So I tried Tasty McD’s method of adding dry hops to the primary at the tail end of primary fermentation on the following IPA (about 4 days in), the thought being the fermentation activity will drive off oxygen thats in the leafs and such, and leave you with the aromatics you want. I tasted this IPA when I added them, and it was overly bitter (bear in mind fermentation may not have been complete). Less than a week later, with the dry hops I pulled another sample of the beer, and the perceivable bitterness had dropped considerably for both me and a buddy who has a pretty good palette.
Anyway, I am procrastinating a huge paperwork-based project @ work and thought I’d share a story of how patience can cure a lot of homebrewing woes! I’m very distracted thinking about how good this beer is and is becoming!
:cheers:
Flight of the Phoenix IIPA
14-C Imperial IPA
Size: 5.5 gal @ 68 °F
Efficiency: 75.0%
Attenuation: 81.6%
Calories: 251.62 kcal per 12.0 fl oz
Ingredients:
0.5 ea Campden Tablet - added during boil
12.75 lb (81.0%) American 2-row - added during mash
.5 lb (3.2%) Crystal Malt 20°L - added during mash
.5 lb (3.2%) Crystal 40 - added during mash
1 lb (6.3%) Melanoidin Malt - added during mash
1 lb (6.3%) White Table Sugar (Sucrose) - added during boil
1 oz (8.3%) Caliente (17.8%) - added during mash
1 oz (8.3%) Columbus (15.0%) - added first wort
.75 oz (6.2%) Magnum (14.5%) - added during boil, boiled 60 m
.3 oz (2.5%) Amarillo® (8.5%) - added during boil, boiled 20 m
.3 oz (2.5%) Centennial (10.0%) - added during boil, boiled 20.0 m
.3 oz (2.5%) Caliente (17.8%) - added during boil, boiled 20.0 m
.3 oz (2.5%) Amarillo® (8.5%) - added during boil, boiled 15.0 m
.3 oz (2.5%) Centennial (10.0%) - added during boil, boiled 15.0 m
.3 oz (2.5%) Caliente (17.8%) - added during boil, boiled 15.0 m
.5 oz (4.1%) Centennial (10.0%) - added during boil, boiled 10.0 m
.5 oz (4.1%) Caliente (17.8%) - added during boil, boiled 10.0 m
.5 oz (4.1%) Centennial (10.0%) - added during boil, boiled 5.0 m
.5 oz (4.1%) Cascade (5.5%) - added during boil, boiled 5.0 m
.5 oz (4.1%) Caliente (17.8%) - added during boil, boiled 5.0 m
.5 oz (4.1%) Centennial (10.0%) - added during boil
.5 oz (4.1%) Cascade (5.5%) - added during boil
.5 oz (4.1%) Caliente (17.8%) - added during boil
.5 oz (4.1%) Amarillo® (8.5%) - added during boil
1 oz (8.3%) Cascade (5.5%) - added dry to secondary fermenter
.5 oz (4.1%) Centennial (10.0%) - added dry to secondary fermenter
.5 oz (4.1%) Caliente (17.8%) - added dry to secondary fermenter
1 oz (8.3%) Amarillo® (8.5%) - added dry to secondary fermenter
I’ve added hops to tail end of primary before but I didn’t feel like I got as much flavor out of it. Right now, I have a Rogue I2PA in primary on day 2, started at 1.085 and would try this method again except that I am using WLP041 and I want to harvest the yeast as much as possible. Also, the Pacific Ale yeast is a distance runner, and it’ll be difficult to gauge when to add the hops if it’s stuck at 1.03 or more.
It’s interesting that you perceived a mellowing of the bitterness, and your anticipated IBUs are 120 even. Maybe that’s a consequence, and not necessarily a benefit??? I’m also interested in your assessment of the dry hops coming through when it’s finished and conditioned, so please post an update.
[quote=“moose”]I’ve added hops to tail end of primary before but I didn’t feel like I got as much flavor out of it. Right now, I have a Rogue I2PA in primary on day 2, started at 1.085 and would try this method again except that I am using WLP041 and I want to harvest the yeast as much as possible. Also, the Pacific Ale yeast is a distance runner, and it’ll be difficult to gauge when to add the hops if it’s stuck at 1.03 or more.
