looks more the part of a traditional bock-relative. The head is coarser, not nearly as attractive. This beer doesn’t have a lot of carbonation, but produces a thin cascade of bubbles after a hard pour.

Smell – No surprise, much fresher, cleaner maltiness without as much dark/dried fruit. There is a subtle dried-plum aroma, but it is behind a mellow-caramel (doesn't smell like burnt sugar). The spirit/vanilla aromatics are mellower as well surprisingly, while the clean ethanol is more present.

Taste – The flavor leans more caramel, less dried fruit, similar to the nose. Despite being more than a year old, it tastes brew-day-fresh in comparison to the more than five-year-old beer. Malty and sweet, but mellower than the previous. The alcohol is a bit more apparent, warming, but not hot. It is over 11% ABV.

Mouthfeel – Full, but just slightly less-so. The carbonation is low, but not non-existent. Any lower and it would actively detract, but I'd say it could still benefit from just a touch more.

Drinkability & Notes – It’s a solid beer, but lacks the depth and assertiveness I demand in a beer with this much alcohol. Hopefully another couple years of aging will give it more depth, but for a third batch I'd go back closer to the original recipe, say 5.0-5.5% Extra Dark Crystal.

Scottish Stout Tasting – Body & Mouthfeel

The mouthfeel of beers is one of the more complex aspects of brewing. I often see it simplified as final gravity equals body. Sure mashing toward the upper-end of the saccharification range results in more alpha amylase activity, which produces a higher proportion of unfermentable dextrins, which in turn leaves both a higher final gravity and a thicker body. However, this is not the same as using a lower attenuating yeast strain, which will leave a higher percentage of fermentable sugars behind. Assuming identical original and final gravities, a hotter mash will produce a beer with more body, while a less attenuative yeast will produce a beer with more residual sweetness.

Carbohydrates aren’t the only source of body in beer however. Proteins from the malt and glycerol from the brewer's yeast are also options for enhancing body. Beta glucans, a type of soluble fiber, gets a “maybe.” While grains that contain beta glucans (like oats) tend to create a silky body, there hasn’t been enough study yet (to my knowledge) to conclusively state that beta glucans are the source.

Carbonation plays a tricky role. In a beer that has a thick body already, I find that higher carbonation wrecks the mouthfeel. There are few things more disappointing than an over-carbonated imperial stout for example. However, for a beer that is thin, higher carbonation can actually improve the body by distracting from the watery mouthfeel. Think gueuze or Berliner weisse. Tannins from oak play a similar role, a small amount can enhance body, while excess leave a rough dryness.

All this is to say that despite a relatively high final gravity (1.017), and moderate-low carbonation, the body on my second batch of Scottish stout didn’t reach quite where I wanted it. Could it be excessive oak tannins? Or was it the lack of protein from the highly-modified Maris Otter? Or maybe my expectations are too high for a beer that is only 5.4% ABV? Otherwise it is a very enjoyable beer, and hopefully I’ll get just a bit closer next time.

90/- Scottish Stout #2

Appearance – The head is a stout-appropriate tan, and wonderfully dense, sticky, and lasting. The body is black, with only a hint of ruby at the bottom where the light can make it through. Held at an angle the beer looks to have dropped pretty clear in the keg.

Smell – The nose is lightly roasted coffee to start. Nothing reads burnt or charcoal (although the fireplace is adding a hint of smoke). There is a deeper maltiness behind the roasted barley that you wouldn’t have in say an Irish Dry Stout, toasted bread and toffee. Otherwise it’s clean without much identifiable character from the yeast or hops.

Taste – Starts out malty and rounded, distinctly Scottish to me. The finish is long and blends caramel and coffee, lingering and evolving for a few seconds after each sip. It isn’t a rich black coffee, more a Frappuccino - mellow and inviting, but not especially complex in terms of roast. Hop bitterness is low, but it doesn’t come across overly sweet thanks to the roasted barley and toasted oak.

