Amber Ale recipe - thoughts

[HarkJohnny]

here's what I've assembled and plan to brew tomorrow. formulated using qbrew software.

please stop me now if you think it will be horrible! also, how much water should I start with to finish with 10Gal?

10 gallon extract
OG 1.059
FG 1.015
35IBU
22°SRM

.75lb Belgian biscuit
.5lb Crystal 20
.5lb Crystal 30 (called for 1lb of 40 but they were out so I split it with 30 and 50)
.5lb Crystal 50
1lb German Carafoam
1lb Belgian Pilsener
.25lb British Chocolate
12lbs Light DME

3oz Willamette 60min
1oz Fuggles 30 min
"" 15 min
"" 5 min

2 tsp Irish Moss @ 30min
WLP008 East Coast Ale Yeast (2, fermenting in two carboys)


P.S. This will be my first brew using my big converted keg! Ran a short test session and fired up about 5 gallons of water in it then ran it through the CFWC i made and tweaked a few things, tightened a few connections and such, but it worked great! whoohoo!

[YamahaXS]

Are those promash numbers? i would of guessed a OG of almost 1.07


Looks like a great beer to me!

Good luck with the new eq

[HogieWan]

Original Gravity 1.063
Terminal Gravity 1.011
Color 15.03 °SRM
Bitterness 42.3 IBU Pellets and 37.1 Whole
Alcohol (%volume) 6.8 %

These are the numbers from BeerTools.com

[BrewDog]

looks good!

[HarkJohnny]

brewed it up on Saturday and man was this fun! My first big brew (10 gal batch) and also first using the converted keg and CFWC. Everything worked nearly perfect. Almost had a boilover but was able to get the flame down and it settled nicely. Oh, this was AFTER my propane tank ran out. Had to emergency run down the street to get it filled back up. Thank goodness there's a place that's close and they only charge $12.

So, anyway i figure the entire recipe cost me about $75 which seems really expensive, but the DME was the most costly part. Next time I'll be doing AG as I have another Keg on the way.

One other thing I think I messed up is (me being lazy/stupid) is that I never measured how much water I used. I just kinda filled the keg and started. I think not enough boiled off and I ended up with about an 11-12 gal batch instead of 10. But the carboys are filled and fermenting rather aggressively ATM... so hoping for a good batch.

Pics of my brewday to come!

[bruin_ale]

Just a tip on the water thing. Comes in handy especially when you move to all-grain because the grains will absorb water so you don't get everything out that you put in. My brew spoon is about a foot longer than my kettle and I've marked critical volumes on the spoon with a permanent marker so I use it as a dipstick to see how much wort I've got. This weekend was the first I've used it, but it worked like a charm. Marked 11 and 12 gallons, lautered and ended up with 11 gallons, topped up to 12 and boiled for an hour and ended up with 11 gallons to split between 2 carboys.

-J

[HarkJohnny]

good tip! thanks!

p.s. even with the extra water (I've since figured nearly 2 gallons) I don't think it killed my recipe too much. I measured an OG of 1.049/1.050 and when I entered 12gallons into my software for this recipe it shows the OG to be 1.049! sweet!

[HarkJohnny]

OK, nearly two weeks in primary and though I did a faux-starter ( a little dme mixed with some of the cooled down wort and WLP008 about 2 hours before pitching) it's still going... the krausen is reasonally big with big bubbles and gunk everywhere throughout. Fermentation started about 12 hours I'd guess and after two days was so vigorous you could see the yeast rising and falling.

but the main thing, is two weeks too long for a primary? I'm thinking i'll transfer them to secondary tonight.

[Grog]

Not for me. I went to 2 weeks in the primary after I did two batches in a row with 2 weeks in the primary because I was originally short on time, but the beers were so much better than they're predecessors that I have continued doing it since (about a dozen batches). I am somewhat superstitious.

