Spawn of Duvel Review

Posted on August 9, 2014 by Nick Ladd

Tasting Notes:

Judged as a BJCP Category 18a Belgian Blond. Recipe can be found here.

Aroma (7/12)
At first pour the nose is a bit biting due to an abundant amount of CO2 coming out of solution. This sharpness combines with a strong ester character making it a bit over-the-top. Aromas of under-ripe pear and a touch of nondescript berry dance from the glass. Once some of the carbonation dissipates, softer honey-like malt components become apparent and are quite inviting. No phenols or alcohol apparent. As the beer warms, a light touch of banana ester becomes barely perceptible.

Appearance (2/3)
Medium golden in color with a light chill-haze that clears up as the beer warms. High carbonation levels (to style) push forth a large billowy white head that is constantly replenished and very attractive.

Flavor (14/20)
The potent ester character found on the nose is much more subdued on the palate. The beer strikes a nice balance between fermentation character, and a beautiful soft pilsner malt backbone. The Belgium pilsner malt has a honey-like sweetness that is very nice. There is a touch of herbal hop flavor coupled with a balancing medium level of hop bitterness. The flavor is very round and soft, but finishes quite dry with a slight mineral note.

Mouthfeel (4/5)
Bright prickly carbonation; perhaps a touch high for style. The beer is medium bodied and has a pleasant dry finish.

Overall Impression (7/10)
This is quite a pleasurable beer that changes dramatically as the beer warms in the glass and loses carbonation. At first, the beer is quite brash. After some time in the glass, the beer flavors round out, making for a softer, much more nuanced beer. In the end, the balance of fermentation flavors and very attractive soft pilsner malt character make this a solid rendition of the style.

Total: 34/50 Very Good

Note: This beer was entered into the Second Round of the National Homebrew Competition. It did not place in the competition, but it did receive a 36.

SMaSH Mandarina Bavaria vs Hallertau Mittelfruh Pilsners

Posted on July 22, 2014 by Nick Ladd

Both SMaSH pilsners were brought the annual NYC Hombrewers Guild picnic — the perfect beer on a hot summer day.

About 6-weeks ago I brewed a couple of SMaSH pilsner lagers, inspired by Firestone Walker Pivo Pils, and featuring 100% Weyermann Pilsner malt. For hopping, one was brewed solely with a new German varietal called Mandarina Bavaria, where-as the other was brewed with the more traditional Hallertau Mittelfruh.

Rather than do a full BJCP-style evaluation of each beer, I’ll describe the malt and yeast character present in both beers, and then attempt to describe the real hop character differences that exists between the beers.

Malt Character:
Clean and crisp is the best way to describe this malt. I was able to achieve 80% + apparent attenuation which lends a nice lean character without becoming watery. Although I missed the very high level of attenuation found in Pivo Pils (88%), this beer still captures the dryness that makes Pivo so great. The standard Weyermann Pilsner malt I used has a nice light bready, and ever-so-slightly grainy character that is very nuanced. This is a great neutral malt that begs to be set down as a base to bounce other flavors against. The Weyermann malt does not feel as round and bready as other pilsner malts I have used, in particular Dingemans pils from Belgium which features an almost honey-like sweetness. Using this malt in this manner clearly illustrates how similarly colored malts from different maltsters can have dramatically different characteristics.

Yeast Character:
Unfortunately, the homebrew shop I purchased from did not have the Wyeast 2124 lager yeast used by Pivo Pils in stock. As a back-up, I brewed with my go-to lager yeast WLP833 from White Labs. This yeast performs superbly, attenuating well, and cleaning up any residual diacetyl. There is a very light fruity ester present in the beer, but other than that, the beer is clean and neutral, setting the table to showcase the hops and malt.

Hallertau Mittelfruh Hop:
This hop look you straight in the eye and without blinking proudly proclaims its German heritage. This hop features a classic, and very nuanced herbal quality. When searching, there is a low white pepper note as well. On the finish is a slightly grassy, almost tea-leaf like flavor which I attribute to the fact that I needed to use nearly twice as much of this hop to hit the same IBU levels provided by the higher alpha Mandarina Bavaria. The quality of the bitterness in this beer is very smooth, and does not linger.

