Denny:[quote=“Denny”] My own perception, drawn from using FWH in hundreds of batches, is that FWH adds great flavor, no aroma, and a smooth bitterness. To my palate, the amount of bitterness it adds is about the same as I get from a 20 min,. addition, so that’s how I consider FWH.[/quote]
I’ll admit that for years I’ve been FWH’ing many of my beers based solely on the research and recommendations of others. I will say that I’ve been very happy with the results and I agree completely that the flavor contribution is significant and the bitterness contribution is much smoother than the equivalent amount of hops boiled for 60 mins.
The question that just came to mind for the first time is: If the perceived bitterness is roughly equivalent to a 20 min addition of the same amount of hops, what is the perceived flavor the equivalent of? Denny mentions his experiment:
This compares the perceived bitterness to an equivalent amount of hops boiled for the same amount of time with two different techniques. But has anyone done an experiment comparing an oz. of hops added FWH vs. an oz. of hops added at the 20 min mark? I think that this would go one step further toward determining if the flavor contribution of FWH’ing is greater than a 20 min addition.
In my eyes, if:
FWH = 20 min addition in terms of bitterness
and
FWH = 20 min addition in terms of flavor
but
FWH < 20 min addition in terms of aroma (solely due to less boil time)
then
a 20 min addition would be the better way to go
but if
FWH = 20 min addition in terms of bitterness
and
FWH >> 20 min addition in terms of flavor
but
FWH < 20 min addition in terms of aroma (solely due to less boil time)
then
FWH’ing would be the better choice
I’m fine with empirical data and opinions, I’ve just never done any kind of comparison between the two techniques.