Doppelbock Recipe and Review

Posted on January 13, 2016 by Nick Ladd

For me, the best Doppelbocks are pure expressions of German Munich malt. Providing a ton of flavor and richness through its high melanoidin content without bringing too much sweetness to a beer, Munich malt is a favorite of mine to brew with. Melanoidins are byproducts of Maillard reactions and differ in flavor from caramelization in that they lean more towards bready/biscuity/toasty as opposed to the caramel/toffee/burnt sugar exhibited by crystal malts. Varying amounts of Munich malt can bring different qualities to a beer. In small percentages, it enhances the overall malty impression of a base malt. When used in high percentages, such as in this beer, it provides an extremely rich toasty bread crust flavor.

Doppelbocks tend to be rich, highly-alcoholic beers that manage to not bog you down in the ways other high-alcohol beers can. This recipe is a work-in-progress as it continues to feel heavier than I would like. Future tweaks to the recipe will likely push the beer to attenuate better.

Doppelbock Recipe

Specifications:
Size: 3.25
Efficiency: 73%
Attenuation: 71.4%

Original Gravity: 1.084
Terminal Gravity: 1.024
Color: 22.23 SRM
Alcohol: 7.94% ABV
Bitterness: 25 IBU

Malt Bill:
8 lb (67.4%) Weyermann Munich II Malt
3 lb (25.3%) Weyermann Pilsner Malt
0.5 lb (4.2%) Weyermann Caramunich Type III
0.25 lb (2.1%) Weyermann Melanoidin Malt
2 oz. (1.1 %) Thomas Fawcett Chocolate Malt

Mash Profile:
146 °F – 25m
150 °F – 25m
154 °F – 20m
170 °F – 5m

Water Treatment:
Extremely Soft NYC Water
2g Gypsum (to mash)
4g Calcium Chloride (to mash)

Hopping:
1.5 oz Hallertau (2.7% AA) – 60 m
0.5 oz Hallertau (2.7% AA) – 5 m

Kettle Additions:
0.5 ea Whirlfloc Tablets (Irish moss) – 15 m
0.5 tsp Wyeast Nutrient – 10 m

Yeast:
Wyeast 2206 Bavarian Lager – Decanted 2L Starter on Stir Plate

Tasting Notes:

Judged as 2015 BJCP Category 9A. Doppelbock.

Aroma (12/12):
Liquid bread. Rich toasty bread crust dominates the aroma. The malt profile is very complex, possessing some slightly grape-like dark fruit aspects. There is a hint of a floral hop character that is somewhat surprising considering the low amount of finishing hops in the beer. Just a hint of toffee and caramel sits in the background. This beer exhibits a very clean ferment with no ester or alcohols apparent.

Appearance (3/3):
Deep brown with some garnet highlights. Crystal clear with a beautiful tightly-bound tan foam. Foam lasts for days. Perfect appearance.

Flavor (12/20):
This beer hits all the notes in terms of malt richness and complexity. Flavors of freshly baked bread crust dominate, but intermingle with some nice dark fruit components as well as a hint of toffee and perhaps just the faintest amount of dark cocoa. There is a bit of hot alcohol heat that hits the back of the throat. The beer has a considerable level of sweetness that reaches just beyond the range described in the style guideline. Hop bitterness is present, but more of a background balancing note.

Mouthfeel (2/5):
This is a full beer with a moderate level of carbonation. I wish the beer was a touch less full, which would enhance the quaffability of the beer.

Overall Impression (5/10):
This beer is so close to great. If I can get it to attenuate perhaps another 4-6 gravity points, it would be right up there with world-class examples. The sweetness is manageable, but makes it drink closer to a melanoidin-heavy barleywine rather than a true doppelbock.

Very Good (34/50)

Mixed-Culture Saison Recipe and Review

Posted on January 7, 2016 by Nick Ladd

It seems that more and more breweries are beginning to incorporate Brettanomyces into their brewing repertoire. When done well, I’m a huge fan. By and large, my favorites are those that focus on creating a pleasant and complex fruity character rather than a horsey, phenol-heavy Brett character typically produced by many strains. I’m not a huge fan of that type of aggressive phenolic Brett character, which I find to be at times overly harsh and perhaps even biting. I think this is one of the biggest mistakes being made by contemporary brewers trying to make funky beers. Bigger Brett character is not always better.