Mandarina Bavaria Hop:
Mandarina Bavaria is often cited as a next generation German varietal being bred to compete with the novel hop varieties being grown in the Pacific NW. True to its name, this hop has a nice round sweet mandarin and tangerine flavor that comes across almost as candied orange that while present, is much more subtle than the citrus displayed by other types of hops. Additionally, there doesn’t seem to be any of the bitter, pithy citrus character that is found in many varieties. There is none of the pine or resin flavors which dominate other hops. This hop does not match the brash intensity and massive oil levels found in the newer American hops. This hop works really well in this beer, providing a sweet citrus component without dominating the malt or other lager characteristics. Mandarina Bavaria shines in more nuanced beers, but probably won’t be able to stand up to the Simcoes, Citras, or even brasher South Hemisphere hops that dominate the IPA world. That said, there is a definite place for this hop in the ever-expanding tool chest of hops modern brewers have access to.

SMaSH Pilsners – Recipe Inspired by Pivo Pils

Posted on July 16, 2014 by Nick Ladd

Lately I’ve been drinking a lot of Firestone Walker’s Pivo Pils. This beer delivers a terrific hop punch set against a modest amount of alcohol and absolutely dry fermentation character. An immensely drinkable beer during the dog-days of summer. Firestone Walker classifies this beer as a ‘hoppy pilsner’; a short and simple sub-title, but perhaps a bit light on providing a comprehensive description of the beer. In many ways, this beer reminds me of a fresh German pils, mainly due to its austere dryness. If you take a classically lean German pils and then beef it up with late kettle and dry hopping as well as a bit firmer bittering, you’ll likely get pretty close to the character of Pivo.

Intrigued by Pivo, I set out to design a beer that captures this malt character, and then use it as a platform for testing out a couple of different German hop varieties. With a little research from Firestone Walker’s website, and an interview with Matt Brynildson during a podcast on The Brewing Network, a few key recipe spec’s could be ascertained:

Original Gravity: 1.048 SG (calculated from terminal gravity and ABV)
Terminal Gravity: 1.005 SG (from TBN podcast)
Attenuation: 88% (calculated)
Alcohol: 5.3% ABV (from Firestone Walker website)
Bitterness: 40 IBU (from Firestone Walker website)
Color: 4 SRM

Other Key Points:

6 week turn-around time (from TBN podcast)
100% Weyermann malts (from TBN podcast)
Mash Regiment: 122° > 145° > 155° > 168° (from TBN podcast)
Calcium Chloride water treatment (from TBN podcast)
Wyeast 2124 yeast (from TBN podcast)
Magnum bittering (from TBN podcast)
Spalter Select mid-boil addition (from TBN podcast)
Saphir dry hop (from TBN podcast)

With these details in mind, I set out to formulate a recipe that captures the spirit of Pivo Pils. I selected two German hop varieties which symbolically depict the tradition of German hop growing and the direction it may be heading. Hallertau Mittelfruher is about a classic as it gets in the German brewing world, where-as Mandarina Bavaria is a new cultivar bred by the Hop Research Institute in Hull which has a Cascade hop lineage and is described as having tangerine and mandarin orange characteristics.

In determining the bittering levels for each beer, I used the Hallerau Mittelfruher beer as my base, and then scaled down the amount of hops used on the hot-side of the Mandarina Bavaria beer to achieve a comparable amount of hop bitterness.

SMaSH Hallertau Mittelfruher / Pilsner Recipe

Recipe Specifications:
Size: 3.25 gal
Efficiency: 68%
Attenuation: 88%

Original Gravity: 1.048 SG
Terminal Gravity: 1.006 SG
Color: 4.26 SRM
Alcohol: 5.53% ABV
Bitterness: 28.0 IBU (does not take into account bitterness achieved during whirlpool)

Grist:
6.75 lb (100.0%) Weyermann Pilsner Malt

Water Treatment added to Strike Water:
Soft NYC Water
4g Calcium Chloride
1g Gypsum

Mash Regiment:
0m – 122° F – Mash in at 122° F and immediately ramp up to next step
50m – 145° F – Beta Amylase Rest
10m – 155° F – Alpha Amylase Rest
5m – 168° F – Mash Out

Hopping:
60m – 20 g Hallertauer Mittelfrüher (4% AA)
30m – 20 g Hallertauer Mittelfrüher (4% AA)
Whirlpool 20m – 80g Hallertauer Mittelfrüher (4% AA)
Dryhop 3 Days – 26 g Hallertauer Mittelfrüher (4% AA)

Kettle Additions:
15m – 0.5 ea Whirlfloc Tablet
10m – 0.5 tsp Wyeast Nutrient

Yeast:
White Labs WLP833 German Bock Lager – 1400ml starter on stir plate

Fermentation:
1. Chill to 46° F and let rise to 48° F
2. Ramp temperature as fermentation slows up to 58° F for diacetyl rest
3. Crash to 32° F
4. Keg and lager at 32° F for 4 weeks.