[danno]

Originally posted by Grog
Not for me. I went to 2 weeks in the primary after I did two batches in a row with 2 weeks in the primary because I was originally short on time, but the beers were so much better than they're predecessors that I have continued doing it since (about a dozen batches). I am somewhat superstitious. from a purely empirical perspective, was that all you did differently from previous batches? I'm asking this for all of us, because I'm pretty certain we all strive to be better brewers...

brewing is a continual process of evaluation and improvement. here's my personal example, I'm an all grain brewer, who strives to do as many of the little things right as possible... I make starters; I oxygenate both my starters and my pitching; I am careful about my mash temps; I use only fresh grains and watch my crush; I'm a ProMash-aholic; I monitor my fermentation temps; (and I'm sure there's bunch more little things I'm not listing here. anyway, my point is, I'm pretty sure I know how to brew beer...) yet, I'm nowhere near the brewer I think I can be. my contest entries consistently score in the low to mid 30's, which tells me I'm a good brewer, but not an award winning brewer...

so, in maybe the most overwritten of all thread hijacks, where do we "good" brewers go to be "great" (and maybe more personally importantly, "award winning") brewers go to be better? and I seriously think there's not that many people that can (or will) answer this question... so, if you're one of those people, give it up already... :cool:

[BrewDog]

Originally posted by danno
my contest entries consistently score in the low to mid 30's, which tells me I'm a good brewer, but not an award winning brewer...

The BYO mag this month had a good article on this.

The article said that award winning beers basically need to over-emphasize the attributes of that style.

edit: Not to mislead: I, too, am in pursuit of that award-winning beer.

[Grog]

Originally posted by danno
from a purely empirical perspective, was that all you did differently from previous batches?

Honestly, I cannot say if that specific instance is what made the improvement. Unfortunately, my life at this time does not afford me the attention to detail (or time, or space) that I wish to give beer making. There are so many variables in brewing, who honestly knows if leaving the beer in the primary for that extra week was THE only thing I did differently, but it was the most obvious thing I did differently.

I have not entered a competition yet, so I have no idea where I stand as a competitive brewer. I might enter a beer or two in our state fair later this summer. I guess I will see then.

[HarkJohnny]

Originally posted by BrewDog
edit: Not to mislead: I, too, am in pursuit of that award-winning beer.

hmm... guess that means i'm a lucky one... of the two beers I entered in our club competition one took a first place.

Interesing point on overemphasizing the character for the style....it was an extra hopped IPA... very fruity nose from adding columbus hops and I'm dammed sure that's what helped the score.

[denver brewhoo]

so, in maybe the most overwritten of all thread hijacks, where do we "good" brewers go to be "great" (and maybe more personally importantly, "award winning") brewers go to be better?

Danno, I was hoping it was oxygen! (since I am in the exact same 30-35 point boat time after time and just got in the mail my wort-oxygenating set-up)

I read the article brewdog references and that makes sense to me. The problem is this just seem wrong--you have to do an exaggeration of a style to make it stand out over the beers people make that are representative of the style. I could give anecdotes involving judge's comments but everybody's probably experienced it, which is why I think it really is true.

I also think that even though, say, an ordinary bitter isn't supposed to have a huge fluffy head and is OK with even moderate chill haze, if you want to get 3 out of 3 appearance points, it better be bright as hell and clear as hell with a pretty head. And it's like going from a 12 handicap to an eight, in golf--every little thing gets mega important as you're trying to go from 33 to 40. (Not that I've ever done it--my highest ever score was a 39 on a beer that the other judge gave a 34 to, knocking it down below 3d place in this years AHA first round and thus out of the second round.) Ditto aroma--I guess we better double up on our aroma hops if we want anybody to give us full points for aroma. And ditto the specialty malts--maybe 50 % more than we think is appropriate for style. I dunno, if that's what it takes maybe I'm not gonna do it.