Mouthfeel – The carbonation is perfect, very light, nothing to disrupt the body. Sadly the body itself is underwhelming. Not thin or watery by any means, but not substantial enough for the flavors.

Drinkability & Notes – Perfect beer to drink on a snow day. Loads of flavor, without too much alcohol. Begs for another sip each time. Maybe next time I’ll add 10-15% flaked oats or rye to enhance the body. Otherwise, just about there!

Scottish Stout - Adjusted and Re-Brewed

I have a mixed relationship with beer styles. As much as I think they stifle creativity, and convince people to brew/drink beers that don't suit their tastes perfectly, they are also a wonderful guide to which combinations of malts, hops, yeasts, and techniques have been found to work.

Rather than start off every batch with a completely original thought or with my target set squarely on one of the 74 styles recognized by the BJCP (not counting the six "open" categories), sometimes I take an established style and give it a twist. This might take the form of swapping the hops (Riwaka-hopped hefeweizen) or changing the yeast strain (barleywine second-runnings lager). For this batch I made a second attempt at a concept I first brewed a few years ago, a Scottish ale with extra roasted barley, a 90 Shilling Stout.

That first batch yielded a decent result, but relying solely on boiling down the first runnings to a syrup proved insufficient to create the bold caramel maltiness and body I expect in a Scottish ale. So for this batch we (I brewed with my good friend Scott - who you might remember from our Smoked Roggenbier) opted to add 8% British caramel malt.

I'm trying to be better about noting exactly which malts are used in my recipes. In some cases the maltster-to-maltster differences are quite significant in terms of color and flavor. I happened to have one pound of a few different versions of roasted barley on hand, so Scott and I had a tasting to pick which ones we wanted to use. We opted for mostly Muntons, along with a bit of Weyermann for its sharper, more acrid notes. The Briess was too pale and mellow for this beer.

In addition to the changes to grain bill yeast (ECY Scottish Heavy previously), the only other significant alteration from the first batch was the addition of a small amount of oak to the primary fermentor. When oak is exposed to fermentation (compared to oak aging) an additional flavor compound is created. In On Food and Cooking, Harold McGee describes furfurylthiol as having a coffee-like flavor. Hopefully this add a bit of the rustic charm that the Traquair House beers absorb from primary fermentation in ancient oak vats.

Expect tasting notes shortly as this one has already been on tap for nearly a month.

Scottish Stout #2

Recipe Specifics
-------------------
Batch Size (Gal): 10.25
Total Grain (Lbs): 23.75
Anticipated OG: 1.060
Anticipated SRM: 32.9
Anticipated IBU: 23.2
Brewhouse Efficiency: 71 %
Wort Boil Time: 75 Minutes

Grain
-------
86.3% - 20.50 lbs. Maris Otter
4.2% - 1.00 lbs. Muntons Roasted Barley
1.1% - 0.25 lbs. Weyermann Roasted Barley
4.2% - 1.00 lbs. Simpsons Carastan Malt
4.2% - 1.00 lbs. Crisp Crystal 75L

Hops
------
1.50 oz. Perle (Whole, 8.85% AA) @ 60 min.

Extras
--------
1.00 tsp. Yeast Nutrient @15 min.
1.00 Whirlfloc @ 15 min.
0.75 oz. Medium Toast French Oak 17 days (primary)

Yeast
------
WYeast 1728 Scottish Ale

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

Mash Schedule
-----------------
Sacch Rest - 60 min @ 156 F

Notes
-------
12/28/13 3 L stir-plate starter made with 2 month old yeast pack, started quickly.

Brewed 12/29/13 with Scott in the rain.

2 g of CaCl added to both the mash and batch sparge.

Boil 1.5 gallons of first runnings down to a syrup, ~1/2 gallon.

Added back to the rest of the wort at flame-out.

60 seconds pure O2 after chilling to 65 F.

Added steamed honeycomb oak to primary. Left at 60 F ambient to ferment.