SMaSH Mandarina Bavaria / Pilsner Recipe

Recipe Specifications:
Size: 3.25 gal
Efficiency: 68%
Attenuation: 88%

Original Gravity: 1.048 SG
Terminal Gravity: 1.006 SG
Color: 4.26 SRM
Alcohol: 5.53% ABV
Bitterness: 28.0 IBU (does not take into account bitterness achieved during whirlpool)

Grist:
6.75 lb (100.0%) Weyermann Pilsner Malt

Water Treatment added to Strike Water:
Soft NYC Water
4g Calcium Chloride
1g Gypsum

Mash Regiment:
0m – 122° F – Mash in at 122° F and immediately ramp up to next step
50m – 145° F – Beta Amylase Rest
10m – 155° F – Alpha Amylase Rest
5m – 168° F – Mash Out

Hopping:
60m – 12 g Mandarina Bavaria (7.2% AA)
30m – 12 g Mandarina Bavaria (7.2% AA)
Whirlpool 20m – 44 g Mandarina Bavaria (7.2% AA)
Dryhop 3 Days – 26 g Mandarina Bavaria (7.2% AA)

Kettle Additions:
15m – 0.5 ea Whirlfloc Tablet
10m – 0.5 tsp Wyeast Nutrient

Yeast:
White Labs WLP833 German Bock Lager– 1400ml starter on stir plate

Fermentation:
1. Chill to 46° F and let rise to 48° F
2. Ramp temperature as fermentation slows up to 58° F for diacetyl rest
3. Crash to 32° F
4. Keg and lager at 32° F for 4 weeks.

Single Tap IPA 3.0 Recipe & Review

Posted on April 23, 2014 by Nick Ladd

Over the years I’ve brewed lots of different IPAs. Lately however, I’ve been focused on developing Single Tap, my house IPA. This third generation recipe has its roots in a beer I brewed back in 2012 which won a first place ribbon in the first round of the National Homebrew Competition. Over the years, the recipe has been simplified, with the notion that every ingredient should have a justifiable reason for its inclusion. While the recipe is always changing, the heart of this beer is focused on providing a toasty, yet lean, highly-attenuated malt background and contrasting it against a ton a big American hop flavor and aroma. I am able to keep the bitterness low compared to other IPAs by pushing attenuation to the point that little bitterness is needed for balance.

Single Tap IPA 3.0 Recipe

Size: 4.32 gal – With system and trub losses, I typically end up with 2.75 gallons in the fermenter.
Efficiency: 72% (Measured)
Attenuation: 82.8% (Calculated)

Original Gravity: 1.070 SG (Measured)
Terminal Gravity: 1.012 SG (Measured)
Color: 9.71 SRM
Alcohol: 7.6% ABV (Calculated)
Bitterness: 24.0 IBUs – Calculations don’t take into account bitterness gained through whirlpool additions, which is considerable.

Fermentables:
5 lb (45.5%) – Briess 2-Row Brewers Malt
3 lb (27.3%) – Crisp Maris Otter
1 lb (9.1%) – Weyermann Vienna Malt
8 oz (4.5%) – Briess White Wheat Malt
6 oz (3.4%) – Crisp Crystal 45
2 oz (1.1%) – Weyermann Acidulated Malt – added for pH correction
1 lb (9.1%) Table Sugar – added during boil

Hop Additions:
4 g Citra™ (13.7% AA) – First Wort Hop
0.5 oz Sterling (7.5% AA) – 10 m
0.5 oz Centennial (10.5% AA) – 10 m
2 oz Citra™ (13.7% AA) – Post Boil Whirlpool – 25 m
3 oz Amarillo® (8.7% AA) – Post Boil Whirlpool – 25 m
1 oz Centennial (10.5% AA) – Post Boil Whirlpool – 25 m
0.5 oz Sterling (7.5% AA) – Post Boil Whirlpool – 25 m

0.5 oz Centennial (10.5% AA) – Dry Hop 3 Days
1.5 oz Citra™ (13.7% AA) – Dry Hop 3 Days
1.5 oz Amarillo® (8.7% AA) – Dry Hop 3 Days

Kettle Additions:
0.5 ea Whirlfloc Tablets – 15 m
0.5 tsp Wyeast Nutrient – 10 m

Yeast:
WYeast 1056 American Ale™ – 1600ml 1.040 starter on stir plate.