It’s interesting that you perceived a mellowing of the bitterness, and your anticipated IBUs are 120 even. Maybe that’s a consequence, and not necessarily a benefit??? I’m also interested in your assessment of the dry hops coming through when it’s finished and conditioned, so please post an update.
BTW your recipe looks great.[/quote]
The interesting thing about the IBU’s is that despite the calculation, because the majority of them were REALLY late, I think the measured bitterness is probably way higher than the perceived bitterness. Denny was mentioning somewhere on here about how FWH’ing and even mash hopping (both of which were a part of this recipe) will bump your IBU calculation (through Raeger formula or whatever), but a drinker will not perceive as much bitterness of an equivalent IBU beer with hops added during boil.
on the taste last night, I got a lot of citrus (lemon/orange, not necessarily grapefruit), some pine, and stone fruit. The earthiness of the CTZ is coming through from the FWH too in the background. I’m hoping this beer will get better with more time on the dry hops, I’m probably going to keg it on NYE or the night before.
hop formula doesn’t matter when figuring bittering increase from FWH
the decrease in bitterness had nothing to do with adding dry hops. I’d guess tht you were tasting bitterness from yeast wthat hadn’t dropped out. In addition, bitterness being reduced over time is a well known phenomenon
mash hopping adds virtually no bitterness. Dan Listermann did an all mash hopped beer that calculated to about 130 IBU. It measured about 25 IBU
I just added 2 oz to primary while fermentation was almost finished. The grain base is Tasty’s APA toned down to be around 5% ABV. Everything is a little muted. However, t’s my 1st use of Belma hops so I would not be able to distinguish if it was the hops or the technique.
hop formula doesn’t matter when figuring bittering increase from FWH
[/quote]
Can you explain this a little more? Are you saying that WHICH hop formula one uses to calculate bitterness is irrelevant, or that ANY hop formula is not useful for calculating the bittering increase? I thought you had said somewhere on this board that FWH were perceived more like 20 minute additions, despite the fact that the hops are IN THE BEER before and at the 60-minute mark.
I was pretty sure that the dry hops didn’t. I was quick to judge the beer as very bitter as my gravity was off, and my OP was attempting to make the point that it wasn’t appropriate to judge ANY beer that early on in the ferment.
[quote=“Denny”]
mash hopping adds virtually no bitterness. Dan Listermann did an all mash hopped beer that calculated to about 130 IBU. It measured about 25 IBU[/quote]
I had just listened to the AmIPA Brewstrong and Tasty wasn’t even sure why he did it, but thought that, like FWH’ing, it might add a softer/restrained bitterness and hop character. The problem is, I hopped this thing at so many different points, it would be difficult to tell if there was any notable taste difference (as you point out, there is not much of a mathematical contribution from doing it).
hop formula doesn’t matter when figuring bittering increase from FWH
[/quote]
Can you explain this a little more? Are you saying that WHICH hop formula one uses to calculate bitterness is irrelevant, or that ANY hop formula is not useful for calculating the bittering increase? I thought you had said somewhere on this board that FWH were perceived more like 20 minute additions, despite the fact that the hops are IN THE BEER before and at the 60-minute mark.
I was pretty sure that the dry hops didn’t. I was quick to judge the beer as very bitter as my gravity was off, and my OP was attempting to make the point that it wasn’t appropriate to judge ANY beer that early on in the ferment.
[quote=“Denny”]
mash hopping adds virtually no bitterness. Dan Listermann did an all mash hopped beer that calculated to about 130 IBU. It measured about 25 IBU[/quote]
I had just listened to the AmIPA Brewstrong and Tasty wasn’t even sure why he did it, but thought that, like FWH’ing, it might add a softer/restrained bitterness and hop character. The problem is, I hopped this thing at so many different points, it would be difficult to tell if there was any notable taste difference (as you point out, there is not much of a mathematical contribution from doing it).[/quote]
Sorry for the imprecision! I meant that which hop forrmula you use doesn’t matter. Each will give you different results, of course, but the overall result will be the same.
I TOTALLY agree that trying to judge a beer’s quality early in the ferment is a fool’s errand.
This beer is really coming along. Pulled another sample last night after just over 2 weeks on the dry hops. BIG stone fruit, tangerine, pine, and underlying CTZ earth/garlic-y thing underlying in the aroma. Great firm but pleasant bitterness that could be a little cleaner/quicker, but overall, this maybe the best IPA i’ve made.
‘Don’t judge early’ is the PSA I’m trying to get across.