The key to this beer recipe is the oats which provide a nice silky component to what could otherwise be a very dry, thin beer. Even more important is achieving proper fermentation character. In my brewery, I am achieving this by utilizing a mixed culture which I’ve been propagating over a number of generations. The culture is composed primary of fruit-heavy Brett and Sacc strains, as well as a touch of Lactobacillus, which is kept in check through the IBUs in the beer.

Mixed Culture Saison Recipe

Specifications:
Size: 3.25
Efficiency: 68%
Attenuation: 96%

Original Gravity: 1.052
Terminal Gravity: 1.002
Color: 5.54 SRM
Alcohol: 6.57% ABV
Bitterness: 12.8 IBU

Malt Bill:
5 lb (69.0%) Weyermann Pilsner Malt
.75 lb (10.3%) Briess Flaked Oats
.75 lb (10.3%) Weyermann Pale Wheat Malt
.75 lb (10.3%) Weyermann Munich TYPE I

Mash Profile:
144 °F – 50m
154 °F – 15m
170 °F – 5m

Water Treatment:
Extremely Soft NYC Water
2g Gypsum (to mash)
2g Calcium Chloride (to mash)

Hopping:
6g Centennial (10.5% AA) – 90 m

Kettle Additions:
0.5 ea Whirlfloc Tablets (Irish moss) – 15 m
0.5 tsp Wyeast Nutrient – 10 m

Yeast:
1L Starter of my house saison culture. The mixed culture is made up of cultured Saison Dupont dregs, The Yeast Bay’s Amalgamation Brett Blend, and White Labs Lactobacillus Brevis.

Tasting Notes:

Judged as 2015 BJCP Category 28A. Brett Beer.

Aroma (10/12):
This is a very fruity expression of Brettanomyces. The beer’s fermentation character dominates the aroma, imbuing the beer with impressions of ripe fruit — cherry, honeydew, and even some tropical pineapple. A very light phenolic pepperiness is in the background with only the faintest hint of rubber. The malt character is very minimal and clean. There is a light tartness on the nose and just a hint of acetic sharpness. As the beer warms, some hot alcohol comes out which detracts slightly.

Appearance (1/3):
Beautiful deep gold with brilliant clarity. A large fluffy white head forms, but quickly dissipates — likely attributable to the Lactobacillus in the mixed culture.

Flavor (17/20):
The overall flavor is really clean considering that this is a mixed-fermentation beer. There is a touch of a leatherlike earthiness from the Brett, but most of the fermentation character is bright and fruity. The malt is really crisp and nice — like a good German pilsner. The beer is about six months old at this point and only has a hint of the Cheerio character it had exhibited only a couple months ago — something I attributed to THP from the Brettanomyces ferment. There is a touch of acidity to the beer that is quite pleasant — not something I’d consider ‘sour’, but more of a complementary note to the fruitiness.

Mouthfeel (5/5):
The beer is very dry, but there is a bit of roundness to the body that prevents it from being too austere. There is a nice mellow acidity that combines with a relatively high carbonation to give a bright clean finish to the beer.

Overall Impression (8/10):
I am really happy to see how my house saison culture is expressing itself in the beers fermented with it. The Brettanomyces personality of this beer is much more in-line with ripe fruit than the earthy funk that can sometimes dominate Brett beers.

Excellent (41/50)

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale Clone – 2.0

Posted on September 23, 2015 by Nick Ladd

Another blog post, another Sierra Nevada Pale Ale clone. The Verdict: Not Cloned.

Commercial beer on the left, homebrew on the right.

That said, we’re getting close.To start, here is the recipe that I brewed.

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale Cone 2.0 (Not Cloned)

Specifications:

Size: 3.25 gal
Efficiency: 68%
Attenuation: 80% (measured)

Original Gravity: 1.051
Terminal Gravity: 1.010 (measured)
Color: 10.86 SRM
Alcohol: 5.4% ABV (calculated)
Bitterness: 37.7 IBU (calculated)

Grist:

6.75 lb (94.7%) Briess 2-Row Brewers Malt
6 oz (5.3%) Briess Caramel 60L

Mash Regiment:

152 °F – Sacc Rest – 60min

Water Treatment:

Extremely Soft NYC Water
4g Gypsum (to mash)
2g Calcium Chloride (to mash)

Hopping:

9 g Magnum (12.6% AA) – 60 m
8 g Perle (8.7% AA) – 30 m
8 g Cascade (6.9% AA) – 10 m
72 g Cascade (6.9% AA) – Whirlpool 15m

Kettle Additions:

0.5 ea Whirlfloc Tablets (Irish moss) – 15 m
0.5 tsp Wyeast Nutrient – 10 mYeast:

Yeast:

WYeast 1056 American Ale™ Starter on stirplate to achieve 1 million cells per milliliter of wort per degree Plato. Use Mr. Malty to determine proper starter sized based on age of yeast package. Pitch into 60°F wort and allow to free rise to 64°F. As fermentation begins to slow, raise temperature to 70°F.