Water Additions:
Soft NYC Water
6g Gypsum (Calcium Sulfate)
2g Calcium Chloride

Mash Regiment:
Saccarification Rest – 149° F, 60m
Mashout Rest – 168° F, 5m

Tasting Notes:

Judged as a BJCP Category 14b American IPA

Aroma (11/12)
Putting your nose in this glass unveils a cornucopia of hop-derived fruit aromas. Most obvious is the mango, but there are also big notes of orange, tangerine, and a hint of peach. There is just a touch of grassiness and pine resin. Underneath the hops, there is a light hint of toasty and bready malt. Very clean. Not alcohol or other off-aromas.

Appearance (3/3)
Beer is a slightly hazy and light copper in color. The glass is capped by a frothy white head of exceptional persistence and lacing.

Flavor (15/20)
This beer is bursting with bright hop flavor. There is tons of citrus, some tropical fruit, and just a touch of grass. The beer is extremely dry, but the ripe fruity hops give a slight perception of sweetness. Bitterness is considerably less than most commercial examples and could be bumped up just a touch. Underneath all of the hops is a moderately toasty and bready malt component which is quite nice. The hop flavor carries through and lingers a touch in the finish.

Mouthfeel (5/5)
Medium bodied with a very nice creaminess that finishes clean. Moderate carbonation.

Overall Impression (8/10)
This is the best iteration yet of my constantly evolving IPA recipe. The dryness of the beer melds well with intense juicy hops achieving a balance that makes the beer extremely quaffable. While it could use just a hair more bitterness and perhaps even a touch more dryness, the beer in the glass is a wonderful example of the style. This homebrew easily stands up to the best commercial examples.

Total: 42/50 Excellent

Reviewing My King Henry Clone Attempt

Posted on April 16, 2014 by Nick Ladd

Goose Island Bourbon County Barley Wine on the left, homebrew variations in the middle and right.

Late in September 2013, I took a shot at brewing a clone of Goose Island’s King Henry barrel aged barley wine. The beer was left to rest on oak cubes which had been soaked in different spirits (Weller 12 Bourbon and Christian Drouin Calvados). After about 3 months on oak, I packaged the beer in individual bottles and decided to taste them blindly against Goose Island Bourbon County Barleywine — the closest beer I could track down that would resemble King Henry.

Rather than do an extensive review of each beer, I’d like to focus on the elements that are clearly different. The recipe I used came directly from Goose Island’s brewsheet for King Henry, so I am relatively confident in the grist make-up and hopping. That being said, I definitely did not achieve a clone due to the various reasons outlined below.

Barrel Character
The biggest thing separating my beers from the commercial example was the dramatic difference in barrel character. The Goose Island beer is extremely rich, with robust amounts of vanilla, toffee, and even a bit of sweetness coming from the barrel. Comparatively, the homebrew was almost thin, with a one-dimensional raw woody character that was dramatically different. I went through an exercise of adding slight amounts of bourbon back to the homebrewed beer, and while it helped, the character it imparted was more spirit-like in its booziness and lacked the depth and roundness of barrel notes the commercial beer contains. I’ve always been aware of the dramatic differences between simulated barrel aging, and actual barrel aging. Having these two beers side-by-side made this difference extremely obvious.

Yeast
The only real omission from the brew sheets I formulated my recipe off had to do with yeast selection. I ended up using Wyeast 1098 British Ale which left my beer with a distinct ester character, not found in Goose Island’s beer. My beer had much more British character than the Goose Island product. For the next iteration of this I brew, I will definitely be revisiting my yeast choice.

Color
The commercial example I am comparing my homebrew against is considerably darker in color. Previously I had discounted the statement I’ve heard in the past that the commercial beer picks up some color from the imperial stout which previously resided within the aging barrels. It’s tough for me to explain the color difference, so perhaps there is some truth to this.

While I wasn’t able to clone the beer, I still ended up with a really nice brew. It is somewhat one-dimensional in its oak character which I hope will evolve a bit with some age. The biggest take-away for me is that there truly is no substitute for genuine barrel aging. For my next iteration, I plan to obtain a 5-gallon whiskey barrel and see if I can get closer to the barrel character that Goose Island is able to achieve.