1/14/14 Kegged and hooked up to gas. FG 1.017 (72% AA, 5.6% ABV)

2/13/14 Tasting notes. The caramel flavor from the malt gave it much of what the first batch was lacking. The body is fuller as well, but it could still be a bit thicker. Maybe some flaked grain next time around?

American Sour Beer: Book Pre-Orders

The book (originally codenamed Mad Fermentation, now officially American Sour Beer: Innovative Techniques for Mixed Fermentations) that I’ve been researching and writing for more than three years is available for pre-order! Not exactly breaking news considering it has been listed online since October... but I’d been reluctant to spread the word too much because the cover is a stand-in (the actual one has been mocked-up, but not shot) and the listed release date is overly optimistic (the current projection is May/June).

Tweets/links/posts started flying on Friday about the release, so I decided it was time to loop everyone in. Sunday ASB briefly peaked at #373 on Amazon (not bad out of over 8,000,000 books – top .005%). It’s also been battling How to Brew for the #1 spot on their beer books list (a testament to the lasting popularity of the book that taught me the basics). Last night Charlie Papazian randomly (no kidding) showed up at the DC Homebrewers meeting at Bluejacket, I took the opportunity to razz the president of the Brewers Association about my momentary lead over Joy of Homebrewing.

As the release date draws closer, the blog will be getting some trimmings that didn’t make the final cut (e.g., kvass, gruit, saison, pairing etc.) as well as some online appendices (commercial microbe descriptions and viable bottle dregs) that I will continue to update. I’m really happy with the way all 400 pages of what remained is coming along! The copy editor is about half-way through his review, with a goal of being completely finished in a week or so. From there it’ll be a jump to layout, graphics, indexing, final review etc. Excited to read the forward as well, and odds are you will be too when you hear who’s writing it!

So order now, or wait for the AHA pre-sale (about two weeks before the release) or the ebook (which is coming eventually) if you’d prefer! You’ll be sick of me soon enough. I’ve got articles for BYO (solera-style blending) and Zymurgy (mashing sour beers) in the works, plus I’ll be at NHC Grand Rapids (hopefully presenting) and later GABF this fall! You’ll start seeing ads in the brewing magazines in a couple months, and I’m sure I’ll be making the rounds on the homwbrewing-podcast-circuit.

In the meantime, please tell your brew-buddies about the book, post it to your homebrew club’s discussion forum, name your first-born after it etc. Any added publicity would be greatly appreciated!

Rhubarb Berliner Weisse Tasting

Raise your hand if you’ve ever eaten rhubarb… in something other than strawberry-rhubarb pie. It is one of the few vegetables that manages to thrive in sweet applications (as opposed to the many savory fruits - e.g., tomato, and chile peppers). Rhubarb stalks have a fruity flavor, acidity, but not much sweetness.

Rhubarb contains oxalic acid, the same compound in sorrel, which is added to BlueJacket’s Sidewalk Saison. Oxalic acid can cause health problems in large doses, but it is concentrated in the rhubarb leaves, with malic acid (also found in apples and grapes) the predominant acid in the stalks. Malic acid is often converted to lactic acid by both malolactic bacteria, which are sometimes used in wine fermentations, and by the lactic acid bacteria commonly found in mixed-fermentation sour beers. Lactic acid tastes "softer" than malic, whose sharp flavor I associate with SweeTarts candy.

When I bought a few pounds of rhubarb this past spring, I was planning to add it to last years' Dark (Red) Saison V, but after tasting how acidic it was already, I added membrillo (quince paste) instead. This Berliner weisse hadn't soured as much as I wanted after a year, so I decided it was a good opportunity to use the rhubarb I had cleaned, vacuum-packed, and stored in the freezer. Like most things beer, I wasn't the first to brew a sour beer with rhubarb. The two most popular are probably Cantillon’s annual-experimental Zwanze (both 2008 and 2012), and New Glarus Strawberry Rhubarb, the former dry and sour, the later sweet and tart. I wasn't even the first homebrewer, what with Ryan Brew's Rhubarb Berliner Weisse.