The one thing--besides the aforementioned O2--I'm interested in now comes from something I read, maybe in that same article---guy from Cali who was 2004 homebrewer of the year whose name escapes (but he had like 9 second round entries and won a couple classes in this year's AHA) said to him it's all about the ferment. I think he means, precision in times and temps. I think I've spent more time worrying about everything up to getting the yeast and wort into the fermenter and not enough on the ferment itself. Specifically, temperature, which is where commercial brewers with digitally controlled glycol-chilled fermenters have an advantage over us.

The other thing is, timing. I felt some of the beers I turned in this year were at their peak, some were a little young, and some weren't quite ready yet. I actually got into the second round with all but two of the ones that I felt were at peak. (One was the aforementioned 39 point beer, the other an English IPA that I thought was the very best beer I've ever made, but which had a restrained bitterness and subtle hoppiness that I thought was appropriate for the English style but may have failed to stand out)

Problem is, not enough time to rebrew the winners before the second round--and in the six or seven weeks between April 20th and June 6-10, maybe they got a little past their peak. So I'm thinking if I were really obsessed about medalling in the AHA I'd probably make a second batch of everything I was entering, say in mid April, i.e. before even knowing first round results, and submitting entries from the second batch if I qualified.

But for me this is where you hit the point of diminishing returns.

[HogieWan]

Originally posted by denver brewhoo
maybe they got a little past their peak.


are you keeping them refrigerated?

[denver brewhoo]

Originally posted by HogieWan
are you keeping them refrigerated?

Oh yeah.

[danno]

Originally posted by denver brewhoo
I also think that even though, say, an ordinary bitter isn't supposed to have a huge fluffy head and is OK with even moderate chill haze, if you want to get 3 out of 3 appearance points, it better be bright as hell and clear as hell with a pretty head. then there's a judging issue. theoretically, you should only take points away for flaws. I'd give you three points, as would most of the judges I know...

guy from Cali who was 2004 homebrewer of the year whose name escapes (but he had like 9 second round entries and won a couple classes in this year's AHA) said to him it's all about the ferment. I think he means, precision in times and temps. I think I've spent more time worrying about everything up to getting the yeast and wort into the fermenter and not enough on the ferment itself. Specifically, temperature, which is where commercial brewers with digitally controlled glycol-chilled fermenters have an advantage over us. Jamil (and I can't remember his last name...). I think he only had two or three winners this year, he must be slipping... (lol)

temperatures are where I'm focusing my energies now. I've upgraded to a digital thermostat for my fermenting chest freezer, and I'm about to purchase a new NIST traced thermometer for my mashing. look for my name in next year's NHC... :D

[Grog]

Originally posted by danno

temperatures are where I'm focusing my energies now. I've upgraded to a digital thermostat for my fermenting chest freezer, and I'm about to purchase a new NIST traced thermometer for my mashing. look for my name in next year's NHC... :D

What is NIST?

[danno]

National Institute of Standards and Technology (http://www.nist.gov/). basically, it means that the thermometer has been calibrated and certified...

[HogieWan]

Originally posted by danno
Jamil (and I can't remember his last name...). I think he only had two or three winners this year, he must be slipping... (lol)

Jamil Zainasheff (http://www.beertools.com/html/recipes.php)

[BrewDog]

Danno-

Which thermometer are you getting for your mash?

[HarkJohnny]

not to interupt your discussion... hehe

one of the carboys was exhibiting a bit of white scum bubbles on the top and so I figured I had better bottle it up. Interesting thing is that this carboy had a much better aroma than did the other one which was pretty clear.

In all the batch yielded about 44 12oz bottles and 3 22oz bottles plus a full corny keg. Waiting for awhile to tap the keg... but certainly will report back!

It will be interesting to judge the difference between the CO2 forced keg and the Priming sugared bottles.

[HogieWan]

Originally posted by HarkJohnny
It will be interesting to judge the difference between the CO2 forced keg and the Priming sugared bottles.

please keep us informed

[HarkJohnny]

Well, the kegged ones are gone now (still have some bottles) and although I did not do a side by side, I am pleased to say that I recall no difference