The Results

While there are some recipe changes in store for the next iteration, this beer primarily misses the mark on technical merits. Most noticeably my beer has a touch of honeyed oxidized malt character with perhaps a faint hint of diacetyl that is not present in the commercial beer.

I am typically very careful to limit O2 exposure, especially in fermented beer. In some ways, the oxidation of this beer is welcome as it is making me look critically at my process and think of ways I can limit O2 pickup. The biggest risk for oxidation in my process comes at two locations: the cold crash and packaging.

When I cold crash my beer, there is usually some suck-back of air into the fermenter due to a vacuum being pulled as the liquid’s volume decreases as it cools. I typically put a little CO2 head pressure on my beers as I cold crash in order to prevent this. With this beer, I got lazy and skipped this step. Nevermore!

The second biggest opportunity for O2 pickup is when I rack finished beer to my keg. I always purge the keg, but perhaps I am not always as careful as I should be in gently racking the beer and purging the racking cane or fermenter head space once it is opened up. In a perfect world, I would be doing a completely closed transfer — this is something I’m looking into and hope to implement in the future.

In terms of recipe, I believe the malt bill I am using is nearly perfect. There is a slight color difference between my beer and the commercial example, but I believe this has more to do with some yeast being suspended in the homebrew, and not a dramatic miss with the malt bill. I may bump up the crystal malt ever so slightly in the next round — perhaps only by a couple ounces.

The biggest recipe difference that I need to implement for the next round is in regard to flavor and aroma hops. The commercial beer has a substantial grapefruit pith and slightly spicy / herbal hop character. While this character is present in the homebrew, it is not nearly as intense. The homebrew’s bitterness level is spot on, but the aroma and flavor needs to be dramatically increased. For the next iteration of my recipe, I intend to boost the amount of late hopping at least by an order of 2 or 3 in order to get closer to the commercial beer.

Circa ’96 Redux IPA – Homebrew Recipe & Review

Posted on September 4, 2015 by Nick Ladd

The new proprietary hops currently being developed by the likes of HBC and others in the Yakima valley are wonderful, interesting varieties. Citra, Amarillo, Mosaic, Nelson, and Galaxy with their intense flavors of tropical fruits and citrus are both novel and delicious. They’re also, very much in demand by today’s craft brewers. Over the past couple of years I’ve been playing around with the idea of someday, in the not-too-distant future starting a craft brewery. With the competition for these hops coming from established brewers with deep pockets, it can be be very difficult for a new brewery to establish contracts for these new varieties. With this reality in mind, it would be an interesting proposition to see if there is a combination of readily available hops (like those popular in 1996) coupled with contemporary techniques (dryness, massive whirlpool, massive dry hop) that can be utilized to create the bright juicy hop character seen in today’s most popular IPAs. This is my first attempt at a recipe that strives to do just that.

American IPA Recipe

Specifications:
Size: 3.25 gal
Efficiency: 62% (measured)
Attenuation: 83.3% (measured)

Original Gravity: 1.066
Terminal Gravity: 1.011 (measured)
Color: 10.78 SRM
Alcohol: 7.2% ABV (calculated)
Bitterness: 42.9 IBU (does not account for IBUs created by whirlpool hop addition)

Malt Bill:
7 lb (75.7%) Briess Pale Ale Malt
0.25 lb (2.7%) Briess Victory® Malt
1 lb (10.8%) Great Western White Wheat Malt
1 lb (10.8%) Corn Sugar – added to boil

Mash Profile:
149°F – 60m

Water Treatment:
Extremely Soft NYC Water
4g Gypsum (to mash)

Hopping:
0.5 oz Centennial (10.5% AA) – 60 m
1 oz Cascade (5.5% AA) – 10 m

1 oz Columbus (15.0% AA) – Whirlpool 25m
1 oz Chinook (13.0% AA) – Whirlpool 25m
2.5 oz Centennial (10.5% AA) – Whirlpool 25m