Rhubarb Berliner

Appearance – “Wine-cooler" pink as a friend described it recently (the photo doesn't do it justice). Not quite clear, but pretty close. The bright-white head unsurprisingly fizzes away within a minute of pouring. The second pour, containing the dregs, actually appears pinker than the first.

Smell – The aroma is clean, lightly doughy, and fruity. Rhubarb is tricky to describe, it isn’t distinct/powerful like cherries, raspberries, or peaches. It certainly shares some subtle similarities to its frequent companion, strawberries, but considerably milder. Luckily despite the similarities in appearance to celery, it has none of its green-vegetal character.

Taste – I added about 1.5 lbs/gal of rhubarb, and while the oxalic/malic acid enhanced the acidity it didn’t make the beer excessively sour. The fruity flavors meld well with the mellow base beer, not obscuring its mild wheaty flavor. The Brett (mostly Trois/Drie) adds a softy farmyard-hay flavor, nothing aggressively funky. The soft red-fruitiness lingers into the finish. Dry, but the fruitiness prevents it from coming across overly so.

Mouthfeel – Light, crisp, and spritzy, as it should be. About the maximum amount of CO2 (3.4 volumes) I’d put in a bottled beer, on opening foam starts to slowly build in the neck.

Drinkability & Notes – Probably not the ideal time of year to drink this light and refreshing, but that isn't stopping me from enjoying it! With the added flavor of the rhubarb I don’t miss the decotion mash I usually perform for  Berliners (this was my first batch with a single-infusion mash). I still need to write up notes on the plain half, we'll see if that holds true.

Tasting Conan the IPA

I usually schedule at least two batches for each pitch of yeast I buy, especially when I get my hands on an interesting strain. When I received a vial of East Coast Yeast Northeast Ale, I knew that I had to ferment something Heady-Topper-esque with it, but I started with a pale ale (Simcoe & Sons recipe). With how well that batch turned out, I had nothing but high hopes for the IPA recipe that followed (hopped with Apollo, Pacific Jade, and a touch of Nelson Sauvin).

Conan the IPA

Appearance – The dry hopping contributed a minor haze to the golden body. The addition of Biofine Clear (silicic acid - a vegan-friendly alternative to gelatin or isinglass) doesn’t seem to have made much of a difference compared to the clarity of my usual IPAs. The thin white head deflates quickly, trailing coating-lacing behind.

Smell – Over-ripe tropical fruit and citrus are the leaders. The fruitiness is so intense that it almost reads artificial. Smells boldly hoppy, but clear that it is very different than the fresh peach aromatics I detected in Simcoe & Sons. There is also a mild peppery spice, hard to say if it is the Pacific Jade (which some sources describe as "fresh citrus and crushed black pepper") or the yeast.

Taste – Similar hop character to the aroma, big fruit, that is well saturated through the flavor. The phenolic (spicy clove and pepper) flavors are somewhat more pronounced, which makes the flavor palette come across like a subdued Brooklyner-Schneider Hopfen-Weisse. Not unpleasant, but not what I expected. Otherwise, clean, minimal alcohol presence, no diacetyl et al. Sticky, resinous, lingering bitterness, without much sweetness. Not over-the-top bitterness for an American IPA, but more aggressive than many.

Mouthfeel – Medium-light body, especially for an 8%+ ABV beer. Solid carbonation, enough to send out the aromatics without being too prickly on the tongue.

Drinkability & Notes – As I near the bottom of the half-pint the flavor seems to improve: the hops taste brighter, more citrusy, but a hint of spice always lingers in the finish. It is a mostly present beer, drinkable enough, but it doesn't wow me like the hop character of an IPA should. While the repitch attenuated like I hoped it would (1.075 down to 1.012), the flavor profile isn’t as magical as is was with Simcoe, Mosaic, and Citra.