1 oz Centennial (10.5% AA) – Dry Hop 3 Days
1 oz Columbus (15.0% AA) – Dry Hop 3 Days

Kettle Additions:
0.5 ea Whirlfloc Tablets (Irish moss) – added during boil, boiled 15 m
0.5 tsp Wyeast Nutrient – added during boil, boiled 10 m

Yeast:
Safale US-05 – American Ale Yeast

Tasting Notes:

Judged as a BJCP 14B. American IPA

Aroma (5/12):
There is a substantial hop fruitiness that is almost lemony on the nose. The upfront fruitiness is supported by some pine and an earthy, almost musty hop character with spicy undertones. Some grassy dry hops notes are present. The malt is very neutral. In general the hop character on the nose is very muddled.

Appearance (3/3):
The beer is deep gold, almost copper, and surprisingly clear. This is astonishing considering that the beer is bottle conditioned and dry hopped. A nice tight white head persists.

Flavor (8/20):
The hops are upfront and dominated by a lemony citrus quality muddled by some resinous notes of pine and spice. The bitterness is quite sharp and coarse. The malt present is slightly toasty and dry. There is some boozy alcohol on the finish as well as a touch of honey-like oxidation.

Mouthfeel (3/5):
Medium-low bodied with a prickly effervescence. A bit over-carbonated. The hop bitterness borders on astringent.

Overall Impression (4/10):
This beer is a long way from being a great. In particular, I think the hops choices are somewhat poor, creating a muddled and at times conflicting hop character. In the next iteration, I plan to use fewer varieties that are more synergistic than the combination of citrus and pine that I employed in this recipe. The malt character is great — lean and dry — right where I like my IPAs to be. I made the mistake of bottle conditioning this beer which seems to have imparted some oxidization, making it tough to truly judge the merits of this recipe.

Good (23/50)

Developing House Sour Cultures – A Bioreactor Approach

Posted on August 16, 2015 by Nick Ladd

Previously I've been keeping my house sour culture refreshed with frequent feedings of starter wort.

I have typically been keeping my house sour culture refreshed with frequent feedings of starter wort.

Over the past couple of years, I’ve cultured and grown up bottle dregs from a variety of commercial sour beers to complete several different projects. These dregs are a great way to add biodiversity to the commercial blends (like Roeselare) that I typically start a sour beer with and tend to produce a more interesting final product. As I acquired these cultures, I began combining them with the intent of developing a variety of house-mixed cultures of bacteria and yeast that I can maintain and use to completely ferment out sour beers. The intent is to continue shaping these mixed cultures until they get to the point where they can consistently produce quality sour beer in a predictable time frame. I fully expect the blend of microbes within the culture to drift, but hope an eventual homeostasis will take hold within the culture. Currently, I have built three different mixed cultures around a spectrum of cultured microbes harvested from commercial beers.

One of the biggest tasks in maintaining a culture like this is the frequent feedings required to keep a culture viable. The idea of maintaining my cultures through periodic feedings of fresh wort that would eventually provide the steady byproduct of sour beer seemed like a great idea. And so, the idea of a sour culture bio-reactor was born. The idea is pretty basic. I’ve put together a schedule of brew days that in theory will consistently provide nutrition for the culture as well as produce a steady stream of sour beer for evaluation. Every four months I brew a different 3-gallon batch of moderate gravity wort that gets split three ways to feed one gallon of fresh wort to each of my three mixed cultures. On brew day I transfer the previous batches of now fermented beer off the culture to a clean glass aging vessel where it will continue to develop for another 8 months (1-year total fermentation time) before packaging. The cultures are then transferred to the freshly brewed wort for a new round of fermentation. After the initial one-year cycle, the bioreactor will consistently output three, 1-gallon batches of sour beer every four months. The beauty of running three cultures in parallel with the same wort is that I’ll be able to compare side-by-side the impact each different culture has on the finished product. My hope is to experiment with different grain bills to better understand the interrelationship between grain bills, mash temperatures, and mixed culture fermentation.

I initially started this project using a single mixed culture. To date, this culture has been through 3 generations of wort. I’ve tasted the first two generations (currently 4-months and 8-months old) and the results have been pretty outstanding; and consistent within the limited sample thus far. I’m optimistic that with some luck and diligence I’ll be able to shape these cultures to the point that they produce sour beer that is both delicious and unique to my brewery.

The first round in the bioreactor ready for fermentation. The initial recipe was 90% Pilsner, 10% Carapils, and had a starting gravity of 1.054.